Leftist brats: You need a 'timeout' ~ By Erik Rush

From WorldNetDaily

By Erik Rush Posted: October 22, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

The White House trying to dictate who's a news organization. Democrats out to gut a business group. Obama media allies damning Americans as racist, unpatriotic and treasonous. Is this the America Obama promised when he campaigned to end the cynical and divisive politics of the past? – Steve Huntley for Chicago Sun-Times, Oct. 20, 2009

As I recall, during implementation of the previous administration's strategies in the War on Terror, members of the far left bleated their resentment toward those who questioned their patriotism. Given the left's pathetic deportment in response to terrorism, and reckless sympathetic tendencies where terrorists were concerned, they had come under criticism of the more circumspect among us. Still, they claimed that their dovishness, objection to such measures as the Patriot Act and support of sanctuary city statutes didn't make them any less patriotic than anyone else, damn it. I could add a litany of surreptitious machinations in which the Obama administration is currently involved that are far more questionable in terms of constitutionality (the argument used by progressives against many of the Bush administration's anti-terror policies). One is the resurrection of a National Institute of Health study on the effects of gun ownership on one's health. (The study had been discontinued by the CDC more than a decade ago.) In characteristic fashion, they are apparently examining the idea of stripping Americans of their Second Amendment rights and selling it to them under the guise of "protection" from something they've determined is "unhealthy." Cute. Then we have the targeting of American citizens at large, and the Fox News television network in particular, with charges of being racist, unpatriotic and treasonous in their criticism of the current administration's policies. At the same time, Americans became aware of this administration's porcine communications director bragging on their control over the press. Anita Dunn, a woman tasked by the Obama administration with policing Fox, was also revealed to be a virtual apostle of China's founding communist chairman, Mao Zedong, a man responsible for the murders of nearly 100 million of his own countrymen. (Other Obama appointees and associates have been found to be committed to Marxism, a doctrine that has led to the deaths of millions more.) [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

The Grating Communicator ~ By Ann Coulter

From WorldNetDaily

By Ann Coulter Posted: October 21, 2009 ~ 6:11 pm Eastern © 2009 The Obama administration has attacked Fox News in order to prevent government corruption stories broken on Fox from bleeding into the other media, which are all-consumed with daily updates on Levi Johnston's Playgirl spread and Carrie Prejean's breast implants. That's understandable. But I think the administration should have picked someone other than David Axelrod to deliver the claim that Fox News is "not really news," inasmuch as Axelrod was behind the leak of scurrilous allegations in Jack Ryan's sealed divorce papers when he was running for a Senate seat against Obama. Talk about vicious personal gossip. Now that Fox has been branded an untouchable, the teacher's-pet media are jubilant. In Newsweek, Jacob Weisberg wrote a column saying liberals should refuse to appear on Fox News, pointedly concluding, "And no, I don't want to come on 'The O'Reilly Factor' to discuss it." Considering that Weisberg is a 107-pound weasel with a speech impediment, this is on the order of Weisberg's announcing that he's not interested in appearing in the next "Ocean's Eleven" movie with George Clooney. The strangest thing about all the invective against Fox is that it is happening in a world that contains MSNBC. At least Fox News prime-time hosts, and many of their guests, know something about politics. MSNBC's prime-time lineup presents an array of people who sound like earnest college kids who just walked up to a Common Cause table, and the sum-total of what they know about politics is what they read in the brochures. In the past week, both Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann have rolled out the Willie Horton ad, claiming that it marked the beginning of vicious personal attacks in politics, as opposed to what it was: The most devastatingly relevant campaign commercial in all of American history. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Why America is exceptional ~ By Walter E. Williams

From WorldNetDaily

By Walter E. Williams Posted: October 21, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Americans are harder workers, more philanthropic, individualistic, self-reliant, anti-government than people in most other countries. We've turned what was an 18th-century Third World nation into the freest and most prosperous nation in mankind's entire history. Throughout our history, the United States has been a magnet for immigrants around the world. What accounts for what some have called American exceptionalism? We Americans, as human beings, are no different from any other people, including Germans, Russians, Chinese, Africans and other people who have produced tyrannical regimes such as those of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Idi Amin. As such we are just as capable of committing acts of gross evil that have been a part of mankind throughout history. We've not been a perfect nation, but we've never approached the level of hideousness seen in other nations. That's despite the fact that our population consists of people who have for centuries been trying to slaughter one another in their home countries, whether it's between the French and Germans, English and Irish, Japanese and Chinese, Palestinians and Jews, or Igbos and the Hausa of Nigeria. Thrown into the American mosaic are religions that have been in conflict for centuries such as Catholic and Protestant, and Christian and Muslim. The question is: Why is the United States an exception and will it remain so? At the heart of the American idea is the deep distrust and suspicion the founders of our nation had for government, distrust and suspicion not shared as much by today's Americans. Some of the founders' distrust is seen in our Constitution's language, such as Congress shall not: abridge, infringe, deny, disparage, violate and deny. If the founders did not believe Congress would abuse our God-given rights, they would not have provided those protections. After all, one would not expect to find a Bill of Rights in heaven; it would be an affront to God. Other founder distrust for government is found in the Constitution's separation of powers, checks and balances and the several anti-majoritarian provisions, such as the Electoral College and the requirement that three-quarters of state legislatures ratify changes in the Constitution. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Is alternative to dollar in works?

