Daily Archives: December 28, 2009

No one in charge of airport security

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Many American airline passengers may be surprised to learn the Transportation Security Administration, the agency responsible with securing all modes of transportation in the country, currently has no leader.

Republican lawmakers have placed a “hold” on President Obama’s pick to head the TSA over concerns he could undermine safety by unionizing airport security. The nominee is Erroll Southers, assistant chief in charge of security and intelligence at the Los Angeles airport’s police department.

“It’s very simple. Giving union bosses control over security at our nation’s airports is dangerous and will harm our ability to respond to serious threats,” said Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

“If President Obama’s nominee will not commit to putting homeland security above the whims of union bosses, it should give everyone serious concern,” DeMint said last month when the conflict developed.

The Washington Times reported last month DeMint blocked a vote to confirm Southers due to the nominee’s ducking of questions about whether he would consider reversing current policy that barred the unionizing of airport security screeners.

(Story continues below)

// <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[// // <![CDATA[//

Such a move would impose rules on union workers that could impede national security efforts in combating terrorist threats, critics charge.

Get “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” autographed, from WND’s Superstore.

Southers had avoided giving a “yes” or “no” answer in Senate hearings over whether he would unionize airport security workers.

Just today, the TSA imposed new rules on airlines that prohibit passengers on some flights from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing. Also prohibited are objects on the laps of passengers during a flight’s final hour.

Those rules are already being criticized today by blogs and newspapers.

“TSA has a long history with the flying public of little communication, scant explanation and seemingly mind-boggling rules. The same mistakes are repeating. The flying public deserves clear, logical rules about air travel and enough information to understand why steps are being taken,” complained the Wall Street Journal.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, however, defended the new measures as “designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same thing everywhere.”

The measures follow the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight over the weekend and come as al-Qaida’s leader in Yemen issued a terrorist threat against the U.S.

In a tape released four days before the attempted destruction of the Detroit-bound Northwest plane, the leader of al-Qaida in Yemen, referring to his plans for attacks against America, declared, “We are carrying a bomb to hit the enemies of God.”

Thomas Woods : States Can Nullify Unconstitutional Federal Laws!

Obama’s Secretary of Homeland Security Is An Idiot

The Obama Files

Dec. 28, 2009

The Daily Mail blogs comments on the mad bomber who came within seconds of blowing up Flight 253 headed to Detroit.  What does the Obama’s chief of Homeland Security plan on doing to prevent a repeat?

Nothing — Janet Napolitano said: “The system worked.”

If by “system” she means having a passenger quick, brave and smart enough to fly over other passengers to get the guy, yes, I suppose in the Land of Lalala the system worked.

But a real security chief who is more concerned about the safety of the public than her own public relations would be angry, would be upset, would be apologetic and would be promising to get to the bottom of this and to overhaul the system.  We need someone who find out why the system failed to keep this terrorist off the airplane and why it failed to detect the bomb in his underpants, planted by al-Qaeda in Yemen, and why it failed to prevent him from detonating the bomb.

Jonah Goldberg adds, “Napolitano has a habit of arguing that DHS is a first responder outfit.  Its mission is to deal with ‘man-caused-disasters’ after they occur.  It appears she really believes it.  If the White House wants to assure people that it takes the war on terror seriously (a term Robert Gibbs used this morning by the way), they could start by firing this patently unqualified hack.”

Like Obama, Janet Napolitano is in way over her head, but that’s what you get when “diversity” is a primary job requirement.

Early Monday, on Fox News, Napolitano, was asked directly, if she was saying the system worked?  Napolitano was forced to admit the system failed — but she danced around her answer a bunch.

Reality Check

The Obama Files

Dec. 28, 2009

Chalk up another outright failure for the Obama administration.

According to Brian Ross at ABC News in a report filed yesterday, the unsuccessful terrorist attack designed to bring down a Northwest Airlines Airbus 330 over Detroit, Michigan was planned and launched by Al Qaeda leaders in Yemen.  Five days before the plan failed on Christmas Morning, Barack Obama’s Justice Department approved the transfer and actually transferred a dozen terrorist detainees from the U.S. detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay — according to a December 20 Bloomberg report, half of the 12 transferred terrorists went to Afghanistan and Somaliland, while the other half . . . you guessed it . . . went home to Yemen.

