Search This Blog

Saturday, April 30, 2011

Glenn interviews his 2012 favorite: Allen West

 Thursday, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:03 PM EDT

It doesn't get any better than 2 favorite guys, Glenn Beck and Congressman West.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

School District Employee Disciplined for Political Phone Call

By Molly Hendrickson  WBAY
A Sheboygan gas station owner is baffled after a mystery caller tells a clerk it's a bad idea to do business with a Sheboygan-area state senator.

It started Tuesday when a woman called Dick Hiers's Northeast Standard gas station after she thought she saw Senator Joe Leibham there. Her call was caught on the answering machine.
"I think that this whole thing has to end. It has to stop," said Hiers. "This type of stuff is totally uncalled for."
Hiers never thought his little gas station in the heart of Sheboygan would be the stage of political controversy. Then again, his week has been full of surprises.
"I was working back here and the answering machine went off, and I was a little surprised by that, and when I heard the message here, I was even a little more surprised."
The answering machine here in the back of the store was left on from the night before and was recording the entire conversation.
Caller: "Can you verify that was Senator Leibham at the gas station this morning?"
Gas station clerk: "Senator Leibham?"
Caller: "Yes. Do you guys support him?"
Clerk: "I have nothing to say about that, I am not politically involved."
Caller: "Alright, well you can tell Dick he's not good for business, I'll tell you that."
Shocked over the 26-second conversation, Hiers quickly traced the call -- only to get surprise number two.
"And it turned out to be coming from the Sheboygan area district school office," he said.
"Obviously our school district equipment and the facilities are for the purposes of school," Superintendent Joseph Sheehan responded. "Any type of phone call leaving any types of threats or condoning any type of intimidation is strictly prohibited."
The superintendent, who was out of the area Friday, said the district's taken what it calls "appropriate disciplinary action."
The woman is a district employee but school officials say that 8:15 call was made before she was on the clock.
It turns out it wasn't the senator but his brother at the gas station.
As for Dick Hiers, he is still wants answers, saying this week full of surprises is a sign things have gone too far.
"Everybody's money is green, it's all the same, and I don't pick and choose who can come into my business," Hiers said.
Senator Leibham, who was not available for comment, has filed an open records request with the school district. The district says it's working on the request.

Please contact the Superintendent to let him know this is unacceptable:

Executive Management Team

Dr. Joseph Sheehan, Superintendent
(920) 459-3512 |

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Milton Friedman on Libertarianism

(Part 1 of 4)

(Part 2 of 4)

(Part 3 of 4) 

(Part 4 of 4)

What are the elements of the libertarian movement and how does one of its most illustrious proponents, Milton Friedman, apply its tenets to issues facing the United States today? Milton Friedman, Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Inst., Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences discusses how he balances the libertarians' desire for a small, less intrusive government with environmental, public safety, food and drug administration, and other issues.

This is a 4 part video. Here are the links to all 4 parts.

Part 1 - (7:21)

Part 2 - (7:42)

Part 3 - (4:31)

Part 4 - (5:59)

Use this link to watch all 4 parts back to back in one playlist:

Milton Friedman, recipient of the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize for economic science, was a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution from 1977 to 2006. He passed away on Nov. 16, 2006. He was also the Paul Snowden Russell Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Chicago, where he taught from 1946 to 1976, and a member of the research staff of the National Bureau of Economic Research from 1937 to 1981.

Recorded February 10, 1999. Please see the end of Part 4 for all of the credit and ownership information.

Chris Medina-"What Are Words"-A Very Emotional Video After an Unimaginable Tragedy - a Must See

What a beautiful and inspiring story. Get out the kleenex, you're going to need them it.

Artist Biography

During his brief time as an American Idol cast member in 2011, Chris Medina attracted attention not only with his strong tenor voice, but also his heartbreaking back-story. Medina's fiancée had been involved in a car accident several months before his audition, suffering a traumatic brain injury as well as severe fractures to her skull and face. He became one of her main caretakers, indefinitely postponing the pair's engagement in order to help her recover. He also tried out for American Idol at the insistence of his fiancée, who accompanied him in a wheelchair.

