ASSAULT ON FREE SPEECH ACCELERATES

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"  So states the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Now while keeping that in mind, if I'm reading the news correctly, it would seem that we presently have underway three separate, dangerous, and simultaneous, assaults that are now ongoing and that have as being in their sights that very same First Amendment. Ya know, if I have this right, there is some pretty scary stuff currently going on out there in that vast wasteland that is our government. There now appears to be several very purposeful attempts afoot with one specific goal in mind and it is not something that will prove to be at all beneficial to the general population of this country. One of the most efficient and effective ways that the American people use to gather information to keep them appraised of what those in government are doing, is the Internet. And it is that very same ability to gather information that is now under a full-fledged assault and on what at least appears to be three fronts, all of which are being waged against the American people by their very own government.


First off is what I have read about regarding many of those who comprise our federal law enforcement as well as our national security officials who are now seeking some sweeping new regulations regarding the Internet. Now while it does not sound like it's hampering my ability to keep myself informed of governmental monkey business, it does sound like "Big Brother" wanting to stick his nose in to the point where they would be able to listen in on the citizenry in order to see just what they might be up to. The supposed argument for requesting these new expanded regulations revolve around, they say, the fact that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorist suspects is in the process of "going dark" because many more people are now choosing to communicate online instead of by telephone. But I do have one small question here. Where is all the concern from all of those screeching liberals regarding the privacy issues that were seen as being threatened with wild accusations quite literally being screamed from nearly every front page and newscast when it was Bush who wanted to be able to listen in on phone calls when one participant of the call was a potential terrorist calling from another country? What these officials are now requesting is for there to be a federal requirement for "all services that enable communications," everything from encrypted e-mail transmitters such as BlackBerry, social networking websites such as Facebook to software that allows direct "peer-to-peer" messaging such as Skype, to now be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. This mandate would include they’re being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages. Now in a day and age when Barry is very busily assembling a rather extensive list of perceived enemies, I'm just not thinking that this is really such a good idea. Call me paranoid, but I just don't see Barry as being anywhere near as trustworthy as Bush was. Now the legislation which our buddy Barry "Almighty" plans to submit to Congress next year, raises a whole new fresh batch of questions regarding how to balance security needs with the protecting of privacy and fostering technological innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally. Which makes it all the more unnerving. So, is someone in some foreign country also going to be looking over my shoulder or perhaps reading my emails?


A fella by the name of James Dempsey, who is the vice president of the Center for Democracy and Technology, an Internet policy group, said the proposal had "huge implications" and challenged "fundamental elements of the Internet revolution" including its decentralized design. "They are really asking for the authority to redesign services that take advantage of the unique, and now pervasive, architecture of the Internet," he said. "They basically want to turn back the clock and make Internet services function the way that the telephone system used to function.” But law enforcement officials “guarantee” us that the imposing of such a mandate is "reasonable and necessary" in order to prevent the erosion of their investigative powers. Hmmmm, investigative powers. Well, one man's "reasonable and necessary" is another man's abuse of power. "We're talking about lawfully authorized intercepts," said Valerie Caproni, general counsel for the FBI. "We're not talking expanding authority. We're talking about preserving our ability to execute our existing authority in order to protect the public safety and national security." Again, when those who are doing the snooping are also the ones who are defining what's "lawfully authorized" I get more than just a tad bit queasy. Ya know, under normal circumstances, normal being not having a “Chicago thug, community agitator” of a Democrat in the Oval Office, I might be a little more likely to go along with this idea. But definitely not when we have the likes of Barry, “Dingy” Harry and “Botox” Nancy running roughshod over a Congress whose membership is comprised of a majority of members who have a rather difficult time behaving in anything that would even remotely resemble an ethical manner. Nope, I'm just not feelin it. Sorry! No way, Jose!


Secondly, we also have our old friend, Senator Patrick "Leaky" Leahy, yet another Democrat as well as being that pillar of honesty and integrity, trying his best to assist his buddy Barry, having now introduced a bill that could have a very “dangerous impact on freedom of speech,” according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Boy, now there's a surprise, another Democrat seeking to place limits on our right to Free Speech. The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) has been introduced by "Leaky", and if I'm reading the news right he’s assisted in his endeavor by Senator Orrin Hatch. “Leaky,” who also happens to be the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, would require Internet Service Providers, Domain Name System providers, and others to block Internet users from reaching certain websites. Well now, I wonder what other "intended uses" ol’ Leaky might have up his sleeve here? This seriously flawed bill would allow our stellar Attorney General Eric "I'm a Black Panther lovin MoFo" Holder, and the Barry Justice Department to break the Internet one domain at a time, by requiring domain registrars/registries, ISPs, DNS providers, and others to block Internet users from reaching certain websites. The bill would also create two Internet "blacklists." Only two? The first "blacklist" would consist of all websites hit with a censorship court order from our Attorney General. Oh, now doesn't that just give that warm and fuzzy feeling all over? Holder is as corrupt as his boss Barry is a narcissist. The second "blacklist" is a list of domain names that the Department of Justice determines, and "without judicial review" I might add, are “dedicated to infringing activities” that violate copyright laws. Again, this sounds just a bit too broad for me. COICA requires blocking for domains on the first list and “strongly suggests” that domains on the second list should be blocked as well by providing legal immunity for those who do block access to websites, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit civil liberties organization. Ya know, it's easy to predict here that there will be tremendous pressure for Internet intermediaries of all stripes to block these "deemed infringing" sites on the second blacklist. “This is a censorship bill that runs roughshod over freedom of speech on the Internet” and could have a “dangerous impact on freedom of speech,” the EFF observes. And the fact of the matter is that The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, passed in 1998, already gives copyright owners legal means to remove copyright violating material piece by piece. But COICA “vastly expands this. It would allow the Attorney General to shoot down a whole domain including all the "blog posts," images, backups, and files underneath it,” the EFF reports. “In other words, it’s not just possible but probable that a great deal of legitimate, protected speech will be taken down in the name of copyright enforcement.” A hearing on the bill is scheduled this week before the Judiciary Committee. COICA is a fairly short bill, but it could result in a very long lasting and very dangerous impact on freedom of speech, current Internet architecture, copyright doctrine, foreign policy, and beyond. In 2010, if there's anything we've learned about such efforts as these, it's that they always produce more unintended consequences than any actual benefits.


And finally third, and perhaps the scariest idea I've heard yet, is something that's being called an "amalgamated cybersecurity bill" that our freedom loving Democrat lawmakers are hoping to pass "before the end of this year", and which is more than just little frightening to me. This little piece of wizardry includes some very interesting new powers which would allow Barry "Almighty" to actually shut down not only entire areas of the Internet, but also give the power to do the same to businesses and industries that fail to comply with government orders following the declaration of a national emergency. Now knowing Barry as I think I do, what is there exactly that would prevent him from using this little gift from Congress as some sort of a political weapon if the mood should strike him? Does anyone other than me see this as being anything other than just another very blatant attempt to stifle potential dissent directed at either our "Fearless Leader?" or his party. The present draft of the bill is a combination of two pieces of legislation originally crafted by, you guessed it, two more Democrats in the person of Senators Lieberman and Rockefeller. “Industries, companies or portions of companies could be temporarily shut down, or be required to take other steps to address threats,” simply by citing concerns about an “imminent threat to the U.S. electrical grid or other critical infrastructure such as the water supply or financial network.” “Even in the absence of an imminent threat, companies could face government scrutiny. Company employees working in cybersecurity would need appropriate skills. It also would require companies to report cyber threats to the government, and to have plans for responding to a cyber attack,” states a report from Reuters. I think it has been pretty much made clear by those much smarter than I that the threat from cyber-terrorists to the U.S. power grid or water supply is actually pretty remote. The perpetrators of just such an attack these types of infrastructure would have to have direct physical access to those systems that operate these plants in order to cause them any significant damage. Any perceived threat from the public Internet to these systems is therefore completely contrived and strips bare what many fear as being the real agenda behind this so-called cybersecurity. That being the enabling of those in government to regulate free speech on the Internet. Handing Obama the power to shut down certain companies or businesses is likely to heighten already existing fears that the new cybersecurity federal bureaucracy could very easy be turned into something that could then very easily be used as a political weapon.


What causes me some very serious concern here is that it was just back in March when Barry's administration released its Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative, a plan that that would provide to those in the government the power to “secure,” or perhaps control is a better word, the nation’s public and private sector computer networks. It just so happened to coincide with the Democrats attempt put forward the claim that the independent news website "The Drudge Report" was serving malware, an incident Senator Jim Inhofe described as being a deliberate ploy “to discourage people from using Drudge”. Senator Joe Lieberman appeared to admit that the legislation had more to do with simply protecting US infrastructure when he told CNN's Candy Crowley that the bill was intended to mimic the Communist Chinese system of Internet policing. “Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in case of war and we need to have that here too,” said Lieberman. In case of war? So now we're looking to China as being our model for governmental control of the Internet? Wait just a minute here Joe. I don't think I'm too crazy about that whole idea. Let's not kid ourselves here, the Chinese government does not disconnect parts of the Internet out of any genuine concerns regarding its national security. What it does do is to habitually take such action for no other reason than to oppress and silence the victims of government abuse and atrocities, and to attempt to literally strangle any and all dissent perpetrated against the state, a practice that many are now beginning to fear as being the ultimate intention of cybersecurity here in the United States. And another thing! The implementation of some monstrous cybersecurity apparatus would represent just one more huge expansion of a federal government that is presently running amuck. A government that has already grown way too much and acquired way too much power and control over the American people already. The creating of an Office of Cyber Policy within an executive branch steeped in corruption and possessing very questionable motives is just not a very good idea. And adding to that “a new National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC) within the Department of Homeland Security, led by a separate director who would enforce cybersecurity policies throughout the government and the private sector” also does not represent the right direction in which we should be going. It just wouldn't be prudent.


Now I don't know about anybody else, but for me it just seems like every time I turn around this crowd of power hungry Democrats are setting about to do their level best in exhausting every possible method in their effort to acquire ever more control over, not only what information is available to the public, but how that information is to be disseminated as well. There is simply too much secrecy involved and it is all but impossible to get the truth from any of those who participate in today's state run media, because those who are relied upon to report the news are essentially in bed with the guilty parties. And to my way of thinkin this is all about nothing more than the creating of yet another way for Barry to poke around in my business. Business that he has no business poking around in. Look folks, let's be real here! This is but one more reason that exposes the fact that we must get away from this "one party rule" nightmare of a situation that we have managed to create for ourselves. And as quickly as possible. Democrats, as a whole, are not to be trusted in any way, shape, manner of form with type of ability that has been outlined in any of this proposed legislation. It allows for nothing more than to provide those in our government new and improved ways to go snooping on anyone they may perceive as being an enemy of the state. To allow the implementation of this type of wide-ranging authority is to put on the fast track a "Brave New World" of Barry's design. And to attempt to do so under the guise of national security no less, is absolutely ludicrous. Might this rather be all about the squelching of any possible dissent regarding the enacting of policies advocated by Barry "Almighty" and his fellow Democrats? Just something to ponder.

ALINSKY'S "RULES" REMAIN ALIVE AND WELL IN 2010...FOR DEMOCRATS

The confidence of Democrats regarding the fact that anything positive awaits them after the votes are counted this November may have taken yet another major hit with a recent poll that now shows that only 38 percent of Americans think Barry is worthy of re-election. So adding insult to injury and with only 35 days remaining before the election, I think it very safe to say that there just might be a growing sense of panic amongst Democrats in Congress in that they may very well be witnessing their majority, at least in the House, slipping from their grasp. If such an event does take place, it could not take place at a more opportune and critical time. The damage not only to our economy but to our nation's reputation that has been inflicted over the course of the last nearly 2 years has been monumental. And we are now witnessing the Democrats beginning to pull out all the stops in an attempt to stem what could very possibly be some substantial election losses. And the plan that they are choosing to rely upon, as is usually the case, is one designed by their hero, Saul Alinsky. I must admit that before Barry “Almighty” came strutting into town I was not all that familiar with Saul Alinsky or his “Rules for Radicals.” Granted, I had heard the name mentioned on various occasions and always in connection with various Democrats, such as Hitlery Clinton, who has actually met Alinsky, but never really delved into exactly what was meant by the comments that I had heard. Since Barry has come onto the scene however, with him being such a devout practitioner of the Alinsky method(s), it’s difficult not to have become more aware of the threat that is now being posed. Democrats have long been much the more prone of the twp political parties to implement those tactics devised by Alinsky, not only in the political arena, but wherever they could be considered as being applicable to the successful achieving some level of advancement regarding the leftist, Socialist or progressive cause here in America and even abroad. And so it is now, with the election only 35 long days away, very clearly now, that the White House is desperate to find some type of attack to brand every day Americans as being ‘extremists’ all in an effort to help preserve Democrats in the Fall. And in their desperation, they appear to once more, to be turning to the employing of the weaponry espoused by Saul Alinksy and his Power Tactics against the American people. Saul Alinsky remains nearly a God-like figure to most, if not all of, those who are of the Liberal or Progressive persuasion, and his rules/tactics have served them pretty darn well over the last fifty or so years. And what the Republican Party is going to have to do if it wishes to, in fact, survive as a viable political party and avoid falling even deeper into obscurity, is to employ similar tactics. Also if the GOP doesn’t wish to be overtaken by a conservative third party, then it is going to have to drop the gloves and the dogma, and begin to fight fire with fire. Why should the political left have a monopoly on politically hardball tactics? They should not be considered as being immune to such tactics if they are to be successfully defeated. We are now watching Democrats resorting to that very common Democrat tactic that has them simply refusing to discuss any of the important and substantive issues, choosing instead to go down the path of character assassination and smear tactics against the opposition as once again being their standard weapon of choice as they attempt to maintain their grasp on control of Congress. It's nothing but more of the same Alinsky type tactics.



Always remember the first rule of power tactics (pps.127-134):


1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.”


2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people. When an action or tactic is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear and retreat…. [and] the collapse of communication.


3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)


4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”


5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”


6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”


7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”


8. “Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.”


9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”


10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.”


11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside… every positive has its negative.”


12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”


13. Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. In conflict tactics there are certain rules that [should be regarded] as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as the target and ‘frozen.’


The question that remains, I suppose, is one that asks will the American people once more continue to fall for such blatant and obvious subterfuge by the Democrat Party. Or, will at least enough of them finally come to see it for what it really is? Regarding the anger and distrust that many Americans now feel toward Congress, will this still be an effective tool for Democrats to use as they proceed to grab at every straw in their effort to maintain their control of Congress? Or will there still prove to be enough simpletons out there to make it an effective and worthwhile tool for the Democrats use? Barry’s political advisers continue to look for ways to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in these final weeks. They are considering a whole range of ideas, including national advertisements, designed to cast the Republican Party as having all but taken over by the Tea Party "extremists," people who have been involved in such discussions have said. “We need to get out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party,” said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private strategy talks. Of course. But I cannot help but wonder as more mainstream Americans become aware of what it is that’s actually behind Barry’s agenda, will they also come to realize just how dangerous it is for our nation to pursue such an radical agenda, an agenda which is driven by the writings of a man who was in turn driven by his hatred of America? That man is of course, Saul Alinsky. And we know, or at least we should know by now, that we now have a devout disciple of Alinsky currently in the Oval Office. And had we a responsible media we would have known that long before he was ever elected or even before he became any kind of a viable candidate for that matter. So shouldn't we now be looking at least a little closer for what it is that might be motivating Barry "Almighty" as he proceeds with his drive to destroy our country. And then also we have in the person of none other than former U.S. Commission on "Civil Rights" Chairman Mary Frances Berry, a long-time and very prominent liberal activist, who admitted in a July 2010 interview with Politico that the left is trying to smear the Tea Party movement as "racist" for purely strategic reasons. It is not out of any genuine concern that the movement is itself actually racist. Berry called the tactic an "effective strategy" and just could not bring herself to actually denounce or condemn it. Of course not, because for Democrats it’s never about having anything that would even remotely resemble a honest discussion about the issues, it’s all about the slandering of the opposition! This idiot Berry, who is now the Geraldine R. Segal "Professor of American Social Thought and History" at the University of Pennsylvania, was asked, "will branding the Tea Party 'racist' work?" Berry replied, “Tainting the Tea Party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that Tea Party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one's opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.” And so my friends, that's pretty much it in a nutshell!


