About Me

Name: Defend America
Email: guy.ratki@gmail.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

'The Great Peasant Revolt of 2010'

The Great Peasant Revolt of 2010
by Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- "I am not an ideologue," protested President Obama at a gathering with Republican House members last week. Perhaps, but he does have a tenacious commitment to a set of political convictions.

Compare his 2010 State of the Union to his first address to Congress a year earlier. The consistency is remarkable. In 2009, after passing a $787 billion (now $862 billion) stimulus package, the largest spending bill in galactic history, he unveiled a manifesto for fundamentally restructuring the commanding heights of American society -- health care, education and energy.

A year later, after stunning Democratic setbacks in Virginia, New Jersey and Massachusetts, Obama gave a stay-the-course State of the Union address (a) pledging not to walk away from health care reform, (b) seeking to turn college education increasingly into a federal entitlement, and (c) asking again for cap-and-trade energy legislation. Plus, of course, another stimulus package, this time renamed a "jobs bill."

This being a democracy, don't the Democrats see that clinging to this agenda will march them over a cliff? Don't they understand Massachusetts?

Well, they understand it through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.

http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2010/02/05/the_great_peasant_revolt_of_2010


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Holder Believes in Procedures above All Else

Holder on Holder
AG is unconvincing about ‘his’ decisions on Christmas bomber.

Attorney General Eric Holder has responded to criticism of the Obama administration’s handling of the Christmas bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, with an “all’s well that ends well” letter to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell.

Holder’s missive vigorously defends what he says was his decision to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant, to impose peacetime law-enforcement protocols on his interrogation, and to charge him in civilian court. He argues that the use of the criminal-justice system has been vindicated because the terrorist is talking again (thanks to whatever undisclosed deal the Justice Department had to make with him). The letter contains various misleading assertions but is a fair statement of Holder’s philosophy — and it is good to have such a statement, given that the DOJ’s practice under his leadership too often has been to stonewall.

The fundamental problem with the attorney general’s line of argument is that it unfolds as though there were no war and no president. Abdulmutallab, Holder believes, is just like any other person arrested in the United States: When an arrest happens, government officials automatically employ “long-established and publicly known policies and practices.” It does not matter who sent the person or what he was arrested trying to do. Miranda warnings are given, lawyers are interposed, charges are filed, and trials are conducted. Even if the nation is at war, we don’t inquire into whether the arrested person is an operative dispatched here by hostile forces to commit mass murder. We don’t concern ourselves with whether he knows about other people plotting the same thing. All that matters to Holder is that we have our procedures, and they must be followed.

http://article.nationalreview.com/424019/holder-on-holder/andrew-c-mccarthy
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Frightening Poll

Socialism Viewed Positively by 36% of Americans

Majority of Americans positive on capitalism, entrepreneurs, free enterprise, and small business

by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- More than one-third of Americans (36%) have a positive image of "socialism," while 58% have a negative image. Views differ by party and ideology, with a majority of Democrats and liberals saying they have a positive view of socialism, compared to a minority of Republicans and conservatives.


Americans' Image of Socialism

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/Socialism-Viewed-Positively-Americans.aspx

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Can the AP Find Another Adverb to Use Instead of Repeating Using the Word "Unexpectedly"

January unemployment rate drops to 9.7 percent


WASHINGTON – The outlook for jobs became a bit less bleak with January's unexpected decline in the unemployment rate, which fell to 9.7 percent from 10 percent as more people said they had jobs.

Still, Friday's unemployment report showed just how deep the job crisis remains. The government now estimates 8.4 million jobs vanished in the Great Recession, and economists think the nation would be lucky to get back 1.5 million of them this year. And they say it will take at least three to four years for the job market to return to anything like normal.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100205/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy


Tags: economy  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Holder Seems to Evade Every Question Posed to Him

Who are the 300 terrorists held in U.S. prisons?

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
February 5, 2010

"The Bush administration used the criminal justice system to convict more than 300 individuals on terrorism-related charges," writes Attorney General Eric Holder in a new letter to Republican critics in Congress. The letter is part of the Obama administration's aggressive defense of its decision to grant full American constitutional rights to al Qaeda soldier Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the accused Christmas Day bomber. That defense boils down to one sentence: Bush did it, too.

Republicans on Capitol Hill object. They argue that one of the reasons some terrorists were handled in the criminal justice system is that it took George W. Bush and Congress years to establish a military tribunal system that satisfied constitutional requirements -- a process that was lengthened by legal challenges filed by some of the same lawyers who now work in Holder's Justice Department.

You can argue about that forever. But there's one serious factual debate going on about Holder's letter, and that concerns those "300 individuals." Just who are they?

It turns out some lawmakers have been trying for months to get an answer. They're not saying the claim is false -- they just want to see what it's based on. But so far they haven't been able to find out.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Who-are-the-300-terrorists-held-in-U_S_-prisons_-83588677.html

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'Pfizer's Bad Political Bet'

Pfizer's Bad Political Bet

Pfizer's Jeffrey Kindler is a case study in the hitch-and-hope mentality.


The sight of ObamaCare on life support has many Democrats disappointed. It could be worse. They could be Pfizer CEO Jeffrey Kindler.

The twin events of an Obama presidency and a financial crisis rattled corporate America. Public anger put companies on the defensive. A liberal president vowing to punish firms that didn't aid his agenda got companies scared.

Fortune 500 execs could stand up for a free market that benefits consumers and shareholders, or hitch their cart to the new Democratic majority. Pfizer's Mr. Kindler is a case study in the hitch-and-hope mentality—a CEO who became the motivating force behind Big Pharma's $80 billion "deal" on reform, and industry support of ObamaCare. With that health agenda burning, the choice isn't looking so grand.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704041504575045702997683276.html


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'Super Commercial'

Super Commercial
by Cal Thomas

In the midst of the usual glut of Super Bowl commercials with messages about beer, cars and women with impossible bosoms, on Sunday there will be one 30-second message that has some people upset, even angry.

It is a message by 2007 Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam, who, after a difficult pregnancy, decided to give Tim a chance to live, though she was advised to have an abortion.

Self-styled "pro-choice" groups initially tried to get CBS to pull the ad, but when the network demonstrated a characteristic not often seen in the face of such lobbying -- courage -- the pro-choicers apparently realized their attempt at censorship wasn't going anywhere and so they are trying a different tactic.

In an opinion column for last Sunday's Washington Post, Frances Kissling, former president of Catholics for Choice and Kate Michelman, former president of Naral Pro-Choice America, portrayed Pam Tebow's choice to give birth to Tim as having no greater moral significance than if she had chosen to abort him. About the uplifting message in the scheduled Super Bowl commercial, they wrote: "People want to be inspired, and abortion is as tough and courageous a decision as is the decision to continue a pregnancy."

No it isn't. Toughness and courage produce a decision like the one made by Pam Tebow. She didn't know if her son would turn out to be "normal," much less a football champion honored by college football's highest award. The "easier" course would have been to accept the doctor's advice and rid herself of a potential "problem" and the "burden" a less than perfect child might have brought to the family.


http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2010/02/04/super_commercial
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

More on the Abstinence Education Study Recently Released

Another Undead Conservative Idea
by Mona Charen

Barack Obama assumed the presidency determined not just to promote certain policies but to tidy up our minds as well. Some things we'd been saving, like conservative ideas on national defense and such, would have to go. Those were "the failed policies of the past," and he would not tolerate people clinging to them. Obama enthusiast and New York Times editor Sam Tanenhaus thought he was writing an epitaph when he published "The Death of Conservatism" six months ago.

But we have not cooperated. More to the point, the facts have not cooperated. That $787 billion stimulus that was guaranteed to keep unemployment at 8 percent or less is now regarded by 75 percent of Americans as a corrupt flop. Seventy-one percent say underwear bomber Abdulmutallab should have been handed over to the military. And 58 percent say he should have been waterboarded.

Now we learn, from a study in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine end ital that another prematurely buried conservative idea, abstinence education, works very well indeed.

The Obama administration had disdained and defunded abstinence education in favor of "evidence-based" programs to prevent teen pregnancy. (Note the assumption that liberal ideas are founded on evidence whereas conservative ideas spring from prejudice, ignorance or downright orneriness.) No one study settles things, but this one, conducted by an African-American professor from the University of Pennsylvania, will be hard to ignore.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MonaCharen/2010/02/05/another_undead_conservative_idea



Killing Abstinence
What teens and parents have to lose.

This week, the media gave us what appeared to be startling news: Research, appearing in a journal published by the American Medical Association, showed (shock!) that abstinence programs dramatically reduced teen sexual activity.

No one knowledgeable about abstinence education, however, would find this startling. In fact, eleven previous sound studies showed strong positive effects from abstinence programs. The mainstream media simply ignored them. Unfortunately, the most recent story came too late — President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have already terminated the federal government’s abstinence programs.

What other story has the mainstream media ignored? The big one concerns the positive effects of abstinence on teens. Obviously, abstinent teens are not going to get pregnant or contract an STD. But the research shows that, in general, they also will be happier and less depressed than their permissive peers.

Abstinent teens also do dramatically better in school. They are half as likely to drop out as their sexually active peers. And teens who abstain until at least age 18 are twice as likely to attend and graduate from college as those who become sexually active while in high school. The extra schooling achieved by abstaining teens will add, on average, an additional $400,000 to their lifetime earnings.

Skeptics might wonder if this effect occurs solely because some sexually active girls have babies and are forced to leave school; however, in this comparison, such cases have been left out. Perhaps abstinent teens come from better socio-economic backgrounds and are therefore more likely to go to college anyway? Nope, the stark differences in educational accomplishment persist, even when the abstaining teen is compared to a sexually active teen from the exact same background.

http://article.nationalreview.com/424073/killing-abstinence/robert-rector
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Supreme Court Justices Should Do What Clarence Thomas Advocates

Clarence Thomas on Why He Skips the State of the Union

I don't go because it has become so partisan.

BY Philip Terzian

February 4, 2010 8:28 AM

One final contribution to the post-mortem on the State of the Union address. 

In a question-and-answer session at Stetson University College of Law in Florida this week, Justice Clarence Thomas defended the court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. This was, of course, the decision that inspired President Obama to criticize the ruling by addressing the justices directly in the audience.

Thomas offered several reasons for the court's decision, which I won't repeat here; but what intrigued me was his parenthetical explanation for his absence from the State of the Union address. "I don't go because it has become so partisan," he said, "and it's very uncomfortable for a judge to sit there. There's a lot that you don't hear on TV: The catcalls, the whooping and hollering and under-the-breath comments. One of the consequences is now the court becomes part of the conversation, if you want to call it that, in the speeches. It's just an example of why I don't go."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/clarence-thomas-reacts-state-union


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Performing Experiments on the Military

Military Lab Rats
by Oliver North

WASHINGTON -- No nation ever has had a better military than today's all-volunteer U.S. armed forces. Though I wouldn't trade anything for the young Americans I served with in Vietnam -- or afterward -- those presently wearing America's uniforms are the brightest, best-educated, best-trained and most combat-experienced military the world ever has seen. Now, in the midst of an unprecedented ninth year of war and nonstop high-stress deployments, their commander in chief intends to put the capabilities of this extraordinary force and our nation's security at risk to carry out a radical social experiment.

During his presidential campaign, Barack Obama frequently promised he would reverse the U.S. military's long-standing policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving in our military. Last October, at a Human Rights Campaign dinner, he said: "I'm working with the Pentagon, its leadership and the members of the House and Senate on ending this policy. ... I will end 'don't ask, don't tell.' That's my commitment to you."

Last week, tucked into the closing paragraphs of his State of the Union address, the president said, "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are." Set aside the disingenuous rhetoric. (It's not about "who they are"; it's really about "what they do.") We now know the "repeal" process is already well under way.

http://townhall.com/columnists/OliverNorth/2010/02/05/military_lab_rats


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

'The Super-Sized Census Boondoggle'

The Super-Sized Census Boondoggle
by Michelle Malkin

If only the federal government were as responsible with our money as Pepsi is with theirs. The soda giant has been in the Super Bowl ad business for more than two decades. But this year, Pepsi determined it was economically unwise to pay $3 million for a 30-second spot. So, who's foolish enough to pay for Super Bowl gold-plated airtime? You and me and Washington, D.C.

The U.S. Census Bureau will squander $2.5 million on a half-minute Super Bowl ad starring D-list celebrity Ed Begley Jr., plus two pre-game blurbs and 12-second "vignettes" featuring Super Bowl anchor James Brown. It's a drop in the census boondoggle bucket (otherwise known as the tax-subsidized National Democratic Future Voter Outreach Drive).

The Obama White House has allocated a total of $340 million toward an "unprecedented" promotional blitz for the 2010 census. That's on top of $1 billion in stimulus money siphoned off for increased census "public outreach" and staffing. In all, the census will triple its total 2000 budget to $15 billion.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2010/02/05/the_super-sized_census_boondoggle


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »