Countering Workplace Violence

Countering Workplace Violence

Noah David Simon

---

• MSNBC cuts minorities at GOP convention
• Museum disinvites Lars Wilks from Art Exhibition for Speaking Out Against Islam
• BBC Today Uses Photoshopped Picture of Rachel Corrie Debunked in 2006
• You Only Live ... Once? Swedish security service under fire after $650,000 James Bond party
• Did Rachel Corrie get college credit for joining the ISM?
• Corrie Verdict Won't End Delegitimization by the ISM
• Middle East Non-Solutions

MSNBC cuts minorities at GOP convention Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:31 PM PDT I was watching MSNBC with my father. My father voted for Obama and is a liberal (he was in a car accident last week after renting a FIAT). He started rubbing my face in the fact that there were not enough minorities being represented. Little did I know that we were viewing an edited version of events. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow (times247.com) One of the left’s favorite attacks on the Republican Party is that it is the party of old white people, devoid of diversity and probably racist. If you were watching MSNBC’s coverage of the Republican National Convention in Tampa on Tuesday night, you might believe those assertions, since missing from the coverage was nearly every ethnic minority that spoke during Tuesday’s festivities. In lieu of airing speeches from former Democratic Rep. Artur Davis, a black American; Mia Love, a black candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Utah; and Texas senatorial hopeful Ted Cruz, a Latino American, MSNBC opted to show commentary anchored by Rachel Maddow from Rev. Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Chris Hayes and Steve Schmidt.

Museum disinvites Lars Wilks from Art Exhibition for Speaking Out Against Islam Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:03 PM PDT (Pamela Geller)It's funny (/not) how the art world fashions itself as cutting edge, outside-the-box, brave culture warriors when in fact they step an fetch it for Islamic supremacists and leftist totalitarians. Lars Vilks er endnu engang endt i et stormvejr. Foto: Stigake Jensson/AP They should have been 17, now there are 5 artists back in Swedish exhibition. 17 Swedish artists should have presented their works at the exhibition "The pr & Jämt" on länsmuseet Jamtli in Östersund from 30 September. But at present there are only five artists left who want their art on display at Jamtli. The reason is the controversial artist and cartoonist Lars Vilks. Is no longer welcome Vilks, who among other things is known to have drawn the Prophet Mohammed as a dog, was selected to participate in the exhibition with a video installation.(MORE) Wow do I know about this kind of thing

BBC Today Uses Photoshopped Picture of Rachel Corrie Debunked in 2006 Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:41 AM PDT The less than objective BBC is also less than accurate, as they use a photoshopped picture that was already debunked 6 years ago. Here is a secreenshot of the BBC online: Just one problem: The BBC is using a faked photoshopped picture that was debunked in 2006: The inconsistencies in the photo are Rachel Corrie casts a shadow to her left, but the tractor does not The man in the picture also casts no shadow -- nor does he have any feet Add this to the inconsistencies the other International Solidarity Movement recite about Rachel Corrie's death. And to the false photos and information we are apparently going to be getting from the media. See also: The Corrie family should place the blame where it really lies on FaithFreedom.org Hat tip: Elder of Ziyon via daledamos.blogspot.com

You Only Live ... Once? Swedish security service under fire after $650,000 James Bond party Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:44 AM PDT STOCKHOLM — James Bond is causing a ruckus in Sweden. Sweden’s prime minister has urged the heads of government agencies to control their spending on staff parties after the SAPO security service admitted it held a James Bond-themed bash for 4.3 million kroner ($650,000). via washingtonpost.com Sweden really is living in a fiction

Did Rachel Corrie get college credit for joining the ISM? Posted: 29 Aug 2012 05:49 AM PDT ( Elder of Ziyon) There is an interesting detail in this 2003 article from a local Olympia, Washington newspaper that profiles a number of Evergreen College students who traveled to Rafah along with Rachel Corrie: Rafah is one of the most dangerous places in the Gaza Strip--"a combat zone," according to Captain Jacob Dallal, the Israeli army spokesperson. ...My Jewish ass has been to Israel several times, but never to Gaza, and I am a bit scared. I have been told not to use any of my Arabic, lest I be suspected of being an Israeli spy. Above all, I have been told not to mention my religion. [Corrie's] cohorts at ISM Rafah were an international group, with members from both Europe and the U.S. It was a young group--most people were under 30, and many were closer to 20. And it was a group that held the potential for romance--a Swedish ISMer named Stefan Villkatt would soon become Rachel's boyfriend. ...In addition to Stefan, there was Chris Allert, 31, also from Olympia, who joined the ISM in April 2002 after hearing about the intense fighting in the West Bank town of Jenin. ...There was Will Hewitt, 25, another Evergreen student who arrived in Israel around the same time as Rachel. ..And then there was Joe Smith, 21--yet another Evergreen student who, with his thick beard and red-checked kaffiyeh, looks like a better-fed, Palestinian-territory version of John Walker Lindh. Joe is from Kansas City, Missouri, and says he (like other Evergreen students) is getting independent study credit for his time in Rafah. At the time, the US State Department had a travel warning against Americans going to Gaza. If true, Evergreen College was rewarding students to go to a war zone and put their lives in danger. (h/t Daled Amos via email) via Elder of Ziyon: Did Rachel Corrie get college credit for joining the ISM? The Geoduck Fight Song words and music by Malcolm Stilson, 1971 Go, Geoducks go, Through the mud and the sand, let's go. Siphon high, squirt it out, swivel all about, let it all hang out. Go, Geoducks go, Stretch your necks when the tide is low Siphon high, squirt it out, swivel all about, let it all hang out. via evergreen.edu

Corrie Verdict Won't End Delegitimization by the ISM Posted: 29 Aug 2012 06:14 AM PDT http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/12106#.UDzQGcFlS6V   Now that the Judge Oded Gershon has ruled that the death ofRachel Corrie her own fault and an accident on the part of the IDF, if anyone thinks this affects the de-legitimization efforts of the IDF to protect the people of Israel or for the nation to protect itself from terrorists, they had better think again. Judge Gershon, by allowing this publicity farce to be held at all, has unwittingly put Israel in a no-win situation by falling into the ISM’s publicity trap. Had Judge Gershon thrown the case out of court and saved the Israeli taxpayer wasted time and money for a publicity stunt by the ISM, the Rachel Corrie circus might have finally ended. Now that the case is over, even though the IDF was exonerated and her death found to have been unintentional and an accident, the Rachel Corrie media hounds in the ISM, including her two parents who are making a career off her death rather than discouraging other parents from letting their children to go off to be cannon fodder for terrorist groups in the ISM, can continue their well-paid careers as champions for Hamas. What Judge Gershon failed to grasp, in allowing the trial to go forth in the first place, is that the ISM will now claim the verdict a sham and try to indict Israel in the Hague for “war crimes”. The same charge in the Hague would have been brought had the IDF been found guilty, as the ISM would then insist on a tribunal to try Israel for war crimes anyway. In order for matters such as the Corrie case to be presented to the Hague, it is required that the use of the courts in the country accused of such crimes be exhausted first. Now that the trial is over, the ISM groups that generated this farce will approach the Hague, claiming the Israeli court was biased and requesting a trial on war crimes charges. Hence, Judge Gershon, by permitting this trial, instead of ending the matter, has only led Israel down the primrose path to being accused of war crimes by a kangaroo court of international judges, some of whom are from the most oppressive totalitarian regimes in the world. This is the same kangaroo court that found illegal the Security Fence that was set up to stop suicide bombers from entering Israel to murder Israelis. Let me tell you about Rachel Corrie: When I visited Israel in 2010 when this trial first began, I brought with me a tape-recorded phone interview I had with ISM activist Joseph Carr, who allegedly was with Corrie when she was killed. Carr actually used photoshop to create phony photos of Corrie standing in front of a bulldozer that were picked up by the wire services and later retracted. Carr was not called as a witness by the Rachel Corrie Foundation because this canard would have been shown in court.   In that phone interview, Carr described to me how he and Rachel Corrie, not long before her death, had actually walked out into a combat zone to retrieve the dead body of a Hamas terrorist in front of IDF soldiers, because Hamas terrorists had asked them to do so. Carr described to me in the interview - that I furnished the IDF’s defense lawyers - how he and Corrie would advance bit by bit into the no man’s land, yelling that they were peace activists and unarmed, until they reached the body and picked it up. I asked Carr if he was afraid at the time of being arrested by the IDF for doing such a thing and he replied, “No. Because we knew the Arab snipers would shoot them if they did.” It’s all on the tape the government has. What it tells anyone with common sense is that Rachel Corrie knew that she was there to draw fire on IDF soldiers if they ever sought to move her. The IDF video of her being struck by the D9 bulldozer also shows she was not protecting a house, and that the ISM “witnesses” who claimed they were running alongside the bulldozer screaming for it to stop (including Carr who claimed this), were not there. Rachel Corrie’s mother is a case in point. She appeared on radio in Santa Cruz, California, where she admitted Rachel had told her she had also retrieved the dead body of a terrorist from a weapons smuggling tunnel at one point. “I knew she was really doing something dangerous when she told me that”, she admitted in the interview. Her daughter had written her about “the martyrs” who died fighting the Israelis and how they lacked the sophisticated weaponry of the IDF. Did Cindy Corrie tell her daughter to come home and stop being a human shield for terrorists? No, absolutely not. Did she tour the US telling other parents not to send their sons and daughters to Gaza where they would be used by terrorists as human shields? No, she did not. Later, when Cindy and Craig Corrie were kidnapped for ransom in Gaza by Palestinian terrorists at gunpoint, then released when her kidnappers realized their value for propaganda against the Jews, the elder Corries didn’t bat an eyelash and continued their new career as propagandists for the Palestinian terror groups, particularly Hamas. Some moron in the US State Department made a statement that the Israeli court’s investigation of Rachel Corrie’s death was inadequate. The US State Department is also to blame for allowing ISM activists to get new passports with no problem when they are deported by the Israeli government so they can continually return to Israel and foment riots in Judea and Samaria. A real investigation needs to be done to determine what the US State Department’s relationship with the ISM is, and its work as human shields for Arab terrorists. If the US State Department can arm and train a Palestinian army and then have the trainer, General Keith Dayton, say with a straight face the army may attack the IDF in two years if the Palestinians aren’t given a state, how difficult a stretch is it to ask what the State Department has had to do with ISM activities since the gang’s inception in 2002? ISM co-founders Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf were both low level State Department employees working in Jerusalem when the ISM was first created. In the US Congress, Representative Peter King’s commission on Homeland Security needs to investigate this issue. After this creation, the ISM created a network of movements on US campuses worthy of a Rico Statute investigation. The death of a stupid (yes, that's the appropriate word) 23 year-old girl, who thought of herself as an anarchist and revolutionary and planted herself in front of a bulldozer in a combat zone because she figured the IDF soldiers inside the tractor would not emerge to move her for fear of being shot by Arab snipers, got an unexpected shock when the tractor, whose driver couldn't see her, accidentally ran over her. For the Arabs her death was a propaganda bonanza that ultimately opened up the Rafah and Philadelphi Corridor to aid the Hamas regime in Gaza. Now the Hague will only put more pressure on Israel as the nation is falsely accused of war crimes because of this girl and her opportunistic parents, who will gladly make hay joining the bandwagon of de-legitimizers of Israel. Anything for the ISM to keep the war roiling until - they hope - the end of the Jewish state. Rachel Corrie just needs to go away, but watch as this next becomes a case accusing Israel of war crimes. Meanwhile, maybe Israel is growing up, because almost on the same day this verdict came out, 109 ISM activists, more Rachel Corries, were finally turned away at the Allenby Bridge by an Israeli government that has been a fall guy to the ISM and their terrorist sponsors for the last 11 years. But don’t expect the Rachel Corrie clown show to end with this investigation. Plan on Israel’s lawyers and foreign ministry to be tied up in the Hague for the next few years, while the threat from Iran looms ever closer. via writingtw.blogspot.com

Middle East Non-Solutions Posted: 29 Aug 2012 06:02 AM PDT Steven Plaut americanthinker.com http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/middle_east_non-solutions.html The mantra crops up almost everywhere . "You Israelis have two simple choices ," it goes. "You can either annex all of the 'occupied territories' and grant equal Israeli citizenship to all of the Palestinians there, in which case Israel will no longer be a Jewish state. Or you can agree to a two-state solution, in which Israel continues to exist alongside a Palestinian Arab state. Simple. Make your choice !" Theposing of these two "choices" for Israel is part of thecampaign to convince Israelis that there is no alternative to the "Two-State Solution." The first "alternative" is often dubbed these days the "One-State Solution" by its anti-Israel advocates. Israel and its Jewish population would be enfolded within a larger Arab-dominated Islamic state. A better term for this is the "Rwanda Solution." It is little more than a recipe for a second Holocaust of Jews, a Nazi-style final solution, in which the Middle East conflict would end because the Jewish population of the Middle East would be exterminated. But the "Two State Solution" is little better. The creation of a "Palestinian" state "alongside Israel" would not solve anything and would not end the conflict. To the contrary, it would be the opening round for a major escalation in the conflict and the launching of an all-out war by "Palestine" against the rump Jewish state -- a war in which "Palestine" would be joined and backed by the entire Arab world and much of the non-Arab Muslim world. Like rump Czechoslovakia after Munich, the remaining Jewish mini-state would be the target for aggression and irredentist belligerence, manifested in rocket and missile attacks. The thousands of rockets that were fired at Sderot and the Negev after the unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza will appear as a child's game by comparison. Let us note that neither the "One State " nor the "Two State" is a viable solution to the Middle East conflict. Neither would resolve anything. There is no two-state solution -- only a two-state "solution." There is also no such thing as a "One-State Solution," at least if one means by that the granting of Israeli citizenship to all those claiming to be "Palestinians." So how must Israelis respond to the diktat that they choose either the one or the other? They must answer neither. Israelis cannot formulate and propose "solutions" to the Middle East conflict for the exact same reason why the Western allies could not have proposed or formulated any "solution" to the ambitions of Germany in the late 1930s. No solution would have satisfied those ambitions, and none could have appeased Hitler. The quest in the 1930s for "solutions" resulted in years of delay, during which Germany re-armed and support for Hitler within Germany solidified. Similarly, no "solution" could have prevented the assaults against Pearl Harbor, Malaya, and the Philippines by Imperial Japan. The only solution to those conflicts was Western victory. In short, "solutions" are magical panaceas sought by lazy, shallow, and impatient minds. The entire Oslo "peace process" initiated by Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres was based upon the belief that peace can be achieved by pretending that war does not exist. Never mind what the Arabs are saying. The Middle East conflict also has nothing to do with territory. The Arab countries already control territory nearly twice that of the United States (including Alaska), while Israel is smaller than New Jersey. The architects of the "peace process" argued that possession of territory twice the size of the U.S. without the Everglades-sized West Bank is a recipe for endless war, but if Israel just turns that Everglades-sized zone over to the "Palestinians," all will be peaceful. Twenty-two sovereign Arab states have produced war and barbarism, but creating a 23rdArab state as a "Two State Solution" will produce peace.  Now, if Israelis refuse to embrace the above two pseudo-solutions, insists the left, then Israel will end up an "apartheid regime" -- one in which "Palestinian Arabs" live under endless Israeli "occupation" and control, but without Israeli citizenship, without the right to vote. It is always amusing to hear whining about the absence of the Palestinian right to vote in Israeli elections, especially when it comes from the very same people who do not care that Arabs have no free elections anywhere else in the Middle East. And never mind that Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is not an apartheid regime. Essentially, the insistence that Israel must choose one of the two pseudo-solutions or else it will morph into an "apartheid regime" amounts to the belief that Israelis are better off allowing their country to be annihilated rather than risk becoming the target of name-calling.  In reality, the most productive way to seek to resolve the Middle East is to take as the starting point the list of what is ruled out, what must never be. No "solution" to the Middle East conflict is possible if it involves creation of an Arab "Palestinian" state, and none is possible if it involves "Palestinians" being granted Israeli citizenship. Both of these nonstarters must be ruled out absolutely. Once that is understood, any proposal based upon those two nevers can be taken into consideration.  The immediate implication is that Israel must remain in the West Bank, and the "Palestinian" population there will be granted neither Israeli citizenship nor national sovereignty. The United States occupied Okinawa for decades, and American national historic and cultural roots did not originate in Okinawa. Indeed, American armed forces still fill that island. There is no time limit on how long Israeli "occupation" can last, and the very word "occupation" is actually a misnomer. In any case, the Israeli presence in the West Bank is sui generis and not comparable to any other case of "occupation."  So if West Bank "Palestinians" will be granted neither Israeli citizenship nor national sovereignty, what can they be offered? The original "peace proposals" offered by Israel in the 1970s and 1980s spoke about limited local autonomy. Had the Palestinians played their cards right, they could have enjoyed as much freedom and prosperity under local autonomy as do Puerto Rica, Guam, and American Samoa. But the Israeli Labor Party lost patience with the idea after a few years and decided to frog-leap to a "Two State Solution." It imported Yasser Arafat's storm troopers into the suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and proclaimed its "recognition" of the "Palestinian people."  There is indeed another "solution" for West Bank "Palestinians" unhappy with the two nevers defining conflict resolution. They can leave. There are those 22 sunny Arab states, plus lots of other Muslim states, whither any unhappy West Bank "Palestinian" can move and live amongst his kin. After all, Jews unhappy with life in Argentina, France, or Hungary demand not the annihilation of those countries, but merely the right to move to Israel. The fact that the "Palestinians" prefer Israeli "occupation" over blissful residence in these alternative countries speaks volumes about just how badly treated the "poor suffering Palestinians" really are.  The "Palestinians" find these constraints on their options distasteful? Too bad! Part of adulthood means coming to terms with the fact that, as in Mick Jagger's words, "[y]ou can't always get what you want." What the "Palestinians" and their apologists want is the annihilation of Israel and a second Holocaust of Jews.  And they are not going to get what they want.

Is Obama Stupid or Just Doing It the Chicago Way?

BAR STOOL ECONOMICS

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for a beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.00

The sixth would pay $3.00

The seventh would pay $7.00

The eighth would pay $12.00

The ninth would pay $18.00

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.00

So that’s what they decided to do. The men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.

“Since you are all such good customers, he said, I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.00.

“Drinks for the ten men now cost just $80.00

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the $ 20 windfall so that everyone would get their “fair share?” They realized that $ 20.00 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay!

And so:

The fifth man like the first four, now paid nothing ( 100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of 12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid 14 instead of 18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before! And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20“ declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right, shouted the seventh man. “why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in union. “ We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

Our country will continue transformation

 

If you really want to get the shakes, check out "2016: Obama's America" a film now playing at several movie theaters.

 

Obama's Second Term Transformation Plans:    The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860.This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.  The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term wasdedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders. The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term is to make Congress irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.  During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama worshipping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferredvirtually unlimited power to the executive branch.  The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write.  For example, in the 2,700 pages ofObamaCare there are more than 2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they "shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310 million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014. The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branchcontrolled by Barack Obama and his radical associates.  Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.   None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse unless stopped in its early stages. It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.   Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them. His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.  The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists. The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as all spending must be approved by them. However, once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics, would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.   Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election. Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.  Many Republicans and conservativesdissatisfied with the prospect of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are insteadfocused on re-taking the House and Senate.That goal, while worthy and necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated. The nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to work with Congress either Republican or Democrat in his second term but rather to force his radical agenda on the American peoplethrough the power he has usurped or been granted.  The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent branches as a check on each other.  What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them  Conservatives, Libertarians, Independents, the Republican Party, and Mitt Romney must come to grips with this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.  And remember, with appointment opportunities coming up in his second term, the Supreme Court will be forever in the government’s pocket, lock, stock, and barrel.  And, if for no other reason, Obama must NOT be granted a second term!   We, the American people, MUST also come to grips with this moment in time, and play our role in denying Barack Obama his lifelong goal of "transforming" us into his slaves, working on his government plantation. Steve McCann May 12, 2012    Please forward this to all you can, maybe together we can save America, both for ourselves, as well as for  those who will follow after us.

 Chris Christie Made Obama Look Small Without Ever Mentioning Him

 

	forward Message | View in Browser | View Mobile Please add news@politicaloutcast.com to your address book. If message was not in your inbox, please add to your approved sender list.  Chris Christie Made Obama Look Small Without Ever Mentioning Him This Seat May Decide Control of Congress GOP Convention Goes to Bat for Akin We Can Do Better... a Whole Lot Better The Romanticism of Being Unashamedly and Shamelessly Liberal Politicians Need to Take a Lesson from Davy Crockett and Horatio Bunce Atheism the Most Annoying Religion of All You have received this Political Outcastemail because you subscribed to it or someone forwarded it to you. To opt out, see the links below. Remove your email address from our list or Manage your profile. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy. Political Outcast 3190 Florence Road Powder Springs, GA 30127 USA