obama

Reflecting Left Wing Thought, America Is "Embarrassing" According To Hollywood Mogul

As we approach Thanksgiving, perhaps the most cherished national holiday, where Americans of all stripes give thanks in their own way for the blessings of living in this bountiful, generous and prosperous country, rife with opportunities for all, we have an example of one of what the Left really thinks about America. It comes from Harvey Weinstein, a Hollywood Honcho and big time fundraiser for Left Wing causes and candidates; and friend not only of Bill, but of Barrack. He's a major producer, the former head of Miramax studios and other plum jobs at media and entertainment companies that affect our culture and impact how and what information we receive. It's fair to say he's reflective of what the mainstream Left thinks of America. The recent interview was with CNN's Piers Morgan and is so appalling, even the liberal Morgan is exasperated at Weinstein's nonsense:

Weinstein speaks for the Left: It's never Obama's fault and you better not criticize him. It's America's fault first, last and always.

President Obama: “Thank You Planned Parenthood And God Bless You.”

Earlier today, President Barack Obama spoke at a Planned Parenthood fundraiser and ended his speech with, "Thank you Planned Parenthood and God bless you.” (See video above.) I was repulsed.

In stark contrast, less than 24 hours prior, Victoria Cobb, president of The Family Foundation, gave the keynote address at a Pregnancy Resource Center. In light of the president's remarks, the words of her address came to mind as I reeled at the audacity of the president's closing. Allow me to share a portion of her speech as you ponder the president's remarks:

Infants are made in the womb, like no other being, a little less than the angels, and they are made in the womb by God and crowned with glory and majesty [Psalm 8:5]. In other words, their supreme place in creation under God is so profound, even at the stage of being infants, that when they open their mouths to cry or coo or babble as a human being, they are bearing witness to their unspeakable dignity in creation and therefore to the majesty of God's name — their Creator — in all the earth . . . and we wonder why abortion is divisive? We wonder why this issue is perhaps the most profound of our day? We wonder why those who advocate for abortion as a right and dismiss the humanity of the womb do so with such vigor?

Killing God's creation in the womb is attacking the majesty of God in the universe . . . John Piper puts it succinctly: "You cannot worship and glorify the majesty of God while treating His supreme creation — humanity — with contempt."

My friends, this isn't about rights. This isn't about the ability of women to have control over their bodies. This isn't even about the rights of the unborn to live. It isn't about us. This is about the majesty and the glorification of God the Father!  Every birth glorifies God. Every decision to deny birth denies God glory.

There are few things in life I am more confident of than this: contrary to what the president alludes, God does not bless the mission of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in America. How do I know this? Like Victoria said, it's not a pro-life, pro-abortion reason. It's a God reason. God desires for His character to be revealed. He desires for His glory and His majesty to be displayed over all the earth so that His creation might worship Him. And His majesty is not displayed in the destruction of innocent human life.

When man worships a god (not God) that blesses the destruction of life, we cannot be surprised when we see the depravity the false worship exudes into culture. The satirical poem by Steve Turner titled Creed states it well:

If chance be the father of all flesh,
Disaster is his rainbow in the sky.
And when you hear "State of Emergency,"
"Sniper Kills Ten," "Troops on Rampage,"
"Youths Go Looting," "Bomb Blasts School,"
It is but the sound of man worshiping his maker.

As we reflect on the president's closing at the Planned Parenthood Gala, let us worship and glorify the Maker. To Him belongs all honor and majesty.

Incredible Irony: Pro-Abortion Obama White House Considers Unborn Babies People For Security

Politicians and hypocrisy are no strangers. Big Government bureaucracy and red tape that creates procedures and jargon less understandable than Martian long ago became a begrudging fact of life when dealing with, and trying to comprehend, Washington (and even state an local officials of the government class). But the sheer absurdity of the latest from the Obama White House defies all comprehension. Apparently, the White House, under the management of the most pro-abortion-on- demand president ever — the same people who attempt to dehumanize unborn children by refusing to call them anything but a "fetus" or a "zygote" — requires pregnant women guests to register their unborn children as visitors! Last week it was disclosed that the Director of the White House Visitor's Office, Ellie Shafer, e-mailed members of Congress and others providing detailed instructions on how to register an unborn child during White House visits for security reasons. Never mind out of control Secret Service agents or White House state dinner party crashers; never mind Homeland Security two years ago stating that Tea Party members and Christian conservatives were potential security risks. The Obama administration is all over that massive threat the invasion of  unborn children pose to the White House.

