Saturday, April 7, 2012

Easter shoppers hit by egg-streme price hikes

AFP Photo / Dieter Nagl

Published: 07 April, 2012, 20:51  by RT news
Europe is in the grip of the usual Easter craze as eggs become the focus of everyone’s attention. However this year’s egg fever is like no other before. Eggs – be they normal or chocolate – have seen an unprecedented rise in price.
There’s nothing unusual in egg prices soaring at Easter. However, this year eggs are almost 80% (76.5) more expensive than last season, according to the Wall Street Journal. Supply is failing to meet demand as many producers have simply halted their egg production. It all has to do with new European Union rules requiring larger cages for battery hens. European Union member states were given until the beginning of this year to switch from using small cages to new ones with more space, bedding and perches. As a result, there are fewer eggs on the market. While some producers are in the middle of upgrading their facilities, others have simply chosen to leave the business rather than pay for the luxurious comfort of their hens. Eastern European countries have suffered the most. Many customers in poorer economies think the regulation has taken fighting for the animal rights a tad far. There are those who now go across borders to build up their stocks of eggs for Easter – for example in Poland the price is 40% less than in neighboring countries. So going abroad to buy several hundred eggs for a family is nothing out of the ordinary these days. 
However, egg-hunting across borders doesn’t solve the problem of chocolate eggs, which are another Easter essential. These too have become more expensive almost everywhere. For example, in Great Britain chocolate treats have become almost 200% more expensive than last year, according to the Daily Mail. And there are fears they could go cost even more by next Easter due to a global cocoa bean shortage after a drought in the Ivory Coast, which is responsible for 40% of the world’s supply. In the meantime, cocoa bean prices continue to fall. Cocoa producers blame droughts forn poor quality beans, with buyers complaining beans are too small, black and contain no chocolate. The confectionery giants and supermarkets have found a way out of the chocolate crisis: excessive packaging. A recent report by a LibDem MP in the UK found only 38% of the contents of an Easter egg box is an egg. Some of the more frugal customers already say it’s not worth it – and suggest buying a DVD with a good movie or a cartoon for kids to last for years, instead of a chocolate egg that won’t last at all. But there are of course those who won’t give up the chocolate pleasure – no matter the price.
Alan Hopkins
NOTE:  Europe is not the only folks noticing the increase in prices this holiday weekend.  No matter where we shop here in the U.S., prices have just about doubled - from eggs, to chocolate bunnies and jelly beans


Barack Hussein Obama: It's Okay Iran, Go Ahead With Your Nuclear Plans, Just Don't Make Any Nuclear Bombs, Okay?

NOTE:  The news was announced yesterday afternoon: Obama is "ok" with Iran obtaining nuclear capabilities, but "just for civilian use" ... HA HA HA!  What?  Does he think for one moment that Iran's purpose for obtaining nuclear capabilities is for "peaceful" use?!  And, who's going to monitor their use?  Iran has made it perfectly clear its intentions: they plan on wiping out Israel and if need be, attack U.S. if we should interfere - how's that for "peaceful" intentions?  Obama's latest comes on the same day as Israel celebrates "Passover" and Christians celebrate Holy Week, and Easter Sunday.  His timing is perfect - he has revealed to all of us that his loyalties lie with Islam - not the United States of America and not with America's allies.  Time to call for his Impeachment - don't wait until November, it may be too late. Holger Awakens is as disturbed as all of us are this weekend.  Perhaps Israel now understands what she must do to protect her people and land, because there is no backing from this administration.



To think that the President of the United States of America could be this naive is beyond comprehension. Especially when we are talking about the "smartest man ever to be President" right? So, if Barack Hussein Obama is THEE smartest President of the U.S.A. ever, he certainly is a LOT smarter than the mullahs and the Ayatollah in Iran, right? And if that is so, then if Obama is going to allow the Iranians to have their nuclear program and believes they won't make it into nuclear weapons then he must secretly WANT them to have nuclear weapons, right? I mean, even one of the dumbest men in America would know that the Iranians are lying when they say they aren't going to build nukes, based upon the mountain of evidence that they are doing just that, right? So, it can only mean that Barack Hussein Obama is complicit with the Iranians building a nuclear weapon arsenal.

If Barack Hussein Obama is complicit in Tehran's aim of arming themselves with nuclear weapons, then he is aiding and abetting an enemy of the United States of America and that is an impeachable offense.