Even better, according to Politico, the administration was hoping to send 80 more Yemeni terrorist detainees back home to Yemen from Guantanamo Bay, the secure facility specifically designed to house such creatures.  This, of course, will complicate things to say the least.  From the Politico piece:

Since Yemenis represent almost half of the roughly 200 remaining prisoners at Gitmo, new hurdles to their resettlement could spell more trouble for President Barack Obama’s plan to close the island prison while transferring a limited number of detainees to a prison in the U.S.  Six Yemeni nationals were returned home earlier this month, and officials hoped more transfers would follow.

The relatively weak central government has been working, with U.S. military and diplomatic support, to counter two separate insurgencies, and the nation, Osama Bin Laden’s ancestral home, has become a haven for some members of Al Qaeda.  That instability has contributed to concerns within the Obama administration and from its domestic critics about returning prisoners there for repatriation.

The Nigerian man charged with the Christmas Day bombing attempt aboard Northwest Flight 253, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, reportedly spent time in Yemen after graduating from a London university in 2008.  According to ABC News, Abdulmutallab has told authorities that, while in Yemen, Al Qaeda operatives crafted the explosive device which was sewn into Abdulmutallab’s underwear.

We know the recidivism rate among former inmates at Gitmo.  We know that approximately one in every seven detainees released return to the battlefield to fight, hurt and kill Americans.  We know this, and yet this administration still plans to carry out civilian show trials for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and five others in Lower Manhattan, and still aims to shutter the detainee facility at Guantanamo Bay in favor of a retrofitted federal prison in Illinois — a plan that would pose an increased security risk according to a senior Department of Defense official.

Good stuff — continue reading here . . .

Socialism Creeps In As America Sleeps

Investors.com

Dec. 28, 2009

Health Care: Democrats on the take and in the dead of night pass an execrable piece of legislation that they haven’t read, the public doesn’t want and only socialists could love. What has happened to this country?

If we hadn’t stayed up past midnight Sunday, we wouldn’t have known what was going on. Here we thought a vote on the proposed health care overhaul wasn’t going to take place until Thursday night — Christmas Eve.

But there they were, the United States Senate, at 1 a.m. Monday, rushing to vote in the middle of a snowstorm to close debate on the most important piece of legislation of our time — the nationalization of the U.S. health care system. And we’ve been scrambling ever since to make sense of it.

Let’s see if we have this right:

• This was a vote on a Democrat-concocted scheme that Americans have rejected every time it’s been proposed for 100 years and that is opposed again, by 54% to 41% by the public at large, by 2-to-1 by practicing physicians and by every last member on the Republican side of the aisle.

• The vote was taken without any members having read the main 2,074-page bill, let alone the 383 pages of amendments that were tacked on at the last minute to buy off senators, including Nebraska’s Ben Nelson, Louisiana’s Mary Landrieu and Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders.

• Despite growing public opposition, Democratic members had the nerve to call those who questioned their monstrosity “obstructionists” and worse. Rhode Island’s Sheldon Whitehouse called health care bill foes “birthers,” “fanatics” and “people running around in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups.” Is this what Democrats meant when they said they seek bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems?

• The bill contains at last count 18 new taxes totaling an estimated $406 billion — including significant new levies on those earning less than $250,000, a major breach of Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes by “one penny” on those in that income group.

A family of four that refuses to buy into a “qualifying” health insurance program will pay a “surtax” of as much as $6,750. At the same time, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that health insurance premiums will nearly double by 2016.

As the nonpartisan Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation put it, “The House and Senate health care bills contain enormous tax hikes to accompany massive increases in government spending.”

DOJ Voting rights chief fired. Prosecuted New Black Panthers

The American Thinker

Dec. 28, 2009

Clarice Feldman
Main Justice.com reports there’s been an unceremonial  removal from office of the Civil Rights Division’s Voting Rights Section chief, Christopher Coates. He signed off on the complaint against the Black Panthers and is presently under subpoena by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission which is investigating Attorny General Holder’s decision to drop the case after it was won.

Veteran Civil Rights Division attorney Christopher Coates is no longer chief of the Voting Section, according to the division’s Web site.

There was no official announcement of the personnel change in the long-troubled section, which most recently has been embroiled in the controversy over the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case. Main Justice noticed the change on the Voting Section Web site.

Taking over for Coates in an acting role is Chris Herren, a deputy chief of the section, according to the Web site.

Alejandro Miyar, a spokesman for the Civil Rights Division, wasn’t available for comment Sunday. Coates did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment. It could not be learned whether Coates left the department entirely or transferred to another post.

Coates signed off on the controversial voter intimidation complaint against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, filed in the waning days of the George W. Bush administration. The Obama DOJ’s decision to dismiss most of the charges in May has become a political controversy for the administration.

Coates also supervised J. Christian Adams, the career Voting Section attorney who compiled the Black Panther case. Adams, who has a history of conservative advocacy, was hired in 2005 by then-Civil Rights Division official Bradley Scholzman, a Bush political appointee who improperly politicized the hiring process in the division, the department’s Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility found in a joint investigation.

Coates had been listed on the Web site as chief of the Voting Section as late as Dec. 20.

Obama’s Image: What a Difference a Year Makes

The American Thinker

Dec. 28, 2009

By Ed Lasky

Almost a year has passed since January 20, 2009 — when the waters of the ocean no longer rose and America began to heal from the depredations of Republicans. Barack Obama has been our president for that long, and the people have started to wise up.

The light that shines on Barack Obama as president has reflected back an image that bears very little similarity to the iconic visage that floated above us all in 2008. Why has Barack Obama betrayed so many allies, broken so many promises, thrown so many pledges and people under the bus?
One simple aphorism (paraphrasing Winston Churchill) can explain it all. Barack Obama is no longer a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Much about his past remains murky, but faced with the need to govern, he has given the American people plenty of evidence of his nature…if only they will look.
Obama is a cynic wrapped in a hypocrite inside a bully.
This comes as a shock to many, who are dismayed to find that he is “just a politician,” as Reverend Wright, Jr. (who knows him so well) called him back in 2008. But Wright was being all too kind and generous to his future former parishioner (Wright followed a long and ever-growing line of people trampled by Barack Obama’s rise.)
But Barack Obama is far more than just a politician. We all swallow a lot from politicians; we know that many pander and narrowcast, changing their message to suit their audience. But Obama expressly campaigned as a man who would not do this. He was the candidate of hope and change — he would bring a big broom to sweep clean the Augean Stables known as Washington, D.C. He called forth the better angels of our nature (hat tip: Honest Abe Lincoln, one of the truly honest politicians from Illinois) and tapped into a deep yearning for the rarest of the real things: an honest leader.
A cynic
Obama defined his campaign with high-sounding rhetoric that “[his] rival in this race is not other candidates, but cynicism.” The line resonated and soon became his mantra.
He later asked us to fight cynicism and revealingly told us that cynics believe they are smarter than everyone else. To this it could be said that Obama knows what that is like.
Could there be anything more cynical than to look upon Americans as being too forgetful to remember all the broken promises Obama made?
These include — but are not limited to — a promise that there would be no health care mandates (there are); that he would take a scalpel to the budget and bring down the deficit (headed towards the stratosphere as he rewards his own special interest groups); and that he would end earmarks (his spending bills are polluted by them; he is, after all, a Chicago politician).
He promised to close Gitmo — not a done deal, and like many deadlines he promised, no one is sure when or if this will happen.
He promised the end of partisanship, but he has stoked it to a roaring blaze with his refusal to work with Republicans. He promised to end our wars, but now he is sending more forces into Afghanistan.
He stated that he would fight the gay marriage ban, but instead he ended up supporting it, in effect, by defending the Defense of Marriage Act.
He promised the most transparent administration in history, but instead he imposes layers of secrecy and invokes executive powers to cloak his administration from scrutiny (e.g., his use of executive privilege to protect Desiree Rogers, his social secretary, from questioning regarding the WhiteHouseGate-crashers).
We were promised that if we passed the stimulus bill under Barack Obama’s presidency, then the unemployment rate would drop below 8% by now — and here we are, during Christmas season, cruising along at a solid 10% (17% if we include the underemployed and those who left the workforce because they saw no prospects of landing a job).
We were promised that the anti-Bush would restore respect for America around the world and bring international comity. Instead, he has alienated our allies and empowered our adversaries — a dynamic that has brought all but zero benefits to America (very little cooperation in Afghanistan, on “climate change,” or on Iran’s nuclear program). While he may have snagged himself a Nobel Peace Prize, the leaders of the world are increasingly treating him, and America, with disrespect and contempt.
The betrayals are so breathtaking and widespread (all of his promises have an expiration date) that all one can surmise is that the ultimate cynic is the One who campaigned against cynicism.
We can sense that Obama is a cynic by referring back to his own definition: someone who thinks he is smarter than everyone else.
We have abundant evidence of this derisive attitude.
I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters. I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m gonna think I’m a better political director than my political director.
Obama had the ego to think he was better than the key experts playing roles in his victory: He is apparently smarter than his policy directors and political directors, and he’s a better speechwriter to boot.
We know how Obama feels about small-town Americans: They are bitter yokels who cling to guns or religion or antipathy towards people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment. But he has additionally demeaned a wide range of other Americans (doctors, cops, Special Olympics contestants, and many more, as you can see via the Insulter-in-Chief). And how many of us are the “typical white person” he derided in the not-so-distant past? Patriots who wear flags on their lapels? They are among the great unwashed.
We also know how Obama feels about people living in suburbia. He has no use for those people in the gray flannel suits. He said, in an un-teleprompted remark: “I’m not interested in suburbs. The suburbs bore me.”
As Barack Obama has intoned, words matter.
Yes, they do Mr. President, especially in the days of YouTube, Google, and the internet. These are the tools the common folk can tap to remember your promises — and your breaking of them.
These are the videos we can watch instead of the redacted versions put out by your pals and accomplices in the media –those versions scrubbed clean of your malapropisms, mistakes, stammering, evasions, and most importantly, your broken promises. Only a cynic would think of us as being too forgetful or ignorant to recognize the Big Lie.
Only a certifiable cynic would consider the American people so unperceptive as to not recognize the wide gap between the image and the reality, the promises made and broken, the differences between the smiling visage on the Shepard Fairey posters (themselves a fraud — how symbolic!) and the hectoring, finger-pointing, vengeful curmudgeon we now have in the Oval Office.
A hypocrite
The hypocrisy knows no bounds, either.
A hypocrite decries the role of money in politics and then breaks his promise to accept public financing for his presidential campaign (because he could see the money rolling in) while his challenger kept his promise to abide by the campaign law he himself created. Was there a certain degree of cynicism displayed there by Obama, knowing McCain was hoisted on his own petard?
A hypocrite preaches that he will bring us together as a people and heal our wounds when he wants our votes — but after he wins, he practices the politics of polarization and declares that he wants not “to quell people’s anger,” but to channel it.
Only a hypocrite would campaign on a platform of bringing us together (“we are one people,” “this was the moment — this was the time — when we came together to remake this great nation,” “there is no red America, there is no blue America,” etc.) and then stoke the very polarization that he promised would end in the Age of Obama. His guru, Saul Alinksy, would be happy that his Rules for Radicals has become the blueprint for how the president can run, and ruin, a great nation.
Only a hypocrite would engage in as many baldfaced lies as our president has over the past few years. The end of lobbyists? Balderdash. In fact, as a Politico headline noted, “Lobbyists are on pace for a record year.”
And what is a lobbyist? What is the meaning of the term when Andy Stern, head of the Service Employees International Union, is such a frequent visitor to the White House that he might as well sublet some space in the Lincoln Bedroom? Does anyone think Andy Stern is there to talk about the weather? A lobbyist by any other name is still, in the end, a lobbyist.
Barack Obama has also countenanced the buying of votes (payoffs to states to get senators to sign on Harry Reid’s health care reform bill) in the Senate to get ObamaCare passed.
Obama decried the politics of fear during the campaign and then employed the same as president — as he did when he had the audacity to predict the “bankruptcy” of America should ObamaCare not pass. Or, before that, he augured the collapse of the economy should the stimulus bill not pass. When every bill becomes a do-or-die proposition, is that not playing the politics of fear?
Is it hypocritical to tout that tax dollars are not “monopoly money” and that we “can’t continue to spend as if deficits don’t have consequences” while engaging in irresponsible profligacy that would make Nero blanch? (Obama has a history of problems with his own credit standing, but now he is playing with our money.)
Does he think others are too stupid — the belief that most defines a cynic — to realize that his deficit-plagued budgets are a sure way to penury for us and our children and grandchildren?
Decrying fat cats while calling up a jet for a trip to Manhattan and a stroll down the Great White Way of Broadway? Taking jaunts to Copenhagen to try to snag the Olympics for his hometown pals in Chicago, who, no doubt, were hoping to snag some lucre? That’s the Chicago Way. One could go on.
A bully
All this cynicism and hypocrisy is wrapped up and empowered by the other notable feature of Barack Obama: Our president is a bully.
Among the many examples: demeaning “fat cats” and telling Wall Street bankers that he is the only one standing between them and the pitchforks; telling a recalcitrant Democratic Congressman that they’d better toe the line because “we are keeping score, brother”; belittling allies, such as the Israelis, by telling them they need to be more self-reflective; trying to impose a left-wing lunatic dictator wanna-be on the innocent people of Honduras; dissing Eastern Europeans by not giving them a respectful warning that he was going to break a promise to them regarding missile bases in their nations; and forcing British  Prime Minister Gordon Brown to grovel in a kitchen in order to have a few words with the President of the United States. (This treatment is attributable, speculates the Wall Street Journal, to some personal bad will between Great Britain and some Kenyan ancestors of Barack Obama. The man knows how to hold an ancestral grudge — even if it means the rest of America suffers from slighting one of our formerly most treasured allies).
A bully is someone who can justify his actions by bragging that “I won.” Whatever happened to the slogan “Yes we can”? Whatever happened to the “new kind of politics“? Well, they’re so 2008.
A bully is someone who taunts, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”
A bully is someone who runs roughshod over not only his opponents (politics can be a blood sport, after all), but also the Constitution — as Obama has from almost day one of the One. Here are just a few examples of his inclination to ignore our most sacred document: czars exercising power without being approved by the Senate; violating the property clause by ignoring bankruptcy law — as he did with the auto bailouts and attempted to do with mortgage “cram-down” plans; the chilling of free speech by threats against Fox News and by bringing back the threat of regulation affecting talk radio. Even health care reform has come under scrutiny for violating the Constitution.
There is a cliché in Washington: that all one needs to know about politics can be learned on the playground. But perhaps Obama’s street-smart education was learned on the basketball court — where height reigns (and there is no higher office in America), and where trash-talk is used to demoralize and defeat.
A cynic wrapped in a hypocrite inside a bully.

A Sealed Past and You Trust him with Your Health Care!!!!

Remember, Tax Time is Coming

It’s time to clean some Congressional House – Congressional Reform Act of 2010

Canada Free Press

By Dr. Laurie Roth  Sunday, December 27, 2009

Congress and this Obama administration in the name of all kinds of international disasters are most happy to heap upon us all manner of controls and new taxes.  Through the proposed Government Health care bill this Government would control our bank accounts by forcing us to pay into health insurance whether we wanted to or not,  tell us how treatment and medical care is going to look and when we will get it.

Naturally, when asked in town halls across the country whether they would use the same health care they want to force on the American people,  most in congress have said that they would keep their premium, fancy health insurance and not take the Government health program over their own.  They have had all kinds of ‘slight of hand statements,’  stalls, and ‘I need to study and look at it moments.  However, most responses boldly implied that they would keep the insurance they had.  Isn’t that special?

Then there are those in this administration and congress that want to push Cap and Trade and other global warming, UN sanction type bills that would essentially enslave American workers and business due to the mythological science regarding carbon emissions.  Using this contrived bunch of carbon formulas,  businesses would be capped and taxed horribly and many simply driven into bankruptcy due to crippling fees.  Once again,  a huge attempt at control, via the stage of environmental concerns.

Lets see……they want to control and micro manage our health,  what we drive,  what we eat,  what our kids learn in school,  what our rights are,  and what we grow.  I think it is high time we offer a few suggestions………no, controls back at them.

Congressional Reform Act of 2010

The following steps for congressional reform were forwarded to me by a concerned American and friend,  John Royall.  I couldn’t agree more and my guess is most Americans will also agree!  It is time the elite, messiahs come down a few notches from their high horses and start serving again.

We have screamed about the self imposed elitism among most members of congress and the Senate but now there is no more coffee to spill and my voice is hoarse from screaming.  It is time for action now.

How is this for reform?

1. Term Limits:

12 years only, one of the possible options below.

  1. Two Six year Senate terms
  2. Six Two-year House terms
  3. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2. No Tenure / No Pension:

  1. TA congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately.  All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.  Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/10.

The American people did not make this contract with congressmen, congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

I think the same rules of logic and accountability should surround any of our Presidents including Obama.

This chick,  Laurie Roth would like to see a few guidelines also written into a bill and law.

  1. The President submits to the same tax and fee structure of all Americans.
  2. The President submits also to the same health care possibilities or restrictions as the American people; nothing more fancy than what the regular American has.
  3. No raises for the President’s salary until the deficit has gone down at least 50%.  Then the salary will also rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
  4. President can also purchase his retirement plan.
  5. If a former President plans to travel around the world, speaking, doing business and meddling in International affairs, he should pay for his own security, not the tax payers.

This administration and congress seems so interested in our “health” and controlling our lives.  Perhaps if they felt a little less God like and a little more servant like they wouldn’t mind such parameters as listed above.  IN FACT,  MOST OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD CELEBRATE THE ABOVE GUIDELINES.  Must we remind most members in congress and the White house that THIS IS NOT AN AUDITION FOR AMERICAN IDOL and this is not a big financial and retirement ticket for the rest of their lives?

I intend to forward the above ideas to as many in congress as I can think of.  Let it be so.  It is time to find a Representative and Senator who will push such action and a bill like this