It should now be seen as being official that Barry “Almighty” has now become the most famous, or is it infamous, “graduate” of the Alinsky school of agitation and provocation. Mike Kruglik, a “direct descendant” of Alinsky, who was once Barry’s Chicago instructor in Alinsky’s teachings, has said on prior occasions, that Barry was the best student of Alinsky tactics that he has ever had. Kruglik went on to say Barry was “an undisputed master of agitation” who “could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid fire Socratic dialogue…” Barry himself has described the four years that he spent learning the science of Alinsky’s community agitating as “the best education of his life.” That short little comment alone should tell you a lot right there about the man who is now our president. Because the underlying tenet in the Alinsky method is really no different than that of the Communist rationalization; that being that the ends always justify the means. An end that is achieved by deception and bully tactics is entirely justified, according to Alinsky, and therefore Barry, and therefore the Democrats if it results in they're being able to retain control of both houses of Congress. It should come as no big surprise to anyone that politicians work to deliberately deceive the public to get elected, it is far from being something that is new. Democrat Party icon FDR masterfully conned his way into office in 1932 and with the assistance of a world war, managed to stay there until 1945. Since then, the practice of purposeful and deliberate deceit has become pretty much standard practice in American politics. Even though it is human nature to hear what we want to hear and to believe what sounds compelling to us, it more often than not leads to a case of severe “buyer’s remorse.” One case in point is the Carter Administration. Another case in point is, I think, Barry “Almighty” who, although he is a master at delivering a very compelling, believable speech, has not turned out to be what many of those who voted for him had hoped or anticipated. There is absolutely no doubt that he knows how to play on the nation’s emotions and he knows how to exploit a crisis for his own political gain. (Never let a good crisis go to waste) His campaign rhetoric was considered as being believable for a sufficient number of people to get him elected as president. Barry compelled his supporters to value and take ownership of their vote. He made his flock proud to vote for him, they felt vested in him. This is precisely why it is so difficult to enlighten his supporters about who Barry really is, and where his philosophical roots originated. That and the fact that many voted for him and still support him for no other reason than because both he and they are, black. This is how Barry, as president, has been able fundamentally change America’s economic landscape while grabbing more executive power thus far. We should not be all that surprised that Barry “Almighty” has seen fit to go around the world, vilifying his own country and every opportunity. With that being said, there is however, a very important difference between Barry and his hero Alinsky, in that Alinsky seemingly used his rules and tactics for the advancement of the perceived down-trodden. Barry, on the other hand, with his being ever the narcissist, chooses rather to employ the Alinsky tactics clearly for his own advancement. Barry, who hardly attended church prior to his attempt to organize a Chicago community, found the church that most in that community attended. This was Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church. You all remember him, right? Barry continued to attend for twenty years in order to keep the voting support of the community for his State Senate and eventual U.S. Senate runs. Everything has a purpose.


With them now beginning to, I think, become more aware that their stock has taken the same serious tumble as have home values, Congress' most vulnerable Democrats are now attempting to utilize yet another Alinsky style tactic. That being a declaring of independence, of a sort, from their party's main agenda in all possible venues that may be available to them. From Facebook profiles and television advertisements to news interviews and campaign websites leading up to the Nov. 2 elections, nary a word is being spoken by Democrats about their party affiliation. The so-called "rebranders" include Democratic Reps. Betsy Markey and John Salazar in Colorado, Zack Space in Ohio, Jason Altmire in Pennsylvania, Glenn Nye in Virginia and Joe Donnelly in Indiana. In Texas, Rep. Chet Edwards, once promoted as being a potential running mate for our buddy Barry, has suddenly become a very vocal critic of his party's policies and agenda. Some political strategists seem to be of the opinion that this tactic may very well prove to be potentially damaging to efforts to drum up a Democrat turnout at a time when the party needs it the most in an effort to stave off the opposition and protect its majority in Congress. "They want to get turnout as high as possible among those who vote for Democrats," said Joseph Bafumi, a government professor at Dartmouth College. "Running away from the president or the party might not be the way to do it." Democrats such as Altmire, Edwards, Space and Nye stand out for defying party leaders on leading issues such as health care, but they are having to defend themselves, and rightly so, because of the "D" that comes after their name. Titus and others have raised eyebrows for carrying water for Barry “Almighty” in vote after vote, only to pivot and say they are not beholden to a party. Huh? Salazar, for example, opposed federal money for abortions and new clean-energy taxes. But then he turned right around and voted for many Democratic priorities unpopular among conservatives, including the stimulus bill, health care reform and debt-financed extended unemployment benefits. Now, sliding toward the middle has proven in the past to be a time-tested tactic that can bring about some positive results. And it could appeal to moderate Republicans, as well as the gullible and uninformed, as well as of course to the supposed nonpartisan voters “alarmed” by the number of "supposed hard-right" candidates running under the GOP banner this year. Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the House Democrats' campaign committee, said ideological diversity will prove to be very much of an asset for Democrats as Tea Party fever continues to push Republicans to the "far right." The far right? "The Democratic caucus is a big-tent caucus," Van Hollen said. "We don't have a purity or an ideological test the way the Republicans do." I would very enthusiastically disagree with Mr. Van Hollen on that point. Republicans, on the other hand, argue that the Democrats are doing nothing more than attempting to whitewash their political records during the sluggish economic recovery that has focused voter anger on Washington. "Democrats may try to run away from their party's unpopular agenda, but their voting record tells the real story," Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, who leads the committee charged with electing House Republicans, said in a statement. "Our responsibility over the coming weeks is to remind voters that House Democrats have been complicit in backing a big-government agenda that has done nothing to create jobs in this country." Well, they had better get to it then!


As well as being a referendum regarding the Socialist path we now would seem to be embarked upon, the November election may also prove to be a referendum on the type of tactics being used far too often in today's elections. Even with that being said however, the Republicans can ill afford to be caught flatfooted when finding themselves on the receiving end of these type of tactics. As mentioned earlier many are going to have to be willing to grow a pair and very enthusiastically fight fire with fire. They cannot be afraid of getting down and dirty if that is what it is going to take to yank control from the grasp of those who are busily driving our country into the ground. We are at 35 days and counting. The time for being hesitant has passed, the time for urgency is now.

NOT SO FUNNYMAN, JONATHAN LEIBOWITZ

Can someone, anyone, please explain to why it is that anyone thinks that Jon Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz; November 28, 1962) is funny. Or, smart. I mean here you have a guy who's portrayed by some, I guess, not many, as practically being the next Will Rodgers. When the fact is, he's nothing more than some shmuck who does nothing more than to regurgitate words that are written for him by someone else so that all he has to do is to then read, like his buddy Barry, those same words from a teleprompter. I'm sorry, but I'm just not gettin the draw here. Now I honestly don't know what the size of his viewing audience may be. But taking into consideration the most likely average IQ is of the viewer that resides in his sought after demographic, it could be fairly large. I have sat down a time or two and actually tried to watch his show with friends who actually do think he's hysterical. They don't care if he's just reading words, he's just so darn funny doing it. But to me he just comes across as being nothing more than kind of tacky and even ride depending on the political persuasion of his guest. He’s really more of a sarcastic simpleton as well as being more than just a little ignorant. More often than not he doesn't really know much of what he's talking about, like I said he's only reading what others have written which under normal circumstances is only the repeating of something that has already been said or discussed elsewhere. And usually more seriously. And to be quite honest, whatever he chooses to support his rationale usually has absolutely no basis in fact. His take on things is usually a little skewed and more than a little warped. But then facts to guys like Leibowitz are kind of a nuisance, really. And the presenting of facts really isn't the business that he's in. He’s more into making things up as he goes along. He tries to pawn himself off as being knowledgeable on any number of topics, but in reality he doesn't really know very much about anything. And yet many proclaim him as being some terrifically skilled and talented political satirist. What Leibowitz does isn't satire, it's more like someone going on television and showing the world just how much of a moron you can be and still have your own television show. And that anyone watches at all doesn’t say much for the intelligence of his viewers. Granted I guess a lot of people watch him, but then you always see a crowd gathered a around a car wreck too.

And I guess he fancies himself as being some great interviewer. But I remember a while back when he had John Woo on his show and Mr. Woo made ol' Jonny Boy look pretty much like the dunce that he is. Like most Liberal, he likes to think that he's just so much smarter that everyone else and the truth of the matter is, that's he not. He's nothing more than a twerp who obviously has some connections that were available to him that enabled to get his own show. I see him as being the kind of know it all guy who goes on that television show "Are you smarter that a 5th Grader" and having those kids eat him for lunch. Of course he'll have his Lib friends on the show and they'll have their silly little banter about Palin or some other conservative they chose to do nothing more that ridicule, but it's just silliness that has no particular point. It's all nonsensical pabulum. If you're looking for a way to thoroughly waste 30 minutes out of your day, then watch his show and you will have satisfied that which you were trying to accomplish. It's easy to sit back and do nothing more than to make fun of people, it doesn't require any special talent. Growing up I see ol' Jonny letting his mouth get the better of him and in return getting his butt kicked on any number of occasions. I just have a very low opinion of smart-alecky jerks like Leibowitz, and that's all this guy really is. The only exception here, is that he get paid rather handsomely to do it. It's not there is any great intellect there, because there isn't. There's just a void of sorts and he tries to BS his way through whatever the conversation may be about and tries to come off as being some kind of expert. In this case what the definition of expert is, is a drip under pressure. And I suppose as long as he’s able to maintain a decent audience, he'll collecting a paycheck. But I refuse to contribute to it in any way. I don’t watch his infantile show, or anything that his name associated with.