Case closed.

The story is from Times of India.

US will accept Iran civilian nuclear programme: Report

WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama has told Iran the United States would accept Tehran having a civilian nuclear program if the Islamic state can prove it is not seeking atomic weapons, the Washington Post said.

Obama sent such a message to Tehran via Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who delivered it to Iran's supreme leader Ali Khamenei last week, said the newspaper's foreign affairs columnist David Ignatius.

"President Obama has signaled Iran that the United States would accept an Iranian civilian nuclear program if Supreme leader Ali Khamenei can back up his recent public claim that his nation 'will never pursue nuclear weapons'," said Ignatius yesterday.

"A few days before traveling to Iran, Erdogan had held a two-hour meeting with Obama in Seoul, in which they discussed what Erdogan would tell the ayatollah about the nuclear issue and Syria," he wrote.

The United States had said on Thursday that it still expected Iran to hold talks with six world powers on the Islamic republic's disputed nuclear program to go ahead next week, despite a dispute on the venue being Istanbul or Baghdad.

According to Ignatius, Obama asked Erdogan to tell Khamenei "that the Iranians should realize that time is running out for a peaceful settlement and that Tehran should take advantage of the current window for negotiations."

However, "Obama didn't specify whether Iran would be allowed to enrich uranium domestically as part of civilian program the United States would endorse. That delicate issue evidently would be left for the negotiations."

Turkey has told Iran it remains ready to host the talks between Iran and the P5+1 group, Iran's Al-Alam television station reported yesterday, but the Islamic republic has said it wanted the meeting held in Baghdad or China instead.

Iran last held talks with the six powers -- Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States -- in January 2011 with no results.

Ignatius added that "the challenge for negotiators is whether it's possible to turn Khamenei's public rhetoric into a serious and verifiable commitment not to build a bomb."

Calif. artist Thomas Kinkade dies at age 54

Note:  Thomas Kinkade is a household name and just about everyone in America is familiar with his paintings.  Hardly a gift shop in this country doesn't have his paintings, china mugs, etc. with his paintings for sale.  He is often called "the painter of light" and has called himself "the warrior for light".  He considered himself a "devout" Christian and his paintings are examples of his "walk" in life.  Our deepest condolences to his family and close friends.  He shall surely be missed by all he loved his art work.  
Artist Thomas Kinkade Dies in California at Age 54
paintings by Thomas Kinkade
Artist Thomas Kinkade Dies in California at Age 54

yahoo! news

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California artist Thomas Kinkade, whose brushwork paintings of idyllic landscapes, cottages and churches were big sellers for dealers across the country, died Friday, a family spokesman said. Kinkade, 54, died at his home in Los Gatos in the San Francisco Bay Area of what appeared to be natural causes, David Satterfield said. Kinkade's sentimental paintings, with their scenes of cottages, country gardens and churches in dewy morning light, were beloved by middlebrow America but reviled by the art establishment. The paintings generally depict tranquil scenes with lush landscaping and streams running nearby. Many contain images from Bible passages.
Kinkade, a self-described devout Christian, claimed to be the nation's most collected living artist. His paintings and spin-off products were said to fetch some $100 million a year in sales, and to be in 10 million homes in the United States. "I'm a warrior for light," he told the San Jose Mercury News in 2002, in reference to his technical skills but also the medieval practice of using light to symbolize the divine. "With whatever talent and resources I have, I'm trying to bring light to penetrate the darkness many people feel." Before Kinkade's Media Arts Group went private in the middle of the past decade, the company took in $32 million per quarter from 4,500 dealers across the country 10 years ago, according to the Mercury News. The cost of his paintings range from hundreds of dollars to more than $10,000.
Artist Thomas Kinkade Dies in California at Age 54 
 painting by Thomas Kinkade

President Obama Is No “Constitutional Scholar”

Constitutional Dullard not a Constitutional Scholar

BY  J.J. Jackson  Saturday, April 7, 2012 
One of the biggest fabrications I regularly hear about our President is that he is a “Constitutional Scholar”.  Yet time and time again the President repeatedly shows he knows absolutely nothing about the Constitution.  Some people suspect that he really does know the Constitution but that he actively chooses to ignore what he knows because his knowledge, if put into practice, destroys the ability for his liberal agenda to be moved forward.  I completely disagree.  The man is clearly a “Constitutional Dullard

This past week the President ran out to prove his ignorance of the document so many claim he understands so well.  The President stood before anyone who would listen and spewed his ignorance while decrying the looming potential for the Supreme Court to strike down Obamacare.  He bloviated about how it would be “unprecedented” for the Supreme Court to throw out a law.  Might I add boldly, a law with no Constitutional backing, Mr. President?