Ms. Shafer's memo, in full:

We have received a number of calls regarding how to enter security information for a baby that has not yet been born.

Crazy as it may sound, you MUST include the baby in the overall count of guests in the tour. It’s an easy process.

LAST NAME: The family’s last name

FIRST NAME: "Baby" as a first name

MIDDLE NAME: NMN as in No Middle Name

DOB: Use the date you are submitting the request to us as their birthday

GENDER: if the parents know put that gender down if not, you can enter either M or F as we’ll ask you to update it at the time of birth

SOCIAL: As they will not have a SSN and are under 18, you will not need to enter this field. Again if the spreadsheet asked for a social enter 9 zero’s (not the word nine zeros but 000000000 and yes it happens!)

CITIZEN/CITY/STATE: The citizen, city and state should be entered the same as the parents

The White House not only wants the information requested, but follow up information after the baby is born! Of course, that's assuming the baby is born. Right there, in the District of Columbia, it is legal to abort an unborn child right up until the moment of birth (see NRLC.org).

Douglas Johnson, the National Right to Life Committee's legislative director, told Steven Ertelt of LifeNews.com:

It is ironic that President Obama’s staff recognizes the existence of unborn babies for purposes of providing security within the White House — yet, there is no indication that President Obama has any problem with the fact that throughout the District of Columbia, abortion is now legal for any reason up to the moment of birth. Notably, the (e-mail) provides no guidance on what the staff should do if an unborn baby is first registered for security purposes, but then aborted.

Maybe the Obama White House, which doesn't seem to mind "sanctuary cities," is creating a sanctuary for unborn children — visit the White House, escape D.C. abortionists. Confirming its intention of counting the unborn child as a person, the form even considers the day of the visit request as the date of birth. (Imagine the president's headache, making phone call apologies to all the pro-abortion groups and allies in Congress.)

Another great irony, pointed out by GOPUSA.com founder and columnist Bobby Eberle, is that pro-abortion and left-wing groups oppose fetal rights and protections bills in the Congress and state legislatures, claim that it is impossible to give "a bunch of cells" rights, privileges and protections, and to do so would make contraception illegal, and contort the legal system by allowing a non-living being the right to sue, yada, yada, yada. Meanwhile, the man they thought could lower the level of the seas may not have accomplished that goal, but he has given life to the unborn, legitimized the pro-life argument and undercut his pro-abortion allies — all in one of those ironic, bureaucratic ways. That does give us hope for change.

Judge Not? Will General Assembly On Monday Elect Controversial Attorney To State Bench?

One of the General Assembly's most important jobs is to elect judges throughout Virginia. The commonwealth is made up of four levels of state courts is ascending order: General District and Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts, Circuit Courts, Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of Virginia. Virginia has 32 districts and within each district there is a court in each city and county. On Monday, the General Assembly will return to Richmond to deal with Governor Bob McDonnell's budget amendments and with the appointment of judges. Currently, there are several vacancies throughout the court system. The appointment of state judges usually receives very little public input. Legislators make recommendations to Senate and House committees, which certify that the nominees are qualified members of the Virginia bar, under state law.

One of the individuals who will be voted on by the General Assembly Monday as a nominee for a judgeship, Tracy Thorne-Begland, has a long history of political activism, was at the forefront of repealing the federal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" policy, and once served as a board member and vice chairman for Equality Virginia, the commonwealth's largest and most influential homosexual activist group. In fact, this nominee for Richmond’s 13th General District Court was with President Obama when he signed the repeal of DADT. Additionally, Mr. Thorne-Begland has lashed out publicly against Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli on a host of issues related to the homosexual agenda, saying, "He’s already stood in the way" in relation to Mr. Cuccinelli's urging of public colleges and universities to follow state law when it comes to non-discrimination policies. Thorne-Begland also criticized Mr. Cuccinelli for being "against hate crime laws" and "employment discrimination" protections based on sexual behavior.

