Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Where has Aristotle The Hun been?

Where has Aristotle The Hun been?

Thanks for the concern so many of you have expressed since I haven’t posted anything to “The Steady Drip” since March 18th. Phil over at “The Right Side of Life” calls me a “prolific blogger” so I understand why questions would arise when I go so long without posting.

I was released from the hospital yesterday re-ran all my diagnostics and all is well. . So,

I'm back in the saddle again
Out where a friend is a friend
Where the longhorn cattle feed
On the lowly gypsum weed
Back in the saddle again

Ridin' the range once more
Totin' my old .44
Where you sleep out every night
And the only law is right
Back in the saddle again

Rockin' to and fro
Back in the saddle again
I go my way
Back in the saddle again

I'm back in the saddle again
Out where a friend is a friend
Where the longhorn cattle feed
On the lowly gypsum weed
Back in the saddle again

Ridin' the range once more
Totin' my old .44
Where you sleep out every night
And the only law is right
Back in the saddle again

Rockin' to and fro
Back in the saddle again
I go my way
Back in the saddle again

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Keep Up the Pressure, America: Flood Congress

Keep Up the Pressure, America:

Flood Congress with Calls, E-Mails

We're having an effect.

The lines are jammed.

Even the media is reporting it accurately.

» Code Red:
Click Here for List of Targeted Congressmen (Rush 24/7 Members: Listen)

» Keep Calling Even If It's Busy: (877) 762-8762 or (202) 224-3121 or (202) 225-3121

» ObamaCare:
Who Should We Be Putting Pressure On? » Whip Count: 3-16-10

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

Democrat Lemmings Mass Suicide

Wake Up America Movement Press Release
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Thanks JCQ

As a FOX commentator reminded viewers last night, the current Obama Care strategy is the use of "inevitability" to persuade undecideds to climb on the "bandwagon" while "demoralizing" opponents into believing they don't stand a chance. In other words, it is no more than a "bluff."

At this point, it's looking likely this approach may turn out to be a "suicide pill" for the current Democratic party as a whole.

Those tracking the immediate scenario are getting cross-eyed and dizzy, reviewing hypothetical listings of who might be a No while who else is swinging into the Yes column. But, if we look at the bigger picture, important facts give good cause for optimism in the ultimate outcome.

Bluffing aside, Pelosi doesn't have the votes to pass this monstrosity. And strong arm techniques being applied could be the last straw when it comes to the future of the "Change" administration. The "Slaughter" rule (named for a finagling legislator with no regard for the Constitution) could well presage how its application could decimate Congress's ruling party. Reactions to Rep. Clyburn's media claims that this "Deemed Passed" strategy is both logical and justified could do more harm than good. Even worse, if the "powers that be" follow through it's more likely that will slaughter them, come November, than the GOP. At this point, their own demise is more "inevitable" than having their bluff succeed. The "writing is on the wall" and here's why:

A pattern is emerging beneath these ongoing legislative skirmishes. Initially, most everyone went "along for the ride." Not so, lately. Moderate Democrats are giving up on their party. Respected party figures, like Evan Bayh and Patrick Kennedy, have already announced their withdrawal from Congress. Frustrated for months in attempts to bring moderation and sanity back to the Hill, the exasperated Indiana Senator claimed that if he creates just one job in the private sector, he'll accomplish more than Congress has done all this year! These are harsh words coming from a man who was, not long ago, considered an emerging party leader.

At the same time, key influence peddlers including Dodd and Rangel are soon leaving Capitol Hill as well. Murtha and Kennedy Sr. have gone to their reward. Other Democrats have opted for "early retirement" from office. Among these, including Gordon of Tennessee, are "sell-outs" who are moving into well paid positions that don't require them to satisfy voters.

Adding up these emerging vacancies shows the party of "Change" now has as many holes in it as a piece of Swiss cheese. Emanuel has become a figure of ridicule, thanks, in part, to the Massa scandal. Rumors are that Axelrod is feeling "fatigued." Senate majority leader, Reid, must contend with his own family's health crisis. While Pelosi races forward in her determination to become the most unpopular figure in the history of Congress. Memorable quotes help, like her statement yesterday, that once we "beat down this door" we'll move "more legislation" forward.

Feeding this self destructive saga by pushing Obama Care into law as "Deemed Passed," with no roll call House vote, will result in every Democrat in Congress being held jointly responsible for its passage! The adverse impact of this record on those running in Blue Dog and Conservative districts cannot be overstated. We need only look back to the 2008 Presidential race to recall that Obama would not be in office were it not for the votes of moderate "Clinton Dems." This voting bloc, by and large, is mad as hell over the party's ObamaCare obsession at the expense of inaction on our economic crisis. The likelihood that these voters will remain in the Democratic column this November grows dimmer every day. Rest assured, the Tea Party movement will draw more from their ranks when the word spreads that the entire Democratic party is to blame for new laws that tax Americans for years before ascribing benefits!

Ironically, the final combustible ingredient in the Democratic party's "suicide pill" has now been added to this mix, courtesy of In a widely publicized email campaign, this far left Soros funded organization, has openly announced its intention to place competitive candidates in nationwide primaries against any Democrat who votes down ObamaCare. If this intimidation sounds like a vote winning strategy, think again.

It's one thing to be a Democratic Congressman who is told to ignore the will of your constituents. It's quite another to be told that you are going to be ignored, too! The only thing "inevitable" at this point is that many undecided officials, who are moved from the "you're so important" column to the new "you don't matter at all" column are going to react accordingly - by deciding that loyalty to the party - in its current visage - isn't so important, after all. Why?

Even with Soros' money, Move On would be spread too thin to ever fulfill this bluff. Let's say they actually drudge up an opposing candidate for each of these primaries. Will these "new" "progressive" candidates all have name recognition? Not likely. Will they have personal ties to the district to rapidly build a sufficient ground force to win? Not much of a chance. And will Move On, ACORN and the SEIU combined have enough funding to build favorable candidate recognition, flashy ads and literature and paid door-to-door staff to man this many Congressional races successfully? Of course not! It's all a bluff and at least some savvy Congressmen will see right through it.

Seems the left is about to learn an obvious political lesson. There's a world of difference between bolstering a major longstanding political party to shift it a bit to the left and, instead, taking over and replacing that party altogether. The harder they push to do so, the more mainstream voters they alienate altogether, the more impossible their task becomes. Now that they've determined to give the ultimate offense to their own party's representatives in D.C. their toxic impact is working its way through the Democratic party's intestines to destroy it from within.

What does all this mean for opponents of Obama? Odd as it seems, at this point it would be hard for us to lose. All we need to do really is stay informed, remain active in our opposition and keep growing our own swelling ranks with Democratic defectors who refuse to swallow their party's bitter pill.

Wake Up America Movement is a grass roots Reform network
New Election 2010 site opening soon.

Monday, March 15, 2010

VA-AG - AKA Obama Birth ""It will get tested . . ."

Virginia Democratic blogger Not Larry Sabato posts the audio of a conversation with Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli -- recorded, the bloggers says, during the transition -- taking Obama conspiracy theories extremely seriously, and talking about legal options.

"It will get tested in my view when someone… when he signs a law, and someone is convicted of violating it and one of their defenses will be it is not a law because someone qualified to be President didn’t sign it," Cuccinelli says on the recording, suggesting its "possible" that he would challenge it.

"Someone is going to have to come forward with nailed down testimony that he was born in place B, wherever that is. You know, the speculation is Kenya. And that doesn’t seem beyond the realm of possibility," he says.

Saturday, March 13, 2010

Friday, March 12, 2010

Urban Myth Exposed: No, liberals aren't smarter than conservatives

No, liberals aren't smarter than conservatives
Exclusive: Phil Elmore rails against the left's 'grand collection of logical fallacies'

By Phil Elmore

Nothing promotes popular culture libel – the propagation of myths, lies and misinformation in society and in popular media – as does technology. Ready access to information is only part of the equation. The remainder is ready access to publication – the ability of individuals, no matter how misinformed, to transmit into the public sphere poorly sourced, poorly analyzed, poorly reasoned pseudoscience that supports their political agenda. When a media outlet of any kind picks up a headline or a sound bite that furthers the left-leaning popular information and entertainment industry's unwritten but nonetheless shared agenda to trash conservatives and libertarians, that bite, clip or statement is repeated ad nauseam in multimedia on the Internet, in print and on television.

