Archive for August, 2009

Harrah’s, Atlantic City hope to become ‘gay friendly’ destinations

August 31, 2009

By DONALD WITTKOWSKI Staff Writer, the Press of Atlantic City, 609-272-7258 | Posted: Saturday, August 29, 2009

ATLANTIC CITY – Harrah’s marketing strategy is coming out of the closet.

The world’s largest casino company will begin courting gay and lesbian travelers in hopes of attracting new customers to a market decimated by the recession and competition from Pennsylvania slot parlors.

The push to establish Atlantic City as a “gay friendly” town not only underscores the need to expand the customer base, but also reflects a shift in the cultural landscape, said Jennifer Weissman, regional vice president of marketing for Harrah’s Entertainment Inc.

“We believe our customer base comes from all cultures, all sexual orientations and all backgrounds. We really believe that our customers will embrace this,” she said.

Harrah’s has been catering to gay and lesbian travelers at its Las Vegas casinos for a few years, but will launch a similar campaign in the country’s second-largest gambling market with an “Out in Atlantic City” weekend of partying Sept. 25-27. The event, expected to draw more than 1,000 people, will bring some of the best-known names in the gay and lesbian entertainment scene to the Harrah’s casinos.

Amanda Lepore, a transsexual icon and New York nightlife host, will kick things off with a party Sept. 25 at Club Worship at Showboat Casino Hotel’s House of Blues. The weekend will also include appearances by singer and “Dyke Diva” Lori Michaels and the cast members of Showtime’s lesbian-themed show “The L Word.”

Lance Bass, of ‘N Sync fame, and Jai Rodriguez, of the Bravo Network’s show “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy,” will host a party at Caesars Atlantic City. Rodriguez will also host a game of bingo at Harrah’s Resort, with proceeds benefiting the South Jersey AIDS Alliance.

Harrah’s will promote the events with an ad campaign in the gay media, such as Out and The Advocate magazines and the online sites and

Weissman said Harrah’s gay marketing program is the first of its kind for Atlantic City casinos. While Atlantic City may not become the next San Francisco for gay travel, tourism officials believe the resort’s evolution into a more upscale gambling and entertainment hub fits the lifestyle of gay and lesbian customers.

“What the gay market is looking for is high-end retail, accommodation and nightlife, and that’s what we have,” said Jeffrey Vasser, president of the Atlantic City Convention & Visitors Authority. “The more we reinforce the fact that Atlantic City is a gay-friendly destination, the better off we will be in attracting that market, which is a very upscale market.”

Atlantic City is developing gay-themed marketing programs based on research studies that show gay and lesbian travel to be among the most lucrative forms of tourism.

As a group, gays and lesbians spend $64.5 billion annually in the U.S. travel market, according to data from the U.S. Department of Commerce and a study by Community Marketing Inc., a gay-market research group. A national online survey conducted by Witeck-Combs Communications and Harris Interactive found that gay and lesbian consumers planned to spend an average of $2,300 for business and leisure trips this summer compared with $1,500 for heterosexuals.

“They can dedicate more of their wallet share to travel, tourism and hospitality,” said Bob Witeck, chief executive officer of Witeck-Combs, a public relations and marketing firm that specializes in the gay and lesbian market.

By touting itself as a gay-friendly travel destination, Atlantic City could capitalize on the gay civil unions or marriages supported by New Jersey, New York and states in New England, Witeck pointed out.

“Atlantic City may well imagine itself as a nearby destination for couples celebrating their unions,” he said.

Weissman acknowledged that Atlantic City’s casino industry simply can’t continue to rely on the same old core of customers. Profits continue to slip as the recession has cut into discretionary spending for gambling trips. Atlantic City also feels the pressure of the new slot parlors in Pennsylvania stealing customers from its feeder markets in Philadelphia, New York and northern New Jersey.

“For me, the important message here is that we have to change the face of Atlantic City. We have to provide new and unique reasons to visit Atlantic City,” Weissman said.

Witeck and Vasser downplayed any potential pitfalls of gay-themed marketing campaigns that could alienate the mainstream market, saying that society is far more tolerant and diverse these days.

“I don’t think you’re going to find cultural battles in a gaming town about more gay people or less gay people,” Witeck said. “It’s a format that should work for everybody.”

Vasser stated that popular travel destinations, such as San Francisco, New York and Fort Lauderdale, Fla., have flourished with the help of gay and lesbian customers.

Separate of the Harrah’s campaign, the Atlantic City Convention & Visitors Authority has reached out to the gay and lesbian community through the gay travel media and by having a promotions booth at a gay-themed consumer show in New York.

In addition, a private, nonprofit organization called the Greater Atlantic City GLBT Alliance was formed recently to promote gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender businesses and people in the surrounding area.

Weissman said Harrah’s developed its marketing campaign with the help of an employee advisory board that includes gay and lesbian casino workers.

“It comes down to diversity in our company and diversity in our workers and our customers,” she said. “We believe that by having different backgrounds and different perspectives, it will only make us a better business.”

E-mail Donald Wittkowski:

It is interesting how this casino company, once owned by a group of Mormons, has changed from a “middle of the road” clientle to, what some will consider, a “fringe group” in casino terms. Do you think the management of Harrah’s, who I once worked for many years ago when I entered the casino industry, REALLY thought this one through? Are they prepared for the ramifications? I suggest, they don’t have a clue!

Harrah’s, like many Atlantic City casinos, have many employees with quite diverse backrounds. In the 90’s, Atlantic City saw a “boom” of Asian employess coming from counties like Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, China, Korea, the Philippines. Some of those countries, like Laos and Vietnam, and to some extent, China, have an enirely different view on such things. what do you think will happen when the Gay customer, flameboyantly, sexual advances or suggestions to the 40 year old , Vietnamese, blackjack dealer and married mother of 3?

Does Harrah’s even care enough about the cultural sensitivites of their employees? Not that I am suggesting that Gay people haven’t before gone to Atlanttic City or been regulars to casinos. They have. However, I have seen some attempts. by those customers, to cause disturbances, try to purposely embarass others, and suggest that THEY will “turn you” because “they know” you are REALLY Gay on the inside.