One statement he made in 2004 in particular stands out. In an interview with Richmond Magazine, Thorne-Begland said, "In Virginia, we’re seeing a different situation. The situation is so hostile to gay and lesbian interests, particularly the judicial system, a lot of gay and lesbians choose to leave." It’s the "particularly the judicial system" statement that is especially concerning. Does he plan to use his position as a judge to accomplish his political agenda?

In 2004, Mr. Thorne-Begland was asked his opinion of the Marriage Affirmation Act, a law that was the model for Virginia's Marriage Amendment, and Virginia's climate toward homosexuals. Mr. Thorne-Begland signaled his optimism and said:

Perfect example: Virginia is the only state in the union that allows businesses to decide whether they can offer health care to gays and lesbians. When progressive representatives in the legislature sought to require businesses to extend domestic-partner benefits, laws are adopted that outright coerce Virginians to accept this way of thinking.

Mr. Thorne-Begland's thoughts regarding the use of coercion to change minds and force private businesses to follow his agenda flies directly in the face of free market political principles. The question is, will his personal political agenda take precedent over Virginia law and the constitution? Is he going to uphold laws he clearly and very publicly disagrees with? What does he believe is the role of the courts in moving in a more "progressive" direction? These concerns have come to light in the time since members of the General Assembly's Judicial Appointment subcommittee interviewed him.

There is additional concern that, once appointed, a progressively minded judge would be fast-tracked by a liberal governor or president to a higher court, such as the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Considering that judges have extraordinary power, one would hope that they would have a commitment to the state and federal constitutions that overrides their personal political agendas. When one is a judicial nominee who has shown himself to be willing to personally violate the law (he violated DADT while in the Navy) and publicly attack a sitting attorney general who is enforcing the law, we share the concerns of several members of the General Assembly, and would hope that it takes a long, hard look at whether that person should elected to the bench.

Until we can be assured he will not put his obvious political agenda ahead of the law, we don't believe he should be approved.

If you would like to express your opinion to your senator and delegate about the General Assembly's consideration of Tracy Thorne-Begland to a judgeship, please click here.

Media Seeks TFF's Opinion On President Obama's Political Coming-Out-Of-The-Closet

The unintended consequences of President Obama's coming out of the political closet to tell everyone what we already knew — that he supports homosexual marriage — we're in the news! Family Foundation of Virginia President Victoria Cobb was interviewed by WRIC-TV (see below or click here), the Richmond Times-Dispatch (click here) and the Washington Post/AP (click here) about the president's declaration and its impact on the dynamics of the presidential campaign in Virginia, seen as a key swing/battleground state in this November's election, and WWBT-TV ran a statement TFF issued on its 11:00 newscast (click here). It reads:

President Obama is busy pandering to his dwindling base in an election year. It's the sign of a desperate candidate.

In the WRIC report, Delegate Joe Morrissey (D-74, Henrico), just can't contain his glee. He hasn't smiled so broadly or been this giddy since his law license was restored last week. Offering different perspectives are Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Manassas) and Victoria.

But if President Obama is being so courageous, as some on the left in these (and other) media reports are saying, why didn't he come out before the North Carolina vote Tuesday, where Tar Heels passed its Marriage Amendment by a 61-39 margin. (It also bans civil unions.) After all, he won North Carolina in 2008 and the Democrats will have their convention in Charlotte. Leading from behind, once again. Never was a man so brave where risk was so unapparent. No wonder he's so loved.

Also interviewed on WRIC is Governor Bob McDonnell, who has an interesting take. While he is continues to be for traditional marriage and supportive of Virginia's Marriage Amendment, he agreed with the president in one respect. He said marriage should be a state issue, not a federal one. Hmmm. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney thinks there should be a federal Marriage Amendment. Does this affect his Veepstakes candidacy?

Ahhhh. Good to see Delegate Joe Morrissey smile again. He didn't have much reason to during the General Assembly this winter.

"We Hold These Truths" . . . A Unique Reply

The following may be hard to classify. Unique comes to mind. It's a priest with a message that is understandable, thoughtful and makes a whole bunch of sense. Don't get me wrong. That's not the unusual part. It's that Father Claude Burns is a rapper. Unique, indeed. His message is a reply to the Obama administration's clamp down on religious liberty. It's a pretty powerful reply at  that — although one would think it wouldn't be necessary to quote back the Declaration of Independence to the nation's chief executive (and constitutional-law-professor-in-chief). But it does show that the power of those words is their universality — in whatever form of delivery — 235 years after its melody of freedom was scratched out on parchment with a quill pen by its lyricist. Nothing more, and certainly not threats, provide its strength, or rather, its peoples' strength. That strength emanates through Father Burns, uhhh, make that, "Pontifex" (because no respectable rapper uses his real name).

