Hillary's Ship Is On Fire

Someone once said that never before has a presidential aspirant been elected to the Presidency of The United States when their approval ratings are overshadowed by their disapproval ratings.

Now, we see that Hillary's approval ratings are at 50% nationwide and her disapproval ratings are at 50%. Gee. Why then, is she still going? Could it be that she has the gift of gab?

Also, now we have a video that the Lame Stream Media will not air. The link was sent to me from one of my readers and I thank Mike M for it. The video is quite long for a video...about 13 minutes...odd that, isn't it? 13? Curious.

We have Hillary exposing her surveillance hypocrisies and in the GOP Debate this evening, Huckabee said that Hillary, if she took her lips off of the backsides of Soros, she might be able to get some fresh air.

In the last DNC Debate, Hillary and all of the other sponges of Soros fundings, told their trolls and blind followers that the troops would be in Iraq until at least 2013 and just last week, Hillary the Fraud told some folks that when she is elected she will pull the troops out immediately. Do we really need a psychopath in the White House?

I think it would be just swell if the DNC Candidates kept on doing what they are doing. That drop into the Abyss of Obscurity will be all the more sweeter.

Catch The Wave

Troll J.B. Poersch Exposes ITS Stupidity

No wonder the DNC likes this guy. Even when and after the SCHIP quagmire of hiding behind a child and using the family as a screen for their untoward attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of the American People was exposed, this idiot continues on with the usual disingenuous and retarded rhetoric, reminiscent of a spoiled brat, repeating their lies.

I received an email from a friend for my amusement and to post. This is the email forwarded to me. I shall rip this apart because it is all too easy. Trolls are trolls no matter their level of involvement within the rank and file of the Leftinistra.

It's the GOP Deceit of the Week

Republicans sliming and swiftboating should come as no surprise, but picking on a middle school student is low - even for the GOP.

Read the above as follows: those damn right wing bloggers sure got the goods on us and we must find a way to spin this incident and blame someone else because we got caught lying, didn't do our homework on this family and now, the American people know without a doubt that this whole SCHIP deal is a major scam.

We tried to convince everyone that 80% of the people wanted this but we didn't tell all...they want it AFTER the scam is fixed.

The Kentucky press has been reporting on a story involving an aide for Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell who was spreading false rumors about a 12-year-old boy and his family. Then when McConnell was asked about the incident, he failed to set the record straight.

Read the above as follows: Mitch won't play fairly and won't bow to our pressures because that damn Silent Majority isn't silent anymore and there are way too many of them and they have infiltrated our ranks and we can no longer keep any secrets from anyone.

DAMN the luck!!

The 12-year-old bravely advocated for S-CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program that provided much-needed health care coverage for him and his sister after a car crash. McConnell has already voted twice to block S-CHIP, and then his aide was trying to drag a kid's name through the mud in a failed attempt to further make his point.

Sen. McConnell should know to pick on someone his own size.

Read the above as follows: waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!! We got caught with our knickers down and we got spanked and exposed for what we are...liars and frauds. Next time, we will have to do a better job at finding a family that CANNOT afford anything. Why won't the others let us have our own way that we have enjoyed all these years! WHY??

Open season

The last time the open-seat Senate numbers looked this good for Democrats was in 1958.

Read the above as follows: we are frothing at the mouth and it has been so long since we had control over the American people that we cannot afford to lose this next election cycle. If we do, we won't be in the White house for another 30+ years. If that happens, I will wet myself and soil my panties.

New Mexico Sen. Pete Domenici recently announced his retirement, marking the fifth GOP senator to opt against re-election in '08. Another open seat means another chance for a pick-up with no incumbent standing in our way. There will be a Republican primary though, and voters will have an unfortunate choice to make.

Read the above as follows: there is no one better than us at lies, deceit and smear campaigns. We are the Masters of it but we have to careful. The Silent Majority is speaking up but we still think they are really stupid. We must carefully weigh in and hope to Satan that we can prey on the emotions of the weak-kneed slow in intellect people and defeat any Conservative that tries to jump in and screw things up for us.

Rep. Heather Wilson is Republican candidate #1. She's voted for Big-Oil tax breaks, rejected the 9/11 committee recommendations, and voted 4 times this year against troop withdrawal in Iraq. Not surprisingly, she votes with Bush 85 percent of the time.

Read the above as follows: if the United States wins this war, we are all sunk and that Abyss of Obscurity that that damnable Snooper keeps yapping about will become an actuality.

But Rep. Steve Pearce, GOP candidate #2, will do you one better. At least 93 percent of the time, this right-winger votes with the president. Both Republican candidates are in a race for who can be more loyal to George W. Bush.

Read the above as follows: the guy that we have said time and time again as being the most stupid guy ever in the White House has outmaneuvered us, outsmarted us and outgunned us at every turn and now we really look stupid. Not that we are because we are perfect and have never made any errors that we couldn't successfully blame someone else for.

In short, the above mentioned folks are a major danger to us and we must succeed at smearing them really bad.

To quit or not to quit

There's stick-to-itiveness and then there's Republican Mike Johanns. When he threw his hat in the ring for the Nebraska Senate race, some seemed surprised that Johanns would depart from the Bush administration at such a critical time. After all, agriculture means a lot to Nebraskans and he skipped out before finishing the Farm Bill.

But anyone who knows anything about Mike Johanns would realize he has played leap-frog from one post to the next, never finishing a job he was elected to do. He's bailed as governor, mayor, city councilmember and now as Secretary of Agriculture for George W. Bush.

Mike Johanns will trample over the needs of his constituents in a rush to his next career move, and the DSCC's media response project has launched a new ad to remind Nebraskans of his disappointing, unreliable record.

Read the above as follows: Even though this guy shows us up at every turn also, we must continue with the lies and deception we are so damn good at!

Tim Johnson's all in

Just moments ago, Sen. Tim Johnson announced that he is running for re-election, rounding out a full ballot of Democratic incumbents in the Senate.

All of our senators are now waging re-election bids, while Republicans have to defend 22 seats in the Senate, including fielding candidates in 5 states where their incumbents won't run again.

Backed by 11 fellow Democratic incumbents, Sen. Johnson is hitting the campaign trail in South Dakota. And he's ready to win.

Read the above as follows: THIS guy is a TRUE socialist and will be GREAT at pulling wool and we cannot afford for the skeletons (and boy are there ever some) from falling out of the cages in the attic...the closets are too small. We must get the True Americans, the far left-wing moonbats of the fruit loop brigades to get on board with these folks so we must paint a pretty picture that they are as anti-American as they are.

Former governor, future senator

These are the kind of poll numbers I love to see.

New Hampshire candidate for Senate Jeanne Shaheen, a former 3-term governor, leads GOP incumbent John Sununu 54-38, according to a poll released this month. Shaheen is running a top-notch campaign in a state hungry for change.

In Virginia, a poll released this week shows former Gov. Mark Warner leading either of his likely opponents by 24 points. Whether he runs against Jim Gilmore or Tom Davis, the Democrat is favored 51-27.

Our opponents in New Hampshire and Virginia are buried in the polls, and it's the DSCC's job to make sure they're not digging their way out.

Read the above as follows: our Komrade, George Soros, is pouring millions into buying the Presidency and we will do our part to ensure that those damn Constitutionalists are buried. We are in the process of buying the poll results we so desire. After all, we blow with the wind and we must ensure that the wind blows in the direction we need it to blow.

We can no longer rely on the RINOs that Soros bought because they might redevelop a spine and moral fortitude and Satan knows that we cannot have anyone of substance in Congress. That way, in about 6 to 8 years, we can finally have the Utopian Society that we all want. we will have all the money and those idiots that trusted us will be like the poor slogs in THE old USSR.

Even though Utopia actually means No Place, it sure sounds good.

The power of one (million)

The rubber has hit the road in the third quarter for a bunch of our candidates as fundraising numbers have just crossed my desk. Rep. Mark Udall in Colorado, Sen. Tom Harkin in Iowa, Sen. Max Baucus in Montana, and former Gov. Mark Warner in Virginia all raised $1 million in just one fiscal quarter. This is no small feat.

Democratic candidates are working hard to raise the money it takes to silence the GOP spin, but the DSCC needs to be there with grassroots support and instant response ads to answer every underhanded attack.

Because even when the numbers look good, we know that the fight isn't over until Election Day.

Read the above as follows: LOL!! Little does anyone know but the funds are coming from George Soros, illegally but the filters in place will take years to decipher and by then, it will be too late. We just have to be sure that the 2nd Amendment is nullified and all weapons confiscated. We don't have what it takes to fight 100+ million gun owners. Can you imagine if we had to like, actually have to fight someone? Good Satan below us all!

It will be much better for all of us to lie and cheat our way into power because honesty and personal integrity just makes life harder for everyone.

Let's keep it up,

J.B. Poersch, Moron, PhD BS

Continuing the Exposing of the Socialist Elitist Soros...UPDATE

UPDATE specifics are at the end of this post. It is along the lines of George Soros, via illegal campaign "secreted contributions" to stack the bloggers up and it is being referred to as Hillary's Bloggergate via Media Matters. Go figure.




Mike at Proprietor Nation has yet another well presented "argument" as we, together, continue the re-education of the American People the dangers this tiny man Soros is up to while he pretends to be on the side of the little guy.

E.N.D.A. To Move Through the Legislature?

A hat tip goes to Right March for bringing this story to my attention. The Employment Non Discrimination Act may find its way through the Congress soon. ENDA seeks to make gays, bisexuals, and transgenders a minority and treat their discrimination in the work place in the same manner that we currently treat age, sex, and skin color.

Now, according to this gay publication here is what Nancy Pelosi promised their lobby.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi agreed Friday to fast-track a transgender-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act once there are enough votes to pass it.

Although a version of the bill that protects only sexual orientation will be marked up by committee and move to a floor vote next week, the San Francisco Democrat has promised to hold a floor vote on a fully inclusive ENDA without delay as soon as the political support is there.

According to Right March, the bill is making its way through House Education and Labor Comittees. The problems with such a bill are plentiful. For instance, while it protects religious organizations, it does not protect groups like the Boy Scouts. If this bill passes the Scouts may very well be force to hire openly gay scouts or face sanctions. It also violates people's freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Finally, and most importantly, homosexuality is a behavior which is totally different from someone else's skin color, age, or sex.

Let's put aside the wisdom or lack thereof of this bill. I think most people that read this page will agree with me on my position.

Instead, I want to focus on two things related to this bill. First there is the political tone deafness and utter lack of competence that the Democratic leadership continues to show. This bill is another in a long line of bills that has either been handled poorly or is simply a total political loser for them. Whatever your beliefs on this particular bill, most Americans will reject it. In fact, short of SCHIP, I can't remember the last thing the Democrats did that works for them politically.

Let's look at some examples. The Democrats tried to pass a NON BINDING resolution that condemned an act from almost one hundred years ago. As a result, our ally, the Turks, took great offense and threatened all sorts of diplomatic retaliation. Fortunately, critical mass was reached when this story saw the light of day and the bill was withdrawn. Also, A high school student wanted to include the word God in a message to his grandfather that accompanied a flag that he wanted flown over the Capitol. Initially, Nancy Pelosi resisted allowing the word God accompany the flag, however once again critical mass was reached. Finally, the leadership backed down and they let the word God stay in the message that accompanied the flag.

In August, the Senate tried to play chicken with the President on the terrorist surveillance program (known as warrantless wiretaps to most of you). Again, the leadership backed down at the last minute and extended the program for six more months. Just this past week, a bill that would outlaw sanctuary cities, something that is popular overwhelmingly with Americans, was voted down 52-42 in the Senate. All but one Democrat voted against it. Even on Iraq, the Democrats have been totally politically tone deaf and incompetent.

Which brings me back to the ENDA bill. This is another in a long line of political disasters for the Democrats. Once critical mass reaches on this bill, they will be forced to back down the way they have on everything else.

This brings me to my second point. It is now nothing less than shocking just how much the Democrat's agenda mirrors that of George Soros. This ENDA bill is right down his gay friendly secular progressive agenda, and it follows a long line of bills and maneuvers that are very friendly to his agenda.

Several months ago, The Supreme Court ruled to uphold a ban on partial birth abortion. All the Democratic candidates came out against this ruling and some even swore to impose a litmus test of only pro abortion Supreme Court Justices.

At their last debate, the Democratic candidates agreed that teaching second graders a story about a gay couple was perfectly acceptable. Half the candidates refused to even acknowledge that the war on terror is really a war. Here is what Soros said vis a vis the GWOT.

Unfortunately, the "war on terror" metaphor was uncritically accepted by the American public as the obvious response to 9/11. It is now widely admitted that the invasion of Iraq was a blunder. But the war on terror remains the frame into which American policy has to fit. Most Democratic politicians subscribe to it for fear of being tagged as weak on defense.

In fact, this statement is eerily similar to one made by John Edwards who called the war on terror...

"bumper sticker slogan" used to justify the war in Iraq and "bludgeon political opponents."

The two leading Presidential said they'd each negotiate with Iran with no conditions. What did Soros say about such matters?

President Bush's global war on terror prevents us from differentiating between them and dealing with them accordingly. It inhibits much-needed negotiations with Iran and Syria because they are states that support terrorist groups.

In fact, when Senator Clinton voted to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards( responsible for among other things hijacking British sailors in international water) a terrorist organization, the rest of the Democratic Presidential contender pounced on her.

Even on the economy, the Democrats are marching in lock step with Soros. We are all well aware of the plethora of big government, quasi socialist, government giveaways. Including the granddaddy of them all, universal health care. How does this jive with Soros' view of the world? He believes in a "mixed economy". That is defined as such.

A mixed economy is an economic system that incorporates the characteristics of several different economic systems. This usually means an economy that contains both private-owned and state-owned enterprises[1] or that combines elements of capitalism and socialism, or a mix of market economy and planned economy characteristics

Of course, it should be pointed out which part of the mixed economy he fears.

Most of all, George believed even then in a mixed economy, one with a strong central international government to correct for the excesses of self-interest.

Thus, anything that takes the decisions away from the market and puts it into the government's hands is something that Soros approves of.

Finally, as I mentioned earlier, in unison with Soros open borders policy, the Democrats just this week killed a bill that would have outlawed so called sanctuary cities. Now, we have the Democrats, through ENDA, pandering to another of Soros' favorite groups, the homosexuals. The overlapping agendas of the Democrats and George Soros can be found just about anywhere you look.

Keep track of these posts and pay attention to that which is going on around you. Check the facts out as you see fit. Don't make us come back and say, "We told you so."

[UPDATE]: This is too "rich"!!
Newsmax:

Call it "Bloggergate" the subversion of the blogosphere by Democrat money.

To be more precise, Bloggergate is the subsidizing of left-wing bloggers with illegal Democrat campaign contributions, laundered through ostensibly "non-partisan" non-profit groups.

At a convention of left-wing bloggers last summer, Hillary Clinton announced, "We are . . . putting together a network in the blogosphere."

Her remarks became public only three weeks ago, on Oct. 2, when an anonymous person posted a shaky, hand-held videotape of her speech on YouTube. In it, Hillary bragged that she had helped create "institutions" which had produced a left-wing "network in the blogosphere" capable of "matching" the alleged "advantage of the other side."

Hillary's claim raises troubling questions. On a practical level, just how exactly does a U.S. senator go about exerting her power to stack the blogosphere in her favor?

One obvious method is to buy favorable coverage. Hillary's boast carries a strong implication that she has subsidized bloggers.

The first evidence of Bloggergate emerged in January 2005 when the two most prominent left-wing bloggers on the Internet "Jerome The Blogfather" Armstrong of MyDD and DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas Zu'iga both admitted to getting cash from Howard Dean's presidential campaign.

The scandal heated up in October 2006, when Republican blogger Michael B. Brodkorb of Minnesota, assailed by piranha-like swarms of leftist bloggers, revealed that his tormentors were on the take; that is, that they had been getting generous cash "fellowships" from an outfit called the Center for Independent Media (CIM). At that time, CIM was working from an office in Washington, DC owned by the Democrat front group Media Matters for America, Brodkorb discovered.

Curiously, it turns out that the co-founders of CIM, David S. Bennahum and Alexandra Savino, are both Media Matters alumni. Mr. Bennahum helped found Media Matters, serving as one of its original senior fellows. Miss Savino worked for Media Matters as a blogosphere analyst.

Clinton Claims

Now Bloggergate has spun into overdrive with Hillary Clinton's revelation, from her own lips, that she helped "start" and "support" Media Matters.

After all these years, can it be that we have finally identified the source of the Bloggergate money stream? Can it be that leaders of the leftwing blogosphere suck their nourishment directly from the swollen teat of Senator Clinton's pendulous fundraising apparatus?

Hillary made her admission at the Aug. 4, 2006 YearlyKos Convention in Chicago. Here is what she said on the now-infamous YouTube video: "I would wish that we had this active and fighting a blogosphere about 15 years ago, because we have certainly suffered over the last years from a real imbalance in the political world in our country, but we are righting that balance or lefting that balance. I'm not sure which, and certainly are better prepared and more focused on taking our arguments and making them effective and disseminating them widely and really putting together a network in the blogosphere."

"In a lot of the new progressive infrastructure, institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress, we're beginning to match what I had said for years was the advantage of the other side.

In plain English, Hillary is saying that she "helped start and support" certain institutions tasked with correcting an alleged "imbalance" between right-wing and left-wing media. These institutions form a part of what Hillary calls "a new progressive infrastructure." According to Hillary, the "infrastructure" she "helped" build has given rise to a left-wing "network in the blogosphere" capable of "matching" the "advantage of the other side."

In this regard, she names two institutions specifically; Media Matters for America and the Center for American Progress.

My co-author David Horowitz and I described the peculiar relationship between these two groups in our book "The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton and Sixties Radicals Siezed Control of the Democratic Party."

We noted that the Center for American Progress was founded in July 2003 by billionaire Democratic donor George Soros, working closely with Morton Halperin, director of U.S. advocacy for Soros' Open Society Institute. The two men appointed former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta to be president and CEO of the Center, and brought in Harold Ickes "chief fundraiser and former deputy chief of staff for the Clinton White House" to help organize it.

Noting the heavy involvement of Clintonites with the Center for American Progress, leftist writer Robert Dreyfuss remarked in the March 1, 2004 edition of The Nation: "In looking at Podesta's center there's no escaping the imprint of the Clintons. It's not completely wrong to see it as a shadow government, a kind of Clinton White-House-in-exile or a White House staff in readiness for President Hillary Clinton.

Eerily foreshadowing her later comments on YouTube, Hillary told The Nation's Dreyfuss, "We've had the challenge of filling a void on our side of the ledger for a long time, while the other side created an infrastructure that has come to dominate political discourse. The Center is a welcome effort to fill that void."

In 2004, the Center for American Progress launched a new organization called Media Matters for America, headed by David Brock, a former conservative journalist who had turned to the left. The stated mission of Media Matters was to serve as a "watchdog" for conservative bias in media. The New York Times reported on May 3, 2004: "Mr. Brock's project was developed with help from the newly formed Center for American Progress . . . Podesta has loaned office space in the past to Mr. Brock and introduced him to potential donors.

"Mr. Brock . . . has also spoken with Senator Clinton, Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota and former vice president Al Gore about his project . . ."

Push to Ban Rush

No sooner had Media Matters opened for business, than Brock began pressuring Congress to ban Rush Limbaugh from American Forces Radio and Television Service an effort which continues to this day.

Much like a yeast colony, in which each bud of yeast sprouts new buds, which in turn sprout buds of their own, the Center for American Progress spawned Media Matters, which has now begun spawning offshoots of its own. One of these offshoots is the Center for Independent Media (CIM). Launched in April 2006, it initially worked from an office owned by Media Matters at 1625 Massachusetts Avenue N.W., 3rd Floor, Washington DC.

Through a system of media "fellowships," CIM recruits, trains, directs and finances a veritable army of leftwing bloggers, all subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer, thanks to the Center's 501(c)(3) tax-free status.

According to the Center's "New Journalist" fellowship application, CIM offers bloggers a three-month, renewable fellowship which includes such perks as "a stipend of $4,500 to be paid over three months," "editorial mentorship from experts in the field of blogging and/or journalism," access to expensive databases such as LexisNexis, as well as free legal advice, training, and technical support.

Because CIM fellowships expire after three months, CIM "fellows" are always on the hot seat. If CIM is satisfied with the blogger's performance, it will renew his fellowship. Otherwise, it will not. Plainly, CIM bloggers have much to gain if they toe the party line and much to lose if they fail to satisfy their benefactors.

CIM does not publish a full list of its bloggers. We can only speculate on their number. However, the CIM Web site does provide a "select" list of some of its more prominent "fellows."

Federal law prohibits national political candidates such as Hillary Clinton from using 501(c)3 tax-free, non-profit organizations such as the Center for American Progress, Media Matters for America and the Center for Independent Media as vehicles for campaign propaganda.

In this, as in so many other matters, Sen. Clinton has conducted herself as if she is above the law. And perhaps she is.

It remains to be seen whether the IRS and the Federal Election Commission will blow the whistle on Hillary's army of paid bloggers. Who knows? They just might. But I'm not holding my breath.

Interesting. Very interesting, eh?

New Spelling for "loser": Democratic Party Leadership

So, if you ever want to call someone a "loser" from now on, just call them a leader of the democratic party. That way, you are calling George Soros a loser as well, seeing that the phony patriot "owns" the democratic party and wants to rid the constitution of, well, itself. He hates the United States Constitution because he cannot get the American People to go along with his One World Socialist Agenda if 100+ million of us own and WILL use guns to ENSURE that George Soros and his ilk do NOT succeed.

I wonder how far the little billionaire would go to push the issue? He would more than likely piss himself and soil his undies.

Anyway, with the East Coast and West Coast successful Troll Trouncings, coupled with other news today, this was a GLORIOUS day for True American Patriots. Here is what I am yacking about.

Gateway Pundit:

BUSH GETS REAL WITH CONGRESS...
President Bush bashed the very unpopular "do nothing" democratic Congress on their horrible record today.

Obviously, Americans expect more from the "do-nothing" Democratic Congress besides sabotaging the troops in Iraq and bashing Four Star Generals when they come to visit.

[...] (go read the rest...OUTSTANDING! Short and sweet yet to the point.)

The Weekly Standard: (on the FISA quagmire...self-induced)

[...]

Perhaps most amusing of all, when forced to explain why they blocked a floor debate, Democrats said it was important to move swiftly to reauthorize the law. Never mind that it was they who insisted the law expire quickly; if this was really their view then they would schedule a vote to extend the measure as is--since the votes were clearly there for such a measure.

Now, after this abuse of process and national security, what does the left say when Republicans use the one procedural opportunity afforded them to force Democrats to cast a difficult vote?

'They're not playing fair.'

Read the breathless explanations on the left--from DailyKos, ThinkProgress, TalkingPointsMemo. They all say the same thing: Cantor's motion-to-recommit was unfair because it called for a vote on something already in the bill, and some Democrats would have looked bad if they voted against it. It was 'trickery.' If that's the best argument they can come up with, Soros's money is being wasted.

The Leftinistra are losers, plain and simple. When they don't get their way, they grab their ball and go home.

Morons.

Power Line:

House Democrats have been forced to pull their proposed legislation to change the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) because they couldn't round up enough support among Dems who need the votes of non-liberals to be re-elected. You probably recall that the Democratic leadership was embarrassed two months ago when these same non-leftist Dems joined with Republicans to pass a temporary FISA fix so that our intelligence agencies could monitor the overseas communications of terrorists without obtaining a warrant. Still unwilling to provide the administration with the FISA fix it needs to ensure the gathering of information vital to the national security, the Democratic leadership has been slapped down again by members of its own caucus.

[...]

Amazing. The Leftinistra are the leaders of the democratic party and, they are losers.

For GWB to be the dumbest and worse President over, he sure does Bush Slap the Leftinistra around quite a bit. What does THAT say for the idiots that walk into his traps?

Morons.

Our Troops Win, Again! Dems Withdraw Support of Armenian Genocide Resolution

This is GREAT news, sure to rile up the most vile Sorosite ever known to man!

Fox News:

A House vote to label the century-old deaths of Armenians as genocide was in jeopardy Tuesday after several Democrats withdrew their support and sounded alarms it could cripple U.S. relations with Turkey.

The loss of support is a major setback to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill, who have fiercely defended the resolution to Republicans and the Bush administration as a moral imperative in condemning the World War I-era killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians by Ottoman Turks.

President Bush called Pelosi on Tuesday to ask her not to call for a House vote on the resolution.

"The president and the speaker exchanged candid views on the subject and the speaker explained the strong bipartisan support in the House for the resolution," Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said, noting that Bush initiated the phone call.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters Tuesday that the plan remained to vote on the measure before Congress adjourns by the end of the year.

But, he added, "there are a number of people who are revisiting their own positions and we'll have to determine where everyone is," he said.

[...]

Fantastic news. Yet another tack being utilized by the Leftinistra to demoralize our troops and to ensure a defeat in this GWOT, as wished and funded by one George Soros, has gone down in flames.

This is a GREAT day for America and more of the Soros Finance Network has squandered away yet again, untold amounts of money to rein in his dream of world dominion.

Get a clue and get a life Georgie Porky Soros...we don't want your kind here. Pack a bag and waddle your sorry ass back from whence thou slithered from.

Catch the wave

George Soros and the 2nd Amendment

Public Enemy #1...Soros.

Cross post from Proprietor Nation

In a previous post of mine, I received this comment

Soros' definition of a "terrorist" rarely strays beyond considering the word semantically equivalent to "American citizen who owns a firearm". His abject hatred and rejection of Americans' freedom to keep and bear arms has been the bedrock of his political "philosophy" since he first came on the scene some twenty years ago.

Now, I myself didn't know until then that Soros is in fact strongly anti 2nd amendment. In fact, he is and it fits right in with the rest of his ideology. If you have read any of my previous work on the man you will find many of the usual suspects

Soros has worked to combine with other wealthy activists and foundations to provide funding for numerous anti-gun projects. Soros and the Irene Diamond Foundation made equal $5 million contributions to form the Funders` Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention. This organization has provided funding to the anti-gun Harvard Injury Control Center and has helped bankroll reckless lawsuits designed to cripple the firearms industry. OSI and the Funders` Collaborative (using money largely supplied by Soros) was the primary funding source for the plaintiffs in Hamilton v. Accu-tek and in NAACP v. ACUSPORT Inc. OSI provided $300,000 to the plaintiffs` lawyers in the Hamilton case and provided a grant identified as between $100,000 and $499,000 in the NAACP case.

When Soros and OSI decided to start spending great sums of money on anti-gun research and advocacy, they went in search of an experienced activist to guide the effort. Soros came up with Rebecca Peters, a central figure in disarming the people of Australia, and a leader in the effort to ban all handguns and most long guns. Under Peters` direction, OSI soon released "Gun Control in The United States." This strikingly simplistic evaluation of gun laws in the 50 states purposefully ignored federal firearms laws and arbitrarily awarded various point values to each state that has imposed gun control restrictions favored by the group.

So, what is Soros problem with the 2nd Amendment? Well, a clue can be found in another policy that Soros thinks the U.S. should follow, one world government.

Soros additionally finances groups supporting the interests of one-world government. While he has criticized the United Nations occasionally, he favors U.N. dominance in world affairs, sees the European Union as a model for "open society" and has called for a global central bank.

Anyone who doesn't agree with this vision, or who doesn't fit cozily into his multilateral model, gets a visit from Soros-backed groups.

MoveOn.org, for example, led the charge to keep John Bolton out of a permanent seat in the U.N., and Bankwatch piled on to topple Paul Wolfowitz at the World Bank.

In fact, pick any cause that seeks to weaken the U.S. and it's hard not to find Soros' name on its list of financial backers. Most of these causes are financed by relatively small amounts, but that's all that's needed to make trouble.

So, what is the connection between the 2nd Amendment and one world government? Just as the man himself, the connection is murky and mysterious and ultimately dangerous to our way of life. Well, when I say Soros wants one world government, I mean one dictated by the likes of the United Nations. One of the UN's pet projects has been an international gun ban.

The U.N. is after Americans' Second Amendment gun rights – it wants gun ownership banned in the U.S., and it's not going to stop until it gets its way.

That’s the warning from the National Rifle Association’s Wayne LaPierre, who reveals that "for the first time in the history of the world, a United Nations conference has set its sights on global disarmament – disarming citizens worldwide – including you and me."

At an 11-day meeting beginning July 9 at U.N. headquarters in New York, every extremist anti-gun group in the world will show up at a summit on "small arms," where the delegates will attempt to create a global standard of gun control, banning civilian fire arms ownership worldwide.

Their aim, LaPierre warns, is "to bring the nightmare of England, Australia and Canada into our country and our homes."

In fact, Soros has worked through the UN in order to impose gun bans.

As our Independence Day celebration approaches, the United Nations is holding a global conference in New York, starting on June 26th and lasting through July 7th, whose real agenda is to begin a backdoor process of interference with our constitutionally protected right to individually bear arms. The UN denies this, of course. It says that the only purpose of the conference is to review progress made in the implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects that was adopted in 2001. Faced with over 100,000 letters of protest about the review conference from American citizens concerned about holding on to their freedoms, the conference chairman - Prasad Kariyawasam, Sri Lanka's U.N. ambassador – said that this year’s review conference will deal only with illegal arms and "does not in any way address legal possession." The review conference’s website says that “it is not the wish of nations attending the Conference to discuss outlawing the legal manufacture or trade of these weapons, nor their legal ownership.”

...

Predictably, the anti-gun possession fanatic Rebecca Peters, who is Director of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) - a network of more than 700 non-governmental organizations working in 100 countries against the individual’s right to bear arms – has seized on this opening. IANSA is the official coordinator of non-governmental organizations’ involvement in the UN small arms process. Its sources of funding include the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute. IANSA is already guaranteed to have a seat at the table, but it is pressing for a fuller partnership with the member state delegations in the review conference’s deliberations.

As with everything that he does, his own presence in the movement is extremely low key. So, what is the link between banning guns and one world government? It can be found in the purpose of the 2nd Amendment itself. The best explanation of the 2nd amendment was made by Judge Andrew Napolitano in his book Constitutional Chaos. The original intent of the 2nd amendment was not only to protect the citizenry from intruders and other criminals but more importantly from the government itself. As Napolitano explained in Constitutional Chaos, each government take over happened when the citizens were unarmed. Here is another way to look at it.

Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that axists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."

- Noah Webster An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal
Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787

In other words, before the U.S. can bend to the will of the United Nations, our citizens must lose their arms.

"They" can take my firearms from my dead cold grip on them. Before they succeed in taking my firearms from me, many of them will join me in death. The question remains: "Are they willing to go that far?"

George Soros Vision of the GWOT

I have been asked by the owner and editor of the blog Proprietor Nation to cross post the following article in preparation for the day he appears on Snooper's Blog Talk Radio show which, airs at 2200 hours on 10/16/07.

George Soros is a character with which I am quite familiar with. His name has started to reach the public consciousness in the last several weeks because organizations which he funds have found their way into the news. Whether it is Moveon.org vis a vis the Betray Us ad, or Media Matters vis a vis the trumped up Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh stories, his proxies are finding their way into the news everyday. George Soros wants to buy the next Presidency of the United States and he is using a sophisticated network of websites, PAC's, and advocacy groups to do it. So, let's see what our foreign policy will look like if he does buy the Presidency.

First, war by its very nature creates innocent victims. A war waged against terrorists is even more likely to claim innocent victims because terrorists tend to keep their whereabouts hidden. The deaths, injuries and humiliation of civilians generate rage and resentment among their families and communities that in turn serves to build support for terrorists.

Second, terrorism is an abstraction. It lumps together all political movements that use terrorist tactics. Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Sunni insurrection and the Mahdi army in Iraq are very different forces, but President Bush's global war on terror prevents us from differentiating between them and dealing with them accordingly. It inhibits much-needed negotiations with Iran and Syria because they are states that support terrorist groups.

Third, the war on terror emphasizes military action while most territorial conflicts require political solutions. And, as the British have shown, al Qaeda is best dealt with by good intelligence. The war on terror increases the terrorist threat and makes the task of the intelligence agencies more difficult. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are still at large; we need to focus on finding them, and preventing attacks like the one foiled in England.

Fourth, the war on terror drives a wedge between "us" and "them." We are innocent victims. They are perpetrators. But we fail to notice that we also become perpetrators in the process; the rest of the world, however, does notice. That is how such a wide gap has arisen between America and much of the world.

Now, to me, George Soros' vision is very dangerous and I believe firmly anti American. The problem, from where I am sitting, is that he uses the terrorists ingenuity and evil genius against us rather than the terrorists. Furthermore, his vision of the war on terror is completely theoretical with absolutely no practical application. Elitist circles have fallen in love with the term political solution, however none of them explain how to apply that. Last time, I checked Al Qaeda has a series of goals, including the destruction of all infidels, and none of those goals are negotiable. Soros is right. Terrorists have no country and they blend in with society, and for that Soros thinks, we shouldn't go after them. In fact, that is why they blend into society.

Furthermore, Soros claims that while AQ, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc. use the same tactics, they have different goals. That may be true to a point, however they all share a common goal of eliminating those that they disagree with, meaning the U.S. Soros seems to think that some of these groups could be reasoned with. Again, he simply doesn't understand the sociopathic nature of the enemy we deal with. Furthermore, he is convinced that negotiation with Syria and Iran are the proper course to take with each of those groups. To me, this is a dangerously naive view of the world simply doesn't recognize the nature of the enemy we are dealing with.

He also advances the elitist view that GWOT is all about finding UBL and Zawahiri. There is no doubt that it is shameful and embarrassing that they haven't been found, however the GWOT won't end when they are and any vision that places this much emphasis on it, is a vision that has nothing to offer the day after they are found.

Now, let's go beyond the four points he made and look at the larger picture. He doesn't consider the GWOT a war, and thus, AQ, and other terrorist, are not enemy combatants but rather criminals. As such, in the world of George Soros they would receive the rights of any other criminal. This of course is crazy. First, a terrorist act is not a crime but an act of war and should be treated as such. Second, it is one thing to investigate a crime that already happened and quite another to investigate a terrorist act that is still about to happen. The two types of individuals will deserve completely different sets of rights.

Second, if a terrorist is a criminal, then Soros would want that criminal prosecuted in criminal courts not in military tribunals. This is just as crazy for its own set of reasons. First, one only needs to look at the spectacle of Zac Moussaoui to see what a nightmare it would be if terrorists were prosecuted in criminal courts on a wholesale level. On that note, the terrorists would get access to all of the government's evidence, be able to depose witnesses, and witnesses would have to testify in open court against them. Now, since a good portion of the evidence will come from fellow terrorists ratting them out, what are the chances that we will be able to get any of them to testify in open court?

Third, Soros would want to close down Gitmo and move those prisoners to places unknown though potentially to maximum security prisons in the United States. The main problem with anyone that claims that Gitmo needs to be shut down is that frankly there is no better alternative that I can think of. Most of these people originate in countries where their civil rights will be violated significantly more than anything that happens in Gitmo. Second, most of these countries don't want them. Does Soros understand the bureaucratic and economic nighmare of trying to house and protect these terrorists if they wound up in federal lock up?

Finally, since, again, he considers them criminals not enemy combatants, all of the tough interrogation techniques: water boarding, loud music, changing temperatures, etc would no longer be in play. It is all nice and well to be a beacon of civil rights even to the worst of the worst in theory, however these techniques work and they save lives. Bill O'Reilly interviewed both Michael Sheuer and George Tenet and they each swore by the techniques and said that using them has saved lives. Thus, while protecting the civil rights of terrorists sounds good in theory, in practice it endangers American lives.

I believe that George Soros is a dangerous man for many reasons, but this is how he is dangerous vis a vis the GWOT.

Snooper concurs. This is why I invited Mike to appear on the show. So, tune in on the 16th of October at 2200 hours. Just click the big blue box labeled BTR Player either 2200 straight up or wait a minute or two. The box is in my sidebar.

Catch the wave
Hillary's Press is upset
The KOSmonoffs whimper and whine
TalkLeft speaks with forked tongue

The Grand Globalist...Socialist Soros, Man of The Abyss

"On the practical level, I have established a network of founda­tions devoted to fostering open societies. This network covers all the countries of the former Soviet empire and it has branched out to other parts of the world: South Africa, the ten countries of South­ern Africa, the sixteen countries of Western Africa, Haiti, Guate­mala, Burma, and more recently Indonesia. There is also an Open Society Institute in the United States." Socialist Soros


And the morons of the Leftinistra call GWB a Globalist? Not hardly.

OPEN SOCIETY

Reforming
Global Capitalism

by GEORGE SOROS

No wonder the moonbats love this guy...

An all so Clear and Present Danger

Everything the guy touches turns to shiite...eventually...

(Hat Tip tip Gateway Pundit for the image.)

Check out Wake Up America's take on the Grand Socialist Loser...

Exposing Soros and Texas Jihadi Web Sites

The below is a compilation of must reads.

We will start off with the exposure of George Soros and his sorry support for a known anti-American Communist front group called MoveOn that lays claim that they support the troops but at "protests, it is "Rather" evident that the group isn't even remotely supportive of anything, save their own not-so-hidden-anymore agenda(s)

George Soros: The Man, The Mind And The Money Behind MoveOn By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY The Left: The smear ad published against Gen. Petraeus has drawn attention to its sponsor, MoveOn.org. But the fingerprints of the group's chief financial backer, George Soros, were all over it. Who is this man and what is he up to? READ MORE

Next, we will look at Israel's attack on a known WMD cache. Where did it come from? Who did it belong to? Why is Iran "interested" in it? For an additional in-depth look at this subject check out Wake Up America from last earlier this week I do believe.

Was The Israeli Strike Osirak II? By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Weapons Of Mass Destruction: A deadly blast occurs at a Syrian missile site as an Israeli airstrike against a suspected nuclear cache catches Tehran's eye. In 1981, Israel thwarted a WMD threat. Is history repeating itself? READ MORE

Next, we will look into Syria working in conjunction with Iran to arm missile warheads with chemical agents. Again, where did these come froom and to whom do they belong?

The Middle East's Gathering Storm By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY War On Terror: Iran, on the path toward nuclear weapons, says it's drawn up plans to bomb Israel. Syria, meanwhile, is working with Iran to arm missiles with chemical warheads. Will the world heed these danger signs? READ MORE

As we approach Biblical Prophecy fulfilled, how do we best prepare? I suggest personal soul searching for one. Start thinking where you will spend your eternity.

The Leftinistra would have the world believe that GWB is a lame duck. I have said this since the '06 elections. He has more power now than he did before. He has the Veto Pen and the LAME DUCK Leftinistra "majority", as vaunted as it is, has not the wherewithal to override ANY veto. So, who are the lame ducks again?

No Lame Agenda By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY The Presidency: Those who call George Bush a lame duck are wrong. He still has both the bully pulpit and his veto pen to help him push his agenda. He might be able to use both, and very soon. READ MORE

Next comes the issue of the 80-minute video made the lame duck terrorist leader Al-Zawahiri. In this video, the moron rag-head goat sucking pathetic "democrat" and MoveOn lover said that Americas has lost in Afghanistan and Iraq. Makes ya wonder who is writing whose scripts, doesn't it? Is ReidCo in cahoots with our enemies or are our enemies in cahoots with RediCo?

The Islamist website www.ekhlaas.org/forum/, which is hosted by Layered Technologies, Inc. in Texas, USA, posted, on September 20, 2007, an 80-minute video of Al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman Al-Zawahiri speaking on the occasion of the sixth anniversary of 9/11.

The video was produced by the Al-Sahab media company in the month of Sha'ban, 1428 (August-September 2007), apparently prior to September 11, 2007, and is subtitled in English.

In the video, statements by Al-Zawahiri are interspersed with footage of jihad fighters in various places around the world, audio clips from Osama bin Laden's speeches, statements by Western commentators and U.S. officials, and more. Following are the main points of Al-Zawahiri's statements in the video: (MemriTV)

First, Al-Zawahiri expresses his condolences for the death of the martyr cleric Maulana Abd Al-Rashid Ghazi in Afghanistan, promises to avenge his death, and calls on Muslims to follow in his path and in the path of other jihad-fighting clerics. Al-Zawahiri then accuses Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf of selling Pakistan's honor and religion, and says that Musharraf's forces are serving "the hunting dogs of the Crusaders-Zionists." Read More:

Sometimes I just have to wonder about some things.

A former CIA chap had this to say in recent days (excerpt below)
Another issue of contention whereas the Leftinistra will not acknowledge in fear of losing their congressional seats or their failed bids for the White House.

Ex-CIA Expert Bin Laden Made 'Very Overt Threat,' Slams Bush Terror Adviser
The former head of the CIA unit responsible for hunting down Osama bin Laden says the terror leader made a “very overt threat” in his recent video appearance and suggests President Bush’s chief terror adviser was “malevolent” for dismissing the risk. The expert warned that al Qaida has been setting major milestones in preparation for its next big attack. Read the Full Story — Go Here Now.

Sad, is it not?

Sometimes I wonder what it is going to take to make the political idiocy we watch every day to get back to basics and win this war.