A Great Place For News, But Not Your Blood Pressure.


Friday, December 31, 2010

LIVE Feed From Times Square on the P/Oed Patriot

Watch live streaming video from 2011 at livestream.com

Marxist Revolutionary Ron Gochez: "Americans Support the Re-Distribution of Wealth"

Obama Administration Forcing Employers to Post 'Union Rights'

It Appears that Obama continues to pay back the Unions for their help in getting him elected. He is going to force all employers to post Large Signs that explain the Rights people have for collective bargaining. Or better known as their Right to form a Union.

Since he knows he can't get this through Congress he is going to do an end run and make it an executive order.

Thanks to an Article on the CPUSA News, People's World, we now know about this new kickback:

"Private employers will be required to post large signs informing workers about their right to form unions under a new rule the Obama administration plans to institute by executive order.

The plan received less than the amount of publicity that might have been expected because it was announced the week before Christmas when the main focus of the news was on the legislative battles in Congress.

The National Labor Relations Board plans to issue a rule requiring almost all employers to post notices in employee break rooms or other prominent spots that explain workers' rights to bargain collectively, distribute union literature or engage in other union activity without reprisal.

In the past the NLRB usually made policy on a case-by-case basis during labor-management disputes.

The decision to issue the new order steps up even further the more aggressively pro-labor role the board has played during the Obama administration.

The president first signaled his determination to strengthen the board's role in protecting organizing rights when he made several recess appointments to give the NLRB its first Democratic majority in ten years.

The recess appointments were made because because the presiden't candidates were held up for months over GOP claims that a former AFL-CIO lawyer, Craig Becker, would be too pro-union.

The administration's new rule is opposed by big business which sees it as an attempt to achieve, by executive order, some of what labor and its allies have not been able to achieve on the legislative front. Republican filibusters have blocked passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier to form unions. The EFCA would allow workers to form a union as soon as a majority sign cards expressing their desire to be in a union.

Others who oppose the rule see it as a step in the direction of reversing a long-term decline in union membership. Only 7.2 percent of the natioon's work force is now unionized. Anti-union forces fear that widespread knowledge of union organizing rights will begin to reverse that trend.

The rule will not take effect until late February. From now until then, the NLRB is taking comments.

In a statement last week the NLRB said, "Many employees protected by the National Labor Relations Act are unaware of their rights under the law."

The posters private employers will be required to display are similar to those already required in the offices of government contractors and subcontractors ever since a June executive order issued by the Obama administration.

Michael Eastman, executive director of labor policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is already leading the charge against the rule, telling the press that the NLRB lacks the "legal authority" to issue such a rule.

Attorneys for the chamber and for companies opposed to the rule are telling their clients that the regulation amounts to "government sanctioning" of unions.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said the rule is "a common-sense policy necessary because there is widespread lack of understanding of the law and because many workers are justifiably fearful of exercising their rights."

New Year, New Health Care

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Marxist Radical Revolutionaries Run Government Advisory Body to LA City Council

The South City Neighborhood Council (Pictured Above) in Los Angles is, according to it's website, "an official government entity, serving as an advisory body to the Los Angeles City Council and all other city departments with the ability to influence decisions that effect the community."

It is also Run by Marxist Radical Revolutionaries.

Looking at this screen shot from the LA Department of Neighborhood Empowerment website, the South City Neighborhood Council is run by:

The President of the Council is listed as Celina Benitez, a known Communist Radical that is the LA contact for the Salvadorian Communist Organization CISPES.

Clemente Franco and Jose Lara, High School Teacher, are both known Marxists and friends of Celnia Beneitez and Ron Gochez.

But the most well known and disturbing member of the leadership is the known Marxist Revolutionary, High School Teacher, Anti-Semite and Vice President of the Neighborhood Council, Ron Gochez.

Mr. Gochez is best known for the calling of a Mexican Revolution in the United States in order to take back 'Occupied Territory' at a rally at UCLA in 2007.

Here is the Video that made him infamous:

Mr. Gochez was then caught on video telling the 'youth' that the Police only serve the Rich. In the Video he says:

"And for the youth...The police will never listen to us. They will never be our friends. Never had. They never will. They are here to serve and protect the interest of the rich. They always had, they always will. We have to organize our communities and that's the only way we will defend our human rights."

Here is the Video:

Considering Mr. Gochez likes to give the 'youth' advice, it shouldn't surprise anyone that his Marxist Mexican Militant Group,Union del Barrio, have opened a Marxist and Mexican Reconquest Militant Center right next to the High School were he teaches.

Here is a Video of the Center:

Coincidentally the 'Marxist Center', also known as the Centro Cultural Francisco Villa, is the Meeting Place for The South Central Neighborhood Council. As you can see in the Picture at the Top of this Article, the Marxist Center is Complete with a Flag of the Marxist Murder Che Guevara and the Flag of the Marxist Mexican group Union Del Barro. (Picture taken from the Communist Party USA News, People's World)

What is most disturbing is that Mr. Gochez and his Marxist Allies were Elected to their Positions on the Council. Here is a Video about the fact that they were running for office:

The South Central Neighborhood in LA is becoming a Breeding Ground for Marxist Revolutionaries complete with their own Council Advisory Board, Marxist Revolutionary Center and Teachers willing to prey on the Youth.

It would seem the Red Menace is reaching far and wide across this Nation.

While many in this Country are quick to dismiss this as a "Red Scare"...

Evidence like this may help to make a Believer out of the most Stubborn of Skeptics.



Communism Spreads in New York

Ahmadinejad: "Iran Now a Nuclear Country"

According to an Article on the Russian News, RT, Iran has declared today that they are a Nuclear Country and Sanctions aren't going to do squat:

"President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has declared that Iran is a “nuclear country,” while warning that the only option for the West is co-operation with the Iranian nation.

­"They (the West) did not like us becoming a nuclear country, but we became nuclear,” the Iranian president told a cheering crowd on Tuesday in the northern Iranian city of Karaj. “The Iranian nation won the political war of the past years.”