Medina passed his initial audition and entered the Idol semifinals, where he was eventually cut from the competition by a teary-eyed Jennifer Lopez. Days later, he was contacted by Rodney Jerkins, the Grammy-winning songwriter behind Destiny's Child's “Say My Name” and Lady Gaga's “Telephone.” Touched by Medina's dedication to his fiancée, Jerkins wrote a new song for the singer. The resulting “What Are Words” became a hit on iTunes, YouTube, and the Billboard charts in March 2011, making Medina the first person from American Idol's tenth season to release any post-show material. ~ Andrew Leahey, Rovi

Lyrics to "What Are Words"

Anywhere you are, I am near
Anywhere you go, I’ll be there
Anytime you whisper my name, you’ll see
How every single promise I keep
Cuz what kind of guy would I be
If I was to leave when you need me most

What are words
If you really don’t mean them
When you say them
What are words
If they’re only for good times
Then they don’t
When it’s love
Yeah, you say them out loud
Those words, They never go away
They live on, even when we’re gone

And I know an angel was sent just for me
And I know I’m meant to be where I am
And I’m gonna be
Standing right beside her tonight

And I’m gonna be by your side
I would never leave when she needs me most

What are words
If you really don’t mean them
When you say them
What are words
If they’re only for good times
Then they don’t
When it’s love
Yeah, you say them out loud
Those words, They never go away
They live on, even when we’re gone

Anywhere you are, I am near
Anywhere you go, I’ll be there
And I’m gonna be here forever more
Every single promise I keep
Cuz what kind of guy would I be
If I was to leave when you need me most
[Chris Medina - What Are Words Lyrics on]

I’m forever keeping my angel close

Buy "What Are Words" Amazon   iTunes

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

We Still Hold These Truths

 How can we get America back on course?

By returning to the timeless principles and practical wisdom that have been the source of America's monumental success.

By knowing and believing in ten core principles that define us as a nation and inspire us as a people—liberty and equality, natural rights and the consent of the governed, private property and religious freedom, the rule of law and constitutionalism, all culminating in self-government at home and independence in the world.


The Quotes Database contains all the quotes from We Still Hold These Truths, and then some. It is intended to be a searchable source of quotes from the American Founders and their progressive/liberal critics, as well as other defenders of the American Founding. Note that all of the quotes are currently in one database, which means that quotes from American Founders and their progressive critics are combined. 

Browse the quotes database by author, category, or document. Search for a quote by entering text from the quote, the author's name, or a subject:


The Heritage Foundation~Leadership for America 


The future of liberty depends on reclaiming America's first principles. "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization," as Thomas Jefferson warned, "it expects what never was and never will be."
Widespread ignorance of American history is but the most recognized symptom of the troubling decline in popular knowledge of fundamental principles. We face an education system that upholds mediocrity in the name of relativism; an ever-expanding and centralized government, unmoored from constitutional limits; judges openly making laws and shaping society based on pop-philosophy rather than serious jurisprudence; and growing confusion over America's legitimate role in the world, made all the more apparent by the fundamental threat posed by radical Islamists. At the root of all these problems is a pervasive doubt about the core principles that define America and ought to inform our politics and policy. 
As the leading public policy institution focused on American liberty, The Heritage Foundation must lead the call to awaken our country and get it back on course. We must recall the nation to its first principles, reinvigorate American constitutionalism, and revive the sturdy virtues required for self-government.
We must restore the principles of America's Founders to their proper role in the public and political discourse, influencing public policy and reforming government to reflect constitutional limits. We must rebuild and unify a robust conservatism around, and in defense of, these core principles, and identify and develop current and future policymakers, opinion-makers, and leaders who understand, articulate, and will promote these principles.
In short, our vision, building on the great successes of the modern conservative movement, must now be to save America by reclaiming its truths and its promises and conserving its liberating principles for ourselves and our posterity.
  The Heritage Foundation~Leadership for America FIRST PRINCIPLES


The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Learn more about the Declaration of Independence

