Godfather Politics |
- Did Michele Bachmann Lie?
- Prisoners May Be Preparing Your Tax Return
- The Stealing of America
- Could Abraham Lincoln Run and Win in 2012?
- The Success of Obama’s Open Dialog Approach to US Adversaries
- Los Angeles Should Change Name to Los Diablos
- America’s Most Corrupt Politicians
Posted: 30 Dec 2011 04:22 PM PST By Joel McDurmon A second key staffer for Bachmann’s Iowa campaign has now resigned, this one over the Congresswoman’s claim that Kent Sorenson, the first defector, left only because “he was offered a large sum of money to go to work for the Paul campaign.” Wes Enos, Bachmann’s own political director in Iowa, came to Sorenson’s defense, contradicting Bachmann’s claim: I can say unequivocally that Kent Sorenson’s decision was, in no way financially motivated. His decision had more to do with the fact that the Ron Paul supporters have been something of a family to him since he was first elected in 2008 and here in the end, as it becomes more and more apparent that the caucus cycle is coming to an end, Kent believed that he needed to be with them as they stand on the cusp of a potential caucus upset. While I personally disagree with Kent’s decision, and plan to stay with Michele Bachmann because I truly believe in her, I cannot, in good conscious watch a good man like Kent Sorenson be attacked as a “sell-out.” That is simply not the case, and it was not the basis of his decision. Now, the Chicago Tribune adds that Enos has also promptly resigned from Bachmann’s dwindling campaign, over the incident: Bachmann’s political director, Wes Enos, resigned a day after her Iowa campaign chairman, Kent Sorenson, left to support Texas congressman Ron Paul’s bid for the Republican nomination to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama in elections in November next year. Enos resigned after he had publicly defended Sorenson, an Iowa state senator, against charges that he had accepted money from the Paul campaign in violation of state law, NBC reported. Sorenson denies that any money was offered by the Paul camp or that he accepted money to endorse the Texas congressman. A spokeswoman for the Bachmann campaign was not immediately available for comment. Establishment GOP megaphone Megan Kelley tried to push Sorenson: “I just want to be clear . . . you are alleging that Michele Bachmann is lying.” Sorensonresponded frankly: “Unfortunately I believe she is. I mean, that conversation did not happen,” he said. “I was never offered a nickel from the Ron Paul campaign,” he added. So, yeah, it looks as if Bachmann was lying. And it looks as if her campaign is finished.  |
Prisoners May Be Preparing Your Tax Return Posted: 30 Dec 2011 03:44 PM PST A story in USA Today reports that inmates, some of them serving life sentences, have applied to the IRS to be tax preparers. Most of them did not reveal that they were incarcerated. It’s good to know that prisoners are trying to be productive members of society. It’s kind of like Andy Dufresne in Shawshank Redemption (1994) who does the books for the warden and the prison guards. While Andy was innocent of the crime of murder that got him into prison, he used his considerable financial skills to turn the tables on the corrupt warden. He learned how to be a criminal while in prison. It’s quite a story worth watching. I suggest that you watch an edited version since the language and some of the scenes are kind of rough. Maybe these incarcerated prisoners got their inspiration from watchingShawshank. The inmates and ex-cons were among thousands of applicants who got the identification numbers from the IRS from September 2010 through July 2011 as the agency began phasing in a 2009 congressional mandate that requires many preparers to file tax returns electronically. There is just one problem. The prisoners will have access to the social security numbers of the tax returns they’re working on. If the prisoners have access to the internet, and they have Social Security numbers at their disposal, who knows what kind of mischief they will be able to get into, especially if they have someone on the outside to help them. It’s kind of appropriate that criminals want to work for the IRS. They’ll fit right in. The IRS is trying to fix the problem: “Our report shows that the problem of misuse of the tax system by prison inmates continues,” said J. Russell George, who heads the inspector general’s office. “Based on our report, the IRS is working on solutions for suspending preparer identification numbers obtained by prisoners and preventing future applicants who are prisoners from receiving a preparer ID number. They must persevere in these efforts … especially given the prison inmate population’s determination to misuse the system.” “[E]specially given the prison inmate population’s determination to misuse the system.” What an understatement. So if you are using an outside organization for this year’s tax return, you might want to ask if the preparer is in a jail somewhere.  |
Posted: 30 Dec 2011 03:18 PM PST While channel surfing, I came acrossThe House I Live In (1945), a ten-minute short film starring Frank Sinatra. Made to oppose anti-Semitism and racial prejudice at the end of World War II, it received an Honorary Academy Award and a special Golden Globe award in 1946. It reminded me of where I grew up. While Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, my hometown, is not as ethnically diverse as a city like New York, it had a similar ethnic and cultural mix. I grew up with other Italians, Irish, Slovak, Polish, Ukrainian, and Jewish families. When I was in the seventh grade, I got to know several black students. The high school I attended was equally diverse. While it wasn’t perfect, and neither were we, it was, as they say, the best years of our lives. What made our neighborhood work so well? While we did not all share the same ethnic or religious backgrounds, we did share a common moral background. The disintegration of neighborhoods, schools, and governments today is not a result of migrating ethnic groups. Rather, the disintegration is taking place through the importation of moral diversity. A generation or two ago, our ethnic, cultural, and religious diversity did not keep us apart because we shared the same moral values. Today, multiculturalism is more than an appreciation of varied cultural expressions; it’s part of an overall philosophy of life. As it is being framed by social engineers, school curricula, and special interest groups, multiculturalism is intimately tied to ethics. An appreciation of diverse cultures is being used as a dodge to smuggle in aberrational moral standards that have the effect of diluting the impact of biblical Christianity. Multiculturalism is a type of moral polytheism: many moral law-orders based on many gods. Polytheism (all gods are equal) leads to relativism (all moral codes are equal); relativism leads to humanism (man makes his own laws); and humanism leads to statism (the State best represents mankind as the pinnacle of power). As Rushdoony remarks,[1] “because an absolute law is denied, it means that the only universal law possible is animperialistic law, a law imposed by force and having no validity other than the coercive imposition.”[2] Generations ago, immigrants assimilated. They adopted a unified American culture while celebrating their ethnic and cultural heritage; and no one minded. Think of the filmMy Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002). Today, there are groups who don’t want to be Americans. They want Americans to acquiesce to their ethnic and moral diversity. In fact, some of them want to impose their minority status on the rest of us while they remain excluded from the mainstream. For them, politics is the way to make us conform to their way of thinking. In 2007, The House I Live In was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.” It’s a peek into another era that is a distant memory for people my age and another world for the younger set. Plot Frank Sinatra, playing himself, takes a smoking break from a recording session. He sees a group of ten boys chasing another boy and intervenes. He asks them if they’re Nazis and explains a few things about America, blood banks, World War II, and teamwork. He then tells a story how following the bombing at Pearl Harbor there was a successful American attack on an enemy warship. It was carried out by a Christian and a Jew of different religions fighting for the same cause. His main points are that we are “all” Americans because we share a set of common ideals. The boys take Sinatra’s words to heart as they walk down the alley. The boy being chased is welcomed into the group and shows his appreciation to Sinatra’s intervention and kind but sober words. You can view The House I Live Inhere. Notes:
 |
Could Abraham Lincoln Run and Win in 2012? Posted: 30 Dec 2011 05:28 AM PST Abraham Lincoln is a political icon to those on the Left and Right. Conservatives like Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck consider him to be our nation’s greatest president, as do many others. Some have compared Barack Obama to Lincoln. Check out the CBS article “The Obama-Lincoln Parallel: A Closer Look” if you want to see how liberals view the iconic history of Lincoln. Hundreds of books have been written about him, more than any other American. There’s a monument in Washington, D.C., extolling his heroism in the face of impossible political odds. His face is carved on Mount Rushmore immortalizing him in solid rock. But has Lincoln been properly vetted? Have conservatives and liberals ignored some of Lincoln’s lapses in judgments and acts of tyranny because his expansion of the power of the State suits their political purposes? If Lincoln ran for president today would he win? Not if his views were scrutinized like other presidential candidates, unless of course, he was running as a Democrat. People would be shocked to learn what Lincoln’s views were on “Negroes” and slavery. Consider this from the Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois, September 18, 1858[1] “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races — that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.” There’s a great deal more. The following is from Judge Andrew P. Napolitano’s book Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History (2010, pp. 245–247). Remove Lincoln’s name from the following, and any candidate running for any political office today would be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail, if we did those kind of things today: “Lincoln was not the ‘Great Emancipator.’ He did not oppose slavery. Before the Civil War, he rarely spoke about slavery. When he did, Lincoln stressed that the president was not constitutionally permitted to do anything about slavery[2], and suggested that if anything was to be done, the blacks should be shipped to Africa; whether forced to come here or born here. While working as a lawyer, Lincoln represented slave owners, and in that capacity he prosecuted fugitive slaves, returned them to their masters, and was paid handsomely for it. “Furthermore, the Civil War initially was not about slavery. It started because the South vehemently opposed the federal government’s increasing power at the expense of the states. The tipping point occurred when the federal government, upon Lincoln taking office, passed a high tariff that benefited the North and harmed the South. The high tariff forced the South to purchase higher-priced Northern goods, and cut of its business relationship with Europe. Lincoln did not introduce the abolition of slavery as a goal until two years into the war, and his Emancipation Proclamation was grossly ineffective. “Lincoln did not attempt to free the slaves in the ‘border’ States of Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Tennessee, and Missouri. His so-called emancipation Proclamation expressly permitted slavery to exist and remain lawful in those states. Nevertheless, Lincoln is viewed as a hero and is falsely recognized by the government and its school systems as the greatest United States president. He was a tyrant. “The point of this story is that the government – and especially our presidents – continually seek to control the news, lie to us in order to reach their objectives, and smother or even prevent dissent. During the Civil War, Lincoln shut down thousands of newspapers and charged thousands of editors and writers with treason. Many of Lincoln’s critics were executed, and many more were jailed, because of their exercise of free speech. Our leaders do not employ such drastic measures today, but they lie and instill fear in us to argue for the necessity of war. Unfortunately, we do not discover their true motives until it’s too late. “Lincoln’s war killed over 650,000 Americans, more than have been killed in all wars in American history combined. He arrested newspaper editors, state legislators, and even a Republican congressman who merely spoke out against him. He suspended the writ ofhabeas corpus. His soldiers robbed American banks, burned American courthouses, raped American women, and killed American civilians – all with legal impunity.” Notes:
 |
The Success of Obama’s Open Dialog Approach to US Adversaries Posted: 29 Dec 2011 11:21 PM PST Senator Barack Obama criticized the administration of President George W Bush for the way he handled diplomatic relations with countries that had proven to be anti-America. In his presidential campaign, Obama vowed to use dialog with our adversaries instead of the typical confrontational methods used previously. Basically, Obama told the world that he would rather talk than fight. After all, look at all of the international diplomatic experience that Sen Obama had on his resume. Oops, there wasn’t any. In less than a month from now, Obama will have had three years in the White House and perhaps it’s time to take a look to see just how successful his open dialog method has been. Upon taking his oath of office in January of 2009, most of his foreign policy gurus believed that Venezuela would be one of the easiest US adversaries to woo over with the President’s experienced diplomatic dialog. At first it appeared that Obama may have made some headway when he shook hands with Venezuela’s dictator Chavez at a summit in 2009. However, just recently, Obama expressed the US’s deep concerns to a Venezuelan newspaper about how their government was restricting the personal freedoms of the Venezuelan people. The progress of Obama’s US – Venezuelan relationship was evident when Venezuelan President Chavez told Obama to leave his country alone and to concentrate on the disaster he made of the US. Chavez also referred to Obama as a clown. Obama’s next adversary to consider is Syria. The situation in that country had deteriorated so far that former President George W Bush left the ambassador position to Syria unfilled. Optimistic Obama tried to open a line of communication with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and then filled the empty ambassador position with Robert Ford. Obama kept pursuing a peaceful dialog with al-Assad in an effort to get him to change many of his harsh policies towards the Syrian people. Currently, the Arab Spring civil strife has been raging in the streets of Damascus resulting in the deaths of hundreds of civilians. Al-Assad has vowed to put down the unrest with force and has all but severed the peaceful dialog with Obama and the US. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has opened a line of dialog with the Syrian opposition leaders, but if you recall, the US did the same in Egypt only to see them become as bad if not worse than the regime of Mubarak. Then we come to Iran who may be the leader among US adversaries, with North Korea being a close second. In Obama’s freshman year in office, he was bound and determined to open a line of communication with Iran’s leaders. Attempt after attempt after attempt was made until after a year of fruitless progress, the administration woke up and realized that Iran was not going to listen to Obama’s words. In response to Obama’s efforts of peaceful dialog, Iran has stepped up its nuclear program and its open hostility to anything and anyone American. They did their best to flaunt the capture of the US drone in front of Obama in a way as to ridicule him in front of the whole world. In some instances, Obama’s open dialog has been so successful that in his three year reign he has turned once US allies into near adversaries. Obama has literally thrown longtime US ally Israel under his Muslim bus and has managed to back up and run over them several times. Russian President Putin was on somewhat descent terms with the US under former President George W Bush. Yet Putin’s tone has gotten much colder and harsher since Obama tried to dazzle him with the twinkling open communication. The once Cold War enemy that warmed up to US diplomatic relations has once again been getting colder. Under former President George W Bush, the US had a somewhat warm relationship with Pakistan. Obama’s approach with them has been so successful that it wouldn’t take much more for Pakistani President Zardari to declare all-out war with the United States. If I were a teacher and had to grade Obama’s foreign diplomatic policy and progress, I would give him an F as it seems obvious that he has done more to alienate the US from the rest of the world than any other president in history.  |
Los Angeles Should Change Name to Los Diablos Posted: 29 Dec 2011 11:12 PM PST Los Angeles – the City of Angels should change its name to Los Diablos – the City of Devils. The perverse and repulsive world of pornography has now made it to the ballot box in the city of sin. Los Angeles is home to a large portion of the adult film industry. Many young people, male and female, make their way to tinsel town with dreams of stardom and glamour. It doesn’t take long for the reality of life to set in and money to run out, forcing many to return home. The cost of living in LA is not cheap. Others are more determined and do everything they can to remain in the city, always hoping that their chance lie just around the corner, but they eventually realize that the only thing around the next corner is just another corner. In desperation, they end up in the world of pornography, committing sinful acts on film so that others can commit equally sinful acts at home and elsewhere. It also doesn’t take long to find out that there is another serious downside that off sets the money to be made. Sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS are one of the more serious consequences of the porn business. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has been trying to get city and state governments to enact legislation requiring actors in the porn industry use condoms or other viable means to prevent the further spread of AIDS and other STDs. According to Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation,
Apparently, they have now succeeded in getting such a measure to be placed on the ballot in the next city election. The general public will be asked whether or not they want to pass a law that requires pornographic actors to wear condoms and be charged a fee to pay for city inspectors to watch and make sure they comply. Just getting such a measure on the ballot is legitimizing an industry that is so perverse and anti-biblical that it makes me want to wretch just thinking about it. Whether the voters of Los Angeles vote for or against the measure, the ballot issue is forcing people to accept the porn industry as just another business that’s no different than auto repair or retail sales. Not only should this issue never be placed on a ballot, but the entire porn industry should be treated like any other immoral lifestyle and be abolished and removed from within the US borders. From the founding of our nation up to less than a century ago, most Americans would take action against people who publicly committed such acts. They would be tarred and feathers and run out town on a rail. In colonial days, the act of adultery was punished with public humiliation and jail. What’s happening in Los Angeles is a sign of God’s judgment on our nation as we read in Romans 1:18-31. The slippery slope to destruction is getting steeper and more slippery, and it won’t be much longer until we won’t be able to stop sliding and we find our nation in complete and utter ruin  |
America’s Most Corrupt Politicians Posted: 29 Dec 2011 11:05 PM PST Yesterday I told you about the Top Ten Admired men and women as listed in a recent poll. In the list of the top ten most admired men, was none other than President Barack Obama. Now Judicial Watch has released the Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians list. To no surprise of my own, President Barack Obama made Judicial Watch’s list along with the nation’s top cop, Attorney General Eric Holder. Judicial Watch’s Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians for 2011 are listed in alphabetical order:
Dishonorable Mentions for 2011 include:
Note that six of the ten list are Democrats and six of the eight listed on the dishonorable mention are Democrats. That’s 75% of those on both lists are Democrats. That has to say something for the overall mentality of the attitude of being above the law that permeates the Democratic Party. As for President Obama making this list and being listed as the most admired man in the country speaks volumes as to just how far American society has declined. Why would a nation of people admire one of the most corrupt politicians of the day and probably in the history of the American presidency? Obama has repeatedly defied the US Constitution and federal laws. He ignores the mandates of Congress and the general opinion of the American people and yet they turn around and admire him for it? And then there has to be a lot said when the US Attorney General makes it to the Ten Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians list. The man who is supposed to uphold the law turns out to be one of the biggest violators of the law. Every day, more Congressmen and women are calling for his immediate resignation and even more are signing on to a vote of no confidence and yet he sees himself as doing no wrong. Leaving Eric Holder in his role as US Attorney General is like placing a career pedophile in charge of a day care. I wish we could post Judicial Watch’s lists of the Ten Most and the Dishonorable Mention outside every polling booth in the nation so that it’s the last thing voters see before placing their votes. Just maybe, it would be enough to change a few votes this next year. |
No comments:
Post a Comment