The Un-American Candidate

A lot of attention was paid to the photo on the left of Barack Obama "forgetting" to put his hand over his heart during the national anthem during a campaign event.

Not being one who looks for a conspiracy behind every fault, I didn't find it alarming and gave Mr. Obama the benefit of the doubt that he was probably nervous or distracted at the moment.

And when Mr. Obama said that he didn't wear a U.S. flag pin on his lapel because it wasn't necessary to prove one's patriotism, I again gave him the benefit of the doubt.

But I can't give him that benefit anymore.

During a campaign stop in Milwaukee his wife, Michelle Obama, said: “People in this country are ready for change and hungry for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”

Michelle Obama is only now "proud of her country"?

America is the country that advances freedom, liberty, and economic opportunity to the rest of the world.

America is the country that has freed hundreds of millions of people from Fascists, Nazis, Taliban, vicious dictators, malaria, AIDS, starvation, communism, Marxism, and slavery worldwide without asking for anything back.

America is the country that has willingly sacrificed the lives of hundreds of thousands of our best and bravest young men and women to help people of all religions, ethnic, and racial origins free themselves of tyranny without asking for anything back.

America is the country where Barack and Michelle Obama have lived the American dream. They are proof that in America "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" aren't just words on a paper but the essence of the American culture and way of life.

The Obama campaign has tried to deflect criticism of Michelle's comments with the usual political spin, but it rings hollow when you look at the track record of this couple.

The most alarming thing about this election cycle is not the lack of qualified candidates, but the willingness of the American public to support and elect people who loathe the country and the Constitution that gives them this opportunity to achieve the highest political office in the world.

The New Climate Trend: Global Cooling

A few months ago, it was quietly reported in the media that in actuality the earth had stopped warming in the late 1990's and that the earth had maintained the same temperature ever since.

Now scientists who study the cycles of solar activity are telling us that the earth is probably going to enter a cooling phase that might last for over a century.

Here's a couple of excerpts from Investors Business Daily:

Kenneth Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada's National Research Council, is among those looking at the sun for evidence of an increase in sunspot activity.
Solar activity fluctuates in an 11-year cycle. But so far in this cycle, the sun has been disturbingly quiet. The lack of increased activity could signal the beginning of what is known as a Maunder Minimum, an event which occurs every couple of centuries and can last as long as a century.
Such an event occurred in the 17th century. The observation of sunspots showed extraordinarily low levels of magnetism on the sun, with little or no 11-year cycle.
This solar hibernation corresponded with a period of bitter cold that began around 1650 and lasted, with intermittent spikes of warming, until 1715. Frigid winters and cold summers during that period led to massive crop failures, famine and death in Northern Europe.

Contrary to the claims of the global warming alarmists, scientists are finding no connection between increased CO2 in the atmosphere and global warming. Here's another excerpt from the same article:

As we have noted many times, perhaps the biggest impact on the Earth's climate over time has been the sun.
For instance, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Solar Research in Germany report the sun has been burning more brightly over the last 60 years, accounting for the 1 degree Celsius increase in Earth's temperature over the last 100 years.
R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Center of Canada's Carleton University, says that "CO2 variations show little correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales."
Rather, he says, "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."
Patterson, sharing Tapping's concern, says: "Solar scientists predict that, by 2020, the sun will be starting into its weakest Schwabe cycle of the past two centuries, likely leading to unusually cool conditions on Earth."
"Solar activity has overpowered any effect that CO2 has had before, and it most likely will again," Patterson says. "If we were to have even a medium-sized solar minimum, we could be looking at a lot more bad effects than 'global warming' would have had."

The evidence is growing that the earth's warming and cooling cycles are driven by solar activity, not by human activity such as burning fossil fuels.

Global warming activists are only using the issue of climate change to change human behavior, not to save the earth. Their goal is to suppress free-market capitalism and industry, cripple the United States economy, and grow government by introducing laws that tell us what kind of light bulbs to use, what kind of cars to drive, and how many children families should have.

Such laws and regulations not only result in less individual freedom and liberty, but also threaten the American way of life and it's culture.

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

What's splitting the Reagan coalition?

How is it that a successful conservative governor who wants to eliminate the IRS, defend the sanctity of life and marriage, appoint judges like Scalia and Roberts, and fight Islamic fascism to the finish is running third in the Republican primaries?