UN document would give 'Mother Earth' same rights as humans

UNITED NATIONS — Bolivia will this month table a draft United Nations treaty giving "Mother Earth" the same rights as humans — having just passed a domestic law that does the same for bugs, trees and all other natural things in the South American country.
The bid aims to have the UN recognize the Earth as a living entity that humans have sought to "dominate and exploit" — to the point that the "well-being and existence of many beings" is now threatened.
The wording may yet evolve, but the general structure is meant to mirror Bolivia's Law of the Rights of Mother Earth, which Bolivian President Evo Morales enacted in January.
That document speaks of the country's natural resources as "blessings," and grants the Earth a series of specific rights that include rights to life, water and clean air; the right to repair livelihoods affected by human activities; and the right to be free from pollution.
It also establishes a Ministry of Mother Earth, and provides the planet with an ombudsman whose job is to hear nature's complaints as voiced by activist and other groups, including the state.
"If you want to have balance, and you think that the only (entities) who have rights are humans or companies, then how can you reach balance?" Pablo Salon, Bolivia's ambassador to the UN, told Postmedia News. "But if you recognize that nature too has rights, and (if you provide) legal forms to protect and preserve those rights, then you can achieve balance."
The application of the law appears destined to pose new challenges for companies operating in the country, which is rich in natural resources, including natural gas and lithium, but remains one of the poorest in Latin America.
But while Salon said his country just seeks to achieve "harmony" with nature, he signalled that mining and other companies may come under greater scrutiny.
"We're not saying, for example, you cannot eat meat because you know you are going to go against the rights of a cow," he said. "But when human activity develops at a certain scale that you (cause to) disappear a species, then you are really altering the vital cycles of nature or of Mother Earth. Of course, you need a mine to extract iron or zinc, but there are limits."
Bolivia is a country with a large indigenous population, whose traditional belief systems took on greater resonance following the election of Morales, Latin America's first indigenous president.
In a 2008 pamphlet his entourage distributed at the UN as he attended a summit there, 10 "commandments" are set out as Bolivia's plan to "save the planet" — beginning with the need "to end capitalism."
Reflecting indigenous traditional beliefs, the proposed global treaty says humans have caused "severe destruction . . . that is offensive to the many faiths, wisdom traditions and indigenous cultures for whom Mother Earth is sacred."
It also says that "Mother Earth has the right to exist, to persist and to continue the vital cycles, structures, functions and processes that sustain all human beings."
In indigenous Andean culture, the Earth deity known as Pachamama is the centre of all life, and humans are considered equal to all other entities.
The UN debate begins two days before the UN's recognition April 22 of the second International Mother Earth Day — another Morales-led initiative.
Canadian activist Maude Barlow is among global environmentalists backing the drive with a book the group will launch in New York during the UN debate: Nature Has Rights.
"It's going to have huge resonance around the world," Barlow said of the campaign. "It's going to start first with these southern countries trying to protect their land and their people from exploitation, but I think it will be grabbed onto by communities in our countries, for example, fighting the tarsands in Alberta."
Ecuador, which also has a large indigenous population, has enshrined similar aims in its Constitution — but the Bolivian law is said to be "stronger."
Ecuador is among countries that have already been supportive of the Bolivian initiative, along with Nicaragua, Venezuela, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Antigua and Barbuda.

Related stories:

Our proposed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein wants to ban hunting, animal agriculture and give animals the right to sue in court. 

His notion is that more can be accomplished by tweaking regulations like the Endangered Species Act to achieve his aims than straightforward attempts to give animals rights to sue in court and be represented by a lawyer as he has proposed. Senators Chambliss and Cornyn have put holds on his nomination, but they and our other representatives need to hear from us. 

The relevant part is 48 minutes into the video. You only need to listen to about two minutes.

Facing Animals

Facing Animals
1:41:36 - 3 years ago
A groundbreaking panel on animals in ethics and the law, with Patricia Herzog, Christine Korsgaard, Martha Nussbaum and Cass R. Sunstein. Moderated by Thomas M. Scanlon, Jr. Tuesday, April 24 7:30 p.m. Harvard Yard, Sever Hall 113 Sponsored by The Harvard Review of Philosophy. To read the panelists' texts visit Patricia Herzog is author of Conscious and Unconscious: Freud's Dynamic Distinction Reconsidered and co-editor of Defending Diversity: Contemporary Philosophical Perspectives on Pluralism and Multiculturalism. Christine Korsgaard is Arthur Kingsley Porter Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. Martha Nussbaum is Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago Law School. Cass Sunstein is Karl N. Llewellyn Distinguished Service Professor of Jurisprudence, at the University of Chicago Law School, Department of Political Science, and the College. For more, attend ANIMAL CROSSINGS, an interdisciplinary panel on animals in law, literature, history of science, natural history, and religion, with Janet Browne (Harvard University), Harriet Ritvo (MIT), Peter Sacks (Harvard University), and Paul Waldau (Tufts University). Wednesday, May 9 7:30 p.m. Harvard Yard, Harvard Hall 104 Questions? Contact«

Coburn on Budget Negotiations: 'Send me Some Senators With Gonads


CIA has slashed its terrorism interrogation role

The agency has stopped trying to detain or interrogate suspects caught abroad, except those captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He's considered one of world's most dangerous terrorism suspects, and the U.S. offered a $1-million reward for his capture in 2005. Intelligence experts say he's a master bomb maker and extremist leader who possesses a wealth of information about Al Qaeda-linked groups in Southeast Asia.

Yet the U.S. has made no move to interrogate or seek custody of
Indonesian militant Umar Patek since he was apprehended this year by officials in Pakistan with the help of a CIA tip, U.S. and Pakistani officials say.

The little-known case highlights a sharp difference between
President Obama's counter-terrorism policy and that of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Under Obama, the CIA has killed more people than it has captured, mainly through drone missile strikes in Pakistan's tribal areas. At the same time, it has stopped trying to detain or interrogate suspects caught abroad, except those captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The CIA is out of the detention and interrogation business," said a U.S. official who is familiar with intelligence operations but was not authorized to speak publicly.

Several factors are behind the change.

Widespread criticism of Bush administration interrogation and detention policies as brutal and degrading led Obama to stop sending suspected terrorists to the U.S. naval base at
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Public exposure also forced the CIA to close a network of secret prisons. That left U.S. officials with no obvious place to hold new captives.
Read complete story: Los Angeles Times

Related articles/videos

U.S. Officials Insist Drones, Covert Operations in Pakistan to Continue Despite Recent Chill