Ahmadinejad, with an eye to upcoming talks in late January with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as Germany, said that the “previous path” of imposing sanctions against Iran will not achieve the desired results.

“That road is closed,” he said.

Instead, the Iranian president continued, the West would have to choose the “second path,” which is “co-operation with the Iranian nation and recognition of the rights of the Iranian people.”

The United States and other Western nations suspect that the Islamic Republic is attempting to build nuclear weapons under the guise of a civilian nuclear energy program. In June, the UN Security Council imposed its fourth round of sanctions against Iran in an effort to block Tehran from enriching uranium.

The Iranian leader dismissed the UN sanctions against Iran as "illegal," adding that such efforts would only "strengthen the Iranian nation and accelerate the pace of our progress."

Iran held a first round of talks earlier this month with officials from the US, China, Russia, France, Britain, Germany and the European Union in Geneva.

One EU diplomat, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity due to his participation in the talks, said that it appeared Ahmadinejad was attempting to strengthen his hand with tough rhetoric before the upcoming meeting with the UN Security Council.
“He [Ahmadinejad] would like everyone to believe that any further resolutions and sanctions to prevent Iran from further enriching uranium will end in failure,” the diplomat said. “But that is an issue that will have to be settled by all of the attending members [of the Security Council], and not by Mr. Ahmadinejad himself.”

The European's Union's foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, hinted to reporters in Geneva that some level of co-operation with Tehran over the nuclear issue may be possible.

At the Istanbul meeting "we plan to discuss practical ideas and ways of co-operating toward the resolution of our full concerns about the nuclear issue," she said.

Ahmadinejad also warned in his speech that any country that attempts to “prevent the Iranian nation from achieving its rights" would “regret it.”

No desire to “become like the West”

Meanwhile, in a separate meeting with intellectuals and managers of Alborz Province on the same day, Ahmadinejad said Iran is “on the threshold of a historical leap in a variety of fields,” as quoted by Press TV, the Iranian news agency.

He outlined the importance of drafting an "Iranian-Islamic" model of planning in order to redirect the country away from a Western-based path to development.

"We plan to set a system and develop an Islamic and Iranian model for planning,” Ahmadinejad said. “We don't want to become a country similar to Western states."

The Iranian president expressed confidence that 99 per cent of the Iranian nation would resoundingly reject the opportunity “to have a country just like the Western states in the future."

Michelle Obama Goofs Reading 'Night Before Christmas'

Is Her Hair Ever Not in Her Eye?

Rep. King: Secure Border with More Troops, More Detection Equipment, Crack Down on Companies that Hire Illegals, No Amnesty

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

GOP vs Obamacare

CPUSA Claims Christmas is a Time For 'Revolutionary Hope'

You have to Love Propaganda, the Communist Party USA Does.

Leave it to the Communists to take the Christmas Story of Jesus and turn it into a Class Warfare Saga where the 'Poor are Fed and the Rich are Relieved of their Ill-Gotten Gains.'

Here is an Article from the CPUSA website that says Christmas isn't a Time for Jesus but for Revolutionary Hope:

"Christmas time can be so depressing. It brings out some of the worst features of capitalism and rubs them in our faces. You can't escape, whatever your philosophical or religious belief.

Advertisements spur on feelings of guilt if you don't buy enough of the right kinds of consumer products for people you love. Creative financing is offered so that lenders can make even more profit. And it is an environmental disaster ... more plastic, cardboard and packaging is produced, carted about, and dumped into landfills, vacant lots, and incinerators at Christmas time than at any other time of the year.

And yet ... Nearly smothered beneath piles of gift catalogs and sale circulars, nearly drowned in a sea of synthesized elevator-music Christmas carols, in a locked theological vault guarded down through the centuries by legions of preachers, priests and pontiffs, there burns a persistent secret flame. It is the flame of a revolutionary hope - hope for a better world, a more just society, where the social order is turned upside down so that the poor are fed and the rich are relieved of their ill-gotten gains. And it is something that working people of any culture, any religious or philosophical background can relate to.

What does Christmas have to do with the class struggle? In a word - everything. The story goes like this:

Once upon a time, in a land far away on the edge of a great empire, there was a people with an ancient culture, a storied past, and a great literature, who had been conquered by a technologically advanced imperial power. They were occupied by foreign soldiers and ruled by corrupt local despots who collaborated with the foreign oppressors. There were periodic revolts of local peasants and slaves that were put down mercilessly.

In the midst of all that, a young unmarried girl becomes pregnant out of wedlock. You might think she would regret this development, but on the contrary, she finds in the anticipated birth of a child a reason to rejoice and to hope for a better world. In her joy and determination, she sings an ancient song of liberation:

My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; for he who is mighty has done great things for me -- He has shown strength with his arm, he has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts, he has put down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of low degree; he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty. (Luke 1:46-53)

She and her fiancee are then forced to make a difficult journey while she is in the last weeks of her pregnancy, ostensibly to comply with the demands of their imperial rulers to register for a census. They are denied lodging in local inns. Homeless, the young family takes shelter in a stable, where the mother goes into labor and gives birth to a baby boy among barnyard animals.

Hardly an auspicious beginning for a child in whom his mother had placed such hope. And then things get worse. The local ruler, a collaborator who is kept in power through an occupation army, decides on an act of terror. Convinced that a revolt is brewing in the village where the young couple has just had their baby, he sends in death squads to kill all the male children under a certain age.

Fortunately, the young family is tipped off and they flee into a neighboring country. There they wait until they receive news of the death of their corrupt local despot, and thereafter return to raise their son in their hometown. When he grows up, the boy becomes a carpenter. As if to fulfill the revolutionary hope expressed in his mother's song, he goes on to organize a movement for social and economic change. It is composed of a coalition of fishermen, reformed prostitutes, the unemployed and low-level public servants, with a cross-section of men and women, and people of different ethnic backgrounds.

The aims of the movement are clear from the very beginning:

Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low, and the crooked shall be made straight ... (Luke 3:4-5) .

He has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord. (Luke 4:18-19)

And so, when you look at the Christmas story closely, you find a story of working-class people living in difficult times, in circumstances not too different from those faced by millions of people today. These are people who are aware of their history of struggle. They draw strength from the lessons of the past and nourish hopes and dreams for a better world.

Mary, the young mother in the Christmas story is supremely confident that the future will be better. Her song, known as the Magnificat, is nothing less than revolutionary.

This revolutionary aspect of Christmas is also found in the popular Christmas carol "O Holy Night" (Cantique de Noel). The words were written by the French socialist Placide Cappeau de Roquemaure and it was translated into English by the American abolitionist John Sullivan Dwight. The music was written by Adolphe Charles Adam, a friend of Cappeau's who was Jewish. One verse of the carol states:

"Truly he taught us to love one another; his law is love and his gospel is peace. Chains shall he break, for the slave is our brother; and in his name all oppression shall cease!"

The political ramifications of this carol were well understood by some reactionaries in our own country and it continues to be controversial. The song was banned for years in many conservative churches in the U.S. and many radio stations in the South refused to play it.

So, whenever you get weary of the holidays and all the claptrap that surrounds them, remember the young family of the Christmas story, how they hoped and dreamed for a revolutionary transformation of their country and how they persevered in the face of oppression.

Whoever you are, have a merry and revolutionary Christmas. And let us then enter the new millennium resolved to wipe out homelessness, poverty, racism and injustice once and for all!"

NYC Employee Destroys SUV

Remember those that work for the the Government Care about you and your stuff.

Warning Foul Language.

Hat Tip The Blaze

PBS Promotes Cuba's Health Care System

Hat Tip Breitbart TV and The Gateway Pundit

Study Finds Fox News Viewers are Stupid

Hat Tip Breitbart TV

Monday, December 27, 2010

Newly Elected "Tea Party" Congressmen Refuses Government Health Care Plan

According to an Ariticle on The Blaze, someone going to Washington is actually living up to his Principles:

"A newly-elected GOP Rep. announced that he is refusing the congressional health insurance plan in a show of solidarity with the American people.

Rep-elect Joe Walsh (R-IL) told the New York Times that he will stick to his Tea Party roots and decline the government health care provided to members of congress.

“I don’t think congressmen should get pensions or cushy health care plans,” he said. But it‘s a decision that’s not being welcomed by everyone in his family. Walsh’s wife has a pre-existing medical condition, and she’ll now be charged with the difficult task of finding a plan on the open market.

Walsh joins two other Republicans in declining the government’s health plan. So far, incoming Reps. Bobby Schilling (IL) and Mike Kelly (PA) have made similar decisions."

New Congress To Take Hard Line On Illegal Immigration?

The Return of Death Panels...

Republican Lawmaker Beaten in Arizona

Obama Supports Giving Back Parts of U.S. to Native Americans?

According to an Article on World Net Daily the President appears to support a UN Resolution that might give parts of the U.S. back to the Native Americans:

"President Obama is voicing support for a U.N. resolution that could accomplish something as radical as relinquishing some U.S. sovereignty and opening a path for the return of ancient tribal lands to American Indians, including even parts of Manhattan.

The issue is causing alarm among legal experts.

In recent remarks at the White House during a "tribal nations conference," Obama endorsed the "United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People," which includes a sweeping declaration that "indigenous peoples have a right to lands and resources they traditionally occupied or otherwise used" but that later were acquired by occupying forces.

"U.N. resolutions like this claiming amorphous rights can be a stalking horse for future attempts to have international courts enforce broad interpretations of those rights at the expense of American sovereignty," Theodore Frank, a fellow with the Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute, a leading public policy think tank in New York City, told WND.

Academic legal experts indicate that American Indians during the Carter era first drew up plans for reacquisition of lost tribal lands, setting the stage for the U.N. resolution that Obama is embracing. The feasibility study, eyeing 650 million acres of federally owned land in the U.S., was conducted by the Indian Education Institute at Eastern Oregon State, one expert recalled for WND.

"Re-purchase would restore land back to its original owners thus strengthening tribal sovereignty and jurisdiction over its people and land," Julianne Jennings Nottoway, a professor of anthropology at Pima Community College in Tuscon, Ariz., said. "Also, it would allow tribes the opportunity to develop socially, politically and economically as competitors as nation-states within a global context under the act of self-determination."

The Bush White House refused to support the U.N. resolution. But last year, the Democrat-majority House and Senate passed a resolution that, in Obama's words, acknowledges "the sad and painful chapters in our shared history – a history too often marred by broken promises and grave injustices against the First Americans."

The president said, "No statement can undo the damage that was done. But it is only by heeding the lessons of our history that we can move forward."

To Read the Rest of the Article Go Here.


Juan Williams Says Palin ‘Can’t Stand on Same Intellectual Stage as Obama’

Love Palin or Hate her, this comment was out of Line.

Hat Tip Breitbart TV

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Tom Coburn : New Congress Can Cut $100 to $200 Billion in Federal Spending

California Goes Farther Left

Gov. Abercrombie Offended by Obama Citizenship Questions

Hat Tip Drudge Report

*UPDATE* TSA Tactics in Malls and Hotels?

It appears the Obama Administration is considering spreading the 'TSA' Wealth by having your body violated at Malls and Hotels.

According to my Buddy Jim Hoft, The Gateway Pundit, this appears to be a Definite Possibility:

"Next up… The Obama Administration is going to begin using their police state security techniques at malls and hotels.
Breitbart reported:

The United States is stepping up security at “soft targets” like hotels and shopping malls, as well as trains and ports, as it counters the evolving Al-Qaeda threat, a top official said Sunday.

A year after a foiled plot to bomb a US-bound passenger plane, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told CNN’s “State of the Union” program that other places and modes of transportation must now be scrutinized.

“We look at so-called soft targets — the hotels, shopping malls, for example — all of which we have reached out to in the past year and have done a fair amount of training for their own employees,” Napolitano said.

Since an attempted bombing on a packed Saturday night in Times Square in May, New York, for example, has installed hundreds of security cameras as part of a plan to triple the number of cameras to 3,000.