This is not news. Since e-mail first became popular, often-forwarded and quite apocryphal "urban legend" messages have been relayed from user to user, furthering falsehoods concerning everything from cookie recipes to Nigerian royalty offering investment opportunities. All too often, these forwarded missives contained lies about Republicans. Remember the list of quotes Vice President Dan Quayle was alleged to have said? Many were manufactured. Then there was the e-mail purporting to reveal scientific evidence that George W. Bush had the lowest IQ of any president in the last 50 years. It turns out that was a lie, too. See this article by Sam Sewell:

But the problem isn't just e-mail. Internet blogging and video sharing allowed the functionally illiterate Rosie O'Donnell to spew hateful rhetoric even after she lost her post on "The View." A bloated, caustic liar churns out "documentaries" full of treasonous hatred and libelous falsehood ... and he wins awards for his documentaries. A former vice president creates a glorified slide presentation built on junk science, and he wins awards, too. A vapid propagandist who rose to fame as a nude model gains notoriety for claiming, falsely, that vaccines made her son autistic and that she cured him with gluten-free diets and other quackery ... and she is rewarded with her own talk show on Oprah's new television network. (That idiot is blogging to "build a following" as you read this.)

Why, even one of my favorite authors, a successful adventure novelist, uses his Twitter account almost exclusively to condemn the legions of slavering torturers he believes are lurking ominously in the wings of our military and intelligence institutions, just waiting for a chance to interrogate a prisoner inhumanely out of sheer meanness. He now writes for the often-wrong Huffington Post, a liberal scandal sheet in which any and all lies about the right are gleefully, breathlessly and uncritically repeated (if not generated). Only the fact that talk radio is dominated by conservatives makes it difficult for me to cite numerous examples in terrestrial radio – that is, now that "Air America" has all but evaporated in a puff of embezzlement-flavored smoke.

Simple lies, distortions and urban legends propagated about conservatives and libertarians all pale in comparison to what is the most coveted of all libelous popular-culture mechanisms. I refer, of course, to the study. A "study," no matter how it is produced and, more importantly, no matter how ineptly it is analyzed, is repeated without question in the popular media if that study furthers a left-wing political perspective. Such studies are presented with pious credulity as liberal holy writ, from which absurd, illogical and irrational pronouncements are foisted on the public.

The most recent and most egregious example comes to us thanks to "evolutionary psychologist" Satoshi Kanazawa, apparently working at the London School of Economics and Political Science. As NewsBusters reported at the end of last month, Kanazawa "correlated" – and that term is important – data on political, religious and sexual behaviors with intelligence. His conclusion? Predictably and giddily, liberals are now repeating the study's wink-wink, nudge-nudge, implied assertion that liberals are smarter than conservatives. In other words, smug left-wingers around the world may now claim that "studies have shown" their ilk to be smarter than Republicans, tea-party attendees, NASCAR fans, libertarians, people who complain that taxes are high and, basically, anyone from a "red" state.

The only problem is that this simply isn't true. The study's conclusion, repeated over and over again without critical analysis, doesn't stand up to even passing logical scrutiny. As NewsBusters' Noel Sheppard commented, the study defines "liberal" only in terms of "concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people." This is far less than an inclusive endorsement of Democrat politics in defining "liberal." It doesn't begin to touch critical litmus test (as Sheppard identifies) like abortion, gun control and gay rights.

Last year, writing in regard to a similar study, "Conservatism and Cognitive Ability," Jason Richwine easily shot down the notion, going on to elaborate on it. In the latter piece, he said, "As long as smarter people are more likely to be skeptical of tradition, then full-blown rejection of tradition will almost inevitably be correlated with higher IQ, even if a majority of smart people still favor traditionalism."

In other words, a similar study conducted among a population whose default, "socially conservative" views were those held by liberals – say, athiesm and sexual promiscuity – would produce the opposite correlation. The fundamental lesson here is that correlation is not casuation. Further, a failure to consider the demographics of the study will inevitably taint the conclusions drawn from the results.

As for Satoshi Kanazawa, this is apparently a common problem for him. An earlier study of his in 2006 prompted "scholars from the U.S. and U.K." to refute the "controversial" work, in which Kanazawa used "questionable and dubious data about national Iqs ... to draw far-reaching conclusions concerning the relationship between intelligence and health." Blogger Matt Katz was less kind, characterizing some of Kanazawa's work as "the stupidest, most sexist" material he had read that year. "His list of articles," Katz rails, "is a grand collection of logical fallacies."
"A grand collection of logical fallacies." I can think of no better words to characterize the body of "liberal" political thought.

Thursday, March 11, 2010

AKA Obama in dire need of an intervention

Obama in dire need of an intervention
By: Noemie Emery
Examiner Columnist
March 10, 2010

Denial is a river that runs through the White House, where the denizens are in the grip of two major delusions: One, that the country really wants really expensive big government, and two, that Obama is "sort of like God."

Since early last spring, they've been waging a fight with the reality principle, convincing themselves (and fewer and fewer in the larger political universe) that in the very next speech, Obama will recapture that old campaign magic. If people don't like what they're doing, the way to regain and to hold their affection was to give them much more of the same.

In the face of plummeting polls, stunning upsets in blue states, and gathering dread among Democrats, they carry on as if the year 2009 never happened, and they were back with their mandate and magical candidate, who was declared a success before he even took office.

Conservatism was dead, the age of big government being over was itself over, and we were all socialists. And if we weren't at the beginning, Obama would talk us around.

A year in, the Obamatrons barely seem to have noticed that they have divided the Democrats, lost independents, and revived the small-government forces as never before. On the heels of the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program bailouts, they began a $787 billion stimulus package, followed by health care, cap and trade, and Government Motors, when the public cared about economic expansion and jobs.

Cap and trade passed the House, but was stopped in the Senate, and the more people heard about health care the less enthused they became. Obama's numbers fell into the mid-40s, the tea parties became more popular than the Democrats and/or the Republicans, and analysts began talking of a "wave" midterm election, like those in 2006 and 1994 before it, when one or more houses of Congress changed hands.

Rep. Marion Berry and other unnerved centrist Democrats went to the White House to beg them not to force them into the "swamp" of having to vote against their constituents. Obama assured them no harm would come to them. After all, as he said, "You've got me."

They did, and they found out in short order what good this would do. Obama campaigned for Creigh Deeds in Virginia, a swing state he had won handily, and draped himself over Jon Corzine in deep blue New Jersey. Corzine lost by 5 points; Deeds by 18. He went to Massachusetts to help Martha Coakley win the seat held by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D. Scott Brown won by 5 points on a pledge to fight health care, taking with him the Democrats' supermajority.

Did this jolt Obamaland out of its reveries? No.

On March 4, Reuters' Chrystia Freeland explained the administration's rationale for its renewed health care offensive: "The reason ... we have the moral authority to do this is Massachusetts was just an act of God," she related. "We had that seat; we got profoundly unlucky. ... This election wasn't scheduled to happen normally, so we shouldn't allow this to knock us off course."

Peggy Noonan says there have recently been "interventions" (the term for when loved ones send you to the Betty Ford Clinic), as in "So-and-so tried an intervention with the president, and it didn't work." David Gergen said Obama reminded him of the old joke about how many psychiatrists were needed in changing a light bulb.

Only one, goes the answer: But the light bulb must want to change first.

Let's hope Obama decides soon his light bulb needs changing -- before the river Denial sweeps him out to the sea.

Examiner Columnist Noemie Emery is contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and author of "Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families."
* NPD or Narcissistic Personality Disorder

World Leaders and personality Disorders

Is the President Diagnosable? DSM-IV-301.81

Link to archived “Sam and Bunny’s Call the Shrink” talk radio program - Personality Disorders and World Leaders

The Narcissist as Liar and Con-man

Obama - Narcissist or Merely Narcissistic?

Do You Recognize Barack Obama in These Texts?