More in a later post about Father Burns, his "street name" and the communications revolution taking place in areas one would least suspect (one that would make the Committees of Correspondence proud). Let's just say trying to whitewash the First Amendment has stirred a sleeping bear. That can't be good news the Left. For now, enjoy the message err, rap, below. (Wonder what his homilies are like?)

Pontifex has a point nobody can deny, even if the Obama administration is trying to deny our religious liberty.

"We Hold These Truths"

At this time in America we've come to the crossroads

Standing with our religious freedom and what we have been told.

We hold these truths to be self evident all men created the same

Endowed with certain unalienable rights that can't be taken away

They cannot be taken away by man, they were given by the creator

God almighty in Heaven, greater than any legislature

No system, No policy, No mandate has the power

To trample on our conscience and rob us of what is ours

Things that violate health, we are told we must provide

Using faulty percentages to justify conquer and divide

This is not about one issue that we need to just let go

It's not simply about contraception but about government control

A Year to comply? A Year to deny?

A Year to turn the other way and let our conscience die?

A Mandate that violates the corporate conscience of our faith

And once this door is open every religion and creed is at stake

Every American should see this as a threat to our country's foundation

Religion doesn't make us second class, settling for an accommodation

Our conscience is sacred; our freedom of religion is a treasure

Handed to us by Soldiers who fought and sacrificed beyond measure

The 1st amendment protects the free exercise of Religion

To exercise our freedom without living a contradiction

As faithful Americans we HOLD THESE TRUTHS

Life, Liberty and Happiness' pursuit

This isn't to be partisan or to endorse a candidate

This is about a plea to the administration to rescind this mandate

And as you deliberate for freedoms sake just remember

We get to use our rights and cast our two cents in November

Lost In More Ways Than One (Or, The Devalued President)

This is why you should never talk politics with strangers. Or perhaps, looking at this another way, think of this (sent to me by a cousin in Atlanta) as a parable of sorts:

A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered her altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know where I am."

The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, "You're in a hot air balloon, approximately 30 feet above ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are at 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude."

She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be a conservative."

"I am," replied the man. "How did you know?"

"Well," answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically correct. But I have no idea what to do with your information, and I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help to me."

The man smiled and responded, "You must be an Obama liberal."

"I am," replied the balloonist. "How did you know?"

"Well," said the man, "you don't know where you are or where you are going. You've risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve your problem. You're in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now it's my fault."

Truth often is found in humor. In the Age of Obama, it is acceptable for leaders to forsake responsibility, blame their predecessors and demonize ordinary citizens (who hold no office) simply for exercising their rights to petition the government and exercise freedom of speech to espouse their views on issues (see Debra Sounders at SFGate.com). In their view, this is acceptable because they are here to be served, not serve, thus the appetite for bigger and bigger government as the answer for every problem — even as that formula has failed so demonstrably — the more government, the more they are needed to run it. Anyone getting in the way of that is trash (or at least trashable).

As blogger Kim Priestap observed recently on Facebook, the video below is prophetic (almost three million views, to boot). It has featured here many times and we gladly post it again. The circumstances are uncannily similar and appropriate to view once more given our country's current decrepit circumstances. Substitute US for UK and Barack Obama for Gordon Brown and you have America in August 2011, smack in the middle of the Age of Obama. Now, who will it be in America to be the man in the boat who stands up to the arrogance and incompetence of the balloonist . . . who will be America's Daniel Hannan?

America in the Age of Obama: A devalued country under a devalued president. 

It's "Gay" Marriage, Stupid!