Although, they are many of us that could “brush that off” or be dismissive of such behavior, there are those who cannot. Some, will find that EXTREMELY insulting, culturally speaking. Then again, what about Harrah’s current clientle? Do they worry that some longtime players will leave because Harrah’s has made it too uncomfortable to play in?

Don’t get me wrong, as I have said, Gay gamblers have ALWAYS been in Atlantic City. But, Harrah’s, with this announcement, has opened the Gay “Pandora’s Box” and this will no longer be a casino that some of the players are Gay but, I venture to guess, will turn into the Gay wild, wild west! Harrah’s will begin to experience behaviors never before seen in a casino and MANY, MANY unhappy members of the staff and disgruntled regular players.


U.S. unveils new rules on border searches of laptops

August 31, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration unveiled new rules on Thursday for searching computers and other electronic devices when people enter the United States, attempting to address concerns about violating privacy and constitutional rights.

At the same time, the Department of Homeland Security defended such searches as necessary to detect information about potential terrorism plots as well as other crimes such as child pornography and copyright infringement.

“The new directives announced today strike the balance between respecting the civil liberties and privacy of all travelers while ensuring DHS can take the lawful actions necessary to secure our borders,” DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said in a statement.

Between October 1, 2008 and August 11, 2009, 221 million travelers were processed at U.S. borders and about 1,000 searches of laptop computers were conducted, of which 46 were in-depth examinations, the agency said.

Searches often involve asking people to turn on the device to verify it is what it appears to be, the DHS said.

Privacy groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation have pushed Congress to stop border officers from searching laptops, cell phones and other electronic devices without probable cause when people enter or return to the country.

The rules permit searches of such devices without a person’s consent. The review is to be done in the presence of the owner, unless there are national security or law enforcement reasons to conduct it elsewhere.

Immigration and customs officers can also hold the devices or the data, which may be copied without the knowledge of the owner for further review, according to the rules.

The new regulations note that border officers should be particularly careful when handling legal or business materials or other sensitive data like medical records or information carried by journalists.

(Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky; Editing by John O’Callaghan)

This reminds me of some friends I had back in the 90’s. These friends were immigrants from Vietnam. After becoming U.S. citizens, they decided to return to Vietnam for a visit. Around that same time, another friend, an American who was married to a Vietnamese lady, both went to Vietnam for a visit. The American friend went first and when he returned, he told me how the Vietnamese governments precautions with electronic and photographic material prevented them from bringing any photographs back immediately. The Vietnamese government would confiscate ALL photographic film and digital media to do what the Obama administration intends to do here. So, over the last few days, we have heard how administration officials seem to want to use the tactics of Venezuela and Vietnam……………….not exactly 2 bastions of liberty. But, we may have something else in common with one of them. Venezuela has a crazed, maniacal dictator who is so paranoid, that all media that is contrary to his view, he tries to destroy. Hmmmmmmm, soon, we will be saying that same thing here with our wannabe “dictator-in-chief”.

Senator Edward Kennedy dies at age 77

August 31, 2009

By Scott Malone

HYANNIS PORT, Massachusetts (Reuters) – U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy, a towering figure in the Democratic Party who took the helm of one of America’s most fabled political families after two older brothers were assassinated, died at age 77, his family said.

Kennedy had brain cancer, which was diagnosed in May 2008. After a funeral Mass in Boston on Saturday, he will be buried later that day at Arlington National Cemetery outside Washington, near the graves of his brothers President John F. Kennedy and Senator Robert Kennedy.

He was one of the most influential and longest-serving senators in U.S. history, a liberal standard-bearer who recovered politically from a string of personal scandals to become known as a consummate congressional dealmaker.

Kennedy’s death marked the twilight of a political dynasty and dealt a blow to Democrats who lost their chief champion of President Barack Obama‘s call for an overhaul of the healthcare system.

“Edward M. Kennedy, the husband, father, grandfather, brother and uncle we loved so deeply, died late Tuesday night at home in Hyannis Port (Massachusetts),” the Kennedy family said in a statement early on Wednesday.

Kennedy was a longtime advocate of healthcare reform, a signature issue of Obama’s presidency. Obama said on Wednesday he was heartbroken to hear of the death of Kennedy, a crucial supporter of his presidential candidacy.

“I cherished his confidence and momentous support in my race for the presidency,” Obama said. “And even as he waged a valiant struggle with a mortal illness, I’ve profited as president from his encouragement and wisdom.”

Kennedy’s endorsement last year was seen as pivotal in Obama’s winning of the Democratic presidential nomination. Many saw it as the passing of the political torch to a new generation. A year to the day before his death, Kennedy made an electrifying speech to the Democratic convention that nominated Obama for president.

Kennedy had recently urged Massachusetts lawmakers to change state law so the Democratic governor, if necessary, could quickly fill a Senate vacancy.

Known as “Teddy,” he was the brother of John Kennedy, assassinated in 1963, Robert Kennedy, fatally shot while campaigning for the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination, and Joe Kennedy, a pilot killed in World War Two.


When he first took the Senate seat previously held by John Kennedy in 1962, he was seen as something of a political lightweight who owed his ascent to his famous name.

Yet during his nearly half century in the chamber, Kennedy became known as one of Washington’s most effective senators, crafting legislation by working with lawmakers and presidents of both parties, and finding unlikely allies.

At the same time, he held fast to liberal causes and was a lightning rod for conservative ire.

“The Kennedy name is synonymous with the Democratic Party, and at times Ted was the target of partisan campaign attacks. But in the United States Senate I can think of no one who engendered greater respect or affection,” Obama said.

Kennedy helped enact measures to protect civil and labor rights, expand healthcare, upgrade schools, increase student aid and contain the spread of nuclear weapons.

“There’s a lot to do,” Kennedy told Reuters in 2006. “I think most of all it’s the injustice that I continue to see and the opportunity to have some impact on it.”

A Roman Catholic, Kennedy was nonetheless a staunch supporter of abortion rights, a fact noted by the Vatican’s official newspaper in an article about his death.

The newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, praised Kennedy for fighting for immigrant rights, gun control and higher minimum wages, but regretted his “unfortunate” support of abortion.

After Robert Kennedy’s death, Edward was expected to waste little time in vying for the presidency. But in 1969, a young woman drowned after a car Kennedy was driving plunged off a bridge on the Massachusetts resort island of Chappaquiddick after a night of partying.

Kennedy’s image was tarnished after it emerged he had failed to report the accident to authorities. He pleaded guilty to leaving the scene and received a suspended sentence.

Kennedy eventually ran for his party’s presidential nomination in 1980 but lost to then-President Jimmy Carter.

His presidential ambitions thwarted, Kennedy devoted himself to his Senate career.

A 2009 survey by The Hill, a Capitol Hill publication, found that Senate Republicans believed Kennedy was the chamber’s easiest Democrat to work with and most bipartisan.

Republican Senator John McCain called him “the single most effective member of the Senate if you want to get results.”


Kennedy had been largely sidelined in Congress since becoming ill. The “Lion of the Senate” began to use a cane and often looked drained as he mixed work with treatment.

Twelve Publishing said Kennedy “worked valiantly” to finish his 650-page autobiography, “True Compass,” which is scheduled to be released September 14.

Colleagues and staff said he remained determined to fulfill what he called “the cause of my life,” providing health insurance to all Americans. He helped draft legislation to overhaul the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, but was sidelined while it was discussed in Congress.

Kennedy’s interest in healthcare dated from his own back injury suffered during a 1964 plane crash that damaged his spine and left him with persistent pain, and later, his son’s bout with cancer in the 1970s.

“I’ve benefited from the best of medicine but I’ve also witnessed the frustration and outrage of patients and doctors alike as they face the challenges of a system that shortchanges millions of Americans,” he wrote in a May 28 issue of the Boston Globe.

Kennedy never fully escaped the cloud of the Chappaquiddick accident. A decades-long argument arose about whether the senator, who was married to Joan Kennedy at the time, tried to cover up his involvement by leaving the scene while Mary Jo Kopechne’s body remained submerged and whether police helped sweep such questions under the rug. All involved denied any cover-up.

Kennedy was divorced from Joan in 1983.

The 1991 Palm Beach rape trial of his nephew, William Kennedy Smith, caught a bloated Uncle Ted in a media glare. Reports of heavy drinking and womanizing led to a public apology for “the faults in the conduct of my private life.”

Kennedy was remarried soon after that to Victoria Reggie, a 38-year-old lawyer with two young children from her first marriage. He poured renewed energy into the Senate, where he would become the third-longest serving senator in history.

Even his Republican foes recognized Kennedy’s dedication as he worked to protect civil rights, give federal help to the poor, contain the spread of nuclear weapons, raise the minimum wage, expand health coverage and improve America’s schools.


Born on February 22, 1932, Edward Moore Kennedy was the last of four sons and five daughters born to millionaire businessman Joseph Kennedy, who would later be ambassador to Britain, and his wife, Rose. Jean Kennedy Smith, is the only surviving sibling.

The Boston Irish family combined the competitive spirit of nouveau riche immigrants with acquired polish and natural charm. The sons were expected to mature into presidential timber and were groomed for that starting with the oldest, Joseph Jr., a bomber pilot who died in World War Two.

“I think about my brothers every day,” Kennedy told Reuters. “They set high standards. Sometimes you measure up, sometimes you don’t.”

(Additional reporting by Thomas Ferraro and Bill Trott in Washington and Patricia Zengerle in Oak Bluffs, Massachusetts; Editing by Alan Elsner and Jackie Frank)

All I have to say about the death of Ted Kennedy is……………..Mary Jo Kopeckne,

may she rest in peace………….

Mary Jo Kopechne

Mary Jo Kopechne

Mary Jo Kopechne (July 26, 1940 – July 18, 1969) was an American teachersecretary and political campaign specialist who died onChappaquiddick Island while a passenger in a car being driven by United States Senator Ted Kennedy.


Kopechne, born in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania,[1] was the only child of insurance salesman Joseph Kopechne and his wife, Gwen.[1] She was of Polish American heritage.[2] The family moved to New Jersey when she was an infant.[1] She attended parochial schools growing up.[3]

After being graduated with a degree in business administration from Caldwell College for Women in New Jersey in 1962,[1][4] Kopechne moved to Montgomery, Alabama, to teach for a year at the Mission of St. Jude[1] as part of the Civil Rights Movement.[5] In 1963, she moved to Washington, D.C., to work as secretary to Florida Senator George Smathers.[1] Kopechne joined New York Senator Robert F. Kennedy‘s secretarial staff, following his election in 1964.[1] There she worked as a secretary to the senator’s speechwriters and as a legal secretary to one of his legal advisers.[1] Kopechne was a loyal and tireless worker for Robert Kennedy, in March 1967 having stayed up all night at hisHickory Hill home to type a major speech against the Vietnam War as the senator and his aides such as Ted Sorenson made last-minute changes to it.[3][6][7]

During the 1968 U.S. presidential election, she helped with the wording of Robert Kennedy’s March 1968 speech announcing his candidacy.[3] During his campaign, she worked as one of the “Boiler Room Girls“, an affectionate name given to six young women who worked from a hot and loud, central windowless location in Kennedy’s Washington campaign headquarters.[3][6][8][2] They were vital in tracking and compiling data and intelligence on how Democratic delegates from various states were intending to vote; Kopechne’s responsibilities included Pennsylvania.[6][8] Kopechne and the other staffers were politically savvy,[8] and they were chosen for their clear heads and ability to work long hours under pressure on sensitive matters.[2] They talked daily with field managers and also served as conduits for policy statements being distributed to strategically-located newspapers.[8]

Kopechne was devastated by the June 1968 assassination of Robert Kennedy, and after briefly working on the Kennedy proxy campaign ofGeorge McGovern, could not return to work on Capitol Hill, saying “I just feel Bobby’s presence everywhere. I can’t go back because it will never be the same again.”[6][2] However, as her father later said, “Politics was her life,”[6] and in December 1968 she used her expertise to gain a job with Matt Reese Associates, a Washington, D.C., firm that helped establish campaign headquarters and field offices for politicians and was one of the first political consulting firms.[1][5][9] By mid-1969 she had completed work for a mayoral campaign in Jersey City, New Jersey.[2] She was on her way to a successful professional career.[10]

She lived in the Georgetown neighborhood with three other women.[1] She was a fan of the Boston Red Sox and fellow Polish American Carl Yastrzemski.[2] She was a devout Roman Catholic with a demure, serious, “convent school” demeanor, rarely drank much, and had no reputation for extramarital activities with men.[9][2][10]


Main article: Chappaquiddick incident

On July 18, 1969, Kopechne attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island, off the coast of Martha’s VineyardMassachusetts, held in honor of the Boiler Room Girls. It was the fourth such reunion of the Robert Kennedy campaign workers.[11]

Kopechne reportedly left the party at 11:15 p.m. with Robert’s brother Ted Kennedy, after he — according to his own account — offered to drive her to catch the last ferry back toEdgartown, where she was staying.[6] She did not tell her close friends at the party that she was leaving and she left her purse and keys behind.[6]

Kennedy drove the 1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 off a narrow, unlit bridge without guardrails that was not on the route to Edgartown and it overturned in the water.[6] Kennedy extricated himself from the vehicle and survived, but Kopechne remained in the vehicle and was found dead.

Kennedy failed to report the incident to the authorities until the car and Kopechne’s body were discovered the next morning.[6] Kopechne’s parents said that they learned of their daughter’s death from Ted Kennedy himself[1] before he reported his involvement to the authorities, but that they learned Kennedy had been the driver only from wire press releases some time later.[4]

A funeral for Kopechne was held on July 22, 1969, at St. Vincent’s Roman Catholic Church in Plymouth, Pennsylvania, attended by Kennedy.[12] She is buried in the parish cemetery on the side of Larksville Mountain.

A week after the incident, Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury. He received a two month suspended sentence.[6] On a national television broadcast that night, Kennedy later said he was not driving under the influence of alcohol nor had he engaged in any immoral conduct with Kopechne.[6]

The Chappaquiddick incident and the death of Kopechne became grist for at least fifteen books, as well as a fictionalized treatment by Joyce Carol Oates. Questions remained about Kennedy’s timeline of events that night, about his actions after the incident, and the quality of the investigation and whether official deference was given to a powerful politician and family.[13]The events surrounding Kopechne’s death damaged Kennedy’s reputation and are regarded as a major reason that he was never able to mount a successful campaign for President of the United States.[14]


  1. a b c d e f g h i j k McFadden, Robert D. (July 20, 1969). “Victim Drawn to Politics“. The New York Times.
  2. a b c d e f g Canellos, Peter (2009). Last Lion: The Fall and Rise of Ted KennedySimon and Schuster. pp. 148–150. ISBN 1439138176.
  3. a b c d Oppenheimer, Jerry (1995). The Other Mrs. Kennedy (4th ed.). Macmillan Books. p. 504. ISBN 0312956002.
  4. a b Damore, Leo (1988). Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up. Washington: Regnery Gateway. pp. 58–59. ISBN 0-89526-564-8.
  5. a b Kappel, Kenneth R. (1989). Chappaquiddick Revealed: What Really Happened. New York: Shapolsky Publishers. p. 16. ISBN 0-944007-64-3.
  6. a b c d e f g h i j k Russell, Jenna (February 17, 2009). “Chapter 3: Chappaquiddick: Conflicted ambitions, then, Chappaquiddick“. The Boston Globe.
  7. ^ Kappel, Chappaquiddick Revealed, p. 189.
  8. a b c d Damore, Senatorial Privilege, pp. 118–119.
  9. a b Clymer, Adam (1999). Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography. New York: Wm. Morrow & Company. pp. 144–145. ISBN 0-688-14285-0.
  10. a b Leamer, Laurence (2004). Sons of Camelot: The Fate of an American DynastyWm. Morrow & Company. pp. 124–125. ISBN 0-06-620965-X.
  11. ^ Damore, Senatorial Privilege, p. 154.
  12. ^ Clymer, Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography, p. 150.
  13. ^ Clymer, Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography, pp. 152–154.
  14. ^ Barone, MichaelCohen, Richard E. (2008). The Almanac of American Politics. Washington: National Journal Group. p. 792. ISBN 0-89234-116-0.

Glenn Beck: A Call to Action

August 31, 2009

August 28, 2009 – 18:42 ET

What a week.

The president said he was going to fundamentally transform America. Since January 20, he’s been racing full steam ahead toward doing just that. This week, can you feel a pivot point? Doesn’t it feel like, as a nation, we are waking up?

We’ve showed you some amazing, frightening facts and the White House hasn’t challenged any of it.

Unfortunately, I guess that means they agree with the information we’ve presented on people like green jobs “czar” Van Jones. He’s an avowed communist and radical activist who co-founded the communist group STORM — a group that describes themselves and their activities as:

“We upheld the Marxist critique of capitalist exploitation. We agree with Lenin’s analysis of the state and the party. And we found inspiration and guidance in the insurgent revolutionary strategies developed by third world revolutionaries like Mao Tse-Tung and Amilcar Cabral.”

The White House hasn’t bothered to even spin the information we presented on FCC diversity “czar” Mark Lloyd. This guy actually lamented the fact that non-state-run radio stations prevented the “incredible” revolution in Venezuela:

MARK LLOYD, FCC DIVERSITY CHIEF: In Venezuela, with Chavez, really an incredible revolution — a democratic revolution — to begin to put in place saying that we’re going to have impact on the people of Venezuela the property owners and the folks who were then controlling the media in Venezuela rebelled — work frankly with folks here in the U.S. government worked to oust him and came back and had another revolution. And Chavez then started to take the media very seriously in this country.

That pesky private sector! It’s just littered with that non-propaganda talk.

Lloyd has talked about balancing out the airwaves — and that’s not just conservatives, that’s everyone who doesn’t agree with the state. Again, the White House is not disputing any of this. That should frighten you. Especially in light of the story on Drudge today about the bill that would give Obama emergency control of the Internet. Wait, that sounds familiar… oh yeah, that’s “czar” Cass Sunstein’s idea.

How about the New York chair of the Apollo Alliance — the people who designed the stimulus package? His name is Jeff Jones. Before deciding who to give yourtax money to, Jones co-founded the Weather Underground with Bill Ayers. The Weather Underground is a domestic terrorist group that came out of the communist revolutionary group Students for Democratic Society of the 1960s.

Does that bother the White House? Apparently not because they haven’t denied any of this, nor have they fired anyone or even denounced these radical backgrounds. And the radical Jones is currently helping New York spend more of the stimulus.

Yet, the White House does seem pretty concerned about you.

The Department of Homeland Security warned of the rise in “right-wing militia” groups — their report said if you are concerned about “legislation on tighter firearms” you could be in a “white supremacist militia movement.”

They are name-calling you.

Saul Alinsky’s big strategy was to take the enemy out of their comfort zone. Van Jones and all of these “czars” know this; they are radicals. To quote Van Jones: “We need to be about the whup-a**. Somebody’s f****ng up somewhere. They have names and job descriptions. You have to be creative about how you engage the enemy, because if you do it on his terms, the outcome is already known.”

You are fighting on their level. We’re taking it. We’re being called greedy hate-mongers who only care about profits whatever else and we cower.

Tonight, I am going to lay out a plan.

Step 1: Fear not and take them on.

We’ve been fighting on their terms — afraid to say anything. It’s time to forget that! Let’s make them uncomfortable with the facts:

— You think I want to starve inner-city children? Really? Let’s look at the policies where radical progressives have had control. The cities with the top 10 poverty rates in America have been run by Republicans only 8 percent of the time since 1965 and eight out of the 11 have been run by Democrats 100 percent of the time.

— Am I the one that hurts education? Washington, D.C., has long been controlled by progressives. They spend $15,000 per student (the national average is $10,000), yet they are still ranked among the worst in the country: Only 60 percent of the kids graduate and only 9 percent will complete college within five years of graduating.

— Am I reckless for supporting gun rights? In England they banned guns in 1998. For the next seven years, the number of deaths and injuries from gun crimes increased 340 percent — because, guess what, criminals aren’t going to wait on a background check on their way to shoot someone.

— I’m “unpatriotic” and “cold-hearted” and even part of “the mob” for opposing government-run health care? When was the last time, in America, you saw patients in hospitals so thirsty they had to drink water from the nearby plants or 4,000 new moms being forced to give birth in hallways because of a shortage of rooms or see someone have their supposedly removed spleen suddenly rupture? Because all of those things did happen in the U.K., where they do have government health care.

The argument isn’t about the facts anymore. When the shouters — on either side — are wrong, instead of admitting it, they just call you a hatemonger. They try and shame you into silence.

We need to screw our courage to the sticking place and, without fear, force them to face the tough questions — no matter what name you’re called or what threat you face because the truth shall set you free.

Sure, groups will come after you. If you disagree with man-made global warming the radicals will attack you and call you a flat-Earth believing, Holocaust-denying, selfish jerk who would rather drive an SUV than save the planet from certain destruction.

But the IPCC report that they so love to quote says the best way to fight global warming isn’t by getting a Prius, it’s by not eating meat. How many of your Earth-loving green friends are vegans? From here on out, when they start lecturing you about the planet, ask: Do you eat meat? Do you have leather shoes? If they say anything else other than “absolutely not,” tell them to sit down and shut up. And when they stop doing more supposed damage with their steak, then you can talk to me about my SUV.

And maybe we’ll also talk about the green jobs “czar,” who sees green jobs like this:

VAN JONES, GREEN JOBS ‘CZAR’: We want a green economy that is strong enough to lift people out of poverty. We’re not leaving anybody behind. We don’t want an eco-elite economy.

We’re talking about people that don’t have a home. How do they get to be part of this green economy?

What good is a green economy if at the end of the day, it’s just eco-apartheid anyway?

Which is it: We need green jobs because the Earth has a temperature (like Al Gore said) or we need green jobs for social justice?

By the way, that’s Marxist code language. Social justice equals “take from him and give to him.”

America, don’t you see it? This isn’t about Republicans vs. Democrats. This is about Republicans and Democrats and Independents against radicals, revolutionaries and anti-capitalist nut jobs.

Almost all Americans love the Constitution and we may disagree with this policy or that, but the fundamental transformation — the change that 80 percent of America was looking for — was a driving out of the money changers — those in bed with special interests, global corporations, Wall Street fat cats and political party hacks.

In the coming weeks on this program I’m going to ask you to continue to watch with a piece of paper because I’m going to continue to expose these connections and plans that are out of step with almost everybody in this country — unless you live in the basement of Nancy Pelosi’s house in the most radically progressive neighborhood in the country while eating arugula and roast beef sandwiches!

But we’re also going to arm you with facts. It’s time to be unafraid and stop fearing name-calling, because sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

And just so you know, for those of you who are working for this revolution at the White House and SEIU and ACORN and Americorps, you should go back and listen to The Beatles’ “White Album.” Listen to a song, co-written by your progressive friend, John Lennon — who got it.

Even during the peak of 1960s radicalism, the Beatles understood:

“You say you want a revolution.
Well, you know,
We all want to change the world.
You say you’ll change the Constitution,
Well, you know,
We all want to change your head.
You tell me it’s the institution,
Well, you know,
You better free your mind instead.
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao,
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow.
Don’t you know know it’s gonna be all right.”

• Is Beck right? Click here to sound off

— Watch Glenn Beck weekdays at 5p & 2a ET on FOX News Channel

Has the Obama administration finally been “outed”? I saw the video clip on Glen Beck’s show and I found it “unnerving”, to say the least. I was taken aback to here Obama’s people saying the model WE should follow is Chavez’ Venezuala!  VENEZUALA???????

It is almost like Obama has declared war on America——Is this the first volley from the forces of the North American Union? The “hostile takeover” of our beloved USA?

If this is going to be your battle cry………..ours will be “OVER OUR COLLECTIVE DEAD BODIES!”

Notice how Obama puts forth the benign “community organizer” schtik as all his “lackys” put all his socialistic nonsense out there.

Well, Mr. President. There is an old adage about an individual being like the company he keeps. And since YOU NEVER come out and disavow any of these socialistic ideas……….we  HAVE TO ASSUME, they are speaking FOR YOU!

Obama’s healthcare messages are backfiring, strategists say

August 22, 2009

The president’s range of abstract arguments for reform are leaving people confused, some Democrats contend.

By Peter Nicholas

August 22, 2009

Reporting from Washington – Democratic strategists say the Obama administration’s evolving, abstract arguments for healthcare reform are backfiring and contributing to a decline in public support for the legislation.

The strategists, many of whom saw healthcare reform fail in the Clinton administration, contend that President Obama has advanced too many rationales for his plan, leaving people confused.

For example, Obama has argued that a new healthcare system is necessary to spur an economic recovery. He also has offered up healthcare as an antidote to rising deficits. Earlier this week in a conference call with religious leaders, Obama laid out a “moral” imperative for revamping the nation’s healthcare system.

At other points, Obama has portrayed “meddling” insurers as a reason for scrapping the existing system.

“One of the difficulties has been that the explanation has changed,” said Howard Paster, a legislative liaison in the Clinton administration. “Originally it was keyed very much to the economy. More recently, emphasis has been placed on issues of fairness and equity. We need to have a consistent set of reasons for doing this.”

Conservative opponents of the overhaul increasingly use a simple, understandable message: Government-forced cost reductions will restrict treatments, imperiling the ill and elderly.

To counter that, the case needs to be made in personal terms, some Democrats have advised. Rather than talk about healthcare’s relation to fiscal policy, the White House should demonstrate how specific constituencies — like the elderly — stand to gain under the plan Obama has championed.

“They have not excelled in that area,” said Chris Jennings, a senior healthcare advisor in the Clinton administration.

Jennings added that the Obama administration must emphasize that “the consequences of inaction are severe, and failure to act is a policy choice that will hurt real people. And the benefits of reform will help key targeted populations. You never want to get to a point in the healthcare debate where people are more comfortable doing nothing than doing something.”

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters Friday that when Obama returns from vacation Aug. 30, he will reengage in the healthcare fight with a compelling message.

The president, Gibbs said, will “continue to tell people about why healthcare reform is important, why we can’t afford to do nothing, the stakes that are involved, and to try to push back on the mistruths and misrepresentations that we all know are still out there about healthcare reform.”

On his final workday before leaving for Camp David and Martha’s Vineyard, Obama talked healthcare strategy with former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle.

In a statement about the meeting, the White House said that the president and Daschle “agreed that substantive reform that lowers costs, reforms the insurance industry, and expands coverage is too important to wait another year or another administration.”

Another distraction for Obama has been uncertainty over his stance on the so-called public option, a government-run program that would serve as an alternative to private health insurance.

The White House contends that its stance is unchanged: The president favors it and wants to sign it into law.

But recently, Obama and other officials also have signaled that the public option is negotiable.

On a TV talk show last weekend, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that a public plan was not “the essential element” of Obama’s healthcare proposal.

Howard Dean, former Democratic National Committee chairman, said: “They’re not all saying the same thing, and that’s one of the problems.”

Others said the administration might be seeking maneuvering room in its dealings with Congress. Previous presidents who racked up significant legislative victories didn’t always spout a consistent message, said Bob Shrum, a longtime Democratic consultant.

“A little bit of zig-zag is probably essential to a successful presidency,” Shrum said.

But if Obama winds up jettisoning the public option, he risks antagonizing labor leaders and liberal supporters who helped him win the presidency.

Asked about Sebelius’ comment, Andrew Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview: “I’ll let her speak for herself. I think it’s pretty essential.”

Maybe the true reason is the people of the United States see what’s in store and are saying “NO WAY!” The are beginning to see that is a lot of “bucks” for not much “bang”. That “piece meal” health care isn’t better for us. Letting  “Dr. Obama” make your health care decisions will get you DEAD!

Obama’s Health Care Whoppers

August 18, 2009

If you take the partisan blinders off, sometimes it gets downright scary.

At his town hall meeting on health care on Saturday in Colorado, President Obama told the audience:

“I just want to be completely clear about this; I keep on saying this but somehow folks aren’t listening — if you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan.”

That is, unless your health care plan is Medicare Advantage — the private insurance options that almost one-fourth of seniors have chosen for their coverage under Medicare. Republicans enacted this choice for seniors, and many, many seniors have chosen one of these private insurance options because they get better benefits from it than from standard Medicare.

President Obama’s health plan targets these Medicare Advantage private plans for $177 billion in cuts in what he misleadingly calls “subsidies”and “sweetheart deals for insurance companies that don’t make anybody any healthier.”At a minimum, these cuts will force these plans to cut back on the benefits they provide to seniors. Or the Medicare Advantage plans may just go out of business altogether, dumping all the seniors who have made that choice because they think they are getting a better deal from those plans.

In these town halls, President Obama has repeatedly denied that his health overhaul scheme includes any cuts in Medicare. But besides slashing Medicare Advantage, the Congressional bills cut over $300 billion more from the program, which the Congressional Budget Office has scored. When arguing that his health overhaul is paid for, he wants credit for these cuts. But when challenged, he wants to deny before the whole country — in broad daylight — that he is doing it. I can’t recall any precedent for such a presidential disconnect from reality.

But it continues. He keeps saying in these town halls that his health overhaul scheme will reduce the deficit. But CBO, which is now in complete control of the Democrat Congressional majorities, says just the opposite, that the plan will increase the deficit by hundreds of billions. But that hasn’t stopped Obama from barnstorming the country openly denying this reality.

And it goes from bad to worse. In Colorado on Saturday, President Obama suggested that his health overhaul scheme would “bend the cost curve,”reducing “health care inflation”so much that the enormous long term deficit of Medicare (unfunded liability: $89 trillion) would be eliminated! Otherwise, he said, “We’ll either have to cut Medicare, in which case seniors then will bear the brunt of it, or we’ll have to raise taxes, which nobody likes.”

But the CBO has not confirmed anything like that. What it has said, again, is just the opposite, that Obama’s health plans will not reduce costs, but, rather, will increase federal spending by close to a trillion dollars.

Of course, President Obama has also repeatedly cited AARP as endorsing his health overhaul scheme although the group has spoken out, on national television, denying that.

Honestly, if you take the partisan blinders off, sometimes it gets downright scary. President Obama suggested in Colorado that “about 100,000 people die every year from preventable diseases and illnesses in hospitals,”and that “50 percent, 75 percent”of these preventable deaths could be eliminated by a doctor’s protocol of “washing your hands, a lot of just basic stuff that costs no money….”Really, President Obama, are you simply so brilliant that you can save 50,000 to 75,000 lives a year by just telling those stupid doctors to wash their hands and do a lot of just basic stuff like that? — Actually, the washing your hands protocol was adopted in the mid-1800s when germs were discovered.