President Obama ran about like a headless chicken imploring Americans to believe that the Supreme Court must show “deference” to Obamacare and concocting all sorts of superficial, non-legal and even non-Constitutional reasons for this.  All of these reasons, however, amount to nothing more than saying because the law now exists, it should therefore be allowed to continue to exist.  Wow.  By that standard, slavery should still be legal and segregation should still be legal.  See what I mean about the President being a “dullard”?

Now the President was not the only liberal having conniptions.  Liberal pundits, who are equally unaware of what our Constitution actually says, and even less aware of what it means, have been lamenting along side of him.  They have said all sorts of crazy things.  They have mused how if the Supreme Court were to vote five to four to overturn the Obamacare that such a decision should be ignored as meaningless, because, well, the vote is so close and not decisive enough.  Some of the most insane on the left have even proposed that any judge who dares vote to kill the horrendous law should be impeached.  Of course, these same liberals never, ever, say such things about the Court when a five to four decision mistakenly goes in their favor because enough partisan liberal justices join with waffling moderate justices on the Court and actually vote to uphold clearly unconstitutional acts by Congress.

It is important that all Americans, lest they be duped into believing that the far left-wing of American politics actually knows their posteriors from the proverbial hole in the ground, be reminded of the facts of the matter.  Especially in light of the fact that liberals are trying very hard to convince the unwashed masses that the Supreme Court should be subservient to Congress and the President despite clearly being a constructed as co-equal branch of government with checks and balances to wield against them.
Liberals are going to hate me for this, but I am going to do it anyway.  Yes, I am going to back up that statement with facts.

First of all, we will turn to the Constitution itself.  Specifically, we will look at Article III.  Section 1 states: “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court”.  This gives precedent for the Supreme Court to have judicial power.  Okay, moving on.  In Section 2, we have this statement: “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;”.  Note the extremely important wording granting the Court authority to hear and rule on cases “in Law” and “arising under this Constitution.”  Why is this important?  It is important because of Article VI which makes the Constitution itself “law”.  Paragraph two says clearly that “This Constitution ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.

Therefore, clearly, except to those spinning themselves sick, the United States Supreme Court has the right to rule on any act undertaken by another branch of the federal government as to whether or not their actions are granted or denied by the “supreme Law of the Land.”  It is often said that only Congress can make law.  This is true, at least with regards to new laws.  But what is omitted is that there is a law, i.e. the Constitution, which existed prior to Congress and which governs them.

Now, I know that it is often, and quite mistakenly, stated that it was Marbury v. Madison that gave the Supreme Court the power of judicial review over the laws of Congress.  In fact, I hear a lot of miseducated people who consider themselves conservatives stating this as well as many on the left.  However, if they would just read the Constitution, and the passages I have just presented they will clearly see that this is completely false.  The power of judicial review existed from the ratification of the Constitution.  The founding fathers and all of the States agreed to it.  What Marbury v. Madison did was only affirm it after years of people who did not want to abide by the Constitution claiming that judicial review did not already exist.  Call them the liberals of their day.

Still not convinced?  Think that the wording of the Constitution is ambiguous and not all that clear?  Well, there is more proof that it says exactly what I say it says.  Oh, I know you liberals hate facts, but here are some more.

We have an actual discussion of the concept of judicial review in the Federalist Papers.  You remember the Federalist Papers, right?  The documents written by James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton designed to explain the already simple language of the proposed Constitution to people who, even back then, could not be bothered to actually read the document?  In Federalist #78, Alexander Hamilton explained the concept of judicial review for anyone unable to understand it as written in the Constitution in such plain language.  Several passages are important and I present them now here to make liberals go nuts.

” ... the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority.” – Alexander Hamilton

And why?  Well, Hamilton tells us why!  “There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

Egad!  Legislative review explained once again!  But, wait, there are even more nails in the coffin of blithering idiots who think that the Supreme Court does not have the power to handcuff Congress and toss their laws or at least did not before the evil Marbury v. Madison.  Said Alexander Hamilton, “A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.”