And now he's planning some cornball joke of a "Rally to Restore Sanity" on October 30 on the National Mall, which just so happens to be the final weekend prior to the upcoming election. Ya know, here we are with our country essentially going down for the third time and a jerk like this comes along to do nothing more than to make a joke out of it. If he was really serious about the shape the country is in then he'd be talking to more of his nut job friends on the left who are hell bent on seeing it destroyed. That's where a good many reside who have lost any sense of sanity. Hell, even racist Oprah has gotten involved in the pushing of this cockamamie event. Supposedly the event is billed as being for people "who think shouting is annoying, counterproductive and terrible for your throat." Leibowitz is keying off the recent "Restoring Honor" rally hosted by conservative commentator Glenn Beck last month. Leibowitz's faux nemesis, fellow Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert, will hold a counter-protest, a "March to Keep Fear Alive" at the same time. The sole intent here of these two boobs is to do nothing more that to ridicule in anyway possible what Beck was attempting to do with his “Restoring Honor” rally. And then yesterday Colbert “testified”, although I’m not sure you could call it that, before some Congressional. What a joke! And yet “Botox” Pelosi has said that it was very appropriate for him to be there. Not! Is this what things have now been reduced to? These two pinheads think it's just so funny to make a complete mockery of those who are trying to bring attention to what is going in Congress, and the White House, and what is now being done to our country. America essentially standing on a chair with a noose around its neck and it’s imbecilic clowns like these two who wish to do nothing more that to cheer on those who wish to kick the chair out from under it. Laughing about it all the whole time. Here we are at what could very well prove to be one of the most pivotal times in our history and you have these two buffoons doing their very best to downplay the seriousness, and make light of, all that is presently going on in this country because it is their political party of choice that in control. Supposedly more than 132,000 of their fellow morons have signed on and plan to attend Leibowitz’s event, at least according to the event's Facebook page, with there also being satellite rallies being organized in Chicago, Seattle, Austin and other cities. But a Democratic Party official insisted that the rally would be a boost, adding: "Getting people engaged can only help." And you know, what do what to bet the news coverage of this thing will be nonstop with the reporting of much exaggerated numbers regarding the number of attendees. It is the type of behavior exuded by Mr. Leibowitz and his ilk, as well as his rather odd choice regarding what is actually humorous, that represents the thinking of the so-called New York and Hollywood elite. And if it also comes to represent the thinking of many more Americans, then I'm afraid that this country may in fact already be dead, it's just that we don't know it yet.

JUST WHAT IS THE "APOLLO ALLIANCE?"

Am I the only one who has never heard of this thing called the "Apollo Alliance?" Now I may be showing my ignorance here, but I think I'm also providing everyone with one more very good reason that it can be pretty darn educational to watch Glenn Beck. I had never heard of this organization before hearing about it on Beck's radio show the other day on my way home from work. Yes, I can say I still have a job, no thanks to Barry. So, what is the Apollo Alliance? Well..

"..the Apollo Alliance is designed to bring together the elements of organized labor with the community organizers with the green groups, the environmental groups, and to access all of the big foundation money that’s been supportive of those causes in the past."

So far what I've been able to find out is that, "The Apollo Alliance is a group of U.S. business, labor, environmental, and community leaders working to promote clean energy as a means of creating energy independence, reducing carbon emissions, and generating new jobs for and opportunities for American workers and businesses. The group was founded by the Center on Wisconsin Strategy and the Institute for America's Future in 2004. Chaired by former California State Treasurer and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides, the Board includes the president of the NRDC and the executive director of the Sierra Club, the heads of the Laborers' International Union of North America and the United Steelworkers Union, and actor and environmentalist Robert Redford." So, here we now have one more clandestine organization operating behind the scenes, so to speak, coming in the form of this "Apollo Alliance" that is working to have an effect on various government policies that are not in the best interest of the American people. An organization possessing some very questionable positions on a great many issues, to say the least. An organization that consists of a coalition of some like minded, and rather unsavory, individuals who represent various UNIONS, like the SEIU, Social Justice groups the likes of ACORN and is the caliber of organization that attracts guys like Van Jones. You all remember him, he was that devout Communist who, for a short time, was Barry’s “Green Czar” as well as being the founder of the "Green Initiative." And apparently this "Alliance", after having been formed by these individuals, seems to have now become very actively involved in the "assisting" of the Barry administration in creating of some of its more egregious government empowering policies, the only result of which is to further erode the already severely restricted number of individual liberties that every American citizen is still able to enjoy. Policies which have no basis in actual need, but have as their sole rationale only the rather insidious, and somewhat dubious, motives of some rather unscrupulous individuals and that nearly always result in only producing some very unpleasant consequences for a majority of the American people. These same groups, have now become able to exert an undue amount of influence over the more ethically challenged members of our government from the White House on down. And the natural outcome of such influence from these various groups as this "Alliance" has been nothing more than to further undermine the very underpinnings of our Republic while unfortunately, most Americans have remained comfortably oblivious until it has essentially become too late to stop any of it. Or, of simply having their dissent completely ignored by the powers that be as they continue to go about the enacting of whatever policies they see fit to enact regardless of how the American people may feel.


We have now arrived at a time when every American must be made to be cognizant of the fact that the current situation in which we now find ourselves, regarding those in charge of the running of our government, is a systemic one. And it is NOT one that can be or will be remedied by the outcome of just one successful election, or even with back to back election successes, should we in fact be able to extricate ourselves from Barry in 2012. The sad truth of the matter is that the Democrat Party won't be going away anytime soon and neither will groups like this "Apollo Alliance." And unfortunately I can only assume that both will be around for the foreseeable future. So, November 2, 2010 must now be identified as being our D-Day, that date which will signal the beginning of our long battle back to regain control of our country, working hard toward wrestling it away from those who are currently steering it straight into the rocks. But we must always remember and never let ourselves forget that it is going to be a very long struggle, a battle that will require much the same time, effort, stamina and determination as does our current conflict which has us fighting against the Islamic murderers. Because the consequences of losing either of these great battles will be essentially the same. That of course being, the virtual end of our constitutional Republic as we know it and of our sovereignty as a free and independent nation. And let this be a warning to all that at the very first instance which we allow ourselves to show any lack of resolve or commitment, or indicate even the briefest moment of hesitation, those who make up those groups that we oppose, such as the Democrat Party and their allies such as this "Apollo Alliance," will attempt to once more seize the momentum from us and alter course, swinging us very sharply back to the left. Believe me when I say that I have never been more terrified for my country than I am today. It is all well and good to say that we must return to conservative principles, but we must also be honest enough with ourselves in realizing that the battle that lies ahead, in our attempting to do that, will not be an easy task. And the odds against our being successful in that endeavor are formidable because our enemy is strong and cannot be counted on to surrender until we have successfully beaten them into submission. Being able to trust politicians, conservative or otherwise, has become a commodity that is now very much in short supply these days and when the decision has been made to place our trust in this or that politician, there is always that chance of being on the receiving end of some rather nasty side effects. And there is always the risk of creating some unintended, and potentially unpleasant, consequences from doing so. And what makes the issue of trust all the more crucial is that we are now living in what can honestly be described as being a very pivotal time in our nation's history. All that it’s going to take is one wrong move on our part and it will all come crashing down. There is no longer any room for error. We cannot continue to remain blissfully ignorant of all that which is being foisted upon us by the very ones whom we elect to "represent" us. Because at the end of the day, more often then not they only end up "representing" themselves!


Knowledge is power my friends, and something like this "Apollo Alliance" provides but one more example on a very long list of many, of how critical it is that everyone work at keeping themselves ever more vigilant and making themselves much better informed about what it is that is constantly going on all around us. When it comes to anything having to do with increasing the power of government, nothing remains stationary, things are in a constant state of flux. Even more so when it is the Democrat party, with the assistance of their many corrupt allies, who hold the reins of power. We must all come to realize that there are some very dark forces at work here and they are able to continue their work mostly unabated, operating from deep within the shadow of our very own Capitol Building. They operate completely undeterred by any opposing public opinion regarding their stated goals and they never really go away, constantly lurking just beneath the surface waiting for what they see as being the most opportune time to strike. The bottom line here is that we can no longer fully trust any of those who comprise our government. Least of all those, of either political party, who perceive themselves to be of the ruling elite. The present scenario is one that has now evolved into one that has essentially created an “us versus them” kind of environment. And if we allow ourselves to be content with just sitting back without ever making our displeasure known, refusing to take the requisite action needed to fight back against these enemies of our Constitution, then we will have no one to blame but ourselves when we wake up one morning to find that it has all, quite simply and unceremoniously, come to an end. Not with a bang, but with a whimper. The question that remains though, is just how many more groups like this "Apollo Alliance" are out there, organizations who behave more like some real world "Legion of Doom", and whose sole purpose is the working covertly toward the successful subverting of our Constitution and the enslavement of the American people? Maybe not a physical enslavement, but enslavement still and in the truest sense of the word. Everyone should do a little research on this group and the many others like it that are out there, because they've all managed to worm themselves way too far into the halls of our government. As I said, by spending just a little time on line what I was able to find out is that this is a group that "advances a plan to lessen the country’s dependence on foreign oil, build a stronger economy, and create a cleaner environment." They have a "ten-point plan calls for diversifying energy sources by expanding the use of existing renewable technologies such as solar, wind, and biomass; modernizing existing power plants; investing in long-term development of hydrogen fuel cell technology; increasing incentives for and prevalence of hybrid cars and energy-efficient building and appliances; and improving transportation options and public infrastructure for metropolitan areas." But no drilling for more oil here at home. The fact that we're just supposed to sit on top of our vast oil reserves but never tap into them is nothing short of ludicrous and shows very plainly just where the mentality of this specific group, as well as of its individual members, lies. HARD-A-PORT!


Regarding Barry "Almighty's" bogus economic "stimulus" bill, this "Alliance" claims that, "While the clean energy focus of the stimulus was inspired by the Apollo’s vision, the specific content of many of the bill’s provisions was influenced by policy proposals that the Apollo Alliance made last year in The New Apollo Program and the Apollo Economic Recovery Act. 'The recovery bill represents the focused work of labor, business, environmental and social justice organizations who developed a clear strategy about where the nation needed to go, and worked together to achieve it,' said Phil Angelides, former California treasurer and chairman of the Apollo Alliance." As “Dingy” Harry Reid, the present Senate Majority Leader, noted in a statement. “We’ve talked about moving forward on these ideas for decades. The "Apollo Alliance" has been an important factor in helping us develop and execute a strategy that makes great progress on these goals and in motivating the public to support them.” Now one thing is for sure, any organization that is close enough to the Democrats to be able to make policy suggestions is not any friend of the American people. And the American people should forcefully resist the supporting of any policy that will in the end rob them of any of their remaining individual liberty. And as we get closer to the election, one thing that every single American should now be asking their Congressman/woman is: JUST WHO THE HECK WROTE THE HEALTHCARE BILL? WHAT ARE THEIR NAMES? After all, it was The Apollo Alliance, again, made up of radicals like ACORN and the Unions the likes of SEIU, who were bragging that it was THEY who actually wrote the STIMULUS BILL. Can you honestly answer that you know exactly WHO it was that wrote the Healthcare Bill; all 1,000+ pages of it and within 6 months of Barry “Almighty” taking office? And then ask them WHO specifically are those "community organizations" that are mentioned on pages 469-472 of that Bill? Groups such as this "Apollo Alliance" have absolutely no business whatsoever being involved in the writing of legislation or in how it is that any policy decisions are to be arrived at. There should be no doubt whatsoever in anyone's mind here that the far left in this country has put together a very well devised plan, as well as a strategy that they feel will enable them to achieve many of their long stated and sought after goals. And trust me when I say, the goals of these individuals, or these "Alliances," are not the goals that will serve the best interests of your everyday American citizen. Building off the disaster that was, and is, TARP, which the present administration pushed through and having succeeded in their effort to nationalize our health care system, how can they not now feel a sense of encouragement that they may yet also succeed in their attempt to implement the largest tax increase in our history with the “Cap and Trade” energy tax bill being passed. And then what's next after that? Most likely the working toward the achieving of amnesty for 20+ million illegals may very well be what is next on their agenda. This move would have a specific political purpose which should be very obvious to just about anyone with a brain. It is designed to do nothing more than to dramatically expand and to then secure the lefts power base. Once that has been successfully accomplished, there will be no stopping them from forcing their socialist agenda on those of us who still believe in individual liberty and self-reliance over collectivism. You know, the principals spelled out in that pesky little document called the Constitution, on which our country was founded, and the document our elected officials seem so eager to ignore and have been pretty successful in their desire to shred it at every opportunity.



The Board of Directors of this highly partisan Democrats Only tax-exempt organization that has been able to substantially influence the Barry “Almighty’s” Administration's energy policy has quite the cast of "Usual Suspects". The following biographies come from the group's own website.


Phil Angelides (Chairman) has made his mark in California and the nation as an effective public leader, as a successful businessman, and as a trailblazing environmental innovator. Mr. Angelides is President of Riverview Capital Investments. He currently serves as Chairman of the Federal Crisis Inquiry Commission, a ten-member bipartisan panel appointed by Congress to investigate the causes of the financial and economic crisis which has gripped the nation. He was the California State Treasurer from 1999-2007 and the Democratic nominee for Governor of California in 2006. For over two decades, Mr. Angelides has been a leader in the movement for sustainable economic progress. In the 1980’s, he pioneered the planning and building of smart growth communities long before the concepts of sustainability were embraced by the marketplace. Among his ventures was the town of Laguna West which was featured in Time, Newsweek, the New York Times, U.S. News and World Report, and ABC-TV’s “Good Morning America,” and sparked a national dialogue around building more livable, environmentally responsible communities. During his eight years in elected office, Mr. Angelides transformed the State Treasurer’s Office into a force for progress, launching ground breaking policy initiatives. He directed $26 billion in state investments to promote smart growth and create jobs, housing, and opportunities in inner cities, catalyzing a wave of reinvestment in America’s urban centers. He put the weight of California’s $400 billion pension funds behind investment in clean energy and the fight against global warming – seeding the “green tech” investment revolution. And, he mobilized investors across the nation to usher in a new era of corporate social and environmental responsibility. He has received numerous awards for his work, including the National Inner City Leadership Award from the Initiative for Competitive Inner City; the California League of Conservation Voters’ Environmental Leadership Award; and the Congress for the New Urbanism’s Lifetime Achievement Award.


Robert L. Borosage is the President of the Institute for America’s Future. He writes widely on political, economic, and national security issues for publications including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and The Nation. He was the founder and Director of the Campaign for New Priorities, involving over 100 organizations in the call to reinvest in America in the post-Cold War era. He has served as an issues advisor to progressive political campaigns, including those of Senators Carol Moseley-Braun, Barbara Boxer, and Paul Wellstone. In 1988, he was Senior Issues Advisor to the presidential campaign of Reverend Jesse L. Jackson.


Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins is the Chief Executive Officer of Green For All. Since taking leadership in March 2009, Phaedra has led the organization to a stirring string of victories. Prior to joining Green For All, Phaedra was head of the South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council and Working Partnerships USA. While there, she earned her reputation as one of the nation’s most inspirational and creative problem solvers for working families. The scope and scale of Phaedra’s many achievements have won her wide praise. San Jose Magazine named her one of the 100 most powerful people in Silicon Valley. The Silicon Valley Business Journal called her one of “40 to watch under 40.” As a woman of color, Phaedra has distinguished herself as an innovative leader in California and led the way for emerging leaders in the American progressive movement, directing campaigns to win policy victories on local, regional, and state levels. She has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News and Essence, and on ABC, CNN, MSNBC and NBC. An alumna of American Leadership Forum, she has served on the boards of the Progressive Technology Project, New World Foundation, the Women’s Fund of Silicon Valley, the City of San Jose General Plan Update Task Force and the Central Labor Council Advisory Committee. She serves on the board of the Leadership Council of California Forward and is Chair and Co-Founder of the Partnership for Working Families.


Leo W. Gerard is President of the United Steelworkers of America (USWA). The son of a union miner who started working at INCO’s nickel smelter in Sudbury, Ontario at age 18, and inspired by a lifelong commitment to economic and social justice, Leo W. Gerard rose through the ranks of the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) to be appointed the Union’s seventh international president on February 28, 2001. Under Gerard, the USWA has heightened its focus on reversing the alarming decline of U.S. manufacturing and the negative impact of it on America’s growing health care crisis. He has worked with equal fervor in developing strategies to inject the rights of workers into trade agreements, investment priorities and corporate governance. Gerard is the driving force behind the Heartland Labor Capital Funds; a network that is creating conceptual, financial and educational tools for capital strategies that will inject the welfare of workers into investment priorities.


Gerald Hudson has served as Executive Vice President of SEIU since leads the work June 2004. He of the union’s Long Term Care Division, which represents nearly 500,000 nursing home and home care workers nationwide. Hudson’s outstanding commitment to labor spans decades. Hudson came to SEIU in 1978 from the Hebrew Home for the Aged in Riverdale, N.Y., where he was a member of SEIU Local 144. Elected as executive vice president for the former-District 1199 in 1989, Hudson spent more than a dozen years supervising 1199 New York’s political action, education, publications, and cultural affairs departments. During his tenure with 1199NY, Hudson coordinated the merger of the 30,000-member Local 144 into SEIU/1199. He also founded the 1199 School for Social Change - a former alternative school in the Bronx - and served as a trustee of the Local 1199 Training and Upgrading Fund, Home Care Workers Benefit Fund, and Michelson Education Fund. As a long-time champion of environmental justice, Mr. Hudson has served on the board for Redefining Progress, the nation’s leading public policy think tank dedicated to developing innovative public policies that balance economic well-being, environmental preservation and social justice. He participated in the first-ever U.S. labor delegation to the United Nations’ climate change meeting in Bali in 2007.


Mindy Lubber is President of Ceres, the leading U.S. coalition of investors and environmental leaders working to improve corporate environmental, social and governance practices. She also directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), an alliance that coordinates U.S. investor responses to the financial risks and opportunities posed by climate change. Ms. Lubber has held leadership positions in government as the Regional Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; in the financial services sector as Founder, President and CEO of Green Century Capital Management, an investment firm managing environmentally screened mutual funds; in the private sector as the President of an environmental law and policy consulting group; and in the not-for-profit sector for more than a decade leading environmental and public interest law organizations, including the National Environmental Law Center, which she founded. She was the Senior Advisor and Communications Director to former Governor Michael Dukakis, and for a decade, held leadership positions with the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group (MASSPIRG), including Chairwoman of the Board of Directors.


Nancy McFadden is Senior Vice President and Senior Advisor to the Chairman and CEO of PG&E Corporation. She is responsible for providing strategic advice to shape PG&E’s business strategy pertaining to competitive issues, key ballot initiatives, emerging issues, and other public policy matters, with particular emphasis on the Corporation’s efforts to continue to be a national environmental leader. Prior to her appointment to the role of advisor in November 2009, McFadden served as Senior Vice President of Public Affairs for PG&E Corporation and Pacific Gas and Electric Company, responsible for managing the company’s federal, state and local government relations, and philanthropic and community initiatives. Before joining PG&E, McFadden spent nearly two decades as a key legal, political, and policy advisor at both the federal and state levels. In California, she served as senior advisor to Governor Gray Davis. A senior member of the Clinton Administration for eight years, she served as deputy chief of staff to Vice President Al Gore, General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Transportation and Deputy Associate Attorney General. The Washington Post named her one of the “go-to people” in the Clinton Administration for her significant record of accomplishment. She started her career practicing law with the firm of O’Melveny and Myers, during which time she was named “One of the 40 Best Lawyers Under 40” by Washingtonian magazine. In addition to serving as an executive with PG&E, McFadden has been appointed by the California State Senate and two governors to serve on the California Medical Assistance Commission, the agency that negotiates MediCal contracts with hospitals and health plans. McFadden is a Bay Area native, and has a J.D. from the University of Virginia and a bachelor’s degree from San Jose State University. She is a member of the Board of Trustees for the California Museum for History, Women and the Arts and the San Francisco Fine Arts Museum. She also serves on the Board of Directors of the Women’s Foundation of California, the California Climate Action Registry, the California Foundation on the Environment and the Economy, the Bay Area Council, the Apollo Alliance, the Council for Environmental and Economic Balance, as well as on the Board of Advisors for the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley.


Terence M. O’Sullivan has been General President of LIUNA – the Laborers’ International Union of North America – since January 1, 2000. He is known as an innovator among the newest generation of labor leaders dedicated to aggressive and sometimes radical approaches designed to increase the power of working people in the 21st Century. O’Sullivan has guided the more than 500,000 collective bargaining members of LIUNA to the forefront of the labor movement, reshaping the Union into one of the fastest-growing, most aggressive and progressive unions in North America. Despite the decline in overall union membership in the U.S., LIUNA has shown steady and consistent growth. He is also a member of the Governing Board of Presidents of the Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL-CIO and a member of the Leadership Council of the Change to Win labor union federation. O’Sullivan is a current member of the Board of Directors of Ullico Inc., and past Chairman and CEO of the insurance and financial services provider. He also serves on the Board of Directors of America’s Agenda: Health Care for All, and is a member of the Management Committee of Americans for Transportation Mobility. Before becoming LIUNA General President, O’Sullivan served the union as a Vice President, Mid-Atlantic Regional Manager, and Assistant to the General President. He has also served as Administrator of the West Virginia Laborers’ Training Center. A proud native of San Francisco, he joined LIUNA in 1974 and is a long-time member of Local Union 1353, Charleston, West Virginia.


Ellen Pao joined Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers in 2005. Prior to KPCB, Ellen held various operating roles at BEA, including head of business development for products, site manager for new mobile products, and lead for new engineering efforts in India. She also served in corporate development, leading strategic projects for the CEO and M&A transactions. Prior to BEA, Ellen focused on business development and closed technology licensing deals for Tellme Networks and Microsoft’s WebTV division. She also served as a consultant at MyCFO and at Danger Research, where she headed the Sidekick’s first marketing requirements efforts. Before entering the tech field, Ellen was a corporate attorney for Cravath, Swaine & Moore in both its New York City and Hong Kong offices, working on deals across the Philippines, Singapore and Greater China. She provided guidance on high-yield debt offerings, M&A transactions, aircraft financings, and pro bono projects for Habitat for Humanity and Covenant House. Ellen holds a BS in Electrical Engineering and a certificate from the Wilson School of Public and International Affairs from Princeton University, a JD from Harvard Law School and an MBA from Harvard Business School.


Michael A. Peck serves on the board of the Apollo Alliance and is a special adviser to the Blue Green Alliance. Michael works closely with several of Spain’s top green energy multinationals in the U.S., including Gamesa, the leading Spanish wind turbine manufacturer headquartered in Pennsylvania, as well as with worker cooperatives and progressive unions to create good and green jobs opportunities. Michael was instrumental in bringing Gamesa to Pennsylvania in 2004, where the company since has invested more than $200 million and created upwards of 850 green and good jobs in partnership with the United Steelworkers union. In 1994, Michael founded the MAPA Group, which is dedicated to ‘doing well by doing good’ in part through transformational green economy projects and missions with clients and allies.


John Podesta is the president and CEO of the Center for American Progress. Under his leadership, the Center has become a notable leader in the development and advocacy for progressive policy. Prior to founding the Center in 2003, Mr. Podesta served as White House Chief of Staff to President William J. Clinton. He served in the president’s cabinet and as a principal on the National Security Council. While in the White House, he also served as both an assistant to the president and deputy chief of staff, as well as staff secretary and a senior policy advisor on government information, privacy, telecommunications security, and regulatory policy. Most recently, Mr. Podesta served as co-chair of President Obama’s transition, where he coordinated the priorities of the incoming administration’s agenda, oversaw the development of its policies, and spearheaded its appointments of major cabinet secretaries and political appointees. Additionally, Mr. Podesta has held numerous positions on Capitol Hill, including counselor to Democratic Leader Senator Thomas A. Daschle (1995-1996); chief counsel for the Senate Agriculture Committee (1987-1988); and chief minority counsel for the Senate Judiciary Subcommittees on Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks; Security and Terrorism; and Regulatory Reform (1981-1987). A Chicago native, Mr. Podesta is a graduate of Knox College and the Georgetown University Law Center, where he is currently a visiting professor of law. He also authored The Power of Progress: How America’s Progressives Can (Once Again) Save Our Economy, Our Climate and Our Country.


Carl Pope was appointed Executive Director of the Sierra Club in 1992. A veteran leader in the environmental movement, Mr. Pope has been with the Sierra Club for nearly thirty years. During Mr. Pope’s tenure as Executive Director, Sierra Club added 150,000 new members, growing to 700,000 of your friends and neighbors. In addition to his work with the Sierra Club, Mr. Pope has had a distinguished record of environmental activism and leadership. He has served on the Boards of the California League of Conservation Voters, Public Voice, National Clean Air Coalition, California Common Cause, Public Interest Economics, Inc., and Zero Population Growth. Mr. Pope was also Executive Director of the California League of Conservation Voters and the Political Director of Zero Population Growth.


Dan W. Reicher has over 20 years of experience in business, government and non-governmental organizations focused on energy and environmental technology, policy, finance and law. He recently joined Google where he serves as Director of Climate Change and Energy Initiatives for the company’s venture called Google.org which has been capitalized with $2 billion of Google stock to make investments and advance policy in the areas of climate change and energy, global development, and global health. Prior to his recent position at Google, Mr. Reicher served as President and Co-Founder of New Energy Capital Corp., a New England-based company that develops, invests in, owns and operates renewable energy and distributed generation projects. From 1997-2001, Mr. Reicher was Assistant Secretary of Energy for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As Assistant Secretary, he directed annually more than $1 billion in investments in energy research, development and deployment related to renewable energy, distributed generation and energy efficiency. Prior to that position, Mr. Reicher was DOE Chief of Staff (1996-97), Assistant Secretary of Energy for Policy (Acting) (1995-1996), and Deputy Chief of Staff and Counselor to the Secretary (1993-1995). Mr. Reicher is also a member of General Electric’s Ecomagination Advisory Board, co-chairman of the advisory board of the American Council on Renewable Energy, and a member of the board of the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy. Recently, Mr. Reicher was also a member of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Alternatives to Indian Point for Meeting Energy Needs. He also served as an adjunct professor at the Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and Vermont Law School.


Jerome Ringo served as president of the Apollo Alliance from 2005 until January 2010. He has first hand experience of the challenges we face after working for more than 20 years in Louisiana’s petrochemical industry. More than half of that time was spent as an active union member working with his fellow members to secure a safe work environment and quality jobs. Louisiana’s petrochemical industry focuses on the production of gasoline, rocket fuel, and plastics – many of which contain cancer-causing chemicals. As he began observing the negative impacts of the industry’s pollution on local communities – primarily poor, minority communities – Jerome began organizing community environmental justice groups. Jerome’s experience organizing environmental and labor communities and his drive to further diversify the environmental movement bridges many of Apollo’s partners to create a broad based coalition to provide real solutions for our energy crisis. In 1996, Ringo was elected to serve on the National Wildlife Federation board of directors and, in 2005, Jerome became the chair of the board. In so doing, he also became the first African American to head a major conservation organization. Jerome was the United States’ only black delegate at the 1998 Global Warming Treaty Negotiations in Kyoto, Japan, and represented the National Wildlife Federation at the United Nations conference on sustainable development in 1999. Jerome inspires audiences around the world to create a new clean energy economy. Some of his most notable keynote appearances include: the Montreal Climate Summit in 2006, the United Nations African Climate Conference in Nairobi, Kenya in 2006, the Kyoto Plus Conference in Berlin Germany in 2007, and the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver Colorado. In 2006, Jerome was a McCloskey Fellow and Associate Research Scholar at Yale University; in 2008, he was a Visiting Lecturer at the University of California, Santa Barbara’s Bren School of the Environment. Jerome is co-author of Diversity and the Future of the U.S. Environmental Movement (published in 2007) and The Green Festival Reader (published in 2008.) Jerome appeared in the Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth.


Joel Rogers co-founded the Apollo Alliance and served as its first chairman. He is professor of law, political science, and sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and a longtime government and campaign adviser and democratic activist. In his academic work, Joel has written widely on democratic theory, American politics, and public policy, including such books as On Democracy, Right Turn, The Forgotten Majority, and What Workers Want. He is currently working on problems in energy efficiency, government performance, and egalitarianism capitalism. Joel is also director of COWS, an applied research center and field laboratory for high road (”triple bottom line” + democracy) competitiveness and government; Center for State Innovation, which promotes high-road policy innovation among elected state executives (governors and others), and the Mayors Innovation Project, which does the same with local elected executive. A contributing editor of The Nation and Boston Review, Joel has received many academic honors and a MacArthur Foundation “genius” fellowship. Newsweek identified him as among the 100 Americans most likely to shape U.S. politics and culture in the 21st century.



BARRY CALLS UPON HIS FAITHFUL TO "GUARD THE CHANGE!"

And so it was on this past Saturday, that Barry "Almighty", in an effort to fire up that all important part of his support base ahead of this November's elections, told black leaders that he wanted their support to "guard the change" that he has been busy delivering. "I need everybody here to go back to your neighborhoods, and your workplaces, to your churches, and barbershops, and beauty shops. Tell them we have more work to do. Tell them we can't wait to organize. Tell them that the time for action is now," he told the Congressional Black Caucus. Yes, that band of hypocritical bigots who sees racists around every corner, under every rock and at every Tea Party rally. The change "HE" has been busy delivering. Don't you just love it? The Messiah talking to his flock about all that which he has seen fit to bestow upon us, the lowly unwashed masses. The sheer galactic magnitude of this jerk's ego is absolutely mind-boggling. And in so doing, Barry was doing his level best to show a deliberate effort in an attempt to recapture at least some of the enthusiasm that helped him to win the White House in 2008. Thus far, however, recent opinion polls have shown that African-Americans are much less likely to vote than whites this time around. "It's not surprising that a lot of people may not be feeling that energized or that engaged right now," he told an annual awards ceremony hosted by the organization representing black members of the U.S. Congress. "A lot of folks may be feeling like politics is something they get involved in every four years when there's a presidential election, but they don't see why they should bother the rest of the time," he said. And one cannot help but wonder why it might be that blacks, ever cognizant of any perceived threat to their never ending taxpayer funded gravy train, and ever on the receiving end of repetitive Democrat rhetoric regarding how it is that they should view themselves as being the victims of an unjust society, should not be more enthused about showing up at the polls. Especially if their beloved Democrats are in anywhere near the amount of trouble proclaimed by so many. With the election just over 40 days away, I don't see any ground swell of support suddenly becoming a reality, so I'm not sure why the apathy on the part of African-Americans, regarding November's election. Besides having to deal with an obvious lack of enthusiasm coming from the African-American community, Barry and the Democrats also have many working hard in their attempt to reignite the youth vote while at the same time working overtime to discredit both the Tea Party as a whole, those Republican candidates who are being supported by the Tea Party as well as anyone who chooses to endorse any of these candidates. The endeavor here, is to paint these people as being so far outside the mainstream as to be nothing more than "extremists." The race appears to now be about who is it that can portray those in the Tea Party as being the more crazy. And it does not help matters when supposed political gurus on our side are providing some of the fodder with which those on the left can then use to bash Republican candidates over the head.

If we can believe all of the pundits and recent polling data, then it would seem on the face of things that the Republicans could very well be poised for the making of some pretty impressive gains come November. Especially with high unemployment and slowing, nearly nonexistent, economic growth turning voters away from Barry's and the Democrats, and what are now proving to be their obvious foolhardy attempts at stimulating the faltering economy. But is there sufficient dissatisfaction with the Democrats to warrant the degree of enthusiasm that's presently out there? And is that level if dissatisfaction enough to potentially cost the Democrats control of one or both houses of Congress? A Gallup survey from earlier in September found that only 25 percent of blacks had given 'quite a lot' or 'some' thought to the November 2 congressional ballot, compared to 42 percent of whites. My question here would be to ask what the heck's up with the other 58 percent of whites? The only way we're going to be able to bi*ch slap Barry all the way back to the place of his birth is to amass a huge enough voting block consisting of Americans of every type who still love this country. Because it will be us versus those who are only looking for additional ways to perpetuate the subsiding of their lifestyles at the expense of those of us who do work for a living and actually "pay" taxes. But this 42 percent does represent a much larger gap than during the presidential election in 2008, when both groups were about equal when it came to their intention to vote. High turnout in the African-American community is vital for Barry and the Democrats because this one group more than any other has bought into the premise, hook line and sinker, that unless you're an athlete of some sort, then you just can't make it through life without getting plenty of help from the Democrats. Together with the enthusiastic support of young, albeit thoroughly indoctrinated, voters formed a striking feature of the 2008 election and an important part of Barry's strategy in securing the White House. So youngsters, how’s all that hope and change workin out for ya? Success in repeating at least part of that performance in the upcoming midterm poll, when voter turnout is traditionally low, could very well make the big difference to congressional Democrats running in close races. Let's not forget, all 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and 37 of 100 Senate seats are up for grabs. "The last election was a changing of the guard, now we need to guard the change," Barry said.


So in the effort to further his attempt to "guard the change", Barry's political advisers are ever on the lookout for new and ever more effective ways to be able to paint the Democrats as being the only sane ones in the room and they have been very busy discussing amongst themselves the formulation of a plan. A plan that can be utilized as they work to alter course in preparation for the midterm elections in the final weeks ahead. These wizards of deceit are considering a whole range of ideas that can then be used to deceive and/or distract the America people just long enough to assist Democrats in the pending election. Ideas which include a national advertising campaign designed not so much to inform as it is meant to distract. Distract voter attention away from our present high unemployment, present outrageous deficits, healthcare "reform", and a very slow growing economy all of which were direct results of a Barry inspired and Democrat enacted agenda of reckless government expansion and reduced personal liberty. Voters must not be allowed to focus on how it is that the Democrats have gotten us into our present predicament or how they have expanded the power of government. Also, they are coming up with ever more inventive ways than usual in their attempt to, at least to the greatest extent possible, cast the Republican Party as having now been all but taken over by all of those "racist" Tea Party "extremists.” I just love how the word "extremist" is now so easily being bandied about these days, especially by those currently in the employ of, or in support of, the most "extreme radical" to ever occupy the Oval Office, Barry "Almighty." And to use it when speaking about every day people whose only desire is one that sees a return to our constitutional form of government and away from government intervention into what is now so much of the daily life of every single American. They seek a return to government of, by and for the people, and to have a government with at least some semblance of fiscal responsibility and that shows at least some restraint when spending the monies provided the taxes they pay. It’s ironic that there is an attempt to portray these people who care for nothing more than the rescuing of their country as extreme, by those who are the true "extremists" in this country and are the ones actively pursuing its destruction. We’ve been witnessing this ongoing assault against our country for decades now, but it was kicked up a notch in 2006 with the Democrats assuming control of Congress. But with the election of our “community agitator” it has been taken to a level unseen since the days of FDR. And all in an effort to bring about a total financial collapse, the complete neutering of our national defense in the face of any number of growing threats, and of course what can only be seen as our unilateral surrender in the war on terror, or our overseas contingency operation. So the people are finally rising up against this renewed onslaught only be called "extremists."


Master strategerists from the White House working together with Congressional Democrats will be trying their best to energize all those supposedly dispirited Democratic voters over the coming six weeks, all in the hopes of limiting the party’s losses presently being foretold and to avoid losing control of either the House or the Senate. The strategists seem to think there are potential openings for exploitation, and exaggeration, after a string of Tea Party successes have, to their way of thinking, split Republicans in a number of states. Adding to their hopes are what culminated last week with developments that have somewhat scrambled Senate races in both Delaware and Alaska. “We need to get out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party,” said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private strategy talks. Yep, these gutless cowards always request anonymity. What a message to run on, demonize the people who actually believe in the Constitution and against the present attempt to bring about nothing more than just another form of tyranny right here in America. So it's now a "dangerous" time to elect Republicans? My God, how can any rational thinking human being look back over the time since the Democrats assumed control of Congress and back over the last 20 months of the Barry presidency and think that it's the Republicans who are the dangerous ones here? However, Democrats do remain divided to some extent. The party’s House and Senate campaign committees are resistant, not wanting to do anything that increases the chances of nationalizing the midterm elections when high unemployment and the drop in Barry’s popularity have made the climate so potentially hostile to Democrats. It was just this past Sunday night that White House advisers denied that the previously mentioned national ad campaign was even being planned. “There’s been no discussion of such a thing at the White House or the Democratic National Committee,” said David "The Pinhead" Axelrod, Barry’s senior adviser. And we know that there is just no way that Mr. Axelrod would be lying to us, right? Proponents say that a national ad campaign, most likely on cable television, would complement those individual campaigns and give Democrats a chance to redefine the stakes. The Democratic strategist said voters did not now see much threat to them from a Republican takeover of Congress, even though some Tea Party-backed candidates and other Republicans have taken positions that many voters consider extreme, like shutting down the government to get their way, privatizing Social Security and Medicare and ending unemployment insurance. So I guess that must mean that the American people must now be convinced that a threat actually exists that they would not have otherwise been aware of were it not for the Democrats warning them about it. I mean really, are there really still enough Americans stupid enough to actually believe any of this drivel? Let's be real here, with the passing of Barry's Healthcare "reform", who is it that has done more damage to Medicare. Which section of the population is it that will essentially be forced to bare the brunt of that whole fiasco? So in an attempt to salvage something from the November election, thus far Barry has largely limited his campaigning to fundraisers and small events. That will all change soon with Barry playing a bigger role in the rallying of the flagging faithful, officials have said. Another part of the White House strategy will be an attempt to mobilize those younger voters who supported Barry in 2008. In an effort to assist in accomplishing that goal, Barry will be holding four big campaign-style rallies, the first on September 28 at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, with satellite transmission to campuses in other states. Later rallies will be in Ohio, Philadelphia and Las Vegas. There will also be an e-mail campaign and robocalls to spur voters, and a national “town hall” Webcast to held sometime in October. “These events are about activating the Obama grass roots to help organizationally in terms of volunteers” for get-out-the-vote efforts, said Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director. “We’re not going to get all the 2008 Obama voters out. We may not get most of them. But in close races, it can be decisive.” Barry will also step up his efforts to draw contrasts between the parties, in particular by his continuing to pound away on his call for extending the expiring Bush-era tax cuts, except for “millionaires and billionaires.” He'll repeat ad nauseam how it is the Republicans who want the tax cuts to be extended for people at all income levels, not just for those with incomes below $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families, as he has proposed.


Even with all this scheming, Republicans strategists remain confident of their party’s prospects for big gains in November, even as they acknowledge that they are unlikely to win the Senate race in Delaware after the victory in the Republican primary there of Christine O'Donnell, a Tea Party-backed candidate with a long record of controversial statements, over Representative Mike Castle. I do have to ask though, why it is that they are so quick to throw in the towel in Delaware. Now I'm sure that the search is already well on track to find whatever speck of dirt that can be found on Ms. O'Donnell just as it was with Sarah Palin. But ya know what, no matter what is found, short of her maybe being an axe murderer, I will still support her since she is running against a self-professed Marxist. And even if it were found out that she were an axe murderer, in this instance there would still be a very good chance that I would still support her. And then just last week, Alaska’s Senate race was sort of upended when sore loser Senator Lisa Murkowski, who lost the Republican nomination to a Tea Party supported, Jeff Miller, decided that it would be a good idea to mount a write-in candidacy against him, saying, “Alaska is not fair game for outside extremists.” Ok, who’s really being the extremist here? Who’s refusing to abide by the will of the people, after losing fair and square in a fair election? Ah, I'd say that that's Ms. Murkowski! You know, this bi*ch needs to understand one thing here, there are more important things than her feeling entitled to her cushy job in Congress. Had she been more conservative in the way that she went about performing that cushy duties, she just might have gotten herself reelected. But she made a conscious decision not to do so and should now have the guts to face the consequences of her own actions and quit whining about it. So now she just needs to stop acting like a spoiled brat and go the fuk away! But I'm kinda left scratching my head when I hear guys like John Weaver, who is supposedly a Republican consultant say things like, “While we may have a handful of nominees out of the mainstream, the American people have come to the conclusion this administration and this Congress are out of the mainstream.” I'd like to know which candidates this guy is speaking of as being "out of the mainstream." Is it guys like McCain, this bimbo Murkowski, or maybe someone like Charlie Crist before he decided to leave the party. Or, is he in fact speaking about candidates like Miller and McDonnell. Please, Mr. Weaver, I'm curious, can you please explain what you mean?


Looking back at the scenario that came about in 1994, Democrats were in power and took similar hope when Republican primaries yielded candidates that were initially deemed as being too far to the right for the general election. Yet the wave that took place against Democrats that year was strong enough to carry those very same "too far to the right" newcomers into office and put the Republicans in control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. What we're hoping for now, actually what the survival of the country may literally depend on, is something of a repeat performance. Will history repeat itself come November? Except for Ms. O’Donnell in Delaware, other Republican nominees that the Democrats like to showcase as being extremists, include those in Senate races in Nevada, Colorado, Kentucky and even blue-state Connecticut, where Republican candidates are either even with their Democratic rivals or are ahead in recent polls. In an effort to continue what is seen as being their best weapon, that being the slandering of Tea Party back candidates, the Democratic National Committee has begun work on a database that will be utilized to link the more controversial statements of the Tea Party backed candidates to possible Republican presidential aspirants who chose to support them. The sole purpose of this database will be to point out, for example, that Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney are supporting the Republican candidate for Senate in Nevada, Sharron Angle, who once said that victims of rape should make “what was really a lemon situation into lemonade,” and Ms. O’Donnell, who has said that having women in the service academies “cripples the readiness of our defense.” Look, this is the type of behavior that we are exposed to by the Democrats every single election. It is nothing more than further evidence that all the Democrats know how to do is whip out their standard playbook and to then do exactly that which they accuse Republicans of doing, use fear as a motivator. This is what the Democrats are now forced to resort to, the art of personal destruction, because that's all they have. Democrats can't go out and actually run on any of the legislation that they've passed, all they can now is to try to demonize their opponents. The question is, will Americans buy into this ploy yet one more time regarding this November's election? Will they see those who have been working so diligently to destroy their country as being the ones to vote for? Or, will they say enough is enough, we're tired of this nonsense. The tactic of linking potential Republican rivals to such statements was already in evidence last week. After Ms. O’Donnell’s victory, a Democrat party spokesman told reporters, “The fact that Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin would put their name behind a candidate that believes women who serve our country ‘cripple the readiness of our defense’ make them unfit to be commander-in-chief.” What a bunch of crap, if there is one specific individual today who is obviously unfit for hold the responsibility of being Commander-in Chief, that individual would be Barack Hussein Obama. Put your life vests on everybody, for the next 40+ days it's liable to get more than a little choppy on the political seas. Hopefully, it will be the other guys who get sunk!




http://www.theblaze.com/
http://www.theactionpage.com/
http://www.werewatchingyou.net/
http://rightnetwork.com/
http://remembernovember.com/
http://senateconservatives.com/