Pope Francis: Too Humble?

By John W. Lillpop

From the “You can’t please everyone” archives, this dilly: Pope Francis incurs wrath for exaggerated humility!

Good heavens, with all of the problems that have confounded the Catholic Church recently, who would have imagined that the new Pope would ignite a firestorm of protest for being too humble?

Is that even possible, given the model of selfless sacrifice and love established by Jesus Christ more than 2000 years ago?

Still, as reported at the reference, Pope Francis is being pummeled in some circles for taking humility too seriously:

Over the past two weeks, with one act of humility after another, Pope Francis has proven he’s willing to break with tradition.

Just after being named the new pontiff, he asked the faithful to pray for him, rather than the other way around. He’s refused to stand on the customary platform above other archbishops and dressed himself in simpler vestments than his predecessors. He’s made a practice of shunning the rich trappings of the position, from paying his own hotel bill to opting out of the palatial apartment popes have lived in for a century in favor of simpler digs.

Many of these acts send a signal about who Jorge Mario Bergoglio is and what reforms he thinks the Catholic Church’s leadership needs to make. He’s making a point of continuing the humble lifestyle he lived in Argentina (where he was known to take the subway and fly coach) and showing how the Church’s bureaucracy has become too wrapped in clerical privilege.

But an act of Pope Francis’s on Thursday perhaps says the most about his humility. Taking part in a tradition of Christianity’s holy week that reenacts the humble gesture Jesus made toward his 12 disciples before the Last Supper, Francis washed the feet of 12 people. What was unusual, however, was that he did not wash the feet of priests or even lay men, as have his predecessors, and he did not do it within the hallowed walls of a Roman basilica. Rather, he washed the feet of 12 juvenile prisoners at the Casal del Marmo Penitentiary Institute for Minors. Two of the young people were women and one was a Muslim, marking the first time a pope had included either group in the ceremony.

The move to kiss the feet of women has some religious experts expecting controversy, saying the pope’s action could “set a questionable example.” Meanwhile, those who hope it’s a sign that he will consider ordaining women as priests may be disappointed. The Associated Press reports that in his 2011 book, he voiced support for the theological underpinnings of excluding women from the priesthood.

Still, the pope’s latest convention-busting move at the very least shows an interest in greater inclusivity. It reveals Francis to be a leader who is not merely humble, but courageously willing to reach beyond the Church in new ways. Thursday’s breach of established ritual may have been his most significant break from tradition so far—but probably won’t be his last.”

Of course, not all Catholics are enamored with humility.

For example as earlier reported this week, Vice President Joe Biden spent nearly one million dollars on hotel lodging over two nights in January, proving that humility is not necessarily a Catholic thang!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/pope-francis-and-a-holy-humble-break-from-tradition/2013/03/28/a9a5f2b4-981e-11e2-b68f-dc5c4b47e519_story.html

Why Does Obama Pander to Illegal Aliens While Unemployment Among Black Citizens Soars?

By John W. Lillpop


Although he does not say so directly, BET founder Bob Johnson’s words indicate that he is not falling for the Obama propaganda which holds that Americans are ‘better of now than four years ago,’ at least as concerns African- Americans.

As reported at the reference:

Black Entertainment Television (BET) founder Bob Johnson said Tuesday that the nation would “never tolerate white unemployment at 14 or 15 percent” and yet unemployment for the black community has been double that of white Americans for over 50 years.

“This country would never tolerate white unemployment at 14 and 15 percent. No one would ever stay in office at 14 or 15 percent unemployment in this nation, but we’ve had that double unemployment for over 50 years,” Johnson said while speaking at the National Press Club about the gap between whites and blacks in America.

“The national average is 7.7 percent, and African-American unemployment is 13.8 percent. To be honest, it’s probably greater than that when you count the number of African-Americans who have simply given up on finding employment,” said Johnson, who is also founder and chairman of The RLJ Companies.”

Of course Johnson has a valid point and his concerns merit attention from the Obama Administration.

However, while he is at it, Johnson should seriously question Obama administration policies with respect to non-citizens, specifically the Obama obsession with regard to illegal aliens, even more particularly, with respect to pandering of Hispanics.

Indeed, Johnson should be outraged that, while the unemployment rate for black citizens is so high, the Obama administration continues to circumvent the law so as to avoid deportation of illegals, going so far as to issuing work permits for non-citizen invaders.

Come on, Bob Johnson!

What about taking Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and the other liberal weasels to task for spending so much time and money pandering to illegals when unemployment among black citizens is so great?

Why is the US government so damn anxious to grant legal status to 11 million (or more) invaders when citizens are struggling so mightily to survive?

Why is it not a priority of the government to locate and deport illegal aliens whom hold jobs that should be filled by citizens, especially black citizens?

Rather than grousing about white advantage so heatedly, Johnson and his sort should focus on Barack Obama’s corrupt efforts to grow the Democrat Party through pandering and groveling to invading criminals!



http://cnsnews.com/news/article/bet-founder-country-would-never-tolerate-white-unemployment-14-or-15-percent

Inconvenient Truth: Global Warming Is on 20-Year Hiatus!

By John W. Lillpop



Environmental worry warts like Al Gore have garnered fame and fortune by issuing cataclysmic warnings of the dire consequences that will ensue unless the world immediately abandons fossil fuels as a source of energy, and adopts green strategies for living without heat, air conditioning, the automobile, and other modern-day, non-essentials that will surely lead to a global meltdown of Biblical proportions.

Now Al Gore faces a new and most vexing worry: The fact that his rhetoric is mostly hot air foolishness!

As reported at the reference:


In a lengthy article this week, The Economist magazine said if climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, then climate sensitivity - the way climate reacts to changes in carbon-dioxide levels - would be on negative watch but not yet downgraded.

Another paper published by leading climate scientist James Hansen, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the lower than expected temperature rise between 2000 and the present could be explained by increased emissions from burning coal.

For Hansen the pause is a fact, but it's good news that probably won't last.

International Panel on Climate Change chairman Rajendra Pachauri recently told The Weekend Australian the hiatus would have to last 30 to 40 years "at least" to break the long-term warming trend.

But the fact that global surface temperatures have not followed the expected global warming pattern is now widely accepted.

Research by Ed Hawkins of University of Reading shows surface temperatures since 2005 are already at the low end of the range projections derived from 20 climate models and if they remain flat, they will fall outside the models' range within a few years.

"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

"If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change," he says.

Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.

The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now, The Economist article says.”

Or to put it in terms any lay person can comprehend, Al Gore’s “inconvenient truth” is, in fact, a convenient lie meant to line his pockets with billions of green backs.

Some friendly advice for Big Al: Get off the climate change gravy train, Al, and concentrate instead on boosting Al Jazeera and other terrorist interests to earn your billions!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980

Will SCOTUS Rule That “Government of, by, and for the People” Is Unconstitutional?

By John W. Lillpop

In 2008, 13.7 million California voters did their civic duty by voting on Proposition 08, the state initiative which sought to define marriage as being valid only when it involved one man and one woman

The election was won by Prop 08 advocates who garnered 51.1 % of the popular vote, to 49.9 % recorded by those opposed.