Published April 12, 2011

WASHINGTON -- Talks between CIA Director Leon Panetta and his Pakistani counterpart did not include an "ultimatum session" for the United States to limit its operations inside the terrorist-laden Afghan neighbor, U.S. officials said after a closed-door meeting Monday in Washington, D.C.
The exchange between Panetta and Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, was the latest discussion between the two sides since CIA operative Raymond Davis was quietly removed from Pakistani custody after Davis shot and killed two Pakistanis in Lahore, setting off demonstrations in the country. Davis said he acted to fend off two gunmen trying to rob him. The families of the two deceased received a financial settlement. 
Reports have suggested the Pakistanis came to town requesting more than 300 CIA operatives leave the country immediately and U.S. Predator drone strikes be halted, or at least restricted to a narrow part of North Waziristan, where they were initially carried out before President Obama and his national security team began expanding the program. 
Last year, more than 119 drone strikes were carried out in Pakistan, but there hasn't been one since March 17.
Unconfirmed reports also said Pakistan wanted to eject 120 Special Ops forces who are training the Frontier Corps, but it is not clear whether the carefully timed leaks from Pakistani officials may have been a negotiating ploy to regain leverage in the relationship.
A U.S. official told Fox News that the Pakistanis are out "in a very public way" to make their case and appear to be using the Davis episode "as leverage." 
The Pakistanis never seem to lose an opportunity "to take advantage of a crisis," the official said.
But the source, familiar with discussions between the two, said that while the Pakistanis have voiced a range of concerns in recent weeks, what they actually want depends on which Pakistani official is asked.
A CIA spokesman said the luncheon was an opportunity for the two sides to sit down and work on issues vital to counterterrorism operations.
"Today's exchange emphasized the need to continue to work closely together, including on our common fight against terrorist networks that threaten both countries," George Little said after the meeting Monday. 
A U.S. official told Fox News that the meeting between Panetta and Pasha included a frank discussion, but the two leaders discussed common interests with a few concerns, "all of which can be sorted out." 
"Panetta -- who made it clear that his first priority is protecting the American people -- and Pasha had a conversation that reflected a sense of partnership and desire to move forward.  This wasn't some kind of ultimatum session, as some press reports have suggested it might be," the official said.
"The Pakistanis have asked for more visibility into some things, and that request is being talked about -- along with a host of other topics, including ways to further expand the partnership. The bottom line is that joint cooperation is essential to the security of the two nations. The stakes are too high," the official added.
U.S. intelligence and military officials believe factions in the Pakistani intelligence agency support Taliban and other militant groups, which are killing U.S. troops just across the border in Afghanistan.
Former CIA officials expressed skepticism that the ISI could be trusted to fight terrorism on its own without the current level of CIA staffing on the ground, citing the ISI's alliance with the Haqqani terror organization and the rise of the Taliban after the U.S. walked away from Afghanistan in the wake of the Soviet Union's defeat.
But Pakistani and U.S. officials confirm that a CIA tip led to Pakistan's capture this year of Indonesian Umar Patek, one of the accused masterminds behind the 2005 Bali, Indonesia, bombing. And U.S. officials add that some joint missions have been carried out despite the recent diplomatic impasse.
White House spokesman Jay Carney on Tuesday said the relationship between Pakistan and the United States is important and the two sides have a shared goal of defeating insurgents. However, he would not discuss specifics of the cooperation. 
State Department spokesman Mark Toner acknowledged that relations with Pakistan are going through a difficult time, but "it's not a one-dimensional relationship" and the two sides are rebuilding it.
Asked about the Pakistani efforts to limit U.S. counterterrorism efforts, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., said he understands why some reduction in U.S. effort in Pakistan has occurred. 
"If you have got a bunch of operatives who are running around your country, if it had happened here in the United States, someone was shot dead in the center of Washington by one of those operatives, there'd be a cry in our country, too. I think we need to be thoughtful about that. They're insisting on knowing who is there and doing what and I think we can work through these kinds of things," Kerry said.
Kerry added that their government can do more to help "decharge" the atmosphere after incidents like the one involving Davis and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen held meetings with Pasha on Tuesday to discuss those efforts. 
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who was appearing with Kerry at a news conference on Internet privacy, added that he believes the Pakistanis "are becoming more and more convinced we are leaving Afghanistan," and since they remain in the region after the U.S. is gone, is covering all their bets.
Fox News' Jennifer Griffin, Catherine Herridge and Trish Turner and The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Should U.S. Cut All Aid to Pakistan?

 Apr 12, 2011
- 4:37 - 
Amid strained relations, country reportedly asks U.S. to stop drone attacks and reduce CIA presence

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Thursday, April 7, 2011

VIDEO~Rep. Charles Rangel: Dems Didn't Pass Budget In 2010 Because 'It Was A Hot Potato'

Bill O'Reilly interviews Rep. Charlie Rangel about the pending budget crisis.  In one of his most honest moments, Rep Rangel admits the Democrats didn't want to do anything about the budget in 2010 because it was a political "hot potato."

With the government on the verge of shutting down, many are wondering how the nation will run if Congress refuses to compromise on the budget. For Bill O’Reilly, the bigger issue appeared why the budget is an issue now anyway, given the typical budget determinations at the end of the year. Asking Rep. Charlie Rangel, O’Reilly got an admission that the budget was a “hot potato” and a lengthy condemnation of Congressmen who think they can “slash and burn” through the national budget.
“I have a series of very, very foolish questions,” O’Reilly began his segment, eliciting a smile from the colorful (today, magenta and yellow) Rep. Rangel. The first question had nothing to do with the current budget issue, and Rep. Rangel made it clear he intended to distinguish it from the current crisis: “you guys [the Democrats] had the majority– why didn’t you do it?” O’Reilly added that, with the majority, the budget could have included many of the programs in contention today, including Planned Parenthood and NPR. 
 “We didn’t get to it,” Rep. Rangel said earnestly. “We didn’t do it. It was a political hot potato, but that has nothing to do with where we are today.” 
Pressed further by O’Reilly, Rep. Rangel added that, not only was the budget a “political hot potato,” but “there was no uproar in November about whether or not we passed the budget” and that the legal budget “was merely a guideline,” anyway.
Rep. Rangel then took a shot at answering why the budget crisis was happening today and, for the most part, appeared to blame inexperienced new legislators. “There are a lot of people down here that really don’t understand the process,” he noted, adding later that “you can’t say it’s either my way or the highway.” O’Reilly agreed that he saw the problem with that perspective, but that there was a lot of waste in government. 
Distinguishing health care from NPR or Planned Parenthood, O’Reilly retorted that, with these programs, “nobody’s life is at stake.” When Rep. Rangel added to the list environmental legislation, O’Reilly hollered “Environmental programs are what? Trying to get climate control money? God controls the climate, come on!”

~~We should issue a recall for every one of these Democrats that have been derelict in their duties and kick them to the curb with NONE OF THEIR BELOVED LIFETIME BENEFITS!~~

Tuesday, April 5, 2011


Jon Stewart Mocks Obama’s New Video While Exposing Broken Campaign Promises


Call me crazy, but it seems Jon Stewart is becoming less and less a fan of President Obama every day.

Last week he hammered the president over the assertion that NATO would be taking over the war in Libya. This week, he‘s lampooning the president’s new campaign video and one of his biggest, broken campaign promises: transparency.

Source: Citrus County Citizens

Jon Stewart: Not a Fan of President Obama’s Not War Speech


"President Obama’s speech picked up another major critic on Tuesday night, when The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart forgot to be impressed by the great orator’s message. We’ll let the video speak for itself, but the high comedy comes when Stewart wonders whether handing over control to NATO would be akin to Beyonce handing control to her alter-ego “Sasha Fierce.” Oh, and Wolf Blitzer gets hit, too."

Source: Hypervocal

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Wisconsin Union Bullies trying to Boycott Businesses BACKFIRING!

Wisconsin Union Bullies trying to Boycott Businesses Backfiring

Dawn Bobo stands up to bully tactics in Union Grove Wisconsin and her business is better than ever!

Can small businesses threatened by big labor pursue legal action?

UPDATE: Well I guess these thugs may have been informed that their threats may be illegal.

Union leader says no boycott planned, blames 'overzealousness' for threats

UNION GROVE — There will be no boycott of businesses in this village that do not display signs in support of worker rights.
Marty Beil, executive director of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 24, said there is no boycott in an email Friday.
"There was some unfortunate overzealousness in the field," the email read. "We have made clear all along that we see small business as a partner and ally in getting Wisconsin back to work."
The statement comes in the wake of a letter sent Tuesday to many Union Grove businesses from AFSCME Council 24 Field Rep. Jim Parrett threatening to boycott those that declined to display signs supporting "workers rights."
Parrett confirmed in an email Friday afternoon saying only that there is no boycott and referring further questions to Beil. It was not clear Friday whether Parrett was acting of his own accord or how the boycott threat came about.
Parrett has not otherwise responded to requests for interviews and Beil and other Council 24 leaders did not return requests for comment Friday.
Dawn Bobo, owner of Village Dollar store, was upset by the boycott threat.
"I'm a new business, and I need to concentrate on issues that won't offend half of my customers," she said Wednesday.
Several weeks ago, Bobo said, five union members showed her the poster and asked her to display it in her front window.
"I said I can't put up any type of signage for either side," she recalled. "They said, 'No problem,' they were all smiles."
READ COMPLETE STORY: Wisconsin State Journal