Even as "Muslim civil rights" groups throughout the West push for muslimatoon to exercise the right to wear the veil, a Moslem shopkeeper in Eurabia has had enough of being robbed at veilpoint. Money still apparently talks:
Everyone entering ATAA Jewellers in Glasgow must reveal their faces under planned new rules to protect staff from further attacks.
The store owners decided to act after two Asian men wearing traditional Muslim women's clothes – including niqab veils – made away with thousands of pounds worth of jewellery earlier this month.
Now the Sadiq family who run the shop are planning to put up a sign informing customers that they cannot wear any headgear that covers the face....
How will the local ummah react to Rukhsana Sadiq's safety measure? He's treading on the toes of fundamentalist Moslems.
These days, a lot of conservatives are complaining that the Republican Party has morphed into a group of RINOS (Republicans In Name Only). As in the past, a lot of those on the right believe that the Republican Party has deserted conservative principles and are saying, "We need a third party!" -------
Yes, parties other than the Democratic Party and Republican Party participate in our elections and have active members. We note, however, that those other parties garner a small percentage of votes, but sometimes a large enough percentage of the popular vote to result in the election of the party to which the third parties are often most opposed.
Read here the arguments in favor of and in opposition to two-party systems. Please do read these arguments before proceeding to the FEATURED QUESTION at the bottom of this post.
Read here about the 1800 Presidential Election, which led to the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
What began as doing research on Islam and filling time when confined to the house for months on end after the dreadful car accident I had, has now turned into a (near) obsession with blogging and searching the Internet for stories which the mainstream media will not publish. Thanks to all the readers who stop by here and to those who take the time to leave comments. Know that I appreciate all of you — except for the vilest trolls, whom I ban through Haloscan.
Look, I love baseball. I was learning to swing a bat even before I started going to kindergarten.
But to expect the taxpayers' to pay for keeping Metro, the D.C. transporation system including both bus and rail service, open beyond the usual hour so that attendeees of night games can ride home. Other groups don't receive that same special privilege for free. Furthermore, such special consideration for the Washington Nationals flies in the face of financial realities, especially at a time when Metro is facing a budget gap of $29 million, laying off some 300 workers, and cutting back on bus services.
The rule for keeping Metro open beyond the usual closing hour is as follows:
Under a 2003 Metro policy, organizations that want Metrorail to open early or close late are required to pay the agency a fee. Such organizations and events include the Washington Redskins, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure, the Marine Corps Marathon and groups that perform at Verizon Center. The fees must be paid two weeks in advance, and organizers receive refunds if fares exceed that amount, which typically happens with large events.
That policy seems fair enough. But after some apparent confusion and a lack of communication among the D.C. Transportation Department, Metro, and the Washington Nationals, the late-service fee of $27,000 per hour has been waived:
District officials have decided that the city will cover all the costs for Metro to stay open to accommodate late Washington Nationals games after having suggested that others in the region share the tab.
Suddenly, as if by magic, the District now claims capable of finding the necessary budget resources for transportation after those late-release baseball games. If those funds can be found now, why couldn't they have been found before? Or is Metro going to make cutbacks in other ways so that the transportation system can run the few times that a Washington Nationals game runs beyond the usual time?
What brought the above to a head and resulted in the city's decision is the following:
The confusion over who would pay for such service began when Gabe Klein, director of the D.C. Transportation Department, told Metro officials in a letter last week that the city would no longer pay the late-service fee of $27,000 an hour because of the budget crunch. Team officials said they did not know that there had been a policy change until Monday night, when a rain delay pushed the game past Metro's midnight closing.
Metro and team officials spent more than two hours squabbling about when Metro would close and who would pay if it stayed open. Some fans said they were confused by last-minute announcements at Nationals Park about when the last train would leave Navy Yard. Ultimately, Metro agreed to stay open past the regular midnight shutdown.
The mix-up stemmed from a communication breakdown, Albert said. Klein said he sent the letter to Metro based on staff information that his department did not have money this year to pay the late-game fees, which occur when games go late because of rain delays or extra innings. He did not check with the mayor's office, he said.