From WorldNetDaily

Plan for 'Special Drawing Rights' creates competition for reserve currency By Jerome R. Corsi Posted: October 20, 2009 ~ 9:38 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily The administration of President Barack Obama, without congressional authorization, is advancing a plan that could end the use of the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency by setting up International Monetary Fund Special Drawing Rights to compete. The move comes as the dollar heads toward a 14-month low of $1.50/euro and as some top fund managers, including some of President Obama's top financial supporters, worry the decline will continue as long as Obama depends on China to fund trillion dollar budget deficits. It is Obama's promise to participate in a G20 nations agreement by giving $250 billion to the IMF to set up the alternative reserve currency that now has been documented in the final communiqué of the London meeting, according to the G20 website. At G20.org, a report under "The London Summit 2009" reveals the LondonSummit.gov.uk/en/ site where "Point 5" of the final communiqué says the G20 agreed to allocate that amount to Special Drawing Rights in a move calculated to provide the liquidity needed to position SDRs as a dollar alternative in international trade. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Look who's married to Obama's media 'controller'

From WorldNetDaily

By Jerome R. Corsi Posted: October 20, 2009 ~ 9:01 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily Attacking Fox News and defending President Obama is a family affair for Anita Dunn, the White House communications director who has blasted Fox as an arm of the Republican Party and talked about "controlling" the news media. She's married to Robert Bauer, the chief of the political law group at Perkins Coie, the Seattle law firm hired by the White House to defend Obama in court cases challenging his "natural born" citizenship status and thus, his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution to be president. Dunn is targeting Fox News with criticisms emanating from the administration that it isn't even a news network, while Bauer has done his best to prevent the American public from seeing a wide range of Obama's records that could prove, or disprove, his eligibility to occupy the Oval Office. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Where's the health-care bill? ~ By Joseph Farah

From WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: October 21, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Documents don't seem very important to this administration or this Congress. It seems Congress is about to approve a health-care "reform" bill without actually reading it or – even more unusually – without actually writing it. The idea, apparently, is to railroad through Congress a piece of non-existent legislation. After all, who can object to a bill that hasn't yet been written? When someone objects to provisions of the legislation, you can always say, "That's not in the bill." And, of course, you would be right. Nothing's in the bill. The bill doesn't exist. It will be written after approval. It's ingenious, when you think about it strictly from a power politics perspective. However, it is so unimaginably unethical, illegal, immoral and anti-American, it literally staggers the imagination. But that's what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plan to do. Already, the non-written version of this bill comes with a Congressional Budget Office price tag of $829 billion. I suspect it will cost much more – like your freedom. But it's nice to know they can actually estimate costs without seeing actual legislation. Maybe they are factoring in savings on the cost of paper on which the bill would normally be printed. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Barack's enemies list ~ By David Limbaugh

From WorldNetDaily

By David Limbaugh Posted: October 20, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Sorry to disillusion those of you who are still in denial about President Barack Obama's true socialistic and dictatorial nature, but this guy's militancy against his perceived enemies puts Richard Nixon's White House to shame. His war on Fox News is just his latest salvo. Obama's perceived enemies are all those who have the temerity not to roll over for his extreme agenda. They all must be demonized, marginalized and silenced by a president who has turned the Oval Office into a glorified street-organizing headquarters to attack his opponents. Indeed, this self-described uniter is the most divisive president in memory, and his uncontrollable ego can't countenance legitimate dissent. Consider: [Skipping down to the last two items on David's list of Obama's abuses of power]

• He has abused the office of the presidency to personally attack Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and conservative talk radio in general. As we speak, his "czars" are devising schemes to shut down that very medium.

• Now he has launched an orchestrated attack against the only television network that makes a sincere effort at offering balance, Fox News Channel, in an attempt to isolate, demonize and delegitimize the organization because it won't follow suit and join the state-run media. The administration is vacillating between boycotting and allowing some administration officials to appear on the network. Obama singled Fox out as "entirely devoted to attacking my administration." Rahm Emanuel said it's "not a news organization so much as it has a perspective." David Axelrod said, "It's really not news; it's pushing a point of view." Axelrod implored ABC's George Stephanopoulos and his network "not to treat (Fox) as a news organization." White House communications director Anita Dunn, who has bragged about her success at controlling the media, said Fox is "like a wing of the Republican Party" that "spouts Republican talking points."

[CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

A 3-letter word – jobs! ~ By Craig R. Smith

From WorldNetDaily

By Craig R. Smith Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 When America elects representatives and dispatches them to Washington, it does so with the belief those servants will focus on the issues affecting us all in our day-to-day lives. The group currently serving in the Capitol has failed grossly and is now just outright ignoring the people. The No. 1 priority of the people is the economy. It's ahead of the wars, health care, the budget deficit, terrorism, climate change, energy independence, etc., and by a huge margin. The data is overwhelming, regardless of what poll you read. Jobs and the economy are so far ahead of the other issues, one would think all we would see coming out of D.C. is legislation to get our economy back on track. Yet you see everything other than the economy capturing the attention of the president and Congress. Climate change and health care consume current leadership while one in 10 Americans are unemployed and as much as 7 percent more are underemployed. Why would our leaders not focus on the No. 1 priority of the people? There can only be two plausible explanations. First, they just don't care. Damn the people. They are in power, and they will do what they want. Or second, they are powerless to get the economy back on track and, as such, want to divert attention away from their weakness. What happened to "Yes we can"? But there may be a third, more sinister explanation. Current leadership appears very content with the prospect of making everyone in the country dependent upon government for their every need. [Emphasis my own] If I wanted to be a conspiracy theorist, I would say this is a master plan to make us all their modern-day slaves to work in the fields and factories for the benefit of the ruling class. But I have too much confidence in the spirit of America to believe the people would ever allow that to occur. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Congress despairs when slaves can read ~ By Herman Cain

From WorldNetDaily

By Herman Cain Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 House Resolution 554 was introduced on June 17 by Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash. It would require a 72-hour reading period for all non-emergency legislation before a vote by the House of Representatives. It is stuck in committee. A motion, or discharge petition to force a House floor vote on the resolution was initiated by Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., on Sept. 23. It needs a simple majority of member signatures (218) to force a vote. As of this writing, the petition has only 182 signatures. We should not even have to petition Congress to read legislation before it takes a vote, nor should the public have to beg to see it for 72 hours. This is doubly insulting to the intelligence of the citizens of this country, and brazenly irresponsible on the part of the Democratic leaders in Congress. But here's why the resolution is needed. The "stimulus bill" of 1,073 pages was voted on within 12 hours after it was made available to members of Congress. The 1,420-page "Cap & Trade & Tax & Kill" bill was passed in 16.5 hours. One version of the health-care deform legislation was passed out of committee in 14 hours. The next huge legislation will be the backroom consolidation of the five health-care Trojan horses voted out of committees, and Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats do not want us to know what's in the bill before they vote on it. Why? [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Barack Obama: It's about priorities ~ By Barbara Simpson

From WorldNetDaily

By Barbara Simpson Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Last week, the president of the United States graced San Francisco with his presence. He was in town on Thursday to raise some $3 million in political money but not to mingle with the average folks – you know, the ones whose votes he solicited last November. The Matier and Ross column in the San Francisco Chronicle on Oct. 14 headlined it accurately: "Obama to avoid the rabble on S.F. visit." Avoid them he did – being whisked in by limo and escorted through back entrances so the only people who saw him were those from whom his presence extracted money – big money, at two fundraisers: a $500-$1,000 a pop reception for about 1,000 and a VIP dinner for some 160 supporters, each paying $30,500 or more for a pair of tickets that got them dinner, a handshake with the man and even a picture. As the Chronicle headlined on Friday, "President visits city – lucky few see him." Actually, the people who really "saw" him were those who ponied up money to refill Democrat coffers to fund upcoming elections. The rest of us didn't count. Last week, I received an e-mail from the office of Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., that contained a copy of his remarks on Thursday, Oct. 15, in the House Chamber, in tribute to Sgt. Joshua M. Hardt, U.S. Army: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to U.S. Army Sgt. Joshua M. Hardt of Applegate, California. He is one of the fallen heroes of the Battle of Kamdesh – the remote outpost that was besieged and surrounded and hopelessly outnumbered by more than 300 Taliban insurgents on October 3rd. No soldiers in the history of our nation have fought more valiantly or bravely than the defenders of Combat Outpost Keating that day. In the end, they held their ground, they defended their flag and the honor of their country." The day Rep. McClintock spoke those words, the president was in New Orleans, for a four-hour pit stop – clearly a token visit to reassure the injured city that the president cares. He made two quick stops while there, using the time to tell folks he would not "quit" New Orleans and went on to promote his medical plan and criticize insurance companies. Obama told residents he wished he could write a check to solve their problems dealing with the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. When a heckler challenged him to do that, he said that there's something called the Constitution and Congress to deal with. What a surprise! Those "details" haven't deterred him from writing massive checks to other entities over the last months. It appears only the "big guys" warrant his check-writing skills, not the average citizens of this country. They only count when he wants their votes. While Obama was in Louisiana, Rep. McClintock in Washington recounted what Sgt. Hardt and his fellow soldiers did at Kamdesh: " … most importantly, they defended something fundamental and sacred and eternal that defines humanity itself. They defended something that can never be abandoned as long as humanity exists. They defended right against wrong – good against evil – freedom against tyranny – in its most stark and defining form." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Big Business joins forces with the Left ~ By Roger Hedgecock

From WorldNetDaily

By Roger Hedgecock Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 While employers large and small grapple with the cost implications of complicated health insurance "reform," Wal-Mart spends millions for TV ads extolling the virtues of government-run health care. Until recently, health insurance companies also supported health insurance "reform," which would put new government agencies in charge of defining coverage terms, prescriptions and even treatments. While the U.S. Chamber of Commerce fights the job-killing effects of "cap and trade," Apple and Nike endorse climate-change legislation and leave the Chamber Board of Directors in protest. Why are some international icons of American enterprise "going green" – or, as some would say, "going red"? Here's why: They'll make money doing it. The Left has long promoted a "new economy" of selected companies within every industry "guided" not by Adam Smith's "invisible hand" of competition, but by the velvet glove (covering a steel fist) of government – for "fairness," for "social justice," to "save the planet!" Well, this vision is coming into focus in the first year of Obama, but the Left might regret the outcome. Take Wal-Mart, for example. Bedeviled for years by Labor for thwarting all efforts to unionize its workforce, rising above Labor-backed "boycott Wal-Mart" campaigns to become the No. 1 employer in the private sector in the U.S., Wal-Mart got tired of playing defense. The TV ad campaign in favor of President Obama's health insurance "reform" caught the Left by surprise. Suddenly, Wal-Mart was cool again. The MSM discarded the "Wal-Mart as evil" theme and adopted the new "Wal-Mart as good corporate citizen" theme. The Left and the MSM were both fooled. Wal-Mart had long provided health insurance to its employees, a price it paid along with pay increases to keep its employees non-union. Smaller Wal-Mart competitors do not offer employee health plans, or, if they do, with much less coverage. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

God and guns, Part 2 ~ By Chuck Norris

From WorldNetDaily

By Chuck Norris Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Despite atheists' attempts to keep our national motto ("In God We Trust") from being engraved on the walls of the new 580,000 square-foot Capitol Visitors Center, or CVC, the inscription was indelibly etched recently in large, bold and deep letters. And the Pledge of Allegiance will soon follow. As Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., noted, "This was accomplished due to the efforts of so many individuals in Congress and across the country who were willing to stand up on behalf of our nation's religious heritage. Thousands of visitors will walk through the center each day. The efforts of the individuals that have joined in this issue have enabled those visitors to experience a more accurate depiction of our nation's heritage written in stone." It's about time that good news came out of Washington. But this shouldn't be shocking news or even a contested matter. For the very words of the national motto are inscribed on our currency. They are even etched above the rostrum of the speaker's head in the House of Representatives. Only in our modern age have skeptics and secular progressives fought God in America. Religious inscriptions on Washington's other buildings testify to yesteryear's commitment to our Judeo-Christian heritage. Take, for example, that in front of the Ronald Reagan Building is a statue titled "Liberty of Worship," which is resting on the Ten Commandments. On the aluminum capstone at the very top of the Washington Monument are the chiseled words, "Laus Deo" (Latin for "Praise be to God"). As Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, reminded his colleagues, the Washington Monument displays the words "Praise be to God" on the east side that faces the Capitol. He elaborated, "every day when the first rays of God's sun hit the very first thing in this Nation's Capitol," those words are illuminated. A statue of Moses holding the Ten Commandments is in the rotunda of the Library of Congress. In addition to the words "In God We Trust" within the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives, a marble bas-relief of Moses is the central and only frontal depiction of 23 reliefs of great historical lawgivers which surround the walls of the chamber and all look in Moses' direction. Is it just a coincidence that Moses is the central figure and the only one looking down on Congress? A stained glass window in the chapel of the U.S. Capitol depicts George Washington with the words of Psalm 16:1 written out around him and the words "This Nation Under God" above his head. The Ten Commandments are also displayed on the floor of the National Archives, just 100 feet or so in front of the original copies of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? The prayer of President John Adams, the first president to occupy the White house, was inscribed on the mantel in the State Dining Room: "I pray to heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that hereafter inhabit it. … May none but the honest and wise men ever rule under this roof." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Sarah Palin: Good Intentions Aren't Enough with Health Care Reform

From Sarah Palin's Notes

By Sarah Palin Sat (10/10/09) at 10:57pm Now that the Senate Finance Committee has approved its health care bill, it’s a good time to step back and take a look at the long term consequences should its provisions be enacted into law. The bill prohibits insurance companies from refusing coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and from charging sick people higher premiums. [1] It attempts to offset the costs this will impose on insurance companies by requiring everyone to purchase coverage, which in theory would expand the pool of paying policy holders. However, the maximum fine for those who refuse to purchase health insurance is $750. [2] Even factoring in government subsidies, the cost of purchasing a plan is much more than $750. The result: many people, especially the young and healthy, will simply not buy coverage, choosing to pay the fine instead. They’ll wait until they’re sick to buy health insurance, confident in the knowledge that insurance companies can’t deny them coverage. Such a scenario is a perfect storm for increasing the cost of health care and creating an unsustainable mandate program. [YOU MUST CLICK HERE AND READ MORE!]

Thatcher adviser: Copenhagen goal is 1-world government

In an hour and a half lecture illustrated by slides featuring scientific data on a wide range of climate issues, Monckton refuted claims made by former Vice President Al Gore in his movie and book entitled “An Inconvenient Truth,” as well as scientific arguments made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Monckton argued that President Obama will sign the Copenhagen treaty at the December meeting, without seeking a two-thirds ratification of the treaty by the Senate, or any other type of Congressional approval.

“So, thank you, America. You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free,” he continued. “But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever.

UPDATE 04/08/14 - This post has been edited to reformat it for easier reading and some other slight changes. You should find that all links included in this post are active as of today.

In this update, I can tell you the good news... so far. I decided to check out the progress of "Hopenhagen" and just yesterday, April 7, 2014, at 11.35 EDT, there was this status update from TheGuardian.com:

Developing countries sharply felt the pain of the missed opportunity. The developed world had promised them billions of dollars in support while simultaneously removing the means to fulfill the pledge. They left Copenhagen calling the pseudo-deal a "suicide pact".

The question had been: could the world agree on meaningful, binding reductions in emissions to avoid dangerous climate change? Preceding the final day of negotiations, US president Barack Obama said: "While the reality of climate change is not in doubt … I think our ability to take collective action is."

Leading into the conference, expectations had been raised to extraordinary heights. A global advertising campaign run by the UN called for a treaty under the strapline 'Hopenhagen'. Writing during the meeting, the Guardian's George Monbiot said the 15th conference of parties was "the moment at which we turn and face ourselves. Here ... humankind decides what it is and what it will become."

So, this story, though it was written back in October of 2009, still has legs. Go figure. This original story by Jerome Corsi was written not long before Major Nidal Hassan's horrific terrorist attack (oops, I mean workplace violence incident) at Ft. Hood. Now, just before more news updates on "Hopenhagen," the environmental treaty that is written about in Jerome Corsi's column, there is "coincidentally" another attack on soldiers at Ft. Hood, this time perpetrated by Ivan Lopez, who was on various possibly psychotropic "medications" which could be for treating mental conditions. Is it me, or is it an odd "coincidence"? Could it be what Lord Monckton knows about the treaty being worked on at the United Nations climate change conference in Copenhagen? It may have been too soon, but was Jerome Corsi on to a story that is still in progress? Just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• Obama Negotiates 'Copenhagen Accord' With Senate Climate Fight in Mind

• Defining moments in climate change: hope and crisis in Copenhagen (From 'Hopenhagen' to 'suicide pact' for developing nations, Cop 15 has gone down as a failure in international cooperation) - April 7, 2014

• VIDEO: The UN IPCC Climate Change Report Debunked? ~ April 8, 2014

Jerome Corsi

By Jerome Corsi

Published: 10/17/2009 at 11:50 PM

From wnd.com

A former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says the real purpose of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen on Dec. 7-18 is to use global warming hype as a pretext to lay the foundation for a one-world government.

“At [the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Copenhagen this December, weeks away, a treaty will be signed,” Lord Christopher Monckton told a Minnesota Free Market Institute audience on Thursday at Bethel University in St. Paul.

“Your president will sign it. Most of the Third World countries will sign it, because they think they’re going to get money out of it. Most of the left-wing regimes from the European Union will rubber stamp it. Virtually nobody won’t sign it,” he told the audience of some 700 attendees.

“I read that treaty and what it says is this: that a world government is going to be created. The word ‘government’ actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity.

“The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to Third World countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt’ – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government is enforcement.”

