Notice:

We have had site problems, first it was the Solar Storm that slowed down my computer system to a snail pace and then on Saturday we moved the site to a bigger server because of increased traffic. The Solar Storm is still causing problems with video streaming.

Please bear with us as we endeavor to fix all.

Quote of the Day 03/12/12

“A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn’t own.” – Unknown

How America Failed Sandra Fluke And Her Kind By: Christopher G. Adamo

    Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil. Isaiah 5:20

Twenty seven centuries ago, the Prophet sternly forewarned of the perils of what we now call “political correctness.” And clearly, the human condition has not “evolved” into anything higher since then. In this past week, America has been subjected to a tirade of liberal sanctimony and hypocrisy unprecedented in recent years, attesting to the glaring perversity with which the American left propagates lies and distortions to advance its agenda. And when, in this process, truth itself becomes a casualty, all who abide in truth will eventually be victims.

The Obama Administration has desperately sought to redirect the 2012 election cycle onto any topic other than how its policies have decimated America’s economy, its political standing in the world, and the time honored freedoms of its citizens. Eventually, it landed on the issue of forcing religious organizations and private companies to bankroll socialized contraception, under the fraudulent premise that refusing to do so was tantamount to infringing on the “rights” of women to engage in profligate sexual activity. Sandra Fluke, a foot soldier in this propaganda war, testified before a contrived “committee” that she and other college women had, as a result of their chosen lifestyles, incurred such exorbitant costs for contraception that their finances were in tatters.

Initially, the incident went largely unnoticed, which in itself is a sad commentary on the spiritual condition of the nation. Yet a major controversy has since erupted in the aftermath of a blunt assessment of Fluke’s moral character by radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. And its distorted portrayal in the liberal media tells a far more grim tale of how Fluke, and other young women of the modern era, are being systematically indoctrinated to accept the premise that such behavior is entirely acceptable and even “virtuous” in its own right. Worse still, in an appalling effort to maximize the political hay they believe they can reap from this episode, liberals are lionizing Fluke in the highest of terms, essentially elevating her to the status of “role model” for other young women.

Republicans could have reframed the issue in real terms, reminding America that the real debate was not over some imaginary GOP war on women (with Limbaugh leading the charge). Rather, it was about whether or not Fluke and her supposed minions of promiscuous coeds should have the power to demand that the costs of their proclivities be borne by others. Instead the GOP responded out of complete cowardice, as epitomized by the insipid assent of House Speaker John Boehner (R.-OH) to the incensed Democrats and their phony outrage.

Sadly but predictably, the invertebrates of the Republican Party were quick to genuflect at the altar of “political correctness,” publicly distancing themselves from Limbaugh and his comments, in hopes of avoiding association with the criticism directed at him. And in the process, the message delivered to the Sandra Flukes of the world is that they are to be credited for their advocacy of a morality that once was largely relegated to the nation’s barnyards.

That Fluke is a willing participant in this sorry chapter of America’s decline is, at best, irrelevant. Throughout history, disastrous social transformations have always required pawns, “useful idiots” Lenin called them, to lead the way down the slippery slope. Some never recover from their downfall, while others eventually recognize the degree to which the “cause” has shattered any prospect of normalcy in their lives. And at that point, they are summarily abandoned by their liberal accomplices, to live out their remaining days in isolation and despair. America owes them something better. But throughout its many institutions, America is failing them.

In a well-orchestrated effort, the many organizations that once upheld the responsibility to instill virtue and worth in young people have been co-opted by the counterculture. Consequently, on reaching adulthood they have been thoroughly cheapened in their own minds, and made merchandise for the promotion of the new order. Schools, pastors, and even parents are either complicit in this abhorrent business, or too timid to confront the rampant cultural disintegration. And the hideous result became painfully apparent in Fluke’s depiction of life among her peers.

Forget such quaint notions as “modesty.” The picture of modern young adulthood she presented in her testimony was one of total moral bankruptcy, abetted by a completely calloused and seared conscience, and lacking any vestige of shame. In truth, Fluke embodied the manner in which too many young women have, in the name of “liberation,” been reduced to being fodder for the nation’s abortion mills and now, the empowerment of the monster state.

Not surprisingly Barack Obama, the champion of that monster state, seized the opportunity of the Limbaugh controversy to call Fluke and offer encouragement to her. Holding the nation’s highest office, he could have inspired coming generations to accept personal responsibility and conduct themselves in a manner that promotes a healthy society. But that would seriously undermine the objectives of the nanny state.

The ugly truth is that Obama’s pandering epitomizes the ongoing betrayal of the nation’s young people. Posing as her friend, he condoned and encouraged more of the self-destructive behavior she trumpeted, which will eventually cost her for more than she can comprehend. A societal class that is thoroughly conditioned to expect the provision of its needs, and the indulgence of its wants, is one that over time will abandon its vision, lose its dreams, and ultimately be reduced to subsistence.

In the starkest of contrasts, Rush Limbaugh’s harsh words for Fluke conveyed an underlying message that she and her kindred can aspire to something far higher and better than the abysmal station to which they have been consigned. And for that he owes no one an apology.

Christopher G. Adamo is a resident of southeastern Wyoming. He has been involved in politics at the local and state level for many years. His archives and contact information can be found at www.chrisadamo.com

Derrick Bell: The Jeremiah Wright Of Harvard

Presidential Vetting: Obama’s days at Harvard have been shrouded in secrecy. But a new video lifts a corner of the veil, revealing his creepy embrace of the “Jeremiah Wright of academia.”

It turns out his favorite law professor was the late Derrick Bell, a black radical who taught classes trashing the Constitution as racist.

He liked Bell so much he led a law school “strike” in support of him in 1991, when the professor went on unpaid leave to protest the lack of affirmative-action hiring on campus.

A video clip posted by Breitbart.com captures Obama praising Bell for “speaking the truth” and hugging him.

Not long before this show of affection, Bell had been called into the university president’s office to explain why he had sent him a letter filled with violent fantasies — including their own death from a bomb planted in his office by white racists. Bell explained that such extremism is what it would take to get the administration to agree to grant more affirmative-action programs.

Harvard’s honcho wasn’t amused. Bell groused he just didn’t get it. But who would? Apparently his star pupil. And that’s what’s so unsettling.

Bell’s nutty ideas — including that America is a “racist nation” carrying out a “quasi-genocide in the inner cities” — were well known to Obama. Bell came highly recommended by Obama’s America-hating preacher Rev. Wright. He and Bell were pals. In fact, Obama just traded Wright’s pews for Bell’s desks.

At the pro-Bell rally, Obama took to the mike as if he were his spokesman. He commended Bell’s “excellence in scholarship,” adding that he “changed the standards of what legal writing is about.”

His legal writings included this gem published in the Connecticut Law Review around the time Obama was defending him: “The whole (classical) liberal worldview of private rights and public sovereignty mediated by the rule of law needed to be exploded.”

Obama lapped it up. This was not some misguided youth flirting with radicalism. He was 30, and Harvard Law Review editor.

Bell’s tirades against racism were really against classism. In 2007 he intimated to a Southern Illinois University professor that he saw “value in Marxist and other writings.” Like Marx, he argued that capitalism creates a racially polarizing battle over property, and that the cure was wealth redistribution. To that end, Bell proposed an “equality” tax on business profits.

In 2002, he told C-SPAN that America is racist because it’s “built on property.” He complained that our free market “increasingly puts some people at the top of the economic scale and most of the rest of us at the bottom.”

So here we have yet another anti-capital class warrior as role model for Obama.

Over his entire adult life, through his academic, legal and political careers, the president has lived in a theoretical bubble divorced from reality. His mind and psyche have been marinated in radical academic notions and conspiracy theories that insist upon hatred for capitalism and the American way of life.

Is it any wonder his agenda is so anti-American?

“Perhaps as president,” Bell hoped in 2008, “Obama can take on the tough issue of the intentional harms our policies have done both here and abroad.”

The student certainly has not disappointed his old professor.

Source: IBD Editorials

SideBear: I don’t know how many times I have watched the video because I was interested in Obama’s body language. At the time BHO was 30 years old, so you can’t write off his words as youthful radicalism.

What I see is a man full of hatred towards this country, his words and posture depict a tone of elitism and arrogance that shows a man totally engulfed in extreme Marxist’s ideology. And to think he is the President of the United States.

Here’s another energy ‘silver bullet’ Obama should fire

With gas prices heading toward $4 per gallon and beyond, President Obama repeatedly declares that “there are no silver bullets” to make the numbers on service station pumps go back down and that it is impossible “to drill our way” out of trouble. In fact, a look at rig counts in the natural gas industry during recent years points to a different conclusion. According to the Baker Hughes Rotary Rig Count, between March 2007 and May 2008, the number of rigs drilling for natural gas soared to more than 1,600. As the accompanying chart shows, during the same period, the spot price of natural gas rose steadily from $255.96 per thousand cubic meters to $405.63. The next month, June 2008, saw natural gas hit its recent high at $456.57. But then, as supplies grew as a result of the increased number of rigs in action, the price of natural gas plummeted and has continued doing so ever since, falling below $100 in January this year. America has gone from having too little natural gas to a historic surplus. Most of the increased natural gas production took place on private or state-controlled lands, not on federal lands.

There is no reason not to expect a similar pattern on oil prices — if the federal government would allow the free market to work. The price per barrel of the benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude oil has steadily risen from below $80 in January 2010 to above $100 at present, even as the number of rigs at work drilling for oil has gone from under 400 to more than 1,200. To be sure, rig counts are far from the only factor determining the market price of natural gas and oil at any given time. But because the federal government issues permits for federal lands and offshore areas, the pace at which Washington approves drilling applications has a direct bearing on supplies and therefore prices. The current uptick in oil rig counts primarily reflects permits issued before the beginning of the Obama administration.

The number of approvals for drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico — which accounts for a third of all U.S. oil production — under Obama has plunged from more than seven per month to only three. Measured in terms of how long is required for the government to consider a permit application, the average for the five years before Obama was 60.6 days. The average is now almost 110 days, according to the Institute for Energy Research. Viewed in terms of the percentage of all permits sought that are approved, the five-year average before Obama was 73 percent. Today under Obama, it is 23 percent and falling. In other words, it is almost certain that the oil-drilling rig count will head back down in coming months, but it will be in response to government interference rather than as a result of price fluctuations. And the price of gas at the pump will continue to go higher.

Source: Washington Examiner