In September, the city activated some 500 new surveillance cameras at its three busiest subway stations — Times Square, Penn Station and Grand Central.

“The overall message is everything is objectively better than it was a year ago, particularly in the aviation environment. But we’re also looking at addressing other areas,” Napolitano said.

As extremists struggle to circumvent tighter security at airports and search for new avenues, she said US officials were looking to step up broader measures.

“What we have to do is say, well, what other ways are they thinking to commit an act, because our job is not only to react, but to be thinking always ahead, what could be happening,” Napolitano said.

“And so we have enhanced measures going on at surface transportation, not because we have a specific or credible threat there, but because we know, looking at Madrid and London, that’s been another source of targets for terrorists.”

It's Nice the President hasn't forgotten how to use an Emergency as an excuse to remove your personal Liberties.



Here is Video From Fox News Talking about this:

Self-Centered Prez: This Holiday Season Talk to your Families About 'Progress'

It would seem that President Obama would like his little minions to gather together with their family and friends at the Dinner Table to have a little chat. But instead of talking about what cousin so an so is doing or what new additions to the family have come about in the past year, he wants them to talk about....him.
In a letter that President Obama sent out before Christmas to his Organizing for America (OFA) Supporters, he explains that they should talk about his 'Progress':

"This time of year, Americans around the country are taking the time to exchange heartfelt messages with friends and loved ones, reflecting on the past year. They write of achievements and setbacks, of births, graduations, promotions, and moves.

These messages allow us to overcome the miles that separate us. And they allow us to continue one of the most basic American traditions that has held folks close for centuries -- the simple sharing of stories.

And as families gather around holiday tables this season, we also have the opportunity to share the stories of the change this movement has achieved together.

It is a narrative woven by individuals across America -- in big cities and small towns, hospitals and classrooms, in auto manufacturing plants and auto supply stores.

These are stories of rebuilding, and of innovation. Stories of communities breathing new life into old roads and bridges, of local plants harnessing alternative fuel into new energy. Stories of small businesses getting up, dusting themselves off, and beginning to grow again. Stories of soldiers who served multiple tours of duty in Iraq now coming home -- and enjoying the holidays this year in the company of loved ones.

These are stories of progress.

They unite us, and they are ours to share.

We've pulled many of them together in one place, PROGRESS. You can see what our reforms have meant to Americans in every state -- block by block, community by community.

Click here to read about stories of progress in your area -- and share them with your friends and family.

The reforms that we fought long and hard for are not talking points.

And their effects don't change based on the whims of politicians in Washington. They are achievements that have a real and meaningful impact on the lives of Americans around the country. They are achievements that would not have been possible without you. PROGRESS localizes them -- and brings them to life.

It tells of how a green technology business in Phoenix, Arizona, is using a grant through the Recovery Act's Transportation Electrification program to bring the first electric-drive vehicles and charging stations to cities around the country.

It tells how, thanks to closing the "donut hole" in prescription drug coverage, a diabetic woman in Burlington, Vermont will no longer have to choose between purchasing her monthly groceries or the insulin she needs to survive.

It tells about how 136,000 Pennsylvania residents' jobs were saved or created by the Recovery Act.

And about how, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, 22,900 small businesses in Utah's 2nd Congressional District are now eligible for health care tax credits -- and how 17,500 residents in Idaho's 1st with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage.

There are thousands more stories like these.

In the coming days, as we gather with our loved ones at dinner tables around the nation, let's pass them on. Let's celebrate the spirit of service and responsibility that brought them to fruition. And let's steady ourselves with the resolve to continue pressing forward.

Because the coming year will hold new challenges -- battles that have yet to be fought, and stories of progress that have yet to be written.

Take a look at the progress we've made in your area -- and share the stories you read with your friends and family:


Happy holidays, and God bless,


Saturday, December 25, 2010

Merry Christmas To Those In Uniform!

Thank You and Merry Christmas to All Those that Serve in Uniform.

This is from one of my Favorite Movies, White Christmas.

Merry Christmas To All!

Merry Christmas to You and Your Family.

May the Holiday Season Bless you with Health, Joy and Happiness!

See you on the 26th!

Friday, December 24, 2010

Holiday Tradition: 'Mickey's Christmas Carol'

Holiday Tradition: 'T'was the Night Before Christmas'

Holiday Tradition: 'Nestor The Long Eared Christmas Donkey'

Literal Attack on Christmas: Holiday Sign Slashed at Parish

Flashback: School Creates 'Obama Burger'

This Story is a Year Old, But I have not seen it before.

When a School names a Burger after the First Lady in My Opinion that Just Goes Way Too Far....

U.S. Gov Allows Companies to Do Business with Known Sponsors of Terrorism

Texas City Bans All Religious Ads

Obama Administration Bypassing Congress to Regulate Guns

Thanks to an Article on WND, we now know of the latest Obama Administration attempt to Regulate Firearms WITHOUT the Approval of Congress. Normally I wouldn't post an entire Article from another website (except from the Communists) but this is too important not to.. Pass it on:

"The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or ATF, has a long history of excess and overreaching … and they're at it again.

Using exaggerated reports of gun smuggling from the U.S. into Mexico as their justification, the agency has filed for an emergency regulation requiring gun dealers to keep track of their customers and file special reports to ATF whenever a customer purchases more than one semi-automatic rifle within any 5-day period. Such special reporting is already required for multiple sales of handguns and has proven to be thoroughly useless as a law enforcement tool.

ATF's requested regulation – which is unconstitutional, violates a statutory prohibition against firearms registration schemes and was obviously filed as an "emergency" simply as a means of bypassing Congress – would be "temporary," meaning that it would have to be renewed in four or five months, and is said to only apply to gun dealers in states bordering Mexico, though the regulation, as submitted, seems to be missing that specific limitation.

At this point the proposed regulation is awaiting approval from the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Political observers will recall that OIRA is headed by President Obama's old friend Cass Sunstein, who famously advocated for the abolition of all hunting and for the extension of legal rights – including the right to have a court-appointed attorney – to animals.

While Mr. Sunstein is an attorney and college professor specializing, in part, in constitutional law, his record shows that his Constitution does not include the Second Amendment. It is expected that Sunstein's office will approve ATF's Emergency Regulation by the first week of January unless there is immediate and vehement objection from members of Congress and the public.

In the late '70s, shortly after my late father, Neal Knox, took over the NRA's lobbying efforts, ATF leaders attempted to expand their power by implementing a regulatory scheme requiring that gun manufacturers add a government-defined 13-digit serial number to every gun and that dealers report detailed information, including that new serial number, to ATF for every sale. Records of those sales, guns, and purchasers were to be stored in ATF computers. It was gun registration, pure and simple. The scheme might have slipped through had it not been for the heightened visibility of ATF due to Dad's efforts and his immediate sounding of the alarm when the proposal was introduced.

Congress had upon numerous occasions debated the idea of a federal gun registration law and had rejected the idea on each occasion. For ATF to decide to bypass Congress and implement such a registration scheme via regulation was rightly perceived as an affront by many members of Congress, and their indignant response was to remove some four million dollars from the agency's operating budget (the amount ATF said they expected to spend on the scheme.)

That overreach, along with egregious abuses of honest gun dealers by the ATF led to the introduction of the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Protection Act to repeal some of the more onerous and confusing sections of the Gun Control Act of 1968.

It is to be hoped that current members of Congress will have a similarly indignant response to ATF's overreaching in this instance, as here again the agency is trying to implement by regulation something which the Congress has considered and rejected in the past.

Rights opponents will argue that rights activists like me are overly sensitive and unyielding in our positions and that we reactively oppose any firearms regulations regardless of how benign or effective they may be. There will be an inclination to accept ideas like this and then place the burden of proof upon rights advocates to explain why it's a bad idea.

Really, the burden of proof belongs to those who wish to interfere with our rights. It is up to ATF to show the legal authority to institute this proposed regulation and that it does not violate the spirit or intent of any existing law. It is also up to the ATF to show that their proposed regulation will be effective and productive as a means of fighting illegal gun trafficking.

The fact is that ATF can present no such evidence in support of their idea, just the suggestion that the proposal sounds reasonable and might be of use. That's not good enough.

It is overreaching for an agency to follow after Congress and enact regulations where Congress has refused to enact laws, especially where Congress considered and discarded those exact actions.

It is extra-legal for an agency to ignore statutory limitations barring the collection or archiving of information about gun purchasers, not to mention limitations under the Paperwork Reduction Act forbidding unnecessary increases in paperwork burdens.

The multiple-sales reporting scheme claims to be aimed at keeping guns out of Mexico, but it fails on that point as well.

First, it will have little effect on gun smuggling in Mexico, for smugglers familiarize themselves with the laws they are breaking. They will easily avoid ensnaring themselves in such an obvious trap.

Second, while the actual number of guns that arrive in Mexico from the USA is impossible to determine, we know that the number being reported is inflated since the ATF only traces those guns selected by the Mexican authorities. There is strong evidence that American civilian gun shops are only one of many sources of guns in Mexico, and a minor one at that. Pictures of confiscated arms in the Mexican press routinely include grenades, rocket launchers and heavy machine guns, arms that aren't in the U.S. civilian inventory.

Finally, the proposed multiple-sale scheme places a significant burden on dealers and puts them at increased risk of prosecution for clerical errors if they fail to detect a repeat buyer in a timely fashion.

You can tell the ATF and Congress that you oppose the ATF's overreach through any − or all − of the following ways:

Call the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulation Affairs, Department of Justice, desk officer at (202) 395-6466

E-mail Barbara A. Terrell, ATF, Firearms Industry Programs Branch at Barbara.Terrell@atf.gov

Call your senators and representative through the United States Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

There is no such thing as reasonable infringement on liberty."


AARP Gets Preferred Treatment Under Obamacare

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Russian News: Obama Orders Indefinite Detention?

Communists Warn: 'Main Danger to Democracy and Progress is from the GOP/Tea Party'

As the Communist Party USA discusses how to move their agenda forward, they have identified who they think the Main threat to them Are.... The GOP and the Tea Party.

Here is the Article from the Communist Party USA News, People's World:

"There is a lively discussion in left progressive circles about the response to the tax (and unemployment insurance) extension compromise, and where to go after the midterm election set back. Left and progressive activists and voters have played a very important role in the fight against the extreme right-wing. I think most left people understand that the main danger to democracy and progress is coming from the extreme right, GOP/tea party and their powerful corporate backers.

The Communist Party will not agree with our liberal allies at every turn, but we keep pushing for unity, we keep working to find the tactics that keep a broad labor and people's coalition, that keeps the movement for change going.

In my view, too many people are arguing that the compromise tax bill "is the last straw" and "I'm through with Obama." This view singles out the tax breaks for the rich and largely ignores the concessions the GOP had to make to the working class. The fact is if the bill had been dumped it would have meant several million workers would go from low income to no income. Taxes would have gone up for working people.

And Republicans would still do their thing in the next Congress only with new powers.

I completely agree that it is wrong to continue tax breaks for billionaires. It's like rewarding the crooks for their crimes. But that is not the whole picture.

In my opinion, a winning strategy has to be based on the real world; on the facts, not on subjective feelings that we all understandably have at this point. Serious change makers should not let those feelings be the sole guide as to how to move forward. If we want to win more economic and democratic rights for working people, minorities, women, young people, etc., it is self defeating to use this tax compromise difference to "break" with Obama. (I have to add that there are some voices who advocate a "break" that were never "with" the coalition to elect Obama in the first place.)

The stakes for our country and world are too high for any break -- or left/progressive go it alone -- tactics. Theories that promote "the worst things get, the better the opportunity for progressive change" are too simplistic and one dimensional. The problem is more complicated then that.

The economic crisis is deep, and millions of working people are suffering. The facts are that the Republicans policies deepened the crisis yet, they made the greatest gains in the last election.

The times we live in call for a strategy and tactics that will bring victories; victories that can be built on. Victories that will better conditions of life not create more suffering. Working and racially oppressed people have suffered enough.

Everybody understands that running an election and running a country are different. It is my view that the Obama administration policies and legislative victories have helped tens of millions of working families -- perhaps more then any president in living memory -- considering the short time and the challenges he faced in office. Much more needs to be done but this struggle is a marathon not a sprint.

Communists say that even though we are not in agreement with the president on many basic issues, he implemented many of his campaign promises. Progressive researchers who track that sort of thing give him pretty good marks.

A significant problem that the president and others had to grapple with was while the Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress, they did not have a big enough majority in the Senate to stop the filibuster. And on many questions Democratic members of Congress were not united enough to win. It was a fragile coalition to say the least.

The first woman speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and the progressive Democratic leadership did a heroic job from 2006-2010. They passed 290 pieces of legislation in the House that the U.S. Senate never acted on, everything from a clean energy bill to the DREAM Act.
The right-wing opposition to these bills and Obama policies have been unrelenting, unprincipled, well financed and well organized.

In my time, I have never seen a sitting president subjected to such an unrelenting, personal attacks. The level of racism and red-baiting, including violent threats, has been unprecedented.

What does it achieve when some on the left join in with the right wing, proclaiming Obama a liar who had deceived the voters; and worst of all that he was no different than Bush.

Tell that to all those workers who were able to put food on the table and keep their jobs and homes because of legislation proposed and passed by Obama and the Democrats in the Congress.

If it were the case -- i.e. Obama is Bush, etc. -- how do we explain those right-wing billionaires who finance so-called tea party and other anti-Obama movements. To these Bush supporters, Obama was the devil incarnate.

Some on the left saw any compromise with the right as "being too soft" rather then what was often a reflection of the real balance of power between the more lock step Republicans and divided Democrats.

I think Obama could have fought harder on many instances, but I also think when the racism was pouring down like acid rain polluting the atmosphere, and staining the political and moral fabric of the nation, the left was amazingly unresponsive. Too many times I heard people say it was Obama's fault for not fighting back. But the movement could have fought back. Blaming Obama makes it seem that the attacks are acceptable. Is that a principled position? For me, it's a form of capitulation to the extreme right and racism.

It's important to note, if the results had been more positive on November 2, the movement would be discussing taking the political offensive to help working people survive this horrible crisis by creating new, green jobs, ending the wars and attacks on immigrants.

The right-wing racist attack did more than mobilize their base, it also demoralized and demobilized Democratic voters. Some Democratic and progressive voters went from a messianic view of Obama to demonizing him. Neither are the right assessments to make.

For progressives, adopting an anti-Obama strategy is totally self-defeating. How do we distinguish ourselves from Sen. Mitch McConnell's and the Republicans' main goal of bringing down Obama?

2012 has to be part of any strategic and tactical thinking after these midterm elections. The next president will either be Obama or some right wing Republican. That's the reality for now. If the Republicans take control of all three branches of government -- again -- that will put the great majority of people on the defensive in the fight for economic and democratic rights. To not see that is a gross miscalculation of the right danger.
I think the most explosive issue is jobs and related economic crises -- like evictions -- facing working people. This will not be a easy time for the broad left/center coalition that brought the victory in 2006 and 2008.

One thing is clear to me, this fight cannot be won by making Obama the enemy. Those who are looking for a third party candidate on the left certainly have a right to do that, but it's not the path to victory at this stage.

The path to victory is in the critical fight for jobs and related issues. It's clear that the crisis of massive joblessness is not going to be solved in the halls of Congress and the White House alone. We need a united visible movement of the jobless to make it happen.

There needs to be a two year offensive for jobs through public works. In every city, state and town across the country we need to raise the demand.

Martin Luther King holiday weekend is an ideal occasion to kick off what should be a two year campaign all across the country.

King struggled for peace, jobs and freedom. The issue of jobs is not just an economic issue but a moral one, too. It can be linked to other issues including child welfare, poverty, immigrant rights, education, racial and gender equality, military spending and housing crisis.

Such a broad, grassroots movement will give real momentum to and build muti-racial unity for the 2012 elections. Franklin Roosevelt needed social movements to deliver the New Deal, and today, so does Obama."

Russian General Warns:"START treaty or not, his nation Will Not Destroy a Single Missile or Launcher before its Service Life is Over"

According to an Article on WND, the START Treaty isn't worth the paper it is written on:

"A Russian general has warned that START treaty or not, his nation will not destroy a single missile or launcher before its service life is over, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The warning from Lt. Gen. Alexander Burutin, the first deputy chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, came in a statement to the Russian Ria Novosti news service that the Russian armed forces will test-launch up to 12 ballistic missiles a year over the next decade.

He said, "We currently carry out 10-12 ballistic missile launches a year and we will maintain this level in the foreseeable future."

His comments came after a meeting some weeks ago of the State Duma Defense Committee, which suggested the Russian parliament ratify a strategic arms reduction deal with the U.S.

Burutin confirmed the treaty would not change the nation's plans, as Russia must transfer to the U.S. telemetric data on only five ballistic missile launches a year.

He said Russia is working on modernizing its missiles and will not destroy any if they still would work.

"A significant portion [of the nuclear arsenal] is in such condition that sooner or later it will be technologically unable to ensure the guaranteed use of nuclear weapons," he explained.

The treaty signed in April in Prague is intended to replace the START 1 treaty that expired."


War on Christmas News...

Sharpton Speaks Out On ‘Arrogance of Letting People Say What They Want’

Hat Tip Breitbart Tv

Obama Labor Department Slow on Releasing Union Corruption Report

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

White House Defends Uninformed Intel Chief

David Manning: 'Hillary Now Runs the Tea Party'

This was recorded on December 8th. I haven't seen it before but all I can say is Wow...

Illegal Busted on DUI for 3rd Time

Dems Shove Through Most Bills in Lame Duck Since WWII

Huckabee Sides with First Lady Over Who Decides What Your Kids Eat

Huckabee Must Not have Heard Michelle Obama say that the Government Can't Just leave it up to the Parents:

So Huckabee is wrong... The First Lady IS interested in the Government telling your kids what they can eat.

Hat Tip The Right Scoop

Progressive Congressmen: ‘God Willing…Border Will Become an Irrelevancy’

Hat Tip The Blaze

Census Shows Americans Moving to Red States

Hat Tip Breitbart TV

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Dick Morris Supports Steelman on the Dana Loesch Show

Sen. Hutchison: New FCC Regulations Threaten the Future of the Internet

FCC Confident Net Neutrality Is Legal

Net Neutrality Rules Do Too Much-Says GOP FCC Commissioner

FCC Defying Congress And The Courts

FCC Passes Rules To Allow Government to Regulate Internet

Looks Like the FCC wants to give the Government more Power, according to an Article in the Wall Street Journal:

WASHINGTON—Federal telecommunications regulators approved new rules Tuesday that would for the first time give the federal government formal authority to regulate Internet traffic, although how much or for how long remained unclear.

The FCC has approved rules that would give the federal government authority to regulate Internet traffic and prevent broadband providers from selectively blocking web traffic. WSJ's Amy Schatz explains what the new rules really mean.
.A divided Federal Communications Commission approved a proposal by Chairman Julius Genachowski to give the FCC power to prevent broadband providers from selectively blocking web traffic.

The rules will go into effect early next year, but legal challenges or action by Congress could block the FCC's action. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) on Tuesday called the FCC's action "flawed" and said lawmakers would "have an opportunity in the new Congress to push back against new rules and regulations."

The new FCC rules, for example, would prevent a broadband provider, such as Comcast Corp., AT&T, Inc. or Verizon Communications Inc., from hobbling access to an online video service, such as Netflix, that competes with its own video services.

The rules would also require Internet providers to give subscribers more information on Internet speeds and service. Broadly, the rules would prohibit Internet providers from "unreasonably discriminating" against rivals' Internet traffic or services on wired or wireless networks.

The rules would allow phone and cable companies to offer faster, priority delivery services to Internet companies willing to pay extra. But the FCC proposal contains language suggesting the agency would try to discourage creation of such high-speed toll lanes.

Companies that operate mobile wireless networks would have fewer rules to contend with. Phone companies wouldn't be able to block legal websites from consumers. They also can't block mobile voice or video-conferencing applications. Wireless providers would be allowed to block other applications, however, that they say could take up too much bandwidth on wireless networks.

The five-member Federal Communications Commission board approved the new rules on a 3-2 vote, with the agency's two Republican members rejecting the measure.

"For the first time, we'll have enforceable rules of the road to preserve Internet freedom and openness," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said Tuesday morning. He said the rules offered "a strong and sensible framework—one that protects Internet freedom and openness and promotes robust innovation and investment."

Republicans at the FCC and on Capitol Hill blasted the FCC's new rules, saying that they could stifle new investments in broadband networks and are unnecessary since there have been few complaints about Internet providers blocking or slowing web traffic."

Why Do Progressives always say More Government Regulation is "Freedom"? Who is Stupid enough to believe that?



Monday, December 20, 2010

EU in Flames of Uprising: Athens, Rome, London - Who's Next?

Rioters Storm Government Building in Belarus

Hat Tip Breitbart Tv

U.N. and Obama Administration looking to Regulate the Web

According to an Article on WND.com, the U.N. has joined the ranks of those looking to regulate the internet:

"The United Nations is now joining the Obama administration and Democratic commissioners on the FCC in an attempt to regulate the Internet, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

"The U.N. is reacting to concerns of member governments, including the United States, that the Internet has made companies like WikiLeaks possible, while the FCC is more concerned about conservative news outlets on the Internet that are increasingly undermining government attempts to control the news through sympathetic mainstream media outlets," Corsi wrote.

"What is at stake is the future of electronic free-speech rights, as governments around the world realize how much less control government authorities have with a robust and critical press able to operate freely on the Internet."

Australia's ItNews.com reported that the U.N. is considering whether to set up an inter-governmental working group to "harmonize" global efforts by policymakers to regulate the Internet.

The U.N. claims authority to regulate the Internet under a U.N. Economic and Social Council resolution passed in July that invited the U.N. secretary-general to begin discussions on coordinating government efforts to regulate the Internet on a global basis.

"Obviously, the U.N. is uncomfortable with anything like the Internet that the globalists cannot control," Corsi wrote.

Meanwhile, the FCC is preparing in its Dec. 21 meeting this week to vote on a proposal called "net neutrality."

Reid Calls Illegals 'Americans'

Did the Politicians in Washington Get The Message from the Tea Party?

Obama Admin Buys 'ObamaCare' Ad to Link to Gov Website

Fox News: Massive Mexican Jailbreak Sparks Drug War Fears

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Prince Harry Pays Tribute To Those Who Died Escaping Communism in Berlin

What is the Future of the Virginia Obamacare Ruling?

Dissent Growing in Democratic Party

Fox News: Shattered DREAM

Unions Remember in 2012: McCaskill Voted Yes on DREAM Act

Claire McCaskill is up for re-election in 2012 and you would think with the huge wave of support against any kind of Amnesty she may have voted like she did in 2007 and say no the the DREAM Act.

But it appears that according to an Article on Numbers USA, she along with 3 other Democrats, changed their vote from No to Yes during the DREAM Act vote yesterday.

This fact may want to be remembered by the Local Unions in particular.


Well, it has been proven that because of President Regan's Amnesty deal in the 80's Illegal Immigration actually Increased instead of Decreasing. In so doing, the market became flooded with Cheap Labor. And Since the Federal Government has no interest in either prosecuting the Employers who Hire them or Deporting those that come here Illegally, the flow of Cheap Labor is almost ensured. Who suffers most when there is Cheap Labor in abundance? The Unions...

Why Hire a bunch of well trained, skilled workers for $30 an hour with an Extensive Pension when someone can Hire skilled workers for less than minimum wage and no retirement?

The Housing Boom was a Great Example of how Cheap Illegal Labor was used to replace the more expensive Union Labor and help lead to the decrease in Unions as a whole.
Some would say that by giving Illegals Amnesty that it will remove the Cheap Labor Threat to the Unions while at the same time increasing their membership through the newly legalized workers.

But that won't hold water Until the Federal Government is willing to seal the border, prosecute Employers for Hiring Illegals and Deport those who come here Illegally. Without doing these things the scenario will just run the same route in the next 20 years as it has in the last 20.

Younger Skilled workers will still come into the U.S. Illegally, work for almost nothing and the Unions will continue to be either replaced by them or be forced to take lower wages and lesser benefits so they won't be.

If the Union Membership continue to support the same people in Washington who Claim to want to help Unions, then watch as those same people turn around and Support Amnesty. Then all Union Members can look forward to is a Job holding a Sign in front of their work Site while they watch 25 Year Old Illegals do their Job almost as good for far less Money.

Isn't It Ironic that when Union Member's Dues are used to Support those in Washington who support Amnesty, that they are in Essence Paying for their own Destruction...?


Strong Tea Party Influence on Capitol Hill

Friday, December 17, 2010

*UPDATE*'Christmas Capital' of Texas Says 'Humbug!' to Tea Party because of Complaints from Local Dems

If you have ever been to Texas around the Holidays you may have heard of a City Called Grapevine, a.k.a. the "Christmas Capital of Texas".

The City of Grapevine is a self described 'winter wonderland' around the Holidays as the town is:
"blanketed with millions of lights, enormous decorations, animated characters and a whole lot more! With all of this plus great shopping for everyone on your list, Grapevine truly is the "Christmas Capital of Texas."

Every year the Grapevine Chamber of Commerce sponsors the "Parade and Carol of Lights". The event is open to all and according to the 2008 parade application has few rules on who can participate.

But that could change in 2011 because of complaints this year about a Float Sponsored by the Local Tea Party.

The North East Tarrent Tea Party entered a float that upset some locals. Oddly enough at least one of them is a Democrat. Here is the story according to the local NBC Station:

View more news videos at: http://www.nbcdfw.com/video.

Now watching that news report one would think that everyone involved is polite and reasonable.
Funny how staring into the lens of a Video Camera will cause people to really think about the words that come out of their mouths.

Because according to an Article on the Colleyville Courier, the Former President of the Mid-Cities Democrats, Kathleen Thompson, wasn't so polite:

"It was just a really ugly disruption," said Thompson, former president of the Mid-Cities Democrats. "People were there to watch their friends and family ride in floats and in cars. It was disruption of the whole idea of what a Christmas parade was supposed to be. ... Politics makes people very upset. Sometimes you just leave politics at the door."

While the Tea Party's participation was upsetting to Kathleen, according to a Letter she wrote to the Editor of a local paper, it was also a politically charged Yell from someone nearby that caused her concern:

"My family, friends and everyone in earshot of us complained about the Tea Party’s presence in the Grapevine Christmas Parade. While Democrats are excluded from paying for and working a voter registration booth at city festivals next to jewelry sales and car dealerships, another partisan group yells “go Tea Party” at a nonpolitical holiday event. Double standards aside, a Christmas celebration is not the place for politics."

I know for some people, Like Kathleen, the idea that someone would support the Popular Grass Roots Movement and actually yell "Go Tea Party" at an event in Texas, can be a disturbing experience. I guess if she had been watching the results of the recent elections she wouldn't have been so surprised and the shock to her system may not have been so severe.

Coincidentally in the above Video, Kathleen Says the "Parade was meant to Bring the Community Together". Which is one of the reasons she says the Tea Party shouldn't have been allowed to participate.

Maybe Kathleen shouldn't Throw Stones because I Fear she might break her own Glass House.

Because in 2009, The Mid-Cities Democrats had a Booth at a non-political event that, like the Parade of lights, was meant to be a "fabulous, free, family-oriented festival that brings our community together in an atmosphere of fun-filled activities" called the Euless Arbor Daze festival. Here is Video of that booth:

But Kathleen isn't the only one that 'Put on a Happy Face' for the Camera.

On the Video, the Grapevine Chamber of Commerce seems logical, reasonable and even supportive of the Tea Party Float. But again, the Article tells a Different Story.

The President of the Grapevine Chamber of Commerce, RaDonna Hessel, is quoted as saying that the Float Selection Committee was caused to "Pause" at the sight of the Tea Party's Entry form:

"This year, the Tea Party's entry caused the float selection committee to pause, Hessel said. But "there wasn't anything in place to tell them 'no,' and you ... can't randomly exclude someone because somebody doesn't care for the organization itself," she said."

But due to all of the complaints the Chamber received, Hessel implies that maybe next year there will be Rules in Place so that the Float Selection Committee can say 'No':

"Hessel said the chamber will review its rules for changes to avoid a similar controversy in future parades."

Now after reading all of this you may assume that the Number of Complaints the Chamber Received must have been enormous, considering it is causing them to look at changing their Parade Entry Rules.

Well, Out of about 30,000 to 40,000 people who attended the Parade the Chamber received a mind blowing total of...... 7 Complaints.

Which we already know, thanks to a Letter to the Editor, consisted mainly of Kathleen's Family and Friends.

Nice to know the 'Christmas Capital of Texas' is so friendly.

Unless you are the Local Tea Party who wants to participate in a Parade with a Float that Honors the Troops...

Bah.. Humbug!


It has been brought to my attention that one other person quoted in the Article saying they don't approve of the Tea Party's participation is a known Democrat.

Mark Bauer, once Vice President(2008) and President(2009) of the South Lake Democrats, was quoted as saying:

"I was taken aback that they were allowed in the parade," said Mark Bauer of Colleyville. "I've been to many Christmas parades, and I don't remember any other political groups ever participating."

Now Oddly enough the Article failed to mention this little Fact...I wonder why....

Thank You to the Reader who Sent me this Information.