“But I think it is here, here in your great nation, which I so love and I so admire – it is here that perhaps, at this eleventh hour, at the fifty-ninth minute and fifty-ninth second, you will rise up and you will stop your president from signing that dreadful treaty, that purposeless treaty. For there is no problem with the climate and, even if there were, an economic treaty does nothing to [help] it.”

~~~ READ MORE on wnd.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

The hapless, clueless media ~ By Joseph Farah

From WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: October 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 When a daring young man named James O'Keefe and a 20-year-old young woman named Hannah Giles rigged up some hidden video recorders and revealed the true depths of depravity of Barack Obama's ACORN, you might have expected these whistleblowers to be treated like heroes in the media. After all, they were doing the media's work – the work the media had failed to do for so long, as this corrosive and corrupt gangster organization got fatter and meaner while collecting hundreds of millions from taxpayers. Instead of welcoming O'Keefe and Giles into the fraternity and giving them awards for courage and making job offers, the media were downright hostile to the pair. They weren't asked how they did it. They weren't even asked why they did it. They weren't asked about the objects of their sting. There was little outrage or even concern expressed about ACORN officials willingly participating in exploiting under-age foreign girls as prostitutes or their eagerness to break other laws. What did the media want to know about the ACORN tapes? They wanted to know if O'Keefe, the 25-year-old mastermind of the operation, had been trained at the infamous Leadership Institute, a conservative political organization in Washington. It was as if his motivations were somehow the issue. Who cares where he was trained? It's not like they taught Obi Won Kenobi Jedi-style mind control tricks at the Leadership Institute. But that's the point. To most of my colleagues in the media, it's perfectly all right to lie about what Rush Limbaugh says and believes. It's just not OK to give ACORN members an opportunity to reveal the kind of monsters they truly are. I'm ashamed of my profession. At least I'm ashamed of most of those who claim to be practitioners of my profession. The arrogance, self-righteousness and cluelessness they exhibit is truly breathtaking. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

White House boasts: We 'control' news media

From WorldNetDaily

Communications chief offers shocking confession to foreign government Posted: October 18, 2009 ~ 7:11 pm Eastern By Aaron Klein © 2009 WorldNetDaily TEL AVIV – President Obama's presidential campaign focused on "making" the news media cover certain issues while rarely communicating anything to the press unless it was "controlled," White House Communications Director Anita Dunn disclosed to the Dominican government at a videotaped conference. "Very rarely did we communicate through the press anything that we didn't absolutely control," said Dunn. "One of the reasons we did so many of the David Plouffe videos was not just for our supporters, but also because it was a way for us to get our message out without having to actually talk to reporters," said Dunn, referring to Plouffe, who was Obama's chief campaign manager. "We just put that out there and made them write what Plouffe had said as opposed to Plouffe doing an interview with a reporter. So it was very much we controlled it as opposed to the press controlled it," Dunn said. Continued Dunn: "Whether it was a David Plouffe video or an Obama speech, a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Protesters target media: 'Can you hear us now?'

From WorldNetDaily

Thousands of Americans demand mainstream media listen to outcry Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 6:45 pm Eastern By Drew Zahn © 2009 WorldNetDaily "Can you hear us now?" asked protesters around the country this weekend, challenging the mainstream media to drop a perceived news bias and give fair coverage to the growing movement against Obama administration policies. Grassroots organizers pulled together small groups of protesters in dozens of U.S. cities yesterday and today, including more than 100 who descended upon the offices of the Florida's St. Petersburg Times this morning. "The press needs to be unbiased," Joe Sekola, an organizer of a group called the North Pinellas 9.12 Project, told the Times. "You guys are the watchdogs." The paper reports protesters accused the media in general of biased reporting on Big Government issues like health care reform and stimulus spending. They carried signs reading "State Run Media," "Take the Left From Your Slant," and "Journalism Malpractice – Just Report the Facts." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Look who's probing 'Muslim Mafia' now

From WorldNetDaily

Book: CAIR leaders subject of official of 'ongoing' Hamas-finance investigation Posted: October 16, 2009 ~ 2:35 am Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily The Washington field office of the FBI is actively investigating the founding chairman and acting executive director of the nation's premier Islamic-rights group in Washington, based on evidence that emerged from the largest terror-financing case in U.S. history, a blockbuster new book alleges. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, along with its founding chairman Omar M. Ahmad, were named by the U.S. Justice Department as unindicted co-conspirators in a criminal conspiracy led by the Holy Land Foundation charity to underwrite Palestinian terrorism. "CAIR has been identified by the government at trial as a participant in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization – a conspiracy from which CAIR never withdrew," federal prosecutors wrote in September 2007, according to court documents. Following the blacklisting, the FBI severed ties with CAIR, a move that sent shock waves throughout the American Muslim establishment. "Until we can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and Hamas," explained assistant FBI director Richard C. Powers, "the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

This week on TheREALjohnny2k - 10/11 to 10/17/09

From johnny2k Is Home

By John Kubicek Sunday, October 18, 2009 There may be a couple things that you will notice about This Week on TheREALjohnny2k today. First, the obvious. For the last several weeks, I had been posting this series in my other blog, johnny2k's Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape. I decided to go back to putting it on this blog, as I had originally done, for a couple of reasons. This blog is where I post my own work, and I guess the videos I upload to youtube is part of my work. And secondly, I had not written much lately, and there needed to be some more content to be keeping johnny2k Is Home a bit more active, if you know what I mean. The other thing you may have noticed... or, maybe not, is that none of videos below has to do with the "Falcon, the balloon boy hoax" that dominated the news the latter part of last week. As far as I am concerned, and figuring out what a hoax it seemed to be shortly after the whole scenario began to unfold, dominating all of the cable news channels, it was nothing short of tabloid fodder, or maybe something that Geraldo Rivera or Greta Van Sustrand may be interested in analyzing for the next few weeks. Anyway, nothing about it had youtube video written on it. It just wasn't a story that needed any further moments of attention for the derelict parents of the 6 year old child that played a role in a gigantic media scam. No further elaboration required. What I did get on video this week had a lot to do with Glenn Beck, the White House and Anita Dunn. I think you are going to love this week's videos. Oh, by the way,, there is a very special treat for you at the bottom of this post. Keep a box of tissues close by. Trust me! [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE AND SEE THE VIDEOS]

Raising drones of the state ~ By Patrice Lewis

From WorldNetDaily

By Patrice Lewis Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 President Obama is pressing to increase the number of hours students spend in the classroom, both per day and per year. He says "American kids spend too little time in school, putting them at a disadvantage with other students around the globe. … But the challenges of a new century demand more time in the classroom." The president wants schools "to add time to classes, to stay open late and to let kids in on weekends so they have a safe place to go." My my. Who needs parents when the government is willing to take over the job? Our schools are unquestionably failing, especially compared with other countries. Therefore, in a typical government solution, Obama's proposal involves taking this failure and multiplying it. Of course, these extra hours would deprive children of any semblance of family time. Which, come to think of it, might be precisely the point. Parents can be so annoying about wanting to impart their own personal values on their children. Three hundred more hours of non-parental supervision per year ought to quash that quaint notion. Besides, with the flood of sexually-transmitted diseases rampant among our young people, it's clear they're not spending enough time learning to put condoms on bananas. With all the proposed extra school time, the possibilities for acquiring new "skills" are endless. I'm certain other students around the globe have achieved such high academic standards because of their military precision in applying prophylactics to fruit. As usual, there are some parents who welcome the idea of extra school time. These are the parents who blindly send their children to government indoctrination centers for most of their waking hours, then seem surprised when their kids emerge from high school unable to read or cipher with any competency. But at least they will possess an inflated self-esteem and a superb grasp of manufactured environmental calamities. I think this is because a lot of parents have visions that school still consists of diligent children sitting obediently at their desks, heads bent over math and science books, dutifully absorbing important information that will lead to superior performances on tests. Think of the descriptions of schools in the Laura Ingalls Wilder books and you'll get the idea. Schools are places of discipline, respect and high academic standards, aren't they? NOT. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Crank up the scare machine! ~ By Henry Lamb

From WorldNetDaily

By Henry Lamb Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Copenhagen is about to become the successor to Kyoto as the synonym for the U.N.'s plan to control climate change. The 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change will meet in Copenhagen Dec. 7-18. Until this meeting ends, expect to hear a growing number of climate-related horror stories, presented by a wide array of so-called environmentalists, at a rising decibel level that's sure to drive the sane quite mad. The UNFCCC was a treaty through which the United States agreed to voluntarily reduce carbon emissions in 1992. At the very first meeting of the COP in 1995, the delegates decided to add a "Protocol" to the treaty that would make specific emissions reduction targets set by the U.N. body legally binding on 34 developed nations. The U.S. Senate adopted a resolution instructing the Clinton administration not to participate in the Protocol unless it included all nations, or if it would have a negative impact on the U.S. economy. At the third meeting of the COP in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, the U.S. delegation followed the Senate's instruction and refused to agree to the terms set for the United States by the U.N. body, because the developing nations refused to accept any reduction in their carbon emissions. The impasse lasted well into the second week of the meeting. Then, Prince Albert Gore made his entrance. In a private meeting in his hotel suite, Gore negotiated a deal that completely ignored the Senate resolution, and agreed to accept a legally binding emissions reduction equal to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, while agreeing to impose absolutely no requirements on developing nations. (Read a detailed personal report here). The Senate was steamed, and Clinton knew better than to transmit the Kyoto Protocol for ratification. One of the two really good things George W. Bush did was to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol altogether. (The other good thing he did was to withdraw from the International Criminal Court.) The United Nations, Hollywood, environmental organizations and most of the Democrats squalled, bawled, cursed and ridiculed "W" for his cavalier, go-it-alone, cowboy swagger. The Kyoto Protocol went into effect without the United States' participation. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Send Biden to get Osama ~ By Joseph Farah

From WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 I don't know why Barack Obama is having so much trouble deciding what to do about Afghanistan. He was so sure before he got elected. For starters, he ought to consult with Vice President Joe Biden. You remember Joe Biden, don't you? He is still vice president, isn't he? Well, just like Obama knew what to do in Afghanistan last year, Biden did, too. Obama wasn't waffling about sending more troops then, when the war seemed to be going better. But now that the war has hit a bit of a snag, he's not so sure. Biden was even more clear. He told us last October: "Ending the [Iraq] war will help us deal with Afghanistan, which we talked about at length this morning. In 2002, I said we should focus on finishing the fight against Osama bin Laden. Throughout this campaign, I have argued that we need more troops and more resources to win the war in Afghanistan, and to confront the growing threat from al-Qaida along the Pakistani border. "Over seven years after 9/11, the situation in Afghanistan is grave. This is the most violent year of the war, with the highest number of American casualties. The Taliban is on the offensive, al- Qaida has a sanctuary across the border in Pakistan, and some experts believe that 50 percent of the Afghan economy comes from the heroin trade. As the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recently said, 'The trends across the board are not going in the right direction.' "Make no mistake: we are confronting an urgent crisis in Afghanistan, and we have to act. It's time to heed the call from General McKiernan and others for more troops. That's why I'd send at least two or three additional combat brigades to Afghanistan. We also need more training for Afghan Security forces, more non-military assistance to help Afghans develop alternatives to poppy farming , more safeguards to prevent corruption, and a new effort to crack down on cross-border terrorism. Only a comprehensive strategy that prioritizes Afghanistan and the fight against al-Qaida will succeed, and that's the change I'll bring to the White House." He said all this in his famous speech in which he predicted Obama would be tested in his first six months in office. In fact, he didn't just predict it – he "promised" it. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Obama's submission to radical Islam ~ By Tom Tancredo

From WorldNetDaily

By Tom Tancredo Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 
In a speech in Egypt this June, President Obama proclaimed, "I have come here to seek a new beginning between the U.S. and Muslims around the world, one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect." 
 
Obama's "new beginning" is a euphemism for the first steps in the Islamification of America, a process that has already infected Europe to the extent that Western Civilization is itself at risk. 
To aid him in his quest, the president recently appointed Dalia Mogahed as his advisor on Islamic issues. She is on the President's Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships and recently appeared on a British TV show hosted by members of the extremist and pan-Islamist Hizb ut Tahrir Party. 
 
According to the London Telegraph, "The group believes in the non-violent destruction of Western democracy and the creation of an Islamic state under Sharia law across the world." Many governments have outlawed the group due to its ties and support of terrorism. 
 
During the segment, the extremists called for banning women from holding political office. They also called for making Shariah the sole source of legislation while attacking "manmade law" and America's "lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism." 
Rather than oppose these radical statements, Obama's adviser defended Shariah. According to Mogahed, "I think the reason so many women support Shariah is because they have a very different understanding of Shariah than the common perception in Western media. The majority of women around the world associate gender justice, or justice for women, with Shariah compliance." She accused Americans of having an "oversimplified" and "misunderstood" view of Shariah.
 
If that's not bad enough, Obama added the United States co-sponsored a United Nations 
resolution with Egypt designed to stifle criticism of Islam. The resolution "urges States to take effective measures" to combat "incidents of racial and religious intolerance, discrimination, and related violence, as well as of negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups" that it calls "incitement to discrimination." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Is the 1st Amendment still relevant? ~ By Pat Boone

From WorldNetDaily

By Pat Boone Posted: October 17, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

How profoundly simple, how elegantly clear and understandable can you get? Our Founding Fathers labored and conferred and, yes, prayed, over this First Amendment to our hallowed Constitution. They honed and pared and polished it, until it still shines like a rare diamond. Which politically it is. It says exactly and precisely what they intended. How is it, then, that today, certain people are straining and misrepresenting and actually twisting it completely out of its pristine meaning? A man named Newdow, in San Francisco, adamantly quotes just the first phrase, before the comma, in his diabolical quest to wrench the two words "under God" out of our Pledge of Allegiance. Though he is trained as a lawyer, supposedly able to interpret the wording of a law – certainly including the wording of the Constitution – he manages to convince a majority of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that he is correct in claiming that those two words might be unconstitutional! And that misguided Court then decrees that school children in nine Western states should stop including those words in the Pledge we've all been saying since 1954. When I confronted Newdow personally on the "Crossfire" TV show, I asked him if he was aware of the next phrase in the Amendment, and why he stopped short of quoting that? He stammered and mumbled something unrelated to my question. And then, when I asked, "You're aware, aren't you, that your atheism is a religion, a faith system based on a premise you can't prove – while the faith system of most Americans is based on a premise the evidence for which is everywhere?" He answered defensively, "Well, I'm not trying to force my belief on others." And I shot back "Are you serious? What do you call what you're doing? You're trying to silence 99 percent of America because you – one man – don't believe our affirmation! You're not trying to force your belief on us?" [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]