It seems that Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s right-hand man, had a problem with his choice of adjectives.

He called his fellow democrats, “F*cking Retards.”

The word “f*cking” didn’t seem to bother anyone, although I DO remember that it created quite a bit of controversy when Dick Cheney uttered it under his breath a few years back.

Things have “changed” in the current White House so I guess the “f- word” is now acceptable….along with a few other things -like Mao ornaments on the White House Christmas tree.

It was the word “retarded” that caused some problems.

I’m not sure what it is with Obama’s administration and their dislike of the mentally challenged. Maybe these White House employees, those who have always surrounded themselves with the “intellectuals” at Columbia and Harvard, can’t understand those with inferior brains.

If they were honest, they would admit to thinking that all of us who attend state schools, are stay at home moms, work in a gas station, or drive a truck are “retards.”

Last Summer, Obama went on the Tonight Show and told Jay Leno that he had bowled so poorly, he looked like someone from the Special Olympics.

Huh.

Funny, but this was shortly after winning an election against a pretty formidable opponent in Sarah Palin, who coincidentally has a Down Syndrome baby.

Actually, not that funny.

Oh, Obama immediately called up the Shriver/Kennedy clan and gave his excuses and apologies. I guess the Shrivers are the “keepers of forgiveness” on all matters involving the disabled.

If you apologize to them AND if they grant you forgiveness, then you’re one of the lucky ones.

Obama got the “All Clear” signal from the Shriver group.

Whew….although, come to think of it, he never had that party he promised to the Special Olympics kids….I suppose that will happen soon….

Rahm wasn’t quite as lucky. While he DID meet with the Shrivers, looking for the forgiveness wand to grant him absolution, word has it from the Special Olympic crowd that they weren’t quite as forgiving as they had been of Barack. That didn’t stop Rahm from publicly claiming that he had been forgiven by the group.

You mean Rahm lied?

Obama and Rahm aren’t the only liberals to make a few gaffes this year. Harry Reid was quoted as saying that Barack Obama was a “light-skinned black” and that he “only talks with a negro accent when he wants to.”

Negro? Light skinned? I thought that liberals LOVED all minorities, regardless of skin tone and dialect…..

Barack quickly forgave the Senate majority leader because Harry “always votes the right way.”

Joe Biden must “vote the right way”, too, because he got a pass for calling Barack a “mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”

Oh, but there’s more.

Joy Behar, host of “The View” was in a discussion about a football player who is alive today because his mother didn’t listen to some advice to abort her baby when she was pregnant with him. Tim Tebow, the famous football player, was trying to show women that the children they abort may someday grow up and do great things.

Joy, of course had a different take on things: “He could have just as easily become a rapist pedophile….”

Leave it to a woman named “Joy” to look at the glass and find it half-empty….

We’ve also seen Rosie O’Donnell, the previous, bullish host of The View, argue on air that President Bush purposefully brought down the Twin Towers. This was shortly after she blasted gun owners, including Tom Selleck, for exercising their second amendment rights. During the April 19, 1999, broadcast of her talk show, Rosie stated, “You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun, I think you should go to prison.”

We then discovered that Rosie’s bodyguard carried a gun. Rosie claimed that their were “threats” on her families’ lives and they needed protection.

Last I looked, she wasn’t in jail. Neither was her bodyguard.

The list goes on and on. Whether Jesse Jackson says that he’d like “to cut off” Barack’s “nuts”, or Michelle Obama talks about our “downright, mean country”, liberals are allowed a very long rope, indeed.

Dan Quayle, on the other hand, wasn’t allowed to spell the word “Potato” wrong.

George Bush was forever criticized for things like bumping his head on the door of Airforce One or dropping his dog on the ground. Sarah Palin has taken extreme heat for the antics of her daughter’s boyfriend. Yet, Barack Obama can tell us that there are 57 states and we are supposed to cast it off as “fatigue.”

Yes, folks, there are a different set of rules for liberals. The media, including TV shows like Saturday Night Live, set the rules. They decide who to criticize, and who to give a “pass” to.

Conservatives, in general, get very few passes.

It seems, we “don’t vote the right way.”

And never will.

lsm
_________________________________

Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

It seems that Americans are an angry bunch these days.

Robert Gibbs, our White House press secretary, claimed in an interview on Fox News Sunday that the voters of Massachusetts elected Scott Brown not because they wanted to send a strong message to Washington but because of “anger and dissatisfaction at the fact that Washington far too many times puts the special interests ahead of their interests.”

He went on to say that this is the same anger that got Obama elected.

When Chris Wallace, interviewing Gibbs, noted that Brown “explicitly campaigned against the Obama agenda“. Gibbs countered, “Well, that may be what he campaigned on, but that’s not why the voters of Massachusetts sent him to Washington.”

What?

I’m totally confused.

According to Gibbs, I guess Brown campaigned with an anti-Obama message but the voters elected him because they loved Obama.

Howard Dean, the former DNC chairman was singing the same tune. He recently stated that many of the voters in Massachusetts who voted for Brown were simply angry that there wasn’t a public option in the Health Care Bill. They were still big Obama supporters, but wanted to “send him a message” that he needs to push his leftist agenda even further to the Left.

Dean wants everyone to push further Left.

President Obama tells us that the reason we voted for Scott Brown was “the same reason we voted” for him. We were angry. Oh, we aren’t angry at him- he made that perfectly clear- we’re angry at George Bush. “People are angry and they are frustrated “not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

So we voted for Scott Brown, a republican, because we’re mad at George Bush, a republican?

The good news is that they’ve all gotten their stories straight…..

Obviously, the “anger” talking-points memo has been released. “Anger” is their new code word they are using to explain the loss in Massachusetts, the loss in presidential approval ratings, and the loss in support for this Congress.

Interestingly enough, the democrats claim that this “anger” is not aimed at them or their policies. Oh no, it’s aimed at George Bush. It’s aimed at Dick Cheney. It’s aimed at FOX News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sarah Palin.

We’ve had enough of those guys.

No one is angry with Obama, and if they are, he’ll schmooze them a little….

He so much as said so when talking with George Stephanopolous after the Brown victory in MA. He explained to George that he was so busy with his policies this year that he really didn’t have enough opportunities to talk to the people to tell them how to feel, act, and think. He promised Americans that he would tell us how to think more in the coming year by speaking “directly” to us.

I guess 411 speeches and statements in 365 days wasn’t enough brainwashing for the average American.

It was more than enough for me.

You see, the liberals have been TELLING us what we think with all of their daily “talking points” for years- this was a favorite tactic of the Clinton machine. What they don’t realize is that many Americans no longer believe them and their lies.  Most of us don’t want our president “telling us ” stuff.

We like to be listened to.

Unfortunately, that’s not in the President’s agenda.

That’s why we supported Scott Brown. He seems to listen.

He made it clear that the seat he was seeking belonged to “the people”, not to the government, not to a party- to the people.

Hey, isn’t that what the constitution says….government by the people?

This administration would rather not acknowledge that nasty constitution…It’s so, so, so….Confining.

That’s one of the main reasons we seem angry, Barack. We don’t want more speeches or more government; we want more freedom. We want the transparency you promised us. We want you to look us in the eye, not look down on us like school children.

You condescend those who “cling” to their guns and religion. You make fun of guys who drive a truck. You rush to judgment about policemen who are doing their jobs.

Of course we’re angry. Those people are the ones who are signing your paycheck, even if they aren’t radical “intellectuals” like the rest of your friends.

We’re done being angry at Bush- Oh, you can tell us that this is his fault, but we’re not stupid. We know that YOU were in that democratic congress in 2006 that enforced many of Bush’s policies. We know that YOU voted for every spending bill, every spending increase to places like Fannie and Freddie.

You’ve been a part of the problem for years.  And now you try to wash your hands of every vote you made while you were in the Senate.

Here’s a newsflash to our President: Scott Brown was elected, not because he wasn’t like George Bush, but because he wasn’t like YOU. The New Jersey governor was elected because people were angry about YOU. Same with Virginia.

We’re angry, all right- angry about your deficit, your spending, your health care, your manufactured global warming, your increase in government, your Czars, your dismissal of the constitution, and your attempt to take our freedom away.

We’re an angry bunch.

And we plan on being angry at least until November of 2012.

lsm
____________________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

By Mark Steyn

The world turns. In Indonesia, the principal of a Muslim boarding school in Tangerang who is accused of impregnating a 15-year-old student says the DNA test will prove that a malevolent genie is the real father.

In New Zealand, a German tourist, Hans Kurt Kubus, has been jailed for attempting to board a plane at Christchurch with 44 live lizards in his underpants.

In Britain, a research team at King’s College, London, has declared that the female “G-spot” doesn’t exist.

In France, a group of top gynecologists dismissed the findings, asking, “What do you expect if you ask Englishmen to find a woman’s erogenous zone?”

But in America, Barack Obama is talking.

Talking, talking, talking. He talked for 90 minutes on the State of the Union. No matter how many geckos you shoveled down your briefs, you still lost feeling in your legs. And still he talked. If you had an erogenous zone before, by the end, it was undetectable even to Frenchmen. But on he talked. As respected poverty advocate and former Sen. John Edwards commented, “After the first hour, even my malevolent genie was back in the bottle.”

Like any gifted orator, the president knows how to vary the talk with a little light and shade. Sometimes he hectors, sometimes he whines, sometimes he demands. “We do not quit,” he said. Boy, you can say that again!

So he did: “We don’t quit. I don’t quit,” he said. But throughout the chamber, Democrats were quitting. “I quit,” says Rep. Marion Berry of Arkansas, declining to run in November. “I quit,” says Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, doing likewise. “I quit,” says Beau Biden of Delaware, son of Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., choosing not to run for his father’s seat.

But not Barack Obama. On he went. As National Review Editor Rich Lowry put it after the Massachusetts vote, the public thinks Mr. Obama doesn’t get it, and Mr. Obama thinks the public doesn’t get it. As he has the microphone, he’s gonna keep talking at you until you do get it. The ever tinnier, more perfunctory sophomoric uplift at the start and finish can’t conceal the hope-killing, jobs-slaying, soul-sapping message in between, which has been consistent for two years. As President Obama sees it, whatever the problem, the solution is more Washington.

Simply as a matter of internal logic, this is somewhat perplexing. After all, when he isn’t blaming George W. Bush, Mr. Obama blames “Washington” – a Washington mired in “partisanship” and “pettiness” and “the same tired battles” and “Washington gimmicks” that do nothing but ensure that our “problems have grown worse.” Washington, Mr. Obama tells us, is “unable or unwilling to solve any of our problems.”

So let’s have more Washington! That raises the question: Does even Mr. Obama listen to his speeches?

The public does – at least to this extent: They understand that when he’s attacking the tired old Washington games, he’s just playing the game, but when he’s proposing the tired old Washington solutions, he means it. That’s the only Barack Obama on offer. And everything the president proposes means more debt, which at the level this guy is spending means higher taxes.

Functioning societies depend on agreed rules. If you want to open a business, you do it in Singapore or Ireland because the rules are known to all parties. You don’t go to Sudan or Zimbabwe, where the rules are whatever the state’s whims happen to be that morning.

That’s why Mr. Obama is such a job-killer. Why would a small business take on a new employee? The president is proposing a soak-the-banks tax that could impact access to credit. The House has passed a cap-and-trade bill that could impose potentially unlimited regulatory costs. The Senate is in favor of health care reform that would allow the IRS to seize your assets if you and your employees’ health arrangements do not meet the approval of the federal government. Some of these things will pass into law; some of them won’t. But all of them send a consistent, cumulative message: There are no rules.

In such an environment, would you hire anyone? Mr. Obama can bury it in half a ton of leaden telepromptered sludge, but the message is clear: more Washington, more regulation, more spending and no rules.

Mr. Obama and the Democrats have decided, in the current cliche, to “double down.” What’s the endgame here? Mr. Obama gave it away in his student loan “reform” proposals: If you choose to go into “public service,” any college loan debts will be forgiven because public service is more noble than the selfish, money-grubbing private sector. C’mon, everybody knows that. So we need to encourage more people to go into public service?

Why? In the past 60 years, the size of America’s government work force has increased five times faster than the population. Yet the president says it’s still not enough: We have to divert more of our human capital into the government machine. He’s explicitly telling you: If you start a business, invent something, provide a service, you’re a schmuck. In the America he’s building, you’ll be working 24/7 till you drop dead to fund an ever-swelling bureaucracy. Mr. Obama’s proposals are bold only insofar as few men would offer such a transparent guarantee of disaster: It’s the audacity of hopelessness.

Imagine, just imagine inviting a few very important guests over for dinner. Imagine seating those guests at the head of the table, showing them respect and acknowledging their importance. Imagine standing up during dinner to make a toast or a speech and verbally condescending these guests- while the other party invitees stand and clap in agreement.

That’s what happened to our Supreme Court justices during the President’s State of the Union address.

It was embarrassing.

These nine justices are not required to attend the State of the Union, but made an appearance this year. They were seated directly in front of the Messiah and well within earshot of the biting words and cold eyes of the president as he ripped them for their decision to overturn the McCain-Feingold bill.

Judge Alito reacted while being chastised in front of the crowd, shaking his head “No” and quietly mouthing the words, “Not True.”

Why? Because Obama was lying. The words he spoke in this carefully scripted speech were simply not true.

Worse yet, half of the members of Congress jumped to their feet and applauded the President, obviously affirming his lies.

The image of Justice Alito shaking his head was played over and over on TV. He was portrayed as a man without respect, a rebel of sorts who many liberals stated “should have sat quietly and shut up.”

Hmmm……

Let me get this straight. The President can stand up and lie, unjustly criticizing people for a decision they made, the Congress can stand up and clap wildly in agreement, but the justice, who’s being unfairly ripped apart, is expected to sit on his hands and show no emotion?

The mainstream media paid little attention to the fact that the President was lying. Obama’s staff, loaded with speech writers who spend days and days writing and rewriting a speech this important, are lobbied by countless people to morph the speech to meet individual needs. Each word is carefully crafted.

The media chose to focus on Alito for his “conduct”.

A headshake? A quiet utterance to himself? Since when is THAT inappropriate?

The President spoke with members of the Republican party last week. Many of the Republican senators asked lengthy questions of the Messiah, basically giving a short speech prior to their question. Some questions included criticism of Obama and his policies.

While the questions were being delivered, I couldn’t help but notice the Messiah began to squirm. He started by smiling and shaking his head, looking up and down, anywhere but at the person delivering the question. He shook his head “No” when something was said that he didn’t agree with . He even tried breaking in, at times, hoping to stop the lecture, so he could simply get to his answer.

I was just wondering….why didn’t he just stand there, without emotion?

Why didn’t he stand in front of the Republicans and “take it like a man”?

Even more interesting is the fact that Obama knew he’d have a chance to answer the accusations thrown at him by the other side. Justice Alito was not given a voice whereby he could explain his decision. He wasn’t asked to stand up before Congress, after the President was done with his mighty speech, and defend himself and his colleagues.

The First Amendment guarantees every American citizen the right to free speech: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.”

I’m not sure- but I believe that includes the right to shake your head “No” when you hear a lie.

When Joe Wilson yelled out “You Lie!!” during a previous speech that Obama gave on the Health Care Bill, democrats were aghast. While it can be said that this outburst was not a proper thing to do in the middle of a speech (although the accusations that Obama lied were actually true), Wilson had every right to his own thoughts and opinions.

He probably should have saved those opinions for a better time.

But, Obama seems to have a history of lying in front of Congress and the American people these days. If no one calls him out, if those who notice the lies are not allowed to wince, if the media won’t report the lies and the democrats stand and applaud these lies, how are average American citizens supposed to know that these ARE lies?

And there’s your answer.

We aren’t.

Our government is now become so big, so powerful, and so opaque that we know very little about what goes on behind closed doors.

Closed Doors….Government BY the people…Closed Doors….Government by the people….

They don’t seem to coincide, do they?

Don’t think about it too much. Don’t ask too many questions.

Just carry on with your day.

This administration knows what’s best for us.

Lying is a necessary evil.

Sit down and Shut up. Life is so much easier that way.

Welcome to the next 3 years.

lsm
______________________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

By Jim Guirard

For almost half a century, the romantic and noble label of John and Jackie Kennedy’s “Camelot” years in the White House has been an integral part of our political lexicon — and a major asset to the once-liberal, now mostly left-illiberal Democratic National Party.

How ironic it is that in the late JFK’s own state of Massachusetts, the voters who elected Republican State Senator Scott Brown to the U.S. Senate have laid the predicate for yet another presidential legacy label: the highly ignoble “Scamalot” for the unfolding political lives of Barack Obama and his far-left entourage.

Faced with so many false assurances, exaggerated “hopes,” and inflated assertions about not only Obama’s health care takeover, but also his radical policies on energy, taxes, the national debt, unemployment, the environment, and the ongoing War on Terror, Bay State voters came to believe that the president is simply deceiving them — to the point that they were routinely thinking, “You lie.”

But using the somewhat softer term of “scam,” let us paint a full picture of what is going on here. Let us pose the tough question: “Does this charismatic, smooth-talking, and openly “progressive” (i.e., socialist) President Obama scam just a little, or does he truly scam a lot?” Consider, for example,

SCAM #1 — He loudly asserts complete “transparency,” but there is little or none — e.g., his birthplace records, his Marxist parentage and upbringing, his school records from grammar to graduate, his passport records, his radical-left personal and professional associations, his deep association with the ACORN conspiracy, his Harvard Law Review and book-writing records, and his multiple far-left, non-vetted, unconfirmed, and largely unaccountable regulatory “czars.”

SCAM #2 — He continues to assure “bipartisanship” and “accountability,” but there is little of either, with most of his “economic stimulus” legislation and “TARP” funding — and now the health care proposals — crafted behind closed doors and with all of the Republicans (and all centrist and conservative Democrats, as well) actually locked out.

NOTE: Massachusetts voters seem to have decided that “BUYpartisanship” might be a better spelling for the blatant vote-buying of several Senate Democrats (and probably as many House Democrats, as well) who are so servile as to be for sale.

SCAM #3 — He promises not to sign any health care bill which “adds a single dime to the deficit” — but he deceitfully front-loads taxes and back-loads benefits to make it seem so, and he contrives multiple “scoring” schemes which grossly underestimate hidden costs by trillions of such “single dimes.”

SCAM #4 — He pledges not to raise the taxes of anyone who earns less than such-and-such amount — a number which keeps getting smaller and smaller — and cynically labels $250-”stimulus” handouts as “tax cuts for 95 percent of all taxpayers.”

SCAM #5 — He has assured that there would no role (or positions of substantial influence) for “lobbyists” in his administration, but he has made so many exceptions and end-runs as to render the original pledge a prima facie lie. (Surely, SEIU President Andy Stern, who virtually lives in the White House, would never “lobby” the president on anything.)

SCAM #6 — He pretends to have left the Liberation Theology church when he has merely distanced himself from a particularly radical minister — while then appointing that minister’s hand-picked and equally radical successor, Rev. Cecil Morris, to his Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Initiatives. Further, he has appointed a Cuban expatriate Liberation Theology theologian, Professor Miguel Diaz, as his ambassador to the Vatican.

SCAM #7 — He claims not to be a socialist, but a “progressive” instead — when the latter has long been the radical left’s codeword for the former, and even when such “Death to America” socialists and communists as Fidel Castro, Hugo Chávez, and Daniel Ortega proudly claim the “progressive” label as well.

SCAM #8 — He talks of “energy independence” but proposes multilayered policies of Less Energy at Higher Prices (LEAHP) — all of which are devoted to a ruinously low “carbon footprint” belief system which is itself a pseudo-religious scam, correctly being called by many the Branch Carbonian Cult.

SCAM #9 — He embraces as “scientific consensus” the junk science of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and shamelessly rejects virtually all scientific evidence (re: solar cycles, cosmic winds, ocean currents, volcanic activity, etc.) to the contrary, just as the pseudo-scientific Branch Carbonians do.

SCAM #10 — He promises “jobs, jobs, jobs” while he relentlessly proposes — in an apparent state of cognitive dissonance — both the proactive outforcing of jobs and capital investment and the determined downforcing of most major domestic energy supplies.

SCAM #11 — He repeatedly blames the ever-exploding budget deficits and the unending loss of jobs on “the Bush economy we inherited” — when it was clearly the Pelosi-Reid Congressional Economy of 2007-08 (with its promises of higher taxes and of radical “carbon-footprint” crackdowns) that he inherited, which had already ended the de facto Bush Boom of the preceding three years, 2004-06.

SCAM #12 — He cynically relabels global terrorism a “man-caused disaster” and redefines al-Qaeda-inspired and trained enemy combatants as mere Miranda-protected “criminals” — and thereby tries to insulate himself and his legacy from ever having “lost a war,” which, after all, was never a war in the first place.

Topping it all, he and his dedicated fellow progressives will continue in the media, in academia, and elsewhere to muddle the truth about all of the major scams listed above — plus provide false or flippantly unreliable promises to end earmarking, to reduce deficit spending, to close Gitmo, to end corruption in high places, ad infinitum.

And they will do this by a wide variety of deceptive tactics, many of which come mainly from the late, great Marxist tactician of community organizing, Saul Alinsky, and his infamous Rules for Radicals handbook — which the young Barack actually taught to fellow radicals in both classroom and streetwise, ACORN-style settings.

And so it is that Barack Obama’s Scamalot army marches onward. As the French always say, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la meme chose.” In this case, it will be the same old Big Brother dream of world socialism — and it will remain so until we are finally able to flush the electoral toilets all across the nation later this year and again in 2012, as has so appropriately just happened in Massachusetts.

______________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

In 2004, John Edwards was a poster boy. He had it all, didn’t he? He had the looks, the money, the lovely wife, the adorable kids, and his name was on every democrat’s bumper right next to the name “Kerry.”

He was the man selected by the Democrats to be John Kerry’s running mate and the potential Vice President of the United States.

Wow, what a guy.

Who cares if he got $400 haircuts and looked in the mirror a lot. He was “Mr. Clean-Cut- All-American.”

When Kerry lost that bid for the presidency, Edwards stepped up his aspirations and essentially moved to Iowa for a couple of years to jump-start a presidential bid for himself in 2008. He attempted to portray himself as “just a regular guy” by throwing on a few plaid shirts and hanging out at the diners in Iowa, talking about cows and corn with the locals there. His lovely wife, having recovered from a bout of breast cancer, urged him on and joined him on the campaign trail whenever she could.

Obviously, she wasn’t there enough.

While traveling from city to city, John met a woman named Rielle Hunter, an actress and film producer. In 2006, she pitched the idea of a series of short, campaign videos to Edwards at a New York bar where he was having a “business meeting.”

Hmm….

His campaign quickly hired Rielle and she began tagging along with the group, taking videos for her project.

One thing led to another, and without Elizabeth’s blessing, John started having an affair with Rielle. As we all know, in December, 2007, the National Enquirer broke a story about Rielle’s pregnancy and the rumors that Edwards was the daddy. Immediately, Rielle came out with a statement that she was pregnant with the child of Andrew Young, a married man who is a former staffer for John Edwards’ presidential campaign.

Oh, and she proceeded to move next door to Young and his wife and kids.

Strange, but no one seemed to remember seeing any type of romance between Young and Hunter. And Young’s wife certainly was understanding, wasn’t she? It’s nice for her to allow the woman who “was pregnant with her husband’s baby” to live nearby. Not many women would be so generous….

Unless they were being paid a huge amount of money.

When asked, John Edwards adamantly denied having an affair with Hunter. He claimed to love his wife and would do nothing to harm her.

Good one, John…..

Meanwhile, behind the scenes, John was a busy, busy man. Not only was he running for the presidency and loving his wife, he was pleading with Rielle to get an abortion, hoping to keep his “squeaky-clean” image for the upcoming election.

Oh, and he was making a “sex tape” with his mistress.

Rielle had the love-child, and a few months later, Edwards was forced to confess; the evidence had mounted to the point where he couldn’t explain it any longer. He sat in his home on national TV and told the world that yes, he had an affair with Hunter, but the baby was not his- there was absolutely no chance that he had fathered the child because the time table just didn’t fit.

Did I mention that during this time, Elizabeth Edwards was rediagnosed with cancer and was getting chemo?

What an honorable man that Edwards is. Let’s see, his wife is home with the small children, hooked up to a chemo drip and he was out screwing the videographer?

Sounds like democratic presidential material to me.

The story remained that Young was the father of this child, and while Edwards never claimed that the baby was his, rest assured that he was paying up the nose to keep Rielle and Young quiet.

There is an investigation looking into claims that Rielle was illegally collecting money, not from Edwards, himself, but from his campaign funds.

What kind of a scumbag won’t even pay for his own child out of his own pocket?

Especially when he lives in a multi-million dollar home….

I wonder how contributors and supporters of Edwards feel about paying his mistress to stay silent?

Just a couple of weeks ago, Edwards decided to come clean. He admitted what we all knew to be true- he was the father of Rielle’s 2 year old child.

A few days ago, Elizabeth announced that she wanted a divorce from Edwards.

It’s about time.

Young has written a book, a certain overnight sensation where he gives the gory details of this whole affair.

What happens in the private life of John Edwards wouldn’t normally concern me, but this man was ON THE TICKET for the democratic party. Had Kerry won, Edwards was “one heartbeat” from the presidency, having been given that position by countless supporters of his party.

The man is a cheat.

The man can look in a camera and lie. Repeatedly.

The man sold out his good friend and made him the scapegoat for his own indiscretion.

The man paid off his mistress, possibly with illegal campaign funds.

The man betrayed his children- including the new baby.

The man did all of this while his wife was battling cancer.

Is this REALLY where we stand in politics today? Are our best candidates for president REALLY this slimy?

What’s more amazing is the lengths to which Edwards went to keep his secret…..

We’re supposed to trust our politicians.

What a joke. What a big joke.

lsm
_____________________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

In 1978, China instituted a “one child” policy, an attempt at population control.

That’s what they do in communist countries- CONTROL.

They felt that by eliminating the number of citizens, they could better develop their economy, resources and environment.

You know, “Kill off the people, Save the environment”.

I’ve always loved that bumper sticker.

The policy had a built-in “sexism” of sorts, because in China male children are considered more desirable than females. According to the minister of the National Population and Family Planning Commission in China, Zhang Weiqing , “We have a 2,000-year feudal history that considered men superior to women, that gave boys the right to carry on the family name and allowed men to be emperors while women could not.”

Female babies have become a thorn in the side of expecting parents.

The Chinese government has a number of ways that they have enforced this population control policy. They require citizens to obtain a birth certificate before the birth of their children. The citizens are also offered special benefits if they agree to have only one child.

Those sound reasonable, right?

Unfortunately, there’s more….Citizens who have more than one child are either taxed an amount up to fifty percent of their income, or punished by loss of employment or other benefits. Furthermore, unplanned pregnancies or pregnancies without the proper authorization are terminated.

Aborted.

Local officials in China are responsible for population controls and those officials who don’t meet the “target goals” for their region are punished by law.

So local government “police” can come into your home and make sure that your 2nd pregnancy is “terminated” or else they, themselves are punished?

Sounds like a great place to live. Sounds like a country of freedom, doesn’t it?

It gets even better.

Forced sterilizations of those who have 2 children is mandatory. Mandatory. At its peak in 1983, tubal ligations, vasectomies, and abortions amounted to thirty-five percent of the total birth control methods.

The cultural preference for sons has not only led to a large number of abortions, it’s also caused an enormous rise in female infanticide- killing these babies after birth. It is estimated that these population control policies have prevented the lives of 400 Million babies.

Talk to those who support these policies and they’ll tell you that China has “prospered” under these population regulations. The economy has improved, and China has become an “industrialized” nation.

Hey, kill a few kids- improve the country.

Another bumper sticker.

Fast forward 30 years and we now find that these policies which were put in place years ago have had ramifications. Males outnumber females in China by the millions. According to the Washington Times: “This phenomenon of “missing girls” has turned China into “a giant magnet” for human traffickers, who lure or kidnap women and sell them — even multiple times — into forced marriages or the commercial sex trade.”

Nice, huh?

Their policy to keep the population down has not only caused millions of aborted children, it is encouraging a rash of kidnappings, prostitution, and slavery.

It’s also caused a higher than average population of gay men.

Not to worry- the economy is thriving, the environment is terrific, and China is now “industrialized.” It’s just the people, mostly women and female babies, who are suffering.

There are casualties whenever there is progress, right?

China is finally recognizing that the discrepancy between the number of males and females is causing problems and has eased up on the policies in some of their rural areas, allowing those couple who have a daughter first to have a second child.

How generous of them. Maybe those lucky little girls will be raped and sold into marriages someday.

Here’s my question: Was there no one in China who could have predicted that this would happen 30 years ago? Aren’t we always praising the Chinese for their intelligence?

You don’t think that they knew this would happen, do you?….

You see, in a communist regime, the ends justify the means. Killing children, to achieve population control, is completely acceptable. Selling women into forced marriages is a necessary evil. Forced prostitution is merely a lifestyle. To communists, people simply exist for the sake of the state- nothing more.

Hey, did I mention that the Chinese economy is booming?

It’s nice to see a country who has their priorities in order.

At the Copenhagen Summit, China shared some advice with the United States on population control, promoting their policies as a way to stop global warming.

They bragged about how well it’s worked out for them.

Let’s see, infanticide, abortions, forced marriages, kidnappings…..that doesn’t sound like something that would be good for America.

What do I know?….I’m just a housewife. I’m certainly not as intelligent as those geniuses in our White House.

You know, the ones who “look to Mao for inspiration”.

The guy who killed 50-70 million.

Yet, John Holdren, our Science Czar, agrees with these policies. He even thinks that putting sterilizing drugs in our drinking water would be OK. And he’s on record as saying that women SHOULD be forced into abortions. He doesn’t think that life really begins until about age 2. Obama voted 3 times for legal infanticide. 3 times.

And these are the men in charge of OUR population.

Comforting, huh?

lsm
_______________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

I just read a revealing headline: “Demand Overwhelms Program to Prevent Homelessness.”

Huh. Overwhelms….where have we heard that before?

Oh, that’s right. Cloward and Piven. Remember them? They were the two 1960 Socialist radicals from Columbia University who had a theory that if you took any system and overwhelmed it, chaos would ensue and cause that system to break down. This was a way to get a new system in place.

Their ultimate goal was to replace capitalism with communism.

It sounds complicated, but it’s really quite easy. When Cloward and Piven wanted to test their theory, they decided to recruit the help of a group of young socialist thinkers from SDS (Students of a Democratic Society.) This group included Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, and Jim Jones-all three of whom went on to found the Weatherman Underground- and also Wade Rathke, the founder of ACORN. With the help of this group, Cloward and Piven were able to shake up the welfare system in New York by overwhelming it with new recipients, and effectively brought the system to the point of bankruptcy. Luckily, the state survived, but the experiment had worked.

It was the pattern for many other socialist endeavors put forth by these radical thinkers. They’ve been very patient over the years, but they’ve also been very effective with their push toward collapsing capitalism. Cloward, Piven, and their minions were the brains behind ACORN (which helped overwhelm both the banks and the elections); they also were the brains behind the Community Reinvestment Act, which ultimately took down the housing industry.

As we’ve recently seen, each time one of these “systems” goes down, the government has to conveniently slip in to save them. This is a way to deliberately increase the size of government under the guise of “helping.” It’s socialism/communism pure and simple.

So now you understand why the headline about the homeless programs being overwhelmed caught my eye.

You see, communists use every opportunity to redistribute wealth through taxation and spending. Their ultimate goal is a classless society for everyone except those in charge, those in the government.

Those lucky ducks live a life of luxury.

The article written by McClatchy states this: ” In rural communities and urban areas alike, one of the least expensive and most unheralded new initiatives of the stimulus bill is quietly saving hundreds of thousands of Americans from homelessness.

Now housing advocates want Congress to boost the program’s $1.5 billion funding as the vast need for more assistance becomes evident nationwide.

Memo to Barack: The policies that you’ve been implementing have caused unemployment to rise to 10%, although you promised it wouldn’t get above 8%. Because of this, there have been massive layoffs, forcing companies to fire employees who can’t find jobs because no one is hiring. This forces these people out of their homes causing HOMELESSNESS.

Now, instead of lowering taxes or giving incentives for businesses to hire people back to work, where most people would like to be, you continue to supplement these homeless workers with government subsidies.

WHY NOT GIVE BUSINESSES THIS MONEY IN THE FORM OF LOWER TAXES AND INCENTIVES INSTEAD? THEN MANY OF THESE PEOPLE COULD HAVE JOBS AND PAY THEIR OWN MORTGAGES.

And of course, if we look to the principles of communism and the policy of Cloward and Piven, we know why.

This administration wants big government. The more people relying on the government, the better. The more government programs, the better. The more government employees, the better. The intention of Obama is to overwhelm almost every system in this country- the economic system, the monetary system, the financial system, the healthcare system, the housing system, the immigration system, the election system, etc.- and cause each of them to collapse.

And when they do, the government will be there to pick up the pieces, calling each of these systems “too big to fail.”

The ultimate goal is control.

They’ll do it with the hard-earned money of the taxpayers, demanding that each of us “pay our fair share”. This is code language for “redistribute the wealth”.

Did I mention that Barack was raised by Communist grandparents, a communist mother, and mentored by Frank Marshall Davis, a communist activist?

What many of us don’t realize is that after communists create a wonderful, “equal” life for everyone, they begin to ration what meager existence there is left, causing thousands to die from lack of food and health care. They take away all freedom, guns, and property, exercising vast amounts of control on the very people who voted this big government into office.

It’s a horrible way of life- just ask anyone who’s lived in a communist country.

When freedom is gone, all is gone.

That’s the way communism ends. Every time.

Every time.

Every time.

lsm
________________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

Let’s see, Barack, how are you doing on terror so far?

You certainly haven’t earned yourself a B+.

Did anyone read or hear about the 2 Gitmo Terrorists, or as the White House calls them- “detainees”- who were released to their home country the other day?

No? Shocking. The mainstream media doesn’t want to report controversial news, only news that pleases the Obama administration. They know that in the wake of the “Underpants Bomber” debacle, releasing two more terrorists would be controversial, at best.

But Obama did it anyway; he couldn’t pass up the opportunity to give the terrorists a “fair” shake.

The two released detainees are Hasan Zemiri and Adil Hadi al-Jazairi Bin Hamlili. They were given back to their own Algerian government to be freed.

Beautiful.

Hey, I wonder if we’ll be smart enough to put THEM on the terror watch list? How about the “No Fly” list- think they’ll get on that one?

Oh, don’t worry about the safety of America-the Justice Department released this comforting statement: “The United States coordinated with the government of Algeria to ensure the transfers took place under appropriate security measures.”

Whew.

Call me stupid, but I was under the impression that the problem has never been the security of the transfer of detainees, it has always been what happens to these men after they’ve been released. Upwards of 20% of these men- and these are just the ones we know of- rejoin militant organizations and plan more terror, most of which is focused toward Americans.

In fact, two of the terrorists who helped the Underpants Bomber with his foiled plot had both spent time in Gitmo and are now coordinating terror efforts in Yemen. They had also made a pit stop for “rehabilitation” in Saudi Arabia- a ridiculous program that claims to change the spirit of these terrorists by giving them crayons and watercolors with which to express their anger and emotions on paper.

Strangely, it didn’t work.

Maybe if they had tried artist’s chalk and some play doh…

In total, 120 Saudi detainees have been released from Gitmo. One group, Batch 10, included 14 detainees who were flown home to Saudi Arabia just over two years ago. Of the 14 radicals in Batch 10, 5 of them completed the rehab and then fled to Yemen, where they formed a new terrorist group (AQAP).

And just a year ago, two other terrorists who had been held in Gitmo for seven years were released to Algeria where they were quickly acquitted by Algerian courts and allowed to go free. Interestingly enough, both claimed that they had been “brutally tortured” while at Gitmo.

I guess they consider hearing a little Willy Nelson music to be torturous. Or maybe “brutal torture” means that they only received three square meals a day, along with doctor and dental care. Maybe they felt it was “torturous” that they didn’t receive trophies when their makeshift, terror-filled soccer team won the Gitmo playoffs.

In May of 2009, a “deal” was struck with the Algerian government which says that any Gitmo detainees we send back to them “cannot be arrested or tortured” by their government. According to Farouq Qusantini, a human rights group: ” Algerian detainees have the right to choose where they want to go, and in case they choose Algeria, the authorities pledges not to arrest or try them “

THEY have the right to choose where they want to go?

Yes, you heard that right. One Algerian terrorist, Lakhdar Boumediene, was released from Gitmo last year and requested that he be sent to France.

I guess he heard that Paris was a great place to visit.

He must like croissants.

Let’s see, besides the attempted attack by the Underpants Bomber, we’ve also watched a Muslim man, Malik Nidal Hassan, kill 14 people on a US military base. It seems that despite the big, red flags which surrounded this terrorist, no one wanted to report him to the authorities because they were afraid of being called “Islamophobic.” Even our president can’t get himself to connect the dots between Islam and terror.

