All American Blogger

Pentagon to Deploy 20,000 Troops in America by 2011

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:07:34 +0000

The Pentagon has released a plan to deploy 20,000 troops in America by 2011. The deployment would be to assist locals in dealing with terrorist attacks, or so the story goes:

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — “would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable,” Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted “a fundamental change in military culture,” he said.

The Pentagon’s plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

I know I’m not the only one who thinks this is a bad idea. When you have the ACLU and Cato both working against it, it’s got to be hazardous to your liberties:

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.

“There’s a notion that whenever there’s an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green,” Healy said, “and that’s at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace.”

Folks, we have a very well trained and capable National Guard in each state, ready, willing and able to assist with disasters, both natural and man-made. This move is unnecessary and dangerous.

Photo by Jef Poskanzer.

Why recessions happen (great Week article)

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 15:49:01 +0000

I’m a huge fan of The Week, a (*gasp*) weekly periodical that does a surprisingly good job of showing both sides of the story. This week, they have a great article on why recessions happen. It also has a great history of recessions, and shows how they play into presidential politics. On the positive side: The Week suggests that recessions are apparently getting better.

Liberalism bombs Bombay

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 01:59:38 +0000

But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.

~ Numbers 33:55

The heart is deceitful and desperately wicked above all things. Who can know it?

~ Jeremiah 17:9

The gut-wrenching headlines told of the recent terrorist attacks in India – “Day 3: Terror at the Taj”; “Gunmen seemed to be sure of hotel terrain”; “Rabbi and wife killed”; “New York guards against Mumbai-like attacks” – yet all of the liberal media outlets, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN and even Fox News seem to ask the same ignorant questions: “Who is behind the recent terrorist attacks? What is the motive of the people who perpetrated the bombings and kidnappings in India?”

The Prime Minister of India seems to be the only person on the planet who realizes who perpetrated such horrid terror upon his country: “India points the finger at Pakistan.” Yes, it is quite obvious for any person who hasn’t been completely indoctrinated by our Stalinist public school system that Muslim religious fanatics, perhaps trained in or facilitated by neighboring Pakistan, are the culprits.

If one needs further assurance of who these evil men were, just ask some of the hostages who were lucky enough to escape who said the first question the Islamic terrorists asked the kidnapped victims was, “Who has an American or British passport?”

The plot gets more diabolical. Now we know that perhaps the only Jews in this city of 14 million residents were also killed. A Brooklyn rabbi and his wife were found among the dead in a series of terrorist attacks in India that have claimed more than 150 lives. Rabbi Gavriel Noach Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka, who ran the Chabad-Lubavitch local headquarters in Mumbai were killed during a hostage standoff at the center. The chances of indiscriminately killing perhaps Mumbai’s only Jewish family? One in 14 million.

Yet the liberal media, the president, the president-elect, the politicians on both sides of the aisle and the ubiquitous “military experts” all seem to be dumbfounded about who caused these well-orchestrated series of seven concurrent terrorist attacks? And more importantly, what to do?

Who are these enemies of civilization? Yes, in India’s case, Islamic terrorists, but it goes deeper than that.

What cultural, societal, political philosophy allows a pseudo-religion like Islam to exist and grow in its midst? Liberalism. In my view the political madness of liberalism is the real culprit behind the bombs of Bombay.

How?

* Liberalism preaches a brand of egalitarianism that places all religions, beliefs and ideas on the same intellectual plane, but this contradicts the principle of rationality because all ideas and religions are not equal – some are evil.

* Nonetheless, under the liberal tenets existent at the founding of the League of Nations (President Woodrow Wilson, 1919) and United Nations (FDR, 1945), nations are mandated under international law to take the diplomatic route verses common sense tactics when their country suffers an unprovoked, naked act of religious-based terrorism.

*Therefore, liberalism prevented India from taking common sense action against her Muslim enemies when, in 1947, the U.N. formed Pakistan out of whole cloth, trying to stem the tide of Islamic fanaticism against the nation of India, but effectively leaving the country to be overrun by the more than 115 million Muslims living in India today.

Conservative intellectual, Ann Coulter eloquently prophesied the world’s pathetic reaction to an international crisis:

There are only two choices with savages: Fight or run. Democrats always want to run, but they dress it up in meaningless catchphrases like “diplomacy,” “détente,” “engagement,” “multilateral engagement,” “multilateral diplomacy,” “containment” and “going to the UN.”

Instead of exporting throughout the world the elements of a representative democracy and a republic rooted in the Judeo-Christian traditions of intellectual thought, America has since FDR exported a bastardized socialism – a diabolical brand of liberalism that is more akin to Marxism and communism than it is to republicanism and freedom.

How do you “negotiate” with an enemy like radical Islam whose proponents think they are following the will of Allah when they mercilessly murder as many innocent men, women and children as they are able?

Liberalism seeks to “understand,” to justify, rationalize and form a consensus with our Muslim brothers under the presumption, “Why do they hate us?”

The madness of liberalism is that it always shifts the blame away from the perpetrators to America. We are the only nation that has this developed sense of self-hatred, an irrational self-loathing that borders on the mentally insane.

Regarding the recent bombings in Bombay, liberalism says, “We can’t jump to conclusions that these terrorists’ acts had anything to do with Islamic radicalism. No, no, no. That would be imprudent, rash and racist. We must dialogue with our Muslim brothers to find the real reasons for their rage against us.”

This kind of perverse logic will cause the death of America, the West and the entire civilized world and what I mean by ‘civilized’ here are those nations that still believe in and practice the fundamentals of civilization: obeying the rule of law, a Constitution rooted in liberty, justice and equality, freedom of religion, the press, the right to protest and freedom of assembly.

The last rudiment of civilization any nation needs to survive is to have the courage to outlaw and destroy any philosophy, religion, ideology or belief that doesn’t honor the aforementioned fundamentals of civilization.

On this point I wrote an earlier article, “Is Islam compatible with a republic?” In a word, No!

In my opinion Islam is ipso facto contrary to every vestige of liberty, morality and truth that mankind has fostered for the past 6,000 years of human history. Why civilized nations allow Islam to even exist in their countries is, as evidenced by the most recent episode in India, only an invitation to a slow and painful national genocide.

While President George Bush, the invisible President-elect Barack Obama, the leaders of the free world, U.N. diplomats and the liberal media all mindlessly wring their hands and fret about what to do to in response to the recent savage acts of Islamic terrorism, Israeli commandos are plotting lex talionis, an eye for an eye justice. Why? Because contrary to the self-genocide of liberal egalitarianism and U.N. diplomacy, when dealing with bloodlust savages, only a more savage nation can survive.

Author: Dr. Ellis Washington

Originally published at WesternFront America

Crowd Tramples Wal-Mart Worker in New York

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 22:38:24 +0000

What is the matter with people? Is that $2 DVD worth killing a guy over?

In New York it is:

The 34-year-old employee, a temporary maintenance worker, tried to hold back the unruly crowds just after the Valley Stream store opened at 5 a.m.

Witnesses said the surging throngs of shoppers knocked the man down. He fell and was stepped on. As he gasped for air, shoppers ran over and around him.

“He was bum-rushed by 200 people,” said Jimmy Overby, 43, a co-worker. “They took the doors off the hinges. He was trampled and killed in front of me. They took me down too…I literally had to fight people off my back.”

The unidentified victim was rushed to an area hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 6:03 a.m., police said.

Get the video of the event, identify people in the crowd. Prosecute. Repeat.

Invisible Victims - The Winchester Atrocity

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 20:01:48 +0000

Wikipedia (aka The Pretend Encyclopedia) still has no page devoted to the ‘Winchester Atrocity’.

On October 15, the tortured corpses of newlyweds, Marine Sgt. Jan Pawel Pietrzak, 24, and Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak, 26, were found in their Winchester, CA home. Mrs. Pietrzak had been gang-raped, and husband and wife had each been bound, gagged, and shot, execution-style, in the back of the head.

Four “Marines” are in custody: Pvt. Emrys John, 18; Lance Cpl. Tyrone “Cripgeneral” Miller, 20; Pvt. Kevin Darnell Cox, 20; and Pvt. Kesaun “Psycho” Sykes, 21. According to the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office, all four confessed to the torture-murders, though there was some dispute as to who the rapists were. Each said he was innocent of the rape—though Sykes confessed to cutting Mrs. Pietrzak’s clothes off of her—but that his three accomplices had raped Mrs. Pietrzak. One thing that Miller, Cox, and Sykes all agreed on, however, was that John was the shooter. (In court, all four suspects have since pleaded “not guilty” to the crimes, which are death-penalty eligible.)

Sgt. Pietrzak was a helicopter mechanic at Miramar Air Station, in San Diego; John and Miller were his subordinates. Pietrzak was white; his wife was black, as are the defendants.

The official story is that the crime was committed for “financial gain,” but there was no financial gain. The killers took the husband’s digital camera and the wife’s engagement ring, but made no effort to sell them.

This was a racial killing. I believe that the motive was humiliation and murder, based on the killers’ racism—and thus their rage that a white man had taken a black woman for his wife—and the items the killers stole souvenirs, with which to recall and savor their crimes. As a black former Marine, Sabrina, who had married a white fellow Marine while in the service and whom black racists put through hell for it argued,

Everything about this case points to a racially motivated hate crime which is fueled by sexual jealousy! It is as much of a hate crime as what happened in 1955 to Emmett Till and in 1998 to Matthew Shepherd….

Wikipedia’s Presentation of the Case:

Wikipedia claims to provide “the sum of all human knowledge,” yet as of 2:28 a.m., November 28, the only mention of this crime in all of Wikipedia’s “2,638,091 articles in English,” is the following, 22-word mention in the entry for “Winchester, California.”

Winchester, California
Winchester is a census-designated place (CDP) in Riverside County, California, USA. As of the 2000 census, the CDP had a total population of 2,155.
Largely rural for most of its history, Winchester experienced rapid growth during the housing construction boom in the early to mid 2000s. However, construction and growth slowed when the housing bubble burst in 2007, resulting in a housing market correction. In October of 2008, the town was rocked by the brutal murders of Marine Corps Sgt. Jan Pawel Pietrzak and his wife, Quiana.

Then again, as I showed in my Wikipedia exposé in the July issue of American Renaissance, where race is concerned, such non-scholarship is par for the course at The Pretend Encyclopedia (TPE).

The Real Stuff of Encyclopedias: The “Erd?s–Bacon Number”

The Wikipedia habitués whom I call, among other sobriquets, Wikithugs, make sure that none of Wikipedia’s entries on black-on-white atrocities honestly depict the crimes.

TPE also purports to be an inexhaustible font of “knowledge” about things like the “Erd?s–Bacon number,” to which a 3,376-word entry has been devoted, replete with 69 footnotes.

What is an “Erd?s–Bacon number,” you ask? Nothing at all, really. The notion is a third-hand trivia game, derived from the trivia game, “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon,” which was itself derived—no doubt by a fan of character actor Kevin Bacon—from the notion embodied in the title of John Guare’s 1990 play, Six Degrees of Separation. Another person—doubtless a camp follower of Hungarian mathematician Paul Erd?s—then created an imitation Bacon trivia game, and combined the two.

Guare’s idea is that six degrees of acquaintance separates every human being from every other human being. Thus, limiting the notion’s application to Bacon’s acting career is contrary to Guare’s idea. Of course, few of the multitudes who use the phrase, “six degrees of Kevin Bacon,” in order to sound hip and knowledgeable have ever heard of, let alone read or seen the stage or film version of Six Degrees of Separation. (This writer has seen both versions.)

During the early 1980s, black con man David Hampton notoriously made fools of a series of white, leftwing, Manhattan socialites, claiming to be the son of Sidney Poitier (who, unbeknownst to them, had no sons!), in order to momentarily drop into their lives and homes, and by the way, pocket some symbolic small change from them. Guare, who was friends with some of the victims, fictionalized the real-life exploits of Hampton, who died in 2003, in order to meditate on the trivial, empty lives of rich Manhattanites—the lefty part somehow never made it into the play—and their desperate need for connection to “the other.”

(During the same period, I encountered alcoholic hustlers pulling similar cons in Vienna and Paris.)
For all the blather and footnotes, no one reading the Wikipedia/TPE entry for “Erd?s–Bacon number” will even learn of this third-hand trivia game’s origins.

A person’s Erd’s–Bacon number is the sum of one’s Erd’s number—which measures the “collaborative distance” in authoring mathematical papers between that individual and Hungarian mathematician Paul Erd’s—and one’s Bacon number—which represents the number of links, through roles in films, by which the individual is separated from American actor Kevin Bacon. The lower the number, the closer an individual is to Erd’s and Bacon.

But Wikipedians and their third-hand trivia-loving counterparts in the “real” world refuse even to follow the rules of their own game. Thus, the first name on TPE’s Erd’s–Bacon number “table” is that of Hank Aaron. But Hank Aaron never authored any mathematical papers. Why is he listed on the table? A Wikipedian gave a “reason,” but since it is completely at odds with the rules of the game, it can’t be the real reason.

What is the point of inventing a game, any game, if the players immediately throw its rules out the window? And aside from the fundamental issue of having “encyclopedia articles” about third-hand trivia games, what is the point of having encyclopedic-looking entries about such games, if those writing them violate their rules, even in their descriptions of the games, and fail to provide their historical background, which is their only aspect which is of intellectual or encyclopedic interest? (In case you were wondering, the “Erd’s–Bacon number” entry is not a Wikipedia self-parody. The people dominating TPE suffer from extreme irony deficiency.)

Thus, Wikipedia is worthless, even as a compendium of trivia! That’s why I call it variously The Pretend Encyclopedia and Antipedia.

Let’s Stop Pretending

To learn more about the racist crime that I have dubbed The Winchester Atrocity, start with my two VDARE articles, and then hit the embedded hyperlinks in them to get to other material:

“The Knoxville Horror with a Twist—Four Black Marines Murder Interracial Couple in Winchester, CA; MSM Censors Details, of Course”

and

“The Winchester Atrocity: Down the MSM Memory Hole While Cops Claim It’s Not a ‘Racial Crime’”

(This article used “nofollow” tags in its links to Wikipedia. In getting everyone to link to it, in order to maintain its page rank, TPE is the universe’s biggest spammer, yet it refuses to return the courtesy. It uses “nofollow” tags for all outgoing links, so that hitting them does not help the page rank of any site to which it links, except for those in which Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy “Jimbo” Wales has a commercial interest. Thus, I am returning the favor. To find out how you can return the favor to WP/TPE/Wales, read this informative article: “Preventing comment spam.”)

Author: J.D Longstreet

Originally published at WesternFront America

“God sent us this special black person in the nation’s time of crisis.”

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:12:14 +0000

This “Messiah” business is getting a bit out of hand. First there were all the photos of Obama with a halo, then there is the Obama Candle and let’s not forget Farrakhan actually calling him “the Messiah.”

But this one is really over the top. This is an actual Letter to the Editor, and it describes how a child has been taught to view Barack Obama:

A few days after Barack Obama won the presidential nomination, I called my 7-year-old granddaughter and asked what she was doing. She replied that she was making a picture of Barack Obama. I asked if I could see it, and a few days later it came in the mail.

…

She drew Obama wearing a black suit with a white shirt and black tie. She had his skin brown, and his shoes were a beautiful shade of green. She placed a pink halo over his head and pink wings. The whole background was colored in a beautiful shade of blue. She placed a huge white cloud below his feet.

…

Barack Obama was descending from heaven. God sent us this special black person in the nation’s time of crisis.

I could feel how powerful the picture was, and every time I look at it, tears of joy roll down my face.

Barack Obama did not descend down from heaven to save the country, or the world. He is a political thug who won his first election by getting his opponents thrown off the ballot.

He is not the Son of Man. He is not the Messiah. He is a guy from Illinois. That’s it.

I’m Going to CPAC This February

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 12:27:53 +0000

Yesterday I dropped the $150 needed to get into the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) this February. For those of you who don’t know what CPAC is, I’ll let Wikipedia explain:

Conservative Political Action Conference is an annual political conference attended by some 6000+ conservatives, activists, and elected officials from across the United States. CPAC began in 1973 as a small gathering of dedicated conservatives but has since grown into a large event attracting members of Congress, college activists, and other political celebrities.

This year it is being held at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington D.C., just as it was last year.

I thought about opting for the Diamond Package, but then thought, “Holy crap! That’s almost $1000!” So, I’ll just be attending the general sessions and the Exhibit Hall. But what an Exhibit Hall!

This is my first CPAC, so I am excited about attending. Plus, I get to visit with my family in the DC area.

Hopefully, I’ll get to meet some of you there. Will you be attending?

Photo by Skye820

A Few Notes From The AAB Team

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:56:42 +0000

We recently updated the look of our site to a more traditional “blog look”. We got a lot of feedback from you guys on the new look. Most of what you had to say was pretty good, but there were more than a few of you who weren’t fond of the reddish/pinkish header.

All of the feedback was appreciated, and we took the criticism to heart. So over the past week or so, we took what you said, added a few boxes of Hot Pockets and a case of Mt. Dew, and came up with a revision. The final product turned out really great, and we’re glad we took the time to work on the change. So thank you for sharing your thoughts with us, and we humbly offer the All American Blogger blue edition. Please leave a comment and let us know what you think about it.

State Blogs

The All American Blogger state editions are starting to blossom. About a month or ago we started launching individual state based blogs and recruiting some of our favorite bloggers to start writing state specific political news. Our intention is to grow this slowly, and focus on building a quality community of bloggers. So far we’ve launched blogs for Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, Arkansas, Florida, and just this past week we added Kentucky. You can get a summary of all the latest posts from the state blogs at the National Edition, and we also list the most recent state blogs posts on the front page of this site.

If you’re a conservative blogger and you’re interested in getting involved with this project in your state, just send an email to us at allamericanblogger[at]gmail[dot]com or use the contact page. We’d be happy to answer any questions you have about the state blogs.

Topspots

A special thank you to Girl Politicized! for her awesome contribution. We added a topspots list to our sidebar. Anybody who drops us a $5 tip gets listed in our topspots list, which appears above the fold on most pages of the site. And there’s a pretty good chance we’ll mention you in a post. So if you want to get your blog promoted, consider giving us a $5 tip. We could really use the money, and you actually get something for it!

Thanksgiving Attacked

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:58:44 +0000

At Condit Elementary School, in Claremont, California, a forty year tradition of celebrating Thanksgiving was attacked by a handful of angry liberals, and the school caved to their demands.

Two elementary schools in Claremont, Condit and Mountain View, used to take turns dressing up as Pilgrims and Indians and visiting the other’s school for a Thanksgiving feast. Thanks largely to Michelle Raheja, and a handful of followers, that tradition has been deemed politically incorrect. Although the meal took place, the children were told not to dress up.

Michelle Raheja claims that dressing up and celebrating Thanksgiving is “demeaning,” that it is akin to asking children to “dress up like slaves (and kind slave masters), or Jews (and friendly Nazis).”

The truth of the matter is that a harvest festival did take place between the Pilgrims and Native Americans, or Indians, as they were then called. At that point in time, the Pilgrims were friendly with the native people, who willingly gave their help and expertise in teaching the Pilgrims to survive in a new land. They did indeed teach the Pilgrims how to plant corn, catch the fish and eels of the area, and hunt in the forests. Without the help of the Native Americans, the Pilgrims would most likely have perished. There was a peace treaty established between the Wampanoag Indians and the Pilgrims that lasted for fifty years.

It is also true that the costumes public school children are taught to make more closely resemble the clothing worn by the Plains Indian tribes, rather than how the Wampanoag Indians would have dressed. Michelle could have better utilized her time by volunteering to teach the children what an authentic Wampanoag outfit might have looked like, and helping to make the celebration more historically correct. She might have helped prepare dishes that the Pilgrims and Wampanoag might have actually shared at their feast. They might have discussed the Pilgrim dress as well- during colonial times, young boys and girls both wore long dresses. It was not until the age of six that young boys would begin to wear breeches like those that their fathers wore.

Instead, she wants to overlook the peace that was shared between two cultures during the time of the festival and instead focus on the barbaric actions that took place later. Considering that her objection is to the dressing up of children as “Indians,” and she seems to have no objection to the children dressing as Pilgrims, I would have to assume that she would also choose to focus on the Native Americans as victims of violence, when there was, by historical account, abhorrent atrocities perpetrated by both sides.

Following Ms. Raheja’s logic, when socialism has done to America what it has done to many nations in the past, we will no longer be allowed to discuss what a great, democratic country in which we once lived.

The truth of the past will be obscured by the horrors of the socialism that followed.

Photo by dkaz.

Obama And The American Socialized Healthcare System

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:01:28 +0000

The MsM is telling us that Obama fully intends to push for socialized medicine early in his first year as President. Why not? Our financial institutions have already been socialized (nationalized, whichever you prefer). Our auto Industry looks, for all the world, as if they are ready to become nationalized, as well. Now healthcare, which accounts for one-seventh of the US economy, is about to be the next huge segment of the American economy to be taken over by the government. How can anyone, observing the American slide into socialism, not be concerned and even outraged at what our government is doing to the democratic representative republic given us by our Founding Fathers?

The soon to be proposed national healthcare program will most likely be patterned after the Canadian nationalized healthcare system. So how does the Canadian healthcare system stack up against US healthcare these days, anyway? Where better to get a comparison than from a declared liberal site. So we dropped by the site “Classically Liberal” here.

We found some interesting stuff. We recommend you visit the site and read it in its entirety.

Socialized medicine is not about our healthcare as Americans. It’s about power over the American citizen and control over every facet of our life by the government of the US.

Our every move will be monitored, and we will be directed, by the government, in every facet of our lives.

Weigh too much? Lose weight… or the government won’t pay for your medical bills.
Drive too fast? Slow down or the government won’t pay for your medical bills if you’re in an accident.

Smoke? The government won’t pay for your medical bills, period.

Have more than (two) kids? Your medical bills will not be paid if you exceed the allowable limit on babies.

Pregnant with a third child and the government insists that you have an abortion, but you really want this third child? Well, either have an abortion, or that third child will have no medical coverage and the cost of the pregnancy, and delivery, will not be covered, either.

Didn’t finish High School? Your medical bills will not be covered if you do not get a High School Diploma.

Take the wrong courses in college? Well, if you didn’t check before you signed up for a course, and you signed-up for a course the government thinks is uncalled for, or that you do not need for your chosen occupation… then your medical bills will not be picked up by the National Healthcare.

Choose the wrong career, and you are on your own! No medical help from the government.

Get the picture? Almost total control. And you, and I, will have given that power to the government.

What about the cost? You sure you want to know? Well let me establish first… there is no such thing as free healthcare. Somebody is going to pay. Who pays? You and I will pay… in taxes. There is no free lunch! There never has been! If you want it… you must be prepared to pay for it… and if you think healthcare is expensive now… just wait ’til it’s free!

So, next time you hear someone calling for National Healthcare, remind them of all the freedom they will give up for that cradle to the grave care.

The founders of this country wanted us to live free… healthy, if we can manage it, but free, in any event. Today, it seems we are prepared to give our freedom up for a form of modern day Marxism. Socialized Medicine.

Author: J.D Longstreet
Photo by respres

Originally published at WesternFront America

U.N. Passes Resolution Protecting Religion from Blasphemy, Limiting Freedom of Speech

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:52:56 +0000

The United Nations, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that a person’s religion is so important that they are willing to limit another’s freedom of speech to protect it from blasphemy.

Combating Defamation of Religions “underscores the need to combat defamation of religions, and incitement to religious hatred in general, by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national regional and international levels.”

The bill passed with 42 nations abstaining. The bill not only limits speech, but lends support to countries that jail people for speaking in a way the government disagrees with:

“It provides international cover for domestic anti-blasphemy laws, and there are a number of people who are in prison today because they have been accused of committing blasphemy,” said Bennett Graham, international program director with the Becket Fund, a think tank aimed at promoting religious liberty.

“Those arrests are made legitimate by the UN body’s [effective] stamp of approval.”

Here is the most troubling part of this whole thing:

Passage of the resolution is part of a ten-year action plan the 57-state Organization of Islamic Conference launched in 2005 to ensure “renaissance” of the “Muslim Ummah” or community.

While the current resolution is non-binding, Pakistan’s Ambassador Masood Khan reminded the UN’s Human Rights Council this year that the OIC ultimately seeks a “new instrument or convention” on the issue. Such a measure would impose its terms on signatory states.

The Canadians make a great point when they say that religions don’t have rights, people have rights. The goal should be to protect the rights of people to practice their religion, not to protect the religion from defamation.

And isn’t it rather impossible to prosecute this? For example, if I say that Jesus is the son of God and that Mohammad is a pedophile fraud, how do you prove that what I said is false? You would have to prove that Jesus wasn’t the son of God and that Mohammad was, in fact, a messeger of Allah.

This seems to me to be more of a way of intimidating people into silence and legitimizing oppression.

Photo by gawd.

Rich U.S. Farmers Get $49 Million in Farm Subsidies Over 3 Years

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:17:00 +0000

The Government Accounting Office has released another troubling report on the nation’s farm subsidy program, this time showing how some farmers are still getting millions in subsidies while bringing in millions in crop revenues:

More than 2,700 people whose gross income topped $2.5 million — making many of them ineligible for farm programs — received more than $49 million in payments between 2003 and 2006, the Government Accountability Office said in a report.

“If this is true, it is a prime example of the kind of waste I intend to end as president,” President-Elect Barack Obama said in a news conference on Tuesday.

We’ll see about that.

The farm subsidy program hands out about $16 billion dollars for about 2 million farmers. Farm subsides are not a good thing. It’s a program I have written about extensively here, here, here, here, here and here.

Of course this being a government program, this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as waste is concerned:

Other potential infractions included a former insurance company executive who received more than $300,000, an owner of a professional sports team who received $200,000, and a top financial services executive who got $60,000, the GAO said.

The $49 million in potential overpayments is a small percentage of total farm payments, but “that’s a lot of money that can go for school lunch programs for low-income kids, or it could be a bottom-line on the deficit,” Grassley said.

Grassley is Chuck Grassley, Republican Senator from Iowa. I would have preferred that he said something more to the tune of, “that’s a lot of money that could go back to the tax payers, so they might give it to charities that provide lunches for low income kids…” but I don’t mind the comment on the deficit.

What are your thoughts on the farm subsidy program and the payments to farmers making millions? Answer in the comments below.

Photo by Nicolas T.

Penn. Democrat: “Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?”

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:36:04 +0000

Gun grabbing Democrats don’t care about the Constitutional rights granted to us by our Creator. They simply don’t.

For example, Pittsburgh is considering a gun ban. I guess they look at the success gun bans had in Washington, D.C. and Chicago, and thought it would be nice to have that kind of success in Pittsburgh.

The only thing standing in the way is the Second Amendment…but who cares about that:

“Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?” said Councilwoman Tonya Payne, a supporter. “This is what’s right to do, and if this means that we have to go out and have a court battle, then that’s fine … We have plenty of dead bodies coming up in our streets every single day, and that is unacceptable.”

How is restricting the right of law abiding citizens the ability to protect themselves going to stop “dead bodies coming up in the street?” Please explain that to me, because I don’t get it.

This is the modern Democrat. Who cares about the Constitution? The problem is, this is the attitude of a growing number of Republicans also. Republicans like recently unemployed Congressman Joe Knollenberg, who I wrote about earlier.

And for the record, I care about the Constitutionality of gun bans, and so do millions of Americans. Don’t tread on me.

Hat Tip: Warner Todd Huston

After Seeing How They Helped the Auto Makers, Congress May Help Make Starting a Union Easier

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 16:38:23 +0000

When the Congress returns next year, one of the top priorities for them will be to pass the misleadingly titled bill, the Employee Free Choice Act.

This bill will eliminate privacy when voting for or against a union in your workplace. The Coalition for Workplace Democracy issued a press release (pdf) explaining why this is a very bad idea:

“We wanted to take the opportunity to remind members of Congress of the overwhelming opposition from the business community, their constituents and union households to this anti-worker legislation,” said Brian Worth with the Coalition for a
Democratic Workplace. “This bill is a job-killer and fundamentally undemocratic.”

The letter also stated:

“This legislation poses not only an assault on an individual’s right to privacy, but a direct threat to economic growth and job creation. Particularly at a time of economic uncertainty, Congress should not enact measures that threaten our economic competitiveness, including the Employee Free Choice Act. Furthermore, this legislation would have a particularly devastating impact on small employers who are the primary source for new jobs in our economy.”

President-elect Obama’s Administration and the new Congress will face its first true test early next year in the form of the anti-worker Employee Free Choice Act — that allows unionization without secret ballots for workers. This Act, more aptly titled the Employee “Forced” Choice Act, is nothing short of a full-frontal assault on American
democracy and worker privacy. Backed by union special interests and their Congressional allies, the anti-worker bill would effectively strip employees of the right to vote in private when deciding whether or not to join a union.

“It’s ironic that members of Congress, all of whom were just elected by secret ballot, would even consider legislation that would remove that right for millions of American workers,” added Worth.

Gateway Pundit notes the agenda of the Obama administration and the unions, and the inherit danger of union expansion:

In Europe the Unions are the number one agent of stagnation and resistance to change, able to paralyze entire nations with continued strikes while protecting the privileges of the few to the detriment of the majority. One of the top priorities of Obama’s is ending secret ballots in Union’s elections. Currently, when 50% of workers in a company sign statements to unionize, that merely sets up a second stage, where workers vote by secret ballot to determine if the company will be unionized. Under the new proposal, shared by Obama and his top aids, using a system called “Card Check,” unionization would occur as soon as half the workers had openly signed cards stating that they favor union representation so that it would be visible who had refused. Such an arrangement would pave the way for a significant expansion of unionization throughout the country, an important move that would ensure an enduring socialist rule even when Republicans returned to power.

Neal Boortz explains how this is a job killer:

Now just ask yourself .. what would you do if you were an employer and you felt that the Democrats were on the verge of passing the union’s “card check” bill. Well .. I’ll tell you what I would do. I would be looking at any automation that I could find that would reduce my workforce. I would then go with all of the offshore options I could find that would allow me to get rid of more employees. Then I would go to staffing agencies for the rest of my workforce. The people working in my place of business would not be working for me. They would be working for a staffing agency. If they want to unionize something, they can unionize the staffing agency. If the Democrats bring us “card check” along with an expansion of the Family Leave Act my guess is that there are a lot of employers out there who will do everything they can to get rid of employees.

Boortz makes a lot of sense. Look at what has happened to the auto makers. Automate a job and the worker who used to do that goes into the job bank, still making his salary, but now doing crossword puzzles.

How could the first African American President sign a bill which eliminates a person’s right to vote in private? Try to wrap your head around that for a minute.

Pelosi, Reid, and the Big Three Charade

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:42:14 +0000

Jim Berlin from Dude With Tude wrote a short piece on the auto bailout. Jim is a satirist, but this one article was serious.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid claim they were incensed when CEOs of Ford, GM and Chrysler came to Washington in their corporate jets, then proceeded to plead for another $25 billion in bailout money.

The anger was phony, a red herring, a play-to-the-public that Democrats have suddenly become disengaged from the inherent liberal notion that unions must be served and money fixes everything. The decision to delay a bailout and order the men to return with a plan had nothing to do with corporate jets or outrageous CEO salaries.

The auto chiefs could have traveled to D.C. on mule and horseback — hell, they could have hitchhiked and offered to work for a dollar a year — and the outcome would have been the same. Not because Dems are suddenly tightfisted, but because Nancy and Harry realized majority public opinion was against a quick handout.

The car-makers will get their money, tons of it, but first The Great Charade must be played out. And it will work like this:

In December the Detroit big shots will be back before Congress. They will arrive on commercial flights. They will have seen Fiscal Jesus.

Detroit’s Big Three, which have sailed a rock-steady course into disaster for the last 50 years, will claim to have undergone a foundational change in philosophy in only two weeks. They will speak of slicing benefits and salaries, an end to gas guzzlers, stringent quality control, alternative fuels, maybe even cars that don’t rust after three years of winter.

They will be promises scribbled in crayon on bar napkins between the second and third martinis.

But Nancy and Harry will wink and say that’s more like it. The CEOs will get their money. And they will not fly commercial again — until their next trip to D.C.

Go check out Jim’s Blog and subscribe to his rss feed while you’re there. It’s one of the most entertaining conservative blogs you’ll ever see.

Bill Ayers On NPR, Post Election

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:29:25 +0000

This is an interesting interview. Bill Ayers went on Fresh Air and was interviewed by Terry Gross.

If you’re like me, you might find this to be interesting. You can hear the interview on the NPR website.

If the audio ever goes away from the NPR site, you can listen to it here, but please go to the NPR site if possible.

I get a laugh when Ayers says it was irresponsible and dangerous for the McCain campaign to associate him with Obama… because Ayers got death threats. This… from a terrorist. Really?

Eric Odom & John Hawkins Interview

dogwings@inbox.com (All American Blogger) — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:01:16 +0000

All American Blogger

Pentagon to Deploy 20,000 Troops in America by 2011

Top posts on All American Blogger from 24th November - 30th November

Why recessions happen (great Week article)

Liberalism bombs Bombay

Crowd Tramples Wal-Mart Worker in New York

Invisible Victims - The Winchester Atrocity

“God sent us this special black person in the nation’s time of crisis.”

I’m Going to CPAC This February

A Few Notes From The AAB Team

State Blogs

Topspots

Thanksgiving Attacked

Obama And The American Socialized Healthcare System

U.N. Passes Resolution Protecting Religion from Blasphemy, Limiting Freedom of Speech

Rich U.S. Farmers Get $49 Million in Farm Subsidies Over 3 Years

Penn. Democrat: “Who really cares about it being unconstitutional?”

After Seeing How They Helped the Auto Makers, Congress May Help Make Starting a Union Easier

Pelosi, Reid, and the Big Three Charade

Bill Ayers On NPR, Post Election

Eric Odom & John Hawkins Interview