Way to go, Scott! ~ By Barbara Simpson

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

"Predictably, Obama blames George Bush for the Democrat loss, and the pundits regard Brown and his supporters as low-class, redneck, truck-driving boobs. "Whatever you call them, they outnumber the Harvard-educated, self-appointed elites who are hell-bent on destroying this country. "There's a reckoning coming."

By Barbara Simpson Posted: January 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 I didn't say it first, but I agree wholeheartedly. "This one's for you, Mary Jo." Last week's election of Scott Brown to replace Edward Kennedy in the U.S. Senate really was justice delayed for Mary Jo Kopechne, who died at the incompetent hands of the last Kennedy brother on July 18, 1969. Because of money, family and political connections, Teddy Kennedy left the scene of Mary Jo's drowning in the car he'd been driving and proceeded into a historic run as a fixture in Washington. This man, who never held a real job in his whole life, found his calling as a U.S. senator, ironically by completing the term of his brother John, who'd been elected president. When Teddy wanted re-election, he got it – again and again and again – ultimately serving eight full terms. His position in the Senate became "Kennedy's seat," as though it belonged to him. It did, but only because voters re-elected him, as though not to do it would insult the Kennedy name and family. He spent 46 years in office, his votes and legislation changing the United States from a free country to one that's now careening toward Marxist socialism. When Kennedy died Aug. 25, for the first time in decades it was an open race for his Senate seat. But Democrats didn't worry. It was Massachusetts, after all. They figured their candidate was a shoo-in. But something happened last Tuesday in that bluest of blue states, a state securely in the liberal pocket. What happened was that a young, mostly unknown Massachusetts politician, Scott Brown, beat the odds and won election to the U.S. Senate to complete Kennedy's unexpired term. It's poetic justice that Kennedy died before his term was up! Imagine! Democrat pundits figured wrong. Their candidate, state Attorney General Martha Coakley, lost. What made the results historic wasn't just that it was to fill Kennedy's term, but that it wasn't just any candidate who won. It was a Republican! Those pundits were really wrong. READ FULL STORY >

Next up: Obama wants your retirement money ~ By Roger Hedgecock

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Roger Hedgecock Posted: January 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see are not going down well with voters. The president has plans for even more big spending. The Chinese have said there's not enough money in the world to finance U.S. debt. Already, the annual federal deficit is being financed by selling 80 percent of the Treasury notes and bonds – to the Federal Reserve! Obama needs lots of real money, and he needs it now. According to the Labor and Treasury Departments, draft federal regulations will be published for public comment as soon as next week which would "promote" the conversion of 401(k) and IRA accounts to annuities. Make no mistake here: Obama is after your retirement money. The "annuities" will "invest" not in the familiar packages of bond and stock mutual funds but in the Treasury debt! The biggest pool of real money left in the U.S. (more than $4.7 trillion) is in 401(k) and IRA "defined contribution" accounts. Created by Congress, these saving for retirement devices allow millions of working Americans in more than 700,000 private plans to defer federal income tax on annual contributions to the account. During working years (the accumulation phase), the account is invested mostly in private companies. These retirement accounts are the lifeblood of capitalism. In retirement, tax is paid on the amount withdrawn from the account. Many retirees choose to buy private annuities with all or part of the 401(k) locking in guaranteed (lower) return. The annuity allows further tax deferment because only a portion of the payout is return of principal. Private annuities also presently invest mostly in private companies although they are permitted to also invest in Treasury debt. Now the feds want to "regulate" the inclusion of tax-deferred annuities into already tax-deferred retirement accounts of still-working Americans. As stated this week by Assistant Labor Secretary Phyllis C. Borzi and Assistant Treasury Secretary Mark Iwry, recent stock losses to retirement accounts mean that the feds must protect workers with safer "lifetime income options." And what could be "safer" than Treasury bonds with principal and interest guaranteed by the U.S. government? READ FULL STORY >

State of the Union grade: 'F' ~ By Chuck Norris

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: January 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1806 what many of us were thinking a week ago when Scott Brown won the U.S. Senate seat in Massachusetts: "I sincerely congratulate you on the triumph of republicanism in Massachusetts. The hydra (or many-headed monster) of federalism has now lost all its heads but two." Of course, Jefferson was referring to the remaining two heads of Connecticut and Delaware, yielding to the overarching federalist powers. A great battle was won – but the war was not over. And such is our struggle today from the overreaching power of the federal government. Remember when Washington powerbrokers, as well as mainstream media like CNN and MSNBC, gave little press to the tea-party rallies? Remember when they mocked cross-country town-hall meetings last summer as pockets of resistance and labeled us patriots, constitutionalists and independents as extremists or radicals who had little sway? That has all changed with the election of Republican Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate seat long held by the late Ted Kennedy. Whether you agree with him or not, Brown's election was a real turning point in our country. It truly is a repudiation of all that Washington is fighting for and forcing like a ramrod down our country's throat. It serves as a reminder that patriots can indeed rally across the country and change the flow of Washington. But does Washington get it? President Obama? For a moment, I thought they might (how temporarily naïve or overly optimistic of me). But then I listened to President Obama being interviewed by ABC's George Stephanopoulos the morning after the Massachusetts election. The president's exact words were: "And here's my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country. The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry, and they're frustrated. Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years." Wrong, Mr. President. What swept Scott Brown into office was a national disdain for what your administration is doing and has done to our country. It's no longer an anger or frustration with Bush's presidency, but yours. It's not what's happened in the preceding eight years, but the past year since you've become president. (Are you really still blaming President Bush?) Mr. President, it's time to face the music, and help America to do the same. This Wednesday evening, you will give your State of the Union address. And millions upon millions of us are even now wondering if you will again sugarcoat the truth – if you will pad your performance over this past year or confess that the path Washington is taking is plummeting our country deeper into the abyss. If you convey the real status of the union, then you must confess that we are truly no better off (and much worse off in many respects) than when you first took seat in the Oval Office. About this I'll give you credit: that you have indeed fulfilled your promise to "fundamentally transform the United States of America." And you've done so in record-breaking speed – one year, to be exact. READ FULL STORY >

CAIR exposed. Media without excuse ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: January 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 When WND Books published "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America," a devastating exposé of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups, my company was quite certain of a couple of things:

• the book would almost certainly result in some sort of frivolous lawsuit by CAIR in a desperate attempt to salvage its reputation as a "Muslim civil rights group";

• the thoroughly documented book based partly on a daring undercover operation inside CAIR would finally result in making the media and public aware of the group's standing as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator and U.S. front for the Muslim Brotherhood;

Well, we got our frivolous lawsuit. But never in my worst nightmares about the timidity and political correctness of the establishment press could I have imagined the way every co-called news organization in America would collectively run and hide – ignoring the book's explosive and meticulous research and keeping critical national security information from the public. Even though Glenn Beck of Fox News was a target of CAIR, he ignored the book. Even though Bill O'Reilly was a target of CAIR, he ignored the book – and, even worse, kept inviting members of the group to appear on his top-rated show without confronting them on any of the material. Not one Fox News show has to date shown any interest in the book or the monumental First Amendment suit it inspired. Not one CNN show has acknowledged the book or the lawsuit. Not one NBC, CBS or ABC news show has touched on it. The Associated Press has ignored it. The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and every other newspaper in America has failed to report on it. Out of fear or journalistic compromise, the media have taken a collective powder. It's a scandal almost as big as what the book itself has revealed. We don't have a free press in America. Apparently, we don't even have the vestige of a free press in America. That's my only conclusion. But it gets worse. Since the publication of the book, the lawsuit filed by CAIR has resulted in some dramatic developments and new disclosures. Last week, WND (and only WND) reported that 12,000 pages of internal CAIR documents captured by researchers during their investigation and sought by CAIR in the lawsuit were instead turned over to the FBI, which deemed them significant enough to subpoena them after a U.S. judge ordered they be returned to the group. Did that stir any curiosity by the media? No. READ FULL STORY >

Repudiation of the unholy trinity ~ By Henry Lamb

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Henry Lamb Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 The rebellion that swept across Massachusetts Tuesday should provide Washington's unholy trinity – Barry, Harry and Nancy – with convincing evidence that the American people will no longer tolerate their tyranny. Tyranny is the "arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority." Does this not describe perfectly the actions of the unholy trinity? Consider the so-called $787 billion "Stimulus Bill" that the public opposed, enacted with little Republican support. Consider the government takeover of General Motors, AIG and the banks. Consider the pending health-care bill the unholy trinity has twisted, shaped and manipulated into such a corruption that even the people of the nation's bluest state rejected it. The unholy trinity now must decide whether to follow the clear instructions of the people and repent from their tyrannical past, or choose instead to follow Master Saul Alinsky's advice given in "Rules for Radicals," which says, "When times get tough, step on the accelerator." Some of the president's advisers are telling him that now is the time to get tough and show strength and conviction of character by forcing his health-care bill through Congress. Nancy told reporters that regardless of the outcome of the Massachusetts election, "… we will have health care one way or another." Congressional underlings, however, who must face a hostile electorate in 10 months, are less confident. There is no doubt that the election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts has dramatically altered the progress of the progressive agenda Obama is pursuing. This remarkable victory in no way reduces the urgency of continuing the rebellion across the country. The unholy trinity and the Marxist majority they lead are not defeated. They have simply been forced to slow down a little and devise new strategies. Their long-term goal is still "fundamentally transforming the United States of America" into a government that reflects their Marxist ideals. While they are trying to put the best possible spin on the Massachusetts debacle, they are also moving ahead with other initiatives that don't get the national spotlight. READ FULL STORY >

Congratulations, Sen. Brown ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Editor's note: Ellis Washington's new radio program, "The Washington Report," airs Thursdays at 11 a.m. Eastern on 1620 AM in Atlanta, Ga. It can be heard online at the Radio Sandy Springs website.

It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams

I love those stirring words of Samuel Adams (1722-1803), one of my favorite historical figures, also known as "The Father of the American Revolution." Would to God we had 535 Samuel Adamses in Congress today. During pivotal times of our history, Massachusetts has been at the epicenter of America's republic. We all remember the two great tea parties that began a tsunami of political reform starting in Massachusetts and quickly spread throughout the country:

• May 10, 1773 – The Boston Tea Party lit the fuse of the American Revolution, which eventually destroyed the shackles of British tyranny, monarchy and confiscatory taxation policies from the colonies;

• April 15, 2009 – The first Tax Day Tea Party was started on Tax Day in Boston, Mass., leading to a steady decline of President Barack Obama in the polls and increasing opposition to his radical Marxist agenda to "remake America," including his socialist health-care program currently stalled in Congress.

The first act of defiance by our forefathers 237 years ago established the republic; the last act will perhaps save our republic from the fascist policies of President Obama and the Democrats. With Tuesday's victory of Scott Brown over Massachusetts Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley, seismic shock waves were sent across the world. The sword of Damocles now hangs ominously over the head Obama and Majority Leader Harry Reid's tenuous 60 votes required to pass their Marxist health-care bill in the Senate. READ FULL STORY >

Time now for real immigration reform ~ By Tom Tancredo

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Tom Tancredo Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 The Senate health-care bill is not the only monstrosity that died in Massachusetts on Jan. 19. Two days after the Massachusetts victory of Republican Scott Brown, Speaker Pelosi announced that she does not have the votes to push the Senate health-care bill through the House. A similar message is being delivered more quietly to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus: There will never be enough votes in 2010 to push the amnesty bill. To all but a few diehard zealots, the amnesty bill is dead. The nation can now move to an honest debate on true immigration reform. Of course, a few tone-deaf politicians are still laboring in back rooms of the Capitol to negotiate a "bipartisan compromise" that includes amnesty. Memo to Lindsay Graham and Chuck Schumer: The party's over. Move on. Thus in 2010, given that the liberals do not have the votes for a comprehensive amnesty bill, the Obama administration will use various stealth amnesty laws already on the books. For example, last week, Obama used current law to grant Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, to 200,000 illegal-alien Haitians. These are not earthquake victims, not orphans and not refugees, but now, they are future citizens. Those 200,000 Haitians are now future citizens because the 18-month time limit will be renewed again and again until they eventually attain permanent status. Who would want to go home to corruption-plagued Haiti after getting legal status in the United States? To be fair, the abuse of the TPS program didn't begin with Obama; it has been going on for years. It is one more example of the need for reform of current immigration laws. Stopping a new amnesty is not enough. We need a reform agenda that can bring some coherence and sanity to our immigration system and bring it into harmony with other national goals, including national-security imperatives. READ FULL STORY >

Your tax dollars at work ~ By Patrice Lewis

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Patrice Lewis Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 A great sadness has befallen some friends of mine. They are expecting their first grandchild. My friend "Linda" has two stepchildren. Bob, her 19-year-old stepson, is a decent and responsible young man who brings her great joy. Jane, her 21-year-old stepdaughter, has done little but spread misery and conflict her entire life. From the moment Linda married her husband when Jane was 5, the girl was trouble. Most of Jane's time was spent with her biological mother, but when it was time for the children to visit their father, Jane lost no opportunity to create havoc in Linda's house. As Jane entered her teenage years, the havoc grew worse. She delved into drinking, drugs, prostitution, theft and death threats against her father's second family. It got to the point where she was placed in a lock-up facility when she was 16. She was "sprung" on her 18th birthday and happily continued her descent into hell with a couple of suicide attempts, more death threats against her extended family and other joyous expressions of love. Linda's husband, once his legal obligations of child support were over, refused to give Jane a penny because he knew how it would be spent. Jane supported herself by sponging off her mother, selling drugs and occasional excursions into the world's oldest profession. And now, at age 21, she's pregnant. This was inevitable, of course, but it brings great stress and sorrow to Linda and her husband. "I pray she doesn't have an abortion," I wrote to Linda. "I pray she gives the baby up for adoption." "Oh, she won't," Linda wrote back. "She's thrilled to be pregnant because it means a free ride for her. She thinks the baby is the answer to all her money woes. She knows welfare will cover it. She's already signed up and, since she's pregnant, she's already approved." At 21, Jane is an expert at manipulating the system. So there you have it. Your tax dollars at work. While welfare was created for the most humane of reasons – no one wants to see mothers with small children begging on the street – the Law of Unintended Consequences meant that women are encouraged to have illegitimate babies. Or, to put it another way, women are no longer discouraged by economic hardship or societal standards not to have illegitimate babies. This isn't rocket science, nor is it news. It's just tragic. There's a line from the 1940 movie version of "Pride and Prejudice" with Greer Garson and Lawrence Olivier. "You must learn, Mrs. Collins," intones the haughty and condescending Lady Catherine de Bourgh, "to draw a firm line between the deserving poor and the undeserving." Off-hand, that remark sounds callous and snotty. Yet the more I think upon it, the more I can't help but apply it to Jane. READ FULL STORY >

After Massachusetts, what's next? ~ By Star Parker

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Star Parker Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Have you ever watched as a dear friend becomes smitten with someone you know is not for them? You listen as they swear how Mr. or Ms. Right has finally arrived, wondering how they cannot see the obvious. Your only option is to watch and wait for the inevitable, knowing that when it's over you'll be there to help pick up the pieces. So, yes, independent voters, who were key to electing Barack Obama, are now falling out of love with him. But, I ask, what were you folks thinking a year ago? You didn't realize that the post-racial candidate with the magic wand was a classic, boilerplate liberal? You were so sick of Republicans that you didn't bother to think about it? But you do know about these rebound relationships, don't you? It's not like we haven't had our experience with liberalism. That experience made the liberal label so politically deadly that liberals renamed themselves "progressives." So, what can we expect now in the wake of the miracle in Massachusetts? Democrats are between a rock and hard place because Barack Obama is not going to change. This is a date you know after five minutes is not going to work, and you have the whole evening ahead of you. In this case, it's three more years. READ FULL STORY >

Patriotism or just PO'd? ~ By Dave Welch

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Dave Welch Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 The political breath of fresh air that swept through Massachusetts this week like an old-fashioned "nor'easter" gave hope that the government takeover of health care and the radical agenda of the Marxist/Democrat machine can be slowed or stopped. The fact that it occurred near where another "shot heard 'round the world" occurred on the 19th of the month (April) was particularly sweet. As usual, let me be the fly in the sugar bowl for a moment to remind us of some important facts. First, anything close to center and certainly center-right from the Commonwealth was a huge victory. However, lest we pin too much hope on Scott Brown, it is important that we remember some critical facts. First, he represents a state that has given us Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Barney Frank and – I know I'll raise some ire with this inclusion – Mitt Romney … all center to very far left on a legitimate scale of true conservatism. This political victory was desperately needed to throw grease under the drive wheels of the Obama/Reid/Pelosi locomotive. The fact that it also represents the uprising of the Common Joe to take our government back is inspiring. With that stated, here is the question we must answer; "How did we get from John and Sam Adams to Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank to begin with?" We must also answer the challenge David presents us from God's word: "If the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?" (Psalm 11:3) The foundation he was referring to is in verse 1, "In the Lord, I take refuge. …" Do we largely take refuge, aka hide our collective self under His authority and protection? How is it that the region that was the birthplace of freedom and produced like the Adams and documents like the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut declined so far, so fast? While we often deride Western Europe for its dead churches, secularism and socialism, those nations have been on a much longer and more gradual decline. New England is the least churched region in the nation, following in the footsteps of our European cousins, producing similar fruits. In large part the majority of our pulpits, congregations and institutions no longer reflect the "aflame with righteousness" described by Alexis de Tocqueville. We have loved comfort, popularity, prosperity and peace far too much to risk even preaching the offensive truth of God's Word lest we chase off the big donors or aren't invited to be keynote at the Church Growth Conference. While we love to wave flags and wipe a tear on Independence Day, do we really know what patriotism is, or is it even a legitimate premise for Christians? Am I irritating you will all these questions? Good. How we define patriotism in its true form, whether it is just people mad at government overreach and overspending or whether the foundations of it are much deeper, is critical. Noah Webster, in his historic 1828 dictionary defines it as:

PAT'RIOTISM ,n. Love of one's country; the passion which aims to serve one's country, either in defending it from invasion, or protecting its rights and maintaining its laws and institutions in vigor and purity. Patriotism is the characteristic of a good citizen, the noblest passion that animates a man in the character of a citizen. (emphasis added)

READ FULL STORY >

Guess who joins Glenn Beck on mission to restore America

From WorldNetDaily

'This grass-roots movement cannot be stopped' By Chelsea Schilling Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 12:25 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily WND founder Joseph Farah will join Glenn Beck and a lineup of prominent speakers in an educational policy conference designed to help restore the foundation of America. Farah will be presenting on "Free Ideas: America's Unique Freedom of the Press" alongside speakers such as Rep. Michele Bachmann; former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Penn.; former U.S. Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo.; Phyllis Schlafly; David Horowitz; journalist and author, Brigitte Gabriel; Movieguide's Dr. Ted Baehr and dozens of other American authors and leaders. "Joseph Farah will discuss the First Amendment and the press and how precious and unique it is that America has a free press," said Donna Hearne, executive director of the Constitutional Coalition, the non-profit, non-partisan think-tank and research facility hosting the event. The conference, titled "What Makes America Work? Lessons Children and Others Must Hear," will take place Feb. 4 through Feb. 6 in the ballroom of Missouri's Hilton St. Louis Frontenac hotel. The Constitutional Coalition is offering tickets for the event until Jan. 25. The coalition addresses contemporary topics from a constitutional perspective, including government, taxes, national defense, education, family needs, property rights and other issues. "The goal of the conference is to bring Americans together on the same page," Hearne explained. "We want to help people understand the fundamentals of liberty and freedom, so that when we make decisions in our own communities or in a legislative situation, or regarding our finances and education of our kids, we're doing so through the lens of understanding how precious freedom and liberty are." READ FULL STORY >

Aliens Cause Global Warming - A speech by Michael Crichton

Aliens Cause Global Warming - A speech by Michael Crichton

Because of copyright permission requirements, I can only give you one excerpt from this Michael Crichton speech. Please click on the link below to read the full speech. You may soon find yourself questioning the "consensus science" of anthropogenic global warming.

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had."

California Institute of Technology
Pasadena, CA
January 17, 2003


An historical approach detailing how over the last thirty years scientists have begun to intermingle scientific and political claims.

READ FULL SPEECH

Senator's call to profile angers 'Muslim Mafia'

From WorldNetDaily

CAIR wants lawmaker to meet with Islamic leaders to explain By Art Moore Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 12:25 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily The Council on American-Islamic Relations' Oklahoma chapter is calling on Sen. James Inhofe, R.-Okla., to meet with Muslim leaders to discuss his statement during a congressional hearing in favor of using religion and ethnicity as factors in profiling airline passengers. "It is disturbing to hear a member of the United States Senate suggest that entire religious and ethnic groups should automatically be considered terror suspects," said CAIR-OK Executive Director Razi Hashmi. "Our nation's leaders have a duty not to exacerbate the growing anti-Muslim sentiment in American society." Inhofe's spokesman has not replied to a WND request for comment. But advocates of the senator's position argue correct profiling would not automatically regard a Muslim as a terror suspect. Rather, it would take a passenger's religion and ethnicity into account among a variety of factors that, together, comprise a terrorist "profile." CAIR itself has been designated by the Justice Department as an unindicted terrorist conspirator, and the FBI has cut off its once-close ties with the group. CAIR's terrorist connections also have been exposed in an undercover probe that obtained internal documents confirming it acts as a front in the U.S. for international Muslim groups working to bring Saudi-style Islamic law to the nation. Speaking at a review Thursday of the Fort Hood shootings by the Senate Armed Services Committee, Inhofe said, "I'm, for one – I know it's not politically correct to say it – I believe in racial and ethnic profiling." The senator elaborated that "if you're looking at people getting on an airplane and you have X amount of resources to get into it, you get at the targets, and not my wife. And I just think it's something that should be looked into." Inhofe said that with few exceptions, such as the 1995 bombing of the Murrah federal office building in his state's capital, the perpetrators of terrorism are Muslims. Even in the Murrah case, however, a congressional committee examined strong evidence, based on an investigation by reporter Jayna Davis, that Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh were part of a scheme involving Islamic terrorists. READ FULL STORY >

January 21, 2010 - Sen. Inhofe (R-OK) on racial profiling and terrorism

Video provided by CSPAN

UPDATE 01-23-10 @ 0331: Is is just me, or does the guy behind Senator Inhofe to his right look a lot like (a young) Jack Bauer? The picture above also shows the guy.

WE the People say, "Scott Brown, thanks for your help"

From TheREALjohnny2k youtube.com Channel

January 22, 2010 We the People just want to say, "Thank you, Scott Brown, for your perseverance, and continuing on with your campaign, even when you were WAY down, in a Democrat (deep Blue) state, for a seat once held by the Kennedy family. Because of the victory, the Democrats suddenly realized the fact that the tea parties were for real, people weren't kidding at the town halls meetings. There is a cameo guest star in this video. It is VERY fitting!

Massachusetts' Other GOP Winner ~ By Kim Strassel

From THE WALLSTREET JOURNAL ~ Opinion Journal

Mitt Romney should write off his health-care plan as a mistake that Democrats have made worse. By Kim Strassel OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH | JANUARY 21, 2010, 9:41 P.M. ET Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts has most Republicans hopeful about midterm elections. It has Mitt Romney hopeful about 2012. In many ways, the former Bay State governor never ended his 2008 presidential campaign. From a perch atop his Free and Strong America PAC, Mr. Romney has been raising money, nurturing his team, keeping himself in the national spotlight. With the Massachusetts Senate race, he sensed an unexpected opportunity to step to the front of the GOP presidential ranks. He played it nicely. Aware that many voters have mixed views of his governorship, Mr. Romney stayed in the shadows, leaving other notables to stump with Mr. Brown. Behind the scenes was a different story. Mr. Romney headlined fundraisers for the little-known state senator and used his own national mailing list to help raise dollars. He called on supporters to make calls on Mr. Brown's behalf, and he harnessed his media operations to bolster the candidate. His closest aides flooded to Mr. Brown, bringing with them the savvy of a national operation. Beth Lindstrom, a cabinet official in the Romney administration, served as Mr. Brown's campaign manager. Also in Brown HQ were Beth Myers, Mr. Romney's presidential campaign manager, and Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom, who worked on the now-famous TV spots showing a tax-cutting John F. Kennedy morphing into Mr. Brown. Mr. Romney got his due on election night. He was the first political figure Mr. Brown thanked for helping "show us the way to victory." Romney allies had already been busy touting his role. "There's no one who has done more behind the scenes and in front of the scenes than Mitt," Republican National Committee member Ron Kaufman told Politico—two days before the election. By midweek, the political pundits decreed Mr. Romney the other big winner. Some went so far as to credit him with the 41st vote, potentially saving the nation from ObamaCare. In doing so, they unwittingly touched on the flip side of this week's race. For all the benefits this contest held for the former governor, it also churned up what will prove the biggest obstacle to Romney 2012. Mr. Brown brazenly turned his Senate bid into a referendum on President Obama's health plan, and voters rewarded him with a job. Yet ObamaCare's model was the health reform inflicted on Massachusetts by a certain Republican governor in 2006, otherwise known as RomneyCare. READ FULL STORY >

Fox News' liberal future? ~ By Robert Ringer

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Robert Ringer Posted: January 22, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 I have long considered Rupert Murdoch – a transplanted Australian, of all things – to be one of the greatest American heroes of our time. Like millions of other Americans, he saw the liberal bias in the media, but what made him different is that he had the financial wherewithal to do something about it. In 1996, Murdoch, through his flagship company [N]ews Corporation, started Fox News as an alternative to CNN's addictive liberal coating of the news. And, in what has proven to be a stroke of genius, he hired Roger Ailes as the man to run his new enterprise. Ailes is staunchly conservative, daring and one of those guys who seems to have been born with the Midas touch. While you're at it, you can add him to my list of the greatest American living heroes. Once Fox News was launched, it didn't take the world long to realize a heretofore well-hidden fact: Most Americans have conservative values. Fox was a dagger in the hearts of left-wing anchormen who had long ago become used to creating their own news stories by leaving out pertinent facts and adding in knowingly false information – and, often, simply ignoring news items altogether that didn't fit in with their liberal agenda. The CNN-Fox News war was over within a couple of years, and today it's become a virtual bloodbath. Without government intervention – like that proposed by FCC "Chief Diversity Officer" Mark Lloyd – it's hard to imagine how CNN, CNBC and MSNBC can continue in business indefinitely. Even the three major networks are getting financially clobbered, yet they stubbornly cling to their left-wing agendas, choosing – like Congress and Obama – to ignore the desires of a majority of American viewers and voters. So far, so good. But a few years ago, I dared to ask the question, "What happens when Rupert Murdoch (who will be 79 in March) dies?" Ditto when Roger Ailes passes on or retires. "Could it be," I wondered, "that progressivism, one of the most highly contagious diseases known to mankind, will find a way to creep into Fox News and metastasize?" As it is, Fox already has its share of in-house liberals (Shepherd Smith, Geraldo, Bob Beckel, et al.) to assure the balance in its "fair and balanced" promise. READ FULL STORY >

Exposed: Saudi Arabia's secret nuke stash

From WorldNetDaily

Riyadh 'confident' it has an atomic option By Aaron Klein Posted: January 22, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily JERUSALEM – Pakistan's nuclear weapons project was partially financed by Saudi Arabia, with the two countries sharing nuclear technology, a senior Egyptian security official told WND. "The Saudis are confident they have a nuclear option via Pakistan," said the security official. "The Pakistani nukes are also Saudi nukes." The official said an agreement between the two countries was secretly inked seven years ago, although at the time such a pact was strongly denied by both Saudi and Pakistani officials. Pakistan in the late 1990s became the seventh country to successfully develop and test nuclear weapons. The Pakistani arsenal is estimated at between 35 and 95 warheads, according to the U.S. Navy Center for Contemporary Conflict. READ FULL STORY >

That old Obama magic is back ~ By Ann Coulter

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ann Coulter Posted: January 20, 2010 ~ 6:11 pm Eastern © 2010 Once again, the people have spoken, and this time they quoted what Dick Cheney said to Pat Leahy. Less than two weeks ago, the New York Times said that so much as a "tighter-than-expected" victory for Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley would incite "soul-searching among Democrats nationally," which sent Times readers scurrying to their dictionaries to look up this strange new word, "soul." A close win for Coakley, the Times said, would constitute "the first real barometer of whether problems facing the party" will affect the 2010 elections. But when Coakley actually lost the election by an astounding 5 points, the Chicago boys in the White House decided it was the chick's fault. Democratic candidate Martha Coakley may be a moral monster, but it's ridiculous to blame her for losing the election. She lost because of the Democrats' obsession with forcing national health care down the nation's throat. Coakley campaigned exactly the way she should have. As a Democrat running in a special election for a seat that had been held by a Democratic icon (and another moral monster) for the past 46 years in a state with only 12 percent registered Republicans, Coakley's objective was to have voters reading the paper on Friday, saying: "Hey, honey, did you know there was a special election three days ago? Yeah, apparently Coakley won, though it was a pretty low turnout." Ideally, no one except members of government unions and Coakley's immediate family would have even been aware of the election. And until Matt Drudge began covering it like a presidential election a week ago, it might have turned out that way. Coakley had already won two statewide elections, while her Republican opponent, Scott Brown, had only won elections in his district. She had endorsements from the Kennedy family and the current appointed Democratic senator, Paul Kirk – as well as endless glowing profiles in the Boston Globe. And by the way, as of Jan. 1, Brown had spent $642,000 on the race, while Coakley had spent $2 million. On Jan. 8, just 11 days before the election, the New York Times reported: "A Brown win remains improbable, given that Democrats outnumber Republicans by 3 to 1 in the state and that Ms. Coakley, the state's attorney general, has far more name recognition, money and organizational support." It was in that article that the Times said a narrow Coakley win would be an augury for the entire Democratic Party. But now she's being hung out to dry so that Democrats don't have to face the possibility that Obama's left-wing policies are to blame. Alternatively, Democrats are trying to write off Brown's colossal victory as the standard seesawing of public sentiment that hits both Republicans and Democrats from time to time. As MSNBC's Chris Matthews explained, it was just the voters saying "no" generally, but not to anything in particular. Except when Republicans win political power, they hold onto it long enough to govern. The Democrats keep being smacked down by the voters immediately after being elected and revealing their heinous agenda. READ FULL STORY >

'Weak evidence,' Mr. Sunstein? ~ By Jack Cashill

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Jack Cashill Posted: January 21, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 In 2008, then Chicago law professor and current Obama regulatory czar Cass Sunstein co-authored with Harvard law professor Adrian Vermeule a paper simply titled "Conspiracy Theories." The good professors describe a conspiracy theory as "an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role." As a response to such theories, the authors argue that "the best government response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups." This infiltration could include a range of actions from penetrating online discussion groups to paying influential commentators to pose as "independent experts." The goal of such infiltration, in all cases, would be to "break up the crippled epistemology of conspiracy-minded groups." These arguments caught my attention as I have been chronicling one of Sunstein's cited conspiracy theories, namely "that the 1996 crash of TWA flight 800 was caused by a U.S. military missile." Along with my co-author/producer James Sanders, I have argued in the documentary "Silenced" and the book "First Strike" that missiles did indeed bring down TWA Flight 800, though I have shied from indicting the U.S. Navy. For the record, "epistemology" is the study of how one comes to know something. What I would like to share with Mr. Sunstein is how I came to know what I know. If he can show that "my evidence is weak or even nonexistent " and that my epistemology is crippled, I will apologize and retract what I have written. If, however, I can prove otherwise, I would invite Sunstein to use his new-found regulatory power to stage an open and honest investigation of TWA Flight 800's demise, the first. READ FULL STORY >

The Democrats' technological thuggery ~ By Phil Elmore

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Phil Elmore Posted: January 21, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Force is technology. It is crude technology, but it is technology nonetheless. Technology is the application of a tool or tools to human effort. This produces a result greater than can be accomplished without the tools used. In the case of naked force, technology could be a clenched fist wielded with intent – or it could be the truncheon in the white knuckles of a Black Panther who is bullying elderly voters. The technology of force can also be thieving, manipulation and intimidation of any democratic or bureaucratic process, in this case as nationally exhibited by the Democratic Party. Force, as misused by the Democrats, is the application of violence, abuse of process, libel, slander, propaganda, theft and a variety of other criminal behaviors to gain and keep, through any means necessary, the power to rule, arrogantly and presumptuously, every miniscule facet of your waking life. Democrats engage in this reprehensible, morally bankrupt, hypocritical behavior even as they breathlessly exclaim that their political opponents mean them harm. The example that springs most readily to mind is the bug-eyed, botox-paralyzed, Medusan visage of Nancy Pelosi as she feigned crocodile tears at the thought of those awful, mean "tea party" people waving imaginary Nazi symbols and somehow implying violence because they dared to oppose the socialization of American health care. Meanwhile, as hand-wringing Democrats engaged in these histrionics, their union thugs were beating protesters in an effort to silence them. A supporter of socialized medicine bullied, assaulted and then bit off the finger of an older man who dared to oppose Obamacare. Supporters of amnesty for illegal aliens attacked Americans opposed to the invasion of their nation. Conservative protesters were pepper-sprayed and beaten by homosexual activists. READ FULL STORY >