The ballot measure was bitterly contested, and hugely expensive. A total of $83 million was spent by both sides.

Despite the millions of votes cast and fortunes spent on the proposition, both for and against,  the issue of gay marriage is still in bitter contention in California, and throughout America.

Just this week, the gay marriage row reached the rarefied air of the US Supreme Court where nine Associate Justices, dutifully wrapped in black robes and reflecting appropriately somber countenances for the occasion, gathered to consider whether 13.7 million voters in California had sufficient intelligence, wisdom, and morality to decide the issue for marriages to be sanctioned in California.

Although no one is sure how the SCOTUS will ultimately rule,  the fact that the issue has even risen to the level of the Supreme Court is astounding!

Whatever happened to the democratic principle of “Government Of, By and for the People”?

What better definition of tyranny could there be than nine   elitist intellectuals ruling to invalidate the results of a free and open election conducted in a democratic setting?

What the hell makes the opinion of Ruth Beta Ginsberg, John Scalia, or any of the other Supremes so much superior to the views of the ordinary citizens of California?

Perhaps the time has come to change our election laws?

Instead of asking common men and women to decide issues of great importance, why not submit the thorniest matters directly  to the SCOTUS brothers and sisters and go around We the People, to begin with?

Especially, since We the People are utterly powerless to oppose the tyranny of the SCOTUS?





 

Why Not Tax the Lean to Cover the Needs of the Obese?

By John W. Lillpop

Progressive tax policies, besides being immoral and discriminatory, are illogical, and mostly involve punishing the well-to-do for doing so damn well.

Indeed, soaking the rich is based on the faulty premise that,  since the successful have more, it is the responsibility of the government(s) to level the playing field by seizing wealth from the well-off and giving said booty to the “less fortunate.”

Less fortunate?  Or less motivated and/or talented?

Having made the immoral leap of faith which allows, even requires, government to treat individuals differently based on class, it is but a tiny step to the day-light robbery that is infecting the island of Cypress, and those unfortunate enough to have substantial assets on deposit in Cypriot banks.

Talk about “less fortunate”! That would be the sorry bloke or blokess who, by government fiat, is suddenly 40 percent less “flush” in order to pay the bills for the reckless and moronic under classes, aided and abetted by reckless and moronic government bureaucrats!

Of course it makes absolutely no sense!  Why should a person of means be punished for being successful?  Why should the well- off be obligated to fund the excesses and imbecilic spending of the great unwashed masses?

An example might be as follows:

Because of the rapidly expanding mid-sections and posteriors of the American public, First Lady Michele Obama, in cahoots with Homeland Security dictator Janet Napolitano and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, have decided that the health care costs for treating (there is NO preventing!) obesity is unfairly on the backs, not to mention rears and waists, of the---obese!

Yes, the obese eat the wrong types and quantities of food and fail to exercise, which gives life to the fat monster!

Still, according to the finest liberal minds, the obese are “victims” and, as such, deserve government intervention and fulfillment of the Constitutional guarantee to the pursuit of happiness, regardless of one’s race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation or Body Mass Index (BMI).

Thus, Michele Obama, Janet Napolitano, and Michael Bloomberg conspire to hatch a progressive tax proposal that will tax the lean in order to meet the costs and burdens of the obese on the American taxpayer!

What could be fairer?

Make a lot of money and stay in top physical shape, and  the federal government and the State of New York will come after you with a vengeance-- in the name of equality and fundamental fairness, and the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights.

A lean tax is just what America needs to cut the deficit and provide for the less fortunate  and morbidly obese.

It is also sadly the new “way that it is” in Barack Obama’s America!

Cypriot Bank Thievery Rooted in Anti-Rich Hatred and Envy

By John W. Lillpop


Those who believe that blatant thievery of the sort which Cypriot depositors are about to suffer cannot happen in Barack Obama’s America are overlooking a vital truth about leftists and their pursuit of agenda items.

Specifically, the confiscation of wealth in Cypress is based on the same disregard (disdain) for individual property rights and blind hatred for the successful that drives Obama and Democrats to use the “rich” as a convenient punching bag to counter the mindless spending and fiduciary recklessness that have left America in a $16.3 trillion deficit hole, with no relief in sight.

As Obama demonstrated last November, when practiced with sinister skill and cunning, class warfare can win elections. Indeed, Obama’s main election strategy was to attack people of means and suggest that all of America’s economic woes could be resolved if only the rich were forced to pay their “fair share.”

The fact that upper-income brackets already pay the overwhelming majority of taxes was conveniently ignored by Obamamites, intent as they were on securing the more massive votes of the great unwashed masses.

“There are one hell of a lot more common people than there are people of means,” so goes the logic.

Unfortunately, that logic also causes Marxists to ignore the fact that “the rich” have the Constitutional right to be treated as equal and without the wicked bias and discrimination so pervasive in the White House and US Senate.

Can’t happen here?

Just remember the brutal force used by Obama, Pelosi and Reid to force Obamacare down the throats of people who did not want Marxist medicine.

Hatred is a potent force in life and politics—it could catapult the Marxists into the sort of mercenary evil that is haunting Cypriots!

Harry Reid’s Despicable Hypocrisy on American Soverignty and the Rule of Law

By John W. Lillpop




Democrat Harry Reid has not always been an ardent opponent of rule of law and advocate on behalf of illegal aliens.

In fact, 20 years ago, Senator Reid considered illegal aliens to be “free loaders and scam artists” and he proposed tough legislation to deal with the interlopers.

On August 5, 1993, Harry Reid’s office released the following statements concerning illegal immigration:

“In response to increased terrorism and abuse of social programs by aliens, (I) today introduced the first and only comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress. Currently, an alien living illegally in the United States often pays no taxes but receives unemployment, welfare, free medical care, and other federal benefits. Recent terrorist acts, including the World Trade Center bombing, have underscored the need to keep violent criminals out of the country.” 

The senator’s bill, titled the “Immigration Stabilization Act,” overhauls the nation's immigration laws, and calls for a massive scale-down of immigrants allowed into the country. The bill also changes asylum laws to prevent phony asylum seekers.

The senator said the U.S. open door policy is being abused at the expense of honest, working citizens.

The senator continued:

"We are a country founded upon fairness and justice. An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum. But this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America's inherent generosity and legal system.”


"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care, and other benefits often without paying any taxes.”

“Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally.”


Specific provisions proposed by the senator in the Immigration Stabilization Act include:

* Reduces annual legal immigration levels. Relatives other than spouse or minor children admitted only if already on immigration waiting lists and their admission does not raise annual immigration levels above approved level.

* Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony "asylum" claims.

* Expands list of felonies considered "aggravated" felonies requiring exclusion and deportation of criminal aliens. Allows courts to order deportation at time of sentencing.

* Increases penalties for failing to depart or re-entering the United States after a final order of deportation order. Increases maximum penalties for visa fraud from five years to 10 years.

* Curtails alien smuggling by authorizing interdiction and repatriation of aliens seeking to enter the United States unlawfully by sea. Increases penalties for alien smuggling.