Answer: Since mid-November of 2007, there has been a push by the conservative "new media" to destroy the Republican opponents of Mitt Romney.

The dominant conservative publication The National Review had set the tone for this by endorsing Mitt Romney. Around the same time, Rush Limbaugh was visiting his idol from childhood, William Buckley, the founder of The National Review and considered by many to be the founder of the modern conservative movement.
Within days, Rush Limbaugh and other "conservative" talk show hosts and columnists were excoriating Huckabee.

Instead of offering an honest analysis of Huckabee's political career, they sought to portray him as a hayseed born-againer who loved raising taxes and wanted to bring about an Orwellian Big Brother state.

In the meantime, Romney decided to go negative against Huckabee in Iowa, where Huckabee had grabbed the lead. Romney's attack ads were a blatantly dishonest attempt to portray Huckabee as a crime loving tax-raiser, and, coupled with the constant barrage of misinformation from the talk shows, alienated a core constituent group of social conservatives who correctly recognized the attacks on Huckabee as a slam against themselves and their values.

The rift that is now splitting the conservatives will not be healed during this election process. The Christian right and the FairTax activists now see that they are welcome just as long as they go along with the Republican establishment. To think that someone like Huckabee who represents these groups should be president is considered heresy by the elitists who want to control the nomination process.

The secular elitists who enjoy the posh lifestyle and rubbing elbows with political snobs are embarrassed that grass-roots activists like conservative Christians and FairTaxers are in their tent and are succeeding in driving them out, ensuring that a liberal, be it Romney, McCain, Clinton, or Obama will be in the White House next year.

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Today's News...

Cost of Romney's Mass. Health-care Plan Skyrocketing

According to recent reports, the cost of Massachusetts' health insurance mandate will rise 85 percent, or $400 million, in 2009. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R), meanwhile, has been on the presidential campaign trail praising the program he put into place.

According to The Boston Globe, the cost increase is largely due to an increase in the number of people signing up for state-subsidized health insurance. State and federal taxpayers are likely to shoulder the cost increase.

"Essentially, the people who signed up under the mandate were the people who were getting subsidies," said Michael Tanner, director of health and welfare studies at the libertarian Cato Institute.

Carmen Balber, a consumer advocate at Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, added, "What we've seen happen in Massachusetts is that lots of people are signing up for subsidized care," although "just 7 to 8 percent of the people who have newly signed up for health insurance have enrolled in a program they must pay full price for."

Tanner told Cybercast News Service that the state will likely need to raise taxes to cover the additional costs.

Romney, however, has been campaigning on the health insurance plan as a success.

"We put in place a plan that gets every citizen in our state health insurance, and it didn't cost us new money," he said during the Republican debate in New Hampshire on Jan. 5. "It didn't require us to raise taxes."

Mitt Romney likes to brag that he got universal coverage in Massachusetts without a tax increase," said Tanner. "I don't think that's going to be true for long."
Click here for full story...

Today's News...

The Truth About The Economic Stimulus Package

What a way to buy votes.

With the threat of a recession looming in the near future, President Bush and Congress agreed to an economic stimulus package of "tax rebates" for lower to middle class households.

People eligible would get anywhere from $300-$1200 in the hope that they will spend the money and restore the lost momentum in the U.S. economy.

The $150 billion package would also give businesses $50 billion in tax incentives.

The normally super-slow federal government displayed tremendous speed in developing this package, which proves that when it comes to buying votes, both parties can spend recklessly and without regard for sound economic principles.

Many of the recipients do not pay taxes, so to call it a "tax rebate" is foolish. It is really a welfare check.

No word yet on where the money for this package comes from.

It would have been better to just tell everyone that does pay taxes to deduct the allotted rebate from their next payment to the IRS, but that wouldn't buy as many votes for either party.

Better yet, the best way to stimulate the economy would be to pass H.R. 25, also known as the FairTax. The FairTax would unleash the economic power of individuals, small businesses, and large corporations.

With the FairTax, every person with a job or business pays no income tax, so they get a full paycheck instead of having deductions taken from their pay and sent to the government agencies like the IRS and Social Security Administration.

The income tax is then replaced with a national sales tax of about 23%, which replaces the embedded taxes that are found in every product or service.

The result is that the prices of products and services remains virtually unchanged while reducing the size of government, getting the IRS out of our lives, and giving the poorest of Americans a real economic boost.

Today's News...