The normal political diatribe for years, from politicians and pundits alike, has been that the focus of nearly every candidate and elected official is and ought to be the economy. No need to be "distracted" by or waste time on those pesky social issues. Usually, that line is thrown in the face of values voters who actually care about the culture. Seldom is it used against those whose "values" are different than ours. Remember another famous line, "It's the economy, stupid"? With New York's legislature and Governor Andrew Cuomo recently passing and signing same-sex marriage into law (see Chuck Donovan at Heritage's The Foundry Blog), the claim by any liberal politician or pundit — or anyone else for that matter — that the focus is, and must be, on economic issues amounts to nothing more than blatant hypocrisy. After all, during an economic meltdown in a state bleeding jobs, in a state on the verge of economic bankruptcy, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor Cuomo and the entire legislature were "distracted" for days debating homosexual marriage. (Not to mention Congress and the Obama administration last December, during a lame duck session, ramming through repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy as unemployment continued to skyrocket.)

Simply put, the next time someone tells you that social issues are a distraction from what's really important, they must be forced to answer the question, "What about New York?"

In Virginia, as we approach this November's crucial elections, that question isn't just for us, it's for the candidates as well. After all, as liberals across Virginia celebrate New York's attempt at redefining one of God's most basic institutions, candidates for the House of Delegates and the Virginia Senate must be asked, "What about New York?"

Politicians, policy makers and pundits, academics and activists simply can’t have it both ways. If social issues such as homosexual marriage are a distraction from the important economic issues, then every candidate in Virginia — regardless of political party — must reject what has happened in New York. If taking weeks to debate the definition of marriage is a waste of time then every candidate in Virginia must be absolutely critical of their colleagues in New York.

Is the same-sex marriage debate a distraction from what’s important? Yes? Go ahead, and say so. Oh, and if it's not, feel free to run on that in Southside and central Virginia.

Virginians made it clear where they stand on the issue of same-sex marriage in 2006. While the ink on our state constitutional amendment is barely dry, we at The Family Foundation have attempted to focus on other issues in recent years, issues like strengthening traditional marriage — the best economic safety net there is — to ensure Virginia’s future economic strength. But with what happened in New York, we have little choice but to once again ask every candidate for office in Virginia, "What about New York?"

So, maybe the question isn't so much about the economy as it is about New York. We look forward to their responses.

ObamaCare Lawsuit: Who's Wasting Money Now?

Speaking of Virginia's lawsuit against ObamaCare: Remember all the liberal hysteria regarding all the money Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli supposedly is spending on the constitutional challenge to the federal health care law (Richmond Times-Dispatch) — as if government spending has ever been an issue with liberals? Never mind that he is defending Virginia law (the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act), which it is his duty to do. Where are the howls of disgust by the same people now that the Obama Justice Department refuses to agree (Times-Dispatch) with the Attorney General for an expedited appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (Washington Examiner)? Without such an appeal, we're talking at least two cases in U.S. Courts of Appeals, at least another year or more of legal work and court proceedings, endless briefs and motions, travel from Washington to Richmond and Atlanta, meetings, hundreds of hours of federal government employee time and who knows what else it takes to try a case these days — only this will be two cases simultaneously, not to mention any further cases that are filed in federal district courts by other states or aggrieved parties. It's no exaggeration to say the cost could be in the millions. That's a lot more than the $350 it cost the Commonwealth to file its case in Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia . . . but a lot less than the $1.1 billion it will cost Virginia to implement ObamaCare. The pricelessness of the hypocrisy is passed only by the reality of the true costs.

A Shocking Day: Chief Justice Hassell's Untimely Death, Webb Won't Run For Re-election

I was in the Senate Finance Committee this morning watching, thankfully, two good bills, which may lead to some much needed tax reform, fly through. The committee agenda was short, normal right after "crossover," and only six bills were heard, all passing on unanimous voice votes. Can't be much simpler than that. At what should've been a quick bang of the gavel to dismiss, committee Chairman Chuck Colgan (D-29, Manassas) made the announcement, the first one in public as it turned out: Former Virginia Supreme Court Chief Justice Leroy Hassell, Sr., died, unexpectedly, at age 55 (WTVR.com). He previously stepped aside as chief justice, but remained on the court.  Governor Bob McDonnell ordered that the flag of the commonwealth be flown at half-staff on all local, state, and federal buildings and grounds (WTVR.com). New Chief Justice Cynthia Kinser was scheduled to be sworn in officially this week. There is no word on the status of that ceremony at this point. She will be the first woman Virginia Supreme Court Chief Justice.