NPD and Paranoia

Approach-Avoidance Repetition Complex and Fear of Intimacy (see re paranoia)

Regarding pathological narcissism:

Download "Narcissistic and Psychopathic Leaders

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

BORN IN THE USA? - Call me a 'birther'

Call me
a 'birther'
Exclusive: Barry Farber says holes in Obama bio
are like Sherlock Holmes' 'dog that did not bark'


No single snowflake ever feels responsible for the avalanche. It's not just the "birth certificate"; President Obama has given us blizzards of reasons to question his autobiographical accuracy.

At my journalism school there were no lessons on how to ignore 800-pound gorillas. How did this current crowd get so good at it? Example: I attended the University of North Carolina with the great movie- and TV star Andy Griffith. When he became a national favorite, those who knew him slightly pretended they knew him well. Those who knew him well pretended they'd roomed with him. That's for a Hollywood star, mind you; not a president. Isn't there one mainstream journalist who finds it odd that, quite literally, nobody recalls going to Columbia University with Barack Obama? – or Barry Soetero?

Jack Cashill's literary sleuthing has convinced millions that Obama never wrote his own books. Interview yourself: Do you believe the president, after 20 years in his pew, was surprised to learn of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's racial views? Or that the president had no clue as to William Ayers' background beyond his being "a guy in the neighborhood"? I forgive myself for being reminded of a guy in my neighborhood whose relationship to the truth suffered perpetual estrangement. He never told the truth. Never! Well, once, I must concede, he did tell the truth, but he thought he was lying! Among my unalienable rights is the right to question everything about the president's past as presented to us.

Now watch the red-hot eligibility story on DVD: "The Question of Eligibility: Is Barack Obama's presidency constitutionally legitimate?"

I remember when American newsmen used to ridicule their French colleagues for their obsequious softball questioning of President Charles de Gaulle at Paris press conferences. Those French reporters were water-boarders compared to the American White House press corps today.

The treatment, by the president's political bodyguards, of those who believe he's not eligible to hold the office is an American disgrace. As King Christian of Denmark spat in Hitler's face by wearing the Star of David (which only Jews were obligated to wear), let me quickly don the label of a "birther," and then I'll move on. Or, let the president "show it" and we can all move on!

Remember the Sherlock Holmes tale of "The Dog That Did Not Bark"? That's a theme that may be worth moving on to.

Among the items in President Obama's biography, I hear a dog not barking. And, to me, the non-barking is quite loud. Obama's handlers have, naturally, enhanced his image by highlighting things that humanize and enlarge the man and impress the masses. The White House PR minions managed to enlist professional basketball stars who straight-facedly praised the president's ability and agility on the court. The famous "beer with the boys" after the Cambridge police incident comes to mind. So do his breakaway visits to the gym, his rapport with ordinary people whose hero-worship of the president could cause radioactive burns, and his tenacity in jack-hammering legislation through, "not because it's politically advantageous, but because it's right!" So what about the non-barking dog?

We're told Obama spent several years in school in Indonesia. The Indonesian language is among the most interesting in the world. When they want to make a noun plural they just say it twice. "Man" in Indonesian is "Orang." "Men" is "orang-orang," and when they write it they just write one "orang" and put a "2" after it, so an Indonesian newspaper looks like an unending algebraic equation. Indonesian is poetic. Their word for "sun" is "mata hari" (same as the seductive World War I female spy, who was considered the "sun" of Asia). Literally, "mata hari" means "the eye of the day." Isn't that nice? Can you imagine Axelrod and the gang not making sure we knew that this president, instead of uttering non-English grotesqueries like "mis-underestimate," actually speaks a major Asian language? Wouldn't you expect at least once to turn on TV and watch the president schmoozing with the Indonesian ambassador in Indonesian? I would; provided, of course, that the president actually speaks Indonesian.

Here's a whole new player with a spotless jersey.

"Mr. Gibbs, does President Obama speak Indonesian?"

I've asked many friends of Obama, including Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois. Nobody so far has a clue. Not producing a legitimate birth certificate is one thing. Refusing to utter a few words in Indonesian is another. By my reckoning, Mr. Obama should speak fluent Indonesian, considering the years he spent in school there.

What magnificent coup would be achieved if we learn of Mr. Obama's ability or inability to speak Indonesian? None. This has none of the potential combustibility of the birth-certificate issue. It's just that I'm the world's foremost authority on what interests me. And I'm excruciatingly curious to know if the president speaks the language of the nation with the largest Muslim population in the world. If he does, why have his image-burnishers failed to harvest some points for that? And if not, what gives?

Dogs that don't bark can, nonetheless, bite.
Barry Farber is a pioneer in talk radio, first beginning his broadcast in 1960. "The Barry Farber Show" is now nationally syndicated on over 100 stations. In 1991, Farber won the title of "Talk Show Host of The Year," and he was recently named among the top 10 radio talk hosts of all time by Talkers Magazine. Farber's columns have appeared in the New York Times, Reader's Digest, the Washington Post and the Saturday Review. Farber is also an accomplished author, whose books include "Making People Talk" and "How to Learn Any Language." He speaks dozens of languages fluently.
Validated Facts on Obama Eligibility Story:
AKA Obama Fans: All together now – say OMG!!
If you read the articles at this link and review the citations at the embedded links, you will be “literate” about the facts of the “eligibility” story and will be able to inform the public objectively and refute the bogus statements of Obot “legitimizers”.

Monday, March 8, 2010

Texas is thriving; California is dying: Liberalism kills conservatism builds.

Texas is thriving; California is dying: Liberalism kills conservatism builds.
March 8, 2010, 7:56 am
By Kevin “Coach” Collins

The contrast between Texas and California is so stark as to question the very possibility of the Golden State ever returning to balanced budget prosperity.

Liberal strongholds in San Francisco and Los Angeles have provided Democrats with the Legislative punch to gain a strangle hold on California’s governmental operations.

The far Left nature of both of these cities has led to the State’s complete capitulation to its public employees unions. The incestuous relationship these unions have with Sacramento Democrats has produced a “taxpayer be damned” attitude that will make curbing the costs of governing California virtually impossible.

Trading taxpayers for tax burners

The Census Bureau estimates that since 2000 more than 1.5 million taxpaying Californians have run away. This loss coupled with the coinciding arrival of a like number of tax money burning immigrants (legal and illegal) means California is headed toward becoming the first failed American state.

Texas: low taxes growing prosperity

Texas on the other hand has low taxes no state income tax and a growing economy to show for it.

Texas calls it’s Legislature together for just one 90 day session every two years. It’s almost nonexistent public employee union members work FOR the State of Texas. The State of Texas does NOT work for them.

Texans get genuine service from their civil servants. While its teachers are paid less than California’s teachers, Texas students score higher on standardized tests.

People across the country are moving into Texas yet its unemployment rate is lower than the national average. California’s unemployment is substantially higher.

Because of its pro-business atmosphere so many people will have moved into Texas that it’s on track to gain four new Congressional Districts all of which will likely be new Republican seats.

Texas is thriving; California is dying: Liberalism kills conservatism builds.

The coming showdown

November’s elections will pit hard core Leftists who want to model America on California against conservatives who want to spread the Texas formula across the country.

The California experiment is over. It was a crashing failure. Letting unions and Marxists run a state, especially the size of California has proved not only disastrous to Californians but a grave danger to the rest of us. When it goes under, California will pull large portions of the national economy with it.

When you vote for your next Congressman remember Liberals did this to us. Their deadly policies have destroyed state and city economies and made failure the only outcome possible for California. Remember who brought us to this point.

Doing nothing is not an option. Stand on your feet and fight or kneel on your knees and serve Obama. It’s your decision.

Be worthy of all the sacrifices made for your freedoms. The time for standing up is coming soon.


CBS Poll - Grading Obama's First Year

CBS isn't an example of a conservative audience. Yet look at these figures

The Economy
A: 2.33%
B: 3.25%
C: 5.18%
D: 19.09%
F: 70.16%

Foreign Policy
A: 3.90%
B: 3.39%
C: 8.22%
D: 23.90%
F: 60.60%

Health Care
A: 2.54%
B: 2.40%
C: 3.42%
D: 9.62%
F: 82.02%

A: 3.83%
B: 14.59%
C: 28.15%
D: 23.29%
F: 30.14%

A: 3.79%
B: 10.03%
C: 27.13%
D: 24.48%
F: 34.57%

Threat of Terrorism
A: 3.69%
B: 3.91%
C: 8.88%
D: 21.72%
F: 61.79%

Energy and the Environment
A: 3.13%
B: 4.26%
C: 12.41%
D: 21.84%
F: 58.37%

Social Issues
A: 3.61%
B: 4.08%
C: 12.79%
D: 21.19%
F: 58.34%

A: 3.62%
B: 2.52%
C: 4.36%
D: 9.86%
F: 79.65%

Obama's Overall Job as President
A: 2.93%
B: 3.24%
C: 4.33%
D: 25.88%
F: 63.61%
Total votes: 569739 -->

NOTE: This is not a scientific poll. The results above are for information purposes only, and should not be confused with the results of the scientific polls conducted by CBS News.

Irrational Obot Rant - See what I put up with in defense of the nation!

Irrational Obot Rant - See what I put up with in defense of the nation!

If Kerry could get a could get out of Viet Nam and get a Purple Heart for a wound that needed a band aid I should at least get an Internet Bronze Star for Valor.

This Obot makes the mistaken point that Jesus would be a liberal if he were alive today. He says the Pharisees were conservative.

I answer:

Error buzzer loudly protesting in your ear!The Sadducee sect were the conservatives. The Pharisees were the Liberals.As for the political point your are trying to make using scripture (shame on you) you are double wrong. Jesus denounced both of the ruling parties of his day just as I do now.I teach Biblical Scholarship for the Theological Center of Naples. The class I teach is described in the link I have provided below so you can brush up on your first century Jewish history.

in reply to AristotleTheHun
Oh, now I understand. Your a good religious man

in reply to mindboggeling
Nope! I'm a sinner just like everyone else."All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23My faith convicts me and extends grace daily.

mindboggeling wrote, in response to AristotleTheHun:

Well Hun, I didn't call you a "good religious man" to necessarily compliment you. You may call yourself an independent, but if you voted for Bush because of what the swift boaters said you probably are more a rightwing nut than independent. You don't seriously believe Bush was the better man? Even retrospectively? If you voted against Kerry because of his stance AFTER serving in Viet Nam and for Bush who spent the war drinking and partying there is more going on here than just being independent. Perhaps your deep religious beliefs that Bush campaign strategists used as a marketing tool to sell Bush to the religious right had something to do with it. A study done by the republicans about the republicans has shown republicans are mostly followers. It is so easy to control groups of people with fear and a common enemy. A lot of the rumors and lies spread about Obama were also spread about Bush. Remember the jails being built all around the country to house citizens who opposes the Bush administration? It looks like they have now turned into Fema camps for the republicans. While I personally would like those jails used as schools to "retrain the republicans" lol, I really don't believe any of these goofball threats. It's fear mongering. No one has to like Obama, but to create these bogus reasons to doubt his Presidency is nothing more than pandering, fear mongering and it allows the racists to try and hide behind, what they believe, are pc reasons. I find it amazing how the rightwingers claim to be so devoutly religious and yet soooo self righteous and judgemental. Before you point out that I maybe judgemental let me point out I don't hide behind the bible. Whats that quote? "Judge not lest ye be judge” or something like that. You religious people would know the quote it a lot better than me.
And as if that was not enough:

mindboggeling wrote, in response to AristotleTheHun:

People like you always fall back on their religion and biblical quotes. I find a lot of religious zealots hide who they really are behind their religion. I'm not against people who need the whole religion-God thing. I object to religions and the religious judging people who are different than them because of color, other religions, sexual orientation or anything that may make them different. There is too much hatred and intolerance in the religious community. It is that intolerance and hatred that seems to fuel the tea partiers and many in the Republican party.

Obama Sedition/Treason Trial in N.Y.-- 14-19 May 2010

People keep saying racism is the primary factor in opposition to AKA Obama. A black Harlem preacher is bringing AKA Obama to trial. Is he a racist?

The most liberal Senator in America gets elected in the most crooked election in the nation’s history and the lamebrains who support him think he is opposed because of his race. These same halfwits think a phony document posted on the Internet proves this same con man is eligible to hold the highest office in the land. He is opposed because he is a crooked big city con man with a socialist agenda. Alan Keyes is strongly opposed to Obama. Is he a racist? Is Michael Steele a racist? Is this guy a racist?

Are these women racists?

Do you really think AKA Obama would have won the election if all the things he is hiding were made known?

Do you really think AKA Obama will be able to finish his first term if all the things he is hiding are made known?

Why aren’t the polls on the birth certificate issue 100% in favor of AKA Obama practicing the virtue of full disclosure? It makes sense that supporters of AKA Obama would want the issue settled along with everyone else. I guess there is a significant portion of the population who are opposed to releasing the birth certificate because they are afraid of what it will reveal. I would conclude that those opposed to releasing all of Obama’s history are frightened of the truth just like AKA Obama.

If you are not suspicious of a man who hides his history I have a bridge in the desert I want to sell you.

If you are unwilling to call for an investigation of a man who attempts to sell you a bridge in the desert I have some beach front property in Florida at the intersection of I75 and Florida # 29 that I want you to buy.

If you place a down payment on a contract for the bridge in the desert and the beach front property in the swamp I would conclude that you voted for Obama.

In 1961, the Public Health Services, U. S Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Division published the "Vital Statistics of the United StatesHere is a blank copy of the Standard Certificate of Live Birth. This is the information being hidden by Obama

Plus read the article that is included with the blank copy.

Somehow, you know its coming. That OMG moment is just around the corner. You can feel the inescapable reality creeping up on you. Something will leak. Someone will spill the beans. “Everything that is secret will be brought out into the open. Everything that is hidden will be uncovered. 3 What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight. What you have whispered to someone behind closed doors will be shouted from the rooftops..” Luke 12:2

Obama “I have nothing to hide but I’m hiding it.”

Obama Sedition/Treason Trial in N.Y.-- 14-19 May 2010
Posted by George Miller, March 3, 2010

Amazing. The Rev. James David Manning, a very outspoken Harlem, NY Conservative Pastor, will do what Congress, Courts, Electoral College, Attorneys-General, Secretaries of State, Prosecutors, State Legislatures (so far), both major political parties and the “Mainstream Media” will NOT do: seriously question Obama’s eligibility to be “President” of the USA.
He is putting Obama on trial, near Obama’s “alma mater,” Columbia U., for sedition and treason. Of course, this proceeding will have no legal weight, but the event’s huge visibility will create the high likeihood of extremely embarrassing and even incriminating information being released worldwide.

Dozens of cases have been filed against Obama and enablers, related to his ineligibility to be President. All but a few have been dismissed on technicalities related to standing and jurisdiction. Some of these dismissals are highly irregular. None have been heard on their merits. Three serious cases that I know of, two of which are appeals, are now active.

We hear that The American Grand Jury, Orly Taitz and others may be involved in this project.
It will be interesting to see what happens between now and the May 14, 2010 trial commencement.

Sunday, March 7, 2010

William J. H. Boetcker's Wisdom - Not Lincoln

1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
3. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
4. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
5. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.
6. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
7. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
8. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
9. You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
10 You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves.

How to handle Census Takers

Admits creating false birth certificate - Let's see where this goes

“My name is Chanise Foxx. I work at a office supply store in Kenwood, IL. After nearly 3 years of silence and death threats to me and my family to stay quiet, I am compelled to come forward and tell the world my secret.“I helped Obama campaign staffer Divorah Adler create a fake birth certificate for use in the famous Fact Check story to prove the world of Obama’s birth in the 2008 election. Divorah approached me in early 2007 and held onto the birth certificate until she released it in August 2008.“As I’ve been making fake IDs part-time for local college students for about eight years now, faking a birth certificate was actually quite easy. Our first step was to get our hands on someone else’s birth certificate from Hawaii. We then created the stationary to match.“Next, we had to create an embossed stamp and rubber signature stamp for Hawaiian officials. With the help of a high-resolution scanner at the store, I did most of my work at night when the place was vacant…"

Don't react yet. This hasn't been vetted and smells suspicious.

Hawaii Conspiracy Allegations

#eligibility Bombshell: Hawaii Conspiracy Allegations on Email Records Request
Submitted by Phil

Major late-breaking news has been posted this evening by Sharon Rondeau at The Post & Email. I have the links to this story and more over at

Basically, officials from the great State of Hawaii “inadvertently” shared some emails with a records requester, and it’s likely to blow back in the officials’ faces.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Best expose yet! This one sticks like glue. Congrats!

The Post & Email has done a really good investigative job on the Hawaiian cover up of AKA Obama's lack of a valid birth certificate


AKA Obama - "How are the mighty fallen" - 2Sam 1:25

AKA Obama's date-rape of America

Barack Obama and the date-rape of America

by David Kupelian

Good Americans from sea to shining sea are grappling right now with how to mentally process what they're witnessing in Washington, D.C.

The spectacle of a far leftist president literally forcing socialized medicine down the throat of an unwilling center-right America is reminiscent, perhaps more than any other contemporary metaphor, of date rape.

A man determined to have his way with a woman may start off seducing her with lies, flattery and the usual pretense of caring about her. But at a critical moment, when she says, "Stop, I'm not comfortable with this and don't want to go any further," he has a choice: Either do the right thing and back off, or abandon all prior pretensions and take her by force.

As president, Barack Obama courted us with sweet talk, but America grew increasingly uncomfortable with his advances and firmly said, "Stop" – in fact, screamed bloody murder for months. Yet Obama remains obsessed with forcing himself on America.

Put aside for the moment the fact that Obama is single-handedly destroying the Democratic Party for years, perhaps decades, by maniacally pursuing ObamaCare as though it were Moby Dick and he Captain Ahab, leading all the Pequod's hapless Democrat crewmen into political destruction.

Rather, let's focus on how to truly understand what we're seeing – something virtually unprecedented in the American experience, at least in our lifetimes.

America is not, after all, a place like Cuba or Zimbabwe where corrupt dictators get their way through sheer ruthlessness, intimidation and naked arrogance. We're accustomed to the rule of law, to civility, to due process, even in the most difficult and contentious of times. After all, when Hillarycare was soundly rejected by Americans during Bill Clinton's first term, he wisely backed off and stopped trying to force socialized medicine on us. (And Bill was a guy with his own date-rape problems, but that's another story.)

Thus, here are a few useful prisms through which we can examine this disturbingly un-American drama riveting our attention day after day:

The Ideological Prism: Obama is America's first truly "radical leftist" president – something worlds apart from merely "liberal."

Quick review: Abandoned by his father, Obama as a teen was mentored by father figure
Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA; at Columbia, he admits (in his book "Dreams From My Father") to having been attracted to the "Marxist professors"; after college he went into "community organizing," the radical political agitation system created by Chicago Marxist Saul Alinsky; he later launched his political career in the living room of another Chicago Marxist (and Weather Underground terrorist) William Ayers; his pastor and spiritual mentor for 20 years Rev. Jeremiah Wright is a Marxist ("Black Liberation Theology" is Marxism disguised as Christianity). As president, Obama appointed as close advisers a self-proclaimed communist named Van Jones, and Anita Dunn who publicly claimed her hero was communist genocidal mass murderer Mao Zedong. All this and much more earn Obama the label "leftist radical" or "socialist" – many say "Marxist."

And according to Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" (which as I point out in my new book "How Evil Works" was dedicated to Lucifer!), all the lies, deceit and corruption in Washington currently marshaled to help pass Obamacare are noble and moral.

The Psychological Prism: There's a lot of talk about Obama's "narcissism" these days, with everyone from radio giant Rush Limbaugh to Pulitzer-winning columnist (and former psychiatrist) Charles Krauthammer referring frequently to the president's extremely narcissistic behavior.

A few weeks ago, I interviewed a top forensic psychiatrist – a medical professional who makes his living evaluating and providing expert testimony regarding the mental condition of people in court cases. He asked me not to disclose his name, but he's well known and has served as an expert witness in thousands of such cases. I asked him, "Does Barack Obama have Narcissistic Personality Disorder*?" Mind you, this was not about whether the president is "narcissistic," which everyone already knows. Rather, Narcissistic Personality Disorder is a serious mental illness or personality disorder with a broad and disturbing symptom picture.

The forensic psychiatrist's response to my question: "Yes, that's a fair assessment, maybe even Malignant Narcissistic Personality Disorder" (which crosses over into criminality). We went through a few of the major symptoms, including:

1) a grandiose view of one's achievements (everything with Obama is "historic"),

2) utter inability to handle criticism (everyone criticizing him or his policies is attacked as a radical or extremist, even Fox News was attacked), and

3) lack of genuine empathy (in his televised speech immediately after the Fort Hood shooting – while the entire nation was reeling in shock – he engaged in small talk and "shout-outs" for two full minutes before mentioning the worst terror attack on our soil since 9/11.)

The Moral-Legal Prism: Obama is a product of Chicago politics, the most corrupt political cesspool in the nation, as a recent study from the University of Illinois at Chicago's political science department once again attests. The blatant healthcare bribes ("Louisiana Purchase," "Cornhusker Kickback," special deals for unions and other powerful interests ad nauseam) are the tip of the iceberg. "Corruption" is synonymous with "business" for the crowd currently in power.

How do corrupt politicians think and feel? Imagine you just met someone who was unusually arrogant, greedy and selfish, who considered himself far superior to everyone else, above the need to be truthful, above the law (and willing to break any law he could get away with), who was contemptuous of others and utterly impervious to criticism or self-reflection – and who also harbored an overwhelming urge not only to take your money, but to control you, to exert power over your life! You might understandably conclude that person is mentally deranged or even a criminal. But there's another group of people that think a lot like that: our current crop of leaders in Washington.

Now, regardless of whatever level of validity you ascribe to any or all of these views (they're not mutually exclusive, far from it), we're still left with a haunting question: How can an apparently decent man like Barack Obama – who undoubtedly loves his daughters and probably reads them bedtime stories, has a good sense of humor, and is highly intelligent and likeable – justify lying and deceiving all the time, pretending to care about Republican input, about transparency, about controlling costs, and so on? Further, how can he justify using such dishonest means to force his will on an unwilling American public? In other words, how can he countenance, in effect, date-raping America?

What we need to understand is that, between his hate-based ideology (Winston Churchill called socialism the "gospel of envy"), extreme narcissism and long-internalized political corruption, Obama and others like him, literally drunk on power, live essentially in a state of delusion: Down is up, truth is cruel and impractical, corruption is just "conducting business," morality is repression, lying is a creative force.

Those on the far left regions where Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid dwell regard free-market capitalism as irredeemably evil, exploitive and unjust – and therefore in need of destruction to make way for the creation of something more noble and just. Likewise, they look at influential conservatives not simply as "old-fashioned," "selfish" or "religious nuts," but as evil. (Remember, Dick Cheney was "Darth Vader" and Karl Rove "the emperor.") If you think I exaggerate the monumental, self-righteous rage with which the left abhors conservatives, watch MSLSD for 15 minutes. I rest my case.

Thus, the left thinks of their constant lying and deceiving the way you and I might regard lying and deceiving were we German undercover operatives in the Nazi army plotting to kill Hitler, as in the true-life Operation Valkyrie. Col. von Stauffenberg and the other courageous patriots in the German army were lying and deceiving all day long. After all, war is deception, and they were operating behind enemy lines, trying to slay a monster and end a terrible war. Their deceptions were indeed noble.

That's how Obama and company think of their daily depredations that endanger the very existence of America as a land of liberty and light among the nations.

Any way you slice it – psychologically, ideologically, politically, morally – we are talking about people in the grip of dark forces and delusion, hell-bent on leading the rest of us downward, which they see as upward. The fact that they may not be fully conscious of the evil they do may make it easier for us not to hate them. But hate is not what we need, anyway. What we need is to vote every single one of Obama's congressional collaborators out of office this November, and to do it so decisively that even "the anointed one's" gigantic fortress-life shell of denial is shattered into a million pieces – as the bells of freedom ring once again throughout America.David Kupelian is an award-winning journalist, managing editor of, editor of Whistleblower magazine and author of the best-selling book, "The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom." His newest book is "How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America."

* NPD or Narcissistic Personality Disorder

World Leaders and personality Disorders

Is the President Diagnosable? DSM-IV-301.81

Link to archived “Sam and Bunny’s Call the Shrink” talk radio program - Personality Disorders and World Leaders

The Narcissist as Liar and Con-man

Barack Obama - Narcissist or Merely Narcissistic?

Do You Recognize Barack Obama in These Texts?

NPD and Paranoia

Approach-Avoidance Repetition Complex and Fear of Intimacy (see re paranoia)

Regarding pathological narcissism:

Download "Narcissistic and Psychopathic Leaders

AKA Obama - Another lie to get elected - even CNN is catching on

"Here's hoping the voters remember some of this crap when the mid-term election came along."

The AKA Obama Eligibility Question Lives On

The Obama Eligibility Question Lives On
March 3rd, 2010
by Paul R. Hollrah, O.E. (Civil Engineer - Oceanic Engineering)

Beyond surviving the current political madness in Washington, the American people have no greater task ahead than to insure themselves that another Barack Hussein Obama can never again hold political power in our country.

When the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia in September 1787 to sign the final draft of the U.S. Constitution, the physical scars of the War of Independence from Great Britain were still visible all around them and a deep-seated animosity toward all things British colored every aspect of their daily lives. So is it even remotely conceivable that just five years and eleven months after the British surrendered at Yorktown, the Founders would have presented to the states for ratification a Constitution that would allow an individual with divided loyalties – e.g., an individual with dual US-British citizenship – to serve as president or vice president of the United States? It is not, and they did not.

In order to forestall that eventuality the Framers included a provision…Article II, Section 4…requiring that candidates for president and vice president be at least thirty five years of age, that they have been a resident of the United States for at least 14 years, and that they be natural born U.S. citizens, owing allegiance to no foreign power because of the circumstances of birth.

Expressing the prevailing concerns of the time, Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers,

“These most deadly adversaries of republican government (cabal, intrigue, etc.) might actually have expected to make their approach from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?”

In recent columns we have discussed the controlling legal authority, under U.S., British, and Kenyan law, necessary to determine Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

If we can agree that Obama’s father, a citizen of Kenya, then a British colony, was a British subject at the time of his birth, a fact that Obama himself has attested to on numerous occasions, it is evident that, under Part 2, Section 5[1] of the British Nationality Act of 1948, Obama was born with automatic British citizenship “by decent” from his father. Thus, it is an inescapable fact that Obama held dual US-British citizenship from the date of his birth, August 4, 1961, until December 12, 1963, the day that Kenya won its independence from Great Britain.

However, Article VI, Section 87[3](2) of the Kenyan Constitution states that “Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (Obama Jr.), or a British protected person, shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.”

Therefore, setting aside the possibility that Obama may have acquired Indonesian citizenship when his mother married Indonesian Lolo Soetoro and moved to Jakarta in 1967, it is clear that Obama held dual US-Kenyan citizenship from December 12, 1963, the date of Kenyan independence, until at least his 21st birthday on August 4, 1982, when he claims to have been a student at Columbia University in New York.

In either event, Barack Obama is clearly not a “natural born” U.S. citizens and is, therefore, ineligible to serve in the office he occupies. So how did we manage to get ourselves into this mess? Three successive systemic failures combined to provide us with a usurper president.

The first failure occurred in Denver, Colorado during the last week of August 2008 when Democrats met to nominate candidates for president and vice president. The delegates to that convention had an obligation to put before the American people fully qualified candidates for our nation’s two highest offices. They did not live up to that responsibility. Instead, they certified to the states a candidate for president who was, and is, ineligible to serve in that office.

The second failure occurred on December 15, 2008 when the Electoral College met to elect a president and vice president. In Federalist Paper No. 68, Alexander Hamilton referred to the “investigation” necessary to the selection of a president and vice president. In describing the duties of the Electoral College, he said, “A small number of persons, selected by their fellow citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to so complicated an investigation.”

Although the Democratic members of the 2008 Electoral College were forewarned that Obama may not possess the necessary qualifications, they were apparently so anxious to regain control of the White House that they simply ignored their constitutional obligation to select a candidate who was fully qualified to serve.

The third and final failure occurred on January 8, 2009 when the Congress met in joint session to certify the vote of the Electoral College. As the final and failsafe step in the electoral process, the Congress had the duty to insure themselves of the qualifications of Barack Obama and Joe Biden…which they failed to do.

So where does this leave us? Obama Kool-Ade drinkers, and Democrats in general, are blithely dismissive. Their view is that the people have spoken; they went to the polls and voted, so that’s it…leave it alone. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution be damned. But that cannot be the case.

In a December 8, 2008 discussion of the congressional certification process, Dr. Edwin Viera, Jr., Ph.D., J.D., a leading authority on the Constitution, argues that, “…the question of Obama’s eligibility vel non is not within the discretion of Congress to skirt or decide as its Members may deem politically or personally expedient.

“Even by unanimous vote, Congress cannot constitutionally dispense with the requirement that Obama must be ‘a natural born Citizen,’ by simply assuming that he is such, or by accepting something other than what lawyers call ‘the best evidence.’ ” (e.g. Obama’s published certificate of live birth, versus a certified Hawaiian birth certificate)

Dr. Viera argues that, if no objection is made on the basis that Obama is not a natural born citizen (in which case an Elector cannot constitutionally vote for him)…the matter cannot be said to have been settled to a “constitutional sufficiency (emphasis added),” because Congress has no power to simply waive the Constitution’s eligibility requirement…

This leaves us with the question, if the Congress acts irresponsibly, indifferently, or not at all, is the issue foreclosed forever? Not at all. Instead, Dr. Viera suggests that the time will come when the Justice Department will attempt to enforce, through criminal prosecutions, some of the controversial legislation that the new Congress will enact and Obama will sign into law. Then, “as a matter of undeniable constitutional right and practical necessity,” a class of litigants with absolute standing will come into existence.

With Obama occupying the Oval Office, that day has already arrived. We need only to await the courageous individual(s) who will stand on principle, demanding that the laws they are required to obey were signed into law by a president eligible to do so…that they are, in fact, the law of the land.

Above all, the American people must understand what it means to simply ignore Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution (Natural Born) …for no better reason than that it would be incredibly messy to remove Obama at this late date. For one to take that position, one must then also be willing to cavalierly set aside other provisions of the Constitution, such as the 1st Amendment rights to religious freedom, free speech, a free press, and the freedom of assembly; the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms; the 4th Amendment protections against illegal search and seizure; the 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination; and the 7th Amendment right to trial by jury.

Are we to question citizenship rights for African Americans under the 14th Amendment, black voting rights under the 15th Amendment, women’s voting rights under the 19th Amendment, or the eighteen-year-old vote under the 26th Amendment? And how about presidential election voting rights for District of Columbia residents, guaranteed under the 23rd Amendment?

It is safe to assume that, among these latter groups…blacks, women, 18-20 year-olds, and DC residents…there are a substantial number of Obama voters. Are they truly serious about simply ignoring Article II, Section 4, while demanding that we hold fast to everything else in the Constitution? Would they have their cake and eat it too?

The United States Constitution means exactly what it says…nothing more, nothing less…and if we expect to reap the benefits of its many rights and freedoms we cannot allow the document to be selectively enforced. Stay tuned, America.


Friday, March 5, 2010

VIDEO - There's a Communist Living in the White House!

Where do atheists come from?

HERE's a fact to flatter the unbelievers among you: the bright young things at the University of Oxford are among the most godless groups ever studied in the UK. Of 728 students surveyed in 2007, 48.9 per cent claimed not to believe in any god, with 49.6 per cent claiming no religious affiliation. And while a very small number of Britons typically label themselves as "atheist" or "agnostic" (most surveys put it at about 5 per cent), an astonishing 57.3 per cent of the Oxford sample did.

This may come as no surprise. After all, atheism is the natural stance of the educated and the informed, is it not? It is only to be expected that Oxford students should be wise to what their own professor Richard Dawkins calls "self-indulgent, thought-denying skyhookery" - and others call "faith". The old Enlightenment caricature, it seems, is true after all: where Reason reigns, God retires.

Of course, things are never quite that simple. Within the sample, for instance, the postgraduates (that is, the even-better educated) were notably more religious than the undergraduates, in terms of both belief in God and self-description. Although the greater number of non-Europeans in the postgraduate population is almost certainly a significant factor here, evidence from elsewhere backs the idea that there is no straightforward relationship between atheism and education.

Let's look at some results from the World Values Survey, an international attempt to assess the global state of socio-cultural, moral, religious and political values. The 2005 results show that while there is a clear positive correlation between education and lack of belief in God, the effect is slightly weaker, not stronger, among those with a university education (14.8 per cent were non-believers) compared with those whose highest attainment was secondary level (17.2 per cent).

What is more, the survey shows a far stronger correlation between education and certain "irrational" beliefs: for example, only 29.6 per cent of those without even an elementary education believe in telepathy, compared with 51.8 per cent of people with degree-level education.

Closer to home, an analysis of the 2008 British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey by David Voas of the University of Manchester reveals that the historical correlation between being educated and being "non-religious" has not only weakened but reversed. Looking at white British people, for example, the findings show that only around 25 per cent of men aged between 25 and 34 claiming "no religion" have degrees, compared with around 40 per cent of those describing themselves as religious. For women in the same age group, the difference is less marked but the trend is the same. The picture is more complicated across different ethnic groups, although the overall trend remains the same.

It appears that Enlightenment assumptions about the decline of religion as the population becomes more educated will no longer do - at least, not without considerable qualification. Why is it that, despite the long history of the study of religion, the picture seems to be getting more and not less confused about what it means to believe in God? We, and the scholars who gathered in December last year for a conference at Wolfson College, University of Oxford, think we may have the answer. The problems stem from a long-term, collective blind spot in research: atheism itself.

This oversight might seem remarkable (or remarkably obtuse on the part of the social scientists) but it is one with deep historical roots. Many of social science's 19th-century founders, including Sigmund Freud, Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, Auguste Comte and Max Weber, were unbelievers, or "religiously unmusical", as Weber memorably put it. For them, religion was the great explicandum: how, they wondered, could so many people believe in something so absurd? What they failed to recognise was that their own, taken-for-granted, "lack" of belief might itself be amenable to inquiry.

Ironically, sociologists, psychologists, economists and, particularly, cognitive anthropologists have become so skilled at explaining why humans seem to have such a widespread bias towards theistic beliefs that a new question readily presents itself: if religion comes so naturally to us, why are so many people, especially in western Europe, apparently resistant to it? In the UK, for example, a sizeable 43 per cent said they had "no religion" in the 2008 BSA survey.

If religion comes naturally to us, why are so many people resistant to it?
Moreover, social scientists themselves consistently rank as the most atheistic of all academics: see a recent study by Neil Gross at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, and Solon Simmons of the Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University, Arlington, Virginia (Sociology of Religion, in press).

What we need now is a scientific study not of the theistic, but the atheistic mind. We need to discover why some people do not "get" the supernatural agency many cognitive scientists argue comes automatically to our brains. Is this capacity non-existent in the non-religious, or is it rerouted, undermined or overwritten - and under what conditions?

Read full article

I was the 2574696th person to watch-

Be sure and watch...there's a counter at the site, look at how many have watched!

Prepare to get goose bumps...

Be sure to keep an eye out around the 2 min 30 sec mark for the Marine in Dress Blues as he stoops down and extends his hand to greet the little girl! This needs to be forwarded to all on your lists.

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Undue Influence - The Arab lobby

Undue Influence
by Nancy Matthis and Max Rugemer at American Daughter

The Arab lobby has taken over from the long time powerhouse Brit lobby for giving us BAD advice. The Saudi-led Arab lobby has been funding our universities, shmoozing the Washington elite, and suckering the gullible New York Times with money they reap from our dependence on their oil. And they have achieved surprising success, considering that 15 of the 19 terrorists who attacked the Twin Towers were Saudis.

Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard and Georgetown Universities "to promote interfaith understanding." For Georgetown, the gift was the second-largest ever received. Cornell University, Stanford University, and Texas A&M University are partnering with a Saudi university, lured by one of the world's largest supercomputers (guess where the money for that came from).

Charming (as a snake is charming) Saudi ambassador to the US Adel al Jubeir (appointed 2007) has been shaping the American dialog since 9-11. As the Saudi foreign policy advisor he was Time's Person of the Week in December 2002 after visiting Charlie Rose, PBS Neshour, ABC Nightline, and Fox News in one day, was again a guest on Charlie Rose in 2003, charmed CNN's Wolf Blitzer in 2004 and captivated Blitzer again in 2005, was awarded an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree from the University of North Texas in 2006, hosted a glittering reception at the Saudi's American embassy in 2007, mesmerized Christian and Jewish leaders with an interfaith conference in 2008, and continues to entrain decision-makers in Washington, DC.

King Abdullah pulled out all the stops for Hillary Clinton's February visit:
RAWDAT KHURAYIM, Saudi Arabia — The king of Saudi Arabia had Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton over for a friendly lunch Monday here at his desert camp, northeast of Riyadh. In a gesture of informality, King Abdullah reached for his remote control and switched on a giant flat-screen TV as soon as they sat down to eat at the vast horseshoe-shaped table.

With sports scores and highlights from a soccer match blaring from the screen, the king and Mrs. Clinton chatted over a buffet of lamb, rice, hummus and other dishes. At times, they lapsed into silence and stared at the TV, which, as if on cue, covered Mrs. Clinton’s visit to Saudi Arabia....
He sent his ultraluxurious tour bus to pick up Mrs. Clinton at the airport for the hourlong drive to his camp. The foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, regaled her with jokes and stories about camels on the way....

And so it goes. Not everyone is taken in. The New York Post carries this article today -- The Arab lobby, Racking up the victories:
The legend of the Jewish lobby's influence over US policies continues to grow -- even as the Arab lobby, led by the Saudis, keeps racking up successes.

With petrodollars and tender loving care spent lavishly on universities, ex-diplomats, PR firms and gullible journalists, the Arab Lobby constantly pushes two contradictory story lines:
* Arabs seek peace with Israel.
* There's no place for a Jewish state in the Middle East.

This week, Saudi-led Arab countries have convinced Western reporters that they're advancing the peace process with Israel. Meanwhile, universities in America, Canada, Europe and the Arab world are marking "Israeli Apartheid Week" -- a vile campaign meant to return the "Zionism is racism" equation to the top of the world's agenda....

And then there's our good old Rudy Giuliani, who rejected a $10 million Saudi donation because it came with a revisionist storyline attached:

Mayor Rudy Giuliani said Thursday the city would not accept a $10 million donation for disaster relief from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal after the prince suggested U.S. policies in the Middle East contributed to the September 11 attacks.

"I entirely reject that statement," Giuliani said. "There is no moral equivalent for this [terrorist] act. There is no justification for it. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification for it when they slaughtered 4,000 or 5,000 innocent people."

As citizens, we need to be extremely alert to both the overt and the subtle influences that shape our thinking and form the world-views of our children in the nation's schools. In this, the mainstream media and our school systems have largely failed us. Until we can reform these moribund institutions, we must keep informed ourselves and make an intense effort to educate our own children against undue influence.


Poll summary below

Based on a recent update to, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Indiana have joined Arizona in producing eligibility bills regarding the presidency (and, in some, the vice presidency). In fact, Indiana’s SB82 is all about “standing,” the ability for a certain class of citizens to rightfully petition the Judiciary with respect to a candidate.

Sample of various polls

AOL poll: 81% want Obama to release it
Say president should show American people birth certificate

Less Than Half Of Republicans Believe Obama Was Born In U.S.

Despite near media blackout on coverage, 49.3% 'troubled,' think he should release birth certificate

67% polled support Palin's remarks about Obama birth

Do You Believe the Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Worth Pursuing? YES - 42.52%

Thirty- four percent of Tennesseans say it is either probably or definitely true that Obama was born in another country

If you think that only far right-wing nut cases believe these wild conspiracy theories, think again. Recent polls reveal some surprising results:

A September Public Policy poll indicated that only 59% of voters believe that President Obama was born in the United States, with 23% saying he was not, and 18% undecided. Among Republicans only, 64 percent were either not sure or disbelieved the president was born in this country.

An earlier poll in August on showed similar findings. In fact, when you took out minorities from that poll, 83 percent of southern whites said they doubted or were unsure about whether Obama was born in the U.S.

In mid-September, a Daily Kos poll in Arkansas asked the state’s residents if they believed Barack Obama was born in the U.S. Thirty-seven percent said “no” or were “unsure.”