* Adds "alien smuggling" to the list of crimes subject to sanctions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

* Expands the categories of property that are forfeited when used to facilitate the smuggling or harboring of illegal aliens.

* Clarifies that a person born in the United States to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen. This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the United States illegally, often at risk to mother and child, for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.

* Mandates that aliens who cannot demonstrably support themselves without public or private assistance are excludable. This will prevent admission of aliens likely to be dependent on public financial support. This requirement extends to the sponsor of any family sponsored immigrant.

* Increases border security and patrol officer positions."



The astounding truth is that Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act in the United States Senate in 1993. The statements quoted above are from a press release issued by Reid’s office on August 5, 1993.

How is it that Harry Reid was exactly right 20 years ago, but is so completely wrong now? Why does Reid oppose programs he once sponsored now that the problem is seven times greater after 9/11?

In the spring of 2006, while the U.S. Senate was debating legislation to make English the official U.S. language, Reid even saw fit to drag out the R word to slander those who supported the English bill.

And, of course, Reid has voted for Mexico and against America every time the U.S. Senate has considered amnesty.

Amnesty for freeloaders and scam artists, Senator Reid?

Why?


Source: http://levin.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjJmNzE3MTg5MDJhYzM4OTM5OGMwOGM5ZTNhYzJlYmE

Amnesty for Free Loaders and Scam Artists? Shame on Democrats and RINOs!

By John W. Lillpop





Most liberals regard illegal aliens as “Undocumented Democrats” and a veritable gold mine of opportunity for holding on to political power by coddling to those here unlawfully. 

For that reason, most Democrat politicians have abandoned patriotic concern about homeland security, the rule of law, stability of the American economy and social order, and preservation of American language and culture. 

In fact, one can search high and low for a liberal with a patriotic, pro-America stance on illegal immigration, and that search will usually be futile.

But there is a notable exception: A U.S. Senator who has shown remarkable wisdom, foresight, and clarity, especially for a Democrat. 

His office released the following statements (in bold) concerning illegal immigration:

“In response to increased terrorism and abuse of social programs by aliens, (I) today introduced the first and only comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress. Currently, an alien living illegally in the United States often pays no taxes but receives unemployment, welfare, free medical care, and other federal benefits. Recent terrorist acts, including the World Trade Center bombing, have underscored the need to keep violent criminals out of the country.” 

The senator’s bill, titled the “Immigration Stabilization Act,” overhauls the nation's immigration laws, and calls for a massive scale-down of immigrants allowed into the country. The bill also changes asylum laws to prevent phony asylum seekers. 

The senator said the U.S. open door policy is being abused at the expense of honest, working citizens.

The senator continued: 

"We are a country founded upon fairness and justice. An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum. But this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America's inherent generosity and legal system.”

"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care, and other benefits often without paying any taxes.”

“Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally.”


Specific provisions proposed by the senator in the Immigration Stabilization Act include:

* Reduces annual legal immigration levels. Relatives other than spouse or minor children admitted only if already on immigration waiting lists and their admission does not raise annual immigration levels above approved level.

* Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony "asylum" claims.

* Expands list of felonies considered "aggravated" felonies requiring exclusion and deportation of criminal aliens. Allows courts to order deportation at time of sentencing.

* Increases penalties for failing to depart or re-entering the United States after a final order of deportation order. Increases maximum penalties for visa fraud from five years to 10 years.

* Curtails alien smuggling by authorizing interdiction and repatriation of aliens seeking to enter the United States unlawfully by sea. Increases penalties for alien smuggling.

* Adds "alien smuggling" to the list of crimes subject to sanctions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.

* Expands the categories of property that are forfeited when used to facilitate the smuggling or harboring of illegal aliens.

* Clarifies that a person born in the United States to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen. This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the United States illegally, often at risk to mother and child, for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.

* Mandates that aliens who cannot demonstrably support themselves without public or private assistance are excludable. This will prevent admission of aliens likely to be dependent on public financial support. This requirement extends to the sponsor of any family sponsored immigrant.

* Increases border security and patrol officer positions."

What sort of a Democrat would take such a politically incorrect--but morally and legally correct--stance? 


The astounding truth is that Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev.) introduced the Immigration Stabilization Act in the United States Senate in 1993. The statements quoted above are from a press release issued by Reid’s office on August 5, 1993.

How is it that Harry Reid was exactly right 20 years ago, but is so completely wrong now? Why does Reid oppose programs he once sponsored now that the problem is seven times greater after 9/11? 

In the spring of 2006, while the U.S. Senate was debating legislation to make English the official U.S. language, Reid even saw fit to drag out the R word to slander those who supported the English bill. 

And, of course, Reid has voted for Mexico and against America every time the U.S. Senate has considered amnesty.

Amnesty for freeloaders and scam artists, Senator Reid?

Why?


Source: http://levin.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjJmNzE3MTg5MDJhYzM4OTM5OGMwOGM5ZTNhYzJlYmE

Amnesty: Carrot or Stick?

According to progressive thought, as articulated by President Obama, High Priest of Liberal Logic, the fix to the illegal aliens mess is really quite elementary: Grant all 12 million or so amnesty.

By doing just that, there would no longer be any illegal aliens to deal with, at least according to the best and brightest liberal minds.

Technically speaking, the left is right: Make that which is currently illegal, legal and you have fixed the problem.

At least until the next wave of 12 million heads north with the glory of amnesty on their minds!

Another amnesty bail out would include an added bonus for progressives: Democrat party rolls would be replenished with millions of grateful voters for decades.

Mind you, that politics has absolutely nothing to do with the universal support for amnesty among Democrat politicians.

Wink, wink!

However, does anyone remember that America dabbled in amnesty in 1986 with the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)?

President Reagan signed IRCA into law based on the promise that it would solve the illegal immigration problem, once and for all.

The IRCA granted amnesty to 3-4 million illegal aliens.

Significantly, it also mandated that the government take actions against employers who hire illegal aliens, and against illegal aliens themselves.

The later is called deportation, an old English term hardly ever used in modern America, except to identify bigoted racists, tea party nut balls, and right-wing terrorists.

Unfortunately, instead of ending illegal migration as intended, the amnesty set forth in IRCA has attracted at least an additional 12 million illegal aliens, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars a year to taxpayers.

Given the liberal obsession with trillion dollar solutions these days, hundreds of billions seems but a mere pittance, a small price to pay for the allegiance of millions of future Democrats.

Nonetheless, it is obvious that the amnesty of 1986 has been more of a carrot than a stick to scores of millions of people living south of our borders.

The tragic fact is that the federal government, under both Democrat and Republican administrations, has blatantly refused to enforce those provisions of IRCA designed to prevent and reverse illegal immigration.

This political malpractice has been the norm, even during time of war!

Remember 9/11? That grim day in American history should have caused our government to seal off the borders permanently.

Instead, government has done nothing to control our borders even as Mexico continues to decline into a failed state of violence where drug cartels appear smarter and stronger than Felipe Calderon and his corrupt Mexican government.

Adding to our misery is this awful truth: America is now controlled by a president who recently CUT the border security budget and by a liberal Secretary of Homeland Security who regards illegal aliens as newly arrived refugees!

Those who really care about America need to remember those facts when considering yet another amnesty bail out!

Another Red Ink Tsunami from Green Enegy!

By John W. Lillpop



Despite all the ballyhoo and misguided cheering from Barack Obama and other environmental adherents concerning the bright future and promise of Green energy, the fact is that solar energy is rarely viable, even in a Communist nation where corruption and state control over the media can squeeze and squelch the truth from public view.

As reported at the reference:

The world’s largest solar panel maker, China’s Suntech Power, put its Wuxi subsidiary into bankruptcy following poor sales and sanctions on the company, reports CNN Money:

Last week, the company missed a payment on $541 million in debt, and the company’s CEO said he was exploring strategic alternatives. According to state-run news agency Xinhua, the company owes nine creditor banks a total of $1.2 billion. […]

The U.S. Commerce Department announced stiff tariffs on Chinese-made solar panels last year, after finding that Chinese solar cell manufacturers were “dumping” their products on the American market below production costs.

The issue divided the U.S. solar industry, with some manufacturers complaining that Chinese trade practices were driving prices down artificially and smothering U.S. production.

Parent company, Suntech Power, will not file for bankruptcy.

Chinese solar panel manufacturers are not alone in having difficulty staying afloat: American solar company Solyndra failed in 2011. Solyndra filed for bankruptcy two years after receiving a $535 million taxpayer-guaranteed loan.

The big question: Will the latest solar fiasco cause Obama to reassess his obsession with that energy source?  Or is he too filled with pride to admit that his judgment lacks business merit and advantage?



http://freebeacon.com/worlds-largest-solar-company-files-for-bankruptcy/

Living in the Era of False Prophets and False Profits!

By John W. Lillpop


Woe be unto we the people of America, at one time thought to be God’s chosen!

Surely the almighty has forsaken us and cursed our once great nation with the presence of doom and gloom purveyors, and with money grubbers selling pie-in-the-sky stocks to replace the American Dream, now an old-school relic from the distant past.

False prophets continually invade our universe to warn against non-existent dangers like global warming, also referred to by newly-minted, politically-correct phooey as “Climate Change.”

According to gifted pseudo-scientists like Al Gore and Prince Charles, unless immediate corrective action is taken, the planet will literally melt, thereby morphing our six billion plus souls into one huge ball of involuntary diversity.

Unless, that is, man-created climate change prompts a new “Ice Age,” in which case our six billion plus tushes will freeze together!

False prophets also warn we the people of the perils involved when reduced spending, balanced budgets, and other fiscally-sound, but socially insensitive, austerity practices are attempted.

According to the left, such actions are doomed to failure since they deny minorities and women Constitutionally-protected rights to wealth, health, and happiness, including abortions and contraception and, in some cases, sex-change surgery and therapy.

The evils of fiscal sanity had false prophets in a heated dither during the recent debates over the Sequester, with progressives like President Barack Obama warning of a complete breakdown of national defenses (a goal Democrats have eagerly pursued for decades!), mass starvation except for illegal aliens on food stamps, disruption of Social Security benefits to needy seniors except illegal aliens registered as Democrats, and other calamities too horrid to discuss in front of children.

To the chagrin of Obama and fellow Marxists, the only negative results to date have been brought about by political abuse executed by Obama himself in releasing illegal aliens from jail, canceling White House tours, and similar nonsense which, far from bolstering the argument that reduced spending is bad, has made it painfully clear that Obama and the Democrats will go to any lengths to distort the truth so as to avoid responsible fiscal governance.

As if the False Prophets were not enough, America is also being plagued by another round of False Profits as illustrated by the obscene upward gyrations of the stock market.

Yes, even as America struggles to deal with permanently-high unemployment, immoral federal deficits, and a President and Congress unwilling to agree that excessive spending is a huge problem, the moguls of Wall Stock ring up record highs, day after bloody day!

What the hell is going on? With more than 47 million Americans on food stamps, 47 percent of the population not working and/or not paying taxes, how is it that the barons of Wall Street are having so damn much fun? Whatever happened to Dodd-Frank?

Whatever happened to Obama’s fairness argument? Shouldn’t the well-heeled be forced to endure a “fair share” of the misery dumped on the rest of we the people?

Not that long ago, Alan Greenspan coined the term “Extravagant Exuberance” to explain the inexplicable on Wall Street.

In 2013, Ben Bernanke appears comatose by comparison to the cautious Greenspan. In fact, Bernanke is bragging about his “pumping” strategy to keep money flowing.

The big question: Will America be done in first by False Prophets or by False Profits?

Challenge for GOP: What is a Politician Profited, If He or She Shall Gain Elective Office, But Lose the Nation?

By John W Lillpop

Rand Paul alleges that he is a conservative. Claims to be a patriotic, pro-American loyalist who can be trusted to protect the Constitution and the interests of American citizens.

Really?

Then why in the hell is the Senator from Kentucky making ‘Hispandering’ a part of his public persona?

Why is he willing to discard American sovereignty and cultural heritage for the fantasy of securing a few more votes from the illegal alien race?

As reported at the reference, Paul’s despicable surrender to the open borders, anti-rule of law thugs was delivered in a groveling presentation to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce:

Paul's first major speech on the topic came the same day the Iowa Republican Party announced he would headline their annual fundraiser -- a coveted stage for auditioning presidential candidates -- and one day after a Republican National Committee report embraced immigration reform as a way to boost the party's appeal with Hispanic voters.

Paul's speech to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Washington was striking not for its policy details -- in fact, they were quite fuzzy -- but for the obvious charm offensive it represented toward the fastest growing part of the electorate.

I think his goal is to appeal to a broader audience," said Sal Russo, a chief adviser to the Tea Party Express and a longtime Republican strategist. "Immigration is not a defining Tea Party issue like spending and debt, and there is a wide spectrum of viewpoints on it. I think it's a political winner."

Paul is not fluent in Spanish but he slipped into the language several times during his speech, drawing applause from the Hispanic audience for his above-average pronunciation. The senator from Bowling Green, Kentucky, also reminded the audience that he grew up alongside many Hispanics in Texas.”

Senator Paul thus joins an ever-expanding gang of alleged “Conservative” Republicans whom are racing as quickly as possible away from the needs and interests of American citizens in order to assuage people who have no right to even be in the country.

All for the foolish fantasy of appeasing foreign invaders and their advocates who do not give a damn about Democracy, the US Constitution, the rule of law, English heritage, and especially the silly (to them) notion of American sovereignty!

Paul, along with stalwarts like Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Marco Rubio, and other GOP dim bulbs, actually believe that pandering to Hispanics will improve the chances that Latinos will suddenly switch political allegiance in favor of the GOP.

However, Senator Paul and others fail to recognize that the Latino voting block is a ‘very high maintenance’ group, and that a few concessions will most likely not tear Latinos away from their socialist heritage and addiction to taxpayer-funded entitlements which the Democrat party is notorious for dispensing in exchange for votes.