(Updated 4:45 p.m.: The governor has ordered that flags be flown at half-staff until his burial on all local, state, and federal buildings and grounds in Virginia. Additionally, Justice Hassell will lie in state in the Virginia State Capitol prior to burial. See his official statement honoring Justice Hassell)

Chief Justice Hassell was the first black person to serve in that position. He was a native Virginian, and proudly so. Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli included this 2003 quote in the Richmond Times-Dispatch in his statement honoring Mr. Hassell:

I do not wish to serve, however, because I happen to be black. Rather, I desire to serve because I am a Virginian by birth who has a strong affection and love for the commonwealth and its people.

He will be missed. He was a man of great faith, intellect, warmth, stature and humility.

Later in the morning, a bombshell e-mail from a political consultant friend: U.S. Senator Jim Webb will not run for re-election in 2012 (Washington Post Virginia Politics Blog). Though not totally unexpected, the timing (through no fault of Senator Webb) was strange, so soon after the sad news about Justice Hassell. Mr. Webb had not actively engaged in fundraising and many thought from the beginning he would term limit himself, given the flukish nature of his election — and a possible Defense Secretary appointment in a potential Obama second term.

Now, the attention turns to who the Democrats will nominate. Early speculation ranges from everyone from former Governor Tim Kaine and Terry McAuliffe (if he can be pulled away from running for governor) to former Congressmen Rick Boucher and Tom Periello, to Krystal Ball, who unsuccessfully challenged Republican Rob Wittman in the first district last year.

We're All Socialists Now Part 2: Video Of Perriello Supporters Proclaiming "Socialism Is Cool!"

Earlier this month there was a "social justice" rally at the Mall in Washington, D.C., meant to counter the Glenn Beck rally in August. (The attendance wasn't within a fraction of the Beck event and yet the attendees thoroughly trashed and littered the Mall, whereas, by all news accounts, the conservative event left nary a hot dog wrapper.) While that comparison chewed up minutes on talk radio, space on Web sites and column inches in newspapers, the most important revelation to come out of the second event was the makeup of the crowd. It was populated by proud socialists and communists. We posted the shocking video from that rally (click here), complete with signs and shirts bearing  socialist slogans, book stands selling communist classics and groups chanting extremist sentiments. No attempt was made to hide their true philosophy and intentions for America.

While a bunch of radicals descending on D.C. may seem pretty far removed from what we must contend with in Virginia, that extremism is closer to home than one might suspect. Sure, we know there are very deep pockets of blue in Virginia, but this hard core? This radically left wing?  

Yes, and it is shocking! Just as with the D.C. march, Americans For Prosperity showed up at the Obama-Perriello rally Friday in Charlottesville(as well as the counter rally) and politely attempted to hand out, for free, the organization's "Socialism Isn't Cool" bumper stickers. As Virginia AFP Director Ben Marchi tells a Perriello supporter in the video below, even the president says he isn't a socialist. But the contentious radicals proudly proclaim socialism (and Perrielloism and Obamaism)! 

Okay, maybe it isn't that shocking that they're socialists. However, their blatant nature and the guy wearing the hammer and sickle is a bit over the top. Who you calling socialist? Why, they're calling themselves that — and dumbfounded as to why Americans reject them. As for the candidate these people support for Congress — Mr. Perriello — remember the adage about the friends one keeps when judging the person in question.

As with the original video, this speaks for itself:

To Perriello supporters, socialism is VERY COOL, indeed!

Obama, Liberals View Americans As "Enemies," GOP Told To Sit In The Back

How many times can a president decry his own nation? We know Barack Obama doesn't think much of certain "bitter clingers." He also hammers away at people and institutions that create jobs as "selfish." His administration is more concerned with white Christian veterans from Western states than documented law breakers. We could launch a blog only on the insults he heaps upon his fellow Americans. But yesterday he went a step further and called for the "punishment" (at the polls) of conservatives whom he called "enemies." So much for the "post-partisan" presidency, the uniting "annointed one." In the Age of Obama, if you have a different idea you are branded.

I'm not your ruler, daggonit, so go out and punish our enemies!

You have to feel sorry for him, though. He clearly laments the fact that he is not our king, although he governs as a ruler and not a democrat. But let's give the president some charity. After all, he said his opponents could join him in a car ride . . . only, they must "sit in the back seat" (see Stop The ACLU).