Barely half of North Carolina voters believe that President Barack Obama was born in the U.S., according to an August poll by Public Policy Polling. Twenty-six percent of those surveyed said they don’t believe Obama was born in the U.S. and 20 percent said they were not sure.

Also in August, at least 10 Republicans Congressmen, led by Rep. John Campbell of California and Rep. Bob Goodlaite of Virginia, sponsored a bill that would require possible candidates for president to release their birth certificates before running, but most didn’t want to talk about the current president’s birthplace when approached (see a funny video posted on

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Obama Imposes HealthCare Edict On America

Obama Imposes HealthCare Edict On America

ALERT: The Democrat controlled government of the United States has failed to lead on healthcare. Today Obama will order Pelosi and Reid to impose Obama's will on all Americans by forcing ObamaCare through Congress using gorilla legislative tactics. Obama is not leading, Obama has become a Progressive Dictator ruling from the extreme liberal left with his own agenda.

TELL ALL 261 Democrat/Independent Representatives, Blue Dog Democrats AND President Obama To KILL THIS BILL and CUT HealthCare COSTS FIRST.

We must make every effort to fax, call and even personally visit every key congressman in their offices in Washington DC. Send faxes, call and or write.

There is no way to stop ObamaCare in the Senate since Obama has ordered Reid to use reconciliation, FORCING THE BILL TO PASS WITH 51 VOTES. But we can beat it in the House! Dozens of Congressmen who voted for the bill last time are re-thinking their support as tax increases and special deals to buy off Senators are included. And, since the bill passed by only 220-215, Pelosi has no Democratic margin for error.

This is the biggest gamble of Obama's presidency. Nancy Pelosi may not have the votes to pass the healthcare bill through the House. So, Obama is telling the Blue Dogs that he is prepared to sacrifice them in order to get ObamaCare. Will they cave in and throw away their chances in November, or will they finally live up to their "conservative" label?

America Cannot Afford To Wait Until November


We must make every effort to fax, call and even personally visit every key congressman in their offices in Washington DC.
We need your continued help more than ever as Socialized Health Care MUST STILL Be Stopped.

TELL KEY CONGRESSMEN LISTED BELOW TO VOTE NO: Fax, Call and Even Personally Visit Each in their Offices in Washington DC:

Harry Mitchell (202) 225-2190 (480) 946-2411 AZ 5th District
Gabrielle Giffords (202) 225-2542 (520) 881-3588 AZ 8th District
Ann Kirkpatrick (202) 225-2315 (928) 226-6914 AZ 1st District
Jerry McNerney (202) 225-1947 925-833-0643 CA 11th District
John Salazar 202-225-4761 970-245-7107 CO 3rd District
Jim Himes (202) 225-5541 (866) 453-0028 CT 4th District
Alan Grayson (202) 225-2176 (407) 841-1757 FL 8th District
Bill Foster (202) 225-2976 630-406-1114 IL 14th District
Baron Hill 202 225 5315 812 288 3999 IN 9th District
Mark Schauer (202) 225-6276 (517) 780-9075 MI 7th District
Gary Peters (202) 225-5802 (248) 273-4227 MI 9th District
Dina Titus (202) 225-3252 702-256-DINA (3462) NV 3rd District
Carol Shea-Porter (202) 225-5456 (603) 743-4813 NH 1st District
Tim Bishop (202) 225-3826 (631) 696-6500 NY 1st District
John Hall (202) 225-5441 (845) 225-3641 x49371 NY 19th District
Bill Owens (202) 225-4611 (315) 782-3150 NY 23rd District
Mike Arcuri (202)225-3665 (315)793-8146 NY 24th District
Dan Maffei (202) 225-3701 (315) 423-5657 NY 25th District
Earl Pomeroy (202) 225-2611 (701) 224-0355 ND At-Large District
Steven Driehaus (202) 225-2216 (513) 684-2723 OH 1st District
Mary Jo Kilroy (202) 225-2015 (614) 294-2196 OH 15th District
Zach Space (202) 225-6265 (330) 364-4300 OH 18th District
Kathy Dahlkemper (202) 225-5406 (814) 456-2038 PA 3rd District
Patrick Murphy (202) 225-4276 (215) 826-1963 PA 8th District
Christopher Carney (202) 225-3731 (570) 585-9988 PA 10th District
Paul Kanjorski (202) 225-6511 (570) 825-2200 PA 11th District
John Spratt (202) 225-5501 (803)327-1114 SC 5th District
Tom Perriello (202) 225-4711 (276) 656-2291 VA 5th District
Alan Mollohan (202) 225-4172 (304) 623-4422 WVA 1st District
Nick Rahall (202) 225-3452 (304) 252-5000 WVA 3rd District
Steve Kagen (202) 225-5665 (920) 437-1954 WI 8th District

Keep calling your Senators and Representatives today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call toll 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOUR OUTRAGE at Arrogant ObamaCare TAX Increase!

CALL PRESIDENT OBAMA 202-456-1111 and 202-456-1414 expressing your outrage at incompetence in crippling and obstructing the "bipartisan healthcare reform summit".


NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS delivered to ALL Congressmen right away!

This is a fight for the very heart of America. We can WIN this fight! With Senate Republicans now forcing Democrats to "ping-pong" the Obamacare bill back and forth between the two Houses, we can capitalize on the divisions within the Democrat Party itself! If we can STOP Reid and Pelosi from getting enough votes in either House -- that means THE BILL WOULD DIE!

This fight CAN BE WON! Please, take action right away to STOP this bill in the U.S. Congress!

Obama's NEW Government Takeover Scheme Creates Socialized Health Care

OMG AKA Obama Fans - Now Watcha Gonna Do?

The way I look at this is "It only takes one!"

60+ Lawmakers 7 States Tell Obama; if you want on 2012 ballot, RELEASE THE RECORDS!

3 more states, South Carolina, New Hampshire and Indiana have joined Arizona in proposing bills requiring proof of Article II Eligibility for POTUS. Does this mean this is no longer a crazy, fringe conspiracy theory movement?
Snippets from Washington Independent;
'Birther' Conspiracy Roils GOP Campaigns - State Legislators, Party Strategists Keep Anti-Obama Rumors Alive -

South Carolina-Bill 3389, freshman state Rep. Tommy Stringer has introduced legislation that would amend the state’s election code to make sure that “a candidate for President or Vice President of the United States may not have his name printed on a ballot in this State unless there is conclusive evidence that he is a natural born citizen of the United States.”...

New Hampshire’s House bill 1245, mandates that “the names of the candidates shall not appear on the ballot unless the secretary of state has received certified copies of the birth certificates of the candidates.”

Indiana’s Senate bill 82, grapples with the legal standing issue that has vexed “birthers,” granting the right to challenge qualifications to “a registered voter of the jurisdiction conducting the election.”... ...more from the Obot's

HERE.Arizona House bill 2441, titled: presidential candidates; proof of qualifications...Within ten days after submittal of the names of the candidates, the national political party committee shall submit an affidavit of the presidential candidate in which the presidential candidate states the candidate's citizenship and age and shall append to the affidavit documents that prove that the candidate is a natural born citizen, prove the candidate's age and prove that the candidate meets the residency requirements for President of the United States as prescribed in article II, section 1, Constitution of the United States... ...

view entire Arizona bill HERE.

Other states are also joining the war to defend our constitution. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures; New York, Virginia, Georgia and other states are also working on the same type legislation. ...more HERE.

Also, let us not forget the federal bill proposed by Bill Posey of Florida; H.R.1503 - Presidential Eligibility Act -To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution......

Congress finds that under - the Constitution of the United States, in order to be eligible to serve as President, an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States who has attained the age of 35 years and has been a resident within the United States for at least 14 years. ...
view entire bill HERE.

We should contact our elected officials in our respective states and push for the same type of action. Contact info for all Elected Officials, HERE;

More States Take On Eligibility Legislation
Could Idaho Be Next?
WND: States Rise Up on Constitutional QuestionTRSoL: AZ State Rep. on Committee-Approved Eligibility Bill: "Issue needs to be addressed"
Indiana SB82 Would Allow Voter Challenges to Candidates
New Hampshire HB1245 Would Require Certified Copies of Birth Certificates
South Carolina HB3389 Would Require Candidates to be Natural Born Citizens

Table of Bills Pending in State Legislatures Regarding Eligibility for the Presidency