My Favorite Video of 2009 - "Validation"

It was an easy pick. When I saw this video for the first time, I knew it was made especially for me. I live my life like Hugh Newman. And I get sad when I see people that aren't smiling. So here is your chance, smile! You will when you see this. Happy New Year!

October 03, 2008 ~ "Validation" (Click here to see it directly on youtube.com)


Video provided by hughnewman1024

Unhealthy arrogance ~ By Thomas Sowell

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Thomas Sowell Posted: December 29, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 The only thing healthy about Congress' health insurance legislation is the healthy skepticism about it by most of the public, as revealed by polls. What is most unhealthy about this legislation is the raw arrogance in the way it was conceived and passed. Supporters of government health insurance call its passage "historic." Past attempts to pass such legislation – going back for decades – failed repeatedly. But now both houses of Congress have passed government health-care legislation, and it is just a question of reconciling their respective bills and presenting President Obama with a political "victory." In short, this is not about improving the health of the American people. It is about passing something – anything – to keep the Obama administration from ending up with egg on its face by being unable to pass a bill, after so much hype and hoopla. Politically, looking impotent is a formula for disaster at election time. Far better to pass even bad legislation that will not actually go into effect until after the 2012 presidential election, so that the public will not know whether it makes medical care better or worse until it is too late for the voters to hold the administration accountable. The utter cynicism of this has been apparent from the outset, in the rush to pass a health-care bill in a hurry, to meet wholly arbitrary, self-imposed deadlines. First it was supposed to be passed before the August 2009 congressional recess. Then it was supposed to be passed before Labor Day. When that didn't happen, it was supposed to be rushed to passage before Christmas. Why – especially since the legislation would not take effect until years from now? READ FULL STORY >

Spell dark ages: I-s-l-a-m-i-c R-u-l-e ~ By Mychal Massie

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Mychal Massie Posted: December 29, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 (Editor's note: This article, originally published July 19, 2005, has been modified from its original publication to reflect today's current events.) First let me cede the requisite acknowledgements that early Islamists played a key role in the developing culture of their day. Mathematics, medicine, astronomy, geography and Arabic numbers factored prominently into their time and beyond. But that was then, and this is now. Back then there were no Afghans to culturally imprison, no tall buildings to blow up and no passenger jets to hijack for purposes of same; there were no embassies in Kenya, no USS Cole, no subway systems in Great Britain and Spain; no night clubs in Bali and Germany, and the Philippines were not a destination point for proselytizing and recruitment. Great Britain was not quite the "great devil," and the United States had yet to pour billions of dollars into their lands not least of all to supply the technology that has made Muslim despotic families the wealthiest in the world – sitting on lavatory thrones with gold seats, while the people starve in the streets. The Islamic religion that played an important role in the development of early civilization has been usurped and co-opted by crazed, ego-maniacal madmen called mullahs, ayatollahs and sheikhs – among whom it can be argued based on the historical record, Muhammad was chief – allowing a reasonable mind finds beheading, rape and conquest barbaric. These madmen can promote and postulate any delusional reason they can divine for their oppressive behavior. My question is what would the world be like if they ruled it? Would the bombings, murders and mutilations of children be part of their world view? Would kidnapping and ceremonial beheadings exampled by Muhammad be part of their code enforcement? Can we assume by their butchering of innocent men, women and children in Iraq that this is their idea of leaping into the 21st century with liberties and freedoms for all? Is this their way of embracing democracy? Or should we look to Afghanistan, where women were students and professionals before Taliban Muslims took over in 1994? Is the brutal oppression women experienced under the genteel and warm religion (sarcasm intended) what the women of the world desire? READ FULL STORY >

The end of the Democratic Party ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: December 29, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Next year could well mark the beginning of the end of the Democratic Party as we have known it since 1972. That was the year the George McGovernites took over the party. It has never been the same since. McGovern was the presidential nominee that year – a man who called for an immediate end to the Vietnam War and a federally guaranteed minimum annual salary of $10,000. It was a radical departure from what had previously been the party of Hubert Humphrey and John Kennedy, liberals in the traditional sense but hardly radicals. In 1976, the party faithful attempted to return to the center with the nomination of Jimmy Carter, but they unwittingly elected an impostor in the mold of McGovern. Democrats have not had an opportunity to vote for a true moderate for president since. In electing Barack Obama as president last year, Democrats got the radical party activists they have been seeking ever since 1972 – a man completely out of step with American ideals of free enterprise, strong defense and personal freedom. With Democrats in control of the House of Representatives, the Senate and the Supreme Court, it might appear that the party is in the political driver's seat. But it is actually on the precipice of a historic setback that could force Democrats to re-evaluate their most basic ideals or face a realignment that could shatter the party's shaky coalition for years to come. The polls tell the story. Obama's approval rating has fallen significantly below 50 percent in his first year and much lower among critical independent voters. After one year in office, Obama is charging ahead with an agenda that scarcely even has the support of most Democrats. While he has three more years in office, his party is set to lose much if not all of its control in Congress in 2010, with even party leaders like Harry Reid facing certain judgment day at the polls. Even Democratic leaders who supported Obama early on are sending out public smoke signals warning of the disaster the party faces because of the radical agenda of those in power. READ FULL STORY >

We can have a better America in 2010 ~ By Herman Cain

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Herman Cain Posted: December 28, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 It is hard to imagine that we can have a better America in 2010 with all the things that got worse in 2009. The economy got worse. The unemployment rate got much worse. The war in Afghanistan got worse. The national debt got much worse. The annual deficit got worse. The general attitude of the American people got worse. The favorability of Congress got much worse. And the president's favorability ratings got much worse. But we can have a better 2010 than 2009, and here's how. First, remember the words of the Declaration of Independence: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it." We have some altering and abolishing to do to make 2010 better than 2009. It concludes at the ballot box in November 2010. It starts with people getting informed, engaged, involved and energized about the issues, the solutions, the deceptions and the lies about what is being forced onto the American people. I know this is the "season for the reason" for being thankful, and we are. But we have to do some things differently in 2010 to keep this country as the greatest country in the world. Thomas Jefferson said, "The American people won't make a mistake, if they are given all of the facts." President Ronald Reagan also reminded us of that truth. That's what the tea party rallies, conferences and demonstration bus tours are all about. That's what the public anger and outrage is all about, even though the president and the Democratic leadership are ignoring it. People are learning the facts and the truth. This time the people will remember in November. READ FULL STORY >

2010: The year ahead ~ By Vox Day

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Vox Day Posted: December 28, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 While the Great Depression is considered to have begun with the great stock market crash of 1929, the first mention of the words "great depression" was in a speech given by Herbert Hoover in late 1931. The first specific and titular reference did not occur until 1934, when British economist Lionel Robbins published a book titled "The Great Depression." This would neither be the first nor the last time economists influenced by the Austrian School would be the first to identify a major economic downturn in the making or to point out that the policies of the fiscal and monetary authorities were guaranteed to exacerbate it.

What then, are the prospects of enduring recovery? It is clear that they are not bright. It is quite probable, if there is no immediate outbreak of war on a large scale, that the next few months may see a substantial revival of business. If the exchanges are stabilised and the competition in depreciation ceases, there is a strong probability that the upward movement, which began in the summer of 1932, will continue. If the stabilisation were made permanent and some progress were made with the removal of the grosser obstacles to trade, it is not out of the question that a boom would develop. There are many things which might upset this development. The basis of recovery in the United States is gravely jeopardised by the policy of the Government. ~ Lionel Robbins, "The Great Depression," Page 195

At the end of 2009, conventional economists are claiming that the economic contraction which began in 2008 is over. Most government published statistics show growth and the stock markets have recovered half of their previous losses. While some of the wiser economists are hedging their bets by stating that they expect growth to be "sluggish" with "downside risks," there are no more expectations of market crashes, financial collapse or widespread economic contraction than there were at the beginning of 2008. The question is not one of growth versus contraction, but rather how much the economy will grow. However, the conventional economists are just as wrong to think the contraction is over as they were to believe that it was not on the horizon before. READ FULL STORY >

Obama's 'most important message'? ~ By Chuck Norris

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: December 28, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 In my last column, "Away with the manger," I predicted that the religious content of President Obama's Christmas address to the nation was going to be the weakest in presidential history. I also mentioned that, in the first year of his presidency, "Every time President Obama has had an opportunity to stand for Christianity in any way, he has not only denied it but disdained it." Any chance he has to dive deeper into its creed, he rises to the surface and changes the subject. I was correct on both accounts, and he proved it (again) last week. But never did I expect to hear Obama during Christmas week dodge children on the main message of Christmas and then teach them a revised version. First, unlike preceding presidents who took pride in America's Judeo-Christian heritage and confessed the nature of Christ as Savior, our president (with the first lady at his side) brought the briefest and most impotent religious admonition in the history of presidential Christmas addresses on Dec. 24, describing the incomparable Bethlehem miracle as merely containing a benign "message of peace and brotherhood that continues to inspire more than 2,000 years after Jesus' birth." The presidential yuletide moment of the week and season, however, dipped far further under the radar just a few days before on Dec. 22. It was Obama's visit Monday to the Boys and Girls Club in Washington, D.C., during which he had a free exchange (non-teleprompter) discussion with the children about Christmas. All seemed to be going fine until after the president read "The Polar Express" and led a discussion on what the kids wanted from Santa, when a few children brought up the real reason for the season. READ FULL STORY >

About my Christmas and Reflections on the New Year (and Decade)

From johnny2k's Facebook Page (NOTES)

By John Kubicek December 28, 2009 Yes, I worked over the Christmas Holiday time, but at least I was able to get with my family on Christmas Eve. The crowd included my brother Dave, sister Mary Jen, my Mom and Dad, and my daughter Lisa accompanied by her awesome boyfriend Andrew. We ate dinner that Mary Jen prepared, ordourves that Dave provided, did our gift exchange which is always fun, and played the card game, Wizard, a family favorite. I hope you all had at least as good of a Christmas as I did. It helped me to get through several days of rain and then snow. Don't you just love Winter? Actually, I apologize for taking it so lightly, knowing that many family plans had to be aborted due to the weather we had in this part of the country. Sorry about that. And I understand your pain. In the opening statement of this comment, I did mention that, "Yes, I worked over the Christmas Holiday time..." It wasn't just at my job, but also in working on my side projects. And of course, the standard delays of this time of the year, like successfully getting my gift shopping done and then (poorly) wrapping them, caused some projects to be delayed. But while many of the top talk-show and TV News hosts were taking the time off, somebody had to be watching out for us, keeping the public informed of all that is going on. I did my usual share of blog posts and youtube videos that you can always check out. We all have our priorities, though, don't we? It was hard, but I managed to get my family first, followed by my job, and then my work on my projects. Because I had my priorities correctly inline, I didn't feel any stress. I did what I had and wanted to do. Now that there is a new decade coming our way, I think that it would be a good time to reflect. What I am doing is evaluating what I did in the last 10 years; what I did right, and what I did wrong. And yes, I gave myself a grade - and that will stay confidential. I can tell you that I did find some areas of my life that need some improvement. To accomplish those improvements, I will have to make some lifestyle changes. To do that, I'm going to have to make some attitude adjustments. But, hey, no problem. I have the motivation. There's no doubt in my mind that major CHANGES really ARE coming our way. Not only do I want to prepare myself, I also want to be able to do my best to also help you get through -- or better yet, prevent -- those changes. During the time that I was thinking about what I want to accomplish in this next coming decade, I realized that it all has to do with what I can do for you. I don't want to sound harsh, but this is NOT the time to be clueless about what is going on in this world. This is NOT the time to be ignorant of the threats that we face. It will be my eternal mission, I think (because I leave it up to the Lord), to do my best to provide the information and resources you need to help us prevent a hostile takeover of our country, and our freedom.

Do you feel safe now? ~ By Joseph Farah

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

Excerpt: "And to every American reading this column, know that your personal security is up to you. The government is not watching out for you." By Joseph Farah Posted: December 28, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 If you have traveled by airline lately – domestically or internationally – you know the meaning of the word "hassle." Ordinary people who pose no possible threat to life and limb are forced to take off their shoes, their belts, walk through metal detectors, get their bags X-rayed and stand on long security lines. Meanwhile, as we saw last weekend, a man with "significant terrorist connections" boards a plan in Nigeria with the components of a bomb and nearly succeeds in detonating it as it approached Detroit. In other words, all the best efforts of government's politically correct, non-profiling of airline passengers proves worthless once again. In fact, if it hadn't been for the alert passengers on Flight 253, all 278 of them might have perished in the latest act of Islamic terrorism. Passengers, not crew members, jumped over one another to subdue the fiend. There was not a TSA agent or a sky marshal in sight. The government's response to the latest incident is to increase its meaningless security charade in which all passengers – elderly grandmas and newborns – are scrutinized with the same level of enthusiasm as those with "significant terrorism connections." Maybe you're asking yourself why someone with "significant terrorism connections" is permitted on a commercial airliner headed for the U.S. What is the purpose of the "no-fly list" if not to keep those with "significant terrorism connections" from getting on board? Don't expect to get an answer to that question. Just expect your own personal airline hassles to increase. READ FULL STORY >

Fretting: Nearly 2 of 3 expect terror trials to spark attack

From WorldNetDaily

Survey: Fear of retribution very real across America By Bob Unruh Posted: December 27, 2009 - 8:06 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily Editor's note: This is another in a series of monthly "WND/WENZEL POLLS" - polls conducted exclusively for WND by the public opinion research and media consulting company Wenzel Strategies. Nearly two out of three Americans expect another new terror attack to accompany the New York City court trials for detainees who are suspects in the 9/11 attacks in 2001, according to a new poll from Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies. "The fear of retribution from terrorists is very real all across America, the survey shows. Nearly two out of every three respondents – 61 percent – said they think it is likely that New York City will experience a terrorist attack, either before, during, or immediately after the terrorist trials," Wenzel said. "Just 28 percent said they thought it was unlikely that such an attack would occur. In a year that saw President Obama's job approval rating move from 69 percent positive the day after he took office to just 41 percent positive in this survey, this has got to be seen as one of the reasons. Obama has pursued an agenda that has been opposed by a majority of Americans since their announcement, and as he continues to push them through to fruition, the American public is responding with unprecedented negativity," he said. The WND/Wenzel telephone survey was conducted Dec. 18-21 using an automated telephone technology calling a random sampling of listed telephone numbers. The survey included 26 questions and carries a 95 percent confidence interval. It included 823 likely voters. It carries a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points. READ FULL STORY >

Harry Reid slips in a bombshell for Obamacare foes

From AmericanThinker.com, with an excerpt from The Weekly Standard

By Rick Moran December 22, 2009 What did we ever do to deserve Harry Reid? When the "manager's amendment" was passed in the dead of night, I pointed out that the wonks had yet to give it a good going over to discern what other surprises might lurk in the convoluted language used to obscure so much in the bill. I'm sure you'll be happy to know that the wonks have not disappointed us. Buried in the amendment is a bombshell; there will be no way to amend parts of Obamacare. Apparently, Reid wants to make this bill something like a royal decree where no one can change what has already been wrought. The Weekly Standard blog has the story:

Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) pointed out some rather astounding language in the Senate health care bill during floor remarks tonight. First, he noted that there are a number of changes to Senate rules in the bill--and it's supposed to take a 2/3 vote to change the rules. And then he pointed out that the Reid bill declares on page 1020 that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board cannot be repealed by future Congresses:

there's one provision that i found particularly troubling and it's under section c, titled "limitations on changes to this subsection." and i quote -- "it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection." this is not legislation. it's not law. this is a rule change. it's a pretty big deal. we will be passing a new law and at the same time creating a senate rule that makes it out of order to amend or even repeal the law. i'm not even sure that it's constitutional, but if it is, it most certainly is a senate rule. i don't see why the majority party wouldn't put this in every bill. if you like your law, you most certainly would want it to have force for future senates. i mean, we want to bind future congresses. this goes to the fundamental purpose of senate rules: to prevent a tyrannical majority from trampling the rights of the minority or of future co congresses.

Watch DeMint's full remarks here or below: December 21, 2009 - DeMint Challenges Democrats on Rules Changes in Reid Health Bill Video provided by SenJimDeMint

U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina) questions the Parliamentarian of the U.S. Senate through the chair about changes to the Senate Rules hidden within the 2700 page Reid-Obama health care takeover bill.

READ FULL STORY FROM THE WEEKLY STANDARD

READ FULL STORY FROM AMERICAN THINKER

Chris Matthews: Alinsky 'our hero'

From WorldNetDaily

MSNBC host hails radical community organizer By Aaron Klein Posted: December 25, 2009 ~ 10:55 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily Just five days after affirming on air that he is a liberal, MSNBC host Chris Matthews exclaimed that radical community organizer Saul Alinsky is one of his heroes. Stated Matthews: "Well, to reach back to one of our heroes from the past, from the '60s, Saul Alinsky once said that even though both sides have flaws in their arguments and you can always find something nuanced about your own side you don't like and it's never perfect, you have to act in the end like there's simple black and white clarity between your side and the other side or you don't get anything done. "I always try to remind myself of Saul Alinsky when I get confused," Matthews said on his "Hardball" show, speaking to guest Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, on the topic of President Obama's health care plan. See video of Matthews' comments:

Here is another very important excerpt from this column:

Former 1960s radical and FrontPageMagazine Editor David Horowitz describes Alinsky as the "Communist/Marxist fellow-traveler who helped establish the dual political tactics of confrontation and infiltration that characterized the 1960s and have remained central to all subsequent revolutionary movements in the United States." Horowitz writes in his 2009 pamphlet, "Barack Obama's Rules for Revolution. The Alinsky Model":

"The strategy of working within the system until you can accumulate enough power to destroy it was what sixties radicals called 'boring from within.'.... Like termites, they set about to eat away at the foundations of the building in expectation that one day they could cause it to collapse."

READ FULL STORY >

Daniel Pearl's Father Speaks Out On The WAR ON TERROR (Video)

Video provided by AlreadyKnownAsX2 February 07, 2009 - Daniel Pearl's Father Speaks Out On The WAR ON TERROR From the video description provided by AlreadyKnownAsX2:

The 'white' house is reluctant to use the term WAR ON TERROR, legitimizing islamic terror is one of the many ways liberals are trying to destroy our great country. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123362422088941893.html

"No. Those around the world who mourned for Danny in 2002 genuinely hoped that Danny's murder would be a turning point in the history of man's inhumanity to man, and that the targeting of innocents to transmit political messages would quickly become, like slavery and human sacrifice, an embarrassing relic of a bygone era. But somehow, barbarism, often cloaked in the language of "resistance," has gained acceptance in the most elite circles of our society. The words "war on terror" cannot be uttered today without fear of offense. Civilized society, so it seems, is so numbed by violence that it has lost its gift to be disgusted by evil." "This mentality of surrender then worked its way through politicians like the former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. In July 2005 he told Sky News that suicide bombing is almost man's second nature. "In an unfair balance, that's what people use," explained Mr. Livingstone. But the clearest endorsement of terror as a legitimate instrument of political bargaining came from former President Jimmy Carter. In his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," Mr. Carter appeals to the sponsors of suicide bombing. "It is imperative that the general Arab community and all significant Palestinian groups make it clear that they will end the suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism when international laws and the ultimate goals of the Road-map for Peace are accepted by Israel." Acts of terror, according to Mr. Carter, are no longer taboo, but effective tools for terrorists to address perceived injustices. Mr. Carter's logic has become the dominant paradigm in rationalizing terror. When asked what Israel should do to stop Hamas's rockets aimed at innocent civilians, the Syrian first lady, Asma Al-Assad, did not hesitate for a moment in her response: "They should end the occupation." In other words, terror must earn a dividend before it is stopped."

obama sucking up to islamic terrorists: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090131/ap_on_go_pr_wh/war_on_terror

"Obama has made it clear in his first days in office that he is courting the Muslim community and making what is at least a symbolic shift away from the previous administration's often more combative tone. He chose an Arab network for his first televised interview, declaring that "Americans are not your enemy." Before his first full week in office ended, he named former Sen. George J. Mitchell as his special envoy for the Middle East and sent him to the region for talks with leaders. According to the White House, Obama is intent on repairing America's image in the eyes of the Islamic world and addressing issues such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unrest in Pakistan and India, Arab-Israeli peace talks and tensions with Iran."

Merry Christmas - Terror Alert - 12/25/09 ~ By Nicholas Contompasis

From the blog, The Left - Watch What They Do, Not What They Say!

By Nicholas Contompasis Friday, December 25, 2009 Today, Al Qaeda, from Yemen authorized an attack on America by attempting to blow up a US air carrier. A 23 year old Abdul Mutallab also known as Umar Farouk Abdulmutalib was apprehended by a passenger while he was attempting to ignite a liquid explosive. He is now with U.S. authorities being questioned. The White House finally has admitted that this is a terrorist attack. Of course this can’t be, since we no longer have a war on terror and any actions such as today’s is called something more mundane. This seems to be a retaliatory strike against America, after last week’s attacks on Al Qaeda training camps in Yemen killing dozens of terrorists. I feel that this is just the beginning of many smaller attacks against American interests. It is general knowledge that there are thousands of Muslim terrorists out there that will sacrifice their lives for this distorted religion. This person was on a terror watch list but did get through by boarding at a foreign airport destine for Detroit. READ FULL STORY >

Obama: A sudden catastrophe ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity. ~ Daniel Webster

During this Christmas season, America should be reminded that President Barack Obama has perpetrated more vicious attacks against the Christian faith than any other president in the history of America. Therefore, I ask: Is Obama's ascendancy a sudden catastrophe? Even many of Obama's most ardent supporters agree that his first year in office has been a catastrophe:

• Increasing the national debt from $10 trillion in eight years under GWB to over $14 trillion;

• Nationalizing private corporations like GM, Chrysler, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;

• Bowing before murderous dictator nations like Saudi Arabia and China;

• Undeservedly receiving the Nobel Peace Prize after only two weeks in office, and;

• Appointing the basest of men (and women) to Cabinet-level positions and as czars to propagate the most anti-constitutional and hurtful policies against America.

One of America's greatest statesmen, Daniel Webster, a congressman, a senator and the secretary of state under three different presidents, said almost 200 years ago, "If there is anything in my thoughts or style to commend, the credit is due to my parents for instilling in me an early love of the Scriptures." Webster warned us that a "sudden catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity" if we didn't "abide by the principles taught in the Bible." Even America 150 years ago, during her most wicked and notorious period of slavery, does not compare with where we are today with abortion on demand, with the corpses of 50 million innocent babies we collectively killed, without even a tombstone memorial. How dare we send a charge to former generations for their sins of slavery, lynchings, de jure and de facto discrimination – with our hands stained with the blood of the innocents by our willful acquiesce to this savagery? Daniel Webster continued his prophetic warnings to this generation, saying:

There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. … [T]hat in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing.

Is President Obama our "public servant" or are We the People his slaves? I believe that the Obama administration and his puppet masters, like billionaire George Soros, the unions, the Hollywood movie moguls, militant gay and feminist activists, as well as legal organizations like the ACLU and the American Trial Lawyers Association, have nothing but utter disdain for the Constitution and the inalienable rights of the people founded under Natural Law. How did we get here so fast? In 1980 candidate Reagan failed to pick a bona fide conservative as vice president, which led to Bush 41 becoming a one-term irrelevancy in 1992. This opened the door to the moral degenerate and demagogue Bill Clinton. Bush 43 won two terms faking as a Ronald Reagan conservative and spending like a drunken Democrat. READ FULL STORY >

Father of Terror Suspect Reportedly Warned U.S. About Son

From FOXNEWS.com

Saturday, December 26, 2009 The father of a Nigerian man charged with trying to blow up a Northwest Airlines plane on Christmas Day reportedly warned the U.S. about his son's extreme religious views and activities, Nigerian newspaper This Day reported. The suspected terrorist has been identified as 23-year-old Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. His father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab, was a former minister and well-known banker, recently retiring from his chairman position at First Bank Nigeria, the paper reported. A close family source said that the father left his hometown of Katsina, in northern Nigeria, to speak with security agencies on Saturday. Family members said the father had become uncomfortable and concerned about his son's fanatical religious views in recent months. They said, as a result, he reported his son's activities to the U.S. Embassy and Nigerian security agencies six months ago. The father was reportedly devastated to hear the reports about his son's arrest and alleged role in trying to blow up a Detroit-bound airplane. A close friend said the father was shocked to learn that his son was even allowed to travel to the U.S. after he had reported him to U.S. authorities, the paper reported. READ FULL STORY >

President Obama's Marxist majority ~ By Henry Lamb

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Henry Lamb Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 A reporter asked Majority Leader Harry Reid how he could justify exempting Nebraska from Medicaid payments forever, in exchange for Sen. Ben Nelson's vote. His reply:

There's a hundred senators here. And I don't know if there's a senator that doesn't have something in this bill that was important to them. And if they don't have something in it important to them, then it doesn't speak well of them. That's what this legislation is all about. (Harry Reid, Dec. 21, 2009, Democratic press conference after cloture vote on health-care bill)

Apparently, Sen. Reid sees the legislative process as an activity through which individual senators vie for taxpayer dollars to obtain results that are beneficial to them. If individual senators don't get something out of specific legislation, then it "doesn't speak well of them." As the supreme benefit broker, behind closed doors, Sen. Reid dished out abundant benefits to selected members of the Senate as a reward for their vote on the health-care bill. This behavior is nothing short of bribery – with taxpayer dollars. Reid is not only proud of his skullduggery, but he suggests that senators who do not poke their hands into the public honey pot aren't doing their job. This Marxist majority has made a travesty of our government: The U.S. Senate should be the world's highest platform of political debate, but Harry Reid has transformed it into a cesspool of political payoffs. Democrats everywhere should be embarrassed. Non-Democrats everywhere should be determined to rid the nation of this corruption. The elections in 2010 will reveal whether the United States has succumbed to the immoral, unethical, "end-justifies-the-means" corruption practiced by this administration and congressional majority, or whether the people will rise up and demand a return to the limited federal government and free market the Constitution requires. This is the choice: America as a land of individual freedom, free markets and unlimited opportunity for personal achievement, or America is the land where individuals are forced to buy what government dictates and surrender their prosperity to the government in taxes to subsidize the failure of others. READ FULL STORY >

U.N. poised for a gun grab ~ By Tom Tancredo

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Tom Tancredo Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 If you think the Obama administration doesn't need help in dreaming up new schemes to reinterpret the Constitution and add new restrictions on our freedom, think again. Arms-control bureaucrats at the United Nations and dozens of allied NGOs (that's non-governmental organizations in non-bureaucratic lingo) have been busy for two decades talking and negotiating among themselves to produce an international treaty regulating the sale of small arms. A U.N. resolution adopted in October calls upon member nations to negotiate the matter and finish writing a treaty by 2012. The United States voted for the resolution, which was adopted almost unanimously. President Bush, for all his mistakes and miscalculations, never allowed his U.N. representatives to participate in such negotiations. But Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reversed course and agreed to join the negotiations. Secretary of State Clinton announced in October that the U.S. would join the negotiations "if they are based on consensus," implying that the U.S. could exercise a veto if negotiations went off course. That implies that the U.S. would reject any treaty that violates our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. The problem is she can't make that promise or guarantee that outcome. The truth is it is very dangerous for the U.S. to go down this road no matter how many assurances are given by Obama and his minions. Once committed to the "process of negotiations," it is hard to reject a product based on "international consensus." There are good reasons why the U.S. ought to stay out of such negotiations, and many good reasons to be wary of any international treaty on the subject. To put this whole matter in perspective, ask yourself how well existing arms-control agreements are working and how well international agencies are enforcing those agreements. READ FULL STORY >

Why the Grinch won't steal our Christmas ~ By Patrice Lewis

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Patrice Lewis Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Recently I had an interesting e-mail exchange with a favorite long-time reader. On my blog entry for Thanksgiving he saw a photo of our dinner table and guest. He wrote: "Your Thanksgiving dinner and your home both look impossibly warm, cozy and homey." Ha ha, fooled him. Our house, cozy? Silly man. I wrote back, "LOL – our home is a fixer-upper with half the walls stripped, unpainted or missing. If you look closely at the panel behind our friend's head, you'll notice it's actually not there. What's showing is pink insulation. One of these days we'll fix it up. ..." He wrote back a scolding note: "Sheetrock doesn't make a home." He related the story of a wayward child who had caused him much heartbreak through her bad choices, but who had straightened out her life and returned to the fold, to his great joy. "Trust me, Patrice," he concluded. "That beats the hell out of sheetrock any day." He's right, of course. Absolutely positively dead-on right. I needed the kick-in-the-pants reminder. You see, for a moment I'd fallen into the classic trap: That externals count more than internals. That things are more important than people. That happiness is defined by income, not relationships. That a beautiful home supersedes those who live in it. It's kind of like the Tiger Woods syndrome: You can be the richest and most successful person in the world, but if your personal relationships are shot to hell, then what good is wealth and fame? Advertisers are very clever at making us feel inadequate if we don't have the Perfect House, the Perfect Tree, the Perfect Presents and other Perfect things during Christmas. Madison Avenue shows us beautiful skinny people dressed in designer clothing surrounded by adorable and well-behaved children opening beautifully wrapped gifts under a tree laden with exquisite hand-made ornaments in homes that could be lifted from the pages of Architectural Digest. They never show people sitting around in ratty sweat clothes with toys scattered on the floor, dirty dishes in the sink and major decorating defects like decades-old avocado-green appliances or scarred walls. They never show a lopsided Christmas tree under which are inexpensive gifts wrapped in brown paper grocery bags with bows saved from last year. They never show walls with missing sheetrock or no paint. It's the job of advertisers, after all, to make us feel defective, because only then can they convince us our defects will be cured by buying their product. As soon as our living environment achieves the shimmer and sophistication of the images they project, then we'll be … Perfect. What no advertiser can admit, though, is without a peaceful relationship with family, friends and our Maker, no amount of "perfect" will ever cut the mustard. Just ask Tiger if you don't believe me. READ FULL STORY >

The war front is at home ~ By Star Parker

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Star Parker Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Christmas 2009 – our nation is still at war. Afghanistan? Iraq? Yes, of course, brave young Americans are in those far off lands defending our country. God bless them. But the war's front is here at home – the war we are having with ourselves. After the horrendous attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, a few Christian pastors stepped up to say that the unprecedented violation of America's homeland was a sign of weakness within our nation. They weren't talking about how we gather intelligence or how we check travelers at the airport. The management best-seller from the 1960s, "The Peter Principle," points out that one sign of an organization or an individual at their "level of incompetence" is thinking that re-organizing alone solves problems. Drawing new organization charts or moving around furniture is a lot easier than getting to the heart of understanding what is causing failure. The weakness that led to our vulnerability on that infamous September day, said those pastors, was moral, not technical. For this, they were widely denounced. President Bush rallied the nation and talked about good and evil. But the evil he talked about was overseas. We deployed our troops and tried to understand what was wrong with "them" and how we could fix it. But little soul searching or introspection was done at home. What might be wrong with us? As we talked about advancing freedom in other societies, we bloated our own government and violated and abused the principles of freedom – private property and personal responsibility – on which our own society was founded and built. READ FULL STORY >

Joy to the world, peace on Earth ~ By Pat Boone

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Pat Boone Posted: December 26, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

It came upon the midnight clear, that glorious song of old From angels bending near the earth, to touch their harps of gold. "Peace on the earth, good will to men From Heaven's all gracious King" The world in solemn stillness lay, to hear the angels sing.

Time, date: 12:01 a.m., A.D. 1. Friend, this really happened. It's not some fairy tale or a nice fable with a moral. Not only do a billion-plus people believe this deeply, but they are willing to stake their eternal destiny on it. I know there are several other faith systems that have almost fanatical devotees – but there is no other religious figure from whose moment of birth we have structured our very calendar. Think of that, will you? From the moment a little Jewish baby left his teen mother's womb, in a humble, dirty, smoke-stained shepherd's cave, most of the world began to count the days. Yes, there's a Chinese calendar, and a Jewish one, maybe another one or two. But all the world calls this 2009, and in a week it will be 2010. My family and I have been in that little cave, in what is still called Shepherd's Field, not far from Bethlehem. We were doing a musical special called "Christmas in Bethlehem," with songs specially written for us to record and use in the special. It was important to us to try to enact and tell the Christmas story, on or near the places where the events actually happened, as near as scholarship could tell us. And so we came to the cave. Because it was a nighttime scene, we decided to videotape the songs at night. Up on the hillside above the cave – which we were told has been in constant use as a "manger" for over 2,000 years – there had just been an archeological discovery. And they came to the educated guess that this had either been a big, sprawling estate – or, more likely, an inn! And down the hillside, there was this small cave carved out of the rock, where shepherd and some of their flock, especially the newborn lambs, could come in from the cold and rain. The fires they made to keep them warm and to cook over stained the walls and ceilings for all time. It seemed just too perfect to be a coincidence. READ FULL STORY >

Al-Qaeda link in failed plane attack

From New York Post

STAFF REPORT Last Updated: 9:42 PM, December 25, 2009 Posted: 2:34 PM, December 25, 2009 DETROIT (AP) — A Northwest Airlines passenger from Nigeria, who said he was acting on al-Qaida’s instructions, set off an explosive device Friday in a failed terrorist attack on the plane as it was landing in Detroit, federal officials said. Flight 253 with 278 passengers aboard was 20 minutes from the airport when it sounded like a firecracker had exploded, witnesses said. One passenger jumped over others and tried to subdue the man. Shortly afterward, the suspect was taken to a front row seat with his pants cut off and his legs burned. The White House said it believed it was an attempted act of terrorism and stricter security measures were quickly imposed on airline travel, but were not specified. Law enforcement officials identified the suspect as 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab. Others had slightly different spellings. While Mudallah was not a no-fly list, his name was in a database indicating that he had significant terrorist connections, said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. One law enforcement source said the man claimed to have been instructed by al-Qaida to detonate the plane over U.S. soil. “It sounded like a firecracker in a pillowcase,” said Peter Smith, a passenger from the Netherlands. “First there was a pop, and then (there) was smoke.” At least one passenger acted heroically. Smith said the passenger, sitting opposite the man, climbed over passengers, went across the aisle and tried to restrain the man. The heroic passenger appeared to have been burned. The incident was reminiscent of convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid, who tried to destroy a trans-Atlantic flight in 2001 with explosives hidden in his shoes, but was subdued by other passengers. Reid is serving a life sentence. King ranking GOP member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said the flight began in Nigeria and went through Amsterdam en route to Detroit. A statement Delta, which acquired Northwest, said, “Upon approach to Detroit, a passenger caused a disturbance onboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253. The passenger was subdued immediately and the crew requested that law enforcement meet the flight upon arrival. “The flight, operated by Northwest using an Airbus 330-300 aircraft with 278 passengers onboard, landed safely. The passenger was taken into custody and questioned by law enforcement authorities.” The FBI and the Homeland Security Department issued an intelligence note on Nov. 20 about the threat picture for the 2009 holiday season from Thanksgiving through Jan. 1. At the time, intelligence officials said they had no specific information about attack plans by al-Qaida or other terrorist groups. The intelligence note was obtained by The Associated Press. READ FULL STORY >

RELATED STORY: HOW AL-QAEDA AIRLINE FIEND USED LEG BOMB AND SYRINGE

Why Does Interpol Need Immunity from American Law?

One step closer to a One World Government? Commentary from National Review Online - The Corner

By Andy McCarthy Wednesday, December 23, 2009 You just can't make up how brazen this crowd is. One week ago, President Obama quietly signed an executive order that makes an international police force immune from the restraints of American law. Interpol is the shorthand for the International Criminal Police Organization. It was established in 1923 and operates in about 188 countries. By executive order 12425, issued in 1983, President Reagan recognized Interpol as an international organization and gave it some of the privileges and immunities customarily extended to foreign diplomats. Interpol, however, is also an active law-enforcement agency, so critical privileges and immunities (set forth in Section 2(c) of the International Organizations Immunities Act) were withheld. Specifically, Interpol's property and assets remained subject to search and seizure, and its archived records remained subject to public scrutiny under provisions like the Freedom of Information Act. Being constrained by the Fourth Amendment, FOIA, and other limitations of the Constitution and federal law that protect the liberty and privacy of Americans is what prevents law-enforcement and its controlling government authority from becoming tyrannical. On Wednesday, however, for no apparent reason, President Obama issued an executive order removing the Reagan limitations. That is, Interpol's property and assets are no longer subject to search and confiscation, and its archives are now considered inviolable. This international police force (whose U.S. headquarters is in the Justice Department in Washington) will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States. READ FULL STORY >

RELATED INFORMATION: Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?

Gore's traveling green tent show ~ By Barbara Simpson

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Barbara Simpson Posted: December 25, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 The world is ending! We're killing every thing and each other. Ice is melting. Oceans rising. Islands inundated. Species disappearing. Then again, drought sears the earth – probably in places that the melted glacier water can't reach. Oh well. Crops fail and people starve. It's the growing threat of climate change and global warming while people around the globe are hip deep in ice and snow. We're all going to die. Merry Christmas, everyone, and Happy New Year. Oops. Sorry. I guess I'm getting good wishes mixed up with all the political, environmental, scientific and now religious people hogging headlines with gloom and doom. It's hard to decide whether to smile or frown – or perhaps just lock myself in a closet and scream. Then again, If I have to hear Al Gore read his paean to doom again, as he ventures into poetry, I really will scream – and never mind the closet! If he wins a poetry or other dramatic prize for his compilation of nonsense – Neptune's dissolving bones, indeed – I'll know for certain there's no justice and everything is a farce. It's really disgusting that we have to put up with his sanctimonious posturings while state media pander to his ego and all the while the flim-flam man gets richer and richer but we're forced to change our lives to suit his environmental religion. Have no doubt, it is a religion. Gaia is Mother Earth, and the rest of us have to worship at her green shrine. That media treat Gore's nonsense seriously shows that the elevation of extreme environmentalism to religious consequence is real. If you think this "climate change environmental religion" is fringe, forget it. The enviros have assiduously courted all denominations with the goal of putting the stain of sin on any perceived transgression of nature. Yes, it's all about – sin! And Al Gore is the Elmer Gantry of this ultimate tent show! The greens and the media sound like a gaggle of Jewish mothers laying the ultimate guilt trip on the world. Actually, they lay the guilt trip on the Western world. Well, really – on the white world. Environmental acolytes did their dance in Copenhagen where Third-World dictators had the podium to hector the West and demand money. To have the likes of Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe lecturing us about transgressions against nature is ludicrous. This is the man who raped his country, sent his soldiers to kill priceless wildlife with machine guns, bulldozed homes with people in them, destroyed fertile farmland and is starving and bankrupting his people. And he claims to be Catholic. What would Jesus say? READ FULL STORY >

Obama's Enemies List ~ By Peter Wehner

From CommentaryMagazine.com

By Peter Wehner (No date provided) I have argued before that the tone and manner in which one practices politics are undervalued commodities, especially at a presidential level. The public looks for leaders who are large-minded rather than petty and peevish, who engage in public arguments rather than in personal attacks, who want to solve problems rather than settle scores. Tone and approach are important not simply for the aesthetics of politics but also because of what they reveal about a person's predisposition and attitude, temperament and spirit. That is but one reason why President Obama's war on Fox News -- being carried out by him and his top aides -- is so unwise. One of the attractions of Obama during the election -- one of his attractions to me, who wrote favorably about him several times -- was his tone and countenance, his apparent interest in a serious engagement with issues, and his professed allergy to politics practiced by those who are bitter and brittle. We should, he said, "resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long." He went on to say, "I will listen to you, especially when we disagree." All impressive and high-minded sentiments. And all, apparently, a ruse. We have seen from this White House Nixonian tendencies and, it would appear, a burning anger and resentment toward its critics. Whether it's Fox News, the Chamber of Commerce, or companies that sponsor reports that take issue with the administration's assessments, there seems to be a cast of mind that views critics as enemies, as individuals and institutions that need to be ridiculed, delegitimized, or ruined. Given the administration's brazen public statements, one can only imagine what is being said privately, behind closed doors, as strategies are plotted and put into effect. READ FULL STORY >