Albert said the city will pay for the extra hour and a half of service after Monday's game, roughly $40,000. That works out to about $2,531 for each of the 16 passengers who entered Metrorail after midnight.
In my view, baseball fans who wish to attend a game should be ingenious enough to arrange their own transportation. Or perhaps the taxpayer subsidy of Nationals Stadium was a bad idea in the first place:
Economists seldom agree, but the many studies done over the past decade all arrived at the same conclusion: Publicly funded stadiums do not deliver the benefits they promise. A recent paper by the Cato Institute concluded, "The academic research overwhelmingly concludes that the presence of professional sports teams has no measurable positive impact on economic growth."
Funding a new stadium in the District may be good politics, but it is bad public policy. Major League Baseball will be laughing all the way to the bank while D.C. residents will find that they get much less than they were promised -- and paid for.
Despite stadium was funded. Now the issue is transportation. Once rearing its head, the nanny continues to need more and more from the taxpayer — all in the name of the common good, even if that good does nothing more than serve special interests.
(hat tip to Weasel Zippers) Remember when Olbermann got into a spot of trouble last fall?
The final straw came during the RNC just after a tribute to the victims of the 9/11 attacks was aired on MSNBC. ..Olbermann apologized that MSNBC had decided to honor the [9/11] victims by airing the tribute and stated that the tribute was ‘’not appropriate to be shown,’’ and that any who participated in showing it should be ‘’eviscerated’’.
Commenters, feel free to add more data about Olbermann.
According to Harvard University economics professor Greg Mankiw:
"To put those numbers in perspective, imagine that the head of a household with annual spending of $100,000 called everyone in the family together to deal with a $34,000 budget shortfall. How much would he or she announce that spending had to be cut? By $3 over the course of the year–approximately the cost of one latte at Starbucks. The other $33,997? We can put that on the family credit card and worry about it next year."
Yet, many Americans believe that BHO can lead this economy out of a recession? Spending like a drunken sailor got us into this mess.
Consider "hair of the dog" as an effective remedy (from Wikipedia) and as a metaphor for today's American economy, especially the federal budget:
A hangover is due partly to poisoning by the toxic chemicals into which alcohol is converted by the body and the other components of the alcoholic drink, and partly to the body's reaction to withdrawal from alcohol. The symptoms of a hangover are similar to those of withdrawal, namely a throbbing headache, nausea, and maybe even vomiting. Thus consuming more alcohol ("hair of the dog") may help by blunting some of these symptoms, but will only aggravate the symptoms once the liver breaks the alcohol down, because the body will have additional toxins to deal with.
Addendum from First Conservative - Conservative News and Opinion:
Obama Hears the Tea Party Message
Robert “Tap Dance” Gibbs, the President’s Press Secretary said this morning that $100 million is a lot of money. Robert Gibbs really isn’t anyone that one would pay money to see tap dance. Responding that cutting $100 million from the incredibly bloated federal budget really is significant, Gibbs dressed up the pig as best he could by assailing the Washington culture where $100 million doesn’t seem like a lot of money.
The window dressing Gibbs was trying to apply to the Obama budget was a direct result of the Tea Party rallies held last week. Understanding that a good portion of the public wants to see the federal government reduce expenditures, Team Obama undertook to eliminate $100 million from the annual budget. This amounts to an infinitesimally small percent of the total Stimulus package. Still, Gibbs insisted this was a meaningful effort. Gibbs and the administration attempted to throw this bone to the Tea Party participants with the hope that their accomplices at MSNBC would make a big deal out of the budget cutting.
Instead, like several other PR problems this week, the budget cutting is proving more trouble than it was worth. Reporters tired of being dismissed by Gibbs actually followed up their questions and even called into question Gibb’s flippant attitude. All this may herald the close of Obama’s first one hundred days. It may also herald the point where the Leader begins taking a popularity dive.
An explanation as to why my blogging has been taking a back seat the past few weeks:
For the third time in my life, I have been robbed. This last robbery was different from the other two thefts — one a car theft from right in front of my home many years ago and the other a theft of money from my purse about this same time a year ago. For this third theft, someone entered my home and tossed a particular area in the master bedroom, the area in which I used to keep my jewelry. ------ This recent home invasion occurred during the middle of the day. The police investigator's best guess is that I came home and interrupted the theft: apparently, whoever had entered my home left when I arrived, leaving via the back door as I came in the front door. Consequently, as far as has been discerned, only one item was taken. The outcome could have been much, much worse.
Am I now living in a state of fear? No way. Am I taking more precautions? Absolutely, including keeping my handgun close by at all times.
In fact, before I even phoned the police, with my handgun in one hand and the telephone in the other, I cleared the house so as to be sure whoever had entered was not still lurking. As you might expect, the police gave me some grief over taking such a precaution on my own. But I'm not one to cower or flee — or to wait nearly an hour for the police to arrive.
I'm also keeping the house locked up like a vault. Perhaps you are accustomed to living in a vault, but nobody is this neighborhood has ever locked themselves in on all sides, especially during the day. Now, however, this community, which used to be one of small farms, open doors, and porch dwellers, has come to a state of alertness as we have locked ourselves in and, maybe, the criminals out. We're spending time looking over our shoulders and scanning the path between car and house. We're also keeping our windows closed and locked.
I do confess a certain uneasiness now that someone with malicious intentions has invaded my space. Simply put, I don't feel as safe as I used to in my own home.
What little time I've been able to spend on the web over the past few weeks Remember mycomputer crash? Restoring programs and data consumed two full days, and I still have a few odds and ends to clear up!) has been mostly time to keep up with current events and The Gathering Storm Radio Show. I'm somewhat back to blog rounds now and hope to be visiting my blogging friends on a more regular basis.
Last month, I posted about the Newspaper Revitalization Act. At the time of that posting, few took seriously the possibility that such a bailout, i.e., government control, of the print media could gain traction. The bill, proposed by U.S. Senator Benjamin Cardin, had no sponsors at the point of that previous posting and was limited to preserving local newspapers, not for the purpose of bailing out the media conglomerates.
Now comes this story from Fox News (hat tip to Weasel Zippers):
Obama Appointee Suggests Radical Plan for Newspaper Bailout
Rosa Brooks, who has moved from the L.A. Times to the Pentagon, called formore "direct government support for public media"and government licensing of the news, which critics say would destroy the independent media.
Influential Los Angeles Times columnist Rosa Brooks has hung up her journalistic hat and joined the Obama administration, but not before penning a public proposal calling for some radical ideas to help bail out the failing news industry.
Brooks, who has taken up a post as an adviser at the Pentagon, advocated upping "direct government support for public media" and creating licenses to govern news operations.
"Years of foolish policies have left us with a choice: We can bail out journalism, using tax dollars and granting licenses in ways that encourage robust and independent reporting and commentary, or we can watch, wringing our hands, as more and more top journalists are laid off," she wrote in her parting column on April 9.
Brooks said this would help rescue the industry from a "death spiral"...
But critics say her proposal would spell an end to the independent media and make journalists reliant lapdogs...
A stepping stone to control of the media as portrayed by George Orwell's dystopia in 1984 via the control of what information and terminology the public can find available in the mainstream media? Welcome to Pravda USA!
Bill O'Reilly on the topic of Rosa Brooks:
WE THE PEOPLE can have all the Tax Day Tea Parties we want, but if the government gains extensive control of the media, those Parties will be in vain, particularly if there is no overall plan to continue the momentum of such a grassroots movement.
I'm not just talking about Obama's failing to mention Jesus—though he did pointedly fail to mention the name of the One—that is, for him, the other "One"—who first told the "parable" he shared.
No, Jesus' very name, in the form of the ancient monogram IHS, which had been in gold lettering on the wooden archway above Gaston Hall's dais, was painted over (or otherwise expertly camouflaged) prior to Obama's arrival. Apparently, the Name that is above every other name is not permitted to be above Obama....
CNS News says that it was at the request of the White House that the name of Jesus was removed...
Oftentimes, leftists accuse conservatives of being "Randians" or "Randoids," referring, of course, to Objectivism. Never having waded through Rand's epic work Atlas Shrugged, I admit that I don't have extensive knowledge of Objectivism and have sometimes been puzzled by the accusation.
Earlier today, I stumbled across a series of three videos, each approximately ten minutes in length. I am posting them for your perusal and commentary. I hope that you'll watch each selection as some of Ms. Rand's words have significance today, some fifty years after this interview was filmed.
Disclaimer:My posting of this interview of Ayn Rand should not be construed as my subscribing to the philosophy of Objectivism. As a Christian, I clearly do not hold with her views on faith.
Note to Duck, frequent user of the term Randoid: Try not to molt!
Part Two and Part Three of the interview are below the fold. Part Two is particularly interesting in these times of economic turbulence.
-------- Part Two:
Evil Conservative, at whose site I found the above videos, states the following:
In Ayn Rand's first television interview, she talks to Mike Wallace about self-interest, the efficiency of free markets, and the dangers of the government welfare state. If I didn't know better, I would almost think that she had traveled backward 50 years from today before she gave this interview - she's that dead-on.
Not being an atheist, I don't consider myself an Objectivist. That being the case, I sincerely think I would prefer a government led by atheist Objectivists to a government run by liberal "Christians."
I concur, as many "liberal Christians" are, in effect, utopianists. And so are caliphate-yearning Moslems, for that matter.
Our guest today at the bottom of the hour is Allan Goldstein, who will discuss with us the first few months of Obama's administration. --------- Listen to the April 17, 2009 edition of The Gathering Storm Radio Show, live or later, by CLICKING HERE.
(This post stuck here for a time. Please scroll down for other postings)
Those reading this posting most likely make use of Twenty-first Century technology. Some of us clearly enjoy spending a lot of time with our electronic devices; others of us must do so because so many careers today require our making use of digital technology.
Recently, some studies have indicated that our reliance on the availably technology is actually changing our brains and possibly our society as well. From this article, written by neuroscientist Susan Greenfield:
...[T]he brain is not the unchanging organ that we might imagine. It not only goes on developing, changing and, in some tragic cases, eventually deteriorating with age, it is also substantially shaped by what we do to it and by the experience of daily life. When I say "shaped", I'm not talking figuratively or metaphorically; I'm talking literally. At a microcellular level, the infinitely complex network of nerve cells that make up the constituent parts of the brain actually change in response to certain experiences and stimuli.
The brain, in other words, is malleable - not just in early childhood but right up to early adulthood, and, in certain instances, beyond. The surrounding environment has a huge impact both on the way our brains develop and how that brain is transformed into a unique human mind.
Of course, there's nothing new about that: human brains have been changing, adapting and developing in response to outside stimuli for centuries.
...[T]he pace of change in the outside environment and in the development of new technologies has increased dramatically. This will affect our brains over the next 100 years in ways we might never have imagined.
Our brains are under the influence of an ever- expanding world of new technology: multichannel television, video games, MP3 players, the internet, wireless networks, Bluetooth links - the list goes on and on.
it's pretty clear that the screen-based, two dimensional world that so many teenagers - and a growing number of adults - choose to inhabit is producing changes in behaviour. Attention spans are shorter, personal communication skills are reduced and there's a marked reduction in the ability to think abstractly.
This games-driven generation interpret the world through screen-shaped eyes. It's almost as if something hasn't really happened until it's been posted on Facebook, Bebo or YouTube.
Add that to the huge amount of personal information now stored on the internet - births, marriages, telephone numbers, credit ratings, holiday pictures - and it's sometimes difficult to know where the boundaries of our individuality actually lie. Only one thing is certain: those boundaries are weakening....
Scientists are beginning to document the traces that the Internet leaves on sensitive young brains. People who play a lot of action video games, for instance, process visual information more quickly than people who don't, according to a seminal 2003 article in Nature. (The study was initiated by a pre-med student who stayed up all night playing Counter-Strike.)
Digital immersion affects the Net Generation in other ways, too. They don't necessarily read from left to right, or from beginning to end. They're more sensitive to visual icons than older people are, and they absorb more information when it's presented with visual images than when it's offered in straight text. This may help them be better scanners, a useful skill when you're confronted with masses of online information.
Many experts contend that if young people try to absorb multiple streams of information at the same time, they'll make mistakes, slow down, and think less deeply and creatively. My observation of hundreds of Net Geners leads me to a different conclusion: Net Geners are faster than I am at switching tasks and better at blocking out background noise. They can work effectively with music playing and news coming in from Facebook. They can keep up their social networks while they concentrate on work—they seem to need this to feel comfortable. I think they've learned to live in a world where they're bombarded with information, so that they can block out the TV or other distractions while they focus on the task at hand. This is a powerful advantage in a digital environment that's buzzing with multiple streams of information....
As expected and contrary to the excerpt immediately above, much information about the impact of technology on our brains and our lives warns of dangers to which we expose ourselves by spending so much time with digital devices. Specifically, while doing research for this FEATURED QUESTION, I found much about internet addiction and even The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery.
Since you started making use of digital-age available technology, have you experienced any brain, behavioral, or social changes — positive or negative?
In recent House hearings dedicated to examining Islamic extremism, I stressed that the fundamental stumbling block to effective policy-making is educational and epistemological. What people are taught about Islam needs a serious overhaul before we can expect to formulate strategies that make sense.
In my  testimony to the House, I wrote: “It should be acknowledged that educational failures exacerbate epistemological ones, and vice versa, leading to a perpetual cycle where necessary knowledge is not merely ignored, but not even acknowledged as real in the first place. When American universities [or high schools] fail to teach Islamic doctrine and history accurately, a flawed epistemology permeates society at large. And since new students and new professors come from this already conditioned-towards-Islam society, not only do they not question the lack of accurate knowledge and education; they perpetuate it.”
This report demonstrates the validity of this vicious cycle. In fact, every last one of those flagrant textbook errors indoctrinating America’s youth is an indisputable “fact” for many of America’s Islam “experts,” particularly those advising the government. The effects are dramatic. For instance, far from objectively examining Islam, the government is now pushing to  ban Arabic words connotative of Islamic ideology from formal analysis — such as “mujahid,” “umma,” “Sharia,” “caliphate” — asking personnel to rely primarily on generic terms, such as “terrorists.”
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." --Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancey, 1816. ME 14:384
"The most effectual means of preventing [the perversion of power into tyranny are] to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes." --Thomas Jefferson: Diffusion of Knowledge Bill, 1779. FE 2:221, Papers 2:526
"I look to the diffusion of light and education as the resource most to be relied on for ameliorating the conditions, promoting the virtue and advancing the happiness of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Cornelius Camden Blatchly, 1822. ME 15:399
"If the condition of man is to be progressively ameliorated, as we fondly hope and believe, education is to be the chief instrument in effecting it." --Thomas Jefferson to M. A. Jullien, 1818. ME 15:172
But what happens when the very education itself is corrupted with lies and obfuscations? The death of a civilization?
Of course, Jefferson had his own troubles with Moslems, particularly the Barbary Pirates:
...In 1786, Jefferson, then the American ambassador to France, and Adams, then the American ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the "Dey of Algiers" ambassador to Britain.
The Americans wanted to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress' vote to appease.
During the meeting Jefferson and Adams asked the Dey's ambassador why Muslims held so much hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts.
In a later meeting with the American Congress, the two future presidents reported thatAmbassador Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja had answered that Islam "was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Quran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."
For the following 15 years, the American government paid the Muslims millions of dollars for the safe passage of American ships or the return of American hostages. The payments in ransom and tribute amounted to 20 percent of United States government annual revenues in 1800.
Not long after Jefferson's inauguration as president in 1801, he dispatched a group of frigates to defend American interests in the Mediterranean, and informed Congress.
Declaring that America was going to spend "millions for defense but not one cent for tribute," Jefferson pressed the issue by deploying American Marines and many of America's best warships to the Muslim Barbary Coast.
During the Jefferson administration, the Muslim Barbary States, crumbling as a result of intense American naval bombardment and on shore raids by Marines, finally officially agreed to abandon slavery and piracy.
Jefferson's victory over the Muslims lives on today in the Marine Hymn, with the line, "From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli, We fight our country's battles in the air, on land and sea."
Jefferson had been right. The "medium of war" was the only way to put and end to the Muslim problem....
Yet, the textbooks in our schools are glossing over the historical facts about Islam and promoting an insane and dangerous kumbaya. Once that imprint is fastened into the minds of young people, can it ever be dislodged?
Would that advocate of education and Father of the University of Virginia could speak to us from the grave right now and sound a heeded warning as to the dangerous path we are treading in this era of multiculturalism and revisionism!
Quickie link to this article at Bob McCarty Writes. Excerpt:
A controversy with life-and-death implications has been brewing for 12 months over the Army’s decision to deploy the Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System, a hand-held lie detector, to combat zones....
3 He is despised and rejected of men; a Man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from Him; he was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4 Surely He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.
7 He was oppressed, and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth: He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare His generation? for He was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was He stricken.
9 And He made His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He hath put Him to grief: when thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
12 Therefore will I divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong; because He hath poured out His soul unto death: and He was numbered with the transgressors; and He bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
This week is one of the holiest seasons of the Christian calendar as Christians throughout the world hold various services and celebrations related to Holy Week. Yesterday was Maundy Thursday, today is Good Friday, tomorrow is Holy Saturday, and Sunday is Easter Sunday. ----- All sensitivies toward Christianity aside, however, Newsweek chose this week to publish a cover depicting a cross with the following words spelled out with capital letters in the shape of the cross, in red lettering: "THE DELINCE AND FALL OF CHRISTIAN AMERICA." I was unable to capture the image, but you can see it here, Newsweek's accompanying article here.
The First Amendment right to freedom of the press certainly allows for Newsweek to publish such a cover and such an article and display them prominently at newsstands and at grocery check-out aisles, even during this Holy Week. But can you imagine the outcry were any mainstream-news magazine to publish a cover making any negative statement about Islam? Can you imagine what would happen if the Danish cartoons were splashed all over the cover of a news magazine at any time of the year, much less during Ramadan or Eid ul-Fitr?
More importantly, would any mainstream-news magazine dare to publish a negative cover about Islam?
Yesterday my desktop computer crashed. Up came the dreaded black screen with grayish letters. The message said something about "config system." All techies whom I consulted greeted this news with solemnity and lots of maybe's and if's. -----
My computer is now in the repair shop, a reliable facility which will recover the data if at all possible and reload the operating system. If some kind of partition is corrupted, all the data will be lost — documents, lesson plans, grade book, pictures, financial records, the whole lot. Once the operating system and the data, if possible, are restored, I will have to reload and download the software I was using. I spent hours yesterday searching my messy home office for those software disks; I think I've found all of them, but once I get my machine back, I'll be spending hours trying to get the computer back to its former operation.
Of course, I was not fully backed up. I was planning to get my external drive and back up fully on Friday. **sigh**
I'm trying not to go into mourning prematurely nor to be too optimistic about recovering the data.
I am now consigned for a full three weeks to this laptop, which will be backed up as soon as the external hard drive is delivered. Too little, too late, for my desktop.
Lesson learned — the hard way, as usual.
Oftentimes, I feel as if the technology upon which we so rely on is a curse just waiting to happen.
First thing on this morning's news, before I had even gotten down my first cup of coffee, one of the local news channels here welcomed CAIR's co-founder and Director Nihad Awad for a smarmy interview, in which the news anchor appeared thrilled to be graced with the presence of one of those Moslems to whom BHO has reached out at least three times since taking office last January 20 — most recently, yesterday in Turkey. ------- In this morning's interview, according to Nihad Awad, who participated in a 1993 Hamas meeting in the United States — a fact apparently unknown by the interviewer — BHO is an American President who understands the following: "American Muslims have suffered tremendously since 9/11." Perennial victimhood in the typical style of CAIR, and the news anchor nodded both solemnly and eagerly in agreement as she sucked down the Kool-aid in huge gulps.
I, on the other hand, nearly choked on my coffee. Mr. AOW uttered several expletives and muttered, "Not nearly enough." I started to enumerate the numerous sycophantic, post-9/11 concessions made to Moslems — wudu washers in airports and universities, Ramadan celebrations in the White House, the whitewash and promotion of Islam in our schools' textbooks, and the continued operation of the Islamic Saudi Academy — but gave up. Why bother ranting and raving first thing in the morning? Mr. AOW's back is killing him as it is, and he knows all those facts anyway.
A few more quotes from Nihad Awad, but not in this morning's interview:
"Address people according to their minds. When I speak with the American, I speak with someone who doesn't know anything."
Clearly, that last statement applies to the morning-news anchor, who didn't have a clue as to the facts about Nihad Awad.
And so it goes.
I expect BHO to partner with CAIR as his administration searches for Moslems to place therein, and America as a whole will be just fine with such a partnership. CAIR will, of course, be salivating with delight and power. The public relations machine for Islamism has worked very well, to the detriment of America's future.
Our guest today for the full hour is Raymond Ibrahim, associate director of the Middle East Forum. He also writes regularly for Jihad Watch.
Raymond Ibrahim is a historian and writer on the Middle East and Islam, and the author of The Al-Qaeda Reader (2007), which exposes al-Qaeda's ultimate motives by showings the striking differences between statements published in English for Westerners and those in Arabic for Muslims...Al-Qaeda stresses Islam's compulsory demand for "offensive jihad," that is, not because Islam is "under attack," as they claim in messages to the West, but simply to offer the world the three sacred choices: accept Islam, live in total submission to Islamic overlords as marginal citizens of an Islamic state, or die. Read more about Mr. Ibrahim HERE and HERE.
Listen to the April 10, 2009 edition of The Gathering Storm Radio Show, live or later, by CLICKING HERE.
Today, Mr. AOW and I signed off on our electronic filing for our 2008 taxes. Maybe we shouldn't have bothered:
Also see the comments at YouTube. ----- Have you ever known anybody who, for whatever reason, didn't pay federal taxes? I have. The result: penalties, interest, seizure of assets, etc. Indeed, I myself got slammed with a penalty last year because I inadvertently underestimated my quarterly payments to Uncle Sam.
But thus saith the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in the U.S. Senate (paraphrase): Our tax monies are not being forcibly taken from us. We have a voluntary system, and that is a "fact of the matter."
When I watch the news, particularly the national news on any channel, I get the distinct impression that the anchors of these shows merely move from one story another as they follow a script and keep an eye on the clock. Are these anchors showing laudable impartiality, pretended impartiality, or hardened indifference? ----- In my own observations, the pundits are little different. They have more of an apparent agenda — left, right, or center — than the news anchors, of course, and often present on-the-air editorials as they pick and choose evidence to prove their theses. Still, in spite of bursts of passion, I again get the impression that these talking heads are quite disinterested in the material they present as they move fluidly from one story to another.
In a recent comment here at Always On Watch, days before I polished this posting, my friend Z summed up some of what I've been pondering about the media:
I keep watching the cable venues and seeing REALLY important discussions that last between commercials, then big smiles "Thanks for coming on!" "You're welcome!" And it's like THEY FORGOT the severity of the problems they're discussing like SOCIALISM IN AMERICA? An American PRESIDENT bowing so exaggeratedly to a muslim KING? Mentioning ONE WORLD ORDER and MAN OF THE WORLD just a few too many times...? IMPORTANT issues..then "thanks, Bill!" "you're welcome, I was HAPPY to BE HERE!"
Do you feel a disconnect, of whatever sort, with the media? If so, does such a disconnect result from an underlying purpose or cause, or is it merely reflective of a sort of attention disorder?
During the 2008 presidential campaign, one in 10 Americans believed that President Barack Obama is a Muslim. According to a new poll from the Pew Center for People and the Press, one in 10 Americans still believe it.
Despite Obama's frequent references to his Christian faith, just as many people incorrectly identify him as a Muslim now as did during the presidential campaign. What's interesting is that while most of those oppose him politically, a portion don't hold it against him. They like the guy, they voted for him -- and they think he's a Muslim....
All the symbolism of the two bows will be lost on them, of course: "They like the guy."
...By replacing the head of the company and demanding a restructuring of its board in return for further TARP aid, Obama has taken upon himself the responsibility for the future of the company....
This move will backfire big time! The auto giant is very, very unlikely to be saved by this current TARP infusion. Doubtless it will need more in the near term. But the resentment now focused on the management of the company will then turn to Obama. Having demanded a replacement of the management, it is he who will be held responsible for the company’s future.
And each time GM asks for more money, Obama will face a choice: take personal responsibility for laying off 100,000 auto workers or anteing up the additional cash. By inserting himself so deeply into the management of the company, Obama makes himself central to its future. If Obama lets the company fail, having already extended credit, he will have all of Michigan on his case. If he keeps coming up with more and more tax money, he will earn the contempt of the voters.
Socialism has its price. By taking over the management of a company, you become the determinant of its fate in the public’s mind.
Obama does not seem to realize that government takeover is the beginning, not the end, of the problem. He should have stuck with being president and left making cars to others.
Statist that he is, BHO successfully demonized GM's corporate management. Continuing the socialistic power grab, he continues to demonize in moralistic tones all sorts of corporate managers and, thereby, presents himself as "The One" who can save us peons from evil management. In his runaway bestseller Liberty and Tyranny, Mark R. Levin explains that kind of maneuver in some detail in Chapter One.
The purpose of this post, however, is not to discuss the same issues as those discussed by Mark Levin in his book, although I recommend that all of my readers obtain their own copy and wade in. Instead, my purpose here, as one who comes from a long line of automotive mechanics, is to ask a few questions about BHO as CEO....
1. Is BHO, or anyone he chooses to manage GM, an experienced CEO?
2. What does the new CEO of GM know about the auto industry?
3. Did BHO's forcing out of Mr. Wagoner amount to extortion?
I know that my analogy below isn't perfect. Nonetheless, BHO's move to push out Mr. Wagoner reminds me of the machinations of the efficiency expert:
A specialist who seeks to increase the productivity of a business or an industry by improving the efficiency of its operations.
Any mechanic can tell us just how efficient such experts are. The mechanic's comments are unprintable in polite company.
Maybe Mr. Wagoner needed to go. I don't know. But will whoever takes his place be any better?
Meanwhile, we also have BHO trying to force Chrysler to team up with Fiat, which, in the past anyway, used to be referred to by mechanics as Fix It Again Tony:
...[M]any autoexpertsthink the proposed alliance between financially healthy Fiat and nearly dead Chrysler can work, when the Daimler-Chrysler linkup is considered to have failed. Fiat, it is argued, builds excellent small and midsize cars - exactly where Chrysler is weakest....
[E]venthe most optimistic experts aren't sure whether Fiat and Chrysler will be a marriage made in heaven - or, like the Daimler and Chrysler tie-up - one made in purgatory....
One can only, pardon the expression, hope that Fiat has improved over the unreliable vehicle is used to be, when even auto salesmen advised buyers, "If you love your wife, don't buy her a Fiat."
In spite of being vilified by various media, Ford Motor Company may have shown great wisdom in refusing bailout money. By refusing federal funds, Ford has disallowed federal control of the company's management. In any case, those of us who rely upon our cars for transportation to and from work are going to find out exactly which makes and models keep us moving on down the road. Perhaps so as to cover our bases, all of us should invest in towing companies. Heh.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Patrons of this Blog are advised that they will be held responsible
for any unlawful, harassing, libelous, abusive, threatening, or
harmful material of any kind or nature posted by their respective ISP.
Patrons are cautioned not to transmit via comments, including links
to any material that encourages conduct that could constitute a
criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or otherwise violate
any applicable local, state, national or international law or
regulation. Comments here are typically unmoderated and unedited.
The fact that particular comments remain on the site
in no way constitutes the site owner's endorsement of commenters' views.