"Obama Man"

I called my stockbroker today and asked him, "What are you buying" ?      

His answer: "Canned goods and ammunition." 

Don't care, the damage is done.

Right Wing Extremist

Without our military nothing else of our country will remain.

Robert F. White wrote:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/14/report-citing-vet-extremism-is-pulled/print/

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Report citing veteran extremism is pulled

Audrey Hudson (Contact)  http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/audrey-hudson/

A contentious "Rightwing Extremism" report that warned of military veterans as possible recruits for terrorist attacks against the U.S. was not authorized, has been withdrawn and is being rewritten, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Capitol Hill lawmakers.

"The wheels came off the wagon because the vetting process was not followed," Ms. Napolitano told the House Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday.

"The report is no longer out there," she said. "An employee sent it out without authorization."

The report was shared with state and local law enforcement officials nationwide via the department's internal Web site on April 7, angering Republican lawmakers and military veterans who said it unfairly stereotyped veterans.

Ms. Napolitano did not say when the report was taken off the "intel Web site" and all Homeland Security Department Web sites, but she said it is in the process of being "replaced or redone in a much more useful and much more precise fashion."

Rep. Christopher Carney, Pennsylvania Democrat, said that as a veteran he "took offense personally," and his constituents were offended by the report as well.

"It really hit home hard to me and in our district," Mr. Carney said. "It's not a good start when I go to town hall meetings and I hear people calling for your resignation."

Ms. Napolitano said the report titled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," is not the only report she has seen that says veterans are targets for recruitment by racist and other hate groups.

"It was an assessment, not an accusation," Ms. Napolitano said.

"It didn't say that," Mr. Carney interrupted.

"That's right," Ms. Napolitano responded. "That is why it should not have gone out."

Asked whether the person who wrote the report is still employed, Ms. Napolitano said, "Appropriate personnel action is being taken."

Rep. Peter T. King, the ranking Republican on the committee, said the report "made an impression" in his New York district as well.

"I don't think it reflects well on the department, and I know you want to address it," Mr. King said.

David K. Rehbein, commander of the American Legion, said the withdrawal of the report "validates our objections."

"It did not contain any evidence," Mr. Rehbein said. "It was an unfair and unsubstantiated stereotype based on Timothy McVeigh."

The report also said "rightwing extremism" may include groups opposed to abortion and immigration, among several other threat assessments.

In March, the department issued and recalled within hours, a lexicon of key terms and phrases used by Homeland Security analysts "that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States."

Whites and blacks, Christians and Jews, Cubans and Mexicans, along with tax objectors, were among several political leanings listed in the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon." Both reports were prepared by the department's Office of Intelligence and Analysis.

"Some things in my initial days have gone very well at the department, some things have not. And that was probably the worst thing," Ms. Napolitano told the House Appropriations subcommittee on homeland security on Tuesday.

"It was not authorized to be distributed. It had not even completed its vetting process within the department. It has been taken off of the intel Web sites and the lexicon that went along with it was similarly withdrawn," she said.

"Neither were authorized products, and we have now put in place processes. And it turned out there were really no procedures to govern what went out and what didn't before, and now there are. I do not want to see a replication of that," Ms. Napolitano said.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Reference: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

The Brits have a way with words.

--------------------------

Barack Obama and the CIA: why does President Pantywaist hate America so

badly?

The Daily Telegraph, Gerald Warner

If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to

kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of

the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the

history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the

interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter.

Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy

does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and

reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at

tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at

war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never

abandoned the campaign trail.

That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's

legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques.

He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to

embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try

to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the

United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.

"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told

intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the

private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies

and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had

not already been outlawed.

So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask

him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due

to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be

irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by

one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the

twin towers.

Obama promised his CIA audience that nobody would be prosecuted for past

actions. That has already been contradicted by leftist groups with a

revanchist ambition to put Republicans, headed if possible by Condoleezza

Rice, in the dock. Talk about playing party politics with national security.

Martin Scheinin, the United Nations special investigator for human rights,

claims that senior figures, including former vice president Dick Cheney,

could face prosecution overseas. Ponder that - once you have got over the

difficulty of locating the United Nations and human rights within the same

dimension.

President Pantywaist Obama should have thought twice before sitting down to

play poker with Dick Cheney. The former vice president believes documents

have been selectively published and that releasing more will prove how

effective the interrogation techniques were. Under Dubya's administration,

there was no further atrocity on American soil after 9/11.

President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys,

excited the ambitions of America's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker

they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans.

Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so

badly?

--

Without our military nothing else of our country will remain.

Subject: FW: AXIS OF IDIOTS



Good reading,  he's right on the mark, what a bunch of cowards our Government leaders are, both side of the isle....Sent to me by my Navy Buddy.....Chief Bob USN Ret.......Gene

            ‘The Axis of Idiots'



Jimmy Carter, you are the father of the Islamic Nazi movement. You threw the Shah under the bus, welcomed the Ayatollah home, and then lacked the spine to confront the terrorists when they took our embassy and our people hostage. You're the runner-in-chief.



Bill Clinton, you played ring around the Lewinsky while the terrorists were at war with us. You got us into a fight with them in Somalia and then you ran from it. Your weak-willed responses to the USS Cole and the First Trade Center Bombing and Our Embassy Bombings emboldened the killers. Each time you failed to respond adequately, they grew bolder, until 9/11/2001.

John Kerry, dishonesty is your most prominent attribute. You lied about American Soldiers in Vietnam. Your military service, like your life, is more fiction than fact. You've accused our military of terrorizing women and children in Iraq. You called Iraq the wrong war, wrong place, wrong time, the same words you used to describe Vietnam. You're a fake. You want to run from Iraq and abandon the Iraqis to murderers just as you did to the Vietnamese. Iraq, like Vietnam, is another war that you were for, before you were against it. The only people I knew that came home in 3 months because of 3 purple hearts were on a stretcher or in a body bag. Bob



John Murtha, you said our military was broken. You said we can't win militarily in Iraq. You accused United States Marines of cold-blooded murder without proof and said we should redeploy to Okinawa. Okinawa, John? And the Democrats call you their military expert! Are you sure you didn't suffer a traumatic brain injury while you were off building your war hero resume? You're a sad, pitiable, corrupt and washed up politician. You're not a Marine, sir. You wouldn't amount to a good pimple on a real Marine's butt. You're a phony and a disgrace. Run away, John.



Dick Durbin, you accused our Soldiers at Guantanamo of being Nazis, tenders of Soviet style gulags and as bad as the regime of Pol Pot , who murdered two million of his own people after your party abandoned Southeast Asia to the Communists. Now you want to abandon the Iraqis to the same fate. History was not a good teacher for you, was it? Lord help us! See Dick run.



Ted Kennedy, for days on end you held poster-sized pictures from Abu Ghraib in front of any available television camera. Al Jazeera quoted you saying that Iraqi's torture chambers were open under new management. Did you see the news, Teddy? The Islamic Nazis demonstrated another beheading for you. If you truly supported our troops, you'd show the world poster-sized pictures of that atrocity and demand the annihilation of it. Your legislation stripping support from the South Vietnamese led to a communist victory there. You're a bloated, drunken fool bent on repeating the same historical blunder that turned freedom-seeking people over to homicidal, genocidal maniacs. To paraphrase John Murtha, all while sitting on your wide, gin-soaked rear-end in Washington



Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Carl Levine, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Pat Leahy, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, the Hollywood Leftist morons, et al, ad nauseam: Every time you stand in front of television cameras and broadcast to the Islamic Nazis that we went to war because our President lied, that the war is wrong and our Soldiers are torturers, that we should leave Iraq, you give the Islamic butchers - the same ones that tortured and mutilated American Soldiers - cause to think that we'll run away again, and all they have to do is hang on a little longer. It is inevitable that we, the infidels , will have to defeat the Islamic jihadists. Better to do it now on their turf, than later on ours after they have gained both strength and momentum.



American news media, the New York Times particularly: Each time you publish stories about national defense secrets and our intelligence gathering methods, you become one united with the sub-human pieces of camel dung that torture and mutilate the bodies of American Soldiers. You can't strike up the courage to publish cartoons, but you can help Al Qaeda destroy my country. Actually, you are more dangerous to us than Al Qaeda is. Think about that each time you face Mecca to admire your Pulitzer.



You are America's 'AXIS OF IDIOTS.'  Your Collective Stupidity will destroy us. Self-serving politics and terrorist-abetting news scoops are more important to you than our national security or the lives of innocent civilians and Soldiers. It bothers you that defending ourselves gets in the way of your elitist sport of politics and your ignorant editorializing. There is as much blood on your hands as is on the hands of murdering terrorists. Don't ever doubt that. Your frolics will only serve to extend this war as they extended Vietnam. If you want our Soldiers home as you claim, knock off the crap and try supporting your country ahead of supporting your silly political aims and aiding our enemies.



Yes, I'm questioning your patriotism.  Your loyalty ends with self.  I'm also questioning why you're stealing air that decent Americans could be breathing.  You don't deserve the protection of our men and women in uniform.  You need to run away from this war, this country.  Leave the war to the people who have the will to see it through and the country to people who are willing to defend it.



Our country has two enemies:  Those who want to destroy us from the outside and those who attempt it from within.

Semper Fi,



J. D. Pendry - Sergeant Major, USMC, Retired

This is a savvy man. He has nailed it down pretty good. Too bad it won't do any good. There won't be 1 in 10 that receive it that will forward it. It sure loses steam that way.

There is much sickness in South Texas. 

Anger and confusion too.  Obama liberals just don't know which way to go and who to attack so they attack everyone.  Knowing he is weak in so many vital and necessary skills to manage the country they hope by attacking his critics attention will be diverted from his faults.

The comment below was left on my profile page back in October 2008.  Like many of you I pity this poor, confused Obama lover.  She doesn't know what to do with herself and obviously has plenty of time to try and figure it out.

Join me and say a prayer for her sanity.

I would draw your attention to the comment, "As a christian woman."  Perhaps I have missed something.  Could someone tell me what kind of "christain" this is?

BO' Diddy has many liberal women confused.  They don't know whether to fall on their knees and greet him as the Messiah or prostrate themselves for the taking.  I doubt BO' Diddy would be interested in these old women one way or the other unless it is for their financial support and votes.  Most of them need to spend a little time with Chris Brown.

Four or five years from now I'll think of BO' Diddy as the Teleprompter President.  He sure loves his Teleprompter. 

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/05/04/congress-votes-to-protect-pedophiles-but-not-veterans/

The mixed up priorities of Nancy Pelosi's House.

Posted by Erick Erickson (Profile)

Monday, May 4th at 4:13PM 

This is really kind of mind numbing and demonstrates what is wrong with Congress.

During a House Judiciary Committee meeting, Congressman Steve King (R-IA) offered up an amendment to the hate crimes bill to exclude pedophiles from being a protected category under the hate crimes legislation.

Every single Democrat voted it down.

In the same meeting, Congressman Tom Rooney (R-FL) offered an amendment to include veterans as a class protected under the hate crimes bill. Not only did the Democrats vote it down, but Cogresswoman Debbie Waasserman Schultz attacked the Republicans for even thinking veterans might need protection under hate crimes legislation. After all, who but Democrats in Congress hate veterans?

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Reference: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

MEDIA MATTERS

U.S. regulatory czar nominee wants Net 'Fairness Doctrine'

Cass Sunstein sees Web as anti-democratic, proposed 24-hour delay on sending e-mail

Posted: April 27, 2009

8:41 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Cass Sunstein

WASHINGTON – Barack Obama's nominee for "regulatory czar" has advocated a "Fairness Doctrine" for the Internet that would require opposing opinions be linked and also has suggested angry e-mails should be prevented from being sent by technology that would require a 24-hour cooling off period.

The revelations about Cass Sunstein, Obama's friend from the University of Chicago Law School and nominee to head the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, come in a new book by Brad O'Leary, "Shut Up, America ! The End of Free Speech." OIRA will oversee regulation throughout the U.S. government.

Sunstein also has argued in his prolific literary works that the Internet is anti-democratic because of the way users can filter out information of their own choosing.

"A system of limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government," he wrote. "Democratic efforts to reduce the resulting problems ought not be rejected in freedom's name."

Sunstein first proposed the notion of imposing mandatory "electronic sidewalks" for the Net. These "sidewalks" would display links to opposing viewpoints. Adam Thierer, senior fellow and director of the Center for Digital Media Freedom at the Progress and Freedom Center , has characterized the proposal as "The Fairness Doctrine for the Internet."

"Apparently in Sunstein's world, people have many rights, but one of them, it seems, is not the right to be left alone or seek out the opinions one desires," Thierer wrote.

Later, Sunstein rethought his proposal, explaining that it would be "too difficult to regulate [the Internet] in a way that would respond to those concerns." He also acknowledged that it was "almost certainly unconstitutional."

Perhaps Sunstein's most novel idea regarding the Internet was his proposal, in his book "Nudge," written with Richard Thaler, for a "Civility Check" for e-mails and other online communications.

"The modern world suffers from insufficient civility," they wrote. "Every hour of every day, people send angry e-mails they soon regret, cursing people they barely know (or even worse, their friends and loved ones). A few of us have learned a simple rule: don't send an angry e-mail in the heat of the moment. File it, and wait a day before you send it. (In fact, the next day you may have calmed down so much that you forget even to look at it. So much the better.) But many people either haven't learned the rule or don’t always follow it. Technology could easily help. In fact, we have no doubt that technologically savvy types could design a helpful program by next month."

That's where the "Civility Check" comes in.

"We propose a Civility Check that can accurately tell whether the e-mail you're about to send is angry and caution you, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. do you really and truly want to send it?'" they wrote. "(Software already exists to detect foul language. What we are proposing is more subtle, because it is easy to send a really awful e-mail message that does not contain any four-letter words.) A stronger version, which people could choose or which might be the default, would say, 'warning: this appears to be an uncivil e-mail. this will not be sent unless you ask to resend in 24 hours.' With the stronger version, you might be able to bypass the delay with some work (by inputting, say, your Social Security number and your grandfather’s birth date, or maybe by solving some irritating math problem!)."

Sunstein's nomination to the powerful new position will require Senate approval. He is almost certain to face other questions about his well-documented controversial views:

• In a 2007 speech at Harvard he called for banning hunting in the U.S.
• In his book "Radicals in Robes," he wrote: "[A]lmost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine. And if the Court is right, then fundamentalism does not justify the view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms."
• In his 2004 book, "Animal Rights," he wrote: "Animals should be permitted to bring suit, with human beings as their representatives …"
• In "Animal Rights: A Very Short Primer," he wrote "[T]here should be extensive regulation of the use of animals in entertainment

, in scientific experiments, and in agriculture."

"As one of America 's leading constitutional scholars, Cass Sunstein has distinguished himself in a range of fields, including administrative law and policy, environmental law, and behavioral economics," said Obama at his nomination of his regulatory czar. "He is uniquely qualified to lead my administration's regulatory reform agenda at this crucial stage in our history. Cass is not only a valued adviser, he is a dear friend and I am proud to have him on my team."

O'Leary disagrees.

"It's hard to imagine President Obama nominating a more dangerous candidate for regulatory czar than Cass Sunstein," he says. "Not only is Sunstein an animal-rights radical, but he also seems to have a serious problem with our First Amendment rights. Sunstein has advocated everything from regulating the content of personal e-mail communications, to forcing nonprofit groups to publish information on their websites that is counter to their beliefs and mission. Of course, none of this should be surprising from a man who has said that 'limitless individual choices, with respect to communications, is not necessarily in the interest of citizenship and self-government.' If it were up to Obama and Sunstein, everything we read online – right down to our personal e-mail communications – would have to be inspected and approved by the federal government."

WHY I AM VOTING DEMOCRAT



I'm voting Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.



I'm voting Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.



I'm voting Democrat because when we pull out of Iraq I trust that the bad guys will stop what they're doing because they now think we're good people.



I'm voting Democrat because I believe that people who can't tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don't start driving a Prius.



I'm voting Democrat because I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as THEY see fit.



I'm voting Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.



I'm voting Democrat because I believe that open borders and government give-aways to foreigners is a great way to grow a nation.



I'm voting Democrat because I'm way too irresponsible to own a gun and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves.



I'm voting Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I've decided to marry my dog.



I'm voting Democrat because I believe oil companies' profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene but the government taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% isn't.



I'm voting Democrat because my head is so firmly planted up my ass it's unlikely that I'll ever have another point of view.

Subject: Fw: Pelosi and the Pope