A counter to the Obama health care fairy tales is the study I did for the Heartland Institute, which shows exactly how the Obama health plan will ration and deny you care, will greatly restrict your freedom of choice and control over your health care, will increase health costs rather than reduce them, will increase federal spending, deficits, and debt, and will leave America with uncompetitive tax rates in the global economy.

Peter Ferrara served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush.

How about this as the marketing strategy for the Obama health care program……………

Get ObamaCare——–Free body bags while you wait! Or, how about………..ObamaCare—Its a KILLER program!

With ObamaCare you don’t have to rush to get rid of that growth—–Let it grow -so its easier to find! Well, we could give the Presidents relatives some credit for molding his thinking with……………

ObamaCare———-its what made Kenya the mecca for medical care!

Poll: More Than Half Say Stimulus Isn’t Working

August 18, 2009

The $787 billion stimulus package that Congress passed in February doesn’t seem to be having an effect, at least in the minds of a majority of adults polled by Gallup and USA Today.

The $787 billion stimulus package that Congress passed in February doesn’t seem to be having an effect, at least in the minds of a majority of adults polled by Gallup and USA Today.

The poll out Monday shows 57 percent of adults say the stimulus is having no impact on the economy or making it worse. Worse still, only 18 percent say they see an improvement in their personal situation as a result of the massive federal spending program, and 60 percent say they doubt the economy will be aided by the package in the years ahead.

“This is a wake-up call for the administration,” House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., told USA Today. “People see the stimulus hasn’t worked, and now you want to lay on over $1 trillion in a health care plan.”

The stimulus package contains $499 billion in new spending. Another $288 billion is intended for tax cuts. But as of Aug. 7 $77.1 billion had been distributed, according to the Obama administration Web site, The government says it has designated $200 billion of that money so far.

The Gallup poll mirrors a FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll taken last week that showed 72 percent of say returning the unused portion of the $787 billion dollar stimulus to taxpayers would do more to boost the economy than having the government spend it. Nineteen percent supported continued government spending.

Of a subsample of the USA Today/Gallup poll of 1,010 adults polled between Aug. 6-9, 51 percent say the government spent too much while 31 percent the sum was “about right.” Almost half of those polled said they are very worried about overspending. The margin of error for the poll was 4 percent.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued a statement Monday saying the stimulus package is “paying dividends” even though it still has a long way to go.

“Millions of Americans remain out of work. Families continue to struggle each day just to keep a roof over their heads and put food on the table. But as last month’s encouraging jobs and GDP numbers show, the Recovery Act is helping our nation move in the right direction,” she said.

Click here to read the full results of the USA Today/Gallup poll.

What do you think your Great-Grandchildren will think of all of you “Obama-philes”? The world IDIOTS will more then likely be used.

Anti-War Protesters Want UC Berkeley Prof. Fired

August 18, 2009

BERKELEY, Calif. —  Anti-war activists protested Monday at the University of California, Berkeley to call for the firing of a law professor who co-wrote legal memos that critics say were used to justify the torture of suspected terrorists.

Campus police arrested at least four people who refused to leave the university’s law school building.

The demonstrators said John Yoo should be dismissed, disbarred and prosecuted for war crimes for his work as a Bush administration attorney from 2001 to 2003, when he helped craft legal theories for waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques.

Shouting “war criminal,” the protesters confronted Yoo as he entered a lecture hall on the first day of class at UC Berkeley’s Boalt Hall School of Law, where the tenured professor is teaching a civil law course this semester.

Yoo mostly ignored the demonstrators and waited for police to remove them from the classroom before he began teaching. Several officers then stood outside the lecture hall to prevent protesters and journalists from entering.

Demonstrators also staged a mock arrest of Yoo. Some dressed in black hoods and orange prisoner suits similar to ones seen in infamous photos of Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison, which was closed in 2006 following reports of detainee abuse.

“There is little doubt that John Yoo is a war criminal,” said civil rights attorney Dan Siegel, speaking outside Boalt Hall. “John Yoo went to Washington and created the ideological, political and legal basis for the torture of innocent people.”

Yoo, who returned to UC Berkeley after spending the spring semester at Chapman University School of

Law in Orange County, did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.

Yoo, 42, has defended the controversial interrogation techniques, saying they were needed to protect the country from terrorists after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“To limit the president’s constitutional power to protect the nation from foreign threats is simply foolhardy,” Yoo wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece last month.

He has come under intense criticism since the interrogation memos became public in 2004. The Berkeley City Council has passed a measure calling for the federal government to prosecute him for war crimes, and convicted terrorist Jose Padilla has filed a lawsuit alleging that Yoo’s legal opinions led to his alleged torture.

Christopher Edley Jr., Berkeley’s law school dean, has rejected calls to dismiss Yoo, saying the university doesn’t have the resources to investigate his Justice Department work, which involved classified intelligence.

Berkeley law students are divided over Yoo, whose classes are among the law school’s most popular.

Liz Jackson, a second-year law student, said the university should determine if he violated UC’s faculty code of conduct. “I personally believe he has blood on his hands,” said Jackson, 30.

But Nathan Salha, 24, who took one of Yoo’s classes last year and is enrolled in his course this semester, said he’s a good teacher. “I don’t think it’s the university’s place to fire him for political opinions,” he said.

As we can plainly see, how irrational the far left is. They want somebody fired from their job for their opinions. This is just another “volley” in the war on Constitution. It is clear these individuals only want freedom of speech for everybody that agrees with them. This is a VERY DANGEROUS precedent! Thankfully, for the time being, it is contained in the “hotbed” of wackos—Berkley. But, this also can filter over into the “mainstream” via “Obama-philes” who aren’t much different.

Hillary Clinton shows the world how warm and fuzzy the Obama administration is….

August 11, 2009

KINSHASA, Congo — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s temper flared on Monday when a Congolese university student asked her for her husband’s thinking on an international financial matter.

A week after former President Bill Clinton traveled to North Korea to secure the release of two detained American journalists and stole the limelight from the start of his wife’s first trip to Africa, Clinton was clearly displeased by the question at town hall forum in Kinshasa.

“You want me to tell you what my husband thinks?” she replied incredulously when the male student asked her what “Mr. Clinton” thought of World Bank concerns about a multi-billion-dollar Chinese loan offer to the Congo.

“My husband is not secretary of state, I am,” an obviously annoyed Clinton said sharply. “If you want my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I am not going to be channeling my husband.” (Scroll down for video)

The question was left unanswered as the moderator of the event quickly moved on.

Sidelined for weeks after she was injured during a fall this spring, Clinton returned to a flurry of speculation that she had been shoved to the side as a diplomatic force inside the administration, overshadowed by globe-trotting President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and a bevy of heavyweight special envoys assigned to the world’s critical hotspots.

Clinton launched into a series of high-profile speeches and television appearances. But just as she landed in Africa, her ambitious visit ran into stiff competition from her husband’s secret mission to North Korea, which drew heavy coverage for his role in freeing the two journalists and talking with the regime’s longtime leader, Kim Jong Il.

It was not immediately clear why Clinton reacted with such umbrage, and she quickly recovered her cool and moved on to other subjects Monday. Just before the question that set off her anger, another student had asked if the U.S. and the West felt a need to apologize to the people of Congo for colonialism and postcolonial interference.

“I cannot excuse the past and I will not try,” she said. “We can either think about the past and be imprisoned by it or we can decide we’re going to have a better future and work to make it.”
Clinton is in the middle of a marathon 11-day tour of Africa and has held to a grueling schedule of official meetings and private events that have kept her busy from sunrise to well after sunset.

She returned to the public eye in mid-July with what aides billed as a major foreign policy address at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington. Since then, she has traveled to India and Thailand and now to seven nations in Africa.

Hours after she left Washington for Africa last Monday, news broke that Bill Clinton had gone on the humanitarian mission to North Korea to win the release of Laura Ling and Euna Lee, two television journalists who had been arrested there and sentenced to 12 years at hard labor.

Mrs. Clinton arrived in Kenya to find herself peppered with questions about his role in the secret mission to North Korea.

Well, we see another indication just how our “touchy-feely” our socialist-democratic leaders truly are! Our chief dipolmat, rather then being diplomatic, chose to show the side of herself that many characterize as being “bitchy”. I am sure her manner will go a long way to help overcome the international opinion of us being “arrogant”.

“Community Organizer”- In- Chief Suddenly Silences Free Speech

August 10, 2009

Once upon a time our president wasn’t always down on dissent. After all, he was a community organizer way before he ever became a politician.

“Go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face,” Senator Obama told his supporters on the campaign trail in fall of 2008.

So I suppose he was for bickering before he was against it?

The left has always loved community organizing-when it’s their interest. Heck, they are being lead by an expert in the field. But when regular folks gather to express unhappiness in the form of a dissenting opinion to their progressive agenda, they despise it, delegitimize it and seek to stop it all costs. Grassroots are bad when the roots aren’t firmly planted in the liberal ground. Apparently bills in Congress aren’t the only thing Democrats haven’t read in a while — how about the Constitution? Remember that? Isn’t this enshrined in the Constitution — freedom of Assembly? Isn’t this one of the foundations of our democracy, organizing, getting like-minded people with the same views to come together, whether they’re in Birkenstocks or Brooks Brothers? Last time I looked there was nothing “manufactured” about organizing for or against a cause.

The White House has called the uproar at recent town halls on health care “manufactured outrage.” Senator Harry Reid calls the concerned citizens speaking their minds “loud, shrill voices.”  Nancy Pelosi called protesters Nazis, who are “carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care.” There is no evidence on this whatsoever.

And Senator Barbara Senator Boxer Senator (not to be outdone on insanity by Speaker Pelosi) has objected to the dress code of protesters. (Did I mention she was a Senator??) She claims they’re “too well dressed” to be legit. You just can’t have a real protest without some tie dye, marijuana and a flaming brassiere, huh.

Ma’am, this is what people with jobs look like. I guess one needs to strip to his or her tighty whities to be taken seriously.

But the polling discredits their charges. According to a recent Quinnipiac poll, on Obama’s effort to overhaul of the health-care system, 52 percent disapprove of his handling of the issue while 39 percent approve. Disapproval jumped 10 points in the last month alone, and 60 percent of Independents – a key voting block – disapprove of the plan. Bottom line: the outrage is real.

Despite the legitimacy of the public’s concern, demonizing democracy has become pretty common these days for the left. They wrote off the tea parties as fabricated and claimed they were funded by FOX News . Most of the mainstream media took their cue from them and refused to report on the gatherings. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the “fairness doctrine” on broadcasters in order to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. And the administration has already tried to label anyone who speaks up as a “radical right wing extremist.”

By dismissing the anger of conservatives, moderates, libertarians, conservative democrats  and independents the administration looks out of touch and appallingly arrogant. In fact, it will hurt them even more because Obama promised to listen to the concerns of the citizens, not operate with a tin ear.

Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Now they are its fiercest opponents. In case they have forgotten, the root of the word “democrat” means power to the people. That means ALL people. Even when they aren’t wearing tie dye.

Andrea Tantaros is a conservative commentator and columnist for Read more from Andrea

More and more are starting to see what I have been saying all along . How the “Social-crats” i.e. the Socialist Democrats,  are  nothing more then European Socialists who long for the days of having a government like they had in the former Soviet Union. Where they had the “elite” ruling class, i.e. party officials, and then they had “the masses”. The party officials lived like royalty and the “masses” lived like peasants. Gee, I kind of get that feeling now with the Senator of California ( Boxer) already!

Every time I read Barbara Boxer’s quotes, I suddenly get this picture in my head of Marie Antoinette. Hmm, I Wonder why? Could it be the condescension of her statements? Her belittling of opposing points of view? Or maybe its because she is downright arrogant?

The President seems to be cut from the same cloth as Boxer. He isn’t as grating on you as she is. He does it with a smile on his face. But the under lying condescension is there. Will these two try to silence us? Yes, they will try. They might even have some minor successes. In the end, I still have some faith in the American spirit. That same spirit that drives people to scream and shout when they are told to be quiet and obey. The same spirit, that when told no you can’t, says oh yes we will. The one that knows that WE THE PEOPLE are not the “peasant class” but, in fact, are the RULING CLASS!