In his mind, little, old white ladies are just as likely to blow up airplanes as Muslims from Yemen who are here without passports.

Political correctness has run amok.

And the most impressive thing that Obama has done in regards to the Gitmo terrorists has been to announce that many of them will receive American rights and civilian trials to be held in New York City.

How civilized of him.

It seems the cost to the city of $200 Million per year to do this doesn’t faze him. It seems that the desires of the victims’ families doesn’t faze him. It seems that the outcry from Americans everywhere doesn’t faze him.

Barack Hussein Obama appears to be a man who isn’t fazed by the ideology of anyone who has common sense.

You see, he’s a radical, and radicals don’t often change their stripes.

Now ABC has come out with a new terror warning. They claim to have intel pointing to evidence that Yemeni women have been recruited to become suicide bombers. More disconcerting is the fact that these women have no known “footprint” of previous terror, thereby making it easier for them to gain access to our country.

Awesome.

Listen folks, it’s a matter of time before the policies of this administration lead us to another major terrorist nightmare. If the government really wants to keep us safe, they have no choice but to throw political correctness out the window. They need to rethink their policy on civilian trials and Miranda rights for terrorists. They need to listen to common sense.

Either that or they’d better start handing out crayons and watercolor paints to everyone in America….

We need to get rid of our anger somehow.

lsm
____________________________
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com

At least we have one branch of government with a moral code, one branch who follows the constitution.

And that’s hanging by a thread.

Ever notice how almost every decision that comes out of the Supreme Court is a 5-4 split decision? The reason? Well, we have 4 judges who believe they can write the law because the constitution is “a living document” which needs updating, we have 4 judges who believe it’s their job to interpret the wishes of our Founders and use the constitution as a rule book, and we have one judge who doesn’t really know what he believes.

This is Justice Kennedy. Sometimes he rules with the liberal justices, sometimes with the conservatives, but his vote is usually the tie-breaker in big cases.

We recently had a ruling by the Supreme Court whereby Justice Kennedy not only ruled on the side of the constitution, he wrote the supporting decision.

This case, referred to as Citizens United, is huge, folks, because it is the essence of the First Amendment- the freedom to speak and think the way we want.

Oh, and it overturns most of the McCain-Feingold Bill, a controversial piece of legislation that was written by McCain but, ironically, used by Obama against McCain in the last election.

That’s what McCain gets for reaching across the aisle.

The case arose over the documentary, Hillary: The Movie, a production that was financed by Citizens United, a non-profit corporation. A lower court had ruled that this movie couldn’t be shown because it violated the provision of McCain-Feingold against corporate political involvement within 60 days of an election.

Citizens United appealed the verdict.

Last Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections- the government has no business regulating political speech.

“If the First Amendment has any force,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, which included the four members of its conservative wing, “it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech. When government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. “This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.””

The four Supreme Court dissenters argued that allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace will “corrupt democracy.”

You see, liberals only want to see their own special interests groups corrupt democracy.

Our President, the one who put his hand on a Bible and swore to uphold the constitution came out with a statement of his own:

“With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans. … We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision.”

You see, in Obama’s eyes, it’s OK for labor unions, teachers unions, SEIU, and auto unions to have free speech. They can “marshal their power” with no recourse. He believes that the mainstream media, all owned by corporations, should have free speech. They indirectly affect our political campaigns everyday with their commentary and their columnists. They have control of who is invited onto their shows and what is printed in their newspapers.

Obama is even in favor of organizations like ACORN having free speech. They can go into our neighborhoods WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS and recruit voters, sometimes with bribes of cigarettes, to vote for liberals.

It’s just the OTHER corporations that must be reigned in, the ones that support the candidates who have an “R” after their name.

You know the ones I mean- those “evil” corporations with names like “Big Oil” and “Wall Street”. They have no business getting involved in politics. They need to sit back, shut up, and let the “little” guy- like the media- control the elections.

What we need to remember is that corporations are merely a group of individuals who work toward a common goal. Listen to Obama and you hear stories of these dark, evil entities who have special interests and want to bring down America.

Why would they do that? If America is prosperous, then corporations are prosperous. When corporations do well, they create jobs which pay workers- which give workers more money with which to buy houses, cars, and other things- which, in turn, keep corporations in business.

Sounds like a plan for prosperity, doesn’t it?

Not to the liberals. You see, this cycle of prosperity leaves government out of the equation.

Hey, maybe that’s why government continuously wants to raise taxes on corporations… They want their “share” of the prosperity. They want to be included.

Bingo.

Liberals have an easier time during the elections if they can “shut up” the free speech of these corporations. Obama and his minions certainly don’t want “free market” ideas floating around and educating our citizens while they’re trying to be elected, do they? They want the voters to exclusively hear THEIR side of the story, the side pushing government as the solution to every problem.

Here’s the deal: Money is our property and we have a right to spend it as we please. Liberals wants us to believe that our money is THEIR property and at any time, they can come and take it from us in the form of taxes. They believe that we live to contribute to the state.

It started as a communist idea.

It’s now become a liberal idea.

And the Supreme Court, with guidance from our constitution, took a portion of unlawful, governmental power… and gave it back….

…to where it belongs.

To us.

Five wise men thwarted the efforts of a power-hungry administration.

Hallelujah.

lsm
_________________________
Go to HOME PAGE- www.awakenthelepehants.com