Friday, December 30, 2011


   There is one candidate running for President of the United States who is a true American minority.  One.  He is not a democrat.  She is a Christian, conservative American minority.  Think about that for just one moment. 
   When our current President talks about his family, he always talks about his white family.  His father, who was born in Kenya, does not have the background to claim to be an American minority.  He may be a minority American, which is different.  His family has not handed down the struggles of a true American minority.  His family is white.
   Michele Bauchman, on the other hand, is a true American minority.  Women have struggled with some of the same issues as Americans of color.  In the mid 1970's, I was hired into a man's job due to the affirmative action law.  They needed to hire a woman.  I would know about the struggles, as would Mrs. Bauchman, who has been a tax lawyer.  
   She is a Bible believing Christian.  She is a mom, who does not believe in abortion.  She has the same points of view that I do.  Why would I vote and support some yahoo who does not act the way he claims to believe? 
   No, my vote and support goes to Michele Bauchman.  Please join me.  It is just common sense.

You can also follow Oma at,, and  Just click the names.

Thursday, December 15, 2011



The CIA’s RQ-170 “Sentinel” drone captured by the Iranians last week may have gone down in Afghanistan and then transported to Iran by friendly forces on the ground, a former officer in the elite Quds Force branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards told The Daily Caller.
The United States has never acknowledged that the drone was flying over Iranian airspace — only that ground controllers “lost contact” with the drone and that it probably crashed.
However, photographs and video footage released by the Iranians on Dec. 8, several days after they announced the drone’s capture, clearly show that both wings had been neatly severed and then reattached.

“This suggests that the drone landed safely and that its wings were cut off so it could be transported by truck,” the former Quds Force officer said. “I believe it was captured by the Taliban inside Afghanistan and transferred to the Iranians, who then reattached the wings,” he added.
The United States military has long complained that Iran supplies weapons, explosives, and money to the Taliban. The U.S. has identified camps inside Iran where Taliban fighters are trained.
Former U.S. Army intelligence officer Lt. Col Tony Schaeffer told FoxNews on Monday that he believed Iran’s claims that it had interfered with the drone’s command signal and forced it to land inside Iran.
“If it had gone down inside Afghanistan, we should have blasted whoever had taken it before they could have moved it to Iran,” he told TheDC on Tuesday.
The United States lost a drone to insurgents in Iraq in 2007 who managed to overwhelm its digital signal, which was unencrypted. The RQ-170 drone is also believed to have used an unencrypted data link, making Iran’s claims to have brought it down through some form of cyber attack more credible.
A three-way relationship connecting Iran, the Taliban and al-Qaida was in place long before the 9/11 terror attacks, and those connections have become increasingly close in recent years.
In July, the U.S. Treasury Department revealed that Iran has been sheltering al-Qaida’s top operations planner, the man who ultimately took over from 9/11-planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammad.
In a press release that highlighted Iran’s support for al-Qaida, Treasury said that Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, the terror group’s operations commander, had been its “emissary in Iran, a position which allowed him to travel in and out of Iran with the permission of Iranian officials.”
And when U.S. special operations commanders raided Osama bin Laden’s Pakistan hideout in May, the overwhelming majority of captured documents and communications were between Atiyah and bin Laden.
A former senior CIA operations officer told TheDC that most CIA drones are programmed to “return to base” if they lose contact with their controllers, using on-board GPS transponders to guide them.
The fact that the drone crashed — or was guided down by a hostile cyber-attack, as Iran has claimed — proves a malfunction occurred, but not one serious enough to cause major damage during a crash landing.
“It’s unconscionable there wasn’t a self-destruct mechanism on board,” the former CIA operations officer said. “Someone is going to have to be accountable for that. It was a clear oversight.”
Senior Iranian officials have used the drone incident to accuse the United States of waging a broad spectrum intelligence war against their country.
Stephen Hadley, national security advisor to President George W. Bush, buttressed those claims last week, telling the Associated Press that U.S. covert operations underway against Iran were “much bigger than people appreciate.”
President Obama revealed Monday that he has asked Iran to return the drone. “We’ll see how the Iranians respond,” he said.

We reported about this war on Dece. 6th.  What is this President doing?  Has Congress signed off on a declaration of war or is President Obama using his "assignation option"?

You can also follow me at,, and  Just click the links.

Read more:

Read more:

Read more:

Wednesday, December 14, 2011


   This is something all of America has seen coming from the Democrats.  They think if they pardon these illegals, that they are sure to win their votes and stay in office:

New Haven Mayor John DeStefano plans to ask the state Legislature to allow illegal immigrants who live in the city to be able vote in municipal elections.
DeStefano said on Tuesday that the proposal would build a more engaged community and follows the lead of other cities, the New Haven Independent reports.
The Independent reports that New Haven has about 10,000  non-citizen immigrants.
Immigrants who are in the U.S. legally or illegally and cannot vote now would still be unable to vote in state or federal elections.
DeStefano, a Democrat, said illegal immigrants pay taxes indirectly through rent and send their kids to New Haven schools and should be able to vote.
New Haven made national headlines in 2007 when the city approved a program that provides municipal identification cards for all residents -- including illegal immigrants -- to provide access to services such as banking and the library.
Malloy told the New Haven Register, "it's not an idea that I'm particularly comfortable with."
The Democratic governor said he believes there are obligations and privileges that come with legal citizenship, but he's willing to "hear the mayor out" on his proposal.

You can also follow me at,, and  Just click the links.

Monday, December 12, 2011



 For many years, credit cards and home equity loans papered over the harsh realities of this new economy.  But in 2008, the house of cards collapsed.  We all know the story by not:  Mortgages sold to people who couldn't afford them, or sometimes even understand them.  Banks and investors allowed to keep packaging the risk and selling it off.  Huge bets--and huge bonuses--made with other people's money on the line.  Regulators who were supposed to warn us about the dangers of all this, but looked the other way or didn't have the authority to look at all.

According to the New York Times, January 25,2011, a report by Sewell Chan, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission that investigated the crisis cited "widespread failures in government regulation, corporate mismanagement and heedless risk-taking by Wall Street, according to the conclusions of a federal inquiry."  
The majority report finds fault with two Fed chairmen: Alan Greenspan, who led the central bank as the housing bubble expanded, and his successor, Ben S. Bernanke, who did not foresee the crisis but played a crucial role in the response. It criticizes Mr. Greenspan for advocating deregulation and cites a “pivotal failure to stem the flow of toxic mortgages” under his leadership as a “prime example” of negligence.
It also criticizes the Bush administration’s “inconsistent response” to the crisis — allowing Lehman Brothers to collapse in September 2008 after earlier bailing out another bank, Bear Stearns, with Fed help — as having “added to the uncertainty and panic in the financial markets.”
Like Mr. Bernanke, Mr. Bush’s Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., predicted in 2007 — wrongly, it turned out — that the subprime collapse would be contained, the report notes.
Democrats also come under fire. The decision in 2000 to shield the exotic financial instruments known as over-the-counter derivatives from regulation, made during the last year of President Bill Clinton’s term, is called “a key turning point in the march toward the financial crisis.”
Timothy F. Geithner, who was president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York during the crisis and is now the Treasury secretary, was not unscathed; the report finds that the New York Fed missed signs of trouble at Citigroup and Lehman, though it did not have the main responsibility for overseeing them.
That means it was government--the same government who is supposed "to protect the security of the citizens of this nation."
It was wrong.  It combined the breathtaking greed of a few with irresponsibility across the system.  And it plunged our economy and the world into a crisis from which we are still fighting to recover.  It claimed the jobs, homes, and the basic security of millions--innocent, hard-working Americans who had met their responsibilities, but were still left holding the bag.

"The recession killed off 7.9 million jobs. It's increasingly likely that many will never come back", according to CNN money report dated July 2, 2010 posted by Chris Isidore, whose information came from the government's job report issued that Friday.
"The job losses during the Great Recession were so off the chart, that even though we've gained about 600,000 private sector jobs back, we've got nearly 8 million jobs to go," said Lakshman Achuthan, managing director of Economic Cycle Research Institute.
What this says, is that the "unemployment rate" is also being "doctored" by this administration.  We have lost jobs that are not coming back and this administration has so many regulations in place that no one is creating new ones.
And let us not forget how Bank of America and others were "signing" foreclosures without proper review, which took our homes from us without due process.


   Brian Bennet from the "Washington Bureau" reports on December 10, 2011 and was published by The Los Angeles Times:

Armed with a search warrant, Nelson County Sheriff Kelly Janke went looking for six missing cows on the Brossart family farm in the early evening of June 23. Three men brandishing rifles chased him off, he said.

Janke knew the gunmen could be anywhere on the 3,000-acre spread in eastern North Dakota. Fearful of an armed standoff, he called in reinforcements from the state Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulances and deputy sheriffs from three other counties.

He also called in a Predator B drone.

As the unmanned aircraft circled 2 miles overhead the next morning, sophisticated sensors under the nose helped pinpoint the three suspects and showed they were unarmed. Police rushed in and made the first known arrests of U.S. citizens with help from a Predator, the spy drone that has helped revolutionize modern warfare
But that was just the start. Local police say they have used two unarmed Predators based at Grand Forks Air Force Base to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June. The FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration have used Predators for other domestic investigations, officials said.

"We don't use [drones] on every call out," said Bill Macki, head of the police SWAT team in Grand Forks. "If we have something in town like an apartment complex, we don't call them."

The drones belong to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which operates eight Predators on the country's northern and southwestern borders to search for illegal immigrants and smugglers. The previously unreported use of its drones to assist local, state and federal law enforcement has occurred without any public acknowledgment or debate.

Congress first authorized Customs and Border Protection to buy unarmed Predators in 2005. Officials in charge of the fleet cite broad authority to work with police from budget requests to Congress that cite "interior law enforcement support" as part of their mission.
Congress first authorized Customs and Border Protection to buy unarmed Predators in 2005. Officials in charge of the fleet cite broad authority to work with police from budget requests to Congress that cite "interior law enforcement support" as part of their mission.

In an interview, Michael C. Kostelnik, a retired Air Force general who heads the office that supervises the drones, said Predators are flown "in many areas around the country, not only for federal operators, but also for state and local law enforcement and emergency responders in times of crisis."

But former Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), who sat on the House homeland security intelligence subcommittee at the time and served as its chairwoman from 2007 until early this year, said no one ever discussed using Predators to help local police serve warrants or do other basic work.

Using Predators for routine law enforcement without public debate or clear legal authority is a mistake, Harman said.

"There is no question that this could become something that people will regret," said Harman, who resigned from the House in February and now heads the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a Washington think tank.

In 2008 and 2010, Harman helped beat back efforts by Homeland Security officials to use imagery from military satellites to help domestic terrorism investigations. Congress blocked the proposal on grounds it would violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from taking a police role on U.S. soil.

Proponents say the high-resolution cameras, heat sensors and sophisticated radar on the border protection drones can help track criminal activity in the United States, just as the CIA uses Predators and other drones to spy on militants in Pakistan, nuclear sites in Iran and other targets around the globe.

For decades, U.S. courts have allowed law enforcement to conduct aerial surveillance without a warrant. They have ruled that what a person does in the open, even behind a backyard fence, can be seen from a passing airplane and is not protected by privacy laws.

Advocates say Predators are simply more effective than other planes. Flying out of earshot and out of sight, a Predator B can watch a target for 20 hours nonstop, far longer than any police helicopter or manned aircraft.

"I am for the use of drones," said Howard Safir, former head of operations for the U.S. Marshals Service and former New York City police commissioner. He said drones could help police in manhunts, hostage situations and other difficult cases.

But privacy advocates say drones help police snoop on citizens in ways that push current law to the breaking point.

"Any time you have a tool like that in the hands of law enforcement that makes it easier to do surveillance, they will do more of it," said Ryan Calo, director for privacy and robotics at the Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society.


Saturday, December 10, 2011


It is great to be back in the state of Kansas.  As many of you know, I've got roots here.  I'm sure you're all familiar with the obamas of Oswatomie.  Actually, I like to say that I got my name from my father, but I got my accent--and my values--from my mother.  She was born in Wichita.  Her mother grew up in Augusta.  And her father was from El Dorado.  So my Kansas roots run deep.
   We know about Uncle Oyango Obama from Framingham, Mass., who was arrested for drunk driving on August 30, 2011.  President Obama talks about his "Uncle Omar" in his memoir "Dreams from My Father," about retracing his roots and his 1988 trip to Kenya, to an Uncle Omar, who matches Oyango's background and has the same date of birth.  
   We also know about Aunt Zeituni Obama, also from Framingham, who was arrested for being in this country illegally.  Zeituni Oyango came to the U.S. from Kenya in 2000 and was denied asylum by an immigration judge in 2004. She stayed in the country illegally and was granted asylum last year by a judge who found she could be a target in Kenya not only for those who oppose the U.S. and the president but also for members of the Kenyan government.
   Oh, but enough about our President's family.

 My grandparents served during World War II--he as a soldier in Patton's Army, she as a worker on a bomber assembly line.  Together, they shared the optimism of a nation that triumphed over a Depression and  fascism.  They believed in an America where hard work paid off, responsibility was rewarded, and anyone could make it if they tried--no matter who you were, where you came from, or how you started out.
These values gave rise to the largest middle class and the strongest economy the world has ever known.  It was here, in America, that the most productive workers and innovative companies turned out the best products on Earth, and every American shared in that pride and success--from those in executive suites to middle management to those on the factory floor.  If you gave it your all, you'd take enough home to raise your family, send your kids to shcool, have your health care covered, and put a little away for retirement.
   I don't know about your family, but that was not true of mine.  We had no health insurance and there were five of us kids.  We got no school lunches-we brought sandwiches from home.  There was surely no savings for retirement.  Who is he talking about...the Henry Fords?
   Besides, when did President Obama decide he was proud of America?  In February of 2009, his wife was proud of America FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HER ADULT LIFE.  He is married to her.  One has to assume he felt the same, which means he was ashamed of America.  So, why is he talking about "American pride"?

Today, we are still home to the world's most productive workers and innovative companies.  But for most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded.  Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people.  fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefitted from that success.  Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and investments than ever before.  But everyone else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren't--and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up.
   Of course, there are also those who have never put in any hard work.  And those who snuck into this country and have been living off the hard work of others for far too long.  Just look at President Obama's Aunt.  She has been living off welfare since she came here, and was illegal.  But our government just keeps taking from us and giving to them.
   Besides, today we are not home to the worls;'s most productive workers.  I posted on this subject back on September 7, 2011 titled "Loss of Global Standing".  So, as you have been with me, you are aware that when our President said this, it was untrue.


You can also follow me at for Bible reading,, for information about health, and for talk about everyday life.

Thursday, December 8, 2011


   The Washington Post reported today that our government  ran a $139 BILLION deficit in November, marking the 38th straight month in the red according to preliminary estimates by the Congressional Budget Office released Wednesday.  Deficit spending means spending money you don't have, like running debt up on a credit card, when you have no income to pay for it.
      the Post goes on to say the gobernment hasn't run a surplus since September of 2008, just before the Wall Street collapse near the end of the Bush Administration.  That is by far the longest streak in records dating back to the 1980's.  Before the current streak, the government had never gone an entire year without running a surplus in at least one month.
   President Obama took office in January of 2009.   He has never had a surplus in his administration.  And all he wants to do is spend more money!  He gives it away like it is candy!  The only ones he doesn't give money to is "the middle class", who pays the taxes.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011


   The following story is brought to you from the Heartlander:

By Benjamin Domenech, Heartlander
According to data collected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare has spent more than $240 million of taxpayer money on penis pumps for elderly men over the past decade, and will surpass a quarter of a billion dollars this year for costs since 2001.
The cost to taxpayers for the pumps more than quadrupled during that period, from a low of $11 million in 2001 to a high of more than $47 million in 2010. And these represent only the costs for external devices, technically classified as “Male Vacuum Erection Systems,” not implantable devices or oral drugs such as Viagra.
Easy to Qualify
In order to obtain a pump, according to CMS’s Local Coverage Determination (LCD) revised in October this year, the “patient’s medical record must contain sufficient documentation of the patient’s medical condition to substantiate the necessity for the type and quantity of items ordered,” noting erectile dysfunction (ED) can “commonly occur in men in the Medicare age group.”
If a medical exam and history shows a senior on Medicare meets the relevant threshold—a diagnosis of ED—he becomes eligible for a wide range of options under the Medicare Prosthetic benefit. Treatment Options covered by Medicare include “oral medications, pharmacological injections, intra-urethral suppositories, vacuum erection devices, and implantable penile pumps.”
But are these devices really “medically necessary”? Health Care News contacted CMS to ask whether they have audited the medical files to determine medical necessity. CMS has not provided a response at the time of publication.

I knew a man who had his implant get infected.  Then medicare paid for the hospital stay, the doctors, etc., tens of thousands of dollars, to have his penis removed.  And Washington just keeps spending.  Do seniors in nursing homes or convicted felon child molesters really need such "medical necessities"?
This is not comparable to women with breast cancer who have breast implants.  The breast implants are not necessary for a woman to force herself on a man.

You can also follow me at:,, and  Just click the links.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011


      The Los Angeles Times posted an article by Ken Dilanian on 12/4/11 titled, "Mysterious blasts, slayings suggest covert efforts in Iran".  The report is as follows:  Reporting from Washington--At an Iranian military base 30 miles west of Tehran, engineers were working on weapons that the armed forces chief of staff had boasted could give Israel a "strong punch in the mouth." 
   But then then a huge explosion ripped through the Revolutionary Guard Corps base on Nov. 12, leveling most of the buildings.  Government officials said 17 people were killed, including a FOUNDER of Iran's ballistic missile program, Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam.
  Iranian officials called the blast an accident.  Perhaps it was.
   Decades of international sanctions have left Iran struggling to obtain technology and spare parts for military programs and commercial industries, leading in some cases to dangerous working conditions. 
   However, many former U. S. intelligence officials and Iran experts believe that the explosion--the most destructive of at least two dozen unexplained blasts in the last two years--was part of a COVERT effort by the U. S., Israel and others to disable Iran's nuclear and missile programs.  The goal, the experts say, is to derail what those nations fear is Iran's quest for nuclear weapons capability and to stave off an Israeli or U.S. airstrike to eliminate or lessen the threat.
   "It looks like the 21st form of war," said Patrick Clawson, who directs the Iran Security Initiative at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington think tank.  "It does appear that there is a campaign of assassinations and cyber war, as well as the semi-acknowledged campaign of sabotage."
   Or perhaps not.  Any such operation would be highly classified, and those who might know aren't talking.  The result is Washington's latest national security parlor game--trying to figure out who, if anyone, is responsible for the unusual incidents.
   For years, the U.S. and its allies have sought to hinder Iran's weapons programs by secretly supplying faulty parts, plans or software, former intelligence officials say.  No proof of sabotage has emerged, but Iran's nuclear program clearly has hit obstacles that thwarted progress in recent years.
   "We definitely are doing that," said Art Keller, former CIA case officer who worked on Iran.  "It's pretty much the stated mission of the CIA counter-proliferation division to do what it takes to slow--Iran's weapons of mass destruction program."
   Many Western experts are convinced that American and Israeli engineers secretly fed the Stuxnet computer worm into Iran's nuclear program in 2010.  The virus reportedly caused centrifuges used to enrich uranium to spin out of control and shatter.  Neither the U.S. nor Israeli government has acknowledged any role in the apparent cyber-attack. 
   Nor did anyone claim responsibility after two senior nuclear physicists were killed, and a third wounded, by bombs attached to their cars or nearby motorcycles in January and November last year.
   Militants waving pictures of one of the slain scientists stormed the British Embassy in Tehran last week, setting fires and causing extensive damage.  Several European countries recalled their envoys from Iran after the British government closed its embassy and expelled Iranian gas pipelines, oil installations and military facilities.
   In October, Iranian news services reported three such explosions in a 24-hour period.  The blasts killed two people.  Another large blast was reported last week in Isfahan, Iran's third-largest city.
   Some analysts suspect the the CIA and Israel's intelligence agency, Mossad, are involved , with possible help from the MEK, a fringe Iranian group that the State Department lists as a terrorist organization, although it has many allies in Washington's foreign policy establishment.  Based in Iraq, the group is believed to have links to dissident networks inside Iran.
   Iran claims to have arrested dozens of CIA informants in recent months, and U.S. officials acknowledge that a handful of informants in Iran have been exposed.  What they did, or where, is unknown.  In October, U.S. officials announced that they had uncovered an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington.
   Some analysts caution against assuming the CIA is orchestrating all the attacks in Iran, arguing is gives U.S. intelligence far too much credit.  But that doesn't preclude U.S. support for allied spy services in Europe and the Middle East that also target Iran.  still, there is more speculation at this point than hard evidence.
  A cyber expert who works closely with U.S. intelligence said he is convinced that Israel, not the U.S., launched the Stuxnet attack because U.S. government lawyers would not approve use of a computer virus that could spread far beyond the intended target, as Stuxnet apparently did.  That caution, of course, presumes the lawyers knew the virus would spread, and that's not clear.  The expert would not speak publicly about classified matters.
   Whether the White House would authorize the targeted killing of Iranian scientists is far from certain.  An executive order signed by President Reagan in 1981 prohibits direct or indirect involvement in assassinations, although the term is not defined.
   President Obama has authorized the killing of Al Qaeda members and other suspected militants, including at least one U.S. citizen in Yemen.
   Some analysts claim that the U.S. would not back a bombing campaign that has killed Iranian workers at oil refineries and other civilian sties.  It would amount to sponsoring terrorism, a charge Washington regularly levels at Tehran.
   "I do not believe that the U.S. has participated in either attacking scientists or physical attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities," said Greg Thielmann, a former State Department Intelligence official who helped expose the faulty intelligence cited by the George W. Bush administration before the 2003 invasion of Iraq.  "Selling them bad parts, introducing malware--that does seem to me within the realm of what one might expect from U.S. intelligence activities."
   Reuel Marc Gerecht, a former CIA operative who specialized on Iran, said he doesn't believe that the CIA could mount a sophisticated covert campaign of sabotage inside Iran, where the U.S. has not had an embassy since 1979.  Gerecht long has urged the CIA to mount more aggressive operations against Iran.
   "I just think trying to maintain and run a paramilitary covert action group inside Iran is beyond America's covert capacity," he said.
   What ever the cause, headlines about unsolved killings, unexplained explosions and sinister computer viruses have rattled Iranians, especially those who work in the nuclear program, analysts said.
   Perhaps that's the point.
   "All these things have a profound effect," Clawson said.  "You have to watch your back when you go to work.  You're not certain what's going to happen when you turn on your computer.  You're not certain whether you can talk to your colleagues."

This article was copywrited and I have permission from Trish @ The Los Angeles Times to copy to my site.
So, is our President going off on his own to unilaterally declare war on Iran, or has he consulted Congress? 

Sunday, November 27, 2011


   Did you hear on "This Week" on ABC today where Colin Powell said that the politicians in Washington really needs to compromise?  He said the Congress failed because the Tea Party refuses to compromise.  His words were, "But the Tea Party point of view of no compromise whatsoever is not a point of view that will eventually produce a presidential candidate who will win."  I have to wonder about the amnesia that this Four Star General and former Secretary of State is suffering from.
   For the first two years of President Obama's reign, there was absolutely no compromise in Washington.  The Democratic leaders in both houses of Congress vowed that they would push through their agenda "one way or another".  They would not consult the Republicans on anything.  Often, they would sneak behind closed doors and shut the Republicans totally out!  Compromise!?!  Are you kidding me?
   And where are you and your neighbors today?  Have they soooo improved your life and mine that we bow down to them and praise them for aaaaall they have done?  Wake up America!  Stop listening to the mainstream media!
   Then the topic of illegal immigration was also discussed.  The mainstream media wants all of these criminals to be given amnesty.  Well, why would we do that for foreigners and not grant amnesty for our home grown criminals?  They talk about "splitting up families" of these criminals.  Well, our American families are split up when some Thug gets prison time for the crimes they have committed.  Let's open our prisons open and re-unite our American families!
   What am I missing?  Leave a comment and let's get this conversation going.  Obviously, I need help to understand!

You can also follow me at, where we read The Bible;, where we discuss health issues, and, where I just rant about daily life.  Just click the links.

Monday, November 21, 2011


  Russian warships are in "Syrian waters" outside the port of Tarsus in the Mediterranean Sea as reported by in response to the continued Syrian unrest.  Three Russian warships will reportedly not dock at the port, but will on operational duty along the Syrian coast to resist any foreign interference in the Syrian civil unrest.
   The U.S. has two carriers:  the USS Stenis and USS Bush presently opposite Iran in the Persian Gulf.  They arrived on Nov. 12, 2011.  On that date, there was an explosion at the Revolutionary Guard's base near Tehran that wiped out the entire leadership of Iran's ballistic missile program, according to THE TOTAL COLLAPSE.
   I reported on September 3rd, that Israel and Iran both had warships in the Red Sea.  This was prompted due to Iran's nuclear program.  You are welcomed to go back and read that post.
   So, we have war ships, nuclear submarines, and carriers in the Mediterranean Sea, Persian Gulf, and the Red Sea from the U.S., Iran, Israel, and Russia. 
   China is also playing naval show.  They have ships in the Indian Ocean.  They are strutting for India.
   Interesting, huh?

Sunday, November 20, 2011


   It is coming down to the wire on the Congressional budget cuts.  Although the liberals had two years without restraint just after we sent Barack Hussein Obama to the White House, they deny responsibility for the state of our government.  Oh, yes, it is G.W. Bush's fault.  Oh, dear!
   The liberals continue to say nothing is their fault.  They just want to be "fair" through government.  O.K., then, let's be fair:  I have been paying taxes ALL of my life.  I will never collect my social security that I paid for.  The liberals want to raise taxes on "the rich".  Well, if we are going to be "fair", let's stop funding welfare recipients with my money.  Let's stop supporting ILLEGAL immigrants.  Let's stop base line budgeting.  Let's stop Congress from making money in a way that would be ILLEGAL for the American Public.  In fact, let's take that money away from them, that is ill-gotten gains, and apply that to the deficit!  If we are taking other people's money, let us also confiscate money from those who are working to destroy this country and apply that money to the deficit.  Hello George Soros, SEIU, etc.  Let's have Egypt pay the millions of debt our President has forgiven since the militant Muslems took over that country.  Let's cancel the milllions our President promised Brazil to drill oil.  Let's stop funding abortion!
   No, the Liberals want to gut our military.  We asked them to CUT spending.  The Liberals can't hear us.  They want to INCREASE taxes.  What is the meaning of the word "is"?  How stupid can you be? 
   What are your thoughts?  Leave a comment to tell Washington how to CUT spending.

Saturday, November 19, 2011


   Are we still on the Jerry Sandusky kick?  Why?  The mainstream media is making the situation out to be something abhorrent.  I just don't understand why.
   Elton John has a son and is "married" to a man.  We give credence to Ellen Degeneres, Rosey O'Donnell, and Jane Lynch.  We tout Chaz Bono as if there is something magical about him/her.  Wake up, America!  If there is nothing wrong with any of these, there is nothing wrong with Jerry Sandusky.  What are you doing?  Let sleeping dogs lie.  Give him the right to marry these young boys.  Won't that make it right? 
   "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman;  that is detestable."  Leviticus 18:21  "Do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it.  A woman must not present herself to an animal to have sexual relations with it;  that is a perversion."  Leviticus 18:23  "Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the nations that I am going to drive out before you became defiled.  Leviticus 18:24  "But you must keep my decrees and my laws.  The native-born and the aliens living among you must not do any of these detestable things, for all these things were done by the people who lived in the land before you, and the land became defiled.  And if you defile the land, it will vomit you out as it vomited out the nations that were before you."

You can also follow me at,, and  Just click the links.

Thursday, November 17, 2011


   Who has the time to invest in trying to find out what the main stream media is not telling us about the President they love so much?  The following piece was obtained from the Jerusalem Post.
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak was quoted as saying today, that Jerusalem was engaged in an "intensive world struggle to enlist the world leaders" to support strict sanctions against Iran.   He was unable to convince the world to implement crippling sanctions against Iran that would convince it to jettison its military nuclear program.
   On Thursday, a resolution was agreed upon in Vienna by the five permanent members of the Security Counsil, plus Germany, to slam Iran for its defiance (regarding nuclear weapons) but stopped short of sending the matter back to the UN Security Counsil for another round of sanctions.  The resolution is expected to be passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors meeting on Friday.

   Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon picked up on the universality of the threat Iran imposes during a speech Thursday at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, saying Tehran's fingerprints can be seen in every area of conflict in the region.
   "It is forbidden for that nonconventional regime to obtain nonconventional weapons, and one way or another Iran has to be prevented from acquiring a nuclear capability", Ya'alon said. "The challange is not only on our doorstep, and it is before the whole free world, led by the U.S."
   Ya'alon said that these were "critical hours" in determining where the world would go with its Iranian policy.    "Our assessment is that it is possible to stop the military nuclear project in Iran if all will cooperate and the Iranians will be faced with the following dillema:  nuclear weapons or survival.
   "Those making decisions in Iran were still not convinced ot the West's determination to stop it", he said.

The bottom line here is that Israel is pleading, unsuccessfully,  with the world to stop Iran from progressing on their nuclear weapons plans.

We are having a fund raising to bring my Mother home.  Any donation of $48.50 or more to will receive a New Your style cherry cheesecake sent to your choice of receipient within the Continental United States of America.  Honoring our parents is the only Commandment with a blessing attatched to it.  God bless you for your help.  E-mail me with the address of where to send the cheesecake at

Monday, November 14, 2011


   In March of 2004, Martha Stewart was convicted of obstructing justice and lying to the government about superbly timed stock sale.  The charges centered on why Stewart dumped $228,000.00 of ImClone Systems stock on December 27, 2001, just a day before it was announced that the Federal Drug and Administration (FDA) had rejected ImClone's application for approval of a cancer drug.  The rejection sent ImClone's stock plummeting.  Anyway,the story goes that her stock broker heard that the CEO of the company was looking to dump his stock, he alerted Ms Stewart, and she said to sell.  She ended up saving over $51,000.00 by the sell.  (This was obtained from AP via Fox News.)
   So, why are we discussing Martha Stewart now since her ordeal was seven years ago?  Did you miss the point that she was convicted of lying to the government about her stock trades?  The CEO of ImClone was convicted of insider trading.  James B Comey, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York was quoted as saying that lying to the FBI and the SEC will not be tolerated.  Ms Stewart was not convicted of insider trading. 

   We are talking about Martha Stewart today, because of the 60 Minute show this past weekend that discovered all the insider trading that our elected officials and all of the lobbyists in Washington are doing.......legally.  Because they own the reigns of the law and they exempt themselves from the same laws they say we have to obey!  These Occupy Wall Streeters have the wrong target:  They should be marching on Nancy Pelosi and the others in D.C. who have made millions from insider trading.
   The person being interviewed by Steve Kroft was Peter Schweizer, who wrote a book about the corruption in D.C., titled "Throw Them All Out".  We all need to read this book and contact our representatives in D.C. and put a stop to all this garbage.   What do you think?  Although with less than 6% of the eligible voters in Texas voting in this past election, how far do you think we will get?  Get involved, everybody!  We are loosing our country!

You can also follow me at,, and  Just click the links.


Saturday, November 12, 2011


    In the State of Texas, the Attorney General has the following posted:

"We all have the responsibility to protect our children from harm.  If you suspect the abuse or neglect of a child, it is YOUR DUTY to report it IMMEDIATELY.

Anyone having cause to believe that a child's physical or mental health or welfare has been or may be adversely affected by abuse or neglect MUST report the case immediately to a state or local law enforcement agency or the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS).

DFPS has a toll-free Family Violence Hotline:  1-800-252-5400.

Your legal obligation

Current law requires that professionals such as teachers, doctors, nurses, or child daycare workers must make a verbal report within 48 hours.  Failure to report SUSPECTED child abuse or neglect is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of up to 180 days and/or a fine of up to $2000.00 ( Texas Family Code, Chapter 261).

Reporting suspected child abuse to your principal, school counselor or superintendent will NOT satisfy your obligation under this law.  Local school district policy cannot conflict with or supersede the state law requiring you to report child abuse to a law enforcement agency or DFPS.

Your legal Protection

Your report of child abuse or neglect is confidential and immune from civil or criminal liability as long as the report is made in "good faith" and "without malice."

In good faith means that the person making the report took reasonable steps to learn facts that were readily available and at hand.  Without malice means that the person did not intend to injure or violate the rights of another person.  Provided these two conditions are met, you will also be immune from liability if you are asked to participate in any judicial proceedings that might result from your report.
If you suspect abuse:
   DON'T try to investigate
   DON'T  confront the abuser
   DO report your reasonable suspicions

It is not up to you to determine whether your suspicions are true.  A trained investigator will evaluate the child's situation.  Even if your report does not bring decisive action, it may help establish a pattern that will eventually be clear enough to help the child."

The bottom line is that it is a crime to ignore child abuse, whether you are in Texas or Pennsylvania.

Sunday, November 6, 2011


  Voting for this amendment honors the sacrifice of the surviving spouse of our totaly disabled veteran.
  This is a power grab.  I'm voting no.
  This is no time to increase state debt.  I'm voting no.
  This is another power grab.  I'm voting no.
  Our government officials need to be accountable to the voters.  I'm voting no.
  Our government officials need to cut spending, not shift money around to cover out of control spending.  I'm voting no.
  Voting no gives officials time to obtain more information before authorizing growing the government.
  This is a duplication of services.  I'm voting no.
  Voting for this proposition gives more equality to people who receive deferred adjudication with those who are convicted of crimes.
  Voting for this proposition reconciles the law with the intent of the law.

  You can also follow me at

NOV. 8, 2011 PROPOSITIONS 6-10

Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment clarifying references to the permanent school fund, allowing the General Land Office to distrubute revenue from permanent school fund land or other properties to the available school fund to provide additional funding to public education, and providing for an increase in the market value of the permanent school fund for the purpose of allowing increased distributions from the available school fund.
The Permanent School Fund (PSF) was established in the Texas Constitution of 1876, which set aside half of Texas' remaining public lands to help finance public schools.  Several different terms are used in the Constitution to refer to this fund, and Proposition 6 would replace other terms with the single term,"Permanent School Fund" in all references.
The proposed amendment also provides for potential increases in distribution from the PSF to the Available School Fund (ASF) , which provides funding to school districts on a per-student basis and supports classroom instructional materials and technology.
  Currently the General Land Office is responsible for managing the public school lands; proceeds from the land and mineral rights are held in the PSF.  The State Board of Education (SBOE) manages the investment of the PSF and, if the fund's investment performance permits, makes distributions from the PSF to the ASF.  Only interest or revenue income from the PSF can be spent; the principle amount remains intact and will contine to benefit the public schools of Texas.
  The proposed amendment would permit the distribution of some revenue derived from the public school lands directly to the ASF.  The GLO, or another entity other than the SBOE with the responsibility of management of public school fund land or other properties, would be permitted to transfer up to $300 million per year of revenues derived from the public lands that year.  This provision addresses problems found by the Attorney General in a previous statute allowing such distributions.
  The proposed amendment would also change the way the market value of the PSF is calculated by including additional assets that are currently not included (i.e. discretionary real estate investments and cash in the state treasury derived from PSF property).  At the beginning of each legislative session, the SBOE determines the rate (up to a maximum rate specified in the Constitution) of the market value of the PSF that will go to the ASF.  Given the current value of the PSF and the rate determined by the SBOE at the beginning of the last legislative session, this proposed amendment might provide approximately $75 million more to the ASF in FY 2011-2012 and 2012-2013.
Arguments for:
Increased distributions to the Available School Fund would provide support for public schools at a time when additional funding for schools is needed.
Arguments against:
Instead of transferring additional revenue to schools now, the revenue should be used to grow the Permanent School Fund to provide support for public schools in future years.
Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit conservation and reclamation districts in El Paso County to issue bonds supported by ad valorem taxes to fund the development and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities.
Under the Texas Constitution, the legislature can authorize specific counties or water districts to create conservation and reclamation districts that would issue bonds and levy taxes to develop parks and recreational facilities that were not so authorized before September 13, 2003.  Currently 10 counties are specified; Proposition 7 would add El Paso County to that list.
If the proposed amendment passes, voters in the district would have to approve or deny creation of a combined city/county tax district in El Paso County in order for the legislature to authorize a district to issue bonds or incur indebtedness.
Argument for
  The City of El Paso's park system is bearing the brunt of tremendous growth in the county, not only from migration but also the relocation of military families to Fort Bliss.  The proposed amendment would enable the city and county to work together to develop a comprehensive regional parks system, which would not only attract development but also could leverage resources of both the city and county and operate more efficiently than either entity could on its own.
  Passage of this proposed constitutional amendment would not automatically raise taxes.  It is just the first step in the process of allowing the district voters to decide on the creation of an El Paso County parks district.  If approved, city and county officials would begin working on legislation for consideration for the 83rd Texas Legislature beginning January 2013.
Argument against
  If the proposition is approved, taxpayers in the county, which is not affluent, could be subject to yet another taxing entity.  Establishing a recreational parks district is a quality of life issue rather than an economic development issue.  Sustaining the economy is a more important focus for community leaders at this time.
   City and county leaders need to have more information about the exact financing, leadership, functions, and authority of the proposed park district before this constitutional amendment is presented to the voters.
Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment providing for the appraisal for ad valorem tax purposes of open-spaced land devoted to water stewardship purposes on the basis of its productive capacity.
  Property that is appraised for open land use (currently for agriculture, ranching, and/or wildlife preservation) is taxed on the basis of its productive capacity, rather than at full market value.  This proposed amendment would add a new water conservation option, called a "water stewardship valuation," to land already appraised for open land use.  This would not decrease property taxes on the land, but would give open-space landowners another option to engage in activities on their property that benefit both water quality and quantity.
  Management plans for individual water stewardship would be created in association with The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and could include brush control to increase stream flow and ground water storage, land management that would enhance infiltration into soil around playas, water reuse projects in wetlands to clean water naturally, and erosion control to impede silting of reservoirs.
Arguments against
  This valuation is unneccesary because it would duplicate options that are already available under the wildlife management valuation.
Official Ballot Language
  The constitutional amendment authorizing the governor to grant a pardon to a person who successfully completes a term of deferred adjudication community supervision.
  In some criminal cases, if a defendant pleads guilty or no contest, a judge may defer adjudication of guilt and place the defendant on probation with community supervision.  If the defendant successfully completes probation, the judge must dismiss the charges.
   Under the current law, the judge can grant pardons after conviction, but not after deferred adjudication.  The proposed amendment would add the authority to grant pardons after deferred adjudication as well.  All other requirements for pardons would remain the same.
  When a pardon is granted, the criminal record may be expunged.  A person who has completed deferred adjudication still has a criminal record in the public domain.
Arguments for
  Proposition 9 would result in a more equitable policy on pardons and expunction of criminal records by offering the same opportunity to persons who have completed deferred adjudication as to persons who have been convicted.  The governor would still have the discretion about whether to grant a pardon.
  Even though charges are dismissed after successful adjudication, the criminal history remains and may be a barrier in obtaining employment, housing, or admission to schools.
Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment to change the length of the unexpired term that causes the automatic resignation of certain elected county or district officeholders if they become candidates for another office.
  Under current law, if certain district or county office holders with more than one year left on their current terms announce for or become candidates for another office, they automatically resign from their current office.  This "resign-to-run" provision was added to the Constitution in 1958 after the terms for certain officials were changed from two to four years.  With a one year unexpired term, it provided a window for elected officials to file for office by January 2 for an election within the same calendar year without resigning their offices.
  Because Senate Bill 100 changed the filing deadline for offices from January 2 of the primary election year to the second Monday in December of the preceeding year, the one-year unexpired term no longer allowed the same opportunity for the office holders to continue in their current office while running for a new office.  Proposition 10 would change the length of the unexpired term that causes the automatic resignation from one year to one year and 30 days, thus preserving the original intent of the provision.
Argument for
  Most candidates for elected office need to have paid employment.  Proposition 10 would allow them to maintain their income while running for office, and would allow the current office to be covered with an experienced person during that time, eliminating unnecessary vacancies and the need for temporary appointments to complete the term.

You can also follow me at

Saturday, November 5, 2011

NOV. 8, 2011 PROPOSITION 1-5

Official Ballot Language:
The Constitutional Amendment authorizing the legislature to provide for an exemption from ad valorem taxation of all or part of the market value of the residence homestead of the surviving spouse of 100% or totally disabled veteran.
Currently the Tax Code fully exempts residential homesteads of totally disabled veterans from property taxes.
   Proposition 1 would let the legislature give a property tax exemption to the surviving spouse of a totally disabled veteran a) if the property had been exempted from property taxes under the disabled veteran's tax exemption, b) if it was the residence of the surviving spouse when the veteran died, c) and remained the surviving spouse's residence homestead thereafter, and d) if the surviving spouse had not remarried.   (Note:  it gives no time limit on the "not remarrying").
   This exemption would follow the surviving spouse if a new homestead were purchased and the surviving spouse had not remarried.  The exemption would be limited to the dollar amount of the exemption of the previous qualifying homestead.
   If passed, this exemption would apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

Official Ballot Language
The Constitutional Amendment providing for the issuance of additional obligation bonds by the Texas Water Development Board in an amount not to exceed $6 billion at any time outstanding.
   The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) makes loans at very low interest rates to cities, towns, water supply corporations and various other political sub-divisions across the state.  These loans are used to fund a variety of local water projects , including infrastructure improvement or water treatment plants.   The TWDB current capacity of bonding of $2 billion is not sufficient to meet the needs of local governments that are upgrading infrastructure to meet the growing demand.  The proposed amendment would authorize the TWDB to issue additional bonds as long as the aggregate amount did not exceed $6 billion.  This ongoing authority is known as "evergreen" authority.
   These bonds, if approved, would be self-supporting and not a detriment to the state budget, would not cost the state any money from the general revenue fund, and would not count toward the state's constitutional debt limit.  The principle and debt limits on the loans would be paid by the political subdivisions.  The interest paid on the loans funds the agency.
   The jump from $2 billion to $6 billion is too large.  The ceiling should be raised in smaller increments, with periodic review from the legislature and voters.
   It is not clear how much development and economic growth our water supply can sustain.  We should determine first how much we should expand our water infrastructure.
   The "evergreen" authority would reauthorize the issuance of bonds previously approved and since paid off and retired.  The legislature and the voters should maintain accountability for the administration of the funds by retaining their authority to approve the issuance of state bonds periodically.
  It seems to me that the government keeps grabbing for more power and no one is ever responsible for the government's actions.
Official Ballot Language
    The constitutional amendment providing for the issuance of general obligation bonds of the State of Texas to finance educational loans to students.
   The Hinson-Hazelwood College Student Loan Program provides low- interest loans to Texas residents who attend public or private higher education institutions in Texas and who have insufficient resources to finance a college education.  The loan program uses general education bonds to finance the loans, which generally must be authorized by constitutional amendment.  Since 1965 Texas voters have approved seven constitutional amendments authorizing $1.86 billion in bonds for the HH loan program.  It is projected that the remaining bonds will be exhausted in 1013.
Arguments against
   This is not a good time to increase state debt.  Even though the program is self-supporting, the bonds are considered an obligation of the state, and the state is ultimately responsible for repaying the money borrowed.
   The current poor economy could increase the rate of default on the loans, affecting the programs ability to be self-supporting.
   The evergreen authority would re-authorize the issuance of bonds originally approved as long as 40 years ago and since paid off and retired.  The legislatures and the voters should maintain accountability of the administration of the funds by retaining their authority to approve the issuance of state bonds periodically.
Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to permit a county to issue bonds or notes to finance the development or redevelopment of an unproductive, underdeveloped, or blighted area and to pledge for repayment of the bonds or notes increases for ad valorem taxes imposed by the county on property in the area.  The amendment does not provide authority for increasing ad valorem taxes.
  Currently the Texas Constitution authorizes the legislature to authorize incorporated cities and towns to use a mechanism called "tax increment financing" to finance the development or redevelopment of unproductive, underdeveloped, or blighted areas.  Under this mechanism the bonds or notes to finance the development are repaid using increases in revenues on the property in the area.  The revenue increases comes from increases in property values in the development area, not from an increased tax rate, which is not authorized.
Proposition 4 would expand the authority to include counties, so that tax increment financing could be used in unincorporated areas.
Argument against:
   Property taxes should not be used to fund transportation and other re-development projects.
   Tax increment financing could create an incentive to increase property appraisals in reinvestment zones to repay the bonds and notes and thus divert funds from other pressing needs.  Because the criteria for the zones are not well-defined, influential developers could get an area designated as a reinvestment zone, and existing businesses in the zone could end up paying higher taxes for development that does not benefit them, or may even benefit their competitors.
Official Ballot Language
The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to allow cities or counties to enter into interlocal contracts with other cities or counties without the imposition of a tax or a provision of a sinking fund.
Currently under the Texas Constitution, cities with a population greater than 5000 and all counties and cities bordering on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico may not create any debt without levying a tax sufficient to pay the interest and provide a sinking fund of at least two percent.  A contract longer than one year between local governments has been interpreted as a debt under certain circumstances, requiring the tax assessment and creation of a sinking fund.
  Proposition 5, along with its enabling legislation would authorize those cities and counties to enter into interlocal contracts longer than one year with other cities or counties without meeting the tax and sinking fund requirement.
Argument for:
 This proposition would give local governments more flexibility to consolidate projects and services over a term longer one year in order to improve efficiency and reduce cost to the taxpayers.
Argument against:
 There may be some cases where multi-year interlocal contracts do constitute a debt and should require a tax and sinking fund; removing this constraint gives too much flexibility to local governments.  And I agree.

You can also follow me at

Tuesday, November 1, 2011


   This is going to be short and sweet:  The main stream media is reporting that Herman Cain was  ACCUSED of sexual harassment in the 1990's.  He was accused.  He was not convicted.  As far as I can discover, there was no trial.  He was accessed, not convicted.
   Let me try to explain:  I was involved in an incident where my truck's back tire allegedly ran over a guy's foot while the truck was on private property.  No ticket was given.  My insurance was notified.  That was all I heard of the issue.  It was months later, when I was talking with my agent that I asked about the case.  I was informed that the insurance co. denied damages.  The guy who was allegedly ran over was involved in several such cases.  I was not contacted about the resolution of the case, so had I not asked, I would not have known. 
   Herman Cain says he did not know the resolution of the so called victims of his sexual harassment.  Some companies would rather settle than go through a lengthy trial and have their names smeared in the public domain.  Whether they are innocent or not, they are still labeled in the mind of the public.
   Now, with all the hype of the liberal media and the current administration in the White House, let's talk discrimination:  Karen Finney is a typical liberal.  She is a democratic strategist and an MSMBC analyst.  Did you hear what she said?  "....they think he is a black man who knows his place.", referring to Mr. Cain.   What place is his?  What happened to Martin Luther King, Jr. who wanted all Americans to be judged by their character and not the color of their skin.  So, it is set in stone that Ms. Finney is racist.  Who else would make such a statement?  This shows how racist the liberals are every time they accuse the conservatives or the Tea Party of being racist.  Why can't we talk about issues rather than color of someone's skin?  It sure appears that the liberals don't want to discuss issues because they just want to destroy this great country. 

Saturday, October 29, 2011


   Reuter's said that Herman Cain's "smoking ad" divided the Tea Party.  They referred to a poll they conducted.  I will argue that it did not.  The questions in the poll made it appear that it divided the Tea Party.  If you did not see the ad, you can find it all over the internet.  Here are a few points for discussion about the ad:
1.   Mark Block was talking about Herman Cain, not about smoking.  Did you hear what he said?  He was saying he joined Cain's camp because he believed in Mr. Cain's ability to run this country and get it back on track.  Of course, this is advertisement.  I'm sure he joined because he will be getting a paycheck.
2.   This government should not force people to stop smoking.  Smoking is a life style choice.  No body forced smokers to smoke.  The government needs to get out of everyone's business.  How can my government target smokers and the obese since that life style is unhealthy and not target homosexuals?
3.   Mr. Cain has a smoker for his CEO of his campaign, and he wears pink shirts.  Perhaps he is demonstrating the inclusiveness of his campaign to contrast the divisiveness of the current administration in Washington, D.C.
4.   Herman Cain has had issues raising funding for his campaign.  How much free advertising did this one ad give him?  Brilliant!

What are your views about the ad?  Disclaimer:  I am not endorsing any Republican candidate or President Obama at this time.

Friday, October 28, 2011


   The following piece was copied and pasted from The Blaze of Bill Ayers addressing the Occupy Wall Street crowd in Chicago:  Former terrorist-turned-university professor Bill Ayers (you may remember him from his ongoing presence in 2008 presidential campaign theoretic), made an appearance last week at Occupy Chicago.
The former radical, a member of the infamous and violent Weather Underground, discussed his experience with “revolutions,” gave advice about how to handle the Tea Party and took a solid jab at President Barack Obama — a man many believe he was once friends with.
Considering the Occupy movement’s ongoing calls for “revolution” and a major push for a fundamentally changed system, it’s no wonder Ayers was brought in to address the Chicago protesters. Among their many questions, his audience wondered how they should handle the media’s continued comparison between Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party.
“A big bright line running through the Tea Party movement is Jingoism, Nativism, racism,” he told the protesters. “A big bright line is funding from the Koch brothers.” Of course, Ayers didn’t mention anything about the large-scale progressive groups that are assisting with Occupy Wall Street and its sister protests.
While he characterized the conservative movement in these terms, he also said it‘s important to remember that those who associate with the Tea Party aren’t the Occupiers’ enemies. ”Even when they’re huffed up with false stupidity and manipulated by all kinds of forces,” he reiterated.
Rather than violence — a tactic his Weather Underground was never afraid to employ — Ayers directed the students to rely on their natural “tools”:
“I think you should use your brilliance, your humor, your wisdom, your body to dramatize the violence that exists. But we do not live in a neutral — not when there’s a trillion dollar military budget — the biggest in the world, not when they’re recruiting kids to be in the service, not when every athletic event begins with guns and marching…that‘s a violent culture and that’s where we live…”
And, very oddly, he was sure to slip in a dig at Obama. ”Somebody like Barack Obama who drone strikes American citizens is saying ‘I want you all to be non-violent.’ Well, I want you to be non-violent,” he quipped.

Q. Why did Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin accuse Barack Obama of "palling around with terrorists"?

A. She was referring to Obama's association with 1960s radical Bill Ayers, now an education professor at the University of Illinois  at Chicago.
Q. How are Ayers and Obama associated?

A. They both live in the Hyde Park area on the South Side, and Obama visited Ayers' home for a meeting at the start of his first state Senate bid in 1995. They were active in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an education reform group, and attended meetings together from the mid-1990s to 2001.

Q. Is Obama "pals" with Ayers?

A. In February, Obama strategist David Axelrod told the Politico Web site that Obama and Ayers are "certainly friendly." More recently, campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt told The New York Times that the two have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mails since Obama joined the Senate in 2005. Their last encounter, LaBolt said, was more than a year ago when they ran into each other on the street in Hyde Park. In a CNN interview aired Monday, Axelrod said that when Obama went to Ayers' home in 1995, "he didn't know the history" of Ayers' radical past.

Q. Was Ayers a terrorist?

A. He was a founding member of the Weather Underground, a radical group opposed to the Vietnam War. In his 2001 memoir, "Fugitive Days," he wrote that he helped bomb official sites, including the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon. In bombings claimed by the group, no one was killed or injured. But some investigators have suspected the group in an unclaimed 1970 explosion that killed a San Francisco police sergeant. No one was ever charged in that case. Years later, while Ayers was no longer in hiding, fellow members of the group were linked to a Brink's robbery in which two police officers and a guard were shot to death.
Q. Was Ayers ever tried for his activities?

A. No. Federal charges had been dropped after FBI surveillance techniques were ruled unconstitutional.

Q. Has Ayers voiced regret for the bombings?

A. No. "We weren't terrorists," Ayers told the Tribune in 2001. "The reason we weren't terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terror against people. Terrorism was what was being practiced in the countryside of Vietnam" by the U.S.

Monday, October 24, 2011


   Did you hear the one where the federal government is taking control of the airwaves?  It was solely the responsibility of the President of the United States to determine when the Emergency Alert System (EAS) should be activated at the national level, but our President does not have time while he is out on the campaign trail to see to his responsibilities.  So, he delegated this minor responsibility to the director of FEMA.  Isn't that just what we need?  After all, FEMA has performed all other responsibilities in such stellar manner.  Oh, I don't know, maybe like providing FEMA trailers to Katrina victims with high levels of formaldehyde in them.  Or how about refusing to assist the victims of the massive wild fires in Texas.  Yes, I'm sure FEMA is better equipped to handle this responsibility than our President. 
   It just makes you want to ask WHY do a national test of the EAS now?  It has never been done before.  What is this Administration expecting?  Or what are they planning?  I have to say, I don't trust ANYONE in the Obama Administration. 
   The shut down of the airwaves is set for November 9, 2011 at 2pm EST.  I am so excited to have the government take full control of all media in this country.

You can also follow me at  Just click the link.