Recent Polls and Interviews have shown that nearly 60% of Democratic registered voters who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 are not willing to do so again. With jobs at depression era levels, record breaking national debt, and rising taxes, they say they cannot survive more Hope and Change as is Obama's vision.
Many interviewed were legalized, Hispanic voters who recognize that Obama's open borders policies have taken their jobs and given them to illegal border jumpers.
With debt now at unprecedented highs and climbing, many voters recognize that much more debt has the power to collapse our economy, which was the goal of the 9/11 Trade Center attack.
They also recognize that Obama's idea of job creation is to create more government jobs and pay the salaries with higher taxes from private sector jobs. This is akin to paying credit card debt with other credit cards.
Some interviews are featured here: "The Hope, The Change"
Want real hope and change? Register, Vote!
P.S. Barack Obama could well be the man who single-handedly brings down the Democratic Party.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Bow To Nobody
Former Navy SEAL and Montana State Senator Ryan Zinke launched SoFA in July as “a call of duty to take back America from a Commander-in-Chief that is incapable of understanding the sacrifices that have been made for the values that have made America great.” In an interview with Breitbart, Zinke offers some perspective on the new ad and what role former SEALs should have in speaking out politically:
“The ad itself accurately portrays where this President is,” said Zinke. “It accurately portrays his core belief that America should not lead. This president is shaping America to be one of the followers, to relinquish our role as a world leader. I didn’t fight 23 years as a Navy SEAL to watch America bow to anybody.”
He continued, “It’s not just the king of Saudi Arabia. My friends from WWII that fought in the Pacific theater -- when they see the president bow to the emperor of Japan, I’ve seen veterans cry. This is about the fundamental belief in American exceptionalism, the notion that America should reign supreme. We are a country of values, and we fought hard to be exceptional, and we are.”
When asked whether it was inappropriate for former SEALs to speak out, as some on the left have alleged, Zinke answered, “If the veterans can’t speak out, who can? I think it’s a duty of every veteran and every citizen to be actively involved in our political process, especially when the president sets out to negotiate away our rights under the Constitution. There have been other veterans -- TR, Eisenhower, JFK -- they’ve been active in speaking out and shaping the policy and politics of our country. I’m going to stand for what I believe in, and I’m encouraging every veteran and every citizen to do the same. Our country is at a crossroads, and this election is certainly the most important in my lifetime.”
Monday, August 27, 2012
2016: Obama's America
2016: Obama's America
This past week, “2016: The Movie” about President Barack Obama opened in the Chicago area, and I chose to get more of an education about Obama by seeing the movie. After the inundation of canned hype for the movie on conservative talk shows across the Chicago radio dial that sounded more like commercials than honest endorsements of the movie, I was skeptical of what I was going to see.
While some talk show hosts sounded like they were genuinely impressed with the documentary and honestly endorsing the film, there were those who were obviously reading a commercial script which was not coming across as sincere to the regular listener – at least not to this often-skeptical listener. Perhaps, in future promotions of the film, it would be wise to have pre-recorded commercials done by the professional commercial-makers rather than having the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity doing script after script to promote the movie. After all, the listeners aren’t stupid and resent any attempt at being conned. After many reads by the talk show hosts, the readings of the commercial script were no more enthusiastic than another Life-Lock commercial read – another commercial that ought to be professionally done.
Yet, I’m glad I saw the hyped-film because it was more informative than I had thought it would be and included less propaganda than I had predicted. If anything, it was nearly too informative as there was an enormous amount of information condensed into the nearly one-hour-and-a-half documentary. Fact after fact is put forth which shows that President Obama definitely has many skeletons in the closet that have not been released prior to the nation’s trust in him with the Oval Office.
To watch this movie and realize – or simply be reminded of – all that is unknown about President Obama is of concern. Much of the information has been ignored by the American media totally. When appropriately reminded as to what is still unknown about Obama to date, one has to ask: How can any logical-thinking person give a damn about Romney’s taxes while not asking any questions regarding our current president’s past?
The man influences the entire globe, but liberal Americans want to know how much Mitt Romney paid in taxes in the past rather than learn about the man who they have entrusted with the country. Unbelievable.
The movie undeniably links Obama to persons of suspicious-interest due to their past actions and statements, such as former radical activist and Chicago educator Bill Ayers. While the media and blinded-liberals cast such facts aside, the movie does not. No, this portion of the movie is not propaganda – it is the display of factual information about relationships between people that cannot be denied. Yet, the “left” does deny the facts that are right in front of them.
Quite disturbing is the talk of the United States economy in the film. The current national debt which has increased two-fold during Obama’s presidency and the horrendous economy is suggested to be part of the plan to strip the nation of democracy – reasonable cause to make citizens totally dependent on the government. The “left” is aghast at this suggestion of the current economy. They actually believe that Obama is unintelligent enough to let this economy just happen. Ironically, it’s many of the people on the “right” who know Obama’s not stupid, and much of what has happened to the United States in the past four years is part of Obama’s plan.
How could one so-highly educated and intelligent as Obama not know what he was doing when he incurred such debt? I left the movie thinking more strongly than I had in the past that the current debt and this economy was part of Obama’s plan all along. Increasingly making Americans dependent on the government is the plan. What’s more, he knew his blind followers would believe it was not the plan and, of course, was all Bush’s fault.
He must be laughing at his blind followers all the way to the “new America” they’re allowing him to create. My belief is that Obama continues to prey on his die-hard followers’ stupidity to accomplish his personal goals for America.
The most disturbing part of the film to me was the interview with President Obama’s half-brother George Obama from Nairobi, Kenya. How can Obama claim to want to help people when he has done absolutely nothing for his own family? It makes me wonder if he really cares about anybody if he can’t find it in his heart to help his own family.
As the closing credits started to role upward across the screen, the audience applauded. Me, I just walked out – reasonably upset.
Those who have already decided to vote for Obama will probably not even see the movie. It’s sad but they probably don’t want to know the truth when it is laid out so clearly for them in this documentary. The independents who are still deciding who they are going to vote for ought to see this film. I’m quite confident that any undecided voter who sees this film will know who to vote for after viewing this documentary. If you know you’re not going to support the “left” in this coming election, see the film out of interest if you like. But, fair warning, it’s disturbing – and quite frightening – to say the least.
About Scott Paulson
Scott Paulson writes political news and commentary for CBS Local and Examiner.com and teaches English at a community college in the Chicago area. The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of CBS Local.
This past week, “2016: The Movie” about President Barack Obama opened in the Chicago area, and I chose to get more of an education about Obama by seeing the movie. After the inundation of canned hype for the movie on conservative talk shows across the Chicago radio dial that sounded more like commercials than honest endorsements of the movie, I was skeptical of what I was going to see.
While some talk show hosts sounded like they were genuinely impressed with the documentary and honestly endorsing the film, there were those who were obviously reading a commercial script which was not coming across as sincere to the regular listener – at least not to this often-skeptical listener. Perhaps, in future promotions of the film, it would be wise to have pre-recorded commercials done by the professional commercial-makers rather than having the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity doing script after script to promote the movie. After all, the listeners aren’t stupid and resent any attempt at being conned. After many reads by the talk show hosts, the readings of the commercial script were no more enthusiastic than another Life-Lock commercial read – another commercial that ought to be professionally done.
Yet, I’m glad I saw the hyped-film because it was more informative than I had thought it would be and included less propaganda than I had predicted. If anything, it was nearly too informative as there was an enormous amount of information condensed into the nearly one-hour-and-a-half documentary. Fact after fact is put forth which shows that President Obama definitely has many skeletons in the closet that have not been released prior to the nation’s trust in him with the Oval Office.
To watch this movie and realize – or simply be reminded of – all that is unknown about President Obama is of concern. Much of the information has been ignored by the American media totally. When appropriately reminded as to what is still unknown about Obama to date, one has to ask: How can any logical-thinking person give a damn about Romney’s taxes while not asking any questions regarding our current president’s past?
The man influences the entire globe, but liberal Americans want to know how much Mitt Romney paid in taxes in the past rather than learn about the man who they have entrusted with the country. Unbelievable.
The movie undeniably links Obama to persons of suspicious-interest due to their past actions and statements, such as former radical activist and Chicago educator Bill Ayers. While the media and blinded-liberals cast such facts aside, the movie does not. No, this portion of the movie is not propaganda – it is the display of factual information about relationships between people that cannot be denied. Yet, the “left” does deny the facts that are right in front of them.
Quite disturbing is the talk of the United States economy in the film. The current national debt which has increased two-fold during Obama’s presidency and the horrendous economy is suggested to be part of the plan to strip the nation of democracy – reasonable cause to make citizens totally dependent on the government. The “left” is aghast at this suggestion of the current economy. They actually believe that Obama is unintelligent enough to let this economy just happen. Ironically, it’s many of the people on the “right” who know Obama’s not stupid, and much of what has happened to the United States in the past four years is part of Obama’s plan.
How could one so-highly educated and intelligent as Obama not know what he was doing when he incurred such debt? I left the movie thinking more strongly than I had in the past that the current debt and this economy was part of Obama’s plan all along. Increasingly making Americans dependent on the government is the plan. What’s more, he knew his blind followers would believe it was not the plan and, of course, was all Bush’s fault.
He must be laughing at his blind followers all the way to the “new America” they’re allowing him to create. My belief is that Obama continues to prey on his die-hard followers’ stupidity to accomplish his personal goals for America.
The most disturbing part of the film to me was the interview with President Obama’s half-brother George Obama from Nairobi, Kenya. How can Obama claim to want to help people when he has done absolutely nothing for his own family? It makes me wonder if he really cares about anybody if he can’t find it in his heart to help his own family.
As the closing credits started to role upward across the screen, the audience applauded. Me, I just walked out – reasonably upset.
Those who have already decided to vote for Obama will probably not even see the movie. It’s sad but they probably don’t want to know the truth when it is laid out so clearly for them in this documentary. The independents who are still deciding who they are going to vote for ought to see this film. I’m quite confident that any undecided voter who sees this film will know who to vote for after viewing this documentary. If you know you’re not going to support the “left” in this coming election, see the film out of interest if you like. But, fair warning, it’s disturbing – and quite frightening – to say the least.
About Scott Paulson
Scott Paulson writes political news and commentary for CBS Local and Examiner.com and teaches English at a community college in the Chicago area. The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of CBS Local.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
This Guy Is Not Cool !
THIS GUY IS NOT COOL!!
Well, early Saturday morning we learned that Congressman Paul Ryan, Republican from Wisconsin , is to be Mitt Romney's pick for the next Vice President of The United States.
What are we to think of this selection? He's not a graduate of Columbia University . He's not a graduate of Harvard. He wasn't selected as the President of the Harvard Law Review. He didn't get a special free quota scholarship ride to any prestigious university and, instead, had to work his way through Miami University of Ohio. For God's sake the man drove the Oscar Mayer Wiener Truck one summer and waited tables another!
One morning when Paul Ryan was sixteen years old he went in to wake his father up and found him dead of a heart attack. He didn't write two books about that experience. Instead, he assumed the role of adult at an early age, never having the luxury to pursue youthful drug use and the art of socialist revolution.
Instead, Paul Ryan and his mother took his grandmother, suffering from Alzheimers, into the household and served as the primary care provider for his grandma. His grandma wasn't the Vice President of the Bank of Hawaii so she could offer nothing in return, except the element of "need".
Once Paul Ryan got his BA in Economics from Miami University of Ohio he was hired as a staff economist in Wisconsin Senator Kastin's office. The job must have not paid well because young Ryan moonlighted as a waiter and fitness trainer. No one offered him a "token honor" position at the University of Chicago and a $200,000 dollar a year salary.
When a still young Paul Ryan returned to Wisconsin to run for Congress he didn't demonize his opponent and dig up dirt to shovel against him. He waited until the standing Congressman vacated the office before seeking the office. In Janesville , Wisconsin they don't have a big political machine to promote you, to criminalize your opponent; instead Paul Ryan had to go door to door and sit at kitchen tables and listen to his future constituents.
After getting elected to Congress Paul Ryan didn't triumphantly march into Washington , buy himself a Georgetown townhouse and proceed over to K Street to rub elbows with lobbyists. He bunked in his Congressional office and used the house gym for showers and a fresh change of clothes.
Paul Ryan then married and took his bride back to Janesville . He lives on the same street he lived on as a kid and shares the neighborhood with eight other members of the Ryan clan. He hunts with the local Janesville hunt club and attends PTA meetings and other civic functions.
For those who can't make those public functions, Paul Ryan bought an old bread truck, converted it into a "mobile constituent office" and drives around to meet with those who need his help and attention.
No, I don't know if we can vote for a guy like this. He doesn't have a regal pedigree; he's Irish for God's sake! No one awarded him a Nobel Peace Prize two months after getting elected. No one threw flowers or got "chills down their leg" as a he took his seat in Congress.
What is most despicable about Paul Ryan is that he has had the nerve to write the House Budget for three years in a row. He is brazen and heartless in advocating in that budget for a $5 trillion dollar reduction in federal spending over the next ten years! The House passed his budget three years in a row and three years in a row the Democratically controlled Senate has let it die in the upper house, without ever proposing a budget of their own. What is wrong with this guy? If Congress were to cut $5 trillion dollars from the budget where would the President get the money to give $500 million dollars to a bankrupt Solyndra? Or $200 million dollars for bankrupt Energy 1? Or $11 billion dollars to illegal aliens filing INIT, non-resident tax returns to claim $11 billion big ones in child tax credits, even for their children living in Mexico ?
I don't know. Paul Ryan seems heartless to me. He keeps wanting to cut government waste, he keeps wanting to put a halt to those big GSA conventions in Vegas and, worse, he keeps trying to make people look at that $16.7 trillion dollar deficit! The guy's no fun at all!
Who wants a numbers cruncher? Who wants someone spoiling the party by showing folks the bill? Nothing will spoil a party quicker than sending the host the bill before the party's over.
Party Hearty folks! At least until November.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Thursday, August 23, 2012
When Will Obama Crack?
What would be your reaction if someone accused the Obama's of "acting Nigger Rich"? Off the scale racist, right? Now . . . . what if the person who made that comment was a prominent BLACK columnist? Very interesting article.
When will Obama crack in public?
By Mychal Massie
At a time when many Americans can barely afford Burger King and a movie, Obama boasts of spending a billion dollars on his re-election campaign. Questioned at a recent appearance about the spiraling fuel costs, Obama said, "Get used to it" and with an insouciant grin and chortle, he told another person at the event, who complained about the effect high fuel prices were having on his family, to "get a more fuel-efficient car."
The Obamas behave as if they were sharecroppers living in a trailer and hit the Powerball, but instead of getting new tires for their trailer and a new pickup truck, they moved to Washington . And instead of making possum pie, with goats and chickens in the front yard, they're spending and living large at taxpayer expense opulent vacations, gala balls, resplendent dinners and exclusive command performances at the White House, grand date nights, golf, basketball, more golf, exclusive resorts and still more golf. In the 1950's they called it acting NIGGER RICH.
Expensive, ill-fitting and ill-chosen wigs and fashions hardly befit the first lady of the United States. The Obamas have behaved in every way but presidential which is why it's so offensive when we hear Obama say, in order "to restore fiscal responsibility, we all need to share in the sacrifice but we don't have to sacrifice the America we believe in."
The American people have been sacrificing; it is he and his family who are behaving as if they've never had two nickels to rub together � and now, having hit the mother lode, they're going to spend away their feelings of inadequacy at the taxpayers' expense.
Obama continues to exhibit behavior that, at best, can be described as mobocratic and, at worst, reveals a deeply damaged individual. In a February 2010 column, I asked, "Is Obama unraveling? "I wrote that it was beginning to appear the growing mistrust of him and contempt for his policies was beginning to have a destabilizing effect on him.
At that time, I wrote that not having things go one's way can be a bitter pill, but reasonable people don't behave as he was behaving. He had insulted Republicans at their luncheon, where he had been an invited guest. I had speculated that was, in part, what had led him to falsely accuse Supreme Court justices before Congress, the nation and the world, during the 2010 State of the Union address.
It appeared, at that time, as if he were "fraying around the emotional edges." That behavior has not abated � it has become more pronounced. While addressing the nation, after being forced to explain the validity of his unilateral aggression with Libya , America witnessed a petulant individual scowling and scolding the public for daring to insist he explain his actions.
But during an afternoon speech to address the budget/debt, he took his scornful, unstable despotic behavior to depths that should give the nation cause for concern. Displaying a dark psychopathy more representative of an episode of "The Tudors" television series, he invited Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to sit in the front row during his speech and then proceeded to berate both Ryan and Ryan's budget-cutting plan. Even liberal Democrats were put off by the act. MSNBC's Joe Scarborough questioned the sanity of Obama's actions.
Today, criticism is coming from all sides. A senior Democrat lawmaker said, "I have been very disappointed in [Obama], to the point where I'm embarrassed that I endorsed him. It's so bad that some of us are thinking, is there some way we can replace him? How do you get rid of this guy?" ("Democrats' Disgust with Obama," The Daily Beast, April 15, 2011)
Steve McCann wrote: Obama's speech "was chock full of lies, deceit and crass fear-mongering. It must be said that [he] is the most dishonest, deceitful and mendacious person in a position of power I have ever witnessed" ("The Mendacity of Barack Obama,"AmericanThinker.com , April 15, 2011).
McCann continued: "[His] performance was the culmination of four years of outright lies and narcissism that have been largely ignored by the media, including some in the conservative press and political class who are loath to call [him] what he is in the bluntest of terms: a liar and a fraud. That he relies on his skin color to in timidate, either outright or by insinuation [against] those who oppose his radical agenda only add to his audacity. It is apparent that he has gotten away with his character flaws his entire life, aided and abetted by sycophants around him. ..."
With these being among the kinder rebukes being directed at Obama, and with people becoming less in timidated by his willingness to use race as a bludgeon, with falling poll numbers in every meaningful category and an increasingly aggressive tea-party opposition � how much longer before he cracks completely?
The coming months of political life are not going to be pleasant for Obama. Possessed by a self-perceived palatine mindset, that in his mind places him above criticism, how long before he cracks in public? Can America risk a man with a documented track record of lying and misrepresenting truth as a basic way of life, who is becoming increasingly more contumelious?
Hope you forward this to everyone in your address book as we are going to need every vote we can get to remove Obama. The liberals are just unable to absorb what he is doing to our country and will continue to vote for him. Just imagine what he will do to America if he gets another term!
ObamaCare Punishes Hospitals
More than 2,200 hospitals face penalties under ObamaCare rules
By Jonathan SerriePublished August 23, 2012FoxNews.com
Obamacare vs. Medicare
A provision of ObamaCare is set to punish roughly two-thirds of U.S. hospitals evaluated by Medicare starting this fall over high readmission rates, according to an analysis by Kaiser Health News.
Starting in October, Medicare will reduce reimbursements to hospitals with high 30-day readmission rates -- which refers to patients who return within a month -- by as much as 1 percent. The maximum penalty increases to 2 percent the following year and 3 percent in 2014.
Doctors are concerned the penalty is unfair, since sometimes they have to accept patients more than once in a brief period of time but could be penalized for doing so -- even for accepting seniors who are sick.
"Among patients with heart failure, hospitals that have higher readmission rates actually have lower mortality rates," said Sunil Kripalani, MD, a professor with Vanderbilt University Medical Center who studies hospital readmissions. "So, which would we rather have -- a hospital readmission or a death?"
But according to federal government figures, nearly one in five Medicare patients is readmitted to a hospital within 30 days of release, costing taxpayers an estimated $17.5 billion.
"Readmissions has been a low-hanging fruit for Medicare," said Jordan Rau, a staff writer with KHN, an editorially independent program of the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation. "They've been very unhappy that about 2 million Medicare beneficiaries are being readmitted every year between 30 days of discharge."
Medicare evaluated readmission rates at 3,367 of the nation's hospitals and will impose penalties on 2,211 starting in October, according to KHN. The analysis shows 278 hospitals will receive this year's maximum penalty of 1 percent. On the other side of the spectrum, 50 hospitals will receive the minimum penalty of 0.01 percent, KHN reports.
The penalties are intended to create financial incentives for the quality of care hospitals provide, instead of the number of procedures. But physicians debate whether readmission rates are the best measure of outcomes.
Kripalani and some other physicians are concerned that readmissions-based penalties may have a disproportionate effect on research hospitals because they handle large numbers of complex cases.
"Often these kinds of institutions take care of the most sick patients," Kripalani said. "They're sent patients by other hospitals because of specific expertise they have. So, perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that some of the nation's best hospitals do have slightly higher readmission rates compared to other hospitals."
The list of hospitals facing penalties includes nationally known names such as Vanderbilt, University of Chicago Medical Center and Massachusetts General, according to Medicare data compiled by KHN.
Some physicians are also concerned about what impact Medicare penalties will have on "safety-net" hospitals that treat large numbers of poor patients with limited access to primary and followup care. However, researchers who helped Medicare develop its quality assessment guidelines say the measures take into account the relative illness of patients coming into each hospital.
"The readmission measures are risk-adjusted measures," said Susannah Bernheim, MD, director of quality measurement programs at Yale School of Medicine's Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation (CORE). "So, if safety-net hospitals are caring for patients that are generally sicker, that's going to be accounted for by the measures. What I think is really remarkable is how well many safety-net hospitals in this country do on the readmission measure."
Bernheim added that the risk-adjustment also applies to research/teaching hospitals serving the sickest patients.
"These measures represent what a patient really experiences," Bernheim said. "And as long as they're designed in a scientifically sound way, they're going to really help move the quality of our health care system forward in meaningful ways."
Physicians debate how much control hospitals actually have over readmission rates since many patients return after failing to follow recommended outpatient treatment, medication and dietary guidelines.
But faced with penalties, the nation's medical centers now have a financial incentive to seek improvements to the way they follow up with patients after they're released.
"There's a real question and a real heavy debate about whether it's fair to hold the hospital responsible for that," Rau of Kaiser Health News said. "Medicare's answer has been that the problem overall with the health care system is that no one's ever in charge. And so they've decided to tell the hospitals, 'Like it or not, your fault or not, you're in charge.'"
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/23/more-than-2200-hospitals-face-penalties-for-high-readmissions/#ixzz24OzOMg8k
Ryan's Medicare plan
Obama frequently attacks Ryan's Medicare plan -- but is he correct?
By Jim Angle
Published August 22, 2012
FoxNews.com
Aug. 22, 2012: Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., speaks during a campaign event at SMT, Inc. in Raleigh, N.C.
Though the Medicare plan proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan has bipartisan support, the Obama campaign went after it early and often after Ryan was selected as Mitt Romney's running mate.
President Obama ripped into the plan before a crowd in Rochester, N.H., last weekend.
"Their plan would shorten the life of Medicare and end Medicare as we know it, because they'd turn it into a voucher system," he said.
At another stop, in Windham, N.H., he repeated the assertions, adding that it would be "a plan in which you could not count on health care because it would have to be coming out of your pocket."
Actually, the Ryan plan would affect no one who today is 55 or older. Then, in 2023, private insurers could bid for seniors' health insurance alongside traditional Medicare.
Ryan's plan would offer federal money to cover premiums equal to the second lowest bidder -- an amount updated every year -- meaning seniors would always have at least two choices of plans at no cost.
“A senior would have the option of taking that plan, taking a cheaper plan and pocketing some of the savings, or taking a more expensive plan and paying the difference,” senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute Avik Roy said.
"It's not going to be an entirely different structure," Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center said. "It's going to be very much building upon things that are already there."
In part, because the plans would have to offer the same benefits Medicare does, and because private insurers already provide plans to one in four Medicare recipients -- something called Medicare Advantage -- they're attractive because they cover more than regular Medicare, avoiding the cost of supplemental plans called Medigap.
"They often will sign up for a Medicare Advantage plan because they get more comprehensive coverage without the need for a second plan," Capretta said.
He added that many of the same advantages are in the Ryan plan.
Nevertheless, Obama told a group in East Davenport, Iowa, last week that seniors would get stuck with the bill if they choose to opt out of Medicare.
"They'd get a voucher to buy private insurance," he said. "And if it doesn't keep up with costs, well, that's the seniors' problem."
The Congressional Budget Office couldn't quantify the savings from competition in an earlier Ryan plan, so it assumed the cost of private plans would increase as much as health care generally, while the premium support was to be fixed.
So Ryan changed the plan -- so much so that it's now co-sponsored by liberal Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, who believes the current system is doomed to fail.
In an interview with Fox News about his embracing of the Ryan plan, Wyden predicts "a steady diet of benefit reductions for senior citizens and cost shifting."
"That will all take place until the Medicare guarantee is threatened, and I'm just not going to sit by and let that happen," he said.
"The whole idea is that this competitive process would lead to cheaper insurance for seniors at the same level of benefits that they currently enjoy," Roy said.
Since Medicare has promised tens of trillions of dollars more in benefits that it can possibly pay for, Ryan and Wyden argue it must be changed in order to survive.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/22/obama-campaign-attacks-ryan-medicare-plan-early-frequently/#ixzz24N4KMISI
By Jim Angle
Published August 22, 2012
FoxNews.com
Aug. 22, 2012: Republican vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., speaks during a campaign event at SMT, Inc. in Raleigh, N.C.
Though the Medicare plan proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan has bipartisan support, the Obama campaign went after it early and often after Ryan was selected as Mitt Romney's running mate.
President Obama ripped into the plan before a crowd in Rochester, N.H., last weekend.
"Their plan would shorten the life of Medicare and end Medicare as we know it, because they'd turn it into a voucher system," he said.
At another stop, in Windham, N.H., he repeated the assertions, adding that it would be "a plan in which you could not count on health care because it would have to be coming out of your pocket."
Actually, the Ryan plan would affect no one who today is 55 or older. Then, in 2023, private insurers could bid for seniors' health insurance alongside traditional Medicare.
Ryan's plan would offer federal money to cover premiums equal to the second lowest bidder -- an amount updated every year -- meaning seniors would always have at least two choices of plans at no cost.
“A senior would have the option of taking that plan, taking a cheaper plan and pocketing some of the savings, or taking a more expensive plan and paying the difference,” senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute Avik Roy said.
"It's not going to be an entirely different structure," Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center said. "It's going to be very much building upon things that are already there."
In part, because the plans would have to offer the same benefits Medicare does, and because private insurers already provide plans to one in four Medicare recipients -- something called Medicare Advantage -- they're attractive because they cover more than regular Medicare, avoiding the cost of supplemental plans called Medigap.
"They often will sign up for a Medicare Advantage plan because they get more comprehensive coverage without the need for a second plan," Capretta said.
He added that many of the same advantages are in the Ryan plan.
Nevertheless, Obama told a group in East Davenport, Iowa, last week that seniors would get stuck with the bill if they choose to opt out of Medicare.
"They'd get a voucher to buy private insurance," he said. "And if it doesn't keep up with costs, well, that's the seniors' problem."
The Congressional Budget Office couldn't quantify the savings from competition in an earlier Ryan plan, so it assumed the cost of private plans would increase as much as health care generally, while the premium support was to be fixed.
So Ryan changed the plan -- so much so that it's now co-sponsored by liberal Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, who believes the current system is doomed to fail.
In an interview with Fox News about his embracing of the Ryan plan, Wyden predicts "a steady diet of benefit reductions for senior citizens and cost shifting."
"That will all take place until the Medicare guarantee is threatened, and I'm just not going to sit by and let that happen," he said.
"The whole idea is that this competitive process would lead to cheaper insurance for seniors at the same level of benefits that they currently enjoy," Roy said.
Since Medicare has promised tens of trillions of dollars more in benefits that it can possibly pay for, Ryan and Wyden argue it must be changed in order to survive.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/22/obama-campaign-attacks-ryan-medicare-plan-early-frequently/#ixzz24N4KMISI
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Are We Set To Go Full Blown Socialist?
PJ O'Rourke, comparing the socialist - or, better, the progressive - agenda to "hay and a barn for human cattle."
'Issues'? Or America?
By Thomas Sowell
There are some very serious issues at stake in this year's election — so many that some people may not be able to see the forest for the trees. Individual issues are the trees, but the forest is the future of America as we have known it.
The America that has flourished for more than two centuries is being quietly but steadily dismantled by the Obama administration, during the process of dealing with particular issues.
For example, the merits or demerits of President Obama's recent executive order, suspending legal liability for young people who are here illegally, presumably as a result of being brought here as children by their parents, can be debated pro and con. But such a debate overlooks the much more fundamental undermining of the whole American system of Constitutional government.
The separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches of government is at the heart of the Constitution of the United States — and the Constitution is at the heart of freedom for Americans.
No President of the United States is authorized to repeal parts of legislation passed by Congress. He may veto the whole legislation, but then Congress can override his veto if they have enough votes. Nevertheless, every President takes an oath to faithfully execute the laws that have been passed and sustained — not just the ones he happens to agree with.
If laws passed by the elected representatives of the people can be simply over-ruled unilaterally by whoever is in the White House, then we are no longer a free people, choosing what laws we want to live under.
When a President can ignore the plain language of duly passed laws, and substitute his own executive orders, then we no longer have "a government of laws, and not of men" but a President ruling by decree, like the dictator in some banana republic.
When we confine our debates to the merits or demerits of particular executive orders, we are tacitly accepting arbitrary rule. The Constitution of the United States cannot protect us unless we protect the Constitution. But, if we allow ourselves to get bogged down in the details of particular policies imposed by executive orders, and vote solely on that basis, then we have failed to protect the Constitution — and ourselves.
Whatever the merits or demerits of the No Child Left Behind Act, it is the law until Congress either repeals it or amends it. But for Barack Obama to unilaterally waive whatever provisions he doesn't like in that law undermines the fundamental nature of American government.
President Obama has likewise unilaterally repealed the legal requirement that welfare recipients must work, by simply redefining "work" to include other things like going to classes on weight control. If we think the bipartisan welfare reform legislation from the Clinton administration should be repealed or amended, that is something for the legislative branch of government to consider.
There have been many wise warnings that freedom is seldom lost all at once. It is usually eroded away, bit by bit, until it is all gone. You may not notice a gradual erosion while it is going on, but you may eventually be shocked to discover one day that it is all gone, that we have been reduced from citizens to subjects, and the Constitution has become just a meaningless bunch of paper.
ObamaCare imposes huge costs on some institutions, while the President's arbitrary waivers exempt other institutions from having to pay those same costs. That is hardly the "equal protection of the laws," promised by the 14th Amendment.
John Stuart Mill explained the dangers in that kind of government long ago: "A government with all this mass of favours to give or to withhold, however free in name, wields a power of bribery scarcely surpassed by an avowed autocracy, rendering it master of the elections in almost any circumstances but those of rare and extraordinary public excitement."
If Obama gets reelected, he knows that he need no longer worry about what the voters think about anything he does. Never having to face them again, he can take his arbitrary rule by decree as far as he wants. He may be challenged in the courts but, if he gets just one more Supreme Court appointment, he can pick someone who will rubber stamp anything he does and give him a 5 to 4 majority.
'Issues'? Or America?
By Thomas Sowell
There are some very serious issues at stake in this year's election — so many that some people may not be able to see the forest for the trees. Individual issues are the trees, but the forest is the future of America as we have known it.
The America that has flourished for more than two centuries is being quietly but steadily dismantled by the Obama administration, during the process of dealing with particular issues.
For example, the merits or demerits of President Obama's recent executive order, suspending legal liability for young people who are here illegally, presumably as a result of being brought here as children by their parents, can be debated pro and con. But such a debate overlooks the much more fundamental undermining of the whole American system of Constitutional government.
The separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches of government is at the heart of the Constitution of the United States — and the Constitution is at the heart of freedom for Americans.
No President of the United States is authorized to repeal parts of legislation passed by Congress. He may veto the whole legislation, but then Congress can override his veto if they have enough votes. Nevertheless, every President takes an oath to faithfully execute the laws that have been passed and sustained — not just the ones he happens to agree with.
If laws passed by the elected representatives of the people can be simply over-ruled unilaterally by whoever is in the White House, then we are no longer a free people, choosing what laws we want to live under.
When a President can ignore the plain language of duly passed laws, and substitute his own executive orders, then we no longer have "a government of laws, and not of men" but a President ruling by decree, like the dictator in some banana republic.
When we confine our debates to the merits or demerits of particular executive orders, we are tacitly accepting arbitrary rule. The Constitution of the United States cannot protect us unless we protect the Constitution. But, if we allow ourselves to get bogged down in the details of particular policies imposed by executive orders, and vote solely on that basis, then we have failed to protect the Constitution — and ourselves.
Whatever the merits or demerits of the No Child Left Behind Act, it is the law until Congress either repeals it or amends it. But for Barack Obama to unilaterally waive whatever provisions he doesn't like in that law undermines the fundamental nature of American government.
President Obama has likewise unilaterally repealed the legal requirement that welfare recipients must work, by simply redefining "work" to include other things like going to classes on weight control. If we think the bipartisan welfare reform legislation from the Clinton administration should be repealed or amended, that is something for the legislative branch of government to consider.
There have been many wise warnings that freedom is seldom lost all at once. It is usually eroded away, bit by bit, until it is all gone. You may not notice a gradual erosion while it is going on, but you may eventually be shocked to discover one day that it is all gone, that we have been reduced from citizens to subjects, and the Constitution has become just a meaningless bunch of paper.
ObamaCare imposes huge costs on some institutions, while the President's arbitrary waivers exempt other institutions from having to pay those same costs. That is hardly the "equal protection of the laws," promised by the 14th Amendment.
John Stuart Mill explained the dangers in that kind of government long ago: "A government with all this mass of favours to give or to withhold, however free in name, wields a power of bribery scarcely surpassed by an avowed autocracy, rendering it master of the elections in almost any circumstances but those of rare and extraordinary public excitement."
If Obama gets reelected, he knows that he need no longer worry about what the voters think about anything he does. Never having to face them again, he can take his arbitrary rule by decree as far as he wants. He may be challenged in the courts but, if he gets just one more Supreme Court appointment, he can pick someone who will rubber stamp anything he does and give him a 5 to 4 majority.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Radical Islam Joins DNC
Radical Islam Joins the DNC
Posted by Breeanne Howe (Diary)
Tuesday, August 21st at 8:30AM EDT
Starting at the end of this month the Democratic National Convention will open with a focus on Islam. 20,000 Muslims are expected to attend according to the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs (BIMA), the national Muslim American non-profit coordinating the two days of events they claim are non-political. ”Jumah at the DNC” begins August 29 and will start with a Friday afternoon jummah prayer followed by other unnamed programs and events, leading up to the Islamic Regal Banquet. The following day will be an all day Islamic Cultural and Fun Fest which will include discussions on the topics of Islamaphobia, Anti-Shariah, Middle Eastern Crisis, Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and more. The purpose, according to BIMA, is to attract national and international attention to the plight of American Muslims and to hold political parties accountable for issues that affect them. However, not all Muslims feel that BIMA represents them and M. Zuhdi Jasser M.D., Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, has expressed serious concerns.
It is troubling that the Democratic National Convention has decided to promote and lend its name and national political platform to the organizers of the “Jummah at the DNC”. The leaders of this event – Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj as advertised are no moderates. They are radicals. These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies.
A quick Google search by the DNC would have shown them that Hough and Wahhaj are leaders in the separatist American Islamist movement. While they may be able to get a few thousand Muslims to attend the event, they are NOT going to be mainstream Muslims. Most will likely come from Hough and Wahhaj’s radical networks that have long been entrenched in the Charlotte area. Make no mistake they are part of the Islamist movement.
This is not about their right of assembly; this group under a different name pulled the same stunt at the US capitol in 2009 claiming 20k and getting 2-3k. THIS IS ABOUT the DNC calling this an “official function” listing these radicals as typical of the DNC community and more importantly about this organization speaking out AS representing supposedly typical American Muslims (or “Mainstream”).
If that is who the DNC is consorting with then all Americans, Democrats should be concerned. There are many patriotic Muslims who are part of both parties, and when radical ideologues like this do a demonstration of “solidarity” in the name of our faith and choose an imam like Siraj Wahhaj who I saw with my own eyes in 1995 seditiously say it his duty and our duty as Muslims to replace the US Constitution with the Quran- then we need to speak up!
Their jummah (group) prayer is supposedly against the Patriot Act, the NYPD, and Islamophobia and is actually NOT about our democracy but about empowering their Islamist and MB (Muslim Brotherhood) sympathetic groups into the very fabric of the political system so that Americans become anesthetized. We need American Muslims to speak up and marginalize these radicals. The DNC needs to understand and reject them because of their radical history and ideas.
They use our American Muslim identity to speak as “one community” as a political unit or as a “bloc vote” – a political Islamist party when in fact most us Muslims don’t want that political unity and seek reform against their ideology that seeks to hijack our community. They do not represent us. (emphasis mine)
In fact, Zuhdi Jasser is correct, Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj have said and done radical things in their past. Which means either the Democrats failed to utilize due diligence or they simply didn’t care. In addition to the Muslims being misrepresented, Democrats and Charlotteans also have a right to know how the DNC has failed them before they even arrive in Charlotte.
Jibril Hough may be a name many in Charlotte are familiar with already. He is the leader of a Sunni mosque, The Islamic Center of Charlotte, who is been known for being outspoken against Representative Sue Myrick – a North Carolina Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee. Beyond calling her plan to fight against jihadist activity in America “a fear campaign” and the “new McCarthyism (or Myrickism)”, he confronted her in a Muslim Town Hall he organized in 2010. According to Jasser, the language used by Hough as his Town Hall was strikingly similar to that of the Muslim Brotherhood when he stated, “As citizens of a non-Muslim country and as American Muslims, we have a contract with America and not a contract on America. This means that we must abide by the laws of this state and we cannot be at war with this state.” As Jasser points out, “note the deep seeded separatism in this ‘we’ mindset. Basically he is saying that this system of laws is not his or the Muslims he represents but they will follow it-for now.” Further, Hough commented on his support of laws that would mandate “Muslim” behaviors for American-Muslims, but wouldn’t affect nonMuslims; again Jasser notes Hough’s separatist tone that mimics political Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood mindset, which supports “separate legal paths for each faith” instead of “one law based in reason”. Jibril has also stated he is the North Carolina head of the Islamic Political Party of America(IPPA), based in Charlotte, who in a 2002 press release claimed the Jews were behind 9/11. As if that weren’t enough, IPPA is close to another organization known as Jamaat Al Muslimeen (JAM), The Islamic Peoples Movement, who (in addition to being Holocaust deniers) had this advice for President Obama:
He should ensure that those Muslims he talks to do represent authentic Islam. All Islamic movements oppose America’s policies. If Obama talks to Muslims who support America’s policies, it will be an exercise in futility.
In response to Hough accusing Rep. Myrick of being anti-Muslim, he was interviewed on the formerly conservative radio station WBT in Charlotte. Radio host Keith Larson questioned him as to why his mosque was owned by The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), an organization blacklisted by the U.S. Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror finance case in U.S. history. According to the government, NAIT is also a front for HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood in America. Hough, when presented by Larson with the documents, claimed he didn’t realize his mosque was owned by NAIT and was also unaware that they had been blacklisted. Hough went on in the interview to defend HAMAS and accuse the U.S. and Israel of the only “real” terrorism.
Imam Siraj Wahhaj is imam of a mosque in Brooklyn, New York, the leader of The Muslim Alliance in North America, a member of CAIR, and an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. As a character witness for Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheik) who was convicted of plotting to blow up the World Trade Center and other New York City landmarks, Wahhaj described him as a “respected scholar,” and “bold, as a strong preacher of Islam.” Wahhaj is also a Board of Trustee member of the North American Imams Federation (NAIF)(who’s website currently features an anti-Jewish, anti-black rant), a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, who (coincidentally) held a conference in Charlotte last year on Islamophobia. Like Hough, Wahhaj is also connected to NAIT by way of his membership in the Islamic Society of North America(ISNA), which was also found by the government to be a front for HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood. While Hough has been careful to play politics in Charlotte, Wahhaj has not hidden his hatred for America. He is quoted as calling America, “a garbage can… filthy, filthy and sick.” As an imam, he has stated, “Where ever you came from, you came to America. And you came for one reason – for one reason only- to establish Allah’s deen (a complete way of life).” He believes that the only reason to get involved in politics is to use it as a weapon in the cause of Islam. By his own admission, the question of why Wahhaj would be interested in hosting events at the DNC is obvious.
How BIMA gained access to the DNC is more of a mystery. Muhammad Heshaam Jaaber, the Executive Director, Jibril Hough, spokesman, and Captain James Yusuf Yee, BIMA National Representative for the DNC are the only publicly identified members and each one appears to be connected to U.S. Representative Keith Ellison; the first Muslim ever to be elected to Congress and a former supporter of Louis Farrakhan. Ellison, who attended President Obama’s Iftar Dinner earlier this month, made the news last month when Representative Michelle Bachmann called for him (among others) to be investigated for ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether or not he has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Ellison is not far from them having associates within BIMA. Jasser points out that Hough sought advice from Ellison before proceeding with his Town Hall with Rep. Myrick. Captain Yee (who will be speaking at the event) appears in BIMA’s promotional video for Jumah at the DNC quoting Ellison as saying, “If you’re not at the table, then you’re on the menu.” Yee is described by BIMA as “a chaplain in the U.S. Military” and an “eye witness to to the unjust treatment of military detainees and prisoners of Guantanamo Bay” who was allegedly detained “when he took steps to prevent the injustice.” However, BIMA fails to mention that Yee was charged by the military with sedition, aiding the enemy, spying, espionage and failure to obey a general order; charges ultimately dropped due to national security concerns about releasing evidence in the case. Also speaking will be Hassen Abdellah, who BIMA has no problem admitting was “a lead defense attorney for the 1993 First World Trade bombing suspects” Ellison has also appeared alongside Wahhaj on many speaking engagements for organizations such as ISNA and NAIF, despite both organizations being fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood. If Ellison is the link between BIMA and the DNC, then can it be said that, not only does he not mind the questionable associations of those within the organization, but also the other speakers they will be bringing in?
BIMA has stated they have smaller events planned for the Republican National Convention, however when reached out to, GOP convention staff said they have no knowledge of any events planned in or around Tampa at the time. With the Democratic National Convention only a couple weeks away, it will be interesting to see if the media chooses to cover what one would assume to be a controversial start to renominate President Barack Obama.
Posted by Breeanne Howe (Diary)
Tuesday, August 21st at 8:30AM EDT
Starting at the end of this month the Democratic National Convention will open with a focus on Islam. 20,000 Muslims are expected to attend according to the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs (BIMA), the national Muslim American non-profit coordinating the two days of events they claim are non-political. ”Jumah at the DNC” begins August 29 and will start with a Friday afternoon jummah prayer followed by other unnamed programs and events, leading up to the Islamic Regal Banquet. The following day will be an all day Islamic Cultural and Fun Fest which will include discussions on the topics of Islamaphobia, Anti-Shariah, Middle Eastern Crisis, Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and more. The purpose, according to BIMA, is to attract national and international attention to the plight of American Muslims and to hold political parties accountable for issues that affect them. However, not all Muslims feel that BIMA represents them and M. Zuhdi Jasser M.D., Founder and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, has expressed serious concerns.
It is troubling that the Democratic National Convention has decided to promote and lend its name and national political platform to the organizers of the “Jummah at the DNC”. The leaders of this event – Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj as advertised are no moderates. They are radicals. These individuals embrace Islamist supremacy and have demonstrated support for radical ideologies.
A quick Google search by the DNC would have shown them that Hough and Wahhaj are leaders in the separatist American Islamist movement. While they may be able to get a few thousand Muslims to attend the event, they are NOT going to be mainstream Muslims. Most will likely come from Hough and Wahhaj’s radical networks that have long been entrenched in the Charlotte area. Make no mistake they are part of the Islamist movement.
This is not about their right of assembly; this group under a different name pulled the same stunt at the US capitol in 2009 claiming 20k and getting 2-3k. THIS IS ABOUT the DNC calling this an “official function” listing these radicals as typical of the DNC community and more importantly about this organization speaking out AS representing supposedly typical American Muslims (or “Mainstream”).
If that is who the DNC is consorting with then all Americans, Democrats should be concerned. There are many patriotic Muslims who are part of both parties, and when radical ideologues like this do a demonstration of “solidarity” in the name of our faith and choose an imam like Siraj Wahhaj who I saw with my own eyes in 1995 seditiously say it his duty and our duty as Muslims to replace the US Constitution with the Quran- then we need to speak up!
Their jummah (group) prayer is supposedly against the Patriot Act, the NYPD, and Islamophobia and is actually NOT about our democracy but about empowering their Islamist and MB (Muslim Brotherhood) sympathetic groups into the very fabric of the political system so that Americans become anesthetized. We need American Muslims to speak up and marginalize these radicals. The DNC needs to understand and reject them because of their radical history and ideas.
They use our American Muslim identity to speak as “one community” as a political unit or as a “bloc vote” – a political Islamist party when in fact most us Muslims don’t want that political unity and seek reform against their ideology that seeks to hijack our community. They do not represent us. (emphasis mine)
In fact, Zuhdi Jasser is correct, Jibril Hough and Imam Siraj Wahhaj have said and done radical things in their past. Which means either the Democrats failed to utilize due diligence or they simply didn’t care. In addition to the Muslims being misrepresented, Democrats and Charlotteans also have a right to know how the DNC has failed them before they even arrive in Charlotte.
Jibril Hough may be a name many in Charlotte are familiar with already. He is the leader of a Sunni mosque, The Islamic Center of Charlotte, who is been known for being outspoken against Representative Sue Myrick – a North Carolina Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee. Beyond calling her plan to fight against jihadist activity in America “a fear campaign” and the “new McCarthyism (or Myrickism)”, he confronted her in a Muslim Town Hall he organized in 2010. According to Jasser, the language used by Hough as his Town Hall was strikingly similar to that of the Muslim Brotherhood when he stated, “As citizens of a non-Muslim country and as American Muslims, we have a contract with America and not a contract on America. This means that we must abide by the laws of this state and we cannot be at war with this state.” As Jasser points out, “note the deep seeded separatism in this ‘we’ mindset. Basically he is saying that this system of laws is not his or the Muslims he represents but they will follow it-for now.” Further, Hough commented on his support of laws that would mandate “Muslim” behaviors for American-Muslims, but wouldn’t affect nonMuslims; again Jasser notes Hough’s separatist tone that mimics political Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood mindset, which supports “separate legal paths for each faith” instead of “one law based in reason”. Jibril has also stated he is the North Carolina head of the Islamic Political Party of America(IPPA), based in Charlotte, who in a 2002 press release claimed the Jews were behind 9/11. As if that weren’t enough, IPPA is close to another organization known as Jamaat Al Muslimeen (JAM), The Islamic Peoples Movement, who (in addition to being Holocaust deniers) had this advice for President Obama:
He should ensure that those Muslims he talks to do represent authentic Islam. All Islamic movements oppose America’s policies. If Obama talks to Muslims who support America’s policies, it will be an exercise in futility.
In response to Hough accusing Rep. Myrick of being anti-Muslim, he was interviewed on the formerly conservative radio station WBT in Charlotte. Radio host Keith Larson questioned him as to why his mosque was owned by The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), an organization blacklisted by the U.S. Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terror finance case in U.S. history. According to the government, NAIT is also a front for HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood in America. Hough, when presented by Larson with the documents, claimed he didn’t realize his mosque was owned by NAIT and was also unaware that they had been blacklisted. Hough went on in the interview to defend HAMAS and accuse the U.S. and Israel of the only “real” terrorism.
Imam Siraj Wahhaj is imam of a mosque in Brooklyn, New York, the leader of The Muslim Alliance in North America, a member of CAIR, and an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. As a character witness for Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheik) who was convicted of plotting to blow up the World Trade Center and other New York City landmarks, Wahhaj described him as a “respected scholar,” and “bold, as a strong preacher of Islam.” Wahhaj is also a Board of Trustee member of the North American Imams Federation (NAIF)(who’s website currently features an anti-Jewish, anti-black rant), a Muslim Brotherhood front organization, who (coincidentally) held a conference in Charlotte last year on Islamophobia. Like Hough, Wahhaj is also connected to NAIT by way of his membership in the Islamic Society of North America(ISNA), which was also found by the government to be a front for HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood. While Hough has been careful to play politics in Charlotte, Wahhaj has not hidden his hatred for America. He is quoted as calling America, “a garbage can… filthy, filthy and sick.” As an imam, he has stated, “Where ever you came from, you came to America. And you came for one reason – for one reason only- to establish Allah’s deen (a complete way of life).” He believes that the only reason to get involved in politics is to use it as a weapon in the cause of Islam. By his own admission, the question of why Wahhaj would be interested in hosting events at the DNC is obvious.
How BIMA gained access to the DNC is more of a mystery. Muhammad Heshaam Jaaber, the Executive Director, Jibril Hough, spokesman, and Captain James Yusuf Yee, BIMA National Representative for the DNC are the only publicly identified members and each one appears to be connected to U.S. Representative Keith Ellison; the first Muslim ever to be elected to Congress and a former supporter of Louis Farrakhan. Ellison, who attended President Obama’s Iftar Dinner earlier this month, made the news last month when Representative Michelle Bachmann called for him (among others) to be investigated for ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether or not he has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Ellison is not far from them having associates within BIMA. Jasser points out that Hough sought advice from Ellison before proceeding with his Town Hall with Rep. Myrick. Captain Yee (who will be speaking at the event) appears in BIMA’s promotional video for Jumah at the DNC quoting Ellison as saying, “If you’re not at the table, then you’re on the menu.” Yee is described by BIMA as “a chaplain in the U.S. Military” and an “eye witness to to the unjust treatment of military detainees and prisoners of Guantanamo Bay” who was allegedly detained “when he took steps to prevent the injustice.” However, BIMA fails to mention that Yee was charged by the military with sedition, aiding the enemy, spying, espionage and failure to obey a general order; charges ultimately dropped due to national security concerns about releasing evidence in the case. Also speaking will be Hassen Abdellah, who BIMA has no problem admitting was “a lead defense attorney for the 1993 First World Trade bombing suspects” Ellison has also appeared alongside Wahhaj on many speaking engagements for organizations such as ISNA and NAIF, despite both organizations being fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood. If Ellison is the link between BIMA and the DNC, then can it be said that, not only does he not mind the questionable associations of those within the organization, but also the other speakers they will be bringing in?
BIMA has stated they have smaller events planned for the Republican National Convention, however when reached out to, GOP convention staff said they have no knowledge of any events planned in or around Tampa at the time. With the Democratic National Convention only a couple weeks away, it will be interesting to see if the media chooses to cover what one would assume to be a controversial start to renominate President Barack Obama.
Monday, August 20, 2012
A Word From Our Sponsor
Gluten Free Nail Treatment that WORKS – Rx4Nails
by THE GAL on AUGUST 14, 2012
Ugh, there it went again! Your nail just split on the side, forcing you to trim it so far back that the sensitive nail bed is trying to peek out from under the shortened nail. In frustration, you begin searching for something to strengthen them, perhaps one of those nail treatments on the end of the Walmart’s cosmetic/self-care aisles. But as you begin searching labels, you start to see a similar pattern… Wheat germ oil, vitamin e (wheat derived), wheat extract, etc. They all have gluten in them! Well then, what can you do for your poor nails?
This is a dilemma I’ve been facing for some time and had no idea where to turn. But one of my super smart and savvy readers found this place. Rx4Nails is an organic, all natural, gluten free nail and cuticle oil for “Longer, Stronger, Healthier Nails. Guaranteed!”
I was pretty excited at the prospect of this oil. It sounded- well, perfect! Chris, the owner and creator of Rx4Nails, came up with Rx4Nails while helping with a specialty food product. While being elbow-deep in work, she realized her nails had suddenly had a serious growing spurt. Curious and instantly aware how valuable this could be, she started messing around and finally discovered which ingredients were causing her nails to grow so fast. And so Rx4Nails was born.
Users have seen AMAZING results with this product!
Increased strength
Accelerated growth
Ridging evening out and disappearing
Decreased splitting, chipping and bending
So, pretty much everything one could want, right?
A month or so back, Chris sent me a sample of Rx4Nails to try for myself. I took my time in trying it out, letting my nails grow out with the product nourishing them.
First thing I noticed is that at first, my nails did not grow faster. But this is all natural stuff, it works with your body. So no two people will have the exact same response. So I wasn’t at all worried, though mildly disappointed. But only very mildly, because although faster growing nails sounded fabulous, what I really needed was stronger nails.
So I diligently continued to apply Rx4Nails and noticed that I could see the new nail at the base because it was whiter than the rest. Now, because my nails have been chipping so badly, I have not been wearing nail polish. I haven’t stained them in any way, but somehow the nourishment of Rx4Nails began to brighten them.
Mightily pleased, I continued cheerily down the testing lane.
As my nails got longer (at the normal summer rate for me), I actually saw the moment I trimmed the last of my pre-Rx4Nails away. Because after that? I almost had to use toenail clippers to trim my thumbnails. No joke, folks! They were THAT thick!
There was only one problem… Although I KNEW they were stronger, for some reason my nails continued to peel, and then after peeling to tear. And somewhere in between my trying to figure out what was wrong and my frustration, Rx4Nails ended up being moved somewhere I never remembered to get it from. So… For a few weeks, I went Rx4Nail-less and still dealt with peeling and chipping nails.
Then finally, I googled possible causes for peeling nails (I know, duh, right?). And one article pointed out something so simple and so obvious, I was nearly gaping. Seriously, how did I now know this? If nails are soaked in water for too long, they will peel. And ‘ya know what? My dish washing gloves had acquired a hole a few weeks back and the replacement kept being forgotten while at the store.
Immediately, I lept out the door and snagged myself some dishwashing gloves and from that point forward, diligently used them every time I washed a massive pile of dishes. And ‘ya know what? The peeling and the tearing slowed. Though I had sadly lost the power Rx4Nails gave me.
Now, I always wear my gloves like Supergirl and have got back onto Rx4Nails, having rescued it from the deep dark recesses of the medicine cabinet (NO idea how it got there!). As a happy ending to this story, with my new nail care routine of protection and nourishment, my nails are exploding in length, thickness and smoothness. I suppose the constant brutality of dish washing was holding them back from growing quickly? But whatever the reason, Rx4Nails is now doing everything it claims for me and I couldn’t be happier.
So if you’re looking for something to strengthen your nails, smooth them out, lengthen them, or just to encourage overall health, check out Rx4Nails!
by THE GAL on AUGUST 14, 2012
Ugh, there it went again! Your nail just split on the side, forcing you to trim it so far back that the sensitive nail bed is trying to peek out from under the shortened nail. In frustration, you begin searching for something to strengthen them, perhaps one of those nail treatments on the end of the Walmart’s cosmetic/self-care aisles. But as you begin searching labels, you start to see a similar pattern… Wheat germ oil, vitamin e (wheat derived), wheat extract, etc. They all have gluten in them! Well then, what can you do for your poor nails?
This is a dilemma I’ve been facing for some time and had no idea where to turn. But one of my super smart and savvy readers found this place. Rx4Nails is an organic, all natural, gluten free nail and cuticle oil for “Longer, Stronger, Healthier Nails. Guaranteed!”
I was pretty excited at the prospect of this oil. It sounded- well, perfect! Chris, the owner and creator of Rx4Nails, came up with Rx4Nails while helping with a specialty food product. While being elbow-deep in work, she realized her nails had suddenly had a serious growing spurt. Curious and instantly aware how valuable this could be, she started messing around and finally discovered which ingredients were causing her nails to grow so fast. And so Rx4Nails was born.
Users have seen AMAZING results with this product!
Increased strength
Accelerated growth
Ridging evening out and disappearing
Decreased splitting, chipping and bending
So, pretty much everything one could want, right?
A month or so back, Chris sent me a sample of Rx4Nails to try for myself. I took my time in trying it out, letting my nails grow out with the product nourishing them.
First thing I noticed is that at first, my nails did not grow faster. But this is all natural stuff, it works with your body. So no two people will have the exact same response. So I wasn’t at all worried, though mildly disappointed. But only very mildly, because although faster growing nails sounded fabulous, what I really needed was stronger nails.
So I diligently continued to apply Rx4Nails and noticed that I could see the new nail at the base because it was whiter than the rest. Now, because my nails have been chipping so badly, I have not been wearing nail polish. I haven’t stained them in any way, but somehow the nourishment of Rx4Nails began to brighten them.
Mightily pleased, I continued cheerily down the testing lane.
As my nails got longer (at the normal summer rate for me), I actually saw the moment I trimmed the last of my pre-Rx4Nails away. Because after that? I almost had to use toenail clippers to trim my thumbnails. No joke, folks! They were THAT thick!
There was only one problem… Although I KNEW they were stronger, for some reason my nails continued to peel, and then after peeling to tear. And somewhere in between my trying to figure out what was wrong and my frustration, Rx4Nails ended up being moved somewhere I never remembered to get it from. So… For a few weeks, I went Rx4Nail-less and still dealt with peeling and chipping nails.
Then finally, I googled possible causes for peeling nails (I know, duh, right?). And one article pointed out something so simple and so obvious, I was nearly gaping. Seriously, how did I now know this? If nails are soaked in water for too long, they will peel. And ‘ya know what? My dish washing gloves had acquired a hole a few weeks back and the replacement kept being forgotten while at the store.
Immediately, I lept out the door and snagged myself some dishwashing gloves and from that point forward, diligently used them every time I washed a massive pile of dishes. And ‘ya know what? The peeling and the tearing slowed. Though I had sadly lost the power Rx4Nails gave me.
Now, I always wear my gloves like Supergirl and have got back onto Rx4Nails, having rescued it from the deep dark recesses of the medicine cabinet (NO idea how it got there!). As a happy ending to this story, with my new nail care routine of protection and nourishment, my nails are exploding in length, thickness and smoothness. I suppose the constant brutality of dish washing was holding them back from growing quickly? But whatever the reason, Rx4Nails is now doing everything it claims for me and I couldn’t be happier.
So if you’re looking for something to strengthen your nails, smooth them out, lengthen them, or just to encourage overall health, check out Rx4Nails!
Nuclear Iran
Iran Will Have a Nuclear-bomb by October 1
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report - August 13, 2012
http://gerarddirect.com/2012/08/13/iran-will-have-a-nuclear-bomb-by-october/
At its present rate of enrichment, Iran will have 250 kilograms of 20-percent grade uranium, exactly enough to build its first nuclear bomb, in roughly six weeks, and two-to- four bombs by early 2013, debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report. Hence the leak by an unnamed Israeli security source Sunday, Aug. 12, disclosing Iran’s progress in developing the detonator and fuses for a nuclear warhead which can be fitted onto Shehab-3 ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel.
Since 20 percent refined uranium is a short jump to weapons grade fuel, Iran will have the capability and materials for building an operational nuclear bomb by approximately October 1.
This knowledge is not news to US President Barack Obama, Saudi King Abdullah, Syrian ruler Bashar Assad, or Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu – and certainly not to Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Netanyahu’s comment at the opening of the weekly cabinet meeting Sunday: “All threats against the home front are dwarfed by one – Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear arms!” – was prompted by that deadline.
Ex-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert did not have that information when he “assured” Tel Aviv students Sunday, “Iran’s nuclear program has not reached the threshold necessitating Israeli action now or in the near future.” He further claimed that Israel’s “defense leaders” don’t subscribe to the view that “action now is unavoidable.” Olmert, who stepped down under a cloud of suspected corruption in 2009, has not since then had access to regular intelligence briefings on Iran. So either he spoke out of ignorance or willfully joined an opposition chorus of voices speaking out against Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak.
The fact is that when Olmert approved the Israeli strike for destroying a nuclear reactor under construction by Iran and North Korea in northern Syria in September 2007, Iran was years away from accumulating enough enriched uranium and the capability to build nuclear warheads. Both are now within Tehran’s grasp in weeks.
Leading an opposition campaign to bring down the incumbent government is legitimate. Discrediting belated Israeli action to pre-empt a nuclear Iran as fodder for that campaign is not. If what Olmert and Barack (the same defense minister as today) did in 2007 was necessary then, action now for delaying Iran’s imminent “breakout” to a bomb is many times more necessary and far more urgent.
However Netanyahu and Barak have put themselves in a straitjacket by two lapses:
1. By foot-dragging on their decision for two years, they have led their opponents at home and in Washington – and Khamenei’s office too – to believe that, by turning on the heat, they can hold Israel back from military action against Iran’s nuclear program until it is too late. The time has been used not just for Iranian nuclear progress, but to enlist ex-politicians and retired generals at home and add them to the voices, especially in the White House, which believe Israel can learn to live with a nuclear-armed Iran.
2. Netanyahu and Barak have behaved as though a decision on Iran is in their exclusive province, insulated from the turmoil and change swirling through Israel’s Arab neighbors in the past two years.
But the Middle East has a way of catching up with and rushing past slow-moving politicians:
Sunday, at 10:00 a.m. Netanyahu warned his ministers that no threat was worse than a nuclear Iran. At 17:55 p.m., Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi dropped a bombshell in Cairo. In one fell swoop, he smashed the Egyptian military clique ruling the country for decades, sacked the Supreme Military Council running Egypt since March 2011 and cut the generals off from their business empire by appropriating the defense ministry and military industry.
That fateful eight hours-less-five-minutes have forced Israel’s leaders to take a second look at their plans for Iran.
Morsi’s lightning decisions were the finishing touches that proved the Islamist Bedouin terror attacks in Sinai of Aug. 5 fitted neatly into a secret master plan hatched by Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to seize full control of rule in Cairo – a plan debkafile first revealed exclusively last Friday, Aug. 10.
Netanyahu now faces one of the hardest dilemmas of his political career – whether to go forward with the Iran operation, which calls for mustering all Israel’s military and defense capabilities – especially for the repercussions, after being suddenly confronted with unforeseen security challenges on its southwestern border, for thirty years a frontier of peace.
The exceptional talents of Netanyahu and Barak to put off strategic decisions until they are overtaken by events has landed Israel in an especially perilous plight, surrounded now by a soon-to-be nuclear-armed Iran from the east; threatened Syrian chemical warfare from the north and the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt to its south.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Jack Wheeler
Jack Wheeler
Jack Wheeler is a brilliant man who was the author of Reagan's strategy to break the back of the Soviet Union with the star wars race and expose their inner weakness. For years he wrote a weekly intelligence update that was extremely interesting and well structured and informative. He consults(ed) with several mega corporations on global trends and the future, etc. He is in semi-retirement now. He is a true patriot with a no-nonsense approach to everything. He is also a somewhat well-known mountain climber and adventurer.
Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract, empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.
He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.
What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is 'African-American,' the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.
Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.
It's something Hillary doesn't understand - how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.
Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.
Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior.
His candidacy is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.
Jack Wheeler is a brilliant man who was the author of Reagan's strategy to break the back of the Soviet Union with the star wars race and expose their inner weakness. For years he wrote a weekly intelligence update that was extremely interesting and well structured and informative. He consults(ed) with several mega corporations on global trends and the future, etc. He is in semi-retirement now. He is a true patriot with a no-nonsense approach to everything. He is also a somewhat well-known mountain climber and adventurer.
Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
The O-man, Barack Hussein Obama, is an eloquently tailored empty suit. No resume, no accomplishments, no experience, no original ideas, no understanding of how the economy works, no understanding of how the world works, no balls, nothing but abstract, empty rhetoric devoid of real substance.
He has no real identity. He is half-white, which he rejects. The rest of him is mostly Arab, which he hides but is disclosed by his non-African Arabic surname and his Arabic first and middle names as a way to triply proclaim his Arabic parentage to people in Kenya . Only a small part of him is African Black from his Luo grandmother, which he pretends he is exclusively.
What he isn't, not a genetic drop of, is 'African-American,' the descendant of enslaved Africans brought to America chained in slave ships. He hasn't a single ancestor who was a slave. Instead, his Arab ancestors were slave owners. Slave-trading was the main Arab business in East Africa for centuries until the British ended it.
Let that sink in: Obama is not the descendant of slaves, he is the descendant of slave owners. Thus he makes the perfect Liberal Messiah.
It's something Hillary doesn't understand - how some complete neophyte came out of the blue and stole the Dem nomination from her. Obamamania is beyond politics and reason. It is a true religious cult, whose adherents reject Christianity yet still believe in Original Sin, transferring it from the evil of being human to the evil of being white.
Thus Obama has become the white liberals' Christ, offering absolution from the Sin of Being White. There is no reason or logic behind it, no faults or flaws of his can diminish it, no arguments Hillary could make of any kind can be effective against it. The absurdity of Hypocrisy Clothed In Human Flesh being their Savior is all the more cause for liberals to worship him: Credo quia absurdum, I believe it because it is absurd.
Thank heavens that the voting majority of Americans remain Christian and are in no desperate need of a phony savior.
His candidacy is ridiculous and should not be taken seriously by any thinking American.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
Down Goes CNN ... Who's Next?
Op-Ed: Down Goes CNN - Who's Next?
Published: Friday, August 17, 2012 9:39 AM
There seems to be an awakening of the public to media distortions. What is the next step?
Jack Engelhard is the author of “The Bathsheba Deadline” and “Indecent Proposal”, as well as the award-winning memoir of his experiences as a Jewish refugee from Europe, "Escape From Mount Moriah". His latest novel, "The Girls of Cincinnati," is available on Amazon. He can be reached at his website www. jackengelhard. com.
The ratings are not good over there at CNN. The network’s honchos are so desperate that there’s talk they may, in part, switch to Reality TV.
What’s next? I suppose it’s The Housewives of Ramallah, starring Hanan Ashrawi. This was CNN’s sweetheart and Yasser Arafat’s mouthpiece when there was yet another suicide bombing and SOMEONE had to explain why murdering Jews was so necessary. Miss Ashrawi was no more than a phone call away and always helpful to CNN.
On top of it all, the latest has it that CNN’s top foreign affairs commentator, Fareed Zakaria, was (allegedly) caught plagiarizing and got himself suspended.
Before that it was Eason Jordan who confessed in a New York Times Op-Ed that as head of News, he withheld news about Saddam’s atrocities so that his reporters could continue to function in Baghdad. (Another case of “half the news that’s fit to print.”)
Speaking of The New York Times and “half the news that’s fit to print,” well, the paper of record is on record as losing millions every month and sometime back had to go to Mexico to beg for money – but is still losing money as, apparently, this ship is being abandoned except for the rats who still get a thrill up their legs when Obama speaks.
UK’s Guardian is being exposed and even ridiculed for flagrant bias against Israel and Steven Plaut (and Arutz Sheva) has finally got the world to understand that Haaretz is a Palestinian/Arab newspaper published in Hebrew.
Meantime, this is the season when PBS and NPR go panhandling for more funds, but the money is not coming in as swiftly as it used to because (is this possible?) even liberal Jews have some smarts. (Don’t quote me on this.)
Get the drift? The colossus that was called mainstream news media, as in America-hating /Israel-bashing journalism, is being cut down to size. People are catching on to the deceptions that characterize most of our traditional news organizations – and work with me when I say that a misinformed public is the greatest danger we face.
This is why I dare not say that you can’t fool all the people all the time. Here in the USA we’ve been fooled for more than three years…and come November we shall see if this persists, this madness when we fell for this dreamer of dreams.
So we’re not safe yet from media distortions that imperil us day to day…such as the lie that appears on Page 1 in our mainstream media and the truth that is buried on Page 36.
Here’s the good news. The hard left makes up only about 10 percent of the population here and in Israel. (Go argue, but this is my personal estimation.)
Here’s the bad news. The hard left still controls just about everything. (Do you really expect Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to ever rule against their prophet who selected them for the Supreme Court?)
Somewhere out there in a galaxy far away the Bob Simon-Tom Friedman-Paul Krugman Axis still exists and the scheming never ends. Do you remember how Bob Simon trapped Ambassador Michael Oren?
Do you remember how Paul Krugman wrote that he was afraid to speak up against Israel because of the Jewish backlash? What? He was afraid that he’d get captured and beheaded by my dentist?
Do you remember how Tom Friedman said that Bibi’s standing ovation in Congress was “bought and for by the Israel lobby?”
So who paid for that nincompoop’s THREE Pulitzer Prizes?
CNN may be down, but truthful journalism can succeed only if we demand nothing less.
Published: Friday, August 17, 2012 9:39 AM
There seems to be an awakening of the public to media distortions. What is the next step?
Jack Engelhard is the author of “The Bathsheba Deadline” and “Indecent Proposal”, as well as the award-winning memoir of his experiences as a Jewish refugee from Europe, "Escape From Mount Moriah". His latest novel, "The Girls of Cincinnati," is available on Amazon. He can be reached at his website www. jackengelhard. com.
The ratings are not good over there at CNN. The network’s honchos are so desperate that there’s talk they may, in part, switch to Reality TV.
What’s next? I suppose it’s The Housewives of Ramallah, starring Hanan Ashrawi. This was CNN’s sweetheart and Yasser Arafat’s mouthpiece when there was yet another suicide bombing and SOMEONE had to explain why murdering Jews was so necessary. Miss Ashrawi was no more than a phone call away and always helpful to CNN.
On top of it all, the latest has it that CNN’s top foreign affairs commentator, Fareed Zakaria, was (allegedly) caught plagiarizing and got himself suspended.
Before that it was Eason Jordan who confessed in a New York Times Op-Ed that as head of News, he withheld news about Saddam’s atrocities so that his reporters could continue to function in Baghdad. (Another case of “half the news that’s fit to print.”)
Speaking of The New York Times and “half the news that’s fit to print,” well, the paper of record is on record as losing millions every month and sometime back had to go to Mexico to beg for money – but is still losing money as, apparently, this ship is being abandoned except for the rats who still get a thrill up their legs when Obama speaks.
UK’s Guardian is being exposed and even ridiculed for flagrant bias against Israel and Steven Plaut (and Arutz Sheva) has finally got the world to understand that Haaretz is a Palestinian/Arab newspaper published in Hebrew.
Meantime, this is the season when PBS and NPR go panhandling for more funds, but the money is not coming in as swiftly as it used to because (is this possible?) even liberal Jews have some smarts. (Don’t quote me on this.)
Get the drift? The colossus that was called mainstream news media, as in America-hating /Israel-bashing journalism, is being cut down to size. People are catching on to the deceptions that characterize most of our traditional news organizations – and work with me when I say that a misinformed public is the greatest danger we face.
This is why I dare not say that you can’t fool all the people all the time. Here in the USA we’ve been fooled for more than three years…and come November we shall see if this persists, this madness when we fell for this dreamer of dreams.
So we’re not safe yet from media distortions that imperil us day to day…such as the lie that appears on Page 1 in our mainstream media and the truth that is buried on Page 36.
Here’s the good news. The hard left makes up only about 10 percent of the population here and in Israel. (Go argue, but this is my personal estimation.)
Here’s the bad news. The hard left still controls just about everything. (Do you really expect Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to ever rule against their prophet who selected them for the Supreme Court?)
Somewhere out there in a galaxy far away the Bob Simon-Tom Friedman-Paul Krugman Axis still exists and the scheming never ends. Do you remember how Bob Simon trapped Ambassador Michael Oren?
Do you remember how Paul Krugman wrote that he was afraid to speak up against Israel because of the Jewish backlash? What? He was afraid that he’d get captured and beheaded by my dentist?
Do you remember how Tom Friedman said that Bibi’s standing ovation in Congress was “bought and for by the Israel lobby?”
So who paid for that nincompoop’s THREE Pulitzer Prizes?
CNN may be down, but truthful journalism can succeed only if we demand nothing less.
Friday, August 17, 2012
How I Became George Obama's Brother
How I became George Obama's 'brother'
By Dinesh D'Souza
Published August 16, 2012
FoxNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/16/how-became-george-obama-brother/
A few days ago I received a call from a man I recently met named George. He was a bit flustered, and soon informed me that his young son was sick with a chest condition. He pleaded with me to send him $1,000 to cover the medical bills. Since George was at the hospital I asked him to let me speak to a nurse, and she confirmed that George’s son was indeed ill. So I agreed to send George the money through Western Union. He was profusely grateful. But before I hung up I asked George, “Why are you coming to me?” He said, “I have no one else to ask.” Then he said something that astounded me, “Dinesh, you are like a brother to me.”
Actually, George has a real life brother who just happens to be the president of the United States. (George Obama is the youngest of eight children sired by Barack Obama Sr.) George’s brother is a multimillionaire and the most powerful man in the world. Moreover, George’s brother has framed his re-election campaign around the “fair share” theme that we owe obligations to those who are less fortunate.
One of Obama’s favorite phrases comes right out of the Bible: “We are our brother’s keeper.” Yet he has not contributed a penny to help his own brother. And evidently George does not believe, even in times of emergency, that he can turn to his brother in the White House for help.
Before I hung up I asked George, “Why are you coming to me?” He said, “I have no one else to ask.” Then he said something that astounded me, “Dinesh, you are like a brother to me.”
So much for spreading the wealth around.
Obama’s refusal to help George is especially surprising because George doesn’t just live in American-style poverty but rather in Third World poverty. He lives in a shanty in the Huruma slum in Nairobi. He gets by on a few dollars a month. Obama also has an aunt named Hawa Auma, his father’s sister, who ekes out a living selling coal on the streets of a small village in Kenya. She says she would like to have her teeth fixed, but she cannot afford it. Obama hasn’t offered to help her either.
What’s going on here? Why is President Obama so hesitant to help family members in need?
A couple of years ago, George teamed up with a British journalist Damien Lewis and the two of them published George’s story in a book called "Homeland." Yet according to Lewis, shortly before the book’s publication in America, the publisher Simon & Schuster decided to shred the entire print run, more than 20,000 copies. Lewis tried unsuccessfully to get an explanation from Simon & Schuster but to no avail. He now suspects that the White House convinced Simon & Schuster that George’s story might prove embarrassing to the president.
In 2010, George also applied for a visa to come to the United States and was refused. While George confesses that in his younger years he was a delinquent, he has never been convicted of any crime. Moreover, he has a very good reason to visit the United States: his mother Jael Otieno lives in Atlanta. So why would the U. S. embassy in Nairobi refuse a tourist visa to the brother of the president who just wants to spend time with his mother?
In the past few days, an article has been circulating on the web that depicts George as a social undesirable. First published in the London Daily Mail, the article portrays George as a habitual drunk and philanderer. I spent a day with George this past February while interviewing him for my documentary film 2016: Obama’s America. I can attest that George is not an innocent. If he had been, he would not have survived life in the Huruma slum. Yes, George is street smart and cunning and I did smell alcohol on his breath.
But so what? George may be a drinker and a skirt-chaser but, as becomes clear from his book, he is also a survivor. He has overcome his past as a gang-member and petty thief and now works as the organizer of a slum soccer league. He is trying to uplift himself, and he is trying to help slum kids aspire to a better life. On balance, Lewis assures me, “George is not a bad guy. He is on the side of the angels.”
But even if Lewis is wrong, and George exhibits some harmful cultural pathologies, the liberal argumentone that Obama himself makes in his book "The Audacity of Hope" is that the cultural pathologies of the poor are themselves the product of social disadvantage.
Barack Obama Jr. first met George in 1987, when George was five years old. He met George again in 2006 when he visited Kenya as a U.S. Senator from Illinois; George was then in his early twenties. Had Obama helped George along the way, perhaps this young man would not have ended up dirt-poor and living such a degraded life.
So what’s the real story here? Where’s George Obama’s “fair share”? George’s tragic situation exposes President Obama as a hypocrite. Here is a man who demands that others pay higher taxes to help the pooreven poor people who are not related to themwhile Obama himself refuses to help a close relative like George.
Yet I believe there is a deeper explanation that goes beyond hypocrisy for why Obama wants nothing to do with George. After all, it would cost Obama so little to raise George out of poverty, and yet he won’t do it. This isn’t mere negligence; it suggests an active animus. The reason for that animus emerges in George’s book and also in my interview with George in the film 2016. In that interview, George rejects the anti-colonial philosophy that was espoused by Barack Obama Sr. This is the “dream from my father” that President Obama celebrates in his own autobiography.
From the record of their lives and writings, it’s clear that Barack Obama Sr. and Barack Obama Jr. both share the anti-colonial view that blames Western colonial exploitation for the poverty and suffering of the Third World. Yet George doesn’t buy it. He observes that at the time of its independence in the early 1960s “Kenya was on an economic par with Malaysia or Singapore. Look where we are now, and where they are. They’re practically developed and industrialized, while Kenya is still a basket case.” George believes that poor countries should take responsibility for their own situation. “What’s our excuse for failure? We don’t have one. We’ve only got ourselves to blame.”
Incredible though it seems, George Obama is, within the context of his own society, a conservative. He doesn’t worship at the shrine of Barack Obama Sr. and he espouses an ideology diametrically opposed to that of his father and his famous brother. George has experienced first-hand the empty rhetoric of the two Baracks, and he rejects it based on his actual experience of Third World poverty.
No wonder President Obama despises George, doesn’t want him around, doesn’t care to hear George’s views circulated in America, and won’t lift a finger to help him even when George’s son is in the hospital.
So that’s why George Obama felt he had to call me. He had no one else to call. He reached out to me in his time of need because he felt he couldn’t call on his real life sibling living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
That’s how I got to be, if only metaphorically and for a short time, George Obama’s “brother.”
Dinesh D’Souza, narrator and co-director of the film "2016 - Obama's America ," is also the author of the new book " Obama’s America: Unmaking the American Dream ," published this week by Regnery.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/08/16/how-became-george-obama-brother/#ixzz23oCl4MIY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. GRG [Ref.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
When Will It Happen Here?
How Political Correctness Is Transforming British Education
by Soeren Kern
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3170/british-education-political-correctness#.UAQtSmOuuGk.facebook
In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class.
In Scotland, 30 non-Muslim children from the Parkview Primary School recently were required to visit the Bait ur Rehman Ahmadiyya mosque in the Yorkhill district of Glasgow (videos here and here). At the mosque, the children were instructed to recite the shahada, the Muslim declaration of faith which states: "There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger." Muslims are also demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to end negative attitudes about Muslims.
British schools are increasingly dropping the Jewish Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, according to a report entitled, Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills.
British teachers are also reluctant to discuss the medieval Crusades, in which Christians fought Muslim armies for control of Jerusalem: lessons often contradict what is taught in local mosques.
In an effort to counter "Islamophobia" in British schools, teachers now are required to teach "key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero" in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.
In the East London district of Tower Hamlets, four Muslims were recently jailed for attacking a local white teacher who gave religious studies lessons to Muslim girls; and 85 out of 90 schools have implemented "no pork" policies.
Schools across Britain are, in fact, increasingly banning pork from lunch menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Hundreds of schools have adopted a "no pork" policy, according to a recent report by the London-based Daily Telegraph.
The culinary restrictions join a long list of politically correct changes that gradually are bringing hundreds of British primary and secondary education into conformity with Islamic Sharia law.
The London Borough of Haringey, a heavily Muslim district in North London, is the latest school district to switch to a menu that is fully halal (religiously permissible for Muslims).
The Haringey Town Council recently issued "best practice" advice to all schools in its area to "ban all pork products in order to cater for the needs of staff and pupils who are not permitted contact with these for religious reasons."
Local politicians have criticized the new policy as pandering to Muslims, and local farmers, who have pointed out that all schools in Britain already offer vegetarian options, have accused school administrators of depriving non-Muslim children of a choice.
Following an outcry from non-Muslim parents, the town council removed the guidance from its website, although the new policy remains in place.
At the Cypress Junior School, in Croydon, south London, school administrators announced in the school newsletter dated June 1, 2012 that the school has opted for a pork-free menu "as a result of pupil and parental feedback."
The announcement states: "Whilst beef, chicken, turkey and fish will all feature, as well as the daily vegetarian and jacket potato or pasta option, the sausages served will now be chicken rather than pork."
In Luton, an industrial city some 50 kilometers (30 miles) north of London where more than 15% of the population is now Muslim, 23 out of 57 schools have banned pork.
In the City of Bradford, a borough of West Yorkshire in Northern England where there are now twice as many practicing Muslims that there are practicing Anglicans, 24 out of 160 schools have eliminated pork from their menus. In Newham (East London), 25 out of 75 schools have banned pork.
Other pork-free schools include Cranford Park Primary School in Hayes (Middlesex), and Dog Kennel Hill Primary in East Dulwich (South London).
The Borough of Harrow in northwest London was among the first in Britain to encourage halal menus. In 2010, Harrow Council announced plans to ban pork in the borough's 52 state primary schools, following a switch by ten secondary schools to offer halal-only menus.
According to the UK-based National Pig Association, which represents commercial pork producers, "It is disappointing that schools cannot be sufficiently organized to give children a choice of meat. Sausages and roast pork are staples of a British diet and children enjoy eating them. If products can be labeled with warnings that they contain nuts and vegetarian dishes can be made and kept separate from meat dishes, [we] don't see why the same can't apply to pork."
Lunch menus are not the only area in which "cultural sensitivity" is escalating in British schools.
In West Yorkshire, the Park Road Junior Infant and Nursery School in Batley has banned stories featuring pigs, including "The Three Little Pigs," in case they offend Muslim children.
In Nottingham, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play; it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims.
Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.
In Stoke-on-Trent, schools have been ordered to rearrange exams, cancel swimming lessons and stop sex education during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In Norwich, the Knowland Grove Community First School has axed the traditional Christmas play to "look at some of the other great cultural festivals of the world."
Meanwhile, the politically correct ban on pigs in Britain also extends to toys for children. A toy farm set called HappyLand Goosefeather Farm recently removed pigs in order to avoid offending Muslims.
The pig removal came to public attention after a British mother bought the toy as a present for her daughter's first birthday. Although the set contained a model of a cow, sheep, chicken, horse and dog, there was no pig, despite there being a sty and a button which generated an "oink" sound.
After the mother complained, the Early Learning Centre (ELC), which manufactures the toy, responded: "Previously the pig was part of the Goosefeather Farm. However due to customer feedback and religious reasons this is no longer part of the farm."
After a public outcry, however, ELC later reversed its decision: "We recognize that pigs are familiar farm animals, especially for our UK customers. We have taken the decision to reinstate the pig and to no longer sell the set in international markets where it might create an issue."
Sunday, August 12, 2012
The Power Of Gratitude
The Power Of Gratitude
Julie Reisman was used to surmounting difficulties. 85% deaf, she learned to lip-read and, with the help of hearing aids, managed to succeed in the world of those blessed with hearing. She had her own business designing, producing, and installing décor for shopping malls. Her first marriage ended in divorce, leaving her with one daughter. At the age of 35, Julie started to connect with her Jewish roots and became religiously observant.
Then, when she was 38, she married Bruce, the man of her dreams. Bruce shared custody of his three daughters from his first marriage, so Julie happily found herself the dedicated mother of a close-knit family. Bruce was a successful professional. They lived comfortably in a big house in an upscale suburb. For ten years, Julie was living her dream.
On a wintery morning in 2009, the dream abruptly ended. Bruce, 48 years old, fell down stairs and hit his head. He died almost immediately.
The shock of her husband’s death was followed by another shock. Of his three life insurance policies, he had let two of them lapse. This included the largest policy, which would have supported his three daughters. Bruce had also neglected to write a will, and to change the beneficiary of his retirement accounts after his first wife divorced him.
By law, half of the large house and Bruce’s other assets should have gone to his first wife, but she and her daughters sued Julie and managed to get 100%, leaving Julie with nothing. Even worse, she turned Bruce’s daughters against Julie. Almost overnight, Julie lost her husband, her close-knit family, her house, and her financial security.
Naturally, Julie felt angry and resentful. “Throughout the entire two and a half years of litigation,” she recalls, “I knew I needed to plug the anger and resentment. At the same time I didn’t want to. I wanted to wallow in my misery. I wanted to make others miserable along with me. I also wanted to stop being miserable and go back to being the upbeat, positive, happy person that I inherently am. But I feared that if I let go of my anger and resentment that I would also be letting go of my rightful inheritance!”
ANTIDOTE TO ANGER
Julie realized that she was standing at a crossroads. She could spend the rest of her life in anger and bitterness or she could choose to grateful and happy. “I decided that I needed to find a way back to my former, positive self, “ she explains. “So I started to practice gratitude as an antidote to my anger.”
Julie had lost her job several months after Bruce died, and she was literally being forced out of her house, so there was nothing to keep her in the upscale town where she and Bruce had lived. She decided to move to a less expensive area, and chose Baltimore. She rented a small apartment. There, she would sit at her computer and make long lists of all that she was grateful for:
For being alive
for finding the Jewish community of Baltimore
that my parents are both alive and loving and supportive
that my brother moved to Baltimore
for my daughter
for my son-in-law
for my grandchild
for having found a beautiful apartment in Baltimore to rent
for all my friends
for having had ten years of “wedded bliss” with Bruce
for the fact that hearing aids exist
for my car
for finding myself living within walking distance to Rabbi Shmuel Silber’s shul where I met many of my new friends
for God’s ever-present Providence
The lists went on and on. “I would go through my day noticing and being grateful for every little thing.”
Then doors started to open for Julie.
She needed to find a job to support herself. She had worked in resource development for non-profit organizations. She sent her resume out to her friends, asking them to forward it. One friend sent Julie’s resume to the Jewish Museum in Baltimore.
Avi Decter, the head of the Jewish museum, had Julie’s resume on his desk and was about to look at it when he was interrupted by a knock at his office door. In walked the woman who worked as the museum’s resource developer. She told Avi that her husband had been transferred to a different state, so she was giving the museum 30 days’ notice that she was resigning. When she left, Avi looked down at the paper in front of him. It was Julie’s resume, applying for the exact job that had just been vacated.
Julie’s gratitude list now expanded to mention her job, a pleasant work environment, a kind boss, and compatible co-workers. In addition, she was grateful that the Orthodox community in Baltimore welcomed her with open arms. Like a camera, the more she focused on what she had, the more what she had lost faded into the blurry background.
One day Avi deposited a pile of papers on Julie’s desk, and told her that he wanted her to write a grant proposal. “I don’t do grant proposals,” she flatly told him.
“Now you do,” was his sparse reply.
Avi taught Julie how to write up a grant proposal. Of the four foundations she sent the proposal to, three agreed to donate funds, an astounding record of success.
In August, 2011, Julie decided to fulfill a lifelong desire to move to Israel. Appraising her situation honestly, she realized that, given her deafness, her employment prospects in Israel were nil. Her Hebrew was not good enough to speak nor to lip-read. She could not work on any job that required telephone communication. Acclimating to a new country at the age of 51 would be difficult; with the language barrier and her deafness, perhaps impossible.
Julie decided to make aliyah anyway. Her daughter and son-in-law were already living in Israel. While Bruce had generously helped support them, after his death they too were struggling financially. Julie calculated that one household is cheaper to run than two, and that if she lived with her daughter’s family, she could scrape by on the Social Security disability payments she would receive, as well as having the joy of helping to take care of her grandchildren.
Shortly after arriving in Israel, Julie got a job writing grant proposals for the Joint Distribution Committee, which is Israel’s highest paying employer of grant writers. “No coincidence,” Julie insists, smiling. “It’s all good.”
Gratitude, however, is not a one-time fix, but a daily choice. Julie still struggles against the pain of being without a husband and a home of her own. She would like to get married again, and she wishes she had enough money to buy a house. “But,” she says with determination, “the anger no longer colors my life.” Every day anew Julie paints her life with gratitude.
THE COUNTER-INTUITIVE FORMULA
The 19th century Rabbi Natan of Breslov taught a counter-intuitive formula. He taught that when you face a problem in life, the more you complain about the problem, the longer you perpetuate the problem. On the other hand, when you thank God for everything, including the problem itself, the problem disappears.
This formula works, explains Rabbi Natan, because God hates complaining. Spiritually, the roots of our long and tragic exile go back to when the Israelites, freed from bondage in Egypt, resisted entering the Land of Israel. Instead of appreciating the spiritual advantages of the land, they complained about the dangers and difficulties of conquering it. The night they spent crying and complaining was the 9th of the Hebrew month of Av. God said to them, “On this night, you cried for no reason. I will give you a reason to cry.” On that date, Tisha B’Av, both temples were destroyed and other great tragedies befell the Jewish People.
Rabbi Natan wrote that we are not suffering because our ancestors in the desert complained. We are suffering because we are still complaining! Complaining is a rejection of the way God runs His world, a failure to appreciate the daily, hourly, and minute-by-minute kindnesses God bestows.
Complaining is the result of focusing on the hole rather than the donut.
The opposite of complaining is gratitude. Julie certainly had much to complain about: her husband’s sudden death, rejection by the step-daughters she had helped to raise, the “unfair” loss of her financial assets, etc. Yet, by composing long daily gratitude lists, she focused on what she has rather than on what she’s missing. The result: She didn’t get back her husband, her family, or her big house, but she did get a life of happiness and Divine blessing.
WHAT GRATITUDE CAN ACCOMPLISH
Professor Robert A. Emmons of the University of California in Davis performed psychological studies to investigate the effects of gratitude on the persons who practice it. (See his book, Thanks!) He found that the subjects who practiced gratitude by writing down five occurrences they were grateful for every week over a period of ten weeks were 25% happier than the control group.
Critics of the study pointed out that the subjects were healthy college students. Could gratitude also improve the lives of people who had genuine reasons to complain? Professor Emmons conducted another study, recruiting as subjects adults who suffered from neuromuscular disorders that resulted in chronic pain and muscle atrophy. The 21-day experiment revealed that, compared to the control group, the subjects who practiced gratitude were more satisfied with their lives, were more optimistic, and slept better.
An article in PN Magazine recommends how to practice gratitude: “Substitute grateful thoughts for ungrateful ones by identifying the good in your life—friends, transportation, family, e-mail—no matter how small. Keep in mind such simple conveniences as warm clothes, running water, indoor plumbing, and living in a free and compassionate country.”
PN Magazine stands for “Paraplegia News.” Richard Holicky, the writer of this article touting gratitude, is himself a paraplegic – he suffered a spinal cord injury in 1989. Before his paralysis, he was a farmer, woodsman, and miner. Instead of complaining about the abilities and activities he lost, Mr. Holicky expresses gratitude for the blessings of running water and indoor plumbing.
Complaining vs. gratitude. Julie Reisman and Richard Holicky courageously and adamantly chose gratitude. Which will you choose?
Sara Yoheved Rigler is the author of the new God Winked: Tales and Lessons from My Spiritual Adventures. Sara Yoheved Rigler is starting a new group of The Ladder, her weekly teleconference spiritual growth workshop for single Jewish women interested in marriage. For more information, see http://www.sararigler.com/ie/theladder.php.
Julie Reisman was used to surmounting difficulties. 85% deaf, she learned to lip-read and, with the help of hearing aids, managed to succeed in the world of those blessed with hearing. She had her own business designing, producing, and installing décor for shopping malls. Her first marriage ended in divorce, leaving her with one daughter. At the age of 35, Julie started to connect with her Jewish roots and became religiously observant.
Then, when she was 38, she married Bruce, the man of her dreams. Bruce shared custody of his three daughters from his first marriage, so Julie happily found herself the dedicated mother of a close-knit family. Bruce was a successful professional. They lived comfortably in a big house in an upscale suburb. For ten years, Julie was living her dream.
On a wintery morning in 2009, the dream abruptly ended. Bruce, 48 years old, fell down stairs and hit his head. He died almost immediately.
The shock of her husband’s death was followed by another shock. Of his three life insurance policies, he had let two of them lapse. This included the largest policy, which would have supported his three daughters. Bruce had also neglected to write a will, and to change the beneficiary of his retirement accounts after his first wife divorced him.
By law, half of the large house and Bruce’s other assets should have gone to his first wife, but she and her daughters sued Julie and managed to get 100%, leaving Julie with nothing. Even worse, she turned Bruce’s daughters against Julie. Almost overnight, Julie lost her husband, her close-knit family, her house, and her financial security.
Naturally, Julie felt angry and resentful. “Throughout the entire two and a half years of litigation,” she recalls, “I knew I needed to plug the anger and resentment. At the same time I didn’t want to. I wanted to wallow in my misery. I wanted to make others miserable along with me. I also wanted to stop being miserable and go back to being the upbeat, positive, happy person that I inherently am. But I feared that if I let go of my anger and resentment that I would also be letting go of my rightful inheritance!”
ANTIDOTE TO ANGER
Julie realized that she was standing at a crossroads. She could spend the rest of her life in anger and bitterness or she could choose to grateful and happy. “I decided that I needed to find a way back to my former, positive self, “ she explains. “So I started to practice gratitude as an antidote to my anger.”
Julie had lost her job several months after Bruce died, and she was literally being forced out of her house, so there was nothing to keep her in the upscale town where she and Bruce had lived. She decided to move to a less expensive area, and chose Baltimore. She rented a small apartment. There, she would sit at her computer and make long lists of all that she was grateful for:
For being alive
for finding the Jewish community of Baltimore
that my parents are both alive and loving and supportive
that my brother moved to Baltimore
for my daughter
for my son-in-law
for my grandchild
for having found a beautiful apartment in Baltimore to rent
for all my friends
for having had ten years of “wedded bliss” with Bruce
for the fact that hearing aids exist
for my car
for finding myself living within walking distance to Rabbi Shmuel Silber’s shul where I met many of my new friends
for God’s ever-present Providence
The lists went on and on. “I would go through my day noticing and being grateful for every little thing.”
Then doors started to open for Julie.
She needed to find a job to support herself. She had worked in resource development for non-profit organizations. She sent her resume out to her friends, asking them to forward it. One friend sent Julie’s resume to the Jewish Museum in Baltimore.
Avi Decter, the head of the Jewish museum, had Julie’s resume on his desk and was about to look at it when he was interrupted by a knock at his office door. In walked the woman who worked as the museum’s resource developer. She told Avi that her husband had been transferred to a different state, so she was giving the museum 30 days’ notice that she was resigning. When she left, Avi looked down at the paper in front of him. It was Julie’s resume, applying for the exact job that had just been vacated.
Julie’s gratitude list now expanded to mention her job, a pleasant work environment, a kind boss, and compatible co-workers. In addition, she was grateful that the Orthodox community in Baltimore welcomed her with open arms. Like a camera, the more she focused on what she had, the more what she had lost faded into the blurry background.
One day Avi deposited a pile of papers on Julie’s desk, and told her that he wanted her to write a grant proposal. “I don’t do grant proposals,” she flatly told him.
“Now you do,” was his sparse reply.
Avi taught Julie how to write up a grant proposal. Of the four foundations she sent the proposal to, three agreed to donate funds, an astounding record of success.
In August, 2011, Julie decided to fulfill a lifelong desire to move to Israel. Appraising her situation honestly, she realized that, given her deafness, her employment prospects in Israel were nil. Her Hebrew was not good enough to speak nor to lip-read. She could not work on any job that required telephone communication. Acclimating to a new country at the age of 51 would be difficult; with the language barrier and her deafness, perhaps impossible.
Julie decided to make aliyah anyway. Her daughter and son-in-law were already living in Israel. While Bruce had generously helped support them, after his death they too were struggling financially. Julie calculated that one household is cheaper to run than two, and that if she lived with her daughter’s family, she could scrape by on the Social Security disability payments she would receive, as well as having the joy of helping to take care of her grandchildren.
Shortly after arriving in Israel, Julie got a job writing grant proposals for the Joint Distribution Committee, which is Israel’s highest paying employer of grant writers. “No coincidence,” Julie insists, smiling. “It’s all good.”
Gratitude, however, is not a one-time fix, but a daily choice. Julie still struggles against the pain of being without a husband and a home of her own. She would like to get married again, and she wishes she had enough money to buy a house. “But,” she says with determination, “the anger no longer colors my life.” Every day anew Julie paints her life with gratitude.
THE COUNTER-INTUITIVE FORMULA
The 19th century Rabbi Natan of Breslov taught a counter-intuitive formula. He taught that when you face a problem in life, the more you complain about the problem, the longer you perpetuate the problem. On the other hand, when you thank God for everything, including the problem itself, the problem disappears.
This formula works, explains Rabbi Natan, because God hates complaining. Spiritually, the roots of our long and tragic exile go back to when the Israelites, freed from bondage in Egypt, resisted entering the Land of Israel. Instead of appreciating the spiritual advantages of the land, they complained about the dangers and difficulties of conquering it. The night they spent crying and complaining was the 9th of the Hebrew month of Av. God said to them, “On this night, you cried for no reason. I will give you a reason to cry.” On that date, Tisha B’Av, both temples were destroyed and other great tragedies befell the Jewish People.
Rabbi Natan wrote that we are not suffering because our ancestors in the desert complained. We are suffering because we are still complaining! Complaining is a rejection of the way God runs His world, a failure to appreciate the daily, hourly, and minute-by-minute kindnesses God bestows.
Complaining is the result of focusing on the hole rather than the donut.
The opposite of complaining is gratitude. Julie certainly had much to complain about: her husband’s sudden death, rejection by the step-daughters she had helped to raise, the “unfair” loss of her financial assets, etc. Yet, by composing long daily gratitude lists, she focused on what she has rather than on what she’s missing. The result: She didn’t get back her husband, her family, or her big house, but she did get a life of happiness and Divine blessing.
WHAT GRATITUDE CAN ACCOMPLISH
Professor Robert A. Emmons of the University of California in Davis performed psychological studies to investigate the effects of gratitude on the persons who practice it. (See his book, Thanks!) He found that the subjects who practiced gratitude by writing down five occurrences they were grateful for every week over a period of ten weeks were 25% happier than the control group.
Critics of the study pointed out that the subjects were healthy college students. Could gratitude also improve the lives of people who had genuine reasons to complain? Professor Emmons conducted another study, recruiting as subjects adults who suffered from neuromuscular disorders that resulted in chronic pain and muscle atrophy. The 21-day experiment revealed that, compared to the control group, the subjects who practiced gratitude were more satisfied with their lives, were more optimistic, and slept better.
An article in PN Magazine recommends how to practice gratitude: “Substitute grateful thoughts for ungrateful ones by identifying the good in your life—friends, transportation, family, e-mail—no matter how small. Keep in mind such simple conveniences as warm clothes, running water, indoor plumbing, and living in a free and compassionate country.”
PN Magazine stands for “Paraplegia News.” Richard Holicky, the writer of this article touting gratitude, is himself a paraplegic – he suffered a spinal cord injury in 1989. Before his paralysis, he was a farmer, woodsman, and miner. Instead of complaining about the abilities and activities he lost, Mr. Holicky expresses gratitude for the blessings of running water and indoor plumbing.
Complaining vs. gratitude. Julie Reisman and Richard Holicky courageously and adamantly chose gratitude. Which will you choose?
Sara Yoheved Rigler is the author of the new God Winked: Tales and Lessons from My Spiritual Adventures. Sara Yoheved Rigler is starting a new group of The Ladder, her weekly teleconference spiritual growth workshop for single Jewish women interested in marriage. For more information, see http://www.sararigler.com/ie/theladder.php.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Makers v. Takers
America's coming civil war -- makers vs. takers
By Arthur Herman
Published July 12, 2012
FoxNews.com
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
Abe Lincoln used those words in 1858 to describe a country that was careening toward civil war. Now we’re a house divided again and another civil war is coming, with the 2012 election as its Gettysburg.
Call it America’s coming civil war between the Makers and the Takers.
On one side are those who create wealth, America’s private sector–the very ones targeted by President Obama’s tax hikes announced Monday.
On the other are the public employee unions; left-leaning intelligentsia who see the growth of government as index of progress; and the millions of Americans now dependent on government through a growing network of government transfer payments, from Medicaid and Social Security to college loans and corporate bailouts and handouts (think GM and Solyndra).
Over the past century America’s private sector has been the source of productivity, innovation, creativity, and growth–and gave us the iPhone and iPad. The public sector has been the engine of entitlement, stagnation, and decline -- and gave us Detroit and the South Bronx.
The private sector built the strongest economy in the world. It armed the free world in World War Two, and then in the three decades after the war turned America into the most prosperous society history had ever seen. It revived America in the Reagan and Clinton years, and thanks to the Bush tax cuts brought this country back from economic collapse after 9/11.
In those same years a growing public sector, by contrast, turned Europe into a cesspool of debt, stalled economies, and chronic social dysfunction that’s set the streets of Athens -- and perhaps other European capitals--on fire.
That’s where we’re headed, too, more rapidly than we like to think.
That public sector–state, local, and federal -- now consumes 40% of GDP, compared to 33% just twelve years ago. It’s brought us to the point where 48% of Americans are now on some form of government handout, from 44% when Obama took office–almost a fifth more than during the Reagan years. And too many of them have been programmed to believe they have no future unless the government takes more from the Makers -- precisely what Obama promised on Monday.
So we know which side Obama and the Democratic party are on. Like John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, ObamaCare has been a wakeup call to what’s at stake–just as the turbulent events in Wisconsin showed how far Democrats are willing to go to win.
We’re not Greece yet -- or on the brink of Bull Run. But it’s time for Romney and Republicans to make clear which side they’re on -- and to make it clear there can’t be government transfer payments, from Medicaid to Social Security, without a strong vibrant private sector to pay for them.
They don’t have to stoop to the Democrats’ tactics. They just have to give our free market, private sector economy the robust defense it deserves.
A country where more Americans go on Social Security disability than get jobs -- as happened last month--can’t stand.
Lincoln hoped in 1861 that the “angels of our better nature” would pull us back from catastrophe. He was wrong. Let’s hope in 2012 those angels still hover -- and can make a house divided whole once more.
Historian is the author of the just released "Freedom's Forge: How American Business Produced Victory in World War II" (Random House May 2012) and the Pulitzer Prize finalist book "Gandhi and Churchill: The Epic Rivalry That Destroyed an Empire and Forged Our Age" (Bantam, 2008).
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/12/america-coming-civil-war/?intcmp=obnetwork#ixzz239EC646m
By Arthur Herman
Published July 12, 2012
FoxNews.com
“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”
Abe Lincoln used those words in 1858 to describe a country that was careening toward civil war. Now we’re a house divided again and another civil war is coming, with the 2012 election as its Gettysburg.
Call it America’s coming civil war between the Makers and the Takers.
On one side are those who create wealth, America’s private sector–the very ones targeted by President Obama’s tax hikes announced Monday.
On the other are the public employee unions; left-leaning intelligentsia who see the growth of government as index of progress; and the millions of Americans now dependent on government through a growing network of government transfer payments, from Medicaid and Social Security to college loans and corporate bailouts and handouts (think GM and Solyndra).
Over the past century America’s private sector has been the source of productivity, innovation, creativity, and growth–and gave us the iPhone and iPad. The public sector has been the engine of entitlement, stagnation, and decline -- and gave us Detroit and the South Bronx.
The private sector built the strongest economy in the world. It armed the free world in World War Two, and then in the three decades after the war turned America into the most prosperous society history had ever seen. It revived America in the Reagan and Clinton years, and thanks to the Bush tax cuts brought this country back from economic collapse after 9/11.
In those same years a growing public sector, by contrast, turned Europe into a cesspool of debt, stalled economies, and chronic social dysfunction that’s set the streets of Athens -- and perhaps other European capitals--on fire.
That’s where we’re headed, too, more rapidly than we like to think.
That public sector–state, local, and federal -- now consumes 40% of GDP, compared to 33% just twelve years ago. It’s brought us to the point where 48% of Americans are now on some form of government handout, from 44% when Obama took office–almost a fifth more than during the Reagan years. And too many of them have been programmed to believe they have no future unless the government takes more from the Makers -- precisely what Obama promised on Monday.
So we know which side Obama and the Democratic party are on. Like John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, ObamaCare has been a wakeup call to what’s at stake–just as the turbulent events in Wisconsin showed how far Democrats are willing to go to win.
We’re not Greece yet -- or on the brink of Bull Run. But it’s time for Romney and Republicans to make clear which side they’re on -- and to make it clear there can’t be government transfer payments, from Medicaid to Social Security, without a strong vibrant private sector to pay for them.
They don’t have to stoop to the Democrats’ tactics. They just have to give our free market, private sector economy the robust defense it deserves.
A country where more Americans go on Social Security disability than get jobs -- as happened last month--can’t stand.
Lincoln hoped in 1861 that the “angels of our better nature” would pull us back from catastrophe. He was wrong. Let’s hope in 2012 those angels still hover -- and can make a house divided whole once more.
Historian is the author of the just released "Freedom's Forge: How American Business Produced Victory in World War II" (Random House May 2012) and the Pulitzer Prize finalist book "Gandhi and Churchill: The Epic Rivalry That Destroyed an Empire and Forged Our Age" (Bantam, 2008).
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/12/america-coming-civil-war/?intcmp=obnetwork#ixzz239EC646m
Wednesday, August 08, 2012
This Is Just Too Cool!
Padloops, Pad Pal
I have just discovered a thing that attaches to the back-side of your iPad, Kindle, Nook, whatever, which prevents dropping them and also prevents hand strain while reading. It is so ingeniously simple I ordered a box of them to give to friends for holidays yet to come!
WEBSITE
I have just discovered a thing that attaches to the back-side of your iPad, Kindle, Nook, whatever, which prevents dropping them and also prevents hand strain while reading. It is so ingeniously simple I ordered a box of them to give to friends for holidays yet to come!
WEBSITE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)