This Federalist Paper is also important with regards to liberals who think that judges who toss an unconstitutional law should be impeached.  Hamilton explains what impeachment is to be used for.  Two paragraphs cover this:
“According to the plan of the convention, all judges who may be appointed by the United States are to hold their offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR; which is conformable to the most approved of the State constitutions and among the rest, to that of this State.”
“The standard of good behavior for the continuance in office of the judicial magistracy, is certainly one of the most valuable of the modern improvements in the practice of government. In a monarchy it is an excellent barrier to the despotism of the prince; in a republic it is a no less excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body. And it is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.”
So, you see, it is judges who act in bad behavior and act contrary to the Constitution who should be impeached, not those that rule in favor of it and keeping Congress within its bounds.  In fact, any justice that does not vote to toss Obamacare is, by definition, acting in bad behavior and they should be the ones that are impeached.

But this is all meaningless, to liberals anyway.  They do not care one lick what the facts are.  They only care about their power.  And as such is their only goal, they will keep lying about the role of the Supreme Court and trying to persuade as many ignoramuses they can to join their cause.  Based on the results of recent elections, there is certainly no shortage of useful idiots willing to make their mark and sign on to the liberal agenda of piracy and raid our rights to secure power for themselves.
Liberals are no “Constitutional Scholars”.  Least among them; President Obama.  Be not fooled by such frivolous claims.

J.J. Jackson 
Most recent columns
J.J. Jackson is a libertarian conservative author from Pittsburgh, PA who has been writing and promoting individual liberty since 1993 and is President of Land of the Free Studios, Inc. He is the lead editor contributor to American Conservative Daily.  He is the owner of The Right Things - Conservative T-shirts & His weekly commentary along with exclusives not available anywhere else can be found
J.J. Jackson can be reached

Jon McNaughton Painting Depicts Barack Obama Trampling on U.S. Constitution


Great news: 300 Hezbullah 'agents' in New York City

NOTE:  That's correct - 300 Hezbullah "agents" (that we know of) roaming the streets of New York City.  Look at what 19 hijackers did on September 11th and now ask yourself what 300 terrorists could do on American soil - mind-boggling, isn't it?  Do you feel safer now than you did BEFORE Sept. 11, 2011?  Immigration and Naturalization Services Dept. was placed under the umbrella of Homeland Security after 9/11 - purpose?  My guess would be that Homeland Security would have a better "handle" of Immigration and protect the United States from having terrorists enter our borders.  So, would someone like to explain to the American people how 300 Hezbullah terrorists were allowed to enter the U.S.? Apparently all those TSA checkpoints at the airport aren't preventing terrorists from entering the U.S.  
Why are they here and why aren't they deported?  Are they here on special Visas, taking a vacation in the Big Apple?  Exactly how has Homeland Security managed to keep Americans "safer" since 9/11?  Why isn't anyone discussing this in Washington?  And, as Carl in Jerusalem notes (below) ... why are we allowing the Muslim community and the "Muslim sympathizer in the White House" to withhold information that Americans should be aware of?  and, since Homeland Security reports "pinpointing the number of Hezbollah operatives inside the U.S. is difficult because of operational security", is our government saying that the terrorists have better "security" than the United States government?  If so, why isn't our government receiving proper training to protect United States citizens?  Perhaps our government needs to seek training from Israel in order to understand the great risks of having 300 terrorists in NYC and elsewhere in the United States.  I believe a group this size would be called a "sleeper cell" - certainly not a "lone wolf".

سيد "أسود الضاحية" وأدغالها
الطاغية المزهو السيد حسن بن عبد الكريم نصرالله
هداه الله
The Maestro of the Mobs and "Lions of Dahieh" and Master of Hezbollah
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah

by Carl in Jerusalem
Friday, April 6, 2012
Remember that story about the New York Police Department using The Third Jihad as a training video and how the Muslim community was seething that the police actually had special training in dealing with them? Well, I'm sure you'll all be shocked to hear that there was a good reason behind that video that the Muslim sympathizer in the White House doesn't want you to know. According to the New York Police Department, there are at least 200-300 Hezbullah agents in New York City, waiting for the right moment to strike.
A law enforcement official said that the New York Police Department, whose monitoring of Muslim communities has prompted political controversy, believes that between 200 and 300 Hezbollah sympathizers live in New York City. Between 10 and 20 of those are relatives of Hezbollah leaders or fighters who were killed in action, said the official.

The NYPD's knowledge of Hezbollah's infrastructure is sufficiently detailed that it has identified three Lebanese towns, Bint Jbeil, Yanoun and Yatar, to which suspected sympathizers of the group have ties. At least a handful of people in New York connected with Hezbollah have also undergone military training in Lebanon, the official said.

A preliminary Homeland Security report said that pinpointing the number of Hezbollah operatives inside the United States was difficult because of the group's operational security. The report nonetheless cited the estimates of "some officials" that the group "likely" has "several thousand sympathetic donors" in the United States as well as "hundreds" of operatives.
Let's go to the videotape.

What could go wrong?

Secret Obama Message Gives Khamenei Permission to Pursue Nuclear Program


Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, April 6, 2012, 8:41 PM

Iranian leader Ahmadinejad inspecting a uranium enrichment facility (Science Wonk)
Barack Obama sent a secret message to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei recently. Obama told the regime leader that he would give them permission to pursue a nuclear energy program.
YNet News reported:
US President Barack Obama has signaled Tehran that the Washington would accept an civilian nuclear program in Iran if Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei can back up his recent claim that his nation “will never pursue nuclear weapons,” the Washington Post reported Friday.
According to the report, the verbal message was sent through Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who met with Khamenei last week. A few days prior to leaving for the trip, Erdogan held a two-hour meeting with Obama on the sidelines of the nuclear security summit in Seoul, in which they discussed what the Turkish leader would tell Khamenei about the nuclear issue.
Washington Post columnist David Ignatius wrote that Obama advised Tehran, via Edrogan, that time is running out for a peaceful agreement. Obama didn’t specify whether Iran would be allowed to enrich uranium domestically. The issue evidently is to be discussed during the talks between the Islamic Republic and the West, which are slated start on April 13 at a venue yet to be decided.
NOTE:   This must be more of that "flexibility" Obama referred to when whispering in the ears of Russia's President.  Of course, "flexibility" actually means "insanity" - it is insane to agree that Iran obtain any type of nuclear capabilities and if Obama thinks they would use it for "civilian" purposes and not what Iran has been threatening to do for years - wipe Israel off the map and strike the USA if we interfered, then Obama needs to be removed from Office, by Congressional means, immediately.  Sure hope Israel is paying attention, as this latest move by Obama sends a death-knell to Israel.  Obama, you are America's "Chamberlain" and we all know how well that worked out with the Nazis, don't we? 

The photo is a smiling Hitler shaking hands with Chamberlain. One of the worse handshakes in history!  Will we now have photos of Obama shaking hands with a smiling Ahmadinejad?  

Friday, April 6, 2012

President Obama, the Muslim Brotherhood, and ‘Signaling’ in International Relations

