Middle America's Worldview

I ran across this and thought it was interesting. If it holds true, then we should see policy change to effect radio talk shows. I know they tried in the past to stimy conservative talk shows. Recall The Fairness Doctrine?

The Fairness Doctrine was anything but fair.

Now that Obama is writing executive orders left and right, we will probably see something similar hit our radio hosts.

Rush Limbaugh may command a large following, but his caustic comments Monday about the GOP’s congressional leadership have at least one Republican House member defending his colleagues and offering an unusually candid critique of the talk radio powerhouse and his fellow commentators.

Responding to President Obama’s recommendation to Republican congressional leaders last week that they not follow Limbaugh’s lead, the conservative talkmeister said on his show that Obama is “obviously more frightened of me than he is Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me, than he is of, say, John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party."

Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., did not take kindly to this assessment in an interview with Politico Tuesday.

“I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach,” Gingrey said. “I mean, it’s easy if you’re Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don’t have to try to do what’s best for your people and your party. You know you’re just on these talk shows and you’re living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn’t be or wouldn’t be good leaders, they’re not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."
See Also

* Saltsman pins 'Magic Negro' on media
* GOP weapon: Obama earmarks pledge
* Republicans chew on DeMint


Asked to respond to Gingrey, Limbaugh, in an email to Politico, wrote: “I'm sure he is doing his best but it does not appear to be good enough. He may not have noticed that the number of Republican colleagues he has in the House has dwindled. And they will dwindle more if he and his friends don't show more leadership and effectiveness in battling the most left-wing agenda in modern history. And they won't continue to lose because of me, but because of their relationship with the grassroots, which is hurting. Conservatives want leadership from those who claim to represent them. And we'll know it when we see it.”

The back and forth comes as some on the right speak more openly about what they perceive as the lack of leadership in the Republican Party. Unapologetic conservatives, like Limbaugh would prefer to see elected Republicans confront the new president. But many GOP officials, daunted by the new president’s approval rating and what they believe is fatigue on the part of voters over partisan fighting, are loath to openly criticize Obama.

An author and critic of Islam says the recent decision by a Dutch court to prosecute a Dutch lawmaker for comparing the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf does not bode well for the future of free speech rights in the United States.



Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made headlines around the world in March of 2008 with his film Fitna, which juxtaposed Koran verses against a background of violent film clips and images of terrorism by Islamic radicals.

The Islamic world complained, but last year prosecutors decided against launching a case against Wilders, saying his strident anti-Islamic statements were "hurtful to Muslims, but not criminal."

But now the Amsterdam Appeals Court has ruled that prosecutors will launch a hate-speech case against Wilders. Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He says this case is part of a larger effort to criminalize any discussion of Islam to which jihadists object.

"The Organization of the Islamic Conference, which is 57 Muslim governments around the world, is making a concerted effort at the United Nations to criminalize any discussion of the elements of Islam that jihadists use to make recruits and justify their actions," he contends.

Spencer says the Wilders prosecution shows that Europe is falling in line with the Islamic initiative to prosecute anyone who engages in what the Islamists say is hate speech. He adds that could affect the free speech rights of Americans as well.

"Especially at a time when the Obama administration has announced its intention to bring the United States into line with European sensibilities about this and closer to the U.N.," he points out. "And with both Europe and the U.N giving way on free speech at a rapid clip, that bodes ill for our freedoms in the United States."

Geez, we are nearing a depression and President Obama throws out $441 million dollars? I guess it's a small drop.

President Obama’s executive order will increase the number of unborn children killed overseas by abortion as federal grants totaling $441 million start flowing to groups like the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

President Obama’s order rescinds the “Mexico City” policy, first established by President Ronald Reagan in 1984. The policy, in effect during both Bush administrations but revoked under President Clinton, limited federal “population assistance” program dollars to groups that agreed not to "perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning."

As a candidate, Obama said he was interested in seeking “common ground” on the abortion issue and finding ways to “reduce the number of abortions.” His executive order does the opposite and is only the first in a series of attacks on the unborn child.

The President wants to force taxpayers to pay for abortions by repealing the “Hyde Amendment,” a measure in force since 1976. The National Right to Life Committee estimates that more than one million Americans have been spared from abortion as a result of this law, which is now targeted for repeal.

The president also wants to mandate abortion as one of the “services” required to be insured under a new federal standard of health care. And he has loudly announced his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, legislation that will invalidate all state and federal limitations on abortion. FOCA will increase the number of children who die from abortion annually by about 125,000, according to one estimate.

You can respectfully tell the President what you think about his executive order and his pro-abortion agenda with a letter, email, or phone call. For contact information, please click here.

I watched a funny video over the weekend called "An American Carol". I normally don't like slapstick, but there were some funny parts in this video.

Netflix users can link it here.

David Zucker directs a star-studded cast in this comedy about Michael Malone, a sarcastic, unpatriotic documentary filmmaker who wants to abolish the Fourth of July holiday -- at least until he is visited by three ghosts who want him to reconsider. But can the spirits of America's past, present and future spark a genuine change of heart? Kelsey Grammer, Jon Voight, Dennis Hopper and Kevin P. Farley star in this modern-day, Dickens-inspired fable.

The film is definitely politically incorrect. I was surprised to see how many stars are actually in this film. My favorite scene is where Bill Orielly (played by Bill Orielly), was interviewing Michael Malone and Rosie O'connel.

Been another busy week, and yes, one to follow.

Today will get crazy with running. Here is a snapshot of the expected day.

9:00 to 12:00 Church
2:00 to 3:00 Basketball practice
2:50 to 4:00 Wife has Girl scout meeting
5:00 to 6:00 Church

This is with on-call looming over me all day. Who knows if/when I will get called.

That gives us approximately 3 hrs today to eat/run.

As for the coming week, the evenings looks like this.

Mon- Boyscout meeting
Tue- ?
Wed- School Board meeting
Thur- We leave for Texas.

We will be in Texas over the weekend for a wedding. That might be a retreat.

Another daunting hit, as Obama swings into action for (Ahem) civil liberties.

Stop the ACLU has a snapshot of Obama's first action items he hit, once in office. The article ACLU Hero Obama Hits Civil Liberties Trifecta; America Can Be Proud Again! shows the media adoration of their new king. The ACLU is basically frothing with excitement.

“These executive orders represent a giant step forward. Putting an end to Guantanamo, torture and secret prisons is a civil liberties trifecta, and President Obama should be highly commended for this bold and decisive action so early in his administration on an issue so critical to restoring an America we can be proud of again.

Well, personally I don't see how it will be done. I am thinking Obama is doing so, because he told his followers he would. He essentially now has provided his end of the deal.

However, questions of 'who will take these prisoners?', 'how will they be parsed out, via trial or awarded money for their inhumane treatment?'.

It will be interesting to see.

Not really surprised by this. Thanks to Fred Jackson for this informative article.

The Barack Obama administration has wasted no time in announcing what his pro-homosexual agenda will include.

Just hours after becoming president, the Whitehouse.gov website has laid out Barack Obama's agenda. Under a section of that agenda titled Civil Rights is a very detailed outline of what Obama plans to do for the homosexual community.

First on the list is the expansion of "hate crimes" statutes to include extra punishment for crimes committed because of sexual orientation and gender identity. Highlighted is the president's political history of support for hate crimes legislation.

Obama also supports full civil unions and federal rights for homosexual couples, and calls for repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). According to the agenda explanation, the president also is opposed to a constitutional amendment to protect marriage as only between a man and a woman.

As expected, the Obama agenda calls for the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy to allow open homosexuals to serve. "The President will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals," says the website.

Obama also wants to expand adoption rights for homosexuals. The 44th president, states the website, "thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not."

Elsewhere on the Whitehouse.gov Agenda section (The Agenda - Women) is a statement noting Obama's longstanding support for abortion rights. On that issue, the "consistent champion of reproductive choice" -- as Obama is described on the website -- promises to stand against any effort to overturn Roe v. Wade, increase funding for "family planning and comprehensive sex education," and remove any insurance restrictions against contraception.

Anyone else wondering why all these "Clinton" nominees are in the Obama camp now? I thought we were going to have change, not a regurgitation of Clinton era.

The Washington Times is reporting that president-elect Obama's climate czar has ties to an international organization that promotes "global governance."





According to the report, as recently as last week Carol M. Browner was listed as one of "14 leaders of a socialist group's Commission for a Sustainable World Society." The group, one of many under the umbrella group Socialist International, calls for rich countries to shrink their economies in order to combat climate change.

Browner's name and biography has since been removed from the Socialist International's web page.



Ms. Browner's appointment as Obama's climate czar does not need Senate confirmation. She served previously as head of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton.

Here's the problem. One group want's something, another group has it. The first group is fighting hard for it. The second group puts it to all for a vote in who should have possession of it. The vote goes to the second group.

Now the first group is oppressing the second group, because they still do not have it.

Sounds like a mini-war going on to me. Not only does this group fight, but harass and whine when they lose. Sigh.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Supporters of the ballot measure that banned same-sex "marriage" in California have filed a lawsuit seeking to block their campaign finance records from public view, saying the reports have led to the harassment of donors.

"No one should have to worry about getting a death threat because of the way he or she votes," said James Bopp, Jr., an attorney representing two groups that supported Proposition 8, Protect Marriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage California. "This lawsuit will protect the right of all people to help support causes they agree with, without having to worry about harassment or threats."

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in Sacramento, asks the court to order the secretary of state's office to remove all donations for the proposition from its website. It also asks the court to relieve the two groups and "all similarly situated persons" from having to meet the state's campaign disclosure requirements. That would include having to file a final report on Proposition 8 contributions at the end of January, as well as reports for any future campaigns the groups undertake.



Proposition 8, approved by 52.3 percent of California voters on Nov. 4, reversed a state Supreme Court decision allowing homosexual marriage. The measure's opponents have asked the Supreme Court to overturn it.



The lawsuit filed Wednesday cites a series of incidents in which those who gave money to support Proposition 8 received threatening phone calls, e-mails and postcards. One woman claims she was told: "If I had a gun, I would have gunned you down along with each and every other supporter." Another donor reported a broken window, one said a fliyer calling him a bigot was distributed around his hometown and others received envelopes containing suspicious white power, according to the lawsuit.

Businesses employing people who contributed to the Proposition 8 campaign have been threatened with boycotts, the suit said.

Supporters of the homosexual marriage ban fear the donor backlash will hurt their efforts to raise money in the future, perhaps to fight an initiative seeking to overturn the ban.



"Several donors have indicated that they will not contribute to committee plaintiffs or similar organizations in the future because of the threats and harassment directed at them as a result of their contributions...and the public disclosure of that fact," the lawsuit said.



The suit said courts have held that laws requiring disclosure of campaign contributions can be overturned or restricted if a group can make "an uncontroverted showing" that identifying its members can result in economic reprisals or threats of physical coercion. California's Political Reform Act, which voters approved in 1974, established disclosure requirements for candidates and campaign committees.


The secretary of state's office and another defendant, the state's Fair Political Practices Commission, declined to comment Thursday on the lawsuit. But Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, the homosexual-rights group that led the campaign against Proposition 8, called it hypocritical for supporters of the measure to try to overturn voter-approved campaign finance laws.



He said Proposition 8 supporters used campaign finance records during the campaign to threaten homosexual-rights supporters. "They've used these records to attack corporations, to attack individuals," Kors said.



Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, which supports public access to government records and meetings, said the lawsuit is likely to be unsuccessful. But he also said the plaintiffs' arguments are not trivial. "The problem with their argument, of course, is that campaign finance laws, both at the state and federal level, have been litigated endlessly now since Watergate and the argument has, in one form or another, been rejected," Scheer said.



He said courts have consistently failed to agree that contributors have a right to donate directly and anonymously to a candidate or campaign. He said some states have less restrictive reporting requirements, but they always include disclosure of donors.

Check this out. I posted an article of muslim cabbies in Minneapolis, now it appears Minneapolis Airport is also jumping in with the muslims. Check out this article regarding public dollars being used for foot baths for muslims.

Why oh why can public dollars go to one religion but ACLU makes a stink over a penny going to another?

Tucked away in a corner of an out-of-the-way bathroom on the vast grounds of Indianapolis’ new airport, back where the cab drivers play gin rummy while they wait for fares, is evidence of the city’s growing diversity.

It’s a trough, about 2 feet by 6 feet, marked off by a cement wall about six inches high. Two faucets empty into the trough.

It’s a foot bath, and it’s not for travelers. Rather, it’s for the Muslims cabbies who observe the purification ritual of “wudu.”

“It’s very nice, much better than the old airport,” said Farh Nasir, a Muslim from Somalia who washes his feet in the bath several times a day.

There was no foot bath at the old airport.

Nasir used to sit down outdoors and pour water over his feet from a bottle. Others used bathroom sinks.

The custom in Islam is to pray five times a day. Cleanliness is a prerequisite to prayer.

As the number of Muslim cab drivers in the U.S. has grown, other airports, such as those in Phoenix and Kansas City, have accommodated them with foot baths.

There have been mild protests. Last year, when the foot baths were in the planning stages here, members of an Indianapolis Baptist church staged a rally to oppose the baths as a dangerous caving-in to Islam.

Today there are two foot baths, one in the cabbies’ men’s room, the other in the women’s. The women’s doesn’t get used, cabbies say, because there are no female Muslim cab drivers.

source

Came across this interesting video showing Tokyo's new "Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display" technology. Essentially the ultrasound provides a 3d feel. Looks impressive. They are saying this would be a great means for future gameplay and design applications.

I was pondering the game risk, then a thought on applying the strategies with life.

It would be interesting to do a pet project by applying the same skills to a possible corporation takedown.

I was listening to a CD referring Christian Financial Practices and my mind wandered on applying Risk.

The project would be simple enough. Take a company or cooperation. You would have to first identify the key players (CIO, Board, ect.). Map out the primary base and divisions, creating a heirarchy. Then you would find their main funds, expenses, ect.

Once you identify the landscape, you would then strategize the means of cutting off the funds, creating chaos, ect.

The question would be which company or cooperation would be a good target?

Now this is interesting. British citizens will be the first to have biometric identity by year end 2009. I have already posted my thoughts before, and knew the technology was already availible. Although, technology being availible to do such things, doesn't mean the people are. However, as identity theft, terrorist activity grows, the people may welcome it more.

For identity theft fear, the world itself (or at least the western world) will move toward this biometric identity.

For the love of our planet and the global warming sensitivity, we will go green, thus moving us to the all-tech mode.

There you have two of the end-times biblical prophecy (written 2000 years ago before electricity), coming into play. A cash-less society where all transactions are controlled and known.

British police have been granted authority to hack into personal computers without first obtaining a warrant.

However, officers must still seek the permission of a local chief constable before accessing a suspect's machine.

Remote searches can be executed by infecting a computer with stealth malware capable of relaying e-mail and browsing habits to a remote surveillance team. Detectives may also hijack wireless networks to access stored data on hard-drives or USB devices.

UK police reportedly carried out 194 hacking operations during 2007-08 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, including 133 in private homes, 37 in offices and 24 in hotel rooms. MI5 and GCHQ currently monitor the Internet via a network of black boxes attached to servers, but are studying ways of expanding the already invasive system.

Law enforcement officials claim the new snooping policy is a critical component in their fight against cyber-crime. However, shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve expressed concern over the "exercise of such intrusive powers" and demanded the government explain what safeguards, if any, would be established.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights campaign group Liberty, believes the practice is no different "from breaking down someone's door, rifling through their paperwork and seizing their computer hard drive".

A Home Office spokesman addressed the above-mentioned concerns by telling the Telegraph that the UK had "agreed to a strategic approach towards tackling cyber crime on the same basis as all member states." The spokesman added that Britian fully supported efforts to develop an understanding of the impact of electronic crime across the UK and would work with states to clarify details of the proposal.

It should be noted that the British political echelon has faced serious criticism over plans for a "big brother" database slated to contain information regarding phone calls, email and Internet visits made by UK residents. British citizens will also receive biometric identity cards by the end of 2009, effectively creating the world's largest identity register. X

One of our friends had sent our son the game Risk. I haven't played it in years and was curious how the kids would take it. Surprisingly, our son hung in 2 hours on our first game. This in itself was a surprise. Our daughter was hooked. I played 2 games with her alone already.




The Risk game itself is a fascinating game. I am not sure if we are playing the easy version or not, the rules seem to be self-explaning and easy to move through.

I can see us playing this more as time allows. We noticed a game takes around 2 hours to play.

This is too funny!

I am not sure how realistic this is. By law, children attend the local school in their area of living. Most states shut down the school ballot initiative (choice).

However, it brings up an issue, most christians should already be aware of. The fight for the culture of the youth is being lost. Bible prophecy already speaks of the last days as the same as the day of Noah. Everyone will be pretty much thinking and doing for themselves, and the hell with anyone else.

The Obama campaign, much like a military operation, succeeded in large part by the youth, rather than the educated. Hitler had it right, control the youth, control the country.

Critics of America's public school system have launched a new effort highlighting the need for Christians to exit the system.

The initiative -- dubbed The Call to Dunkirk (Critics of America's public school system have launched a new effort highlighting the need for Christians to exit the system.


The initiative -- dubbed The Call to Dunkirk (video link) -- was launched by Dr. Bruce Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools; Rev. Voddie Baucham, author of Family Driven Faith: Doing What It Takes to Raise Sons and Daughters Who Walk with God; and the founder and director of the Exodus Mandate Project, retired U.S. Army Chaplain Lt. Col. E. Ray Moore.

Moore explains the proposal. "The Call to Dunkirk is a special emergency effort to try to get other ministries, churches, pastors, and the major Christian right and pro-family movement to join with us and the other K-12 home-school ministries in rescuing the children from the public schools during the year 2009," he says.

Although Christians have fought other aspects of the culture war such as homosexual "marriage," Moore contends they are losing the fight when it comes to the education of their children.

"The real target of the liberals and the left has always been the children. And we can see in California where the conservatives won Proposition 8 -- the vote [was] 52 to 48 [percent] -- but...when Proposition 22 was voted on [in March 2000], they had a 61-percent margin of victory. So the culture is turning against Christianity and against the pro-family movement primarily because we've allowed our children to be educated in their schools," he adds. "They're converting our children; we're not converting them."

The Call to Dunkirk gets its name from the historical WWII event when the Allied forces of England and France were run out of Europe, but ordinary citizens rallied to their aid and used their own boats to help more than 300,000 soldiers escape safely in order to return again on D-Day.
-- was launched by Dr. Bruce Shortt, author of The Harsh Truth About Public Schools; Rev. Voddie Baucham, author of Family Driven Faith: Doing What It Takes to Raise Sons and Daughters Who Walk with God; and the founder and director of the Exodus Mandate Project, retired U.S. Army Chaplain Lt. Col. E. Ray Moore.

Moore explains the proposal. "The Call to Dunkirk is a special emergency effort to try to get other ministries, churches, pastors, and the major Christian right and pro-family movement to join with us and the other K-12 home-school ministries in rescuing the children from the public schools during the year 2009," he says.

Although Christians have fought other aspects of the culture war such as homosexual "marriage," Moore contends they are losing the fight when it comes to the education of their children.

"The real target of the liberals and the left has always been the children. And we can see in California where the conservatives won Proposition 8 -- the vote [was] 52 to 48 [percent] -- but...when Proposition 22 was voted on [in March 2000], they had a 61-percent margin of victory. So the culture is turning against Christianity and against the pro-family movement primarily because we've allowed our children to be educated in their schools," he adds. "They're converting our children; we're not converting them."

The Call to Dunkirk gets its name from the historical WWII event when the Allied forces of England and France were run out of Europe, but ordinary citizens rallied to their aid and used their own boats to help more than 300,000 soldiers escape safely in order to return again on D-Day.