The great conciliator: "Enemies" need to take a seat "in the back." So much for uniting the country.

The State Of Affairs In The Age Of Obama (And Reid And Pelosi)

This hot-off-the-editing-computer ad from the Republican Governors Association says it all. From government takeovers, reduced freedoms, unfathomable debt, sky rocketing  unemployment, prohibitive taxes, incompetence, oil spills, arrogance and blame, and a general lack of standing in the world — and no end in sight (see BigGovernment.com) — it's all compressed here into two minutes and 40 seconds:

A stark video compilation of the disaster of the last two years under Obama-Reid-Pelosi: America in decline while Obama vacations and the liberals bale on tax relief.

November Is Coming, Starting Tomorrow, To Virginia

Conservative grassroots activism has never been greater nor more effective than over the last year-and-a-half. Tea Parties, town hall meetings, anti-government-run health care rallies and other events in localities as well as in Washington, D.C., have grabbed the media spotlight, dominated the political debate, sent powerful messages to the big spending politicians, and reshaped and re-energized the conservative movement. Now is not the time to let up. Tomorrow and Friday, our friends at Americans For Prosperity are bringing their November Is Coming bus tour to the commonwealth. Per AFP:

While politicians in Washington are hoping voters are asleep at the wheel, they are trying to hide their big-government spending policies from the public and pass them with ease. Government spending has grown out of control under the current leadership in Congress . . . may soon vote on job-killing cap-and-trade policies against the outspoken voices of millions of Americans. Daily, big government power grabs by the Obama/Pelosi/Reid machine continue.

We must tell Congress very clearly that if they keep voting YES on big government programs, we will vote NO on their re-election this November! We need to tell these big-spending liberals in Washington . . . that "November is coming"!

Here is the November Is Coming bus tour schedule. We hope you can attend one of its stops.

Thursday, September 9:

Charlottesville: 8:30 a.m., Albemarle County Administration Building, 401 McIntire Road

Lynchburg: 11:30 a.m., Liberty University Dining Hall Parking Lot, 1971 University Boulevard

Rocky Mount: 3:00 p.m., Franklin County Courthouse, 275 South Main Street

Danville: 5:30 p.m., Danville Courthouse, 401 Patton Street

Friday, September 10:

Abingdon: 8:00 a.m., Virginia Highlands Community College Higher Education Center, 1 Partnership Circle

Wytheville: 10:15 a.m., Wytheville Courthouse, 225 South 4th Street

Roanoke: 12:30 p.m., Roanoke City Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue

Reagan Confronts Today's Left Wing Thirst For Control Over Our Freedoms

One of our avid readers sent this to me. It's a fantastic reminder of how relevant Ronald Reagan remains. It's as if he's calling out today's Far Left. The video is a mash-up of RR's 1964 "The Speech" with some of the most notorious quotes from within the last year by Washington's liberal leaders — Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Frank, Durbin; they're all here, with a supporting cast every bit as fanatical about control. That's a thirst for control over your health care, your earnings, over how you spend your earnings, over the economy, over how your children learn, over the legal process . . . you name it, they want control over it. U.S. Representatives Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and John Dingell (D-Mich.), respectively, say it most pointedly:

give us more authority and more ability. ...  

And:

. . . put the legislation together to control the people.

Hear it for yourselves:

Ronald Reagan calls out today's Far Left just as he did in 1964.

Sign The Petition: Defense Of Marriage Act Needs An Appropriate Defense By The Obama Justice Department

Even as the fallout from the Prop 8 ruling is still getting sorted, another legal proceeding dealing with a major marriage protection law is ongoing. But barely. Whereas the defenders of California's Marriage Amendment filed a prompt appeal and yesterday won a stay on San Francisco Federal District Judge Vaughn Walker's deplorable decision at least until the end of the year (San Francisco Chronicle), the Obama Justice Department's weak and meek defense of the federal Defense of Marriage Act appears to have "thrown the match" and it says it is not certain whether it will appeal a recent Massachusetts Federal District Court's decision that ruled DOMA unconstitutional. As Chuck Donovan writes at The Heritage Foundation's The Foundry blog:

Echoing some of the most notorious boxing matches in the history of the ring, the Obama-Kagan Justice Department engaged in what even one supporter of same-sex marriage, the distinguished constitutional law scholar Richard Epstein, labeled "almost like collusive litigation," where the adversaries in a case are secretly on the same side.

