There was a shooting at an Apple store in West Virginia, on Friday morning, 7/3. Watch the clip below and listen closely to the reporter's description of the alleged shooter.
Witnesses report hearing a loud bang coming from the back room followed by a woman screaming. A thin-framed, black male believed to be in his twenties and wearing a fake beard was seen fleeing from the rear of the store.
Why, I wonder, was the alleged perpetrator's race left out of the Fox News affiliate's report? And don't they think that might be a little relevant when actually looking for this possible suspect? Was he afraid that those crazy folks in West Virginia were going to pull out their white hoods and shotguns and go hunting for any skinny young man who happens to black? I would love to believe that if the person seen "fleeing from the rear of the store" were white, that the reporter would also not report that relevant fact, buuut, somehow I doubt he would take that approach.
This is how subtle political correctness in the culture can be. The straight-forward reporting of a tragic shooting, gets turned into a culturally sensitive moment toward the African-American community. And who, exactly is served by the reporter's failure to mention the race of the man seen fleeing from the store? It isn't the neighborhood in which this thin-framed person lives. Only one person is served by the reporter not doing his job: The person who pulled the trigger.
A while back, I heard Obama bragging about his first few months in the White House. When he claimed he had done as much in that period as any president in history, my initial thought was that for the first time in his life he was being modest. Frankly, I think he’s done more, much more, and I only wish that some of it had been good for America.
He’s taken over car companies, banks and lending institutions. He’s printed so much currency that he’s the envy of counterfeiters and con men everywhere. He’s buried the nation in so much debt that children born 40 years down the road will be greeted with a slap on the butt and a lien on future earnings. For good measure, the Community Organizer in Chief has created more czars than the Romanovs.
Still, we’re told, a majority of Americans like Obama. That would absolutely confound me if I wasn’t already aware that a lot of people think David Letterman, Jon Stewart and Bill Maher, are funny.
But liberals are always, in the words of the Siamese king, a puzzlement. For instance, when I was five years old, my family still lived in Chicago. One day, I recall, a cousin came running up the stairs and pounded on the door to breathlessly announce that President Roosevelt was dead. The way my parents and older brothers reacted, you’d have thought the Nazis had just stormed ashore at Lake Michigan. My parents were grief-stricken. For the life of me, I couldn’t figure out why. I remember thinking how odd it was that my family was so sad over the death of someone who’d never even visited our apartment.
Well, of course that’s the way a child would think. But the truth is, I’m now 69 years old and I still can’t figure it out. To this day, FDR holds a warm spot in the hearts of most Jews for reasons I can’t begin to imagine. There is nothing in FDR’s record that shows he had positive feelings about Jews. Some people have even suggested that, with his patrician background, he probably had a negative attitude. But the fact remains that he refused to let the Jews aboard the St. Louis disembark, and instead forced the ship and its passengers to return to Europe, back into the hands of the Nazis. For good measure, FDR, although urged by many, also refused to bomb the railroad tracks leading to the concentration camps.
Although FDR’s apologists like to point out that there were a great many isolationists in and out of Congress who opposed our entry into World War II, the fact remains that in the end Hitler declared war on us and not the other way around.
I know many Jews who think that because Rahm Emanuel, a Jew, has Obama’s ear, it means Israel can rely on Obama’s better instincts. What they are ignoring is that Mr. Emanuel is a longtime veteran of Chicago politics, which means that power and influence are an end in themselves. And as every tyrant and left-winger will tell you, the ends justify the means. With friends like Obama and Emanuel, Israel doesn’t need any enemies, although God knows they have plenty.
One of the things that annoys me the most about Obama is how easily he lies. One of the things that annoys me about the media is the way they enable him to get away with it.
For instance, when he jammed through the trillion-dollar pork pie, he claimed it was so urgently needed, he couldn’t spare the legislators even 48 hours to plow through the 1,100 pages. However, once they passed the bill, Obama waited four days before flying off to Denver to sign it.
Lately, there’s been a video making the rounds on the Internet showing one of Obama’s female bureaucrats being grilled by a congressional committee that was trying to find out where a couple of trillion dollars might have gone missing. I almost felt sorry for the lady as she shuffled her papers around, as if the money might be hiding between the pages. After six or seven minutes of this hilarious, but chilling, charade, I fully expected her to say her dog ate it.
A second lie that recently went unquestioned by the media was Obama’s claim that he had only given President Sarkozy short shrift when he was in France because it was essential that he get back to the Oval Office and make those tough decisions that only he can make. And, sure enough, it turned out that within an hour of his return to Washington, he was on the golf course, making one of those gut-wrenching executive decisions -- deciding whether to use a putter or a sand wedge from the edge of a bunker.
Wait, you may say, Independence Day isn’t until July 4th.
If you think that’s true, think again. For while the Continental Congress adopted our Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, it was on July 2 that that body officially declared independence from Great Britain by voting in favor of the Lee Resolution.
Named for its author, Virginia Delegate Richard Henry Lee, the Lee Resolution stated:
Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown; and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.
Lee originally presented his resolution to Congress on June 7, and July 1 was chosen as the date for consideration of the resolution. In the meantime, however, a committee was appointed to draft a more formal declaration of independence. Interestingly, Lee was not appointed to the committee, but the reason was hardly a difference of opinion or viewpoint. Rather, on the day Lee presented his original resolution, he received word of illness among his family members. So, he immediately took leave of Philadelphia and set out for his home in Virginia.
With Lee gone, the men chosen to craft the declaration of independence were John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston, and Thomas Jefferson.
It was this formal Declaration of Independence that Congress adopted on July 4, 1776, two days after actually declaring independence. Not surprisingly, the wording of second Declaration mirrored that of the first (and, truth be told, also echoed the words and ideas of thinkers past, including John Locke, Scottish Reformer John Knox, and Samuel Rutherford, also of Scotland.)
But isn’t a few minutes worth devoting in return for the blood and sacrifice of those who made it possible?
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass [sic] our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat [sic] the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish [sic] brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:
Column 1 Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton
Column 2 North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton
Column 3 Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton
Column 4 Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean
Column 5 New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark
Column 6 New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
Barack Obama's honeymoon among likely voters slipped away in the dog days of summer. As unemployment rose by another 467,000 to 9.5% in June, the Bush economy has now become the Obama economy and voters are not pleased.
The economy is unsurprisingly the dominant concern of voters. In May, a narrow majority of voters gave Obama excellent or good ratings on his handling of the economy. As June turns to July, that number has collapsed to 42% with only 30% trusting Obama to handle the economic crisis in the future. Only 10% believe Obama's promise to cut their taxes and 73% believe that government spending will increase. (This last finding begs the question of on what planet the other 27% are living?)
Government ethics somewhat surprisingly comes in a close second to the economy as a major concern of voters. It appears voters are beginning to look past Obama's charisma and are catching on that the President has been lying to them continuously. Only 47% of voters now rate Obama's ethics as excellent or good and only 39% think his ethics superior to the average politician.
National security and terrorism has slipped to the fourth most important concern of voters, substantially behind the economy and ethics. Only 44% of voters now rate Obama's national security ability as excellent or good.
Finally, the facade that Obama is a political moderate has completely fallen apart. A full 70% view Obama as a liberal. Too bad Rasmussen did not ask voters how many considered Obama to be a socialist.
Is this the free market at work or has the MSM finally gone off the deep end and joined Soviet era reporting practices?
Politico broke a story this morning and it was not in their classified section. The Washington Post is offering an "underwriting opportunity" for an "intimate and exclusive ... Salon, an off-the-record dinner and discussion at the home of CEO and Publisher Katharine Weymouth." If the Russian newspaper does not mind, maybe this D.C. newspaper can officially change its name to Washington Pravda.
If you have $25,000 to $250,000 lying around you too can have access to "key Obama administration and congressional leaders" in order to express your or your company's concerns Federal take-over of the health care industry. ... BUT WAIT ... THAT'S NOT ALL!!!
In addition to having an "intimate ... off-the-record ... discussion" with "key Obama administration and congressional leaders" you also get access to WaPravda “health care reporting and editorial staff."
... SCREEECCHH ...
WAIT A MINUTE! ... A part of America's allegedly free-press is selling access to the current administration and its reporting and editorial staff?!?
Well, not quite, according to a newsroom memo that went out after Politico broke the lobbyist flier story. Per this memo, editor Marcus Brauchli stated,
"[newsroom personnel] will not participate in events where promises are made that in exchange for money The Post will offer access to newsroom personnel or will refrain from confrontational questioning."
Well, isn't that special. I wonder what reporter will be brave enough to find the list of those who buy a ticket to attend the boss's shindig, where lobbyists, CEO, and other company executives have bought access to the President and Congress. What reporter will have the guts to go after the story of what was discussed, what promises were made and what White House and Congressional personnel were present. I'm guessing that the only ones who might take on this tough task are those who don't particularly value their jobs.
Maybe they can find someone from the sports pages. But I doubt even there you'll find someone who would look twice at this obvious breach of media ethics.
Can we please, please, please NOW stop pretending that the Mainstream Media Outlets are unbiased sources of information.
This article may not be interesting to those of you who enjoy my political posts, but it's nice to have something positive to write about. I had an unexpected visit yesterday, and I would like to take a minute to share the story.
Occaisionally, people contact me via email to let me know they like my artwork. At this point in my career, that is a huge encouragement. Better still, are the people who check in on me regularly to ask how I am doing and let me know they keep up with the blogs. In an age of computer driven anonymity, it is nice to know people care enough to reach out and encourage one another. This is how I first met Laura, who is a dance instructor from Brooklyn. The main focus of her program is to pass on family histories and personal experiences through the medium of dance.
As it turns out, she was on a road trip with her sister's family this week, from New Hampshire to Texas. I received an email from Laura on Monday night asking if my work was available for viewing. She wanted to 'stop off' in Atlanta on her way home if I didn't mind. Seeing as how my work is just hanging around the house, I said come on by. To be honest, I didn't expect her to call me. However, yesterday afternoon, Laura called to say she was heading to Atlanta, and would like directions to my house.
I greatly enjoyed the opportunity to meet Laura, and not just because she likes my work. She is an interesting and intelligent woman who faces many of the same obstacles I do. Imagine being a dance instructor in the Northeast, surrounded by Liberals, while being politically Conservative in your views. Needless to say, our common experiences led to a lengthy conversation on how we can make a place for like-minded people in the arts.
Luckily, Christopher and I have already laid the groundwork here at Liberatchik. Being at the forefront of a movement is a very demanding, and sometimes lonely, endeavor. I spend long hours on the computer, away from my family and my art. However, meeting Laura, and seeing her enthusiasm for my work and ideas is all the encouragement I need to persevere. Who knows how many other people are out there, with the same passions and vision, who are afraid to be openly political with their Liberal friends.
I hope that I will soon have the opportunity to introduce Laura to you as well, through Liberatchik. I feel that she will be a wonderful addition to our team.
The Washington post reports that Justice Ginsburg wrote in her dissent.
“Congress endeavored to promote equal opportunity in fact, and not simply in form,” she said. “The damage today’s decision does to that objective is untold.”
I have nothing wrong with dissent or with opposing viewpoints, but a supreme court Justice of the United States of America should know the difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. I read most of her dissent, work got in the way of my finishing it.
The idea that Supreme Court Justices should legislate from the bench, or rule according to their preference for equality is repulsive.
What kind of support would there be for Cap & Trade system, which the House passed by a mere 7 votes last week, if the media did its job and reported these comments.
Then candidate Obama on his Cap & Trade system:
The language in that clip is shocking to say the least, and I'm not just referring to his acknowledgement that his plan would be an effective tax increase on every American household. I'm referring to his off the cuff comments about forcing the People and their Representatives to accept his vision.
"Can you get the American People to say this is really important and force their Representatives to do the right thing? That requires mobilizing a citizenry. That requires them understanding what is at stake."
Who is the "you" that will engage in "mobilizing a citizenry" and forcing Representatives into action? The Media? The Federal Government?
Apparently part of "mobilizing a citizenry" and "forcing their Representatives to do the right thing" involves bankrupting the Coal Industry and picking winners and losers in the realm of energy production.
"I ... called for a 100% auction on the Cap and Trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases that was emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which, whatever technologies are out there being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the riggers of that market and the wratched down caps that are placed, uh, imposed every year. Soif somebody wants to build a coal powered plant, they can. It's just that it will bankrupt thembecause they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted. ... That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in Solar, Wind, Biodiesel, and other alternative energy approaches. ... If we set rigorous standards for the allowable emissions then we can allow the market to determine and technology and entrepreneurs to pursue what's the best approach to take. As opposed to us saying, at the outset, here are the winners that we're picking, and maybe we pick wrong and maybe we pick right."
So the Federal Government will bankrupt anyone who wants to build a coal plant and impose riggers "every year" on any "technologies that are being presented" and on any "power plants that are being built," but that doesn't mean that they are picking winners and losers? And remember when then Candidate, now President, Obama says "we" will have billions of dollars to "invest" he is not talking about private entrepreneurs, he means the bureaucrats in Washington D.C. giving companies that do the Federal Government's bidding taxpayers money. If that isn't picking winners and losers then I don't know what is.
Don't even get me started on his ill-informed comments about Nuclear Power.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has finally resolved that state's recount battle for US Senate and the "Land of 10,000 Lakes" is sending none other than SNL alum and failed Air America talk show ranter, Al Franken, to Washington:
I only wish I was kidding.
Exit Question: After electing wrestler Jesse Ventura and then clown Al Franken to statewide political offices, has Minnesota officially eclipsed Cah-LEE-fornia as the least serious state in the Union?