For instance, many Latinos are opposed to border security—it runs counter to the desire to move wherever and whenever they choose, and to hell with American sovereignty, borders, and law.

Many Latinos come to America with little or no interest in learning English and assimilating. Rather, they are adamant about preserving Spanish and living in accordance with third-world culture;

Latinos overwhelmingly support liberal programs which provide food, food stamps, welfare, housing, health care and other benefits at American taxpayer expense.

In sum, illegal aliens are generally unsuited politically and culturally for participation in conservative objectives.

In pursuing their Hispandering agenda, conservatives must answer the question set forth in Matthew 16.26:
For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Translated for the likes of Rand Paul: What is a politician profited, if he shall gain elective office, but lose his nation?


http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/what-exactly-is-rand-pauls-position-on-immigration-reform/274195/

Bad Hair Day for Di-Fi and Obama: Assault Weapon Ban Shot Down--- by Democrats!

By John W. Lillpop

California Democrat Diane Feinstein is pained to announce that her assault on the 2nd Amendment will NOT include a ban on assault weapons. With any luck, the gutting of the Democrat gun control bill in the Senate should convince the 80-something Feinstein that Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was not alone when he took the lefty to task last week.

As reported at the reference:

Whither assault weapons ban: “Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said on Monday that a controversial assault weapons ban will not be part of a Democratic gun bill that was expected to reach the Senate floor next month,” Politico notes. “After a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday, a frustrated Feinstein said she learned that the bill she sponsored — which bans 157 different models of assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines — wouldn’t be part of a Democratic gun bill to be offered on the Senate floor. Instead, it can be offered as an amendment. But its exclusion from the package makes what was already an uphill battle an almost certain defeat.”

Too bad, Di-fi, especially given the fact that you cannot blame “Evil Republicans” for shooting down your silly attack on the Constitution!



http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/19/17371231-congress-assault-weapons-ban-nixed-from-bill?lite

Latest Sequester “Games”: Safe Meat for US Citizens Less Important than Promoting Food Stamps for Illegals!

By John W. Lillpop


Barack Obama’s shameful game- playing with the Sequester fiasco has seen thousands of illegal aliens released from jail and White House tours cancelled, pathetically obvious examples of his Marxist loathing of austerity.

Clearly, Obama and the left are most anxious to recast the term “Austerity” as a right-wing evil with origins in anti-American racism, or worse. The notion that being fiscally responsible with taxpayer treasure is one of the greatest responsibilities of any individual elected to public office is, in the minds of Marxists, old school, naïve and long overdue for the trash bin.

Of course, while Obama manipulates government spending to assure that all budget cuts are as excruciatingly painful to an many Americans as possible, his U.S. Department of Agriculture, under the misguided leadership of Tom Vilsak, is working on behalf of illegal aliens at the expense of American citizens:

As reported at the reference:

Salmonella outbreaks. E. coli outbreaks. Millions of dollars in economic losses.

These are among the scenarios the Obama administration warned about last month as it claimed the sequester would force the U.S. Department of Agriculture to furlough meat inspectors.

But while the administration prepares to take that step, it continues to pursue a "partnership" with the Mexican government to "raise awareness" about food stamps among immigrants from that country. When a top Senate Republican proposed cutting off funds for that program last week -- in the form of an amendment to a budget resolution -- Democrats on the Budget Committee shot it down.

It's hard to put a firm price on the cost of the partnership, which was launched under the George W. Bush administration. But an aide to Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., who has railed against the partnership for months, said it could easily be in the millions. Since 2004, the program has blossomed to include dozens of meetings and conferences and health fairs with Mexican officials -- all of which cost money, not to mention the cost to the food stamp program of new enrollees brought in as a result of this partnership.

Sessions, in a statement to FoxNews.com, said he believes the public will eventually demand an end to the program, though the Senate Budget Committee allowed it to continue in the vote last week.

"We have uncovered extensive evidence that federal authorities have -- during the Bush and Obama administrations -- aggressively undermined a core legal tenet of immigration policy: that those granted admission should be self-sufficient and contribute to the economic health of the nation," Sessions said. "It is amazing that Budget Committee Democrats would unanimously vote to continue funding these costly promotions, especially when our debt is causing such profound economic harm."

According to a letter from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to Sessions last September, the "partnership" since 2004 has included roughly 91 meetings between U.S. and Mexico embassy and consulate staff; 29 health fair events; and 31 roundtable discussions, conferences and forums in 20 cities.

Twenty percent of the meetings and activities occurred since 2008, according to Vilsack's letter. Sessions is concerned the collaboration amounts to a vehicle for the USDA to pressure people onto the food-stamp rolls -- in this case, non-citizen immigrants from Mexico.

The USDA denies this. In his letter last year, Vilsack said the purpose is "to help eligible people in need make informed decisions about whether or not to seek assistance."

The initiative is one of several the agency has "to promote awareness of nutrition assistance among those who need benefits and meet all program requirements under current law," Vilsack told Sessions in the 24-page letter.

However, his letter indicates the number of legal, non-citizens participating in the program -- now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- has increased from 425,000 to 1.23 million between 2001 and 2010.

Meanwhile, the USDA continues to press forward with plans to furlough meat inspectors, describing it as a necessity of the sequester -- though the department has eased off a bit on warnings that this could lead to more food-borne illness, since all meat and poultry will still have to be inspected.”

Once again, Obama’s hateful anti-American actions prove conclusively that he has virtually no interest in fulfilling his fiduciary responsibilities to the American people!




Ref: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/18/dems-preserve-us-mexico-food-stamp-partnership-while-usda-prepares-for-meat/#ixzz2NuuGZ9qj

Great News From TV Cultural Wars: “The Bible” Tops “American Idol”!

By John W. Lillpop



OK, patriots, so America is unquestionably in the sewer economically, socially, militarily, culturally, and politically. However, given the fact that our nation is, and has been, under the control of anti-American Marxists like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, what else should we expect?

In computer lingo, it’s called, GIGO—or Garbage In, Garbage Out!

GIGO, a most apt acronym for the Obama-Pelosi-Reid tragedy that has America on her heels and headed for the judgment and wrath of the All Mighty!

There are exceptions, of course. As previously reported, Comrades Keith Olbermann and Ed Schultz have been reduced in influence by MSNBC, a public service for which all should give profound thanks.

Adding to the emerging trend of civic responsibility among the executive class of TV moguls, is the sensational news that a religious series dedicated to The Bible has roared ahead of the morbidly stupid cesspool called “American Idol.”

As reported at the reference:

It's the David and Goliath of television: an obscure religious miniseries has beaten television's former top show in the ratings.

The premier of the History Channel's The Bible attracted 13.1 million viewers, topping American Idol's 12.8 million viewers on Wednesday of the same week.

The ratings have confounded Hollywood's biggest decision-makers. Overt religious programming can be a notorious tough sell to the public, while American Idol has dominated television for the past eight years.

The about-turn is evidence again that Idol is just not the ratings juggernaut it once, while also pointing to an opportunity for networks to capitalize on the largely untapped religious genre.

Thursday's episode of American Idol sank to an all-time low 3.0 rating for its scheduled episodes, attracting a paltry 11.8 million viewers.

The ratings for television's former top show are less than half of what they were during the height of the shows success, when nearly 37 million people tuned in to watch.”

Perhaps all is not lost, after all?  Maybe Hollywood and the anti-God, anti-American pap produced there is going the way of the typewriter and phone booth?

If so, Forget Hooray for Hollywood: The new refrain will be Good Riddance to Hollywood!












Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2294206/History-Channels-surprise-hit-The-Bible-tops-flailing-American-Idol-ratings-13-1million-viewers.html#ixzz2Njl6Hv4A

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter
DailyMail on Facebook

Can “Star Wars” Save America from Kim Jong Un?

By John W. Lillpop



Former President Ronald Reagan was often ridiculed by the left for “simplistic” ideas like Star Wars. The idea of a missile system to defend against attacks by foreign evil doers was almost too outrageous to consider—a perfect topic for a grade B sci-fi movie and “dumb actor” like the Gipper.

Unfortunately North Korea’s pudgy doughboy, Kim Jong Un, is changing a lot of minds about Star Wars and the good- versus -evil mindset which Ronald Reagan used with such great effect to defeat the Soviet Union in the Cold War.

As reported at the reference, the Obama administration is reacting to Kim Jong Un’s reckless bullying and bluster with a Star Wars strategy of its own:

North Korea’s deployment of a new road-mobile missile that can hit the United States prompted the Pentagon on Friday to add more ground-based anti-missile interceptors to bases in Alaska and California, senior defense and military officials said on Friday.

Adm. James Winnefeld, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon that North Korea’s new, road-mobile KN-08 ICBM has emerged as a threat “a little bit faster than we expected.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel announced the new long-range interceptor deployments as part of four steps being taken in response to North Korea’s latest nuclear test Feb. 12 and the recent rollout of the KN-08 road-mobile missile that intelligence officials said this week is becoming operational even though it has not been flight tested. The Taepodong-2 rocket that launched a satellite recently also highlights the long-range missile threat, he said.


“The United States has missile defense systems in place to protect us from limited ICBM attacks, but North Korea in particular has recently made advances in its capabilities and is engaged in a series of irresponsible and reckless provocations,” Hagel said.

“By taking the steps I’ve outlined today, we will strengthen our homeland defense, maintain our commitments to our allies and partners, and make clear to the world that the United States stands firm against aggression,” he said.”

The new Ground Based Interceptors (GBIs) would be in place by the end of 2016, he said

Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), chairman of the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces, said the missile defense interceptor deployment was welcome news.

“The Obama administration’s decision to deploy more interceptors for the national missile defense system is welcome news after four years of devastating missile defense cuts by this administration,” Rogers said.

Rogers said the administration four years ago “began to unilaterally disarm our defenses and deterrent in the hope our enemies would follow suit.”

“But hope is not a defense strategy, ”Rogers said in a statement. ”President Obama is finally realizing what President Reagan taught us 30 years ago. The best way to keep the peace is through strength."

The big unknown:  Will Kim Jong Un “stand down” until 2017?


Ref: http://freebeacon.com/intercept-and-defend/

MSNBC Serious About Clean Air: Jettisons Olbermann and Schultz!

By John W. Lillpop


Lately there has not been much to cheer about for hard-core conservatives: Barack Obama is still in the White House, Harry Reid in the US Senate, and Nancy Pelosi continues to significantly drag down the average IQ in the US House.

There is nothing even approaching a balanced budget, the federal deficit continues to grow, by design, and yet another Bush is threatening to defile the White House with a brand of conservatism that makes no sense to anyone not named Bush.

Illegal aliens are the new preferred class, in both liberal and conservative circles. English is definitely old school, and speaking Spanish is mandatory for scam artists and free loaders looking to make hay off the entitlement insanity which has overwhelmed Barack Obama and his gaggle of Marxist renegades other wise know as Democrats.

Over all, it has been a bad year for the roses and worse for those who believe in honest work, just rewards, and American values.

Still, there ARE some bright lights in the otherwise dismal sky and both concern the ugly doings at MNSBC where Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann have failed to survive the judgment of the free market in television broadcasting.

The unlovely Keith Olbermann has apparently been out of work for at least two years, a fact that renders one much less sympathetic to the plight of the unemployed.

Couldn’t happen to a more deserving bloke, ya know?

Meanwhile, MSNBC has excused the bellicose and bloated Ed Schultz from the obligation to disgrace the news industry during prime time. Mr. Ed will henceforth be seen and heard only as a fill-in for dopey commercials during non-regular, unannounced time slots.

Hats off to MSNBC for it’s contribution to cleaning the airwaves and making it safer for all to breathe.

Big Lie About ObamaCare Costs Set to Implode in 2014!

By John W. Lillpop

Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid sold their Marxist takeover of the US health care system on a massive, illogical lie, namely: 30 million or so uninsured Americans would be added, AND that would cause overall health care costs to decline!

Needless to say, that mindless argument was so phony that only the least informed and most ignorant of Americans would believe it. Unfortunately, the low-information voter IS a mainstay of the Democrat party, part of the 47 percent that does not work, and does not pay taxes, but whom, survives on the backs of people who DO work and pay taxes.

Millions of dim-witted entitlement leeches such as Sandra Fluke voted for Barack Obama in 2012 and are responsible for what is about to happen with Obama still in the White House.

As reported at the reference, contrary to the foolish promises of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid health care terminator team, health care costs will NOT be reduced as the number of insured increases:

Some Americans could see their insurance bills double next year as the health care overhaul law expands coverage to millions of people.

The nation's big health insurers say they expect premiums -- or the cost for insurance coverage -- to rise from 20 to 100 percent for millions of people due to changes that will occur when key provisions of the Affordable Care Act roll out in January 2014.

Mark Bertolini, CEO of Aetna Inc. (AET), one of the nation's largest insurers, calls the price hikes "premium rate shock."

"We've done all the math, we've shared it with all the regulators, we've shared it with all the people in Washington that need to see it, and I think it's a big concern," Bertolini said during the company's annual meeting with investors in December.

To be sure, there will be no across-the-board rate hikes for everyone, and there's no reliable national data on how many people could see increases. But the biggest price hikes are expected to hit a group that represents a relatively small slice of the insured population. That includes some of the roughly 14 million people who buy their own insurance as opposed to being covered under employer-sponsored plans, and to a lesser extent, some employees of smaller companies.

The price increases are a downside of President Barack Obama's health care law, which is expected to expand coverage to nearly 30 million uninsured people. The massive law calls for a number of changes that could cause premiums for people who don't have coverage through a big employer to rise next year -- at a time when health care costs already are expected to grow by 5 percent or more.”

The simple fact is that Obamacare is an ill-conceived, hurried effort to introduce Marxist health care to America before the mid-term elections of 2010.

Now the big question is: Will the Democrat Party survive the 2014 mid-term elections?



http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/03/14/health-care-premiums-expected-to-soar-insurers-warn/

What Would Jesus Say About the Freak Show Passed Off as the Modern Catholic Church?

By John W. Lillpop



As the world celebrates an otherwise benign puff of white smoke polluting the air in Rome as a symbol of God's will as expressed to and through 115 so-called “Princes of the Church,” one must wonder what Jesus must think about all the pomp and ceremony, hypocrisy, and shame surrounding the modern-day Church?

The conclave is supposed to be comprised of Holy men of God dedicated to selecting a Pope to represent Jesus on earth. After all, the new Pope will be responsible for tending to a flock of 1.2 billion faithful followers, and for providing all of human kind with spiritual manna as regards compassion, peace, love, and hope.

What would Jesus say about the fact that Roger Mahoney was among the 115 “princes” who had  a voice in selecting the new Pope?   The same Mahoney who wasted $600 million dollars of Church proceeds to settle and bury sexual crimes committed by Catholic priests against young, innocent worshipers?

The same Mahoney who was finally stripped of all diocese responsibilities by the church following years of decadent evil while masked in the garments of the Holy Spirit?

What of the rumors and innuendoes concerning the sudden resignation of Pope Benedict and the possibility that even more devastating scandal has infected the Catholic Church, much of it homosexual and pedophile in nature?

Would Jesus be proud of his modern-day church and the image of Him that is being portrayed in the gaudy freak show now being staged at the Vatican--in His name?

Or would Jesus explode in righteous indignation, as he did toward money-changers in the temple, at the blasphemy, hypocrisy and evil of the conclave of demons seeking to deceive the masses?

What Would Jesus Say About the “115 Princes of the Church” and the Gaudy Conclave?

By John W. Lillpop


As the world anxiously awaits a cloud of white smoke to emerge from the Sistine Chapel indicating that the 115 so-called “Princes of the Church” have settled on a new Pope, one must wonder what Jesus must think about all the pomp and ceremony, hypocrisy, and shame surrounding the modern-day Church?

The conclave is supposed to be comprised of Holy men of God dedicated to selecting a Pope to represent Jesus on earth. The new Pope will be responsible for tending to a flock of 1.2 billion faithful followers, and for providing all of human kind with spiritual manna as regards compassion, peace, love, and hope.

What would Jesus say about the fact that Roger Mahoney is among the 115 “princes” who has a voice in selecting the next pontiff? The same Mahoney who wasted $600 million dollars of Church proceeds to settle and bury sexual crimes committed by Catholic priests against young, innocent worshipers?

The same Mahoney who was finally stripped of all diocese responsibilities by the church following years of decadent evil while clothed in the garments of the Holy Spirit?

What of the rumors and innuendoes concerning the sudden resignation of Pope Benedict and the possibility that even more devastating scandal has infected the Catholic Church, much of it homosexual and pedophile in nature?

Would Jesus be proud of his modern-day church and the image of Him that is being portrayed in the gaudy freak show now being staged at the Vatican?

Or would Jesus explode in righteous indignation, as he did toward money-changers in the temple, at the blasphemy, hypocrisy and evil of the conclave of demons seeking to deceive the masses?

Congressional Black Caucus Urges Obama to Make Appointments Based on Skin Color!

By John W. Lillpop

On August 28, 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. electrified the world with his “I Have a Dream Speech,” in which the great man stated, in part:

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Unfortunately, 50 years after MLK spoke, America is still bitterly divided on race, and electing African-American President Barack Obama to two terms appears to have only exacerbated the divide.

As reported in the media, the Congressional Black Caucus is even urging President Obama to use skin color as the basis for making cabinet appointments, provided the skin color is dark enough, that is:

Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Marcia L. Fudge is escalating her campaign to urge President Barack Obama to pick African Americans for his cabinet, publicly releasing a letter that slams the first black president for a lack of diversity among his closest advisers.

“The people you have chosen to appoint in this new term have hardly been reflective of this country’s diversity,” the Ohio Democrat said in the March 11 letter.

Fudge adds that CBC members’ offices have received phone calls from angry constituents questioning why Obama hasn’t nominated anyone with the ability “to speak to the unique needs of African Americans. Their ire is compounded by the overwhelming support you’ve received from the African American community.”

By releasing the letter, Fudge is escalating a campaign by the CBC to push Obama on his cabinet diversity and continuing to demonstrate her willingness to push Obama aggressively to embrace her group’s priorities.

The Ohio Democrat previously moved to promote three CBC members for open Cabinet positions, highlighting a long-standing sore spot in the relationship between the CBC and the president, who was a member of the group during his one Senate term.

Obama, in turn, dispatched top aide Valerie Jarrett for her first Capitol Hill meeting of the second term to meet with the CBC for a State of the Union preview and listening session with members.

White House officials have assured CBC leaders that they will be pleased with future decisions. But
Fudge apparently has lost patience, hence the letter Monday.

In the letter to Obama, Fudge said the CBC “looks forward to meeting with you to discuss this and other pressing issues.” CBC spokeswoman Ayofemi Kirby said a meeting with Obama has been requested, but no answer has yet come back from the White House.

Privately, the relationship between Obama and the CBC has been complicated for a long time, with members complaining about social snubs and Obama’s reluctance to address the high black unemployment rate head on.

The rift over Obama’s Cabinet is a case in point. For example, there was some jealousy in Obama’s first term that a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, then-Rep. Hilda L. Solis, D-Calif., was chosen to lead the Labor Department but that no member of the CBC was even vetted for a Cabinet slot. Rep. Sanford D. Bishop Jr. of Georgia was discussed for Agriculture secretary but not formally vetted.”

With all due respect to Ms. Fudge and her black brothers and sisters in the CBC, do Dr. King’s glorious words have no meaning at all, just fifty years later?

And how can CBC seriously advocate on behalf of a divisive, and prejudiced procedure that will take the nation backward, rather than forward?



http://cdn.rollcall.com/news/cbcs_fudge_escalates_push_for_obama_cabinet_diversity-223009-1.html?popular=true&pos=hln&cdn_load=true&zkPrintable=1&nopagination=1

Breaking News From NYC: 16 Oz. Sugary Drinks 1, Michael Bloomberg 0!

By John W. Lillpop

Just when it seemed that freedom and liberty were dead and buried amid the tsunami of progressive lunacy in New York, a Judge in the Big Apple has ruled in favor of common sense, the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, and against Michael Bloomberg, the demented, progressive billionaire posing as Mayor of the City.

As reported at the reference, Bloomberg’s obscene obsession with keeping adult sizes of sugary –drinks out of the bellies of otherwise law-abiding New Yorkers was smacked down quicker than one can cry “fascist dodo head”:

A State judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration from banning New York City restaurants and other venues from selling large sugary drinks, a major defeat for the mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure at City Hall.

The city is "enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations," New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling decided Monday.

The regulations are "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences," the judge wrote. "The simple reading of the rule leads to the earlier acknowledged uneven enforcement even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole….the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the state purpose of the rule."

Bottom Line for Bloomberg: Get your silly nose out of the people’s business and focus of things like murder, rape, car theft and other atrocities. Or have you already eradicated those evils, Mayor?



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826704578354543929974394.html

North Korea Threatens to Nuke US: Where Are Barack Obama and/or John Kerry?

By John W. Lillpop

Barack Obama’s second term is starting out to be a tragic repeat of his first—a dismal failure on all domestic and foreign issues that the administration gets involved in—or fails to address.

The latest news from North Korea is a perfect example: That renegade nation has made a provocative statement about a preemptive nuclear strike that could do real damage to real estate values in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

As reported at the reference:

The provocative statement comes weeks after the country conducted underground nuclear tests which caused a massive earthquake.

America’s west coast cities on Los Angeles and San Francisco are feared to be in Kim’s sights.

A foreign ministry spokesman said: "Since the United States is about to ignite a nuclear war, we will be exercising our right to pre-emptive nuclear attack against the headquarters of the aggressor in order to protect our supreme interest."

And just where the hell are America’s alleged leaders while North Korea threatens to turn the West Coast into a radioactive dust bowl for the next millennia, or more?

Well, President Obama is spending his time shutting down White House tours in order to make his sequester sting as much as possible, and John Kerry just took a check for $250 million dollars to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt!

Obama plans to round out his week with a preemptive strike of his own: He will release another few thousand illegal aliens from prison to roam the streets of America, which used to belong to US citizens, pre-Obama and pre-Sequester, that is.

The big question for citizens these days seems to be: Will you be smitten by a nuclear device from Korea, or will you be victimized by an illegal alien fresh out of jail?



Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4829035/north-korea-says-it-will-launch-nuclear-attack-on-america.html#ixzz2Mrbly

Who Needs Keystone Pipeline? Let’s Nationalize Venezuelan Oil—Under Auspices of US!

By John W. Lillpop

Hugo Chavez has gone on to the next life and, although he was a bit of a stinker to the US, we wish the charismatic(?), totalitarian the best. He will no doubt be happy to learn that his destiny in eternity involves the company of no-account weasels like Oliver Stone and Sean Penn, the pleasure of which will be enhanced by perpetual flames and huge bellows of smoke!

As far as we know, W. Bush will not be there, but what the hay, Hugo. Can’t have everything after you have been so naughty for 58 long years!

Chavez leaves behind what are purported to be the largest oil reserves on the planet! And what timing!

Under Barack Obama’s zero-energy plan, gasoline prices are soaring past the $4/gallon mark-- again. The Keystone Pipeline is back in the news—again. And Iran is reportedly close, oh so close, to being nuclear-bomb capable—again.

America’s ability to prevent Iran from actually going nuclear has been largely based on the twin myths of diplomacy (Talk, talk, and more talk) combined with sanctions.

With Chavez’s passing, Islamic tyrants in Tehran must be salivating at the very thought of all that oil in Venezuela, and the fact that there is no longer a chubby dictator to protect said assets.

How very convenient it would be for Iran to requisition Chavez’s legacy for itself and the spread of Islamic terrorism throughout the globe, with the ultimate goal of eliminating Israel!

But wait! America has vital interests in that oil as well—provided we can keep Barack Obama off the golf course long enough to tend to the legitimate needs of our nation.

Here’s what should happen: The United States military should take over the Venezuelan oil fields and declare them nationalized—as American assets!

You say that sounds unfair and too aggressive?

Remember, please, that Hugo Chavez was fervently anti-American, and worse, in his claims that America was home to greedy capitalists intent on colonizing any soil with even a trace of oil to exploit.

Thanks to Chavez, that is already how Latin America views America! So, let’s stop fighting the Spanish-speaking propaganda moguls and instead affirm their worse fears, now that it is in our national interest to do so!

Invade Venezuela, Mr. Obama, and you can forget about the Keystone Pipeline!

Invade Venezuela, Mr. Obama, and turn those oil factories over to Shell and Exxon, and you will generate all the added “revenues” you need for the foreseeable future.

It’s a win-win! Take over Chavez’s abandoned oil reserves and restore the American economy, save America from global warming, and save Israel from annihilation.

What could be simpler? Invade Venezuela!

US Cannot Afford to Keep Illegals in Prison, Yet Sends $250 million to Muslim Brotherhood!

By John W. Lillpop



Janet Napolitano, Director of Homeland Security, claims that the Obama-initiated Sequester is causing such budget headaches that she has been forced to release illegal aliens from jail.

Oddly enough, at the same time as Nappy is releasing criminals to the streets of America because of insufficient funds, John Kerry, Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, is in Egypt giving away $250 million taxpayer greenbacks to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Just what the hell is going on here?

If it is true that money is just not available to keep the invaders in jail where they belong, why not simply deport them back to from whence they came? Let Mexico fed and house its bad-actor thugs for a change!

Or is the word deport no longer used in the world of PC bureaucrats?

Why not siphon off enough of the loot headed to Egypt to at least buy one-way tickets back to Mexico for our unwelcome prisoners?

Is it any wonder that politicians are regarded as the lowest form of life in the universe?

Abraham Lincoln Freed the Slaves, Barack Obama Freed Illegal Aliens!

By John W. Lillpop

In his hysterical scramble to reinvent himself as one of America’s “great” Presidents for historians, the not-so-great Barack Hussein Obama actually betrays any proximity to Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, or other notable great men, and, in fact, makes a strong argument against his being regarded as even modestly gifted intellectually.

The president’s own anti-Obama campaign features incredibly bizarre presidential actions which can only be described as breathtakingly, mind-numbingly stupid.

For example, Father Abraham Lincoln, America’s 16th President, is credited with freeing millions of African-Americans from forced indenture (slavery), a modest first step in putting teeth into the notion that “all men are created equal” as trumpeted in the Declaration of Independence.

Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and victory in the US Civil War paved the way for the rehabilitation of African- Americans from the curse of discrimination and dehumanization at the hands of those who would deny the black man his rightful place in the community of God’s children, solely because of skin color.

Remember, too, that most slaves were born on American soil and were, therefore, technically legal citizens, notwithstanding the despicable Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857 which wrongly ruled in favor of barbaric, anti-human intolerance which, as Lincoln correctly pointed out, was unsustainable.

Fast forward to 2012 where we have the foolish spectacle of an inept community organizer posing as an American president.

Barack Hussein Obama glibly likens himself to the legendary Abraham Lincoln and to prove his Lincolnesque mettle, our befuddled community organizer has decided to free the 11 million or so invading criminals whom have ignored US borders and immigration laws and have taken up residency where they are neither welcome nor deserving.

Whereas Abraham Lincoln freed African-American slaves largely in the pursuit of justice and humanitarian considerations, Barack Obama’s advocacy on behalf of foreign invaders is a ruthless, reckless act waged to increase the numbers in his corrupt Democrat party.

Whereas African-Americans were forced to provide labor without compensation, illegal aliens advocated by Barack Obama compete with American citizens for jobs in an environment of ultra-high unemployment.

Obama’s illegal aliens also cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars each year at a time when the federal government is bankrupt.

Barack Obama as Lincolnesque? Hell no!

Remember, Lincoln freed black citizens, while Obama is working to enslave citizens so as to curry favor with millions of foreign invading criminals!