Via GateWayPundit, this is just damned cool:

On Sunday the left went bonkers after they discovered that the TelePrompter-less former Governor Sarah Palin wrote notes on the palm of her left hand for her speech to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville. The far left absolutely freaked over this non-issue rather than focus on her brilliant speech knocking the Obama Administration’s horrid record on economics and national defense.

Today Sarah fired back…

In case you can't tell, she wrote "Hi Mom" on her hand...

The gal's got chutzpah... and you know the haters are gonna be hatin' her all the more...

Heh...

Crossposted(*)

The man is a hall of fame ditherer:

The Obama administration has come under strong criticism from Republican lawmakers and some residents and business owners in lower Manhattan for a decision by the Justice Department to try confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspects in civilian court.

Asked on Sunday in an interview with CBS News whether the administration still planned to hold the trial in New York City, Obama said, "I have not ruled it out."

"But I think it's important for us to take into account the practical, logistical issues involved," he added.
 
Mayor Michael Bloomberg originally said he supported the plan, but when costs for security reached an estimated $1billion, he said holding the trials elsewhere -- like a military base -- would make more sense.  Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said he was never briefed by the Justice Department about its plans to stage the trials in lower Manhattan.

"If you've got a city that is saying 'no' and a police department that's saying 'no' and a mayor that's saying 'no,' that makes it difficult," President Obama said.

Oh... poor, poor Mr. President... governing is so hard... sigh... so hard...

And we have idiots saying that Palin is the incompetent one?

Good grief.

Crossposted(*).

Brought to us by Philmon:

National Socialism was considered “right-wing” because (again, by its close relative just to its left) of it’s emphasis on strong, strict, social controls.

But are you really going to try to convince me that the Soviets and the Maoists didn’t use strict social control?

I think the globalists kid themselves about how different they really are, and how egalitarian they really are.  The Ruling Class always develops, and it always has special privileges.

I also think the reasons they object to the term "socialist" are 1) bad connotation due to abuses of socialist governments in the 20th century (in other words, it's bad marketing) and 2) they really think that they can do this gradually, without a bloody revolution, and everybody will just be happy once we all see how wonderful it is.  So in other words, no boody revolution, no "Socialism".

But they fail to see ... the reason that we are anti-socialist has little to do with the bloody revolution aspect.  It has to do with the fact that, as a political philosophy for running a state and its economic system, it doesn't work.  And it doesn't "not work" because of the bloodiness of the revolution or the iron-fistedness of the State --- it doesn't work because it rewards sloth and punishes productivity and innovativeness. (And the iron-fistedness of the state becomes necessary because it doesn't work!)

It is inherent in human nature to want to better one's lot in life.  Generally speaking, when bettering one's lot in life while following rules that keep you from confiscating from others -- you better others' lives as well.  You produce.  "Money", in reality, is a representation of production. (A portable proxy, if you will.)  The more you produce as a nation, the wealthier your nation is ... the better you do.  The less incentive to produce, the less will be produced.  The poorer your country will be.

So what you end up with is lower production, and confiscation from the productive to redistribute to the non-productive.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Sounds great, on the surface, but it ain't human (or animal) nature.  On top of that, who decides what your abilities are, and who decides what someone's needs are?   And if I "need" more because I'm not performing up to my ability ... how does that get resolved?

By force.

That's right.  The state must either force me to work, or force someone else to support me.  If neither really works, then everybody gets poorer.   This will not stop the state from continuing to use force, though, and it will use more and more of it as time goes on in more and more desperate attempts to keep control.  This happens eventually every time.  It is inevitible, because of the nature of what we are, and that is homo sapiens.  It gets bloody one way or the other, because at some point someone's going to rebel against being used.

He's got more.  It's all enlightening.

Crossposted(*).

There's growing scientific consensus that the IPCC is on its deathbed:

It’s not just the threat of Himalayan glaciers disappearing by 2035.

Now another headline grabbing IPCC scare story is melting away.  A report in Sunday’s London Times highlights new humiliations for the IPCC.

The most important is a claim that global warming could cut rain-fed north African crop production by up to 50% by 2020, a remarkably short time for such a dramatic change. The claim has been quoted in speeches by Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman, and by Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general.

There is however one teensy-weensy little problem.  As Professor Chris Field, the lead author of the IPCC’s climate impact team has now told reporters that he can find “no evidence” to support the claim in the IPCC’s 2007 report.

There’s more.  When the glacier story broke, IPCC apologists returned over and over again to a saving grace.  The bogus glacier report appeared in the body of the IPCC document, but not in the much more carefully vetted Synthesis Report, in which the IPCC’s senior leadership made its specific recommendations to world leaders.  So it didn’t matter that much, the apologists told us, and we can still trust the rigorously checked and reviewed Synthesis Report.

But that’s where the African rain crisis prediction is found — in the supposedly sacrosanct Synthesis Report.

So: the Synthesis Report contains a major scare prediction — 50% shortfall in North African food production just ten years from now — and there is no serious, peer-reviewed evidence that the prediction is true.

But there’s more. Much, much more. 

Pull the plug on the IPCC and pull the plug now.  They need to seriously give up the Nobel Peace Prize, give back the money and her members go back to doing whatever it is they were doing before.

Now.

Crossposted(*).

First there are those like Mark Liebovich at The New York Times:

Ms. Palin is becoming increasingly vocal and visible, with a series of events scheduled this weekend: delivering a paid speech to the Salina, Kan., Chamber of Commerce on Friday night, headlining a national Tea Party convention in Nashville on Saturday and appearing on behalf of the re-election campaign of Gov. Rick Perry of Texas in Houston on Sunday.

This latest foray “Outside” (Alaskan slang for the rest of the country) culminates a week in which she achieved a typical run of multimedia ubiquity from Wasilla: She e-mailed a high-profile endorsement of Dr. Rand Paul in a Republican Senate primary in Kentucky. She called — via Facebook — for the resignation of the White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, for using the term “retarded,” and announced — via a column in USA Today — that she would attend a Tea Party gathering next month in Searchlight, Nev., the hometown of the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid.

Her growing cast of advisers and support system could be working in the service of any number of goals: a presidential run, a de facto role as the leader of the Tea Party movement, a lucrative career as a roving media entity — or all of the above. Ms. Palin represents a new breed of unelected public figures operating in an environment in which politics, news media and celebrity are fused as never before. Whether she ever runs for anything else, Ms. Palin has already achieved a status that has become an end in itself: access to an electronic bully pulpit, a staff to guide her, an enormous income and none of the bother or accountability of having to govern or campaign for office.

...

Ms. Palin has also enlisted a small team of policy counselors to guide her through the substantive areas in which many deemed her to be lacking in 2008. Randy Scheunemann, a foreign policy adviser to Mr. McCain who also clashed with the campaign leadership, got $30,000 from Ms. Palin’s PAC in the second half of 2009. He helped write a speech for Ms. Palin in Hong Kong last September and also contributes to a daily briefing prepared by Kim Daniels, a Maryland lawyer who did legal work in Alaska for the McCain campaign. (She is now advising Ms. Palin on domestic policy issues and received $21,000 from SarahPAC in the second half of 2009.)

People with knowledge of the daily briefings say they are conducted by phone or e-mail. They typically include information on the day’s news, material that could be relevant to an upcoming speech, or guidance about a candidate Ms. Palin might endorse. Mr. Scheunemann in particular is known as a conservative hawk on foreign affairs, in keeping with what many Palin-watchers have viewed as her steady shift to the right.

In other words, Liebovich is seeing the machinations of political maturity, a woman of substance who's not just learning the ropes but fashioning them into a noose to perhaps hang those that underestimate her... like Robert at Work in Progress who reacts to Palin's speech before the Tea party conventioneers with this:

The first question that comes to mind is how many empties of moonshine does one have to return to accumulate $1,100?

I wasn't even aware they had recycling projects in the banjo-pickin', cousin-marryin', less learnin'-more earnin' areas of the country from which Mrs. Palin supporters hail.
 
While I suppose we should all take comfort the $1,100 spent on the conference admission will reduce attendees' ammo budget for the next few months, liberals are not the only ones who should be terrified by the idea of President Palin. All bipeds without feathers should be terrified of the notion of that arrogant know-nothing with access to the nuclear codes.

Nothing would ensure the reelection of President Obama than running against Mrs. Palin as the GOP candidate which is why it will never happen. But we can dream...

Let's ignore the fact that Robert can't seem to correctly reference the story he cites as to the convention's admission price (it was $349 and not $1,100).  Let's instead hope that he and other liberals continue to make light not only of Palin's abilities but of those who find her striking a chord.

It will make this November (and November in 2012) that much sweeter.

By the way, I left the following at Robert's place but expect it to disappear within minutes... perhaps some of you can stop by and gently chide the man for his lapses:

Say Robert...

Re-read the story you've cited and get your numbers straight... 1,100 paid $349 to get into the convention... twice you mention an $1,100 admission price... I'm thinking you need a teleprompter...

Just sayin'...

Crossposted(*).

Posted by guest blogger Fr. D.

Sexagesima

1 Corinthians 11:19–31
St. Luke 8:4–15

+ In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

For today, Sexagesima Sunday, the second Sunday of the Pre-Lenten season, the theme of virtues for the Christian life continues. Last Sunday we considered Temperance, Hope and Justice. This Sunday, we move on to consider Fortitude, Prudence, and Faith.

A virtue is a good habit. A virtue is an established, settled practice of the soul to act in a particular way that is proper and correct. It is not a single correct choice. Those virtues that correctly direct our choices are called moral virtues, and they guide us to right actions.

There are four principal moral virtues, also known as cardinal virtues: Prudence, Courage, Temperance, and Justice. These were all known in the ancient, pre–Christian  world, and many noble ancients were guided by these virtues. They are made characteristics of the soul by hard discipline and practice. In most cases, it is fairly easy to identify those persons who exemplify these virtues and others who do not. They speak for themselves.

Baptism into the Body of Christ infuses other virtues, virtues that can come in no other way. The infused virtues are gifts of the Holy Ghost, and are nourished in the souls of Christ’s members. The major infused virtues are the three theological virtues, Faith, Hope, and Love, which enable us to do what we could never do by our own efforts, namely to love God and to put our trust and hope in Him. These infused virtues – Faith, Hope, and Love – create in us the tendency to seek God who is our true end, in contrast to our natural tendency to seek the ways of the world. The infused virtues, which are solely the gifts of the Spirit, draw us towards God and to our eternal salvation.

Through the theological virtues, infused by the Spirit, Christians are given an aptitude for holiness of life. This potential for holiness must be expressed and worked out in our everyday lives, and that is where the cardinal virtues of prudence, courage, temperance, and justice become manifest as well.

Consider our Epistle lesson for today. I must confess, I have always found this to be a confusing passage. St. Paul seems to be going off in many different directions at once. The first part of the passage is in regard to a problem with false teachers that have come among the Corinthians. St. Paul is chiding them for failing to have the wisdom to reject these false teachers, but rather they have accepted them because the Corinthians thought themselves wise. They allowed these false teachers to impose burdens upon them, things not of the Gospel, and allowed the teachers to set themselves up as superior to the people. Let us consider just this much in regard to the matter of prudence.

What is Prudence? Were the Corinthians prudent people? What is prudence? Prudence is the right choice of means for living a good life. It is right judgement, followed by right action. Prudence is not theoretical, it is not about generalities, but rather it is about guidance for living in the situations of life right here and now. It always consists of two parts: (1) correct judgement, (2) followed by prudent action. This implies a sense of good will, a desire to do what is right. If you think about it, it becomes clear that the moral virtues are interrelated such that a man cannot act prudently unless he is also courageous, temperate, and just. His will must be strengthened against fear, lust, and self–interest, which is to say that he must have the other moral virtues as well. It is by prudence that he determines in each particular case what is courageous, temperate, and just. Without prudence, the brave man becomes foolhardy, the temperate man becomes puritanical, and the just man becomes scrupulous, all examples of virtues carried to extremes, and hence no longer virtues at all.

There are three basic parts to prudent action. The first is to take counsel, to seek advice. The second is to weigh the alternatives, consider the options. And the third is make a decision and take the action. Notice that it is not impulsive, but rather it is a considered action. It is based on as much knowledge as may be available, and it is done with confidence and decisiveness.

Now return to the beginning of our Epistle lesson for today. The Corinthian Christians have received into their congregation false teachers, teachers who have introduced various strange practices and who lord it over the people. Have they acted prudently? Did they seek counsel? We do not know to whom they might have turned, or exactly what they did in fact do. Did they weigh the options, which in this case would be to accept these teachers, or to cast them out? We might well imagine that there was some discussion of the matter, but evidently in the end, the decision seems to have been to accept the false teachers because we know that they were in Corinth. And there we have the third step, the decision as well, the decision to admit the false teachers.

Now the Corinthians may have thought that they were making a prudent judgement, but clearly they were not because it led them to admit false teachers into their Church. What went wrong here? Remember that a virtue is a settled, well established personal characteristic. Most of the Corinthian Christians had not been long in the faith, and they may not have developed the virtue of Prudence to a significant degree. To this we might add that they rather clearly were not following the Holy Spirit in their actions.

When we look further into the Epistle lesson for this morning, we hear St. Paul talking about all of his hardships endured for the sake of the Gospel. He speaks of being whipped, in prison, being beaten with rods, being stoned, being shipwrecked, in hunger, athirst, and so on. St. Paul has suffered much for the spread of the Gospel and the establishment of the Church. What is the natural human response to such suffering? Fear! We fear for ourselves when we see such dangers coming upon us.

The control of fear in the face of great danger is the virtue of Fortitude. Fortitude restrains fear to reasonable limits, while recognizing that it is necessary to avoid foolhardiness and recklessness. Fortitude is particularly bravery in a good cause, because it is the task of fortitude to hold man on the path of virtue and prevent him from being dissuaded by fear. Fortitude is not stoicism or indifference.

When we read St. Paul’s recounting of his list of sufferings for the advancement of the Church, we are reading a clear account of fortitude in action. Notice that his sufferings are definitely for a good cause, they are not reckless or foolhardy, but the dangers were in each case very real. Fortitude is what kept St. Paul going as he worked to spread the Gospel which we know resulted in most of the Christian Church as we know it today.

Our Gospel lesson for the day deals with the third virtue for our consideration today, Faith. Faith is a word used to describe both the content of what we believe, and also the act of believing it. The virtue of faith is the habit of belief; the object of that virtue is what we believe. Faith is habitual belief in God. This implies a wholehearted willingness to believe anything that God has said, for no other reason than that God has said it.

In the Gospel lesson, Jesus describes the Word of God as sown seed. The act of sowing the seed, planting the Word of God, is the act of planting the faith. But Jesus goes on to describe what happens to that faith in a field which is the world. Some of it is immediately destroyed by the birds of the air, referring to the circumstances of life. It is never amounts to anything at all more than the seed that went out. Other seed falls upon the rock, a place where it may quickly sprout and begin, but there is no soil in which it may take root. This is the shallow person who is open to each new experience, always looking for new excitement. But that faith plant quickly withers and dies as the person moves on in search of some other new experience. Some seed falls among the thorns where it is choked. This is the Word of God that comes to those where it takes root and grows, but is never allowed to become truly central to their lives. Eventually, this faith plant also is choked by the affairs of the world and it dies. Finally there is the seed that falls in good soil and prospers, yielding a hundredfold. This is where the Word of God is truly received into the heart of a person, and becomes central in their life. That person’s faith, growing in the world, produces an abundant yield for the Kingdom of God.

Two things are necessary for faith: (1) an external inducement, and (2) an internal inducement. The first by itself is never sufficient. For two men, observing a miracle, or hearing a great sermon, one will believe while the other does not. The miracle or the sermon is the external inducement. The necessary internal inducement is an act of God Who moves the will to assent. God moves the will to assent, He makes it possible, but He does not compel it. By the grace of God, all men can believe, but none are forced to believe. Why do some not believe? It is called free will.

+ In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

For the uninitiated, Mr. McLaren is a Religious Leftist leading the effort in righting the alleged wrongs committed by Israel against Palestinians.  He and his like-minded cohorts are of the mind that Israel, and Israel's supporters, are propagating a big lie as to the danger posed by the Palestinian people. 

Listen carefully.

I applaud a heartfelt and sincere desire by anyone to seek peace and justice.  There's a part of me that sees that attempt as honorable and necessary... but reason, prudence and knowledge, especially of history and of ideology, must form the basis for that attempt, not naivete based on wishful thinking.

Yesterday, I covered the BBC story detailing the experiences of a 13 year old girl named Meena whose father and brother were members of the Taliban. 

Today I bring you the story of Medine:

A 16-year-old girl was buried alive by relatives in southeast Turkey in a gruesome honour killing just because she reportedly befriended boys, the Anatolia news agency reported Thursday.

Acting on a tip-off, police discovered Medine Memi's body in a sitting position with her hands tied, in a two-metre-deep hole in a chicken pen outside her house in Kahta town, Adiyaman province, 40 days after she went missing, the agency said.

A subsequent post mortem revealed that she had a significant amount of soil in her lungs and stomach, meaning that she was buried alive, foresic experts told the agency.

"The autopsy result is blood-curdling. According to our findings, the girl -- who had no bruises on her body and no sign of narcotics or poison in her blood -- was alive and fully conscious when she was buried," one anonymous expert said.

Medine's father and grandfather have been formally arrested and jailed pending trial over her killing, the agency said.

The father is reported to have said in his testimony that the family was unhappy she had male friends.

In honour killings, most prevalent in Turkey's mainly Kurdish southeast, a so-called family council names a member to murder a female relative considered to have sullied the family honour, usually by engaging in an extra-marital affair.

I find myself seriously struggling with a mindset that finds Israel to be such a danger when she is surrounded by those who embrace an ideology subjecting young girls like Meena and Medine to what they've been subjected to on a daily basis.  And I think we all know that there are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of Meenas and Medines out there in the Islamic world.

If you were able to ask Mr. McLaren and those who think as he does one question, what would that question be?

Please leave that question in the comments.  I may actually have an opportunity to pose it to him later this week.

Stay tuned.

Crossposted(*).

Where indeed:

“We can fly Orion in 2013”, says John Karas, the VP and General Manager of Human Space Flight for Lockheed Martin. Lockheed is the prime contractor for NASA’s Orion capsule.

“There is no doubt in my mind we can do this. And Orion is very safe”. He strenuously repeated this statement to me several times with absolutely no doubt in his mind during a wide ranging interview. I spoke at length with Karas today (Feb. 6) at the NASA Press Center shortly before the scheduled Feb. 7 launch of shuttle Endeavour on the STS 130 mission to the ISS.
Lockheed Martin has issued an official statement saying, “We are keenly disappointed in the Administration's budget proposal for NASA that would cancel Project Orion as part of an elimination of NASA's Constellation Program. Orion's maturity is evident in its readiness for a first test flight in a matter of weeks. In fact, Orion can be ready for crewed flights to low Earth orbit and other exploration missions as early as 2013, thus narrowing the gap in U.S. human space flight capability when the shuttle is retired later this year”.

Karas decried the complete lack of vision and realism by the Obama Administration and NASA in deciding to terminate Project Constellation, which includes the new Orion Capsule, the Ares 1 booster rocket for Orion and the Ares 5 Heavy Lift booster required to reach the Moon, Mars and beyond. “I was very surprised by the cancellation. We expected and felt that a middle ground with some changes to Constellation was reasonable. We did not expect to be left with nothing”.

“Where is the US Leadership in space if we don’t have a heavy lifter soon ?

“Russia, China and India will all have Heavy Lift boosters better than the US. Why would anyone have an incentive to work with us if they have already developed their own Heavy Lifter. The nations of the world will look elsewhere, not to the US”, Karas told me emphatically.

“We will not maintain Space leadership if the US will only be spending money on technology development under the new proposals by the Obama Administration, and not on an actual rocket program that builds, tests and launches flight hardware.”

“For now, I told the team that Job 1 is to stay calm and keep focused. We are not terminated yet. We are continuing the Constellation program according to our contracts with NASA. By law, the Congress must still have its say. The program cannot be terminated without congressional approval. We have some hope there and are working with Senators and members of the House of Representatives.”

Crossposted(*).

Via Left Coast Rebel, something that brings it all back:

The video was shot by an optometrist named Jack Moss from the back garden of his home in Winter Haven Florida. It is moving, stirring and fascinating to witness the event from his (BETA) video camera and to note that Jack Moss and his wife and neighbor weren't quite sure what had transpired before their eyes. As you can tell from the video, they were excited, then perplexed, then shocked and horrified. I'm sure that we can all relate.

We can indeed.

Via BlackFive comes this report from the BBC that will surely turn your stomach:

In Pakistan an account of life with the Taliban has emerged from a 13-year-old girl called Meena, who says her own family tried to turn her into a suicide bomber.

There is no independent confirmation of her account but police say they believe she is telling the truth, and her information could be valuable.

Meena told her story to our Pakistan correspondent Orla Guerin.

...

My brother used to tell me that the place for a woman is either at home or in the grave. I was always restricted to home.

He said: "If you leave the house I'll cut off your head and put it on your chest."

My brother had been to the local school and beaten the girls and the teachers.

He said anyone who wanted to study was a friend of America.

I wanted to be a doctor. I wanted it so much that once I dreamt I was sitting in a hospital, working as a doctor. I wanted to help the poor, those who cannot afford medical fees.

Taliban commanders used to come to our house. There was an underground bunker beside the house, with electricity.

It was concrete and very strong. Cars would drive on top but no-one would realise what was underneath. In that hideout they used to train suicide bombers.

Most were children of my age or younger than me. They were used for these activities because they were too young to know any better.

Going to 'paradise'

I used to see these children getting on a vehicle to go for their missions. They used loud Islamic CDs to motivate them.

And I would think, "My God, more Muslims are going to be buried". Then the news would come that more Muslims were wiped out.

There's more, including a video.

How anyone can think we can coexist with this sort of wickedness is beyond me.

Crossposted(*).

A man whose greatness as President becomes more evident each day that Barack Obama spends in the Oval Office:

Even Reagan’s bitterest critics, by contrast, would agree that the Gipper was superb at bringing the country together in times of national grief and on occasions of solemn remembrance. His address on the night of the Challenger explosion in 1986 was a defining moment for a generation; so, too, was his speech at the Normandy cliffs on the 40th anniversary of D-Day. Gesturing to elderly Army veterans, the President declared, “These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent”--as an enthralled world watched in misty-eyed admiration.

But Reagan was vastly more than a scene-setter and speechmaker. He was a great president, one of America’s greatest. During his eight years in office, inflation and interest rates fell from their double-digit levels, even as the nation’s economic output grew by a third. He appointed center-right judges who helped restore order and sanity to our legal system, initiating a process that reduced crime and ended egregious legal insults to common sense.

He rebuilt our military, a group that had been demoralized after Vietnam. In the late 70s, the United States had ships that couldn’t sail, planes that couldn’t fly and soldiers and sailors who were on food stamps. In the 80s, Reagan changed all that. He built the mightiest military in the world with improved manpower and the best equipment in the world that faced down the Soviets from a position of superior strength. The Reagan defense buildup has been the backbone of today's military, which has defended America and its allies for the last quarter-century.

Overseas, Reagan’s achievements were even more remarkable. Working through agents and allies, the president beat the Soviets in Afghanistan, without the loss of a single American G.I. His leadership set the stage for the fall of the Berlin Wall, thus imploding the Soviet Union and ending the Cold War.

Did he make mistakes? Sure. But when he did, he took responsibility and fixed the problem, without wallowing in self-pity. And all the while, he demonstrated a personal probity that never left anyone wondering if the man in the Oval Office was keeping faith with the people who had put their faith in him.

James Pinkerton, the author of the piece, goes on to write of what Reagan would do if he were in office today.

A must read.

Crossposted(*).

President Obama, in his State of the Union address:

That’s what I came to Washington to do.  That’s why -– for the first time in history –- my administration posts on our White House visitors online.  That’s why we’ve excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions.

But we can’t stop there.  It’s time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress.  It’s time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office.

President Obama's actions:

Last month, Congress scoured the spending bill—all 1,000 pages of it—trying to find the most wasteful, pork-filled programs to cut.

They finally found one they could agree on: the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which provides vouchers that get poor children out of bad and dangerous public schools into good private ones.

Cutting this program is a disgraceful example of how our leaders often pander to special interest groups than protect our most needy citizens.

And it’s not that the voucher program didn’t work. A federal study showed that the mostly black and Hispanic participants were making great academic gains, narrowing the achievement gap. And more than 70 percent of Washingtonians supported the program.

So why did Congress cut it out? The National Education Association wanted them to do so.

So our lawmakers—many of whom have their own kids in private schools—had a tough choice to make: Should they pander to the special interests that fund their campaigns, or help disadvantaged kids?

President Obama—who was the recipient of educational scholarships, and whose daughters attend an elite private school—signed the bill abolishing the program. His own secretary of education, Arnie Duncan, publically acknowledged that the voucher program had been a big success.

There are no bigger lobbyists in DC than the NEA... no bigger... and there's no bigger hypocrite that the one occupying the oval office... no bigger...

Your hope and change.

C'mon 2012... get here...

Crossposted(*).

Thanks to those who'll give again:

You can help by going here. Pray about it.

From Nancy Pelosi back in 2003:

August 1, 2003

Washington, D.C. -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on the Bureau of Labor Statistics' announcement that 470,000 people abandoned their job searches in July and that 3.2 million private sector jobs have been lost since President Bush took office:

“The fact is that President Bush’s misguided economic policies have failed to create jobs. Since President Bush took office, the country has lost 3.2 million jobs, the worst record since President Hoover. And today we learned that in July nearly half a million people gave up looking for a job.

“Job losses are taking a real toll on the financial security of American families. While Democrats are fighting for opportunity, jobs, and economic security for working families, Republicans continue to focus on helping those who need help the least.

“According to today’s survey, while the national unemployment rate dropped slightly, it still stands at a near record high. In addition, the unemployment rate for African Americans was still over 11 percent in July, and the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 8.2 percent in July.

“It is time for President Bush and the Republicans to get to work for all Americans, not just the elite few.”

Some reporter with a set of gonads, real or artificial, ought to wave this in the woman's face and demand a response.

Ain't gonna happen.

Guest posted by tim AKA The Godless Heathen (and Colts fan).

While football may not be the usual subject mater around I thought a little football talk is warranted considering the Big Game is upon us this Sunday between the Indianapolis Colts and the New Orleans Saints.

The game is shaping up to be an exciting, entertaining and potentially high scoring affair. (Though I’m more of a old school, defensive minded fan, even I have to admit watching Peyton Manning light up the league for the last twelve seasons has been fun). Both offenses are dangerous and can score points seemingly at will, while Indy’s defense is better, at least statistically, especially during these playoffs. Not to overlook NO’s ability to create turnovers which can change the game in their favor.

Having said that, big games such as this one sometimes play out much different than what everyone expects. But, the odds that this particular game ending up a low scoring, slugfest is unlikely.

Now, a couple things about all the over hyped, sideshow, soap opera story lines I refer to as peripheral BS; Dwight Freeney will not be effective and probably won’t even play that much (I love the guy, I think he’s one of the best DE’s in the game but with that badly sprained ankle he is not going to be much of a factor). No, I don’t believe New Orleans, or any team for that matter, “deserves” to win because a hurricane devastated that city 4-½ years ago. If that was true, the Jets or Giants would “deserve” to win the game every year since 9/11/01. Stop with that silly rationalizing already.

OK, a couple story lines that actually are pretty cool; Peyton Manning, who grew up in New Orleans, is also trying to be beat the team his father played for. On the other side, Drew Bress, played college ball for Purdue in Indiana. Also,  Colts wide receiver Pierre Garcon’s parents immigrated from Haiti.

Now, full disclosure, I’m a life long Colts fan going back to the late 60’s, so obviously I’ll be rooting for the guys with the horseshoes on their helmets. As such, I’m truly enjoying everyone and their brother  hurting themselves jumping on the Saints bandwagon along with every other talking head, expert on TV is picking the Saints to win. There are two things the Colts do that I love, they keep their mouths shut and they win…all the time…making the folks who keep underestimating them look extremely foolish.

GO COLTS!!!

OK, now back to your regularly scheduled program.

Resident go to Religious Leftist Mike Todd is doing his level best to reveal 'The Big Lie':

As I have said before, we in the west have been force-fed a narrative that tells us that Palestinians--all Palestinians--are dangerous, if not terrorists. And this is, if I can be blunt, a lie.

Those of you who have been on trips to the Holy Land have experienced this, whether you're aware of it or not. Remember the warnings? Having spent three days at a Franciscan guesthouse right on Nativity Square in Bethlehem, I've seen this narrative play out with my own eyes. The tour bus pulls up, and the pilgrims on board fairly run into the church. Ten minutes later they are back out, and heading quickly for the bus, some looking suspiciously over their shoulders at the local Palestinians who, I'm convinced, come to watch the show. Don't stray from the group, and for God's sake don't talk to anyone. The bus moves on quickly to the next holy sight, or, at the end of the day, for the relative safety of West Jerusalem, with the pilgrims uttering a silent prayer of thanks for making it safely back to civilization.

Obviously I’m exaggerating, but I don’t think I’m exaggerating much.

I want to suggest to you that this scenario is intentional. It’s planned. It’s carefully designed to keep people from actually meeting a Palestinian. After all, an encounter might lead to a conversation. A conversation might lead to some level of understanding, and understanding has an annoying habit of revealing truth. And truth, even just a little, would reveal this narrative for the lie that it is, and shatter it completely.

Mike fails to go into who is responsible for the false narrative (though the implication is clear... it's the Jooos... and the Jooo supporters... for those of you who haven't a clue) but I want to take the opportunity to ask... where's the evidence for the claim?  Got links?  Is there substantiation?

Yes, there are some who would make the claim that ALL Palestinians should be mistrusted, avoided, seen to be evil... but thinking people don't make those kinds of generalizations... or do they?

Mike considers himself a thinking person... and in large part I'd agree though I question the thinking... but is Mike engaged in a big lie himself, a lie meant and intended to promote a leftist perspective and agenda, one that desires to see Israel faulted for all that is wrong in the Middle East?  Is Mike making a generalization himself when he damns the Jooos (indirectly)?  Has Mike walked the streets of any Israeli city and met her people and drawn any conclusions?

I would suggest that there is more evidence to support that it is Mike engaged in "The Big Lie" than there is to support the lie he's claiming to be so big.

In the mean-time, there's this relevant news coming out of that region:

No one would suggest that ALL Palestinians are responsible for this... but I can't help but wonder, when Mike propogates the idea that a big lie is being promoted, whether he would ever consider meeting and greeting with the loved ones of those maimed and killed by Palestinian terrorists... and choosing as a result to draw any conclusions?

Mike?

Crossposted(*).

Pulls out of the IPCC:

The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it “cannot rely” on the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group headed by its own leading scientist Dr R.K Pachauri.

The move is a significant snub to both the IPCC and Dr Pachauri as he battles to defend his reputation following the revelation that his most recent climate change report included false claims that most of the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035. Scientists believe it could take more than 300 years for the glaciers to disappear.

The body and its chairman have faced growing criticism ever since as questions have been raised on the credibility of their work and the rigour with which climate change claims are assessed.

Kudos and cheers to India for the move.

Obama, what's yours?

Crossposted(*).

... and therefore one might argue he should've been aborted...

You can't make this kind of stupidity up:

Crossposted(*).

Posted by guest blogger Locutisprime (and edited slightly by Mr. BH).