The collusion boils down to this: attorneys in the Obama Justice Department, who have sworn that they will "well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office" in which they serve, abandoned not one but all four of the bases for DOMA asserted by Congress. "Congress" in this instance was no small minority cobbled together at the last instant for legislation it scarcely debated, but a bipartisan majority that encompassed 85 percent of both houses of Congress, joined by a Democratic president (Bill Clinton) who had access to comprehensive reports that amplified the many grounds for DOMA.

The Justice Department’s concessions were crucial to the outcome in the case. As Judge Joseph Tauro noted, he felt bound to address the detailed justifications Congress provided for DOMA only briefly, because, "For the purposes of this litigation, the government has disavowed Congress’s stated justifications for the statute[.]"

As Family Research Council President Tony Perkins (see FRC Blog) wrote yesterday: 

The Defense of Marriage Act merely defines marriage — for federal purposes — as being between one man and one woman, and protects states from having to change their state definitions. Not surprisingly, a liberal court in Massachusetts — after a weak defense from the Obama Justice Department — ruled DOMA unconstitutional. Amazingly, the federal government appears to be dragging its feet as they contemplate whether or not to EVEN APPEAL the decision! If the Department of Justice does not appeal, it is unlikely outside defenders of marriage will even be allowed to defend marriage in court.

The Department of Justice is supposed to vigorously defend statutes passed by Congress, not to roll over to appease President Obama's political base.

So, FRC Action has started a nationwide petition to hold the Justice Department accountable and to do its job — appeal and aggressively defend the law of the land. Please take time to sign the petition (click here to sign) and send a clear message to the Obama administration. He has said he believes marriage is between one man and one woman (ABCNews.com). It's time he proves it with a vigorous defense of federal law he is sworn to uphold.

The Case For Lower Taxes: By Obama's Top Economic Adviser

Liberals always scream at any tax rate reductions. It doesn't matter if the rates are across the board and equitable. The contrived and demagogic class warfare card gets pulled out faster than a Las Vegas dealer. We're at that point again. This New Year's Eve, the tax rate reductions from 2001 and 2003 will expire and rates will sky rocket, further hammering the economy and deepening the Obama recession. Liberals in Washington, including the president, say with a straight face the revenue gained from the automatic tax increase will bring in more than $700 billion over the next several years, money needed to close the deficit. Apparently spending $787 billion in one year isn't a problem, however, as he did with the so-called "stimulus" bill, which was supposed to keep unemployment below 8 percent. (Not to mention today's $26 billion federal bailout of the national teacher union's pension fund.) (Wall Street Journal Washington Wire blog.)

(By the way, in a move that eerily presages the future under ObamaCare, it will be better to die on New Year's Eve if you are planning to leave an estate to a loved one. On January 1, that loved one will get hit with a massive tax increase, as the death tax itself rises from the dead.)

But some Democrats are lobbying for an extension of the tax cuts, such as Evan Bayh of Indiana (Washington Examiner). Of course, it won't happen because the president is busy demonizing every action by the Bush administration as evil, and extendin the tax cut are politically untenable . . . for him. Never mind the bogus premise that raising taxes beyond a certain point increases tax revenue, because it decreases revenue, while lower tax rates increase it as history has shown time and again.

Don't believe me? Then try this one on for size. One of Virginia's most quoted economists, Christine Chmura, in the Richmond Times-Dispatch yesterday, wrote about a study on tax rate reductions by two University of California-Berkeley economists (not your most conservative campus). The study was a bit different because it examined a broad scope of federal taxation as well as four categories, including reducing the deficit and economic growth. Their findings?

The resulting estimates indicate that tax increases are highly contractionary.

Then, Chmura summarized the rest of their findings:

The large effects are driven considerably by a sharp reduction in investment.

Other parts of the economy, such as consumer spending on goods and services, as well as imports, also are negatively impacted.

However, the economists also found that tax increases to reduce a persistent budget deficit leads to a reduction in real gross domestic product. ...

She urged Congress to heed the study, published in 2007. But perhaps so should the president. It was written by professors David Romer and his wife, Christine — Mr. Obama's very own Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers.