Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

President Obama’s First 2012 Campaign Ad: from the Right.

2011-04-03T07:43:00.000-07:00

The NRSC launches a truthful, effective, and amazing "Obama 2012 Campaign Ad!"

President Barack Obama is proud of his record of accomplishment. Watch his first ad of the 2012 campaign brought to you by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Disclaimer: *Not actually an Obama 2012 ad*

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) is the official political committee established by Republican Members of the United States Senate to help Republican candidates develop the campaign resources they need for the 2012 elections. The Chairman of the NRSC is Senator John Cornyn of Texas.

NRSC website, check it: www.nrsc.org.
You Tube TheNRSC
Twitter @NRSC
Facebook: National Republican Senatorial Committee

Get ready folks, the 2012 elections are just around the corner, and it's gonna get ugly! Most importantly –– get involved so we can send a clear message: "Ahh, Hell No we won't...reelect Obama"!

2010 Midterms: What California “Fools” Re-elected Barbara Boxer for U.S. Senate?

2010-11-06T09:00:00.000-07:00

Observing the 2010 midterm elections unfold was truly exciting –– a historic “political earthquake” where, after winning over 60 seats, –– the largest number of House pickups since Democrats picked up 75 seats in 1948 –– the Republicans took control of the House, as well as adding six in the Senate and winning countless other Governor and State Legislature positions.

With the voice of the majority of the American people and a highly-charged Tea Party, the 2010 Midterms, rocked the Democratic Party, forcing President Obama to admit to “ A shellacking," yet in that same speech and subsequent talks with MoveOn.org (and I'm sure others), Obama is demonstrating that he doesn't quite “get it!" I think they call that DENIAL. And if anyone thinks that President Obama will follow President Bill Clinton's swing to the center after the Democrats lost big-time in 1994, is dreaming –– because Obama is all about BIG GOVERNMENT and more.

Fortunately for us on the right, we can say good-bye to Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House, yet as of late (and via twitter), Pelosi has announced that she is staying in the game and hopes to be the Dem's Minority Speaker. Oh my, I guess she is not done getting more Republicans hired to office. But we can say, "hello" to John Boehner, who gave and emotional, humble victory speech –– that I personally found refreshing.

Although I must admit that I viewed the 2010 midterm elections between three networks –– Fox News, CNN and the left-wing news network, MSNBC, with my favorite coming from CNN and it’s high-technology gadgets as wells as their mixed panel of both liberals and conservatives –– giving the commentary more balance. However, pundits on MSNBC (Lawrence O’Donnell, Chris Matthews, Keith Olberbmann, and Rachel Maddow) were embarrassing, acting like high and mighty gossip, "mean girls". One of the low points for the "MSNBC gang" was when Matthews asked his demeaning question to Congresswomen Michelle Bachmann, “Are you hypnotized," as the the MSNC gang laughed in the background. But as fate would have it, a sign appeared behind Bachmann –– “How’s the tingle, Chris?” and then Bachmann responded, “We (the people) are coming out of our trance…out of our nightmare. People are thrilled tonight…I imagine that thrill is probably maybe not quite so tingly on your leg anymore.”

This brings me to the title of my blog –– with all the RED showing up on the map of the United States, I was "thrilled!" Yet, the “fools” in California re-elected Barbara Boxer for U.S. Senate (51.9% to 42.6% defeating Carly Fiorina) –– Boxer, one of my least favorite women on the planet.

Since March of 2009 I began blogging about politics and for the first time I decided to get more involved. No I didn’t join, but I am a defender of the Tea Party. However, thanks to Felicia Tweedy (a Carly supporter and friend on Facbook), I did volunteer at my local California Republican Party (San Luis Obispo County Republican Party) headquarters a week before the elections to help get the vote out. I must say that I met so many terrific people, including Dolores Jackson [Dolores is in photo with Meg below for the Telegram Tribune] who is a leader of the Women's Republican Party here in San Luis Obispo (SLO) and Laura Mordaunt, a local Tea Party patriot who is a valuable source of information about politics and the issues.

I was pleasantly surprised by the dedication of the Republican youth who came out to help, including Alexis and Amber [Alexis photo R with me] who were both there every day, along with other college students –– all
eager to do their part. One of the highlights is when Amber [photo L] also gave me a copy of Karl Rove's new book.

Even Meg Whitman stopped by the SLO Republican hq, as did our Congressman Kevin McCarthy to help out. It was terrific and was my first photo with a "real" politician [see photo below]. Although, sadly we know that Jerry Brown defeated Whitman, and gladly Prop 19 was voted down, I think Brown may have had a few "puffs" before his victory speech. That was weird.

Considering I had a "somewhat invested interest" in the U.S. Senate outcome, I was not surprised at Boxer’s win, but I was disappointed. After analyzing the election map here in Californian, I can say that my county voted 51.3% for Carly Fiorina with only 42.8% for Boxer. Thank goodness the majority of my "neighbors" are RED. What is interesting about the election map, is that San Luis Obispo County is surrounded by BLUE. To our South, Santa Barbara, yet Ventura County went RED and of course, LA County (with all it's Hollywood Liberals) is always BLUE. But Orange County and San Diego is RED. However, to our North, Monterey, Santa Cruz and all the way up the coast through Marin, Mendocino, and Humboldt counties, you will find way to much BLUE! However, as you go inland, it is all RED except for Alpine County and Imperial County.

So, now we know the "fools" –– at least the counties –– who re-elected one of the most arrogant, condescending, and partisan career politicians –– “don’t call me ma’am, call me Senator" Barbara Boxer for her fourth term. Boxer is a die-hard liberal who strongly supports "free Viagra and abortions for all" as well as President Obama’s left-wing agenda. An agenda that includes a bigger and more expensive and intrusive government with its socialistic tendencies of “redistributing the wealth,” taking over private sector industries, and other radical concepts –– of which the majority of Americans clearly rejected when they went out and voted on November 2, 2010.

What does the 2010 midterm elections mean? Well, as both sides of the political isle continue to spin the results and President Obama stays in denial, "we the people" know better and I think the "rising political giant," Senator-elect of Florida, Marco Rubio, had a profound message on election night...

“We make a grave mistake if we believe that tonight these results are somehow an embrace of the Republican Party. What they are is a second chance. A second chance for the Republicans to be what they said they were going to be, not so long ago.”

Yes, it is also clear that the 2010 midterms was not a "solid endorsement" of the Republican Party either. They had eight years of big government, lack of transparency, an unwarranted war, and plenty of corruption. The Republican Party is in dire need of “rehabilitation” and they have a lot of work to do as outlined in an article by Michael D. Tanner (of the CATO Institute) –– Ten Takeaways from the Big Night –– of which I agree with 100%.

It's the Economy, Stupid.
Obamacare Must Be Stopped.
Cut Spending, Not Just Taxes.
Ban Earmarks.
Level with the American People.
Offer an Alternative.
Investigate ... Carefully.
Tackle Entitlements.
Don't Fear a Shutdown.
Remember, the Tea Party Is Still Out There.

I would add a few more. Bring home our troops and protect our boarders. And while Washington is at it, let's work on "responsible and reasonable" energy independence " and work together to green our planet and protect our animals and marine life.

Republicans, don't be afraid to say NO as I would if my teenage daughter, who doesn't have a driver's license, asked me for the keys so she could drive the car. When appropriate, do as Boehner did on ObamaCare –– full all of its deception and corruption –– just say "Hell NO!" Lastly, keep in mind that the Tea Party is not the only one watching –– "Concerned Citizens" are too, including this one.

Where’s Bandit? A Missing Cat and the Lessons Learned

2010-09-28T07:05:00.000-07:00

A “till death do us part” pet owner rants about her missing cat – and the lessons learned.

About six weeks ago – August 15th to be exact – my cat Bandit went missing. I began searching for him immediately. Knocking on neighbor’s doors, putting up flyers with his picture, calling and showing up at the local animal shelters, placing an ad on Craigslist, and walking the streets calling his name day and night.

Bandit, a feral cat whom I had adopted about three years ago, was an inside-outside cat, and enjoyed his freedom immensely, but always returned to the safety and comfort of his loving home. So, I was no stranger to him staying out for a day at time. This means that early on I had hope that he would walk – I mean strut, because Bandit was cool and charismatic – through the little doggie door, give me that “hello meow,” approach me for a quick pet and purr, then be off to eat and take his nap. Yet, as days turned into weeks, my heart sank and I even tweeted my concerns and grief – "Where's Bandit?" I was consoled by a few of “my tweeples,” Facebook friends, and a Blogcritics writer as far away as Israel took the time to provide some newfound hope. Thanks so much Ruvy, but Bandit is still missing.

I have always been an animal lover and I am no stranger to losing pets, but as an adult it has always been due to death, not going missing. It started with my two purebred, papered, German Rottweilers (Rotts) [1996 Marilyn (L) and Brigitte (R)] who both died of Lymphoma cancer. This evil disease hit Marilyn at age three and she died in my arms (naturally) on a hot summer day in 1999. In the meantime, Brigitte was diagnosed when she was eight and in an eager attempt to prolong and hopefully save her from this dreaded disease, I went ahead with chemotherapy that my vet told me about, which only kept her around a few months longer than her sister who did not have chemo. In a short time, Brigitte went from a strong, robust, and blissful 130-pound energetic dog to a fragile 90-pound weak one – unable to eat or even walk. Still intact to the bitter end were her unwavering loyalty, the love expressed in her eyes, and her attempts to wag her tail. One of the most heart-wrenching times for any animal lover is when we make that decision – to “put down” our pets. Unwilling to see her suffer anymore, Brigitte’s time had come and on another sad summer day (2004 this time), I said, “Good-bye” to my other best friend.

I blame the pathetic breeders and their inbreeding practices for the cancer that took the lives of my Rotts, and since then I refuse to get purebred dogs. Not to mention that we are overpopulated with domestic animals and there are so many pets that need to be rescued. In fact, every time I visit a pet rescue center or the government-run animal shelter, I always leave in tears – from anger when visiting the latter, especially the one here on the Central Coast where I live.

In between the tragic suffering and subsequent deaths of my Rotts, I adopted Jessie, a Chihuahua-Corgi mix [R] and Whiskers a Terrier-Dachshund (Wiener Dog) mix [L]. From their"issues," it was obvious they had been abused and/or neglected by someone out there. Both are long, painful stories and sadly Jessie and Whiskers are no longer alive.

After the heartbreaking loss surrounding Whiskers in 2007, I decided take a break from dogs. My sister found two feral cats that were brothers (around seven months old) being kept by a girl who needed to find them a home. We were both immediately smitten and my sister adopted the white one and named him Zeus, while I took in the grey and my daughter named him Bandit. My sister and I scheduled "play dates" for Bandit and Zeus and, amazingly, they would frolic around with such affection every time – proof of the bonds of brotherhood. Later I sought out a friend for Bandit when I rescued Tinkerbelle (a Calico cat) from that hellhole government-run animal shelter in my area. Tink, as I call her, is so wild she won’t let anyone come near her, yet after a year she finally started seeking my physical affection, though only on her terms.

Since having two cats, I realized that I am more of a dog person, so off I went to find my new best friend – Shorty, a Chihuahua-Terrier mix, this time from a local animal rescue center called Woods Humane Society – a pristine place, with a loving staff, where the cats have a special place to run free and the dogs are treated with the utmost care and dignity. As with most rescued animals, Shorty has his issues, anxiety and a few others, but it's nothing unmanageable. What is funny about my trio of pets was that Bandit preferred my dog Shorty to my cat Tink, and watching them play together was so refreshing – something I miss very much.

[Photo from left to right: Bandit, Shorty, and Tinkerbelle]

I still look for Bandit, yet with a heavy heart, feeling like I failed him somehow. You see, I’m a “till death do us part” (warts and all) pet owner and Bandit was part of my family. What upsets me is that there are people out there who abandon their cats and other pets with no feeling whatsoever and I don’t understand that type of apathetic mentality. But I’ll move on because animal neglect and cruelty, which unfortunately rages on in our country and around the world, gets my blood boiling.

What I will expand on is that this experience has hindered my desire to engage in activities that I enjoyed before Bandit went missing. Including not completing two series that I had started here on Blogcritics in fitness and politics, which cast a shadow over my sense of follow-through. Hopefully, I will re-surface soon because I'm sure my liberal friends here on Blogcritics miss me. Furthermore, and on a more serious note, it brought up dark thoughts of how distressing and overwhelming it is for those dealing with missing children – another topic entirely, yet to me, as a mother of two terrific daughters, it is by far one of the most horrific things that could happen to any parent. Unfathomable – and just thinking about it sends a chill down my spine.

Even though these past weeks have been filled with sorrow, lessons have emerged, including the usual ones that come out of losses: be kind to those around you and savor every moment with those you love, including pets, because you never know, you may never see them again. Also, to me, the death of a pet is easier to handle than wondering and worrying, which I do every day. Is Bandit dead or alive? Is he suffering? Is he hungry or thirsty? Does he feel abandoned? Is he lost? Is he trying to find his way home?

Will I ever get over my missing Bandit? Eventually, however, those thoughts will only occur incrementally. Yet, no matter how much time goes by, I'll always wonder, "Where's Bandit?" Unless of course, I find him!

Article first published as Where's Bandit? A Missing Cat and the Lessons Learned on Blogcritics.
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Sep 27, 2010 at 6:33 pm

Obama’s Political Payback: Green Corruption –– Part Two

2010-08-09T06:32:00.000-07:00

Climate Scam players are powerfully positioned in the middle of cap-and-trade –– the real pot of gold at the end of the “climate rainbow.”

PART ONE first published as Obama's Political Payback: Green Corruption –– Part One on Blogcritics.

Article first published as Obama's Political Payback: Green Corruption –– Part Two on Blogcritics. Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Aug 08, 2010 at 9:14 pm

CAP-AND-TRADE: THE REAL POT OF GOLD AT THE END OF THE CLIMATE RAINBOW

Let me be clear, this is not a debate on whether or not the globe is warming or is going to blow up if we keep breathing. And to be clearer, protecting our environment, energy independence, and doing more to “green” our planet are worthy and necessary endeavors, which most of us on the Right wholeheartedly support. However, at heart of the U.S. climate legislation –– Obama Climate –– is Cap-and-Trade, which passed the House June 26, 2009 (H.R. 2454). In essence the government sets limits on the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) a company can emit. The limits are called a “cap.” If a company has to exceed the limit, it is allowed to buy “credits” from companies that pollute less. This transfer is the “trade" –– pollution trading, wow, another human invention! Companies selling their credits under this elaborate accounting system can expect to prosper, including many involved in this Climate Scam.

Considering last summer and into the winter of 2009 the Obama administration was bogged down with their massive takeover of our health care system –– deceiving Americans as to the content and the cost. And as they continue scrambling to fix a drowning economy and high unemployment raging across the nation, the Democratic leadership have been "unable to sell cap-and-trade as a job creator," knowing that Americans "see it as a job killer and a costly energy tax." So in December 2009 the Obama administration decided to go through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to move their climate agenda via the Clean Air Act, ruling that “greenhouse gases threaten public health and the environment" and six key greenhouse gases were listed, including carbon dioxide (C02), opening the "regulation door" to carbon emissions from automobiles, power plants, and other sources.

In May 2010, the Senate climate bill was unveiled by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman –– the American Power Act –– and just a couple of weeks ago Senator Harry Reid's "energy and oil spill response legislation" has been floating around, which according to the author of the bestseller Climate Gate, Brian Sussman, "[it] contains a clot of overpowering government spending and social engineering." Furthermore, recent reports are claiming that "cap-and-trade is dead" (kind of like the public option in ObamaCare), while rumors have surfaced that the Democratic leadership plan on using more of their Chicago-thug-style political tactics as they did to make ObamaCare law of the land –– this time a more cowardly method, “a lame-duck session.”

With so much at stake for many in this Climate Scam, even if the planet blows up, they will get their cap-and-trade, or a version of it –– a legislation that they helped create, shape, facilitate, lobby, testify, and will continue to push for because at the end of the day, they will ultimately benefit from it –– big time! And if a Senate bill passes and is reconciled with the tougher cap-and-trade House version, most economic analysis confirm that it will hurt the economy, raise taxes, and kill jobs. Even candidate Obama in 2008 stated, "Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

TWO MAJOR PLAYERS IN THIS CLIMATE SCAM: AL GORE AND JOHN DOERR

As outlined in Green Corruption, Part One, the Obama administration has already approved numerous "green" government contracts to the heavyweight Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB), of which we already know that Al Gore and John Doerr are both partners. Billions of taxpayer dollars from the Obama Green Stimulus and other government loans and grants are funding KPCB's "green" projects and ultimately their pockets.

Obviously, government favoritism is at play here and it goes further than KPCB, leaving out a host of companies that offer green energy technologies who are ready to make a positive impact on our environment. It's a disease within our political structure –– the all too familiar and ugly evolution of "crony capitalism," spewing out of both political parties. However, most of the players in this scam are connected to the party in power –– the Democratic leadership –– so it will move ahead as planned, unchecked.

Ironically, in April 2009 when Gore testified in a hearing before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, he was confronted by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) about his financial interests in, at that time, to the pending cap-and-trade legislation. What’s funny about this interchange is that Blackburn, citing an October article by the New York Times Magazine about Kleiner Perkins, asked Gore, "Are you aware of that company?" Gore, laughingly said, “Well, yes, I’m a partner in Kleiner Perkins.” Blackburn then noted that “they [Kleiner Perkins] had invested about a billion dollars in forty companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation,” and she asked, “Is the legislation that we are discussing here today; is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?” Blackburn also asked, "Are you willing to divest yourself from any profit?"

Gore sidestepped the questions and took a somewhat defensive posture, claming that "every penny" that he has made from "green" –– his movie, book and investments in renewable energy –– goes to his non-profit organization, "the Alliance for Climate Protection to spread awareness."

Spread awareness. Hmm, OK we'll move ahead because more significant is the fact that Congresswoman Blackburn was onto something big!

OBAMA'S GREEN TEAM

Early in his presidency, Obama put together his Green Team and it comprised of a well-respected scientist as well as an array of global- warming activists, progressives, and left-wing radicals like Van Jones, who is part of the Apollo Alliance –– the left-wing group that helped draft the "green" in the 2009 stimulus package (ARRA).

At this point we'll take a peak at Gore's "awareness" organization. Coincidently, the Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change is Carol Browner, who prior to her position in the Obama administration was a board member of the Alliance for Climate Protection. In fact, Browner and Gore go as far back as the late 80’s and early 90’s when she worked as legislative director for then Senator Gore. Browner also spent time on the board of the Center for American Progress (CAP) –– the Soros-funded liberal organization –– and according to Bloomberg.com, "a squadron of CAP experts" worked with president Obama's transition team. Looking deeper into CAP you'll discover it's an organization very popular with the Apollo group as well as being the middle of the green movement. Additionally, despite Browners' controversial ties to Socialistic International –– a worldwide organization who “seeks to establish democratic socialism" and other radical ideas like "global governance," she was still "chosen" as Obama's Climate Czar.

Also, Cathy Zoi served as the CEO of the Alliance for Climate Protection until she was appointed as the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) –– positioning her to “manage the U.S. Department of Energy's $2.3 billion applied science, research, development, and deployment portfolio.” Moreover, Ms. Zoi “oversees EERE's $16.8 billion in funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.”

Apparently, "a number of former Venture Capitalists (VC) jumped ship last summer and are now executing President Obama’s green power policy," including Jonathan Silver, who in November 2009 Energy Secretary Stephen Chu announced him as a new team member of the Department of Energy (DOE). Silver is now the Executive Director of the Department's loan program office and oversees the U.S. Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program that was "kicked into high gear" with the Obama administration, as well as the $25-billion Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) loan program, both discussed in Green Corruption Part One.

Evidently, the VC guys as well as the folks from the Alliance for Climate Protection and the Apollo Alliance have the ear of the president, influence over legislation, and other areas on the "green front," and despite the obvious conflict of interest, many are now in charge of deciding who gets billions of "green" taxpayer dollars.

OBAMA'S ECONOMIC ADVISORY BOARD

While it is clear that Al Gore is a heavy weight within political circles, don't underestimate John Doerr's, which dates back to the Bush administration when "Doerr and his team were responsible for getting the 'end-oil-addiction' wording inserted into President Bush's 2006 state-of-the-union address." Currently, Doerr's "hope" is on "the anointed one" and his persuasion was reflected in the stimulus package via his "meetings with Obama's transition team and leaders in Congress" as well as his list of “five recommendations” that included a cap-and-trade system, smart grid, solar, and more federal money to be allocated toward renewable energy –– all of which would benefit his portfolio dramatically. And so it has!

Also worth repeating is that a week prior to enactment of the stimulus package, Obama announced his Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB), "to provide him and his staff with independent advice," of which we know that Doerr is one of the "chosen." However, another "chosen" PERAB board member is Anna Burger, a top-ranking officer at SEIU, whose profile brags that she "led SEIU's grassroots election work, which helped elect President Barack Obama." Ms. Burger is also connected to the Apollo Alliance and is Chair of Change to Win, a "union-united" organization that endorsed Senator Obama as "the American Dream Candidate."

Edward John Craig in his May 2009 article on National Review Online, Thick as Thieves, commented on the so-called advisory board, “Of the 16 [PERAB] members only one (Martin Feldstein) opposes cap-and-trade. At least six expect direct financial benefits from cap-and-trade and the remaining members are either Obama supporters or union representatives.” Sure enough, June 17, 2009 the PERAB voted 15-1 in favor of submitting a memo to Obama that, of course, consisted of "endorsing" cap-and-trade.

JOEL ROGERS: "THE WIZARD" OF THE GREEN MOVEMENT

Furthermore, the typical cap-and-trade proposal seeks to reduce CO2 emissions by 17% by 2020 and over 80% (below 1990 levels) by 2050 compared to 2005 levels. Worth noting is that The Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation "analyzed a proposal to cut CO2 emissions by 70 percent" and concluded that "such a cut would have little impact on global temperatures."

Since The Heritage Foundation leans to the Right, you'll want to meet Joel Rogers from the far, far Left, who was the co-founder of the 1992 Marxist New Party –– a political party, whose "members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA, still alive today) and the militant organization ACORN." Interestingly, all three of the aforementioned organizations "endorsed" Obama at one time or another, but I digress. Rogers is also connected to other left-wing groups and is known as an "anti-capitalist" and "The Wizard" of green movement. In fact, Rogers started a new "green" organization in 2008 –– Emerald Cities Collaborative (ECC), whose mission statement is “united around the goal of 'greening' our metropolitan areas in high-road ways that advance equal opportunity, shared wealth, and democracy within them.” Recently, Rogers was "praised" by the "radical revolutionary" and "social justice guru" –– the 1990 Self-proclaimed Communist Van Jones –– for his “progressive accomplishments," which includes "a new energy paradigm." Rogers and Jones are key players in this Climate Scam and both are part of the Apollo Alliance, of which two key board members are also on the board of Rogers' ECC. Rogers is one of the four co-founders and current board member, while Jones served on the Apollo board until he was "chosen" to be Obama's Green Jobs Czar, which was short lived. In fact since most of these "green" people are all interconnected through various left-wing political and environmental organizations, you wonder if they ever sleep. Later, more of these associations will be confronted –– Jones and the Apollo Alliance included –– when I attempt to connect the "radical climate dots."

For those that don't give a crap about the hard-core-left wing radicals, who have infiltrated the green movement, listen to what Rogers had to say during The New Green Deal – Take Back America 2008 Conference, in a very revealing speech that should be watched in its entirety, however, highlighted below is Rogers' statement after he downplayed the "money aspect of carbon [trading]..."

You can do everything you want to in the U.S. to reduce greenhouse gases and it won't make much of a dent frankly in world wide climate change...I hope you all realize that you could eliminate every power plant in America today and you can stop every car in America today. Take out the entire power generation sector. Take out all of the transportation sector. And you still would not be anywhere near below 80% below 1990 levels. You would be closer to around 60% it would be around 68% percent and that is with bringing the economy to a complete halt. Basically.

Again, debating whether or not CO2 is a toxin causing global warming is not the point of this article –– it's the deception, what's really going on behind the "climate scenes." Stay tuned because the plot thickens –– the notorious “Banksters” Goldman Sachs, the “Godfather of Carbon Trading” Richard Sandor, and others are operating within this Climate Scam.

THE PLOT THICKENS –– MORE GORE AND DOERR CONNECTIONS

Al Gore and John Doerr's –– the "climate duo," whose combined carbon footprint is larger than my entire city –– friendship dates as far back as the 90's. Since being converted to “global warming” by Gore in 2005 with “a convenient hype," Doerr has become a “green evangelist,” with his climate crisis message, “I’m really scared, I don’t think we’re gonna make it.” At the same time Doerr continually markets energy as “the mother of all markets” –– $6 trillion a year worldwide.

As written by Troxler and Brown in their book Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth, around 2005 Kleiner Perkins had initially invested $100 million into “green” and announced publicly that they would “advocate for policies that reduce the climate crisis and increase energy innovation.” Yet, “within hours of Obama’s victory –– a candidate that both Gore and Doerr had strenuously campaigned for, including financial donations –– Kleiner Perkins had upped their investment in forty-eight clean-energy-technology companies to the tune of nearly $2 billion.”

In 2004 Gore started a company with CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management David Blood –– Generation Investment Management (GIM), a “green” and "global warming" investment company valued at $2.5 billion. GIM partners include two other Goldman bigwigs, Mark Ferguson and Peter Harris, with speculation that Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson is involved somehow, yet I am unable to confirm.

RICHARD SANDOR: THE GODFATHER OF CARBON TRADING

In 2007, GIM and Kleiner Perkins created "an International Alliance to accelerate global climate solutions," and about that time, Gore became a partner of Kleiner Perkins and Doerr joined the GIM advisory board. More compelling, both GIM and Goldman Sachs are two of the largest investors in the cap-and-trade carbon-trading platform that Obama helped get funded back in 2000 and 2001 via the Joyce Foundation. That company is the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), which was launched in 2003 and whose founder and CEO Richard Sandor –– the “Godfather of Carbon Trading," another major player in the Climate Scam –– estimates that the worldwide carbon market could be "a $10 trillion a year market.”

If you've followed any of Glenn Beck’s Crime Inc. series, conservative blogs, or caught Deborah Corey Barnes' 2007 article at HumanEvents.com –– The Money and Connections Behind Al Gore's Carbon Crusade –– you’re probably aware that during two of the eight years (1994 to 2002) that Obama sat on the board of The Joyce Foundation (the Chicago-based organization, who is a major donor to radical environmentalist and conservation groups, including Joel Rogers' Emerald Cities Collaborative and progressive movements like Center for American Progress), then Senator Obama voted in favor of the nearly $1.1 million in two separate grants that were instrumental in developing and launching CCX. Also, prior to joining the Obama administration as Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President, Valerie Jarrett served as a director of The Joyce Foundation. During the time funding was approved, Paula DiPerna, the Joyce Foundation's president became the Executive Vice President for CCX.

Furthermore, during Senator Obama's April 2006 “Energy Independence” speech, he even gave CCX a "shout out" –– "Right here in Chicago, the Chicago Climate Exchange is already running a legally binding greenhouse gas trading system," announces the Organizing for America website, the successor organization to Obama for America. Interestingly, in October 2006, then Chicago Governor Rod Blagojevich, in his Executive Order on Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reduction, it states, "It is the intent for the State of Illinois to join Chicago Climate Exchange," and sure enough the State of Illinois is a CCX member.

Most are aware that GIM purchased a ten percent stake in CCX and became the company's fifth largest co-owner and in 2006 Goldman Sachs also purchased a ten percent share of CCX for $23 million –– marking Goldman and GIM as the largest investors in the Chicago Climate Exchange. However, what is not known is that Sandor is well connected and even had a hand in shaping the Waxman cap-and-trade bill –– as reported by Bloomberg News in June of 2009, which also confirmed his ties to Obama. Sandor stated, “Obama was on the foundation [Joyce Foundation] that gave us the grant.” “We know him well.”

In addition, in a May 14, 2009 press release by ResourceInvestor.com, Sandor was named as part of a new panel called the Energy & Environmental Markets Advisory Committee (EEMAC), of which Bart Chilton Commissioner of the Commodity Future Trading Commission (CFTC), is also the chair. “This is a distinguished group that will help the agency as we prepare for what could be the most important commodity market ever,” Chilton said. “I know it is sort of rare for government to do a lot of work before a new law is even passed, but carbon markets are too important for us not to get right,” Chilton added.

It must be a Chicago thing, but the Climate Scam is much bigger.

MULIT-BILLIONAIRES MAURICE STRONG AND GEORGE SOROS

CCX board includes a very controversial figure –– Maurice Strong, who has described himself as “a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology” and Strong is another "global warming guru," playing "a unique and critical role in globalizing the environmental movement." According to Canada Free Press, Strong was part of a scandal with Al Gore back in the 90’s and has been known to be working on "anti-American schemes with George Soros as far back as 2006." Canada Free Press pronounces, “All that President Barack Obama is doing to transform America and the Free World over to One World Government begins and ends with one Maurice Strong. Soros is merely the financier.”

Speaking of George Soros, Troxler and Brown open Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth, heralding Soros “the first of the Killionaires, but not the last” –– and highlight his trail of destruction. Killionaires, the authors state, “Are focused on killing off the wealth of millions to increase their own personal wealth.” And in Soros own words, “I am basically there to make money. I cannot and do not look at the social consequences of what I do.”

According to DiscoverTheNetworks.org, Soros through his foundation Open Society Institute (OSI), has dispensed billions of dollars to a multitude of left-wing organizations, including bankrolling, as mentioned earlier, the Center for American Progress as well as Moveon.org –– the web-based political network that uses its fundraising clout to push the Democratic Party to the left. Apparently, Soros "is one of the most powerful men on earth" and "has long, deep and shady ties to the Democratic Party," more specifically, Hillary Clinton, yet Soros jumped into the political ring with Barack Obama as early as 2004.

But we’ll “move on” because more relevant to the Climate Scam is an organization that Soros happens to be one of the largest donors –– the Tides Center/Foundation, "with a 30-year history in progressive social change work." The Tides Center is a large and frequent recipient of Joyce Foundation grants, who, as noted earlier, funds a lot of "green," lists the Apollo Alliance in their "Project Directory" and recently gave a $175,000 grant to the Tides Center for the “work” of the Apollo Alliance. A tangled financial web is woven in the fabric of the green movement and there's more...

THE NOTORIOUS “BANKSTERS” GOLDMAN SACHS OPERATING WITHIN THIS CLIMATE SCAM

Goldman Sachs is like a parasite, inhabiting, surviving and thriving at the expense of its host –– our political structure, infecting our capitalistic system turning it into a distasteful, dysfunctional, and destructive machine. Goldmanites are also “Banksters” operating within this Climate Scam. In fact, Matt Taibbi in his July 2009 Rolling Stone Magazine article –– The Great American Bubble Machine –– warns that Goldman Sachs is "helping create the next bubble, 'global warming.'” Other economic analysts label it “alternative energy,” yet most predict, and as presented in Troxler and Brown's book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth –– it will be the biggest financial bubble in U.S. history.

Additionally, Taibbi's Rolling Stone Magazine piece and video, exposes Goldman Sachs' "long-standing and very deep ties to the Democratic Party," and their "long history of putting their former employees in Democratic administrations." Sure enough, Goldman Sachs was one of Obama’s leading campaign donors in the amount of $994,795, and they currently occupy high-level important positions in the Obama White House.

Taibbi also reveals that Goldman Sachs “ramped up its push for cap-and-trade" back in 2008 "when their firm spent $3.5 million to lobby for climate issues, pointing out that one of the lobbyists at that time was Mark Patterson, who now serves as Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s chief of staff." Goldmanites also made early “green investments," including wind power, renewable diesel, and partnered with BP Solar” –– BP another major contributor to the Obama campaign, but right now they are in "deep water" with the White House. Goldman Sachs "has invested over $2 billion in alternative energy projects in the US, Europe and Asia" –– a "green portfolio" along with Kleiner Perkins, that should be thoroughly investigated, but we'll take a brief glance.

GOLDMAN SACHS CASHING IN ON THE OBAMA GREEN STIMULUS TOO

As the Climate Scam turns, one of the early investments reported by Taibbi is Horizon Wind Energy –– still on the Goldman Sachs Environmental Markets portfolio, but owned by Portuguese EDP Renewables –– won a $229.8 million grant from the Obama Green Stimulus package, as reported by GreenTechnology.Daily.com in December 2009, pointing out that it was one of the "top grant recipients." The article also notes, "European companies have scooped up the majority of U.S. stimulus money set aside for wind power projects."

Nordic Windpower, funded by Goldman Sachs and Khosla Ventures (and others) –– Vinod Khosla, an affiliated partner of Kleiner Perkins –– in July 2009 announced that it had "received a conditional commitment for a $16 million loan guarantee offer from the US Department of Energy (DOE), supported through the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act."

U.S. Geothermal Inc. –– an Idaho-based geothermal energy developer with three main projects in the works (San Emidio in Nevada, Raft River in Idaho, and Neal Hot Springs in Oregon) with plans for more –– are a Goldman Sachs investment and they are a 5.98% shareholder in the company.

Back in October 2009, the San Emidio Project, a 3.6 megawatts power plant in Nevada was awarded $3.77 million in federal stimulus money. Also, in February 2010 it was declared that "work has begun" on USG's Raft River Project –– a $10 million Enhanced Geothermal System grant program funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. Lastly, June 2010, USG announced that it “was offered a conditional commitment for a $102.2-million loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy," slated to build a 22-megawatt power plant in the eastern Oregon desert –– the Neal Hot Springs Project. The Associated Press reported that "once it [the Neal Hot Springs Project] is done (around 2012), the company is counting on a separate, $34 million federal tax rebate" –– money that's part of the 2009 federal stimulus act meant to help spur investment in renewable energy, which will help pay down the federal loan as well as pay off some private investors."

IN SUMMARY

Obviously, these uber-rich individuals along with crooked politicians are running the "green show." With their "planet saving venture," they have hijacked our environment for profit, using deception and corruption on many fronts, making this a scam. They are fueled by greed and power as they engineer the largest financial bubble in U.S. history, while American taxpayers foot the bill, ultimately to suffer the dire consequences, unless of course, Captain Planet arrives. On the other hand, the left-wing radical agenda that is attached to the green movement is complex and even much more difficult to track then the billions of taxpayer dollars going to "favored" green companies, yet it is just as troubling and I will attempt to make sense out of it next.

Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Obama's Political Payback: Green Corruption –– Part One

2010-07-31T06:46:00.000-07:00

Billions of stimulus money going to Al Gore and John Doerr “green” companies –– multiple federal investigations are underway.

Article first published as Obama's Political Payback: Green Corruption–Part One on Blogcritics.

Alarmingly, our environment has been hijacked by uber-rich individuals, crooked politicians, and an assortment of left wing extremists who are fueled by greed and power attached to a radical agenda to bring about "global governance," “redistribute the wealth,” and put the progressive movement –– big government, social justice and the death of capitalism –– on the fast track. Under the guise of “saving the planet,” these players, who are all interconnected in a variety of ways, are transforming our climate into something more sinister –– a scam of epic proportions.

Due to its magnitude and the potential dire consequences to our economy, our freedoms, and the voices of the honorable environmentalists –– this "Climate Scam" will be confronted in three parts.

TROXLER AND BROWN PREDICTIONS OF GREEN CORRUPTION CONFIRMED

This year, Lee Troxler and Floyd Brown in their newly released hit book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth How to Save America's Economy and Your Own, predicted that the veteran Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB) (multi-millionaire Al Gore and billionaire John Doerr are both partners) would get government contracts from the Obama administration unfairly.

In developing this story, which took months of research, backed up with extensive resources, we learned through an anonymous source that there are multiple federal investigations from different agencies and senators underway against the Department of Energy (DOE), in particular, the Loan Guarantee Program (LGP) and possibly others. Our source, who is close to the some of the ongoing investigations, "guarantees there was corruption and bad ethics involved" and that at this time "a number of the investigations are getting stonewalled." Our findings, along with this recent inside information, confirms Troxler and Browns' predictions of corruption on the "green front." As we learn more, we will share the details.

At this time we do know that the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has been in the process of reviewing –– in response to Congress' mandate –– the DOE's execution of the Loan Guarantee Program (LGP), which was established as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and set up for innovative energy projects. About two weeks ago (July 12, 2010), the GAO released their findings and recommendations, noting that the "LGP scope has expanded both in the types of projects it can support and in the amount of loan guarantee authority available. DOE currently has loan guarantee authority estimated at about $77 billion and is seeking additional authority."

At issue, the DOE's lack of "comprehensive performance goals," particularly in relation to the DOE's "broad policy goal of helping to mitigate climate change and create jobs." The GAO concludes, "Without comprehensive performance goals, DOE lacks the foundation to assess the program's progress and, more specifically, to determine whether the projects selected for loan guarantees help achieve the desired results."

Predictably, the GAO also found that the "DOE's implementation of the LGP has treated applicants inconsistently, favoring some and disadvantaging others, as well as the fact that the "DOE lacks systematic mechanisms for LGP applicants to administratively appeal its decisions or to provide feedback to DOE on its process for issuing loan guarantees."

OBAMA'S GREEN STIMULUS

In February 2009 Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the $862 billion stimulus package, of which $86 billion was earmarked for "green"; the Apollo Alliance –– a left-wing organization who exerts a powerful influence on the views and policies of the Obama administration –– was also involved in drafting it. More on Apollo later, but Kleiner Perkins are like ants at a picnic; they’re everywhere that’s green, including on the Apollo board, where they have placed one of their partners, Ellen Pao. Furthermore, Obama was a candidate that both Gore and Doerr had strenuously campaigned for, including financial donations, and early on, Doerr had his hand in shaping ARRA, "urging" Obama's transition team and leaders in Congress "to use the new economic stimulus package to modernize the electric grid and offer new incentives to help clean energy startups get off the ground." Doerr also sits on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB), who President Obama appointed as one of the "chosen" back in January 2009.

In following the ARRA, meant to stimulate the economy and create jobs, it is clear that the Obama administration is circuitously funneling government contracts to their favored companies –– "stimulating" the "green" pockets of Kleiner Perkins. This screams corruption and it’s time to call in a special prosecutor!

FOLLOW THE "GREEN" MONEY: KPCB GREENTECH PORTFOLIO

Since last summer when the Department of Energy (DOE) started handing out the $86 billion "green stimulus" money, Gore and Doerr’s “green companies” have been cashing in big time –– billions of taxpayer dollars! Keep in mind, this doesn’t account for funds not yet allocated, or hidden contracts, nor the mass amount of money KPCB and others in the Climate Scam will generate if the U.S. climate legislation becomes law –– "Obama Climate," more specifically cap-and-trade, which will be covered in more detail later.

So far over fifty percent of the companies listed on the Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers Greentech Portfolio, of which KPCB partners are positioned on the board of many, have –– directly and indirectly –– received money from the "Obama Green Stimulus" package as well as through other government programs approved by the Obama administration.

AL GORE’S FISKER AUTOMOTIVE $529 MILLION DOE LOAN IGNITES RED FLAGS

One of the most blatant examples of government favoritism, catching headlines in the Wall Street Journal back in September 2009 (Gore-Backed Car Firm Gets Large U.S. Loan) was the $529 million dollar government loan guarantee (which was cinched in May 2010) that Fisker Automotive received to build its high end, hybrid sports coupe, Fisker Karma, to be manufactured in Finland and sold for $89,000. Fisker Automotive was a 2008 investment for Kleiner Perkins and it was confirmed that Gore has already purchased his Karma.

In June 2009 the DOE announced three other large government loans that included $5.9 billion to Ford Motor Company, $1.6 billion to Nissan Motors, and $465 million to Tesla Motors. Although the four loans came out of the DOE's $25-billion Advanced Technologies Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) Loan Program, it was approved by the Obama administration and it did ignite some red flags.

As reported by the Wall Street Journal, "the awards to Fisker and Tesla prompted criticism from groups that question why vehicles aimed at the wealthiest customers are getting loans subsidized by taxpayers" and "concern from companies that had their bids for loans rejected." Included in the reaction was Leslie Paige, a spokeswoman for Citizens Against Government Waste. "This is not for average Americans. It's status symbol thing," Ms. Paige added. More gripping is the fact that this favoritism didn’t sit well with some of the firms that were turned down for loans from the DOE –– stating "they did not get much feedback from the department about their applications" and "were unable to get a full explanation as to why their loan request was turned down."

THE VINOD KHOLSA CONNCECTION

The CEO of EcoMotors John Colettie, whose $20 million ATVM loan from the DOE was denied, didn’t have an “issue” with the winners. Probably because EcoMotors' lead investor is Vinod Khosla, an affiliated partner of Kleiner Perkins, whose firm Khosla Ventures has also invested in some of the same companies as Kleiner Perkins, which have received government funding including Obama Green Stimulus cash. Those companies include; AltaRock Energy Inc., $25 million grant from the stimulus; Amyris Biotechnologies, $25 million grant from the stimulus; and Mascoma Corporation has received state and federal grants from the DOE since 2006, totaling over $170 million and as recent as 2008, received another $49.5 million in funding from the DOE and the state of Michigan.

SILVER SPRING NETWORKS SCORES OVER $700 MILLION IN SMART-GRID GREEN STIMULUS FUNDS –– RIGGING THE BIDDING PROCESS?

One of the most contentious of Obama Green Stimulus money awards comes out of the ashes of the $4 billion smart-grid grants, with some of the nation’s largest providers of electricity meters “crying foul” over the smart-grid standards in the stimulus bill, according to a report by USA TODAY in February 2009. Additionally, they said that the economic stimulus bill "could put them out of business and wreak havoc in the new market for smart-grid technology by favoring certain computer network standards.”

Itron, Landis+Gyr, Elster and Aclara even wrote a letter to U.S. Senators to voice their concerns regarding the “protocols and standards” that were placed into the House version of the legislation for all smart-grid projects, which states that "utilities receiving funding must use Internet-based or other open protocols and standards if available and appropriate." Ed Gray, vice president of regulatory affairs for smart-meter provider Elster, said "the bill gives a leg up to Silver Spring at the expense of other providers."

Interestingly, in March 2009, a month after the stimulus bill had already passed, Jeff St. John from GreenTechMedia.com, quoted a statement made by Stuart Bush, an alternative energy analyst for RBC Capital Markets, "both Trilliant and Silver Spring (both smart-grid communications companies) could benefit from the way the stimulus plan was structured to require open standards." Bush also added, "Clearly the West Coast VC guys had a lot of lobby pull getting that in there."

Clearly the "West Coast VC guys" –– Kleiner Perkins (Gore and Doerr), have more than "lobby pull." In fact, Silver Spring Networks, as revealed in Troxler and Browns book, is one of Kleiner Perkins shining “green” companies –– their 2008, $75-million investment has scored over $700 million! Since August of 2009 when the DOE started dishing out the $4-billion from the Smart Grid Investment Grant Program (part of the stimulus plan) –– awarded to selected utility companies for particular smart-grid projects –– close to sixty percent of Silver Spring “customers” were winners.

American Electric Power (AEP) received $75 million for AEP Ohio gridSMARTSM Demonstration Project, announces earth2tech.com in August 2009. It should be noted here that Richard Sandor is on the AEP board. Sandor, Chairman and founder of the Chicago Climate Exchange, who is connected to President Obama and Al Gore, is another key "player" in this Climate Scan, which will be exposed later.
Bluebonnet Electric Cooperative got $18.8 million for a general smart- grid build out in Texas as reported in August 2009 by earth2tech.com. Additionally, in November 2009 Austin’s Pecan Street Project won $10.4 million in federal stimulus money to create a smart-grid demonstration project, which includes Bluebonnet as part or their Technology Review and Advisory Committee.
In October 2009 Florida Power & Electric was awarded $200 million for Energy Smart Florida –– posted by earth2tech.com.
In April 2010 Pepco Holdings Inc. signed contracts for three ARRA grants totaling $168.1 million to advance smart-grid projects, reported by the Washington Business Journal. Additionally in April 2010, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced $100 million from the stimulus will go for Smart Grid Workforce Training and Development, of which Florida Power & Light got $5 million and Pepco got just over $4.3 million.
In October 2009, "the U.S. Department of Energy announced that Modesto Irrigation District (MID) was one of only six California utilities selected to receive a $1.5 million federal stimulus grant to support MID’s efforts to install smart control equipment throughout its electric infrastructure" –– published in an Oracle Press Release.
Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. received a $130 million stimulus grant for a 771,000 smart meter deployment, as reported in October 2009 by GreenTechGrid.com.
Sacramento Municipal Utility District got a $127.5 million stimulus grant for a comprehensive regional smart-grid system, announced in October 2009 by GreenTechGrid.com.
According to an August 2009 article by earth2tech.com, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) –– another Silver Spring customer –– "applied for $42.5 million government grant for home area networks in conjunction with the city of San Jose and Stanford University," yet it is unclear whether or not they received it. However, in May 2010, the DOE awarded PG&E a $25 million stimulus grant to develop compressed air storage for electricity" –– writes the San Francisco Business Times.

But the "government bucks" don’t stop at Silver Spring Networks...

Ausra Inc.

Ausra Inc. –– a KPCB investment that "develops and deploys utility-scale solar technologies," was acquired by AREVA Inc. in March 2010. Then in July 2010 "AREVA accepted the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) offer of a conditional commitment to issue a $2 billion loan guarantee to support construction of the Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility, AREVA’s $3 billion state-of-the-art gas centrifuge enrichment plant in Bonneville County, Idaho."

Bloom Energy

Bloom Energy –– Kleiner Perkins is listed as a primary investor and John Doerr as a board member –– in February 2010 launched its Bloom Box. The real name is the “Bloom Energy Server" and is marketed as "a stand-alone electric generator that requires no connection to any centralized power generating plant and no coal-based or oil-based fuel to operate it" (translation: cheap, clean energy flows almost magically from a refrigerator-sized box). The Bloom Box debuted in a "big scoop" segment on 60 Minutes on February 21, 2010, followed with a star-studded (Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Colin Powell) Bloom Energy Press Conference attended and filmed by TheAutoChannel.com. Marc J. Rauch Executive Vice President/Co-Publisher of The Auto Channel noted "our contact [at the National Renewable Energy Labs (NREL) in Colorado] had known of the Bloom technology and revealed that the government had actually provided a $5 million grant to the company during its development stage. There are also rumors (and news) of "an enormous government contract to order the Bloom Box" and Bloom Energy "is due for a verdict on their DOE stimulus funds shortly," as reported by GreenTechMedia.com, February 19, 2010.

Harvest Power Inc.

Harvest Power Inc., backed by Kleiner Perkins, is basically a company that "turns trash into fertilizer and fuel," and according to a June 2009 article by GreenEnergyNews.com and a City of San Jose Press Release, "GreenWaste Recovery would partner with Harvest Power Inc. on a project (if approved by the city council) known as the Zanker Road Biogas facility." Mayor Chuck Reed said in a statement, "This project not only demonstrates San Jose's leadership in the production of renewable energy but will help us meet the economic development, zero waste and energy goals of our city's Green Vision."

Evidently, the Green Vision is raking in big bucks from the Obama Green Stimulus, as reflected in their 2009 Annual Report –– "In 2009 over $50 million in federal and state grant money, including federal stimulus dollars were allocated or awarded towards projects that will advance Green Vision goals." Additionally, "local companies received over $80 million in federal tax credits that will spur expansions and hiring in sectors such as renewable energy," and as of May 2010, the City of San Jose –– Capitol of Silicon Valley –– "is estimated to receive nearly $108 million in Recovery Act funds."

MiaSolé

MiaSolé Thin-film Solar, part of the KPCB Greentech Portfolio, with "more than 500 applications that were submitted for the tax credits," in January 2010 MiaSole "received two Advanced Energy Manufacturing tax credits totaling $101.8 million from the Obama administration for the manufacture of low-cost thin-film cells and modules."

RecycleBank

RecycleBank –– another Kleiner Perkins green investment –– works with municipalities and haulers to measure and reward residents for recycling. As reported by RecycleBank, "in April 2009 $2.8 billion were allocated to cities with 14 uses that include recycle projects." It turns out that Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Houston, Texas; and Hartford, Connecticut were the first cities to "take advantage of stimulus funds and work with RecycleBank to improve their waste diversion rates." Also, in August 2009, Chicago became the first Illinois city to partner with RecycleBank, then there are the cities in between, and recently in February 2010, Los Angeles became the largest city to partner with RecycleBank.

While it is obvious that the folks at Kleiner Perkins have strategically positioned their investments to profit from “green,” including the massive influx of taxpayer money, placing them ahead of the competition –– still others need government mandates and regulations to really make them fly. One company in particular is Hara Software, "a company that sells software to help businesses measure and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions," where three KPCB partners sit on the Hara board. In a June 2009 article by Reuters –– Gore-Backed Hara Sees Profit From Low-carbon Economy –– Hara Chief Executive Amit Chatterjee, who in July 2009 was part of a group of "innovative energy leaders" that "advised Obama," stated that [cap-and-trade] "will force companies to act, as opposed to seeing the business benefit of acting." "The debate alone of 'cap and trade' is a driver for our product," Chatterjee added.

In closing...
Considering the magnitude of this Climate Scam –– its scope; cost and paybacks; "players" and agendas –– these findings may only scratch the surface. This Climate Scam goes beyond the billions of taxpayer dollars that Gore and Doerr, via Kleiner Perkins, have already unfairly snagged from the Obama Green Stimulus and huge DOE grants and loans. More disturbing is the fact that these "players" –– and others that will be exposed in Green Corruption parts two and three –– have direct ties to the Obama White House, strong influence over government policy, and are connected to the rest of those caught up in this scam, including the hard-core-left-wing radicals.

Moreover, most of "the players" have helped create, shape, facilitate, lobby, testify, sell, and even if the planet blows up, will get their cap-and-trade, which despite reports that it's dead in the Senate, will soon to be on the Obama agenda — the real pot of gold at the end of the climate rainbow.

First published at Blogcritics Magazine in politics, by Christine Lakatos –– Concerned Citizen: the Right Perspective Blog. Lee Troxler and Floyd Brown, authors of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth can be found on their Freeing Wealth website.

California Senate: Carly Fiorina VS. Barbara Boxer

2010-06-19T11:14:00.000-07:00

Do Californians want an arrogant, "tax and spend, baby, tax and spend" career politician or a fresh and feisty fiscal conservative?

Within days of former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina winning the GOP primary, to face Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer in November, her favorable ratings jumped and latest polls place Fiornia in a statistical tie with Boxer, marking this as the re-election fight of Boxer's career.

Both candidates have their high-profile endorsements. In Boxer's corner is President Obama –– a president that blew off the Gulf memorial service to attend a fundraiser for Boxer, and Vice President Joe Biden, who is scheduled to assist Boxer here in California next month. Ringside for Fiorina are Condoleezza Rice, Sarah Palin, and Dick Morris, but more interesting is the way that this political bout has heated up so quickly.

Boxer came out swinging at Fiorina’s CEO background, a full liberal "hot air" attack, void of the complete Fiorina story. Meanwhile, The National Republican Senatorial Committee landed a right hook to Boxer's campaign by launching callmemaam.com –– Senator Barbara Boxer: Decades of Epic Failure.

The latest jab came from left-wing media, who briefly attempted to turn "hair-gait" –– an "oops, I forgot the mic was on" comment about Boxer’s “that’s so yesterday” hair –– into some sort of defining moment for Fiorina. Oh please. But if you want to talk about "gaffes" (a term I use loosely) let’s take a look at Boxer’s greatest hits. First on the docket is Boxer’s recent claim that, “carbon pollution leading to climate change will be over the next 20 years the leading cause of conflict, putting our troops in harm’s way.” Forget about terrorists, CO2 is now our greatest national security threat.

Last December at the height of the ObamaCare debate, Boxer compared abortion to Viagra –– a moment that defined her ignorance or insensitivity (still trying to figure that one out). During August, Boxer was more wrapped up with her book signings than that of her constituents, yet she took the time to appear on MSNBC to condemn concerned citizens that gathered at town hall meets across the nation to protest against ObamaCare –– proof this woman is out of touch with reality.

This month we celebrate the one-year anniversary of Boxer's arrogant request to General Michael Walsh, “Don’t call me Ma’am, call me Senator. I worked so hard to get that title.” Still, Boxer's classic hit is her interaction with Black Chamber of Commerce, President and CEO Harry Alford –– a video that needs no interpretation.

While this is guaranteed to be a fascinating political race to watch, what really counts is character and how each candidate will handle the issues facing California and America. Most troubling is the direction of our country, our national debt that has topped $13 trillion, and our economy that is in shambles –– with no hope in sight. As a resident of California it is difficult to face the sad reality that our state is no longer "golden" –– we're broke and saddled with 12.6 percent unemployment rate, which causes many of us to worry about the future of our state, as others scramble to find jobs. If we don't have a job, can't put food on our table or a roof over our head, how are we going to pay for mandated health care insurance?

So, where are the jobs, Madam Senator?

Evidently, Boxer believes that you create jobs by passing bills in the Senate that expand government, increase taxes, add more regulations, mandates, and entitlements. Boxer even voted to throw money at the problem like the $862 billion pork-laden stimulus package that has failed miserably, unless of course you are one of the 411,00 temporary Census workers.

Moreover, Obama and the Democratic leadership, which Boxer strongly supports, are killing American prosperity and creating an abundance of economic uncertainty through their legislation –– past and future –– that are nothing but huge government power grabs, assaults on our liberties, and ways to redistribute the wealth: ObamaCare, EPA carbon regulations and cap-and-trade, financial regulations, impending tax hikes (an I'm sure there are more in the "liberal works"). And, believe or not, Obama is proposing spending more money to "fix" the economy.

In stark contrast to Boxer, Fiorina understands that "our nation’s top priorities should be economic growth and job creation, and that "small businesses, family-owned businesses and entrepreneurs are the economic engines that will lead us through these difficult times." Thankfully, Fiorina can see right through Washington, asserting that those on Capitol Hill (the party holding the majority, which includes Boxer) are "destroying jobs through too much government, too much taxation, too much regulation, too rich entitlements."

Fiorina wants to "unleash the talents and energies of California workers, small-business owners, innovators, and entrepreneurs" –– which she views are best served by "government staying out of the way and reducing the uncertainty that is inevitably caused by intrusive and over-reaching government regulatory policies" –– and she is armed with a 3-point "economic growth plan" to do so: lowering taxes, fighting for every job, and incentivizing innovation.

Fiorina is also ready to take on other issues that Boxer had three terms (28 years total in Washington) to address, yet failed to do so entirely, adequately, and/or appropriately –– restoring fiscal responsibility, reducing deficit, energy and the environment, illegal immigration, the California water crisis, health care, and protecting America.

Californians have to ask themselves whether or not they are eager to re-elect a career politician like Boxer, with her far left political agenda, her "tax and spend, baby, tax and spend" mantra, along with her ongoing drivel on the Senate floor and in the media. Or do Californians want a fresh and feisty businesswoman like Fiorina –– not part of the “establishment” –– a fiscal conservative who is ready to solve problems, make tough decisions, and do what's best for California and America?

The choice is obvious. Boxer needs to be stripped of her Senator title and returned back to her Ma’am status and Fiorina is just the woman to "bounce Boxer out" of the political ring. That is change we can look forward to this year.

This article first published as California Senate: Carly Fiorina VS. Barbara Boxer on Blogcritics Magazine. Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jun 19, 2010 at 10:24 am. Brought to you by Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective.

The Single Mom and the Census Guy

2010-06-03T06:29:00.000-07:00

Am I my neighbor's keeper when it comes to the 2010 census form? [graphics for affects –– not me in the photo left]

As early as January I had been bombarded by census ads, the short-lived controversy, and our government touting that the 2010 census form was "the shortest form in U.S. history." Back in February, I had even written an article about the 2010 census and its $340 Million campaign, including our taxpayer-funded Census Road Tour and a 30-second, $2.5-million Super Bowl ad –– a reminder to "stand up and be counted."

Back in early March, I received an announcement that my 2010 census form was forthcoming and later that month it arrived. Like a good citizen, I filled out my census form and thought I did a good thing. April came and I got knock on my door. Wearing the signature census necklace-type badge and sporting a clipboard, it was a census worker, a.k.a., "the census guy." I was excited to tell the census worker that I had already filled out my 2010 census form and he informed me that he knew that –– he was inquiring about my neighbor, who hadn't filled out his census form.

Since I live in a townhome complex, my place is in close proximity to three of my neighbors, one of whom I know pretty well because our daughters attend the same middle school. I politely told the census guy that I rarely see that particular neighbor and don't even know his name. I even took the time out to show the census guy the front side to my neighbor's place and that maybe he would have better luck contacting him that way. The census guy thanked me and went on his way.

A couple of weeks later, the same census guy knocked on my door, looking for my neighbor again. We had the same type of interaction; the census guy left and I went about my day. A few days later, I ran into my neighbor as he was off to play golf, and told him that the census people were looking for him. He laughed and said, "I know."

At this time, I should add an important factor to this scenario: I am a single parent –– in the most legitimate form that title implies, raising a daughter by myself. I'm not seeking sympathy here, but it is relevant to what is about to come next. It is also a testament to the fact that I am very busy, however, I am the type of person to stop whenever I see a stray animal and make sure they get home or to an animal shelter. I'm even crazy enough to stop traffic and help a mother duck get her little ducklings safely across the street.

Just last week, I was having a bad day and was quite grumpy. I had just gotten home and was unloading groceries, getting ready to prepare dinner, feed the animals, walk the dog for the second time, do some laundry, keep my daughter on task with homework, and so on. I got a knock on the door and who do you think it was? Yes, another census worker; again equipped with a badge and clipboard. This time, I wasn't so pleasant –– no patriotic, "I did my duty" attitude –– and before the census guy could get a word out I said, "You guys have already been here twice, what the heck?" He responded with, "It wasn't me, this is my first time here." I then confirmed, "Well, I already told the other guy that I don't know where my neighbor is and I am sick of you guys knocking on my door, bothering me." Prefaced with a "ma'am," the census guy kept his calm demeanor and offered a "limp" apology, yet he still wanted to know about my neighbor. So, I pointed at his clipboard and pleaded, "Can you please get my name off of your list or something? Make a note on your file there." The census guy, a little ruffled at this point, told me that he didn't know what he could do, offering no solution. I'm sure I spewed out a few unpleasantries during our brief interaction, but I ended our encounter frustratingly with, "Well, then can you call someone at the head of the Census office? Can you call the president or something?" As I slammed the door, the census guy left.

After the fact, I felt bad of course, but dang, all that for my neighbor's census form. It's June; isn't the 2010 census stuff over yet? More probing thoughts have entered my mind since; was I too hard on the census guy and will another census worker be back knocking on my door looking for my neighbor's 2010 census form? Gee, I hope not, but then again, worse things could happen.

First published in Blogcritics Magazine –– Politics
The Single Mom and the Census Guy
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jun 02, 2010 at 10:05 pm

Interview with Marie Stroughter, Co-Founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS)

2010-05-31T06:46:00.000-07:00

What to do you do when you are NOT among the 96% of blacks who voted for Obama? Ask Marie, rising conservative talk-radio star –– BlogTalkRadio!

Marie Stroughter is co-founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS), which started just after the 2008 presidential election of Barack Obama –– a place for black conservatives to "vent, "share," and "build consensus." Later AACONS added BlogTalkRadio to their repertoire with host Marie Stroughter, opening the show in a sleek, cool and confident tone, "...African-American conservatives; the soul of the conservative movement."

In less than a year, Marie is quickly becoming a conservative talk-radio star. With a line-up consisting of high-profile guests like Steve Forbes, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Malkin, Andrew Breitbart, Lloyd Marcus of the Tea Party Express [photo above: Stroughter and Marcus], Peter Schiff, Chuck DeVore, John Dennis, Star Parker, and many more, you can see why the Los Angeles Times recently took notice of AACONS, with the headline, "Aspiring Rush Limbaughs take to Web radio."

AACON's Internet show, which airs live every Tuesday at 7:00 (PDT) –– occasionally more, has been featured on BlogTalkRadio numerous times including Blog Talk's blog. Last week, Marie had an entertaining interview with Michael Graham, talk show host and author of his latest bestseller, That's No Angry Mob, That's My Mom: Team Obama's Assault on Tea-Party, Talk-Radio Americans, and snagged an interview with former Ambassador John Bolton as well as returning guest, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

I learned about AACONS' "web talk-radio show" back in early March when I was snooping around BlogTalkRadio and happened to listen in on their interview with Steve Forbes. Later, Jamison Braly, Blogcritics writer, who also hosts a BlogTalkRadio show along with Braden Pace –– Stubborn Facts Radio from the Conservamedia Network –– introduced me to Marie.

Listen to internet radio with AACONS on Blog Talk Radio

[AACONS interview with Steve Forbes, March 9, 2010]

Over the past couple of months, I've followed Marie via AACONS' radio show as well as the usual social networking culprits, Facebook and Twitter. In fact, Marie calls me one of AACONS's "biggest fans," and she's right; I admire her mission and the passion she exhibits behind it.

Last week, I had the privilege of interviewing the "interviewee," for Blogcrtics Magazine, realizing that Marie and I have more in common than Conservatism: our Christian faith, raising children, and our pet Calico cats. Marie, along with my teenager daughter, helped navigate me through my first time using Skype and we chatted for a while, discussing a variety of topics including biblical, but mostly political, our president, and the inside story on how AACONS was born and their successful "web talk-radio" show.

Marie, have you always been political?

I can't say that I was apolitical, but I would say that I had been apathetic for a long time, and just voted on measures and never voted for people. I was really disillusioned because I would see candidates that supported something that I believed in, but then they espoused another position that I equally didn't. It was really hard for me to reconcile that.

The two things that politicized me –– "the lightening rods" –– were President Obama's election and watching my mother dying in a county hospital. If you want to know what free-health care is about, just die in "free" health care! But that is another topic entirely, however, at the height of the ObamaCare debate, I addressed it quite passionately in a podcast, with a very personal account about my experience with socialized medicine and why I am against it.

During the campaign I got tons of e-mails from Sebastian's family (my husband) saying, "We have to support Obama." I sent them back this wonderful piece that I found online written by an African-American man named Huntley Brown –– a Christian concert pianist I believe –– "Why I cannot support Barack Obama." He said, "I do not process my life through my blackness, I process my life through my Christianity."

I think most in the African-American community process our politics through our "blackness." Because, economically, we tend to be pretty disenfranchised. And there are so many issues that our community faces –– as all communities do –– so, I think that we tend to process our political views based on what is going on for us culturally. We shouldn't do that. I remember growing up, I had a youth minister that used to say, "You cannot be a thermometer; a thermometer reacts to external situations. You have to be a thermostat; a thermostat sets the temperature, and it does not deviate." Part of the problem is that we as Christians –– as the bible puts it, "My people perish for lack of knowledge." And some are what I call, "cafeteria Christians," while others tend to do "Situation Ethics" rather than allow the Word to be their thermostat.

Did I ever think about voting for Barack Obama? Never once did it enter my mind. Never once did I think,"Oh should I?" Never!

Have you always been a Conservative?

Interestingly, I grew up in a very solidly "blue" household. I mean, it was a sin to like the Dodgers [laugh] –– sorry no offense –– and it was equally a sin to vote for anything other than the Democratic ticket.

However, even in high school, when I was president of our debate team, I gave a speech on "life" and I talked about abortion and its gory practice, in detail. I've always been pro-life and the "sanctity of life" is still a big issue for me today. As I became a Christian, lived life, and starting raising and teaching my children, it solidified what I had always felt about a lot of things.

Let's fast forward. Since you are co-founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS), I was wondering if you would tell me how it all got started? [The ACCONS website, talk-radio show, blog, Amazon bookstore, and the Cafe Press Store]

What really kicked it off for me was having this particular president [Obama]. My family tends to deconstruct the day around the dinner table. My husband and I would talk about a lot of things and my kids were sitting there. I thought, "It's not enough for me to just kvetch about what I like and dislike about this administration. I've got to do more. As long as I have the right to free speech, I need to exercise it and teach my kids to do the same –– to have respect for the office, yet, they can dissent through the laws that are given to us.

So, do you oppose Obama because you think he is too far "left"?

Absolutely! Not only is Obama pro-choice, but partial birth abortion? That is just absolutely barbaric!

[Conversation goes on for a while, but we move on] Remember when I called into your show a couple of weeks ago and I wanted to know how you get so many high-profile guests. As one of your "biggest fans," can you divulge your secret now?

What happened was, as I mentioned, right before the election I got all these e-mails saying, "We need to support this man." Then right after the election, well meaning people would come up to me and say, "We're so happy for YOU" and "YOUR president." And it was like, "Uhhhh . . . okay he doesn't really speak for me." Yeah, of course I appreciate the historicity of the moment. Sure I understand...the guy is our first president of African decent. He is equally as white as he is black, which nobody really talks about. As someone who is multiracial myself, I am sensitive to that particular issue. But, be that as it may, he presents as black and that is how people perceive him. And of course, I am happy for our country; that we have gotten to that point. Am I happy for him? Am I happy that he is the one that broke that barrier? NO! Absolutely, a thousand times, no!

I had been following "DarkKnight3565" on Twitter and I was watching all the things he tweeted. Then I noticed his avatar and I thought, "This is a black guy saying this!" So, I wrote asked him, "Are you tired of people coming up to you, congratulating you on your president." And he expressed some of the similar feelings that I had.

As we talked more, I thought, "I bet there are other people feeling this way," and of course hearing the whole "Tea Party is racists" thing, –– blah, blah, blah. Then I suggested maybe we should throw up a little website where we could talk about some of these things behind closed doors –– not to exclude anybody, but it's just that there are issues specific to the African-American community that may feel a little different to some then they do to the mainstream. Like gun violence and race issues; that we are supposed to be Democrats, that we betrayed our race; that we are "Uncle Toms," and we're "sell-outs." Let's talk about that behind closed doors and then come out and present a unified front on a variety positions. Maybe we can develop some sort of a platform; knowing that there would be a breath of diversity and opinion.

So, were you building a platform to have your voice –– the black conservative community –– be heard?

I think it was really just a place to talk about stuff, vent, and process what was going on because this was a momentous occasion in history and yet we weren't processing it the way that most of our community was –– with this kind of joyous enthusiasm.

Didn't Obama get 95 percent of the black vote?

I think it was around 96 percent. It was huge.

So you are part of the 4 percent that didn't vote for Obama?

Yes. Can you imagine what that was like? I forwarded Huntley's article to my family and they responded, "Oh, you [sic] drinking that Bush kool-aid." I felt like I needed a place to lick my wounds because I was getting it from both sides. I was getting it from the black community because, "I'm the sellout." And people, who were not of the same ethnicity, were celebrating how we're "post racial" and "racism is dead." And I'm sitting there thinking, "I don't fall in either camp; I am totally disenfranchised." As I began to get more involved on Twitter and talk to more people, I found that I wasn't alone. So, we thought that we've got to have a place where we can talk about some of this stuff because we don't fit into any peg.

Right after Sebastian, "DarkKnight," and I started the AACONS website, one of the people that I follow on Twitter mentioned that a friend of his was running for office here in California –– Craig DeLuz, a young conservative black guy, who was doing a lot of great things. He's working with youth and the African-American community, who tend to be blinded in their allegiance to the Democratic Party that has done nothing for them. I wanted to interview him and know how to he was able to translate our conservative values into something that people can internalize –– to make them think and realize that our "core spiritual values" are closer to the conservative end of the spectrum than they are to the liberal [Democratic] end. When you take the word Republican out — the perception that it is all white, old men, and blah, blah, blah –– and you talk about traditional family values and the sanctity of life –– it goes beyond that stereotype.

So, I spoke to Craig DeLuz on the phone for about an hour and it was amazing! When I asked him if he would do an interview, he said, "My twin brother is a Democrat and we have a radio show on BlogTalkRadio (The DeLuz Brothers) –– have you heard of it?" Since I hadn't, he gave me the information and we did our interview on BlogTalkRadio –– our first, which aired on April 16, 2009. Craig Deluz has been our show several times and he started a new show that debuted today, Conversations with Craig.

Well, since your first interview; your show has become a hit and quite popular, attracting high-profile guests like Steve Forbes, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, many politicians and political candidates, authors, and an array of interesting guests. How the heck did that happen?

How that happened was, like I said, I had this political awakening and I found out –– I think on Twitter –– that Chuck DeVore was running for office here in California. And I wanted to do something locally; get involved and make a difference. So, I researched Chuck and later became administrator of the Bay Area Group for Chuck's campaign on Ning (not the official campaign website). Due to the fact that I was in on conference calls and intimately knew the people involved with his campaign –– now with a fledgling radio show –– I thought, "Maybe I'll tap into some of these contacts and see if I could get Chuck on the show." So, Chuck was on the show. I am still a staunch Chuck DeVore supporter –– a man that carries a copy of the Constitution in his breast pocket at all times!

Chuck DeVore was a guest on your show recently, was he on a few times?

Yes, he was our guest in July or last year too. Our second guest was Navy veteran and aspiring politician, Coby Dillard, founder of the blog, The Dillard Doctrine, who has been on the show a few times.

Then I started meeting people of color that were fiercely conservative and I just started asking if they would be on the show. And people would know people that would know people...and so on.

Another draw came from those promoting books and going on press junkets. Also, I think part of the attraction is our name, AACON. It was meant to be a play on ACORN; it was never meant to be this divisive hyphenated thing, but having "African-American" in our name helped with people who wanted to reach out to the black community.

In the beginning, we got the third degree from publicists and press secretaries of potential guests, asking, "How many listeners do you have?" Originally the attitude was sort of like "you're small potatoes." As we got more and more of the bigger names through relationships that we developed, then people started to take notice a little bit. Then we were featured on Blog Talk and later Radio for Conservatives (From the Right Radio) approached us to be a show on their channel. Now we can usually get interviews because of our track record: over 10,000 "listens;" a featured show; and we've been number one on BlogTalkRadio a few times.

You did this all in less than a year and you are becoming quite the conservative talk-radio star. Wow, I'm impressed!

I would say that it is totally a God thing! I truly believe that. I can also attribute it to the First Amendment and my strong belief in modeling to my kids that you can exercise free speech. I can also talk about God on the airwaves as much as I want –– for now [we both smirk]. It is not only an opportunity for me to be a political Mama –– Sarah Palin calls us, "Mama Grizzlies," but I can be a political activist as well as impart my faith.

"African-American Conservatives...Your source for conservative political news and commentary, from an African-American perspective... African-American Conservatives; the soul of the conservative movement." –– Marie Stroughter, BlogTalkRadio

Next week,Tuesday June 1, 2010 at 8:00 AM Marie interviews Judge Andrew Napolitano:
Andrew P. Napolitano joined FOX News Channel (FNC) in January 1998 and currently serves as the senior judicial analyst. He provides legal analysis on both FNC and FOX Business Network (FBN). He is also a fill in co-host for FOX & Friends regularly and co-hosts FOX News Radio's Brian and The Judge show daily.

Originally published in Blogcritics in politics
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 31, 2010 at 6:15 am
Interview with Marie Stroughter, Co-Founder of African-American Conservatives (AACONS)
Brought to you by Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Interview With Lee Troxler, Co-Author of "Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth"

2010-05-21T06:56:00.000-07:00

Newest book offers a scary warning: Take your money away from Obama before Obama takes it away from you!

Floyd Brown and Lee Troxler both began their careers working in the Reagan administration and before the 2008 election teamed up to pen the bestselling book, Obama Unmasked: Did Slick Hollywood Handlers Create the Perfect Candidate? In that book they predicted the stock market crash to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. Now they return with new forecasts about another looming market disaster and strategies for protecting your wealth in Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth: How to Save America's Economy and Your Own, which was released recently and is quickly cranking up the bestseller charts.

There is a backstory to this interview. Early in the writing process, Troxler asked me to dig into the research on global warming, for he had a suspicion that many of the same folks who had been peddling “global cooling” back in the 1970s had returned with a new scam to make themselves money at the expense of the gullible, liberal "believe anything" crowd. I did in fact uncover a fascinating—at times frightening—connection between Silicon Valley and senior Democratic party leaders. The authors included my findings in their book and as we unearth new information already in the works, we will be sharing it.

If you told me that after a year of blogging about politics I would be part of an unnerving, timely analysis of the U.S. economy and instrumental in exposing the special interest groups, unions, "fat cats," and others who are raping entrepreneurs and small business of their prosperity—what Brown and Troxler call “Killionaires”—my response would have been, “You’re out of your mind.” But now I’ve learned through this book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth, that these Killionaires have had our government in their back pockets for several presidencies in a “revisionist conspiracy to undermine capitalism and grab for wealth.” Brown and Troxler also reveal the next financial bubble—predicted to be the biggest ever—and the potential criminal elements behind cap-and-trade, which is back on top of the Obama agenda.

Considering my participation in this book, I won't be able to review it, but I convinced Troxler to give me an interview. However, I will say that it is a fast-paced and gripping whodunit that is guaranteed to get your blood boiling and rock the political world! The book is available at Amazon, major bookstores, and soon at the official website.

In your last book Obama Unmasked, you predicted the financial collapse of 2008 to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. What do you see coming in this new book, Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth?

Just recently these insiders collapsed the stock market again, as we forecast on page 127. We wrote: “In throwing trillions at the economy, there has to be at least a few billion in financial gains. And there will be. From the Fed we’ll hear cautious talk of ‘recovery’… Americans will fast and furiously shovel what remains of their wealth back into U.S. equities. Right about then, a merry band of international bankers who have been lying in wait will step out of the shadows and crash… And Mr. Obama’s economic recovery will go into the record books as a goose egg, a ‘Big O.’”

When the Dow collapsed 1000 points, all the ‘people who know’ rushed out to blame a computer glitch—knowing the public would buy it. But just as we didn’t learn the truth behind the 2008 collapse until a year later, we won’t this time. All we know are the broad outlines of what actually happened: a merry band of international bankers took the money Obama gave them for free, created a sucker’s rally in the markets, then hopped out with hundreds of billions more fleeced from gullible investors.

You have given a name to these wealth killers—you’ve called them “Killionaires.” Who are these Killionaires?

It may surprise many people to find that the majority of Killionaires have liberal and socialist beliefs, as hypocritical as that is. They agree with the revisionist view of America, and feel no guilt in asset-stripping the nation. They know that the easiest way to steal billions is to get a Senator, or a President, in their back pocket. So they are most fond of the activist presidencies of liberals like Obama and Bush (yes, Bush).

King of the Killionaires is George Soros. After crashing the English economy in 1992, he set his sights on a bigger prize—the U.S. economy. But if he was going to make a killing here, the bilious old windbag knew, he’d have to circumvent a lot of financial controls. Step one for Mr. Soros was to make friends in Washington and smear his ill-gotten gains all over the Democratic party—for they shared his vaguely anti-American, socialist beliefs and were, historically, more easily compromised.

In interviews, some Killionaire wannabes have admitted to being inspired by the 1967 Bonnie and Clyde movie with Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway—cool cats taking on the power structure. They were gorgeous, wildly liberal in real life, and they robbed banks. So why not in real life, these soulless sociopath socialists reasoned? Why not take advantage of emerging technologies to steal? First task? Tear down the real economy — which can be hard to control — and replace it with an artificial economy buttressed by fancy mathematical models all designed to create the pretense of value with salesmen paid obscene sums to convince everyone that they’d invented a perpetual prosperity machine.

People think Obama is cleaning up Wall Street, but you insist it’s all pretend. Is Obama in Wall Street’s pocket?

We’re seeing a lot of Kabuki theater in Washington and Wall Street—a big show to convince voters that action is being taken. And sure, a few high-profile heads will roll. But none of the real problems are being addressed. The big investment houses from Goldman on down are still allowed to cheat the system and front-run ordinary investors to profits.

Obama is no different than his predecessor—both beholden to Wall Street. Between them they’ve already transferred $2 trillion from taxpayers into the pockets of Killionaires.

The newest scheme is to loot Ginnie Mae the very same way they looted Fannie Mae, and let taxpayers again clean up the mess. It’s going on now. On Obama’s orders! Why? Obama wants the government to keep picking up the mortgage bills for people who can’t afford their homes—since most of them vote Democrat. And Obama needs the Killionaires to get himself reelected. Obama and his Killionaire pals spent a record $2 billion getting elected, and they will need to again. You think that kind of money comes from Main Street? Hah! Only from Wall Street.

Obama will huff and puff but the blow is just for show. No Killionaire will be inconvenienced.

You speak of an America divided, but not in the usual red state vs. blue state sense. You write of Traditionalists vs. Revisionists. What do you mean?

The “red-blue” view of America is not only simplistic—it’s dangerous. It tosses us into sports metaphor surreality and we lose clarity on what’s real. What’s real are values—specifically the values we need for a successful American tomorrow.

One set of values—we call them Traditionalist—hold that America is the best thing this world has ever known; it is to be honored and exalted even, for it has no equal in providing freedom and opportunity for all.

The other set of values—we call them Revisionist—were shaped by a single anomaly in our long history: Vietnam. Any mistakes we made in that war have become the fractured prism through which all Revisionist judgments are now made. The unquestioning acceptance of American goodness is viewed as sappy, naïve, and knuckle-dragging.

So today we have two scripts. Traditionalists celebrate the essential goodness of American institutions; Revisionists consider them corrupt and valueless. Traditionalists see America learning from her mistakes and constantly improving; Revisionists are rewriting history books to focus with vengeance on a litany of wrongs we’ve supposedly committed right back to 1607 Jamestown.

Traditionalists believe in making money the old-fashioned way—earning it; Revisionists are intent on asset-stripping a nation they have little regard for.

With scripts this divergent, there is no compromise. One must prevail.

In chapter 10 (the one I know well) on page 173 you write, "We have uncovered a disturbing and potentially criminal connection between Silicon Valley venture capitalists and the Democratic Party leadership. The revealing of even the broadest outlines of this [green energy] connection could prompt investigations into several high-level Administration officials." Is this connected to the recent devastating BP oil spill?

What are the odds of the biggest oil derrick explosion in history happening two days before Obama was to decide on extending offshore drilling licenses? One in a thousand? It’s just too coincidental to be believable. But no matter what or who caused the BP disaster, Obama did not act to contain the damage—exactly what his environmental friends wanted. That was criminal.

As for the criminal connection we wrote about, it involves the fraud and racketeering charges that will be leveled if Team Obama gives big government contracts to green companies that helped elect him. That remains to be seen.

You write that Obama is employing a sugar/sugar/shaft strategy; what is that?

Obama’s decision to spend a staggering sum—$1.7 trillion—in his first few months was entirely unprecedented. Not even Roosevelt, who faced a worse economy, tried anything so radical. So it was unprecedented, but Obama knew exactly what he was doing. Most of the cash went to his Killionaire pals who will fund his reelection—they got the sugar. Some of the cash went to the downtrodden who will give him votes in his reelection—they got the sugar. Not a billion found its way to the small business entrepreneurs who create most of the jobs—they got the shaft.

So sugar for the very rich, sugar for the lazy and poor, the shaft for entrepreneurs—it’s the Obama stay elected strategy.

In the second half of the book that’s devoted to “freeing wealth” you give investors what you call a “Personal Clawback Strategy”—can you briefly explain?

It has come to this: investors need a way to take their wealth away from Obama before Obama takes it away from them! There are legal strategies for doing this. We’ve laid them out in simple A-B-C format. This is probably the most valuable intel in the book!

To learn more about Floyd Brown, Lee Troxler, the book, and the Freeing Wealth Fellowship visit World Net Daily.

Originally published in Blogcrtics Magazine: Interview With Lee Troxler, Co-Author of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 21, 2010 at 6:15 am

Floyd Brown and Lee Troxler on G. Gordon Liddy, May 17, 2010.

To hear Lee Troxler's interview on News Talk AM 1440 BILL MEYER PODCAST, which aired on Tuesday, May 18, 2010:
Lee Troxler, author of Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth how the economy was intentionally trashed, and how you can protect yourself. Open calls on the election, too.

Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

World Net Daily: Cabal killing off U.S. wealth

2010-05-15T08:32:00.000-07:00

WND MONEY
Cabal killing off U.S. wealth
Investigation documents American economy didn't fall, it was pushed

A cabal that has been traced back almost half a century still is working – using a manipulative carbon credit scheme among other things – to kill off the wealth of the United States, according to a new investigation that has been documented in "Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth: How to Save America's Economy … and Your Own."

The work, with an official launch date Tuesday, is by author and economist Floyd Brown and broadcaster and political adviser Lee Troxler. Brown created the Willie Horton ad, considered by many the most impactful campaign commercial ever, and Troxler wrote speeches for President Reagan.

The bottom line is a warning that the last economic collapse didn't just happen, it was forced, they report.

They explain the machination consumers have seen at the highest levels of finance isn't just some cyclical phase the nation is enduring, but a capital crime, and the murder victim is the nation's wealth – "Hundreds of billions, even trillions of dollars – destroyed in order to enrich and empower beyond imagination a ruling elite of 'Killionaires' whose membership will shock even seasoned political observers."

The authors combed the wreckage of the U.S. economy for their evidence of sabotage, and now are revealing a billionaire financial complex spanning several presidential administrations that set out in conscious conspiracy to kill individual initiative in their wealth grab.

They also are warning that the economic turmoil isn't finished. In their last book they accurately predicted the 2008 financial collapse – to within one month and 100 points on the Dow. Their new forecast includes a Washington-Wall Street conspiracy, an eco-terrorist link to the BP oil catastrophe, and Goldman Sachs.

"Killing Wealth, Freeing Wealth" reports that Americans need not depend on the government they support to protect them, either.

"(Obama) chose 'house upon stone' as his vision, and he told a nation that it wouldn't be easy rebuilding that house since we had 'lost trust and confidence' after years of Republican misrule," the book reports. "He's right. It won't be easy … On the very same day Timothy Geithner announced his anti-lobbyist rules he hired goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson as his chief of staff."

The authors have followed the money back to secret meetings in Silicon Valley in 2005 where these "Killionaires" conspired to create a colossal and entirely artificial market in carbon credits with the design of bilking investors of hundreds of billions of dollars when the right environmental catastrophe "could be engineered."

They went back even further, revealing from the 1960s the originas of today's political and economic problems.

And they offer suggestions, a "claw-back" strategy entrepreneurs and investors can use to face the coming years, which is expected to include more turbulence because of the continuing policy of – literally – creating money out of ink and paper.

Brown studied economics at the University of Washington under famed economist Paul Heyne, and forged his political experience working for President Reagan and Sen. Bob Dole. Now president of the Western Center for Journalism, he has authored "Obama Unmasked: Did Slick Hollywood Handlers Create the Perfect Candidate?" "Say the Right Thing," "Prince Albert: The Life and Lies of Al Gore," and "Slick Willie: Why America Cannot Trust Bill Clinton."

Troxler wrote not just speeches for Reagan but also books, "Obama Unmasked," "Hillary the Movie," "On Native Soil: The Documentary of the 9/11 Commission Report," "FahrenHYPE 9/11: Unraveling the Truth About Fahrenheit 9/11 and Michael Moore," and "Along Wit's Trail: The Humor & Wisdom of Ronald Reagan."

Posted: May 10, 2010
9:58 pm Eastern
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

The authors unite again and have just published a fast-paced and gripping read that will get your "blood boiling!" Troxler and Brown expose the Killionaires and their continuous scam –– who is really destroying America's prosperity and how the rich are getting richer and the poor more dependent on the government. And who is gets the "shaft?" Entrepreneurs and "small business" is left footing the bill. Killing Wealth is guaranteed to "rock the political world" and could be the next New York Times Best Seller. Also, "yours truly" contributed "time and talent," to certain parts of this book!
AMAZON
BARNES & NOBLE
And everywhere.

EducationNews.org:

"Brown's and Troxler's work is not your ordinary economic postmortem. While supported by depths of investigative research, it reads with the intrigue and tension of a gripping whodunit. It also offers specific strategies for freeing your wealth from the Killionaires grasping hands."

Stay Tuned; it's just getting started...

Interview: Matt Heath, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California

2010-05-08T05:55:00.000-07:00

The "conscience of the Republican Party": advancing the ideals of individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise.

[Photo: Matt Heath with Ron Paul, September 2008 at the Rally for the Republic in Minneapolis]

It all started as a "typo" on one of my political blogs, which quickly stirred up my inquisitive nature and led to an interaction that brought about a pondering of my own personal beliefs and stance as it relates to “liberty”. This past month, I had the privilege of interviewing the folks from the Republican Liberty Caucus of California (RLCCA), exclusively for Blogcritics Magazine.

Because of our very own Blogcritics writer and editor, Dave Nalle, I am somewhat familiar with the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), but I wanted to get acquainted with the pulse of the RLC in my home state of California. And no better way than from those leading this grassroots organization –– Chairman of the RLCCA, Matt Heath with the assistance of RLC Secretary Parke Bostrom. My thanks!

In summary, the RLCCA is the officially chartered California chapter of the RLC (founded in 1991). They work to advance the ideals of individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the State of California and the Republican Party.

Considering the 2010 elections are a hot topic in the political arena these days, let’s first talk about the California primary coming up next month. So far the RLCCA has endorsed three Congressional candidates: Gary Clift, Clayton Thibodeau, and John Dennis, who is in the high-profile race against Nancy Pelosi. Do you have any inside information on how this race is going and what are your predictions for the outcome?

Heath: Given the size of the Bay Area media market and the fact that Nancy Pelosi is a polarizing figure nationally, a tough, hard-hitting campaign by John Dennis will help every Republican candidate in our region. John is already generating interest and enthusiasm in San Francisco with his small government, pro-liberty message. His race will likely be a key factor in boosting Republican campaigns throughout Northern California. His campaign is going very well, and I predict that John Dennis will do better than any Republican congressional candidate has done in San Francisco in recent memory.

Additionally, for us in the RLC it is very exciting to see Dennis receive the pre-primary endorsement of many establishment Republicans in San Francisco. It shows us that we should be trying to find and recruit strong candidates rather than engaging in political debates with other Republican activists.

As you know, I had mistakenly reported that the RLC had endorsed one of the three California Senate candidates and your very astute Secretary Parke Bostrom corrected my blog. Is there a reason that the RLCCA has not endorsed Chuck DeVore, Carly Fiorina, or Tom Campbell? And do you have a personal favorite?

Heath: We work to recruit and support candidates who will reduce the size of the federal government, and also the size of state and local governments. Specifically, we try to recruit and support candidates who are fundamentally motivated by a sincere and profound respect and appreciation for the concept of human liberty –– the idea that if you are an adult, so long as you are not harming someone else, you should be able to do whatever you want. We focus on this one core issue of liberty because we believe that candidates motivated by respect for liberty will be the most effective at reducing the size and scope of government interference in our private and economic lives.

Granted, that is a somewhat subjective criterion, and each member of our board of directors has to make her or his own subjective determination as to whether a given candidate meets that standard. We do not try to endorse candidates in every contested primary. With respect to the Senate race, it appears that the RLCCA board has yet to be convinced that any of three candidates you mentioned shares our appreciation for human liberty.

Are there candidates on your radar, that others may not be aware of, who the RLCCA thinks have a lot of promise?

Heath: The RLCCA has endorsed Gary Clift (CD10), Clayton Thibodeau (CD45), Linda "Ellie" Black (AD27), and Bill Hunt for Orange County Sheriff, as well as John Dennis in San Francisco.
I feel it would be inappropriate for me to mention specific candidates that have not yet been endorsed.

Seemingly, the “Boxer match” is receiving a lot of attention –– even from President Obama, who lent his support for her last month. Do you expect that Obama will help or hinder Boxer’s campaign?

Heath: President Obama is a popular politician in California and with many Democrats. I suspect he will bring his "bully pulpit" to California in support of Barbara Boxer as often as needed in her reelection bid.

Boxer has held the California Senate seat for three terms, and California is primarily a liberal state. What are the odds that California could pull off another “Scott Brown” type victory –– marking us “red?” Or is that just hopeful thinking for us conservatives?

Heath: Boxer can be beaten, but the race will be much more clearly defined after the Republican primary election in June. And as I mentioned earlier, it appears that the RLCCA's board has yet to be convinced that any of the three Republican candidates shares our appreciation for human liberty.

So Matt, on a personal note, what drew you to the RLC and how did you become Chairman of the California chapter?

Heath: After becoming actively involved locally in the Sonoma County Republican Party, I looked for a larger Republican organization that promotes libertarian philosophy. I discovered the RLC and was inspired by their Statement of Principles and Positions.

Several other Sonoma Republicans joined me and we organized under the banner of the Republican Liberty Caucus to do political activism in our neighborhoods, on the street, and within the county Republican Party. Subsequently, in February 2009, I attended the state convention of the California Republican Party. I connected with RLC'ers from other parts of California, and was elected chairman. It has been an exciting year!

I noticed that the RLC welcomes constitutionalists, libertarians, classical liberals, and free market advocates. Will you expand on that?

Heath: All of the groups you mentioned agree that the government, and specifically the federal government, is too big. Constitutionalists believe the federal government is too big because it is doing more than is authorized by the Constitution. Classical liberals believe that people can best improve their lives without government "help" (or interference) and without the temptation and danger of becoming dependent on government welfare programs. Free market advocates believe that the government should not try to regulate, "stimulate", "bail-out" or otherwise interfere our economy. (Yet strangely some self-proclaimed "free market advocates" support macro-level government interference in the economy via the Federal Reserve and the banking cartels controlling national lending policies and the supply of fiat currency.)

So all of the above groups believe that the federal government should be significantly smaller than it is today. That is a huge piece of common ground. The RLC comes into the picture because we take that common ground and work to turn it into a specific political strategy: we work as a caucus within the Republican Party to promote candidates that support these ideals.

Since I consider myself a conservative, what caught my attention was that the RLC welcomes "tolerant conservatives". How would you describe a “tolerant conservative”?

Heath: We welcome all who support the RLC Statement of Principles and Positions. And, to answer your question, I would describe a “tolerant conservative” as a fiscal conservative who believes the government should not attempt to regulate the private lives of citizens. By “regulate” I mean things like: restricting freedom of speech, compelling military service, interfering in relationships between consenting adults, outlawing adult consumption of recreational drugs, and requiring the use of a national ID card.

I’m glad you brought up the topic of “government regulation” –– two areas in particular. I have heard that the RLC gets a certain amount of flak in the GOP in other states as being against the war on drugs and relatively pro-gay. Do you have less of a problem with that in California?

Heath: Perhaps California is more tolerant on those issues. I am not aware of our positions on those issues causing any official strife with the California Republican Party (CRP). However, there may be individuals or other caucuses within the CRP that disagree with some of our positions. This is only to be expected and is not unusual in any way.

Related to the specific issues you mentioned:
I suspect most RLC'ers believe the federal war on drugs is unconstitutional. Back in the 1930's we as a country understood the Constitution well enough to know that attempted federal regulation of alcohol required a Constitutional amendment. Unfortunately, it seems that America today does not understand her Constitution as well as she used to.

As for the claim that the RLC is "relatively pro-gay", I suspect most RLC'ers believe that the purpose of government is to secure the natural rights of each individual in these 50 states, so that we as individuals may enjoy Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

We take our inspiration from the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men."

Expanding on the RLC and the GOP’s rapport, I hear that the RLC in some states, most notably Florida, has had conflicts with the state GOP. How is your relationship with the state GOP?

Heath: Here in California the RLCCA has a growing relationship with the California Republican Party. Many RLCCA members work closely with their respective county Republican parties; so it is only natural that the RLCCA works closely within the California Republican Party.

At the September 2009 convention of the California Republican Party, a resolution supporting Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" bill (HR 1207) and the companion bill in the Senate (SB 604) passed with overwhelming support. Many RLCCA members worked hard to bring that resolution to the CRP and to get it passed. (I should again thank Assemblyman Chuck DeVore for his support in that effort.) It was very gratifying to work with the CRP to call for an audit of the Federal Reserve, as an audit is the first step towards developing an honest currency and restoring economic confidence in America.

Speaking of “parties,” what are you thoughts about the Tea Party movement, its relevance and impact on the political scene?

Heath: It is exciting to see so many new people jumping into the political process through the Tea Party movement. There is a common theme with the individuals who attend Tea Party events: they believe government, especially at the federal level, is too big and encroaches too much on our private lives. While the Tea Party has a lot of new and exciting energy, it will be interesting to see how the many diverse groups of the Tea Party movement organize over the next few years, and what long term strategies they will rally around to achieve their goals.

What are the RLC and/or your personal thoughts about our current administration and its direction –– what many deem to be an intrusive expansion of government on many fronts?

Heath: The RLC is, of course, no fan of the Obama administration as they continue down a course of greater federal government power over individual American lives.

Personally, I believe the Obama administration is just a continuation of the Bush administration with regards to the scope of the federal government: continuing interventionist foreign policy, expanding executive powers, ongoing manipulation of the free market, continuing growth of federal health care programs (after all, it was President Bush who created Medicare Part D), to mention just a few examples of the similarities.

In closing, what can we expect from the RLCCA in the near future?

Heath: You can expect the RLCCA to continue to grow in numbers and influence among Californian Republicans. If any activists reading this are inspired by our work thus far, they should contact us via our website to become active in the RLC in their local counties. You can also join the RLCCA on Facebook and Twitter.

Exclusive Interview for Blogcritics Magazine: Matt Heath, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: May 07, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Also, on National Broadside

Thanks to Matt and Parke (and the RLC; including my friend, Dave Nalle) for all they do to advance individual rights, limited government, and free enterprise: something us, conservatives embrace as well. And a special thanks for taking the time out of their busy schedules to do this interview.

Satire: MSNBC Hosts “To Catch a Racist”

2010-04-29T06:43:00.000-07:00

Dateline MSNBC series, with host Chris Hansen, “To Catch A Predator,” is known for its undercover sting operation to catch those sick individuals that prey on our youth via the internet. But did you know that MSNBC is now engaged in a scheme to protect our president? Yes, they are on "racism patrol," staking out protests and criticism so that they can catch themselves some racists!

"To Catch a Racist" hosts include Keith Olbermann (brainchild of “Worst Persons”) and his sidekick, Janeane Garofalo (brainless), as well as Dylan Ratigan, Chris Matthews, and others. The latest is Nora O'Donnell, who attempted a "got a racists" outside shot.

The left-wing media is relentless with their talking "race baiting" heads and not only are they trying to capture any "sign" of racism, they are targeting African-American citizens to make sure they are safe.

Kelly O'Donnell, an NBC reporter, confronted Darryl Postell at the April 15, 2010 Tax Day Tea Party rally in Washington D.C. O’Donnell's question, “There aren’t a lot of African-American men at these events, have you ever felt uncomfortable?” Postell responded, “No, no, these are my people…Americans.”

It turns out Postell is a retired Air Force veteran and appeared on Fox News to talk about this incident. Gretchen Carlson asked why he attended the rally and Postell answered, "I care about the country and I know the direction that most tea partiers are moving in and they care about liberty and government intrusion, so I just wanted to go and be a part if it."

Lloyd Marcus, a black conservative and Tea Party rock star, is on the left-wing media's radar and on his website journals some of his interviews — more like interrogations, with the hopes that Marcus will ID the racists.

At the April 15th Tax Day Tea Party, Marcus was ambushed by a reporter for Ebony (a prominent national black magazine), who according to Marcus, asked him "the same two questions every other reporter has asked;" 'Are the tea parties racist?' 'Why are blacks not attending?' Marcus explained to the reporter, "the Tea Party movement is not about race, but about stopping an out-of-control administration from pushing our country towards socialism." Frustratingly, the Ebony magazine reporter replied, 'So why do you hate Barack Obama?' The reporter asked again, 'Are these rallies racist?' Marcus notes that it was if the reporter never heard a word he said.

Another account occurred right after Marcus performed at the Tea Party in Traverse City, Michigan (part of the Tea Party Express tour) when a "white snooty female reporter" asked him a "series of annoying questions straight out of the liberal playbook." Marcus goes on to describe what got his “blood boiling”; when she asked him the following question with what he described as “the trademark liberal condescending edge,” 'Mr. Marcus, don't you think by calling yourself an unhyphenated American, you are encouraging white people to feel comfortable with their racism?' While Marcus wanted to respond negatively, he chose the higher ground and ended the interview abruptly, "With all due respect, I strongly disagree."

Where were the left-wing "racist police" when Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative, was physically assaulted and racially insulted by SEIU thugs (oh, I mean members) outside a 2009 town-hall meeting in St. Louis, Missouri –– just for handing out "Don't Tread on Me" flags? Maybe they were on a coffee break having "cupcakes" with Olbermann.

In March, another MSNBC "To Catch a Racist" host, David Shuster, interviewed (more of a duel) Kevin Jackson, author, blogger, black conservative, and a well-known speaker at the tea parties. Shuster was armed with his bag of race-baiting talking points and brought up what he considered "the violent imagery and rhetoric," specifically in reference to the ObamaCare, March 20th protest on the steps of Capitol Hill. Jackson responded, “I’ve been to hundreds of tea parties around the country. What I can tell you is that I’ve never seen any blacks lynched at one of them. That’s still one of those things that only Democrats can hold a distinction about.”

Shuster later asked if Jackson was okay with how President Obama had been depicted in signs at Tea Party rallies, the Hitler mustache and the Joker. Jackson responded, "It's par for the course. Every president that's been elected has gone through something like that." Jackson also reminded Shuster that Bush had been demonized as a gorilla, a chimpanzee, a cowboy, cowpoke, and a host of other things. In fact, "[Bush] was depicted as Hitler many, many times and more than Obama."

Jackson is dead on, Bush was called every ghastly name in the "hate" book; evil, the Antichrist, Hitler, terrorist, fascists (to name a few), and they just didn't want to kill him, they wanted to impeach, imprison, smite, shoot, hang, bomb his house, chop his head off, and burn him. Although it is unclear in what order they wanted to do all of this. But that was back in the day when it was "patriotic to speak out against our government" –– when Bush was president.
[Three "hate Bush" photos; pick a year –– 2001 to 2008 –– you will find tons; and for your attire pleasure; “Kill Bush” t-shirt]

[Photo right; March 20, 2010 Protest against ObamaCare]

I guess we “concerned citizens” should remain silent and allow this administration to do whatever it wants. After all, Obama and his cronies (including Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid) know what's best. Let’s just light a campfire, burn our Constitution, hold hands, and sing Kumbaya as they chip away at our liberties and bankrupt our country. Any criticism over a federal government that has grown too large, too expensive, too intrusive, and in many aspects too corrupt is, in the shallow words of Garafolo, “racism straight up.” And, well, Olbermann (talk about an angry white man) is just pissed off because he didn't get enough "free hate Bush cupcakes."

I hope the gang at MSNBC catches all those damn racists! Maybe we can arrest them, make them register as “racist offenders,” and start a “racist registry.” With a quick Google search we can find the little red dots (racists) within a 10-mile radius, pulling up their “rap sheet.” Angry dudes lounging on the grass with the, "No ObamaCare” sign. Hateful teenager holding sign that said, “I’m 14, Stop Spending my Retirement.” Radical grandma for her sign that says, "Stop the Insanity, the borrowing, spending and taxing.” All guilty, lock the em’ up! The most violent citizen, "You can’t fix STUPID, but you can vote it out!" and the dangerous woman with the words, "NO socialism." Make sure the racist dog, Scruffy, with his plate that says, "I didn't read the stimulus bill either," is arrested too –– he or she looks like a real threat to our government!
[Photo left, Dog at Tax Day Tea Party, April 15, 2009 in California]

Personally I have witnessed "racism straight up" from my two stepfathers and other people I've known over the years, who called me an "N-lover," and it sent chills down my spine and got my blood boiling. Back then I didn't sit back idly –– they were confronted harshly regardless my age. While I am not a member of any tea party –– not the joiner type –– I refuse to sit back and watch this crap coming from the left-wing media, labeling ALL critics of Obama and his administration as racists; causing more division. In doing so, I won't sit back and condone the very offensive and obvious racially charged signs as well as any of the shameful and lame ones displayed at some of the Tea Party rallies and elsewhere. As I watch the reported behavior and disgraceful comments coming from the fringe nut-jobs –– which attach themselves to all movements –– I am equally appalled.

Come on people, let’s honor our First Amendment –– speech, press, and peaceable assembly –– by protesting with dignity and don’t give the left-wing media or anyone else a reason to demonize legitimate criticism of our government, its policies and direction. For God sakes, leave your racial remarks, guns, Hitler signs, hate, and violence at home.

Let me be clear, by no means does this imply that the Tea Party movement is about race and ALL, or even the majority of protestors are racists. And as the debate over Immigration reform heats up; we can expect more racists charges to emerge, with MSNBC at the helm. On the other hand, I won't bury my head in the sand and claim that racism is dead. Despite the fact that 2008 was a historical moment for our country, electing our first African-American president, Obama, who won by a large margin, racism still exists in America and it's ugly. However, you don't have to be white or part of the Tea Party or any "party" to be a racist — it comes in all colors and exists on both sides of the political isle. Racism is an issue that deserves much better –– an intelligent discussion, not reckless accusations, assumptions, and the manipulation of the facts.

When Nathanial Stuart, BigGovernment.com, covered the April 15, 2010 Tax Day Tea Party rally in Washington D.C., he decided to do a few interviews of his own. He wanted to know what attendees thought about the left-wing media's (Huffington Post, New York Times, and MSNBC) charge that the tea party goers as racists and hateful. One woman in particular (didn’t get her name, but I like her), was asked about her feelings on MSNBC's reporting that black conservatives have been called Oreos, traitors, and Uncle Tom by other blacks. Her response, “If we’re talking about Olbermann — Keith Olbermann is not a black person. I am not an Oreo. I am a very aggressive, assertive, professional black woman….”

Earlier in Stuarts interaction with this woman, she had this to say, “…Black Americans have been following Democrats off a cliff for the last 40 years...So, I’m out here with my family of tea party people — Democrats, Republicans, Independents...It's not that we hate the president, its not that we hate the Democrats; but we love our country, we love our children." We’re allowed to have a voice. Just like they’re allowed to have a voice.” Amen sister!

Politics at Blogcritics
Satire: MSNBC Series, “To Catch a Racist”
by Christine Lakatos

Satire: Where's My Free ObamaCare?

2010-04-09T09:20:00.000-07:00

From free Obama money to free health care: are we all entitled to free schools, Humpback Whales, and Unicorns too?

Apparently, some Americans have lost their minds and are asking, “Where’s my free ObamaCare?” After I stopped myself from rolling on the ground laughing, I had to see this for myself.

Americans (along with the majority of Congress for that matter) are still trying to figure out the massive health care overhaul that President Obama signed into law a few weeks ago. Evidently, questions have flooded insurance companies, doctors' offices, human resources departments and business groups. eHealthinsurance.com (expert advice hotline) has received hundreds of thousands of calls from consumers and according to Carrie McLean, a consumer specialist for the company, “most of the help-seekers are asking questions about when the bill takes effect and what changes they're going to see, but many are under the impression that they're going to get coverage for free.” In the midst of this confusion, crops up a comical line of questioning, “Where do we get the free ObamaCare and how do I sign up for that?” Hmmm...are they expecting free Obama cookies and Kool Aid with that too?

This recent "government give-me disorder" coincides with last year's stimulus insanity, when people lined up to get of all things; “free Obama money." Where was this Obama cash coming from? "His [personal] stash, I don't know!"

Did the Obama election foster in a new "caretaker" –– our government –– unleashing a smorgasbord of entitlements, relieving us from our "worries of putting gas in our car or paying our mortgage?” If so, forget about the gas and mortgage, where is my "free Obama" Porsche and beachfront mansion? And while we are at it, I want a "free Obama credit card" –– unlimited, like the one Congress is using right now!

It appears that America is morphing into Dane Cook's version of the Oprah Winfrey Show, where we all get a free "school and a HUMPBACK WHALE!" As perplexed citizens rise up to wait in line for more "free Obama stuff," we can anticipate that Americans will soon demand, “Where’s my free Obama Unicorn?”

Politics on Blogcritics: Satire: Where's My Free ObamaCare?
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Apr 09, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Interview: Kenny Lee Lewis –– Guitarist and Bassist for the Steve Miller Band

2010-04-02T06:11:00.000-07:00

Jack-of-all trades Kenny Lee Lewis is a gifted guitarist, long-standing Steve Miller Band member, and devoted family man.

Late last summer, my daughter told me that her friend’s dad is a "rock star." Well, I had to see for myself and sure enough, my daughter was right — Kenny Lee Lewis is both guitarist and bassist for the Steve Miller Band.

Interestingly, I've had numerous conversations with Kenny's wife, Diane, because our daughters attend the same middle school and are good friends. However, most of our talks were centered on our girls and teenage stuff. This past fall, the Lewis family was gracious enough to have my daughter over for Thanksgiving dinner and it was around that time I met Kenny.

As spring arrived, our girls started softball season. Because the Lewis' are supportive parents, they show up at every game, accompanied by their cute dog — arising another friendship: Sophie and my dog, Shorty. So, one day at a softball game, I had a thought and asked, “Kenny do you still like being in the limelight?” Kenny looked at me bewildered, not quite sure where I was headed (which was hitting him up for an exclusive interview for Blogcritics).

What I did know going into this interview is that Kenny and Diane are both in the music business, and more importantly, it is obvious that they are great at their most precious “gig,” raising two terrific daughters, who possess talent of their own.

This past weekend, on a beautiful afternoon here on the Central Coast of California, I arrived at the Lewis home with my daughter, dog, and notepad in tow. Lewis greeted me with his “cat that ate the canary” smirk and gift of storytelling –– and we sat outside and had a two-hour chat.

We discussed his lengthy music background, the music business in general as well as what really happens behind the scenes of a famous band. We briefly reminisced about some of the Steve Miller Band hits that I had listened to back when I was a teenager and young adult such as "Living In The USA," "The Joker," "Fly Like an Eagle," and others.

My interview proved to go better than anticipated. It revealed that Lewis is a gifted and multi-talented musician, who “rocks” with the best and also shines as a jazz artist. And dang, can Lewis play the guitar (as seen below in a 2006 video clip from the Shoreline Ampitheatre, shredding away with fellow guitar great Joe Satriani).

Lewis is no stranger to the music business. Back in the 70's he was a very successful studio bass player in LA. It was in 1978 that Lewis landed a record deal on EMI/UA with his own band, Pieces. Later in 1981, Lewis joined up with another band, Gerard McMahon and Kid Lightening. He became a songwriting partner with notable drummer Gary Mallaber, who had been a part of the many Steve Miller Band's hits from the 70’s. Lewis and Mallaber even started a band called, Robby Yubop (Yeah, it was named after beer induced belch-talk, Lewis explained).

After three decades, Kenny Lee Lewis is still "rockin" with Miller, and is very active with other projects. Toss in a movie script Lewis has written that is now under production, two novels in the works, and his recent solo instrumental smooth jazz CD, New Vintage, and you begin to wonder: does this guy ever sleep?

So Kenny, how did you get involved with the Steve Miller Band?

Lewis: Back in late 1981, Steve Miller called Mallaber and told him he was looking for material for his next album for Capitol Records. Miller took all eight of our Tascam 80-8 masters, and transferred them to 24-track format –– [translation: Miller used all of the Lewis and Mallaber songs, which included Lewis on guitar, bass and vocals as well as Mallaber on drums]. These songs ended up on the hit album, Abracadabra, which was released in the spring of 1982, selling over five million copies worldwide.

One day, Miller called me and said, “I’m taking pictures tomorrow for the Abracadabra record, how would you like to be in the band?’ "Since you played on over half the record, you might as well join my band and tour with me!"

Did you say yes, right away?

Lewis: No, I was hesitant because I was very active as a thriving studio bass player in LA. I also discussed it with my then girlfriend (now wife) Diane Steinberg, and consulted with the big name producers that I was working for at that time. Since I had moved to LA to promote my original music, I realized that this was my opportunity to do so, even though I would have to sacrifice my successful studio musician career. A day later, I was in the band.

Looking back, did you make the right choice?

Lewis: Yes, because with the advent of digital sampling and other technological advancements, the need for studio musicians has lessened over the last twenty years to the point where there is only a handful of musicians left making a decent living in that business. Live classic rock bands are doing great selling tickets to live concert performances. They can rely on classic rock radio formats without needing to have new hits on music stations or record sales.

So, do you want to hear a story that most people don't know about? It has to do with what transpired behind the delayed success of Abracadabra and it has never been exposed publicly.

Sure, give me some dirt...[mischievous smirk, writing as fast as I could]!

Lewis: Capitol Records did not release a single off of the Abracadabra album when it came out: they suggested to Miller that he “grease the palms” of the DJ’s using "payola" (an illegal practice of payment, or "pay-for-play" in the music industry). Miller refused and Capitol Records declined to spend any money on promotion and let Abracadabra disappear off the record charts.

Miller only had U.S. and Canada distribution deals with Capitol Records; yet, he had another label deal with PolyGram-Mercury in Europe. PolyGram-Mercury ran with the Abracadabra single, which had a European flavor, and they backed it with an aggressive promotional campaign, making Abracadabra a worldwide hit. After that, the U.S. picked up Abracadabra and it became a U.S. number one hit two times in a row, of which Capitol Records, of course, took credit for [sarcastic laugh], for doing absolutely nothing!

Wow, I think I heard of that "payola" thing and it's illegal? It sounds like Miller is a decent guy and that record company were [bleeps] at the time.

Lewis: Yeah, and Miller is an honest guy, who never had to use this type of shady business practice in the past for any of his other hits.

Well, I'm glad you guys won in the end. So, what you are up to now?

Lewis: [teasingly with a tad of sincerity] You know, the next time you do an interview, you should think about using a tape recorder.

Cute. Well, this is only my second interview. And need I remind you about your score keeping performance at the last softball game [chuckle]. (It should be noted that this was the game where Lewis’ daughter slid into home base to break a tie game, propelling our team to a well-deserved victory.)

Lewis: [grin, laugh] Besides touring with the Steve Miller Band, I am also the lead singer of several other bands including The Hang Dynasty — a "who's who" of famous rock star sidemen, who do corporate events nationwide. Also, The Barflyz, a smaller jazz flavored group, which will be performing at the Hearst Castle in April and local wineries throughout the summer.

Interview with Kenny Lee Lewis –– Guitar ist and Bassist for the Steve Miller Band
BlogCritics in Music
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Apr 01, 2010 at 7:33 pm

New Vintage on Amazon
Smooth jazz guitar from the lead guitarist of the Steve Miller Band. Kenny Lee Lewis has been Steve Miller's lead guitarist for over 20 years, and has co-written several songs and CDs that have sold millions of copies worldwide. This new CD features some of the finest studio musicians in the country.

President Obama Heading to California to Campaign for Barbara Boxer

2010-03-26T11:55:00.000-07:00

Three Republicans that are fighting to get into the "ring" with Boxer are closing in and Boxer now finds herself facing her toughest re-election “bout” yet.

Considering the rise of incumbent unpopularity and the fact that Senator Barbara Boxer –– the three-term Democratic senator –– is confronting her own unfavorable rating, which has recently shot up to 51 percent; Boxer is now facing what is expected to be her toughest re-election “bout” yet. However, President Obama has decided to step in as “promoter in chief” and will be making a trip to California next month to help raise money for Boxer and the Democratic National Committee: a fundraiser event that is set to take place in Los Angeles.

Boxer, a staunch progressive, needs a jolt to her campaign because Republican hopefuls are closing in. The latest Rasmussen poll puts Boxer in a virtual dead heat with Tom Campbell in California’s U.S. Senate race and Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore remain within striking distance.

The three Republican candidates, who are in a match of their own fighting to get into the "ring" with Boxer, are aggressively stepping up their strategies and snatching strong “ringside” support. Carly Fiorina, the wealthy former Chief Executive of Hewlett-Packard, just last week secured a very high profile endorsement by former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Tom Campbell, on the other hand, is a former member of Congress, who seems to fit the moderate Republican profile, has the backing of Conservative GOP politician Bill Simon. Meanwhile, Chuck DeVore, a Republican Assemblyman, has just snagged the support of the Tea Party Express, which will be announced today (Saturday - March 27, 2010) at a mega rally –– located in Senator Harry Reid's hometown of Searchlight, Nevada and headlined by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

So far it looks like Fiorina has a slight lead over Campbell, while DeVore trails behind. The Republican California primary coming up in June will be fascinating to watch and its outcome will decide who will get into the much anticipated political bout with Boxer. And with such an important midterm election coming up in November, that looming question arises: will Boxer get “knocked out” of the California senate seat, marking a predominately liberal state into the “red?"

With "dope" now on the 2010 California November ballot, which has the possibility of turning California "brown," coupled with an unpredictable political climate, it is safe to assume anything can happen!

NEWS in Politics: BlogCritics
President Obama Going to California in April to Assist Senator Barbara Boxer
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 27, 2010 at 5:02 pm

National Broadside

Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

ObamaCare Passes By Means of Arrogance, Deceit, and Payoffs

2010-03-22T16:56:00.000-07:00

White House and Democratic leaders resort to tactics right out of Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals. The ultimate rule: the ends justify the means.

"Look at how this bill was written... can you say it was done openly — with transparency and accountability, without backroom deals and struck behind closed doors, hidden from the people? Hell, no you can't!" — House Minority Leader John Boehner on the House floor, March 21, 2010

More appalling than the health care bill itself, was the process which President Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi employed to guarantee a conquest –– one of the biggest entitlement programs and power grabs in our history.

The drama over ObamaCare began with dismissing and devaluing American citizens and their concerns. Criticism was combated with “citizen bashing,” which included terms like racists, stupid, and many other disparaging labels. In the midst of the health care reform hoopla were the ongoing backroom deals that were cut to buy Democratic votes with taxpayer money. Later stages opened up controversy over political procedural issues like reconciliation and the “deem and pass” rule. While Nancy Pelosi didn’t use the “Slaughter Solution” to pass ObamaCare, we learned that she and other Democrats do not have much respect for “the rules” and many are dead set on trampling on our liberties and “slaughtering” our Constitution.

Late Sunday, the ObamaCare push ended the way I had predicted, relying on Bart Stupak, who went from pro-life “hero” to pro-life phony. The once pack of twelve pro-life Democrats that dwindled to five by vote time, were “handled” during the final countdown with a promise of an executive order from the president, which in reality is worthless. And that's not just coming from the right, but directly from the lips of Democrat Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who told Fox News, “[this] executive order can't change the law.” Thanks to the Stupak “sellouts,” ObamaCare passed the House with a 219 to 212 vote (with no Republican support and 34 Democratic “no” votes) and this morning President Obama signed the health care bill, which is now the law of the land.

As a result of the Obama/Pelosi win, they quickly set into motion their “spin machine” (with much more to come) and are touting themselves as the “party that cares.” In both victory speeches they heralded delusional assumptions: Pelosi identified the House actions as “an act of patriotism,” the bill an “all American act,” and that it “honored our Founding Fathers.” Obama declared, amongst other things, that somehow the vote represented the “will of” and was a “victory for" the American people –– wasn't it more like 41%?

Now the Democrats are using rhetoric that doesn't match reality. Their marketing "fairy tale" campaign consists of discrediting criticism of the bill by asserting that those opposed don't care about children with pre-existing conditions, twenty-six-year-olds, and seniors' medications: three immediate benefits, yet, the substance of this glorious law will not take place until 2014. Moreover, they fail to divulge the many, many negative aspects like the mandates, fines and what it will eventually cost taxpayers, the states, and our country as a whole.

Not only did Democratic leaders attempt to deceive the American people with fuzzy math –– a plan that relies on ten years of offsets to pay for only six years of spending –– they failed to add the “doc fix,” which we know changes the numbers entirely and ObamaCare will ultimately explode the deficit. We have also been duped into thinking that student loans have something to do with health care and in the dark of the night, a plan to takeover our student loans was placed in the reconciliation package.

The Senate had an array of sweetheart deals or to put it in more current terms, "cash for votes." Payoffs included $100 million for the Cornhusker Kickback, $300 million for the Louisiana Purchase, $100 million for the Connecticut Hospital, and many more. Of no surprise, the right arm of Obama, SEIU, got their own deal in the Senate bill and was out in full force threatening House Democrats who opposed the bill.

The House Democrats were not exempt from hatching deals of their own: many were "bought off" one way or another. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who publicly opposed the bill, switched to a "yea" vote after his ride on Air Force One (taxpayer funded, of course). The Hispanic Caucus , who was set to vote against the bill, was appeased by Obama's "renewed commitment to immigration reform."

Shedding light on other ObamaCare bribes –– or just coincidences –– can be found at Code Red Deal Watch and today we find that Stupak was awarded over $700,000 in grants for three airports in his district, two days prior to voting. Another deal was devised and added to the reconciliation package that will benefit a couple of major insurance companies and quite a number of doctor-owned hospitals, which happens to affect Democratic Representatives Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, and Bart Gordon of Tennessee. Coincidentally, a few states got their “pet projects” passed just in time for the House vote like Rep. Alan Boyd’s Florida National Forest Land Adjustment Act of 2009.

More sweetheart deals include Rep. Bart Gordon, who happened to change his vote from “no” to “yes” is set to get $100 million in Medicaid for Tennessee and the two Congressmen from California, Dennis Cardoza and Jim Costa (once a fence-sitter), may get an increase in federal water allotment in their districts sooner than anticipated. And there are more.

Today the focus turned toward the Senate to hash out the reconciliation package, AKA "the fix it bill," which was secured by a non-binding, promise letter from Harry Reid. Considering this Senate battle, the unanimous Republican opposition, and continuing American outrage, we can expect more health care drama to unfold.

Did ObamaCare pass by means of corrupt tactics? Hell, yes it did! If ObamaCare is so great, why did the White House and Democratic leaders have to resort to deception and bribe the Democrats in the Senate and the House for their votes? What is apparent is that we have a White House who is governing with arrogance and are only concerned about their political careers and their ideology. What is even clearer is that those on the far left believe and subscribe to Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals where “the ends justify the means.”

In closing and using the words of our president from his victory speech, “This is what change looks like”: the kind of change –– the means and the end –– that we can count on in the future as this White House presses on to impose their radical, socialistic agenda (recently confirmed by Al Sharpton) on the American people.

ObamaCare Passes By Means of Arrogance, Deceit, and Payoffs
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 23, 2010 at 6:27 pm
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Pro-life House Dems Thrown Under the Bus: "Stupak Dozen" Stand Firm

2010-03-17T17:31:00.000-07:00

Pelosi is still scrambling for votes and so far she doesn't have the pro-life House Dems on board. "Slaughter Solution" is still on the table to pass ObamaCare.

With the stakes high over passing ObamaCare –– or not –– and only days left before President Obama is set to depart on his overseas trip (or will it be delayed again?), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is still scrambling for her 216 votes to "overhaul" our health care system.

In my last article about ObamaCare, I advised that we keep our eyes on Congressman Bart Stupak. Considering the vote count is close and the "Supak Dozen" (no confirmed list to be found) have threatened to vote no on the Senates' version of the health care reform bill unless the abortion language is fixed, Stupak has certainly been in the political limelight.

This morning on America Live with Megyn Kelly, Stupak was questioned in regards to the rumor that Pelosi has peeled back several of the "Stupak Dozen" votes. Stupak responded, "not even close," and announced once again, that he is a "NO" vote if the abortion language is not fixed.

Stupak also told Megyn Kelly that "the democratic majority would like to see public funding for abortion," which is consistent with other comments Stupak made public last week. Stupak's interview on Michigan's Mark & Walt Radio Show revealed a conversation he had with Representative Waxman about the Senate version of the health care bill. “I gave him the language. He came back a little while later and said, '”But we want to pay for abortions.'” “I said, 'Mr. Chairman, that's where we disagree. We don't do it now, we're not going to start.” "But we think should," Waxman answered.

More interesting is Stupak's phone interview with the National Review where he stated that the Democratic leadership's position is "that women, especially those without means available, should have their abortions covered.” Stupak also pointed out that the arguments the Democrats have made to him in recent deliberations “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.” Without names this time, Stupak exposed one of the startling arguments that he was hearing, “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more."

Later, Stupak did clarify his comments for the NRO, stating that some of his conversations with Democratic members centered on the CBO's report, which claims that his amendment will cost $500 million to implement over ten years, and that costs should not be a reason to deny his amendment. That said; the update does not address the "more children will be born" comment, leaving many wondering what that was all about.

A few days ago, Stupak appeared On the Record with Greta, where he explained that they [his group] have worked hard to make sure current law is kept: no public funding for abortion, yet, he stated, "we haven't seen any language to placate our concerns." When Greta Van Susteren pressed Stupak if he had been approached by anyone from the top of the leadership, Supak responded with “no, because they disagree with me on the issue, so they'll wait until the last minute and see if they can run –– do an end run, get the votes without us."

Despite the fact that the Democrats have thrown pro-life House Democrats "under the bus,” it looks like the "Stupak Dozen" are standing firm –– at least we can confirm that Bart Stupak is.

In the wake of the Stupak saga arises that daunting question: how many votes does Pelosi have and can she pass the Senate bill without the "Stupak Dozen?" The answer could lie in the fact that the House Democrats may not vote at all because they are considering using the “Slaughter Solution” AKA the self-executing rule –– no up or down vote, just “deem and pass."

Pelosi and the rest of the House Democrats should be aware that Americans are watching: we do care about the "process" as well as the product, and whoever votes for the "rule change" is a vote in favor of ObamaCare, DemCare, or in context of the Hyde Amendment –– Dems "don't" Care.

Pro-life House Dems Thrown Under the Bus: "Stupak Dozen" Stand Firm
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 17, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Also on National Broadside
Brought to you by Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Supreme Court Justice’s Wife Launches Conservative Movement Linked to Tea Party

2010-03-16T12:42:00.000-07:00

Virginia Thomas (citizen) energized into action by President Obama's "hard-left agenda." Left-wing media projects possible "conflict of interest."

According to the Los Angeles Times, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ wife, told Tea Party leaders in Washington, "I am an ordinary citizen from Omaha, Nebraska, who just may have the chance to preserve liberty along with you and other people like you." Apparently, Mrs. Thomas went on to count herself among those energized into action by President Obama's "hard-left agenda."

Mrs. Thomas is energized all right! So much so, that in January she launched a non-profit, conservative, tea-party-linked movement –– Liberty Central –– whose mission includes "activating informed American patriots who are seeking knowledge of the core founding principles and passionate about preserving freedom and liberty.” LibertyCentral.org will serve the big tent of the conservative movement by using a three-prong approach: education, motivation, and activism. Back in February, Mrs. Thomas (wearing her Liberty Central sweatshirt), had a pleasant interview with Ed Morrissey at CPAC, highlighting her focus and Liberty Centrals' "five core founding principles" –– limited government, personal responsibility, individual liberty, national security, and free enterprise. Mrs. Thomas also described the Tea Party as "new citizen activists," something she is very excited about and wants to be part of.

While the author of Sunday's LA Times article, Kathleen Hennessey, does point out that experts don't deem Mrs. Thomas' work as a violation of ethical rules, noting that “under judicial rules, judges must curb political activity, but a spouse is free to engage,” her tone and tag line paint a different slant. Ms. Hennessy projects that Mrs. Thomas’ activism “is likely to test notions of political impartiality for the court." Andy McCarthy of the National Review quickly fired back, calling Hennessey’s piece a "hit job on Ginni Thomas" and documented the blatant double standard of the left-wing media and their on-going "war" against Conservatives (especially women).

Where was the left-wing media's "conflict of interest" outcry when Mrs. Obama, who was armed with a task force and got a State of the Union "shout out" –– unlike our Supreme Court who were humiliated with a “shout down” –– launched her Let's Move Campaign? Did they miss the fact that the controversial left-wing group, SEIU, has been caught with their greedy hands in the "childhood obesity cookie jar?” Who by the way, lobby’s for and benefits from proposed legislation, who just happens to have strong and direct ties to Mrs. Obama's husband –– our President. Hmmm.

Supreme Court Justice’s Wife Launches Conservative Movement Linked to Tea Party
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 16, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Also on National Broadside
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

Life of ObamaCare Relies on Abortion Language: All Eyes on Bart Stupak

2010-03-10T14:54:00.000-08:00

A week ago, Pelosi and Stupak were “liars,” this week a so-called "compromise" was brewing: what "drama" is next?

Late last week, the National Review summed up the fight over a government takeover of health care this way: "The attention is on the Senate, but the battle is in the House." You see, Democrats want to force the House to vote on the bill already passed by the Senate by March 18 –– the day the president leaves for an overseas trip. And part of the ObamaCare battle is the abortion language — it clearly allows federal funding for abortion.

News broke early yesterday morning announcing that Representative Bart Stupak thinks a "compromise” can be reached on the issue of abortion funding in the Democrats' Senate version of the health care bill. “I’m more optimistic than I was a week ago,” Stupak said in an interview between meetings with constituents in his northern Michigan district. Hmmm... while many were speculating the meaning behind the so-called "compromise," including myself, it looks like Stupak had an interview with The Weekly Standard yesterday, where he clarified what was really going on. "Obviously they don’t know me," Stupak said in his interview. "If I didn’t cave in November, why would I do it now after all the crap I’ve been through? Everyone’s going around saying there’s a compromise — there’s no such thing," Stupak said. What's changed between this week and last, Stupak went on, is that he had his first real conversation with Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Congressman Henry Waxman about fixing the bill.

The latest health care "drama" began to unfold directly following the health care summit “sham” –– plus C-SPAN, minus the beer –– and President Obama’s news conference, escorted by “people in the white coats,” urging Congress to allow an "up or down vote" on the Democrats' health care bill. Since then, two key words have been in the limelight: one that has the power to give “life,” the other to “kill.” Pundits, politicians, and American citizens have been discussing and debating reconciliation and back into the health care debate is the dreaded and highly controversial abortion issue.

Stupak has made it clear that “he and a dozen other Democrats who voted yes the first time will vote no on the Senate health care bill because it provides taxpayer funding for abortion." Last week it was the clash over who was telling the truth, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Stupak were practically calling each other liars. Nancy Pelosi got irritated (what else is new) during her weekly news conference, claiming, "There is no federal funding for abortion. That is the law of the land. It is not changed in this bill." Three hours later, Stupak fired back. “She’s incorrect,” he said. “I’d ask the speaker to direct her attention to page 2069 through page 2078. There are two ways in those pages where you pay for abortion. Number one, you get tax breaks that subsidize your insurance policy that will pay for abortion. Number two, when you read the legislation, one dollar per month for all enrollees, must go into this fund for ‘reproductive care,’ which includes abortion coverage.”

What a difference a week makes. Ironically, the life of ObamaCare is partly dependent on abortion –– Stupak and other pro-life Democrats. Last week, the question remained on the House floor: will abortion kill ObamaCare legislation, which the majority of Americans oppose? And this week, apparently the abortion language has not been fixed yet, which leads me to another question: will the pro-life Democrats stand firm on their convictions (moral code) or will they sell out like Senator Ben Nelson did? Considering all of the back-room deals, bribes, and other shenanigans that took place in order to pass the Senate's version of the health care reform bill, it is hard to say what will happen next. As we get closer to the new Obama deadline –– eight days away –– and as the Democrats get more desperate, you can bet the fight over ObamaCare will get much more ugly.

BlogCritics in Politics
Life of ObamaCare Relies on Abortion Language: All Eyes On Bart Stupak
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 10, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Concerned Citizen: The Right Perspective

STOP ObamaCare!

Playing Politics With Childhood Obesity?

2010-02-28T08:21:00.000-08:00

[Cartoon courtesy of John Cole @ MSNBC Political Cartoonists Index]

A personal fitness trainer’s (conservative) take on First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move campaign: facts, praise, advice, sarcasm, and satire included.

First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move campaign –– taking on the childhood obesity epidemic –– is an ambitious movement that was launched early February. The goal: “to solve the problem of childhood obesity within a generation.” Mrs. Obama was armed with a "task force" by her husband, President Barack Obama, via a Memorandum on Childhood Obesity, whose mission includes the following objectives: “ensuring access to healthy, affordable food; increasing physical activity in schools and communities; providing healthier food in schools; and empowering parents with information and tools to make good choices for themselves and their families.”

Sounds like a noble cause, one that happens to be related to my passion and expertise. Despite Mrs. Obama's media rounds — she even appeared on FOX News and in an interview with Mike Huckabee said this is not government intervention — critics have arrived on the playground, including Glenn Beck and others. Concerns range from government’s involvement in our diet to the cost of such a large undertaking as well as which special interest groups will climb into the "obesity backpack." Erupting outside the White House is an angry mob, aka the Tea Party, protesting. Is the government trying to takeover our children's bodies? Are they going to socialize our Cheerios?

What is disturbing is that SEIU has their hands in the “obesity cookie jar." Yeah, the powerful labor organization, which received the back room special deal (Cadillac Tax exemption until 2018) in the Senate's version of the Democrats’ health care bill. The union that is led by the die-hard progressive Andy Stern, the White House's most frequent visitor who was just appointed to the deficit commission.

SEIU launched their own major ad campaign “demanding reauthorization and funding increases" in the Child Nutrition Act. In a January press release, SEIU Executive Vice President Mitch Ackerman had this to say: "A more robust expansion of school lunch, breakfast, summer feeding, child care and WIC is critical to reducing hunger, ending childhood obesity, and providing fair wages and health care for front line food service workers."

In reality, it is much safer to pack your child’s lunch, yet many parents don't have that luxury. So, first and foremost, we need to clean up the school meals, especially the cooked ones. I am sure that the school food servers are nice enough, however, most are not "poster children" for fitness, and do any of them bring to the cafeteria credentials that will help with the childhood obesity problem? Ironically, foods best for health, wellness, and fitness, even when it comes to school meals, require little preparation — like fresh fruits and vegetables as well as whole grains. How difficult is it to cut up some fresh fruit, make a tossed green salad, prepare oatmeal, steam brown rice or veggies, bake a yam, or toast a whole wheat bagel?

While it is admirable to feed and provide nutrition for our children, it is quite another to add your self-serving, power hungry agenda to a decent and pure cause. This reminds me of what the food industry has done to our wholesome foods by adding sugar, salt, trans fats, and other harmful additives and preservatives, thus marketing and selling a product that tastes good, yet fails the health test.

Julie Gunlock of the National Review, who is skeptical of “federalizing fat,” noted that Mrs. Obama was “was murky on the details” of her Let’s Move campaign and that “federally funded child-nutrition programs, along with the WIC program, cost American taxpayers $19 billion in 2007.” Mrs. Obama has called for overhauling many federal laws and guidelines, including adding $10 billion over the next decade to “update” the Childhood Nutrition Act, which feeds 31 million children at school and would add funding to feed more children. Again, admirable, but all large campaigns come with a price tag and generate that "downer" question: how much will Let’s Move cost and who is going to pay?

In a recent article by Mark Bittman of the New York Times, soda may be considered the new "sin." Bittman wrote that the “Obama administration announced a plan to ban candy and sweetened beverages from schools” and that many are pushing for stronger measures to discourage consumption, “urging that soda be treated like tobacco” (i.e.: taxes, warning labels, and a massive public health marketing campaign). Interestingly a tax on soda was one option considered to help pay for health care reform, an idea that President Obama entertained last fall.

Soda and other sugary drinks are bad news for a variety of reasons and I do believe it is prudent to ban certain foods and beverages from our school campuses, while encouraging healthier foods and more water consumption. However, though I am no fan of the food industry, is it fair to single out soda when sugar is a staple in many man-made food products like cookies, pastries, ice cream, cereal, and even in chocolate milk, applesauce, peanut butter, crackers, bread, sauces, and condiments –– the list is endless? Just take a look at any packaged, canned, or bottled food item and you will find sugar in many forms (high fructose corn syrup for one), and unfortunately at the top of the ingredient list.

So, what’s next? Is the government going to brand every fattening and unhealthy food a "sin” and tax it to support more entitlement programs? We don't need "fat police," we need a "truth squad" –– one that will unveil the realities of consuming certain foods and liquids in excess, contributing to weight gain and health issues. For example are the “three evil whites”: sugar, salt, and white flour, as well as America's enormous appetite for the three "F's": fat, fried food, and fast food. Since Mrs. Obama has plans to push for manufacturers to make their labels more “family friendly," many of them should include a warning sticker: "In Excess this Product Can be Hazardous to Your Health and Fattening to Your Body." And instead of a tax on consumers, Mrs. Obama should enlist the food industry (one of the villains in this crisis), including McDonalds and all the rest, to pay for her ambitious and seemingly costly undertaking –– giving them a way to redeem themselves.

When Mrs. Obama, a woman who works out and appears to have a good sense about this issue, broadcast her Let's Move kick-off at the White House, she also announced the creation of a “new, independent foundation," Partnership for a Healthier America, and laid out her plan while noting, “We are going to need to make modest but critical investments in the short run, but we know that that they’re going to pay for themselves likely many times over in the long run.” Mrs. Obama concluded by articulating that "this problem can be solved” and that it “isn't like a disease where we're still waiting for the cure to be discovered, we know the cure for this.” Mrs. Obama is on target because we know that the key to reducing childhood obesity is to get our kids to eat better and exercise more –– something most health professionals and fitness experts have been heralding for decades.

There are so many health risks associated with obesity, like heart disease and stroke, high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer, gallbladder disease and gallstones, osteoarthritis, gout, and breathing problems, such as sleep apnea and asthma. Is this the future we want for our children? Well, the future is here.

Childhood obesity is real and unfortunately on the rise. According to the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, "childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30 years." What is even more alarming are the health consequences: "Obese youth are more likely to have risk factors for cardiovascular disease, such as high cholesterol or high blood pressure." They are also at greater risk of developing Type-2 diabetes, bone and joint problems, and other health issues. Let’s not kid ourselves; other areas are affected when children are overweight or obese; energy levels, mood, and yes, self esteem. Sadly, "obese youth are more likely than youth of normal weight to become overweight or obese adults."

The good news is that we do have the cure (better yet, the prevention) to obesity; it lies in proper diet and exercise; however, the real task at hand is education, motivation, and discipline, of which the latter is much more difficult to cultivate and should never be forced by the government. We don’t need government intervention; we need education and incentives, not mandates and regulations. I just hope they don't mandate tofu on the "anti-obesity menu" and ban my monthly Snickers. If Let’s Move does involve higher taxes and takes away any of our "diet freedoms (and indulgences)," John Cole's cartoon, which I found hilarious, may not be that far-fetched.

Obesity is not partisan –– it strikes both Republicans and Democrats alike –– therefore, we should not play politics in our fight against it. In fact, it is not a political issue at all; it’s a cultural problem that we all can help eradicate, or at least lessen. Moms, dads, uncles, aunts, teachers and all the rest of us can educate ourselves about proper diet and begin an exercise regimen, and then we can lead by example and become a guide and motivator and move our children toward a healthier lifestyle. Our children will reap the rewards of better health and wellness and our country, as a whole, will become more fit –– something we can all agree is a good thing!

What started in the garden at the White House has now become a worthy crusade. Let's hope that the First Lady will ensure Let’s Move truly caters to the health and wellness of our children, and at the end of a decade, and along the way, manifests a concrete and huge difference.

Playing Politics With Childhood Obesity?
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Mar 02, 2010 at 6:22 pm
Author of MY DIVIA DIET Fitness Book Series

Book Review: Game Change

2010-02-21T09:44:00.000-08:00

Oh my, Game Change, though somewhat “tabloidish” is a fascinating read and quite the political ride. If the information gathered by authors, John Heilemann and Mark Halperin (both veteran political reporters), is accurate, not only does it confirm the head games, spin, smear tactics, rumor mills, and the wasted multimillions of dollars that has become commonplace in political campaigns, it exhibits more of what really happens –– the good, the bad and the in between –– inside a presidential campaign; a game where stakes are high and boundaries are low.

The uniqueness of Game Change is that in a novel-like style it brings back memories of the historical 2008 presidential race and takes you deeper into the main teams and the players in this match: Obama, the Clintons, McCain and Palin. A presidential race, which actually began with Barack Obama’s (then a candidate for Senator) keynote address at the 2004 Democratic Convention –– a speech I personally remember saying, “that guy is gonna go far!” How far, we all now know!

Game Change quickly became a media sensation –– the media, another key factor in the 2008 presidential race –– and a bestseller even before it was released in January 2010. This was partly due to the Harry Reid “light-skinned, no Negro dialect” comment. However, what didn’t make the headlines were more prickly pieces of the campaign that are found in this book. The most telling were the disloyal and spineless Democratic Senators, Chuck Schumer, along with Ben Nelson, Barbara Boxer, and others, who were "nudging" Obama to run for president, yet, they would only "bless him secretly."

While in 2006 Obama’s staffers gave Obama the nickname “Black Jesus,” Hillary Clinton had another name for Obama; in reaction to the presidential debate at Drexel University in October 2007, “What an asshole,” Clinton grumbled to her aids. “Am I the only one who sees the arrogance? Does that not bother people?” Then there was Joe Biden's "run-away-mouth," which continued even after he became the vice-presidential pick. Seemingly, Biden shared with others that "he was more qualified to be president than Obama." This statement and other "public gaffes" frustrated and angered the Obama Team and caused major tension between Biden and Obama. Game Change also explores why McCain chose an unknown to be his vice-president running mate –– Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin –– an announcement that shocked the nation, the media, and even Obama.

Heilemann and Halperin also bring to the forefront the personalities and temperaments of the 2008 presidential candidates as well as their staff — some public knowledge and some not. They shed light on Obama’s arrogance and elitist mentality and John Edwards' infidelity and desperation. Game Change provides other tidbits of data like McCain’s fondness for the “F” word, a hilarious account of McCain's media guy who thought Palin's hair was on fire, plus much more.

While it is not fair to judge one’s entire character derived from the accounts of a book which is based on facts mixed in with hearsay, my own personal opinions arose from reading Game Change: Obama arrogant, absolutely, but he scores high points on the family front. It left me with the sense that John Edwards is a weasel, McCain a grump, and Rudy Giuliani’s third wife pathetic. However, I did gain a new found respect and admiration for Hillary Clinton and found Bill Clinton to be somewhat amusing. Joe Lieberman shines as a loyal McCain ally and friend. Sarah Palin on the other hand comes across as confident with rock star qualities, yet, ill-equipped to handle the task at hand. And what made Palin "go rogue"? Maybe it was because she was on the Atkins diet. Eat some carbs, woman, you'll feel better!

Additionally, about a third of the way through Game Change, it dawned on me –– not that I hadn’t had these thoughts before –– these people (politicians) don’t give a rat's ass about us (citizens). In fact we are not human beings to them; we are just polls and votes that feed their huge egos and catapult them into their ultimate goal of power and in this case the presidency of the United States. The true “game change” will be when we Americans wake up, take a long look at all of our politicians, and make more educated and enlightened choices.

As many of us watched the unraveling of the 2008 presidential race –– a game that changed often and at times seemed chaotic –– the end game is no mystery and boiled down to Hope and Change vs. Country First. Presidential political campaigns are an arena where perception and truth are intertwined and this time brought us a mirage of "hope and change." Game Change covers the final weeks concluding with Obama's sweeping victory, but the book doesn't end there; Heilemann and Halperin, reveal one more interesting piece of the "game change" puzzle. This piece, like so many others mentioned and left out of my review, is best to unveil when the book is read in its entirety.

Game Change, a present I got for my birthday last week, although a lengthy book, is definitely worth reading — especially if you enjoy politics. After all, politics is a contact sport and no better place to view the brutality and pleasure of it all than from the inside, even if it is already in the past.

Book Review: Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Feb 22, 2010 at 9:56 pm
Check out other book reviews on BlogCritics

Women Activists Still Attacking the Tebow Family Ad

2010-02-08T14:46:00.000-08:00

Abortion advocates switch their tactics: now asserting that the Tebow Family Ad promotes domestic violence.

Even though many women's groups supporting abortion rights condemned CBS and wanted the Tebow Family Ad pulled from the Super Bowl commercial line-up, claiming that somehow it would undermine a women's right to choose, millions of Americans viewed it yesterday. Not knowing what to expect and most holding on to a tight opinion either for or against, the Tebow Family ad didn't quite measure up to the hype; however, Tim Tebow tackled his mom!

Reactions to the commercial were swift and mixed. According to today’s Los Angeles Times, Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, had this to say, "Focus on the Family has really been strategic. They went with the old adage 'less is more', and they put a positive message out there." Likewise, Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List, which supports candidates who oppose abortion, was pleased. "Wow, this is so benign," she said. "It's a story of a mother's strength. That is the message that I saw." Still, the attacks against the Tebow Family Ad rage on; Terry O'Neill, president of NOW, stated, "I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it." "That's what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don't find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself," O'Neill added. Abortion advocate, Amanda Marcotte, shortly following the premier of the ad, posted this "tweet" on her Twitter page: "Hey Mom! Tried to kill you from the womb and failed. How about a blind side tackle? Violence against Moms."

Cries from the depths of activism are now asserting that the Tebow Family Ad promotes domestic violence; yet, not a peep on how 88-year-old Betty White was tackled into the mud in a TV Super Bowl Ad? Maybe they are coming to rescue Betty, soon! And what about Abe?

Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Feb 08, 2010 at 10:31 pm
BlogCritics News Flash in Politics

The 2010 Census and Its $340 Million Campaign

2010-02-05T17:28:00.000-08:00

What does our government, the Super Bowl, ACORN, Jesus, Sesame Street, and billions of taxpayer dollars have in common?

As you probably know, the Constitution mandates a complete population count every 10 years, which helps redraw political boundaries and determine states' representation in Congress and the distribution of more than $400 billion in federal funds to state and local governments every year. In March of this year, Americans will be receiving what is considered the shortest Census form in U.S. history and the 2010 Census will be advertised by what many are calling the government's "unprecedented promotional blitz," costing taxpayers $340 million.

The Census campaign includes $140 million on TV, radio, print and outdoor advertising and roughly $80 million spent on ads that will target racial and ethnic groups and non-English speakers in 28 languages. They will be accompanied by a road tour called “The 2010 Census Portrait of America Road Tour” — stopping and exhibiting at more than 800 events nationwide, of which “13 road tour vehicles will provide the public with an educational, engaging and interactive experience that brings the 2010 Census to life.” The Census Road Tour will be stopping at the Super Bowl in Miami this Sunday, February 7th.

Speaking of the Super Bowl and all of its advertising glory: Hold on to your football jerseys because this season you won’t see Pepsi, yet, Dr. Pepper will be making an appearance during the game ads. Also, it turns out that the “Man Crunch Ad” was rejected by CBS; however, you will be able to catch the “Tebow Family Ad” and plenty of beer and Doritos commercials. Just in case you can't afford to go to the Super Bowl this weekend, it is nice to know that your taxpayer dollars will be there and we have our government to thank. Not only will the Census Road Tour be in attendance, but "Uncle Sam has purchased a 30-second, $2.5-million reminder," so that you will stand up and be counted! Apparently, Christopher Guest has directed quite a few of these Census ads under a project called "Snapshot of America," starring actor, activist Ed Begley Jr. and others. [It is not quite clear which ad will be airing during the Super Bowl – here is a preview of what I could find]

Due to concerns over ACORN’s shady reputation and accusations and convictions of voter-registration fraud, last September the Census Bureau severed its ties with ACORN, noting that they will not be involved with the 2010 head count. However, as many of us were focused on the health care debate and other issues of the day this past December, Jose Cruz, Senior Director of Civic Engagement for the National Association of the Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) enlisted Jesus to get the Census “word” out and designed a poster that included the over 2000-year-old biblical account when Mary (with child) and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem after Caesar Augustus called for "all the world to be counted," so that they could be taxed.

While the government did not pay or play a role in creating the posters, this type of propaganda did cause quite a stir amongst the faithful. Still, Cruz defended his decision in using this tactic as a means to get "full Latino count," and stated, “For people who fear government — especially those here illegally — the plea to fill out the Census has to come from someone they trust – there is no more trusted voice in our community than faith-based leaders."

Our government is also taking Census education and advertising to our children. The Census Bureau and the US Department of Education have launched the "2010 Census in Schools" program. If you have children in school be prepared for a week of Census education, which is scheduled to occur anywhere between January and March. Since the Census Bureau partnered with Sesame Street to extend the 2010 Census message, The Count and Rosita have already been spotted on American school campuses and it's possible we will find Big Bird, Elmo and the rest of the Sesame Street crew on our TV screen, marketing the 2010 Census. Maybe our government will employ Elmo to be a census taker, the Cookie Monster to hand out free refreshments, and The Count to add up all the taxpayer money our government is spending on the 2010 Census?

As it turns out, "the 10-year life-cycle costs of Census 2010" are estimated at $14 billion, of which the $340 million allotted for paid advertising to "urge participation in Census 2010," are in full force. Will you be counted?

Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Feb 06, 2010 at 3:21 pm
BlogCritics in Politics (2010 Census) and National Broadside Mag

The Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad Controversy

2010-01-28T17:44:00.000-08:00

Women’s groups urge CBS to cancel the “Tebow Family Ad,” yet CBS and Tim Tebow stand firm: NFL takes no issue with CBS decision.

Next weekend millions of viewers will tune into Super Bowl XLIV featuring the New Orleans Saints versus the Indianapolis Colts. The Super Bowl is a huge event featuring our football champions and over the years it has become the place where the most unique, expensive, and much anticipated commercials are launched. TV Super Bowl ads have become such a phenomenon that sales for 30-second commercial slots sell for $2.5 million to $3 million, and each year it reaches an estimate of over 100 million viewers. These Super Bowl commercials have taken on a life their own by becoming themselves a competition, with ratings, winners and losers including the best of 2009 and my favorite, the "Budweiser: Horse in Training Ad."

However, with popularity comes controversy, and TV Super Bowl ads are no different. Last year, PETA was under fire for their "sexual" commercial promoting vegetarianism, NBC deemed it too explicit for the Super Bowl and it was banned. The reason: the "PETA spot submitted to Advertising Standards depicts a level of sexuality exceeding our standards," stated Victoria Morgan, NBC advertising spokesperson. Over the years other TV Super Bowl ads that were considered too “racy for the masses" have been banned. This year, women’s groups are riled up over an ad scheduled to air before and during the CBS broadcast of the 44th Super Bowl game, celebrating the story about the 2007 Heisman Trophy-winning American football quarterback for the Florida Gators, Tim Tebow.

So, why are "women's groups" creating such a fuss over the Tebow ad? Tebow is a talented, successful football player: he's young and hot "to boot." But wait, Tebow is a Christian whose mother suffered a life-threatening infection while she was pregnant. Doctors expected a "stillbirth and recommended an abortion to protect her life." But Pam Tebow, despite the odds, chose life for her son. Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian ministry, of which the 30-second spot will feature college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, purchased the ad. They will share a personal story centered on the theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life."

In spite of the fact that no one has seen the "Tebow Family Ad," women are crying foul before the game even begins, calling it an anti-abortion promotion. According to Reuters, the Women's Media Center and over 30 other liberal and women's advocacy groups sent a letter to CBS urging them to "cancel the ad" and "refuse" Focus on the Family or any other advertisement promoting their agenda. Jehmu Greene, the president of the Women's Media Center, told Reuters, "We are calling on CBS to stick to their policy of not airing controversial advocacy ads... and this is clearly a controversial ad."

This past week, in an interview with Bill O'Reilly on Fox News, Greene was questioned about her "beef" with the Tebow Family Ad and she responded by claiming the ad was an "attempt to undermine a woman's right to make decisions about her reproductive decisions" and that the ad would somehow "take away a women's right to choose."

Apparently CBS has reversed their stance on airing "advocacy" commercials during the Super Bowl, providing they are "responsibly produced," and an NFL spokesman weighed in: "CBS standards and practices department approved the content of the ad as appropriate for the audience. We take no issue with CBS' decision." Focus on the Family's Gary Schneeberger has come out stating, "There's nothing political and controversial about it. [...] When the day arrives, and you sit down to watch the game on TV, those who oppose it will be quite surprised at what the ad is all about."

Still sports enthusiasts and columnists like CBSSports.com's Gregg Doyel, are uncomfortable with the Tebow Family Ad because it interferes with what Doyel calls "the holiest day of the year." What is quite interesting is that our society is okay with sexually charged commercials like the Carl's Jr. Paris Hilton ad. And when commercials include the constant pimping of pharmaceutical drugs like Viagra, we don't protest. We don’t even cringe at the fact that fast food commercials continually sell us poor health and obesity, of which most Americans turn a blind eye to what PETA does prove: widespread animal cruelty in our food industry (a heartbreaking and angering reality). Although TV Super Bowl ads adhere to a higher standard, they do promote a lot of beer, so it is refreshing that CBS will air a wholesome, positive advertisement and women's groups can then take their "pom poms" somewhere else.

Early on when Tim Tebow met with reporters last Sunday in Mobile, Alabama before beginning preparations for the Senior Bowl, he made an effort to tackle the controversy by standing up for what he believes. Then with admiration and gratitude he pointed out, "My mom is a very courageous woman..."

By many people's standards, Pam Tebow is a role model and the Tebow Family Ad just might go all the way to the end zone, scoring a touchdown on February 7, 2009, uplifting hearts and minds, marking it a victory for free speech and dare I say, us pro-lifers –– possibly catapulting it to my new favorite TV Super Bowl ad!

My First BlogCritics Sports Article
The Tim Tebow Super Bowl Ad Controversy
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jan 29, 2010 at 12:42 pm

Dems Like Howard Dean Just Don’t Get It

2010-01-21T18:20:00.000-08:00

Why are the people of America angry and frustrated?

The aftermath of Scott Brown’s historical win last week, when he was voted to fill "The People’s Seat" in Massachusetts, is quite fascinating. Pundits and politicians have been scrambling and speculating about why a predominately liberal state would elect a Republican to the Senate. Those on the right are taking a victory lap and may be seeking advice from Brown, while a handful of Democrats are doing some soul searching. Senator Evan Bayh sees it as a wake-up call and Senator Joe Lieberman urges the Democratic party to move more toward the center. Then there is Governor Howard Dean.

As the news broke over this election, Rachel Maddow interviewed Dean. His analysis included blaming Bush for the Democrat's loss and, a few breaths later, affirming, "People who blame others are losers." In an awkward and spirited exchange between, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Dean over Brown's victory and the future of the Democrats' health care reform bill, Dean came up with some interesting conclusions. "Yesterday, the problem was that people wanted more," stated Dean. Matthews pointed out the differences between the two candidates: Martha Coakley, who is very progressive and in favor of a public option versus Brown, who said that he would "kill the bill." Asked Matthews, "Why didn't they vote for the candidate for the public option?" Dean's response? "They want real change"!

Let me see if I have this straight. In essence, what Dean is saying is that the Independents and Democrats who voted for Brown wanted the public option in the health care bill, so they voted for the candidate who campaigned as "Mr. Forty-One; the vote to filibuster." Were the voters sending smoke signals or is Brown secretly a progressive, masquerading as a conservative?

While Dean continues his delusional interpretation of the Massachusetts Senate election outcome, many have turned to second-guessing the mood of the country, including President Obama. Why are the people "angry" and "frustrated?"

Let's take a look at what transpired during the past year: bank bailouts, the GM takeover, and the passing of the February 2009 $787 billion stimulus package, which was marketed with the assurance of economic recovery and the creation of jobs, yet our economy is still in the dumps and unemployment has risen to 10%. Okay, so Obama inherited an economic mess, but what about tone and direction?

Elitism and Arrogance

The elitist mentality of the White House staff and amongst the Democrats is palpable; they think that their skills, abilities or wisdom render them fit to govern, without full consideration of what the people want, their arrogance has been demonstrated time and time again. All criticism has been met with attempts to dismiss, discredit, and demonize, and an entire news network was rebuked. Democrats and the left-wing media have talked down to the people, labeling us with everything from stupid to angry mobs and Astroturf, from un-American to racists, and our own president has mocked us.

Broken Political Promises

Every political campaign comes with promises of a better, cleaner, and more noble government, with the declaration that they will represent "the will of the people." Obama arrived on the political stage with his speeches about "hope and change," and most likely, good intentions. He was clear and confident that he was going to be the one to usher in bipartisanship and government transparency –– a message that resonated with the majority of American voters.

Candidate Obama promised to veto any bill with earmarks, yet the amount of pork in the bills passed by Congress last year would give the healthiest American athlete an immediate heart attack. The Democrats' widely unpopular and massive health care bill is a key example of how a multitude of promises were broken. Starting with the fact that Republicans were shut out of the process and despite C-SPAN CEO Brian Lamb's letters to leaders in Congress, urging them to open up the last leg of health care reform negotiations to the public––access thus far has been denied and the people left in the dark.

The most angering aspect is in the process: it reeks of corruption. What is transparent is that, instead of taking a bipartisan approach and listening to the American people, President Obama, Senator Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have chosen to deliberate behind closed doors, using bribes such as the $300 million "Louisiana Purchase," the "Cornhusker Kickback" ($45 billion for the first decade), and more. To add insult to injury, last week Obama made a back-room deal with the unions. According to The Washington Post, this deal "would exempt union members from a proposed surtax on expensive insurance plans (so-called Cadillac plans) until 2018, five years after the legislation would take effect." It seems that Obama's resolve to take on special-interest groups and their perverting influence on the entire legislative process only applies to the ones he is not connected to. Nevertheless, Governor Dean may be right from one perspective: the legislative process under this administration may be politics as usual, and Americans want real change –– we need more than health care reform, we need "sausage making reform."

Expansion of Government

President Obama came out fast and furiously, expanding his executive power by appointing a record number of "czars" and filling other key positions of influence in the White House with a coterie of radicals, socialists and socialist sympathizers.

I am not ready to echo Glenn Beck's accusations of conspiracy in this area. However, I will say that since Obama's agenda is a moving target and remains a mystery, it does lead many Americans to pause and wonder. What we do know is that this administration is comfortable with demonizing success, yet they want to use the rich to pay for all of their government programs and have been quoted as saying that "redistribution of wealth," is a good thing.

Out of Control Debt

When President George Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion. That is a difference of $4.97 trillion in eight years. A year ago our national debt was $10.7 trillion and now it is at $12.3 trillion and rising. So what is driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? The answer lies in analyzing the nonpartisan details.

Back in December, Congress raised the debt ceiling by $290 billion and this past week the Democrats opened a debate to push for the ceiling to be raised by $1.9 trillion, so they can borrow and spend more money.

Many Americans are disturbed and frightened by the fact that legislation like ObamaCare, cap-and-trade, and many others coming down the political pike are destined to raise taxes even for the middle class (broken promise), will expand all aspects of government, and jeopardize many of the freedoms we, the people enjoy today. It looks like hope and change is morphing into government control and debt.

Lawyers for Terrorists

With recent cases like the White House party crashers, the Fort Hood shootings, and the Christmas underwear bomber, it seems that we have an administration that has trouble keeping the White House secure and connecting the intelligence dots. What is frustrating to many Americans is their attitude toward terrorists and how they are handled. I am personally against any type of torture, including water boarding, because our respect for humanity is what separates us from the evil we are fighting. However, treating terrorists like common criminals and giving them a lawyer, doesn't make sense. Part of the rationalization floating around for this decision is "Bush did it." If Bush jumped off a building would they follow? Speaking of Bush, that brings me to my final point.

Blame Bush

The blame Bush game, which President Obama and the Democrats, with the support of the left-wing media, have used to escape or deflect culpability, has gone on long enough, tiring even non-Bush supporters. Did they get the memo that Bush is not the president anymore? Even a day after Brown won the Senate seat in Massachusetts and in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, President Obama gave his assessment of the vote and the mood around the county, "People are angry and they're frustrated, not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years."

Why are the people angry and frustrated? Only time will reveal why and what it really means in the political arena, but for now it looks as if some just don’t get it. And as one voice of the people, an average American voting citizen, may I remind those at the White House and on Capital Hill that, "pride goeth before a fall."

Dems Like Howard Dean Just Don’t Get It
Opinion in Politics — by Christine Lakatos — on Jan 24, 2010

For Orphans in Haiti, Cut the Damn Red Tape Already

2010-01-19T06:55:00.000-08:00

The “letter” vs. the “spirit” of the law; the Haitian orphan crisis deserves the latter.

Prior to the devastating 7.3 magnitude earthquake that devastated Haiti last Tuesday, according to the United Nations Children's Fund there were about 380,000 orphans, a number that is expected to grow in the wake of the quake. What is most maddening is many of these orphans were already in the process of being adopted, but the paperwork got “lost in the rubble” — putting this process in limbo and leaving the families involved in adopting Haitian children feeling helpless and distraught.

A few days ago, CNN's Gary Tuchman broke the story about two young American sisters from Pittsburgh, Jamie McMutrie, 30 and her sister Ali McMutrie, 21, who run the BRESMA orphanage in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. With the collapse of this orphanage and food, water, and other supplies running low, these two young girls continued their dedication to care for the children with the hopes of getting them out.

This story has a great ending because this morning a "mission" formulated by the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), with the assistance of Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and others, succeeded in bringing 53 of the 150 BRESMA orphans back to the United States. Officials are saying, "The other children are being cared for by people from the countries where they are being adopted, such as France and Holland."

Yesterday, Jonathan Hunt, who is on the ground in Haiti, and Shepard Smith in the Fox News studios, brought another compelling Haitian orphanage story to the forefront. The "House of the God" orphanage, run by a Texas-based outreach organization, was in dire straits for aid and the Salvation Army and Red Cross responded. According to Hunt and others, the urgent need now is "to get these children out of Port-au-Prince.” Hunt also informed Smith that the Dutch government decided to “fly a plane there today and pick up 100 children to be adopted by Dutch families."

With much frustration, Hunt pointed out the "ridiculousness of the situation" occurring at the "House of the God" orphanage that he was positioned at, stating that the majority (120 of the 135) of the children "had already been legally adopted by American families.” Despite the fact that "For His Glory Outreach" had sent an airplane and it was sitting in the Dominican Republic, waiting for permission to pick up the children, the orphans still sit in Haiti. "The problem is the State Department; they will not act to allow these children to come into the United States now," Hunt said.

Sitting with the children, Hunt began to introduce Smith to the orphans by name and said, "these kids... are the very best of Haiti." "The families who have adopted [these orphans] in the United States are the very best of America and what is keeping the best of these two countries apart is the worst of America: bureaucratic red tape," Hunt stated with what seemed to be pure disgust.

The stories in Haiti move rapidly, making it difficult to track, and as I write this article, Hunt and Smith announced that Texas governor Rick Perry is lobbying heavily to move these orphans out of Haiti as soon as possible. It turns out Hunt was right, The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs chartered a plane to pick up about 100 children on Monday and from the same CNN report, “300 children have pending adoption cases with American families and six children arrived in Florida Sunday night and were met by their adoptive parents with hugs and tears of happiness.”

As many organizations and government officials are making efforts to protect and provide care for the Haitian orphans and are scrambling to move them to a safe and secure place, I can't help but share the same irritation and outrage Hunt displayed in his reporting. It is sad that the fate of these children lie in the hands of politicians. Furthermore, anyone with half a brain (actually heart) knows that there is a difference between the “letter of the law” and the “spirit of the law,” and this particular crisis calls for action. The Haitian government and any other country, including ours, need to get off their butts, cut the damn bureaucratic red tape, and let the "already adopted" children go home to their new families.

Since my mother died when I was three and my father abandoned me, the orphan issue in Haiti has pulled on my heartstrings. Due to the kindness of distant relatives, I was only an orphan for a short period of time and by no stretch of the imagination can I compare my childhood situation with what is going on with the Haitian orphans, yet, I can care. Because I am not in a position to adopt and will have to settle with my adopted pets, I can only hope that those who have it in their heart to adopt consider the Haitian orphans. Lastly, I can pray that when the reporters go home, the orphans in Haiti are not forgotten or forsaken — all the orphans around the world for that matter.

First on BlogCritics in Politics
For Orphans in Haiti, Cut the Damn Red Tape Already
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jan 19, 2010 at 4:59 pm
National BroadSide

Haiti’s Catastrophic Earthquake: "Where’s God"?

2010-01-14T16:30:00.000-08:00

When natural disasters cause so much death, destruction, and devastation; we ask why.

In the wake of the 7.0 magnitude earthquake that hit Haiti on Tuesday, January 12th, and crushed most buildings in Port-au-Prince, including churches, hospitals and schools, and severely damaged the presidential palace, it's like time stood still and words cannot express what was about to come next.

Within 24 hours of this massive earthquake, I watched the human drama unfold. Knowing that immediately after this catastrophe struck thousands lie dead under the rubble, what is still most chilling is that there continue to be reports of people trapped beneath the collapsed structures crying for help. Where is the search and rescue; I keep asking?

Observing some of the live coverage by CNN's Anderson Cooper, Dr. Sanj ay Gupta and other newscasters, who arrived in Haiti yesterday, their stories are chilling and the look on their faces haunting.

What about the children and helpless, the wounded and weary, the thirsty and hungry? Where are the medicine, doctors, water and food? I realize that there are tons of logistical problems in getting the Haitians the aid they desperately need, but where is it? The Red Cross, Salvation Army, and other charitable organizations have been part of the early responders and from what I know so far, rescuers from around the world poured into Haiti today. Many nations, including ours, are sending more resources to help the Haitian people and donations are pouring in. Help is on its way, but will it be soon enough?

Early reports have estimated more than 100,000 have perished in this devastation –– a number that could increase substantially –– and dead bodies lie in the streets. Observing the death, suffering, trauma, anguish, and chaos, I have rarely been able to contain my emotions and have wept bitterly. I struggle from within and keep asking, why? Why does this happen?

From my own personal faith, I have learned that trials and tribulations are used to build Christ-like character and over the years, have had my share of character building. Yet I've never understood the reasons behind calamities such as this one –– it just doesn’t make sense and it shakes the foundation of my faith.

Every time a natural disaster hits that causes so much death, destruction, and devastation, I stand dumbfounded and I always have that daunting question in my heart, why God? Now I ask, "where’s God in the midst of Haiti’s catastrophic earthquake and its aftermath"? And my answer is: "I don’t know." But I can only hope and pray that He arrives soon.

Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jan 14, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Haiti’s Catastrophic Earthquake: "Where’s God"?
Blog Critics Culture Section

Governor Schwarzenegger Slams ObamaCare

2010-01-07T06:23:00.000-08:00

California's governor sees the light and in his final address, speaks up against ObamaCare's “health care to nowhere.”

California Governor Schwarzenegger is one of only a few Republican officials to publicly come out in favor of ObamaCare. In October of 2009 he even submitted a statement of support.

Now, he's back...

Yesterday, Governor Schwarzenegger gave his final State of the State address in Sacramento and along with his famous accent and charm, mixed in with occasional humor, he had much to say about California issues, especially our economy and jobs.

Toward the middle of his address, he talked about the "special burden" we face as a border state. He identified the federal government’s role on immigration policy and border security and noted their lack of fairness in sharing the financial responsibility in dealing with "undocumented immigrants".

Schwarzenegger continued, “We no longer can ignore what is owed to us, or what we are forced to spend on federal mandates," and expressed his concern over the billions of dollars already owed, later adding, "And now Congress is about to pile billions more on to California with the new health care bill."

Schwarzenegger expanded further on the current health care legislation being proposed by the Democrats. "While I enthusiastically support health care reform, it is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling while other states are getting sweetheart deals," said the Governor. "Health care reform, which started as a noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes....you’ve heard of the bridge to nowhere; this is the health care to nowhere”, Schwarzenegger added.

Schwarzenegger advised California's congressional delegation to either vote against the bill, labeling it "a disaster for California" or to get in there and "fight for the same sweetheart deal that Senator Nelson of Nebraska got for the Cornhusker State". "He [Nelson] got the corn; we got the husk".

It's obvious to anyone paying close attention; Republicans do want health care reform. However, they and most Americans still oppose the current health care bills being proposed by President Obama and the Democrats. And Schwarzennegger, a Republican who once supported ObamaCare, has now publicly and firmly spoke out against it!

Back in the 90's, I ran into Arnold and Maria at Gold's Gym – –terrific people. I vividly remember Schwarzenegger giving me some sound bodybuilding advice, which had an impact on my bodybuilding and fitness career. As a citizen of the United States and a California resident, I wonder if the "2010 words" of Schwarzenegger will resonate with those in Congress or anyone else for that matter? Will they see the light as he did, and come to the conclusion that ObamaCare is “health care to nowhere”?

Thanks for your service to California, Arnold!

First on BlogCritics in Politics
Governor Schwarzenegger Slams ObamaCare
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Jan 07, 2010 at 10:46 pm

And on National Broadside

A Mother’s Concern Over Homeland Security

2009-12-30T11:25:00.000-08:00

The aftermath of the Christmas Day, Flight 253 attempted terrorist attack hits home.

Since 9/11 I haven't been that enthused about getting on an airplane, but it's never been a problem because I'm not a frequent traveler. However, I did allow my teenage daughter to fly out of the country to Taiwan and Malaysia for the Christmas holidays. Prior to my daughter's departure, I was aware that I would miss her a lot because she had never been out of my sight for more than five days and as most mothers, I was concerned about her safety. And, yes, I did think about terrorism and even mentioned it to some of my friends. There response, “You watch the news too much”.

The Christmas Day attempted terrorist attack on Flight 253 (Amsterdam to Detroit) awakened my fears because four days after this dreadful event, my daughter was about to board a flight to come home. And what made it most worrisome, she was flying from another country back to the United States––Taipei, Taiwan to Los Angeles. Feelings of fear hit home. Not like the terror experienced by the passengers and crew on Flight 253 on Christmas day, but inner panic that this terror plot might be more of a larger one. Was our government on top of this situation and handling our homeland security properly? Will be my daughter be safe?

I guess I wasn't too crazy because as I was writing this blog I found out that another airline bomber, with a plan similar to that of the "Christmas Bomber," was caught trying to board a commercial airliner in Mogadishu last month.

Suffice it to say, my daughter made it home safely and without incident. In an effort to keep this story from becoming melodramatic, I'll just say that Tuesday, December 29 was a very long day of waiting and worrying, but with the assistance of my brother, my eldest daughter, a few friends, and my dog Shorty, I picked up my daughter from LAX and was relieved and excited!

Shortly after this attempted terrorist attack, the facts surrounding Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab began to unravel. While many are still questioning how Abdulmutallab got on a plane with a bomb and why there weren’t more “red flags” raised, information about this case continues to soar faster than a jet. Like the fact that Abdulmutallab purchased a ticket with cash and did not carry any luggage and back in May he was denied a visa by the British government and was placed on an official watch list to prevent him from re-entering Britain. What we are learning is that Abdulmutallab has links to Al Qaeda, who have claimed responsibility for this plot to blow up the airliner bound for Detroit.

The most interesting part of this story is that the father of Abdulmutallab had recently (about a month ago) contacted the U.S. Embassy and various other security agencies to warn them that his son had "become radicalized." Apparently Abdulmutallab was placed on the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE) list but failed to make it on the “no-fly” list. Recent reports also tell us that the CIA knew of a "Nigerian" airline terror plot, but according to a CIA spokesperson, "We learned of Abdulmutallab in November, when his father came to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria and sought help in finding him. We did not have his name before then."

What Flight 253 deserved in the days following this terror attempt was a quick response from a president to commend them for their heroic acts; followed by a nation that needed a sense of safety and security. But what we got was a president that decided to wait a few days before he addressed our nation, and worse an administration that sent out Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, who appeared on State of the Union this past Sunday and she stated that "the system worked" and a day later she clarified her ridiculous and controversial remark by backtracking and admitting, “Our system did not work in this instance".

When President Obama gave his second press statement in reaction to the Christmas day bomb plot, he labeled it a "systemic failure". Well, they got that right––the system and the people running the system FAILED! It not only failed those 278 passengers and crew on Flight 253, the city of Detroit, and the United States, but it failed all of the of people flying this holiday season, including my daughter.

I thought it was the job of Department of Homeland Security to prevent terrorist attacks, not the responsibility of citizens to thwart them. While there is plenty of blame to go around, a third grader could have put all of these “dots” together, made a nice picture, and colored it in without going out of the lines.

It’s unfortunate that our current administration treats terrorists more like common criminals as opposed to the unrelenting and deadly, terrorizing threat they represent. It's quite fascinating that they have changed the name from a "War on Terror” to "Overseas Contingency Operations". Did they miss the fact that these radical Muslim extremists declared jihad (“holy war”) against the U.S., intensified their warfare on 9/11 when they used four of our airplanes as weapons murdering almost 3000 innocent people, have in 2009 vowed to open "new fronts" against the U.S. and its allies, and evidently aren’t done yet.

I’m not saying that I advocate the aggressive “Cowboy Bush”––shoot first ask questions later approach, but going the other extreme––everyone needs to love me passive, “Obama Style”––is just as dangerous. I'm well aware of the complexity of the terrorism issue and the difficulties involved in combating this type of evil, but homeland security should be a top priority––they need to fix the failures, make sure there are no other loopholes in the system, and anticipate possible killing methods terrorists may try in the future. I can only hope and pray that moving forward our concerns will be lightened and as we (or one of our loved ones) board an airplane we will be safer.

A Mother’s Concern Over Homeland Security
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Dec 31, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Politics, BlogCritics

Just in Case You Missed Church This Christmas 2009

2009-12-25T09:17:00.000-08:00

Candles illuminate what is most important during Christmastime; the birth of Jesus and family and friends.

When I was growing up and our family would go to Church, my mother would test me to see if I had paid attention to the sermon, by asking me what it was about. Raised Catholic and a child who went to Catholic school for my elementary school years, I didn’t appreciate my faith and the people surrounding it, so how could I remember the sermon and it's message.

What is amazing is that I can recall all of the nuns who were my educators at St. Theresa School. In hindsight, the nuns and priests had a profound impact on my life then and to this day. In fact, when I was very young I wanted to be a nun. Well, we all know that didn’t happen. But it was Monsignor Rice and Sister Theresa, not part of my Catholic school but leaders of a church I later attended as a youth, who had the most influence –– they were my heroes growing up.

Presently, I can honestly say that the gift of faith that my mother introduced me to and nurtured (along with all the nuns and priests), was the best gift of all. Over the years I drifted away and turned my back on my faith, and at times was one of those "carnal" Christians with one foot in Christianity and the other in the world. Talk about darkness and inner turmoil –– but that’s another story. The good news is that whenever I returned to my faith, I always found Jesus Christ waiting with open arms and forgiveness in His heart, ready to put me back on the path of "light".

Christmas 2009 is “bitter sweet” for me because my youngest daughter is on a holiday trip, making this the first Christmas that she is not with me. However, my eldest daughter came for Christmas bringing me comfort and joy! It's interesting to note that my youngest, who does believe in Jesus still has many questions in her young mind to contend with in order to put all her faith in God, but my eldest daughter has found her way and is a strong believer; as they say in Christian circles, she’s "on fire for the Lord"!

So, with only one daughter by my side, we attended the Christmas Eve Candlelight Service at Grace Church here in my hometown. Considering it was Christmas Eve and church with candles, we were both excited. After all candles, developed by the Ancient Egyptians, have been used for light and to illuminate man's celebrations for more than 5,000 years. “Candles have played an important role in early religious ceremonies including Hanukkah, the Jewish Festival of Lights, which centers on the lighting of candles and dates back to 165 B.C.”

As we entered the church, we got our candles, had a quick giggle, and found our place in the pews –– a mother, daughter bonding moment if you will. Later a very special friend of mine along with her family joined us. The Christmas Eve service provided a collection of scriptures from the Old and the New Testaments, some foretelling the birth of Jesus, while others confirming that He has arrived. The scripture that caught my attention and stuck with me throughout the service was Isaiah 7:14, "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel"––Immanuel meaning God with us.

In between scriptures were traditional Christmas carols that brought me back to my youth and at the end of the service we all lit our candles and sang, Joy to the World. With hundreds of candles burning and unity and goodwill abounding, what a precious time it was. I could feel the power of God’s love –– realizing, not for the first time but a much deeper revelation, that God actually came down from heaven to be with us –– the light and savior of the world.

This Christmas, candles have taken on a more significant meaning for me: a guiding light illuminating what is most important during Christmastime: the birth of Jesus as well as my family and friends. Also, leaving me a glimmer of a distinct memory I will have forever –– Christmas 2009.

First on BlogCritics in Culture

With all my love to my wonderful daughters Nicole and Angelica! MOM

Barack Obama: “Absolutely, We Need Earmark Reform”

2009-12-13T19:20:00.000-08:00

Business as usual in Washington: So much for "Hope and Change", just control and more debt.

The term earmark comes from the practice of marking the ears of livestock for identification, yet in American politics it has come to mean money that is "set aside for a special project or purpose": AKA pet projects, pork. As I'm sure that animals are not thrilled by this procedure, I am more confident that Congress and their frivolous spending outrages the American people.

According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, an independent watchdog organization states "widespread earmarking is a relatively new phenomenon in American politics, which gained momentum in the 1970's". Pork in a bill in Congress is as common as a hot dog at a football game. Moreover there continues to be a rise in pork barrel spending and there is no getting around it; both Republicans and Democrats are part of this Congressional excess and waste.

During the first presidential debate Senator John McCain and then Senator Barack Obama argued over the earmark issue, and Obama pledged, "Absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely." Hold your applause please; I'm just getting started!

Considering the White House continues to proclaim that "we are in the worst economic crisis since the great depression", why does Congress keep spending money on flippant projects. It's one thing to spend money when we are flying high in prosperity, but when we are drowning in debt, it doesn't make sense.

Any intelligent American household would have enough common sense to cut out the "extra stuff" when they are facing dire financial times; why doesn't Washington? Are they that ignorant, unwilling or are they just self-serving?

We started 2009 spending; when Congress passed the urgent $800 billion Economic Stimulus Package claiming that it would create jobs and save our economy. Almost a year later and as we continue to await the arrival of our jobs, we do know that the White House Recovery.gov website, which costs over 18 million dollars to renovate, reported that thousands of jobs were saved in Congressional Districts that don't exist. Not to mention that stimulus checks were sent out to dead people and inmates. But, that’s another story.

While the stimulus package was in the midst of scrutiny, President Obama said, '"Members of Congress won't be allowed to slip earmarks into the economic recovery package Congress will soon take up. And concluded "we are going to bring a long-overdue sense of responsibility and accountability to Washington." "We are going to stop talking about government reform, and we're actually going to start executing."

The Republicans claimed that there were over 9,000 earmarks with an estimated value at $7.7 billion in the stimulus and the Democratic leadership estimated the dollar amount to be around $3.8 billion. But President Obama bragged, "We passed a recovery plan free of earmarks," and on many fronts, has blasted earmarks. In February Robert Gibbs declared victory on the earmark front maintaining there were "no earmarks" in the stimulus package, yet politifact.com Truth-O-Meter found his statement to be FALSE. I guess that is the nice way of saying "you lie".

Congress continued this pattern and in March of this year passed an Omnibus Spending bill at a price tag of $410 billion, which contained 9,287 pork projects at a cost of nearly $12.8 billion.

Contrary to his campaign promise, President Obama signed that bill too, however, the White House did have an excuse. In an exclusive interview with ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos White House Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag told Stephanopoulos, "This is last year's business. We want to just move on". Orszag also stated that Obama intends to work on earmark reform in the future.

Even Chris Matthews, one of Obama’s biggest fans, criticized Obama for breaking his earmark reform pledge.

Now we end 2009 with yet another spending fiasco. Over the weekend the Senate was at it again and passed a $1.1 trillion spending bill. The 1,000-page-plus package passed with a 57-35 vote and now heads to President Obama for his signature.

According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, there are 5224 earmarks worth $3.998 billion, and that is just the preliminary round. Included in the list of pork barrel spending are "home-state projects sought by individual lawmakers in both parties". While the legislation also contains numerous items not directly related to spending, it also approves a 2 percent pay increase for federal workers.

On the Senate floor, Senator McCain expressed his concern over the earmarks in the spending bill, calling it "shameful", urging his colleagues to vote against it, and "demanded" President Obama to "keep his word" and veto it.

McCain’s two favorite earmarks are the $2.7 million to support surgical operations in outer space at the University of Nebraska and the $655 thousands for Cedar Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, California for equipment and supplies for the Institute for Irritable Bowel Syndrome research. This would be laughable if it were a Saturday Night Live skit, but this is not joke, this is our Congress in action.

Americans are jobless, losing their homes and can barely put food on the table, yet Congress wants to play doctor in outer space and contribute to IBS –– literally. By the way Woodstock Film Festival Youth Initiative gets 30 thousand of our taxpayer dollars. Besides the fact the youth in America are already inundated with Hollywood stuff, isn't the film industry wealthy enough to pay for their own special projects? And, I wonder if this earmark has anything to do with the National Endowment for the Arts.

I’m just waiting for the millions we’re going to spend on condoms for animals; or will it be Viagra? I’m sure Congress wants to put a Kool-aid station on Mars or research the farts of pigs. Yeah, that makes sense. And since this is the season to spend frivolously, maybe Congress plans on buying Christmas presents for Al Qaeda this year.

Despite the 5000 earmarks, President Obama has gone ahead and signed it anyway. Apparently, Obama didn't get that earmark reform memo.

And to add insult to injury, Washington is so out of touch with reality and politicians like Senator Schumer have the nerve to utter that American people don’t care about earmarks. Billions of dollars wasted, are you kidding me? Congress is nuts to think we don’t care –– we do! Furthermore, we are sick and tired of out-of-control spending, votes being bought as well as the fact that special interest groups, lobbyists and big business are making out like bandits, while the needs of the American people are ignored.

With our economy in shambles, unemployment above 10%, and our national debt at $ 1 2 , 1 0 5 , 1 3 8 , 4 6 5 , 5 3 5 . 5 1 and climbing (financial burdens of the massive health care reform and cap and trade legislations yet to be factored in), what is their excuse? I’m sure the White House would like to continue to blame Bush, but even smart Obama supporters know that game is getting old––BLAME GAME OVER.

This may be business a usual in Washington, broken promises and a smorgasbord of pork, but it's an utter disgrace and a slap in the face to the American people. Both sides of the political aisle, Republican and Democrat are guilty; and that means those who get appropriations for their pet projects, vote yes on pork-laden bills, and any president that signs such treacherous bills. So much for "Hope and Change": all we can expect is government control and more debt.

BlogCritics in Politics
Barack Obama: “Absolutely, We Need Earmark Reform”
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Dec 16, 2009 at 7:07 pm

Senator Barbara Boxer Compares Abortion to Viagra

2009-12-08T19:20:00.000-08:00

Drivel and arrogance intact, Boxer is up for re-election here in 2010––time to run Boxer right out of office.

“The men who have brought us this [amendment] don’t single out a procedure that is used by a man, or a drug that is used by a man, that involves his reproductive health care, and say they have to get a special rider...There is nothing in this amendment that says if a man some day wants to buy Viagra, for example, that his pharmaceutical coverage cannot cover it, that he has to buy a rider.”

This is the latest drivel in the health care debate brought to the Senate floor by Barbara Boxer this past Monday in response to the Nelson Amendment, a proposal "to ensure that no federal funds are used to pay for abortion".

After Senator Reid's ridiculous statement comparing health care reform to slavery, this recent absurdity reminds me of the Jim Carrey movie, Dumb and Dumber. What the heck does Viagra have to do with abortion? How is there any comparison between an erection (or lack thereof) and terminating the life of a fetus? Either Barbara Boxer is on drugs, is showing her ignorance, or worse, she's demonstrating her lack of sensitivity for the unborn.

Nebraska’s Senator Ben Nelson noted that the current Senate health care bill does “allow taxpayer dollars, directly and indirectly, to pay for insurance plans that cover abortion”. Nelson led the charge along with nine others Senators, offering an amendment that mirrored the Stupak Amendment language that was passed by the House last month and was to extend the Hyde Amendment, which was passed by Congress in 1976, barring public funds from covering abortion.

Abortion is an extremely contentious topic and even though the goal of the ten Senators was not to take a women’s "right to choose" away, but to make sure taxpayer dollars don't have to foot the bill, it was rejected yesterday by the Senate with a 54-45 vote. While I'm sure Boxer did some high fives, Majority Leader Harry Reid had a message of his own, "The legislation is about access to health care, not abortion". Do Boxer and Reid know that an abortion is an elective medical procedure with the goal of ending a life, not health care aimed at caring for and saving lives? When are these progressive Democrats going to get out of their pathetic ideology and off their "we know what is best America pedestal” for just a few minutes and do what is right? Or at least they can choose proper analogies to make their point.

The silver lining in the dark clouds looming over ObamaCare (if there is one) is that Barbara Boxer and others in Congress are up for re-election in 2010! "Call me Senator”, Boxer may be facing off with either Republicans Carly Fiorina or Chuck Devore in 2010. While a November Rasmussen poll puts Boxer ahead of both Republican candidates, there is plenty of time to expose her inadequacies.

Senator Boxer's voting record reflects a left-wing political agenda, a partisan approach, and a strong partiality toward unions. Boxer is also considered a career politician who apparently hasn’t done much legislating or communicating with her constituents, although she has plenty of time to write books and attend book signings.

This past summer, Boxer preferred to serve herself rather than conduct Town Hall meetings to address the concerns about health care reform shared by many California citizens. Who could forget her starring role as "Obama's attack dog"; condemning concerned citizens. Both proof that she doesn't give a damn about us citizens. And more revealing was Boxer's condescending racial twaddle when she addressed Harry Alford, the President and CEO of the Black Chamber of Commerce.

As I continue to monitor and research the potential Republican candidates who may get in the ring with Boxer, it is clear that whoever gets the job, a knock out would be the best outcome for this political bout. Since this match will affect my state, my hope is that Boxer’s 2005 book; A Time to Run is prophetic in nature. Wake up California, we need a change; it's time to run Boxer right out of office –– three terms (18 years) is long enough!

Senator Barbara Boxer Compares Abortion to Viagra
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Dec 09, 2009 at 4:07 pm
And featured on National Broadside Mag - the place to get your political fix!

White House Party Crashers: Who Let the Salahis In?

2009-12-01T19:38:00.000-08:00

As the mystery unfolds, a Congressional hearing is forthcoming, to which the Salahis do have a formal invitation.
Caution: this is a SATIRE piece...

'Twas the night of the White House dinner, when all through the House
Not a guest was stirring, not even a spouse;
The Secret Service were standing by the White House with care,
In hopes that the President would soon be there;
The media were nestled all snug in their heads...[screech]...BUT WAIT! A couple appeared, with camera in tow and even got a photo with Joe.

You know the story and it's not the one about St. Nicholas. A Virginia couple apparently crashed the White House dinner last Tuesday, November 24, 2009, which included 320 guests — “a potent mix of politics, diplomacy and glamour.” Later identified as Tareq and Michaele Salahi, the couple managed their way past the Secret Service and into the star-studded state dinner, where they mixed and mingled, shook hands with President Obama, warmed up to Vice President Biden twice, had a photo op with Rahm Emanuel and others, posting their exploits on Facebook. Busted?

First, where was Joe Biden’s wife? From the looks of this cozy photo with Joe, if I were Mrs. Biden I would have chased that Michaele woman right out of the dinner and with one of my Callaway golf clubs –– maybe my nine iron. Speaking of golf, you can’t even gain access to a private golf course without a membership or a guest pass. In fact, a while ago and guest approved, I was unable to play golf or have lunch at The Olympic Club in San Francisco because my pants were inappropriate –– they had belt loops. Furthermore, the odds of penetrating certain night clubs without being on a list is grim.

So, how did this happen? This story reminds me of the song “Who Let the Dogs Out?” and would be funny if it didn't reflect a breach in the security of the White House and our President. Maybe they should do what Santa does –– check the list twice. What is bizarre is that we are the most powerful nation in the world and we can’t seem to figure out who let this star-struck, fame-seeking couple into the White House dinner in the first place.

The Salahis recently appeared on the Today Show where they told Matt Lauer that they were “shocked and devastated” to discover they were labeled as “party crashers.” Lauer also pointed out that they had been kicked out of another event on September 26, the Congressional Black Caucus Dinner –– where they were also uninvited — and they denied it. When asked by Lauer, “Who invited you,” the interview progressed or should I say, regressed. The couple had a pity party, portraying themselves as victims, claiming they were invited and that at the end of the investigation, they will be exonerated. At the center of this obscurity is Michele Jones, a special assistant to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and she had this to say on the matter: "I specifically stated that they did not have tickets and in fact that I did not have the authority to authorize attendance, admittance or access to any part of the evening's activities. Even though I informed them of this, they still decided to come."

So, who let the Salahis in? At this point, with all the coverage, confusion, and rumors, it still remains a mystery. While the Secret Service have launched an investigation into the security breach, the preliminary probe has already thrown them under the bus, yet this couple is free to crash the next party and maybe a party near you. In the meantime, a Congressional hearing is forthcoming, to which the Sahalis do have a formal invitation.

Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Dec 02, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Satire in politics on BlogCritics

2009 CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute

2009-11-26T08:39:00.000-08:00

"Tonight we honor the best humanity has to offer" - something we can all be thankful for.

If you haven’t heard of CNN Heroes, you are missing out - it's a pageant with substance, honoring those worthy of recognition. CNN Heroes started in 2007 and its focus is ordinary people from around the world, who with a compassionate heart go out of their way and “make an extraordinary difference in their communities and beyond.” Nominated by people from around the world and highlighted on CNN, the votes are tallied via CNN.com, then they make their way to a blue-ribbon panel for a final ten and a winner, who are honored at a gala event: "CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute."

The third annual CNN Heroes were chosen by a panel that included distinguished leaders and humanitarians like Colin Powell, Whoopi Goldberg, Ted Turner, and Elton John. With 9,000 nominations from over 100 countries, CNN Heroes captured record attention and participation this year and after seven weeks of online voting and more than two and half million votes counted, the list was shortened to that special top ten, each to receive cash prizes to carry on their tedious and selfless yet most needed work.

"CNN Heroes: An All-Star Tribute", hosted by Anderson Cooper, was taped before an audience of 3,000 at the Kodak Theatre and premiered Thanksgiving evening, November 26, 2009. Anderson Cooper, cute and calm as usual, opened the show: "Tonight we honor the best humanity has to offer." Not only was I exposed to stories of human suffering and tragedy around the world, I found out that we have courageous people who are willing to take a chance, one problem and person at a time, making our world a better place. I discovered that while some were motivated by their own personal tragedy or turmoil, others just saw a need. Whatever the case, each of the honorees was emotional and grateful, and all had a message of hope and healing.

For the past few weeks I had the privilege of viewing some of the CNN Heroes and their incredible stories and even though I knew that Efren Peñaflorida had been named the 2009 CNN Hero of the Year, I was moved when Anderson Cooper opened that envelope. It was an emotional moment when Peñaflorida was announced and his walk to the stage to accept his award was enhanced by the music of Mariah Carey and her heartwarming song, Hero. As the cheers silenced, a humble Peñaflorida had this to say: "Our planet is filled with heroes, young and old, rich and poor, man, woman, of different colors, shapes and sizes. We are one great tapestry...Each person has a hidden hero within, you just have to look inside you and search it in your heart, and be the hero to the next one in need".

Celebrities were featured in this tribute and with charm and talent intact bared a sense of pride and pleasure just for their involvement in this celebration, albeit no less affected by the stories they unveiled to the audience. Presenters included Nicole Kidman, Kate Hudson, Greg Kinnear, Randy Jackson, Neil Patrick Harris, Pierce Brosnan, Dwayne Johnson, Eva Mendes, George Lopez, and Julia Louis-Dreyfus. There were also performances by Carrie Underwood, R&B Crooner Maxwell, and British pop-star Leona Lewis.

The 2009 Top 10 CNN Heroes are quite extraordinary, tending to a wide range of needs for children, from helping the disabled and getting them off the streets, to providing them with food, shelter and education, and providing a safe haven for young victims of sexual abuse.

Wine to Water provides clean water to communities worldwide, while a breast cancer survivor in Florida has taken it upon herself to bring early detection to the doorsteps of uninsured women. A veteran in Florida searches for homeless veterans and those who are struggling with addiction, so he can take them in and change their lives. A bus driver, after a long day's work, goes out and distributes meals to the hungry in Queens, seven days a week, 365 days a year.

I'm sure it was quite difficult to choose a winner from these top ten, because they are all winners - heroes. I must admit that I was too late to vote but if I had, I would have chosen Roy Foster. The inner joy expressed on Foster's face as he takes in a homeless veteran brought tears to my eyes and hope in my heart. But they all deserve our vote of gratitude as they exemplify how compassion should be revealed, not just in thoughts and words, but in actions. This is the best of humanity: something we can all be thankful for this Thanksgiving and every day.

"Then a hero comes along, with the strength to carry on, and you cast your fears aside, and you know you will survive." - Mariah Carey
BlogCritics Review in Culture — by Christine Lakatos — on Nov 27, 2009

Dems Health Care for America: Who is Going to Pay?

2009-11-24T08:17:00.000-08:00

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness could foot the bill...and a lot of cash.

As the health care reform debates settle for a holiday break, only to resume again shortly after, I am left to ponder the question: what are the Democrats really after? Do they care about the millions of Americans without health insurance or is this a scam to take over our entire health care industry? Is this about saving lives or controlling lives?

The government already has programs to assist the elderly, poor, and our vets and in many cases our children, however, their effectiveness and financial stability is of much concern and debate. The focus and distress should be over those who do not have access to health insurance. That number is floating around is 46 million, but if you analyze that figure you will find out that many millions of the uninsured are actually eligible for existing government programs like Medicaid and SCHIP. You will also find that some of the uninsured can afford it, but choose not purchase it. Many would rather buy material objects rather than health insurance or anything to do with their own health and wellness for that matter. As the government promotes the 46 million figure in order to move their agenda, the health insurance industry sees it closer to 8.2 million. For the sake of argument and propaganda emerging from both sides –– government and the health insurance companies – –lets say the real number lies somewhere in the middle, and that nobody is denying that we should help the uninsured and fix our health care system. Despite the price tag, most would like to see health care reform done in an efficient manner and without trampling on American liberties and putting our "unalienable rights” at risk.

"We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." –– Thomas Jefferson, July 4, 1776

Life:
Nancy Pelosi used restrictions on abortion coverage to pass the Democrats' health care reform bill through the House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid thus far has not. John Boehner cites many disturbing facts about abortion in the Senate bill: “Senator Reid’s plan would levy a new “abortion premium” fee on Americans in the government-run plan: the government will determine when an abortion is allowed under the government-run health plan; and Reid’s plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions.”

Last I checked, other than when a woman’s life or health is at risk, abortion is an elective procedure and is not part of health care –– care that saves lives not terminates them. If the Democrats are willing to sacrifice the unborn in order to provide health insurance to others, this should be a non-starter for anyone that cares about the sanctity of life. And considering us pro-lifers see abortion as “the shedding of innocent blood” and those on the pro-choice side already have the right to choose to terminate, we should have the right to choose NOT to pay.

Liberty:
Due to the Democrats' use of closed-door meetings and unwillingness to compromise on any issue, one can only conclude that their health care reform proposals have more to do with government control and their coddling of and catering to the Left and their ideology of "social justice" and the redistribution of wealth. While this “Robin Hood” mentality is quite amusing, it is a serious matter that if realized will cripple our economy as well as our society, leaving many Americans less prosperous and others unmotivated.

Nothing is free, especially when it is proposed or delivered by the government. The Senate Democrats’ deception on the cost of this massive 2,074-page legislation is troubling, claiming to cost $849 billion over a decade. Did the Democrats flunk math or is this a gimmick? Reid and his cohorts will begin collecting taxes "for 10 years (2010-2019); however, actual health care expenditures are scheduled just for the final 6 years of that period"; this means that the Senate’s bill actual price tag is closer to $1.6 trillion, providing all proposed cuts come to fruition.

So, who is going to pay for it? As noted by the Wall Street Journal, “both the House and Senate bills make hundreds of billions of dollars in proposed cuts in spending on Medicare. But the two chambers differ on how to raise revenue. The House legislation relies largely on an income surtax on the wealthy. The Senate bill would raise money across a range of health care sources”. And to be exact, there are 17 proposed taxes in the Senate Bill.

Consequently the taxpayers will pay and to be more precise…the rich! This reminds of the movie Other People’s Money; the Democrats want to take care of all of our woes and use money from the rich. It is not enough that "five percent of Americans pay over half the income taxes in this country and forty percent of Americans pay no income taxes at all" –– and now they want even more.

It is honorable and righteous to help the poor and sick in our country and that of other countries as we do, however, it is entirely wrong to build an entitlement mentality. The rich are demonized and penalized; yet, they do more than there share of paying for government-run programs as well as their contributions to charity. Now the Democrats want the rich to pay for health care reform and be subjected to one of the biggest redistributions of wealth plans in recent history, with the potential of a government takeover of the entire health care system, which will affect everyone’s liberty––the rich and the poor alike.

Pursuit of Happiness:
The “pursuit of happiness” is a somewhat ambiguous part of the phrase by Thomas Jefferson and can be interpreted in many ways. Unfortunately, we are a culture of instant gratification, where we want and have everything within minutes, even if it is not good for us. Health and wealth are two key examples: instead of a little discipline in our life, we want a pill to fix all of our ailments and even to solve our self-inflicted health predicaments. Take a look at the success of the lottery system; people are willing to spend their last dollar on luck. And to add insult to injury, we seek out superficial happiness, those things that offer short-term solutions to a much more profound and lasting inner need. No longer do we rely on work ethics of commitment, diligence and integrity; we are moving away from accountability and self-sufficiency and toward dependence on government for everything.

Do these government entitlement programs propel our pursuit of happiness? What we fail to realize is that government interference many times leads to less liberty –– we lose more of our freedoms even if we don’t pay the tab. Moreover, the government is not responsible for our happiness––their job is to get out of the way “in our pursuit”. I can’t speak for the rich because I am not one of them –– I'm actually one of the millions that would benefit from more government entitlements and handouts. What I can say is that relying on our government for health, happiness, our needs and desires is not only debilitating, but in the end, will stifle our true pursuit of happiness; that which on a deeper level signifies inner peace, which is captured more so when we are independent — individually and as a nation.

First on Blogcritics: Politics Debating Health Care
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Nov 24, 2009 at 3:07 pm

Sarah Palin Book Tour Underway: Drama Ignites

2009-11-15T08:57:00.000-08:00

Love her or hate her, Palin is a “Rock Star” in the political arena and isn’t going away any time soon.
Opinion in Politics — by Christine Lakatos — on Nov 15, 2009

With the much anticipated release of Sarah Palin’s book, Going Rogue: An American Life, it is already an Amazon best-selling pre-order that many are calling a “phenomenon.” Published by Harper Collins, Going Rogue is set to be released November 17 and apparently with quite the marketing strategy — as if Palin has difficulty drawing attention.

While Palin enjoys widespread popularity and adoration, the criticism and slams are already pouring in, starting with the Associated Press and their reports on her book. The Huffington Post fired an attack entitled "The First Ten Lies from Going Rogue."

Due to the fact that Palin writes about her experience during the 2008 campaign and apparently criticizes some staffers from the McCain campaign camp, many are crying foul, drumming up all kinds of drama.

Last week, Rachel Maddow, in the condescending way reserved for those she doesn't like, featured a Palin book segment, which included Ana Mari Cox, from Air America Radio, Cox claiming she has the “inside scoop” into the McCain camp and a direct line to the McCain staffers.

As both Maddow and Cox whacked around some petty complaints and opinions about Palin and her book, Maddow surmised a gloomy prediction of Palin's reputation. I wonder why don't these "targeted staffers" come out and speak for themselves? Even though I have yet to read Going Rogue, I'm confident it has more to offer than Palin's attitudes about her vice presidential candidacy; nevertheless, many prefer to ignite drama rather than substance.

As the Associated Press stands by their story, Palin fired back on her Facebook page, “Amazingly, but not surprisingly, the AP somehow nabbed a copy of the book before it was released. They're now erroneously reporting on the book's contents and are repeating many of the same things they spewed during the campaign and afterwards. We've heard 11 writers are engaged in this opposition research, er, 'fact checking' research! Imagine that…”

I’m sure there is more criticism looming, but I’ve been debriefed and am certain that when I watch Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher or David Letterman, I will get an earful of Palin bashing.

It wasn’t enough for liberal pundits, politicians, and comedians to take pot shots at Palin and her family, her life, and anything else they found useful in their arsenal of contempt during the 2008 campaign. The left wing media continues its obsession with Palin and their attempt to discredit and demean her at every turn — the criticism is unrelenting and senseless. I don’t quite get it.

Love her or hate her, Palin is a rock star in the political arena and the pundits, politicians, bloggers, and all the rest might as well get used to it. Palin is here to stay and she is now going on tour!

The official publicity for Going Rogue started with a taped sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey, which is set to air on November 16 and clips have already emerged along with an Oprah promotion and a statement that directly followed the interview. Palin also noted her experience with Oprah and announced it on her Facebook page: “Oprah was very hospitable and gracious, and her audience was full of warm, energized and (no doubt) curious viewers.”

I am no fan of Palin or Oprah for that matter, but then again my “fan list” is quite short and reserved for people like Mother Teresa and Martin Luther King Jr. That said, I do admire and respect both of these women and may watch my first Oprah Winfrey Show on Monday with the hope that it goes better than the Katie Couric debacle.

Labeled as a "wide-ranging interview" including insights into Palin's public and personal life as well as her presidential aspirations, the Barbara Walters Sarah Palin special will be a five-part series and is scheduled to begin airing on Good Morning America starting November 17. Palin will also be a guest on Sean Hannity's show November 18 and she may later have interviews with Rush Limbaugh, and other FOX News Channel personalities like Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, and Greta Van Susteren.

Palin is set for the first part of her book signing tour, for which she will travel across the county to strategically selected locations, starting on November 18 in Grand Rapids, Michigan and ending November 24 in Orlando, Florida.

Many are pondering whether Going Rogue and the Palin publicity tour is the beginning of a 2012 political campaign. Since Palin is full of surprises, we will just have to wait and see. What we do know is that drama sells books and in this case has the potential of catapulting Going Rogue and Sarah Palin beyond a phenomenon.

First on Blogcritics: Politics
Blogcritics.org--News, Reviews and So Much More...

Check out all Palin Book action on Twitter: Sarah Palin USA

Senator Joe Lieberman: “Public Option is Unnecessary”

2009-11-08T17:38:00.000-08:00

“Joe the Senator” believes that it is wrong for our government to take over the health insurance industry. So do many Americans.
Author: Christine Lakatos — Published: Nov 09, 2009 at 3:39 pm

The news, pundits, politicians, and bloggers have been on fire over Saturday night’s historical vote––220 to 215 on H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, passed with one Republican in favor and 39 Democrats opposed.

Joe Lieberman appeared on Fox News Sunday, spending most of his time discussing the Fort Hood mass murder. With just less than a minute left, Chris Wallace dared to ask about the 'F factor'; “Do you still intend, if there is a public option and if there’s this tax on so-called Cadillac health plans, will you support a Republican filibuster on final passage in the Senate?" Lieberman noted that there are good things in the Democratic plan which just passed the House, noting that we “ought to do health care reform this year to deal with the two great problems that President Obama and others have talked about:” the unsustainable continuing increases in the cost of health care and the millions of Americans who don’t have health insurance. However, he did discuss his fear that “[his] colleagues in the House added a lot on to that, that subtract from the genuine purposes of health care reform”. One thing Lieberman referred to was the public option plan proposed by Pelosi and the House Democrats and he firmly stressed, “The public option plan is unnecessary". Lieberman is convinced that the people who put forward this plan are those who really want the government to take over all of health insurance, concluding that this would be “wrong.”

When Chris Wallace posed the question more directly, “At this point you are a NO vote in the Senate?” Lieberman responded, “If the public option plan is in there, as a matter conscience I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote,” relaying his concern over our country’s mounting 12 trillion dollar debt, "I believe the debt can break America..."

As Nancy Pelosi basked in her glory Saturday evening, “Oh what a night”, and other Democrats put her on a pedestal, proclaiming her to be one of the greatest House Speakers in the history of the U.S., I had to hold my breath. I’ll give Pelosi a lot of credit for moving health care reform this far, however, her method of using abortion to keep the House Democrats' bill alive is disturbing. It doesn’t take a detective to come to the conclusion that the Stupak Amendment was a ploy to get the pro-life Democrats on board because without them the bill would have died. And worse, at the end of the day it is doubtful this amendment will remain intact in the final bill.

What is laughable is Pelosi’s claim that she has “listened to the American people” and is representing the will of the people; all under the guise of helping us American citizens, “A great victory for the American people”, she said. Where was Pelosi this past summer, when thousands of protesters gathered and town hall meetings where held across the country demonstrating their disapproval for ObamaCare? Did she miss the "Kill the Bill"rally where approximately ten thousand people gathered on Capitol Hill, November 5th, just two days before the vote? Didn't she see the paper trail left outside her office by the protesters?

Pelosi needs to get her facts straight. The next time she proclaims that she stands for the American people; it would be more accurate if she were to state that she is representing 42% percent of the American people. Last I checked, 54% is a majority. While most Americans, if not all, want health care reform and are troubled by the millions of uninsured, fewer than half want the Democrats’ plan. Many are getting the sense that Pelosi is more concerned about her own agenda: the progressive movement, social justice, government control, and the special interest groups she's harvested along the way, than she is about the American people.

Just as we had “Joe the Plumber” who realized that the redistribution of wealth is amiss, we now have “Joe the Senator,” who believes that it is wrong for our government to take over the health insurance industry, and worse, the entire health care system. Although our plumber was exposed as not possessing an actual plumbing license, Lieberman, on the other hand, is a Senator packed full of credentials, with the power to be part of obstructing ObamaCare (or is it PelosiCare) if it still contains the public option when it hits the Senate. Let's hope he stands his ground when the time comes and Joe says NO to the public option and others rise to rally against government takeover of our health and its ramifications––literally and economically!

First on Blogcritics Politics Debating Health Care...