By  on Apr 06, 2012 in Politics
As the Obama administration hosted delegatesfrom the Muslim Brotherhood, the socialist-Islamist group that rose to political power following the “Arab Spring” revolts, rockets were virtually flying from the Egyptian-controlled Sinai peninsula into the territory of our ally Israel.  As with its terrorist offspring al Qaeda, the timing of the Muslim Brotherhood’s White House visit and the relatively rare rocket attack on Israel from Egyptian territory, represents “signaling”that the days of detente between Egypt and Israel are likely over.
The significance of the White House hosting the Muslim Brotherhood at this point in time is accentuated by a cluster of events. These are both international and national in nature. As this analyst has argued before, the president’s foreign policy is an extension of, and is reflective of, his domestic agenda. Since the president is an ideologue, albeit one very shrewdly and pragmatically refraining from overtly expressing his core beliefs, there is a high degree of continuation between his foreign policy and his domestic agenda.
By taking into account a number of direct and indirect signs, the president and the Muslim Brotherhood can be considered tacit allies. The evidence is multi-faceted and will be addressed further below. The broader context of the shift in U.S.-Middle Eastern relations under President Obama is that the Muslim Brotherhood can be considered Alinsky-style community organizers; they are radical pragmatists with Marxist-Leninist ideological ties who use religion to bolster their drive for totalitarian power. Democracy is but a means to the end of assuming control over society; while “liberation” may be promised to the people initially in order to usher the Muslim Brotherhood into power in countries under authoritarian regimes, this is but a temporary maneuver until sharia can be established.  Evidence of this will be provided during the article. But first we will address a few basic points about the Muslim Brotherhood’s visit and the political timing.
White House spokesperson Jay Carney denied any broader significance of the Muslim Brotherhood visit, pointing out that two mid-level administration officials met with the delegates, the organization won representation in the Egyptian government through democratically held elections, and other politicians, namely Lyndsey Graham and John McCain, had met with members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) while in Egypt. Ironically, the two GOP Senators had met with these representatives while U.S. hostages were being held in Egypt. The GOP Senators, who took heat at the time from conservatives for meeting with the MB, were seeking to expand U.S.-Egyptian business ties. They criticized the holding of the American hostages, who were members of Non-Governmental Organizations or NGOs. Meeting with representatives of even enemy nations or organizations does not necessary entail endorsement of policy.
But some things should be kept in mind about the Obama administration’s meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood.  The administration has made no substantive criticism of the MB or of several other takfirior jihadist groups around the world. A wall of silence seems to have been erected since Obama took office regarding socialist or communist regimes. On the other hand, “conservative”-authoritarian, nationalist, and liberal democratic (U.K., Israel) regimes have come under fire; not to mention conservative groups and tea party activists. The president has had nothing but warm words for the seemingly disastrous Arab Spring and the Occupy movement.
The “democratic” Arab Spring movement that is ushering socialist-Islamist groups to power throughout the Middle East is so well-regarded on the left that Obama’s former “Green Jobs” Czar and self-professed communist/truther Van Jones is launching a “99% percent spring” movement whose astro-turfing is set to begin next week. One wonders what the group looks to accomplish since Obama is the current dictator-in-training and we are scheduled to have free and fair elections in November (unless Obama’s Department of Justice gets its way).




AP Images

Aleluia! Aleluia! - A Joyful Easter!

Wishing all our friends celebrating Easter,
 the most joyful and blessed Easter ever
for you and your family.

andre rieu - aleluia aleluia

Bashers Mr. Dean? Look In The Mirror - by Jessica Rubin

NOTE:  I heard Howard Dean's comments last night on one of Fox News "fair and balanced" TV shows.  My mind was racing overtime, thinking of responses to his accusations about the GOP and remembering the most recent remarks made just this week, by Barack Hussein Obama and his administration. (The one about the Supreme Court is a hum-dinger!)  The only thing left to the "Dems" is to go on the defensive and make false accusations, as they will never take responsibility for their "Party's" actions and policies these past 4 years. 
April 6, 2012


Jessica Rubin
Former Chair of the DNC, Howard Dean, has just accused the GOP of "bashing" Muslims, women, gays, immigrants and Latinos. What he forgot to mention is that the Democratic Party bashes the most basic values of The United States of America: pride in country, family and religion. You can throw in bashing of a  core value of Western civilization to boot: freedom of speech.

Obama started his presidency on an apology tour. Big, bad America has bulldozed, exploited and humiliated peoples and countries around the world. The rhetoric is different but the drivel is right out of Reverend Wright's rants G-D-ing America. Moreover, his administration is chipping away at pride in citizenship by giving illegal aliens all the rights of the failed Dream Act by various Obama agency directives. The net result is that illegals have nearly all the rights of citizenship except the right to vote -- and they are working on that.
His administration continues its assault on the traditional family by extolling the single parent family and gay-parenting.
Obama has shown disdain for the values of the Catholic church and sneered at "bitter," "frustrated" Christians ("And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.")
The Obama administration has ordered all intelligence agencies to expunge reference to Islamism, radical Islam, Jihad and all other terminology which might suggest the Islam is religion prone to terrorism. AG Holder has also brought suits against free speech. His DOJ has just lost a suit trying to muzzle a peaceful pro-life demonstrator.
Moreover, what Mr. Dean calls "bashing" is really the refusal to elevate gay marriage over traditional marriage, refusal to elevate Islam over Christianity, refusal to grant illegals all the rights of citizenship and refusal to elevate pro-choice over pro-life.
Is it any wonder there is a growing drug problem among Americas teenagers. They are being taught to be ashamed of Country, family and religion -- ashamed of being American.

Read more:

ISNA: And "Partner's in Crime"

April 6, 2012


By Bill Warner
The Islamic Society of North American (ISNA) is an organization linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.  ISNA was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror financing trial ever held.  If you go to the ISNA website, you will find a very interesting list called the Partners of ISNA.  Here is a partial list of church Partners:

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Presbyterian Church (USA)
The Union for Reform Judaism
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
United Methodist Church
Unitarian Universalist Association
How do these Partners of ISNA work?  They work very hard serving Mohammed and Allah.  Their first job is to be ignorant of Islamic doctrine.  The Partners never show the slightest sign of knowledge about Islam, except to parrot what their Muslim "handlers" tell them. 
To assure that this ignorance is passed down to the next generation, the Partners use their schools to train the next generation to be as ignorant as they are.  In other words, their schools never teach how Christians were dhimmis (semi-slaves) inside of Islam, even in those mythical days of the Islamic Golden Age.  The schools of the Partners never teach the Islamic doctrine as regarding Christians and Jews.  There is no Jew-hatred in the Partners' version of Islam, in spite of Islamic doctrine being more filled with Jew-hatred than Hitler's Mein Kampf
The Partners never bring up the murder of Christians and Jews to their ISNA masters.  When ISNA puts up a condemnation of murder of Christians in Nigeria on their website, that is enough.  The Partners never get around to asking why these murders of Christians have happened for 1,400 years, or why there will be yet more this week. 
Instead, the Partners are content to believe the stories of how Islam honors Isa (the Jesus of the Koran) and loves the People of the Book (one of the names for Christians and Jews).  Of course, the fact that Isa lacks every quality of Jesus as found in the Gospels never troubles a Partner, since the Partners honor their oath of subservience to Islam and do not read the Koran.
The Jewish Partners are equal in their ignorance when they never mention that the Musa of the Koran is not the Moses of the Torah, in spite of their ISNA masters' declarations.  Since the Jews are as deliberately ignorant of Islamic doctrine as are the Christian Partners, they don't know who the Musa in the Koran is.  The willful ignorance of these Christian and Jewish Partners is traitorous.
The banner cry of the Partners is "tolerance" -- tolerance of the intolerable.  The Partners will tolerate religious genocide, church-burnings, rapes, kidnapping, honor killings, and lies, as long as these are done by Muslims.  The Partners will piously smile when faced with evil, because they are being tolerant.
But there is one thing that that Partners will not tolerate: conversation about the doctrine and history of political Islam.  Want to be a bigot?  Speak about the suffering of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and atheists under Islam, and down comes the name-calling against those who know and speak out against the evil of sharia persecution of Kafirs. 
Speaking of sharia, the Partners love it and want it to rule anywhere ISNA wants.  You see, the Partners know that Islam is one of the three great Abrahamic faiths (an Islamic concept that denies the truth of both Christianity and Judaism).  They want Islam to practice its religious laws and grow.  So when a Christian or Jewish woman approaches a Partner leader and asks if she should marry this nice Muslim man, the Partners insist that that is a wonderful idea.  After all, the Partners and Muslims all worship one god.  And since the Partners have not the slightest idea of what the sharia is, they can, in all good ignorance, encourage their sister to marry a Muslim.  The fact that the Muslim husband can now follow the sharia and beat the Christian/Jewish wife is of no concern to a Partner. 
The Partners train their congregants to be ignorant so that they can respond like the French Jews in the last murder of Jews by Muslims at Toulouse.  These Jews have been well-taught how to be ignorant, so that they can say things like "Why would they do this?"
Why?  Because Allah hates the Jews.  Mohammed murdered Jews, raped Jews, enslaved Jews, tortured Jews, and exiled Jews.  Hence, in Toulouse, France, a Muslim can murder Jews.  It is Sunna.  But in the world of Partners, these heinous acts have no explanation, except local politics and poverty.  Israel caused it.  Right-wingers caused it.  Anything except Islam. 
Let's lay our cards on the table.  These Partners are partners in crime -- crimes against humanity.  These pious wimps are evil themselves, because they curry favor with evil.  They willfully practice ignorance, arrogant ignorance, in order to conceal their cowardice.  We must call them out and condemn them. 

Read more: