Tag Archives: country

Daily Kos Creates Petition To Abolish Filibuster

A petition is beginning to show up in e-mail inboxes across the country thanks to the left-wing website Daily Kos. The goal? Ending the practice of filibuster completely and letting Senators pass news laws with a 50 plus 1 vote. For those who paid attention to Senator Scott Brown (R-Mass.) becoming the infamous “number 41,” the implications are all too clear. The Senate passed Obamacare on Christmas Eve in 2009 only because there were exactly 60 votes to stop a Republican filibuster. Brown’s election weeks later dropped Democratic control to 59 and virtually stopped them cold. Democrats are now expecting to lose the House in November and keep the Senate only with a slim majority. The folks who run Daily Kos, apparently thinking 49 Republican votes should not matter, are trying to change the rules to make it easier for Democratic agendas to sail through. Behold the thought process of today’s Machiavellian liberals who will do absolutely anything to get their way (h/t NBer choselife3x): Today we’re launching a campaign to end the filibuster. Join this campaign by clicking the link below and signing the petition that appears: We’ll deliver the petition to every Democratic nominee for Senate and every returning Democratic Senator. When we do, we’ll get them on record about whether they agree that the rules of the Senate can, and should, be changed with a simple majority vote on the first day of Congress next year. Once 51 returning and potential Senators have come out in support, we’ll have proven that changing Senate rules is possible with a simple majority vote. Sign the petition, prove change is possible! There’s no bigger decision Senate Democrats will make next year. The Senate is where good legislation goes to die. Democrats can either change a system that allows a tiny unaccountable minority to thwart the will of the country, or they can continue being part of the problem. So even though Republican Senators ostensibly represent 41 percent of America now, and are predicted to represent even more states in 2011, the Daily Kos calls them “a tiny unaccountable minority.” And even though the majority of Americans repeatedly tell pollsters they reject Democratic agendas, it’s Republicans who “thwart the will of the country.” On each of those issues, the Daily Kos came down on the side against the will of most Americans. And now the plan is to make it even easier to ram things down Americans’ throats. Democrats will presumably be able to squeak into the Senate with a bare 51 votes and then pass whatever they want even when the public loudly protests. The filibuster has been an important part of Congress since the very beginning of this country. Film director Frank Capra used the procedure in the iconic 1939 movie “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” proudly displaying the means by which a minority can protect itself from a bullying, overconfident majority. Ending the filibuster would be a drastic departure from our nation’s founding and a radical change in the meaning of representation. As of this writing, Daily Kos is not displaying the petition on its front page. Yet one Kos member by the name of garscosi posted this rather embarrassing diary pleading with the website’s owners to reconsider, followed by a slew of comments in agreement. For a website that habitually trumps up popularity for unpopular ideas, it’s just so fitting.

Read the original post:
Daily Kos Creates Petition To Abolish Filibuster

CNN Lets Pro-Abortion PAC Spout Its Anti-Palin Talking Points

CNN’s Jessica Yellin, a one-time ” prominent feminist activist ,” helped forward the talking points of the pro-abortion lobby by devoting part of a segment on Tuesday’s Rick’s List to EMILY List’s new anti-Sarah Palin ad. Yellin aired their left-wing accusations against the Republican and her endorsed candidates without providing the other side and/or fact-checking them . Anchor Rick Sanchez introduced the issue by bringing up the Republican’s recent “mamma grizzly” ad: “It seemed like a very effective ad that Sarah Palin had put out . I mean, professionally speaking, it was very clean, very well put together – the whole ‘grizzly mom’ ad that everyone was talking about- and, apparently, there’s some blowback on this now. What is that?” Before playing the PAC’s video, which featured women dressed and made-up to look like bears, in mockery of Palin’s “mama grizzly” term, the CNN correspondent noted that EMILY’s List is a ” political action group that raises money for Democratic women pro-choice candidates , and they are now unveiling a new get-out-the-vote effort that’s hitting back on this idea that Sarah Palin speaks for women voters…EMILY’s List’s campaign is called ‘Sarah Doesn’t Speak For Me,’ and they’re taking the whole idea of ‘momma grizzly’ quite literally.” She then played a clip from the ad. During the clip, the unnamed women launched standard attacks from the left against the former Alaska governor and her endorsed candidates: ” Want to know what threatens me? My daughter not having the right to choose. The fact that if you were in charge of this country, my little cubs wouldn’t have health care….Unemployment benefits…something that you and your gang of candidates want to do away with .” Sanchez and Yellin shared a laugh over the ad, and the correspondent continued that EMILY’s List is “trying to drum up interest among Democratic voters who aren’t that energized right now, compared to Republicans, by taking on this whole idea, and with a little bit of humor.” Neither CNN personality provided any response from a pro-life organization or individual, something that CBSNews.com brought up in their Tuesday article about EMILY List’s campaign: Anti-abortion rights group the Susan B. Anthony List , which recently concluded a 23-city bus tour designed to spotlight its support for candidates who oppose abortion rights, quickly hit back with a statement suggesting “EMILY’s List is running scared.” “EMILY’s List is busy perpetuating what it purports to abhor: using women candidates with whom they disagree as punching bags,” said Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser. “On the eve of the 90th anniversary of women’s suffrage, the SBA List calls upon EMILY’s List to come to grips with reality.” Yellin also said nothing of whether Palin and her endorsed candidates actually are against health care for children and seek to “do away with unemployment benefits.” Obviously, the former governor and most, if not all, of her picked candidates are pro-life. It’s not surprising that Yellin would omit doing this, given her past as a leader of Harvard-Radcliffe Students For Choice , and, as The Harvard Crimson described her , a “prominent feminist activist in her own right .” During an April 10, 1992 interview with The Crimson , she actually lamented the apparent opposition to women’s studies at Harvard when she was an undergraduate there (Yellin was a political science and women’s studies double major): “For people interested in women’s issues or gender studies, this is an overtly hostile environment .” The transcript of the relevant portion of Jessica Yellin’s segment on Tuesday’s Rick’s List, beginning at the 19 minutes into the 3 pm Eastern hour mark: SANCHEZ: Let me ask you about the Sarah Palin situation going on, because- you know, we saw the ad, and I thought- and I had said on television- in fact, you and I were watching this- that it seemed like a very effective ad that Sarah Palin had put out. I mean, professionally speaking, it was very clean, very well put together- the whole ‘grizzly mom’ ad that everyone was talking about, and, apparently, there’s some blowback on this now. What is that? YELLIN: That’s right. Well, that Sarah Palin ‘momma grizzly’ ad has caught a lot of attention, and driven a lot of media interest, at least in Palin and this movement of women candidates she’s endorsing. But EMILY’s List is a political action group that raises money for Democratic women pro-choice candidates, and they are now unveiling a new get-out-the-vote effort that’s hitting back on this idea that Sarah Palin speaks for women voters who are- quote, ‘conservative momma grizzlies.’  EMILY’s List’s campaign is called ‘Sarah Doesn’t Speak For Me,’ and they’re taking the whole idea of ‘momma grizzly’ quite literally. Watch this. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 1 (from EMILY’s List ad): When my cubs are threatened- (unidentified woman roars like an animal) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 2: But want to know what threatens me? My daughter not having the right to choose. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 3: The fact that if you were in charge of this country, my little cubs wouldn’t have health care. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 4: When the salmon stopped coming down the stream and I didn’t work for three months, guess how we survived? Unemployment benefits, which is something that you and your gang of candidates want to do away with. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE 5: You know, Ms. Palin, that really gets under my skin and my-   SANCHEZ (live): (Yellin laughs) Oh, my God. Did we have to stop it there because the bear was going to really get mad? (Sanchez laughs) YELLIN: It was going to climb out of the TV screen and get you. (Sanchez laughs) So, you see what they’re doing. It’s a get-out-the-vote campaign. That’s on their website. They also ask people to go in and sign a pledge that they’ll turn out to vote. Obviously, they’re trying to drum up interest among Democratic voters who aren’t that energized right now, compared to Republicans, by taking on this whole idea, and with a little bit of humor- SANCHEZ: Yeah. YELLIN: I think that’s humorous. SANCHEZ: Humor both ways- we will let the viewers decide. My thanks to you, Jessica.

Go here to read the rest:
CNN Lets Pro-Abortion PAC Spout Its Anti-Palin Talking Points

UK Cops: Local Weed Sucks, Comparatively Speaking

A report by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Britain concluded that marijuana is being grown on a massive scale in the country, but that “UK-produced skunk is of a lower quality than varieties available on the continent.” Ouch. http://gawker.com/5614675/uk-government-our-weed-sucks-compared-to-everywhere-el… added by: JackHerer

Norah: Mosque Opponents Acting Like 9-11 Terrorists

Harry Reid may have deserted Pres. Obama over the Ground Zero mosque, but PBO can count on at least one stalwart defender: Norah O’Donnell.   On today’s Morning Joe, the MSNBC “correspondent” today declared that the prez is deserving of praise for his position.  Then, dancing a quantum leap further, O’Donnell accused mosque opponents of acting “like the people who attacked America and killed 3,000 people.” Ironically, just minutes earlier Mike Barnicle and Joe Scarborough were heaping scorn on Newt Gingrich for having said that the mosque has no more right to be built near Ground Zero than would a Nazi site near the Holocaust Museum or a Japanese one next to Pearl Harbor. The pair were horrified by Newt’s analogy.  But when Norah compared mosque opponents to the 9-11 murderers, Mike and Joe were peep-less. NORAH O’DONNELL: I think this makes Democrats uncomfortable to talk about it.  But they may be, the President and Bloomberg, may be–I say may be–standing in political concrete, as Pat [Buchanan] suggests, with some independent voters who may be key in this election. But I think there’s a question about whether what Pres. Obama said and President [sic] Bloomberg said were at least the right thing to do. And when do we stop praising politicians for doing what is right just because it’s not politically expedient? I thought the reason everybody’s groaning all the time about our politicians is because they’re such hacks and nobody stands up for what’s right.  Who cares about the concrete?  Somebody’s got to say that we’re not going to act like the people who stole freedom from Americans, the people who attacked America and killed 3,000 people.

Read more here:
Norah: Mosque Opponents Acting Like 9-11 Terrorists

Olbermann Hints Moral Equivalence Between U.S. & Islamic Empire, Blocking Mosque May Be First Step to New Holocaust

On Monday’s Countdown show, MSNBC host Keith Olbermann delivered a “Special Comment” in which he invoked Nazi Germany and suggested that blocking construction of a mosque near Ground Zero could be the first of a “thousand steps” toward another holocaust. He also suggested a moral equivalence between the Islamic Empire’s conquests and America’s expansion into the lands of Native Americans as he attempted to discredit former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s concerns about the choice of “Cordoba House” as the original name planned for the mosque as being intentionally symbolic of a Muslim victory at Ground Zero. After starting his “Special Comment” by quoting Pastor Martin Niemoller’s famous words about the Holocaust of World War II, he at first tried to make his rant sound more moderate and not really a comparison to the Holocaust: “I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust.” He added: “Such a comparison is ludicrous – at least, it is now.” But the Countdown host was still alarmist enough to fear the mosque controversy could lead in that horrific direction: “Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust. He was warning of the thousand steps before a holocaust became inevitable. If we are at merely the first of those steps again today, it is one step too close.” Citing Gingrich’s contention that members of the Islamic Empire historically engaged in a practice of building large mosques on the holy sites of their conquests as monuments to their victories – citing the mosque that was built in Cordoba, Spain, as an example – Olbermann at first argued that, because Cordoba was eventually recaptured by Christians, Gingrich’s concerns are somehow undermined. The MSNBC host even sounded as if he were defending the Muslim expansion into Spain as he recounted that Christians continued to fight even though the Muslim conquerors built “multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning.” Olbermann: Those Muslim conquerors are a figment of Gingrich’s lurid imagination. In Spain, in Cordoba, though the Muslims established multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning, they were under constant attack from Christian armies and from a series of internal all-Muslim civil wars. The Muslims lost Cordoba and the Christian church they transformed into the world’s third largest mosque complex, that was turned back into a Christian cathedral in the 13th century, and it has been one ever since. But moments later, Olbermann seemed to contradict himself by acknowledging that Gingrich was correct in his reasoning about the historical significance of the name “Cordoba” being provocative, as the MSNBC host gave the Muslim group credit for changing the name in response to the former House Speaker’s criticism. Olbermann: “When the historical implications of Cordoba were made clear to the backers of this project, the property developer, Sharif Gamal, changed the name. They’ve already compromised.” Olbermann did not theorize about why the Muslim group was motivated to choose this provocative name in the first place. The Countdown host also suggested a moral equivalence between America’s history of confiscating land from Native Americans and the Islamic Empire’s conquests. Olbermann: “And is there not a logical extension to Mr. Gingrich’s conclusions about Cordoba and triumphalism? Virtually every church, virtually every synagogue, every mosque built on this continent stands where a Native American lived or died or was buried or saw his world – his religions included – wiped out, by us. What are we, then, Mr. Gingrich?” But, unlike many predominantly Muslim countries, the United States provides full citizenship rights to Native Americans, who are now even greater in number than when Christopher Columbus first visited the New World. By contrast, not only do many countries that are successors to the Islamic Empire sharply restrict the rights of their citizens, but, as recently as the period between 1948 and 1975, in many predominantly Muslim nations, Jewish residents faced so much persecution in the form of violence and confiscation of property that the number of Jewish refugees who fled Muslim countries is estimated to be greater than the number of Palestinian refugees who fled Israel after the Arab states invaded the tiny nation in 1948. Some estimate that the land confiscated from Jewish residents by governments in Muslim countries amounts to several times the total area of the state of Israel. After recounting the story of a mosque that was bombed in Jacksonville, Florida, Olbermann also declared that Muslims in America are more likely to be targeted by terrorism than non-Muslims: “As the Jacksonville mosque bombing shows, since 9/11, Muslims have been at far greater risk of being victims of terrorism in the United States than have non-Muslims.” Below is a complete transcript of the “Special Comment” portion of the Monday, August 16, Countdown show on MSNBC, with critical portions in bold : KEITH OLBERMANN: Finally, tonight, as promised, a “Special Comment” on the inaccurately described “Ground Zero mosque.” “They came first for the communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. And then they came for me and by that time, no one was left to speak up.” Pastor Martin Niemoller’s words are well known, but their context is not well understood. Niemoller was not speaking abstractly. He witnessed persecution; he acquiesced to it. He ultimately fell victim to it. He had been a German World War I hero, then a conservative who welcomed the fall of German democracy and the rise of Hitler, and he had few qualms about the beginning of the Holocaust until he himself was arrested for supporting it insufficiently. Niemoller’s confessional warning came first in a speech in Frankfurt in January 1946 – eight months after he had been liberated by American troops. He had been detained at Tyrol, Sachsen-hausen, and Dachau for seven years. He survived the death camps. In quoting him, I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust. Such a comparison is ludicrous – at least, it is now. But Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust, he was warning of the willingness of a seemingly rational society to condone the gradual stoking of enmity towards an ethnic or religious group or more than one, warning of the building up of a collective pool of fear and hate, warning of the moment in which the need to purge outstrips the parameters of the original scapegoating, when new victims are needed because a country has begun to run on a horrible field of hatred – magnified, amplified and multiplied by politicians and zealots within government and without. Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust. He was warning of the thousand steps before a holocaust became inevitable. If we are at merely the first of those steps again today, it is one step too close. Yet in a country dedicated to freedom, forces have gathered to blow out of all proportion the construction of a minor community center to transform it into a training ground for terrorists and an insult to the victims of 9/11 and a tribute to Medieval Muslim subjugation of the West. There is no training ground for terrorists. There is no insult to the victims of 9/11. There is no tribute to Medieval Muslim subjugation of the West. There is, in fact, no “Ground Zero mosque.” It is not mosque. A mosque, technically, is a Muslim holy place in which only worship can be conducted. What is planned for 45 Park Place, New York City, is a community center. It’s supposed to include a basketball court and a culinary school. It is to be 13 stories tall, and the top two stories will be a Muslim prayer space. What a cauldron of terrorism that will be. Terrorist chefs and terrorist point guards. And truly those who will use the center have more to fear from us than us from them, for there has been terrorism connected to a mosque in this country, in this year. May 10, Jacksonville, Florida, a pipe bomb at the Islamic Center of Northeast Florida. The FBI thinks the man in this surveillance video could be the bomber. The bomb went off during evening prayers and it was powerful enough to send shrapnel flying 100 yards. Fortunately, the bomber didn’t know where to place it, so the 60 Muslim worshipers were uninjured. If he had put it inside and not outside, they had been dead and you probably would have heard about it on the news. Or maybe not. Maybe those exploiting 45 Park Place would still shake their fists and decry terrorism by extremists who happen to be Muslim and never faced the shameful truth about our country. As the Jacksonville mosque bombing shows, since 9/11, Muslims have been at far greater risk of being victims of terrorism in the United States than have non-Muslims . But back to this Islamic center. Its name, Cordoba House, is not a tribute to the Medieval Muslim subjugation of Spain. Newt Gingrich has been pushing that nonsense that Cordoba is dog whistle for triumphalism : “It refers to Cordoba, Spain – the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world’s third largest mosque complex. Today, some of the mosque’s backers insist this term is being used to ‘symbolize interfaith cooperation’ when, in fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest.” Those Muslim conquerors are a figment of Gingrich’s lurid imagination. In Spain, in Cordoba, though the Muslims established multicultural, nondenominational institutions of learning, they were under constant attack from Christian armies and from a series of internal all-Muslim civil wars. The Muslims lost Cordoba and the Christian church they transformed into the world’s third largest mosque complex, that was turned back into a Christian cathedral in the 13th century, and it has been one ever since. And is there not a logical extension to Mr. Gingrich’s conclusions about Cordoba and triumphalism? Virtually every church, virtually every synagogue, every mosque built on this continent stands where a Native American lived or died or was buried or saw his world – his religions included – wiped out, by us. What are we, then, Mr. Gingrich? And by the way, a point Mr. Gingrich has not even whispered as he has shouted fire in a crowded theater: When the historical implications of Cordoba were made clear to the backers of this project, the property developer, Sharif Gamal, changed the name. They’re already compromised. “We are calling it Park 51 because of the backlash to the name Cordoba House,” he told the Financial Times. “It will be a place open to all New Yorkers, and that is a very New York name.” A very New York name. Like Ground Zero. Except that this place, Park 51, is not even at Ground Zero. Not even right across the street. Even the description of it being two blocks away is generous. It is two blocks away from the Northeast corner of the World Trade Center site. From the planned location of the 9/11 memorial, it’s more like four or five blocks, even. You know what is right across the street, though? I went there yesterday to refresh my sense of the World Trade Center, in which I worked nearly 30 years ago. At Church and Veezy Street so close that the barbed wire of Ground Zero obscures its spire is St. Paul’s Chapel. Been there since 1766, where Washington went the day he was inaugurated, where the first responders came for relief nine years ago. You know what’s also closer to Ground Zero than this Muslim community center will be? Church of St. Peter, at Church and Barclay Streets. As the sign says, “New York’s Oldest Catholic parish.” People hear “Ground Zero mosque” and they think Mecca in the backyard and the loud call to prayer and they take umbrage. “We’ve got no more than a few inches of skin and a couple pieces of bone. Ground Zero is the burial place of my son,” said Joyce Boland at the public hearing about this center. “I don’t want to go there and see an overwhelming mosque looking down at me.” I honor her pain and her fear, but Mrs. Boland has nothing to worry about. Unless she walks directly over to it, several blocks away, she’ll never see the thing. This is what you see from where the center will be. Another nondescript building is across the street. This building and others like it would block views of the Trade Center and views from the Trade Center. The community center certainly will stand out on the north side of Park Place, but amid the canyons of lower Manhattan, it will just be a distinctive building that, if you happen to wander down a side street near the Trade Center, you might see it. You know what you’ll see there now? This. The Burlington coat factory, abandoned since 2001, when the landing gear from one of the planes fell 90 stories and went through the roof. For nine years, nobody’s been willing to buy that building, just to knock it down and build a new one. It sold for $4,850,000. In New York City real estate, that is spare change. And you know why it’s spare change? Because walk around Ground Zero any day of the week and it’s packed with tourists and our version of pilgrims. But walk two and three blocks away, and not so packed. Not packed at all. Empty stores, boarded up windows, nine years later, and two and three blocks from the action, it’s a ghost town. What was that about government not getting in the way of private business? What was that about letting the private sector spur new jobs in blighted areas? Oh, and what was that about Iraq? Why did we go into Iraq again? I don’t mean the real versions or the naked vengeful blindness that enabled the forging of a nonexistent connection between Iraq and 9/11, I mean, the official explanation. To free the world, and especially Iraq’s citizens, of the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. That’s its supporters’ defense of the Iraq invasion to this hour. Well, who lives in Iraq? Muslims. I hate to reveal this to anybody on the right who did not know this, but when they say Iraq is 65 percent Shia and 32 percent Sunni, you do know that Shia and Sunni are both forms of the Muslim religion, right? We sacrificed 4,415 of our military personnel in Iraq to save Muslims, and there are thousands of us still here tonight to protect Muslims, but we don’t want Muslims to open a combination culinary school and prayer space in Manhattan? From the beginning of this nation, we have fought prejudice and religious intolerance and our greatest enemy, stupidity, exploited by rapacious politicians. It is only 50 years now, this month, since Americans publicly and urgently warned their countrymen not to support a presidential candidate because he was a Roman Catholic. He would bow to the will, not of the American people, but of the Pope. He would be a papist. He would be the agent of a foreign state! His name was John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

Glenn Beck Told He Can’t Lead Audience In Prayer At Kennedy Center

Conservative talk radio host Glenn Beck was told by officials at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts that he can’t lead his audience in prayer at his August 27 Divine Destiny event. Beck has rented out the facility the night before his “Restoring Honor” celebration at the Lincoln Memorial for “an eye-opening evening…that will help heal your soul.” As Beck relayed to his radio audience Monday, his religious plans during the festivities were a serious point of contention before the powers that be came to their senses (video follows with transcript and commentary): GLENN BECK: They have told people on the steps of the Supreme Court that they cannot pray there. They have told students on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial they can’t sing the National Anthem there. And last week I was told by the Kennedy Center that we could not pray there. We were told by the Kennedy Center in no uncertain terms that we could hold our event there, sure we had a contract. But they weren’t told that we were going to have an opening prayer. The program is has the word divine in it, our divine destiny. We couldn’t pray at the Kennedy Center. So my attorneys came to me and said, Glenn, are you willing to compromise on it? And I said, I sure am. You tell them that not only will I do an opening prayer, I’ll do a closing prayer, and the entire program may be a prayer. In fact, take this down. It is a night of prayer. You’ll see if you are lucky enough to get a ticket to the Kennedy Center, and they are not for sale. You will see in the program how I described it. I described it that way. So they could print that in their program at the Kennedy Center which they insisted on having after they told us we couldn’t pray. I said, let me dictate this one. Friday night I was supposed to have a meeting today at 1:00 with their attorneys and I had already talked to my attorneys. Zero compromise. We asked them, where is that in your I didn’t see that in your rules and regulations. “It’s not written down.” No prayer at a federally funded building. Friday night I think they got a hold of Common Sense. They alerted me Friday night that they will allow prayer to happen on the stage of the Kennedy Center. I told them, thank you so much for your graciousness. I appreciate the scrap from the table. America, our religion and our faith is under attack and whether people care to realize it or not, it is. Ironically as our friends at The Right Scoop noted , prayer isn’t allowed in government buildings, but the current President “can still have a Ramadan dinner at the White House.” That said, Beck informed his readers of this event Wednesday: Glenn Beck’s Divine Destiny is an eye-opening evening at the historic Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C that will help heal your soul. Guided by uplifting music, nationally-known religious figures from all faiths will unite to deliver messages reminiscent to those given during the struggles of America’s earliest days. The event will leave you with a renewed determination to look past the partisan differences and petty problems that fill our airwaves and instead focus our shared values, principles and strong belief that faith can play an essential role in reuniting the country.  Those interested can read more about Restoring Honor here .

Link:
Glenn Beck Told He Can’t Lead Audience In Prayer At Kennedy Center

Cenk Suggests The 70% Of Americans Who Oppose Ground Zero Mosque Are ‘Ignorant’

Different host, same liberal bias . . . Subbing for Ed Schultz on MSNBC this evening, Cenk Ugyur suggested that the roughly 70% of Americans who oppose the Ground Zero mosque are “ignorant.”  Ugyur was debating the mosque matter with Republican strategist and former Newt staffer David Winston.  Winston suggested that the people behind the mosque could, in light of the overwhelming oppposition of Americans to the plan, show sensitivity by agreeing to site it elsewhere. That provoked Cenk’s snide insult, which, as you’ll see, actually revealed his own lack of knowledge on the subject . . . DAVID WINSTON: What I’m saying is, 70% of this country doesn’t like this idea. There’s a unique opportunity for Muslims to show, look, we understand Americans have difficulty with this, and we’re willing to have, to move somewhere else.  There’s just a sense of like, look, if we’re going to cooperate and get along, and things are going to work, people are going to have to understand the concerns that other folks have — CENK UGYUR: So you’re saying, you’re saying two things from what I’m hearing. One is, if 70% of the country is ignorant, we should back that up. If they don’t know the Constitution or they think Muslims are the same as al Qaeda, we should back that up.  Cenk suggests that those “ignorant” Americans “don’t know the Constitution.”  But if he had taken the time to inform himself of the poll question that CNN had put to people, and which generated the overwhelming response, he would have found that it read [emphasis added]: “As you may know, a group of Muslims in the U.S. plan to build a mosque two blocks from the site in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand. Do you favor or oppose this plan? ” So that 70% [68% to be precise] weren’t asked, and weren’t opining, that they thought Muslims didn’t have a right to build the mosque. They were simply expressing their personal opinion to the effect that they “oppose the plan.”  And that is their constitutional right.  So who’s ignorant now?

Read the original post:
Cenk Suggests The 70% Of Americans Who Oppose Ground Zero Mosque Are ‘Ignorant’

CBS’s Schieffer: Obama Right ‘Intellectually’ on Mosque, Just Bad Politics

Appearing on Monday’s CBS Early Show to discuss President Obama showing support for a controversial mosque being built near Ground Zero, Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer agreed with the President’s sentiment but lamented the political fallout: “The President said and made the right intellectual argument, but I’m not sure that it was great politics for him to say it at this particular time.”   Schieffer began by outlining White House talking points on the issue to substitute co-host Erica Hill: “The story they tell is the President thought this Ramadan dinner – these were dinners that were started after 9/11 by President Bush as an outreach to demonstrate that our problems are with terrorists, not with people who are Muslims – he thought this was an appropriate place to say what all Americans believe, in that everyone has a right to practice their religion in this country.” Schieffer later added: “I would agree with the White House.” At the same time, both Hill and Schieffer fretted over the political fallout, particularly Republican criticism. Hill teased the segment at the top of show by declaring that Obama’s “apparent defense of the proposed mosque at Ground Zero has Republicans howling.” Schieffer remarked: “Republicans are trying to take every advantage of this they can.” Continuing to worry about the political impact of the President’s comments, Hill asked: “And this could feed into the criticism of this current administration, that this is an administration that is out of touch, that is, in many ways, seen by folks across the country as being elitist. Is that what you’re hearing?” Schieffer replied: “Yes. Well, that’s exactly the spin that Republicans are trying to put on it, is that – you know, that the President’s not paying attention.”    Earlier, Schieffer described the anxiety of Democratic candidates: “But the response to this has, even from some Democrats, has been, ‘why did he have to say it at this particular time and about this particular site?’ ‘Yes, intellectually that is the correct argument,’ they say, ‘but is it entirely appropriate at this very special place, to try to link a Muslim worship center with this 9/11 ground?'” He later added: “…a lot of candidates around the country are saying, ‘look, with the economy in the shape it’s in, we need all the help we can get. And we really wish the President had not said this.'” Here is a full transcript of the August 16 segment: 7:00AM ET TEASE ERICA HILL: Political firestorm. President Obama launches a five-state political blitz today but his apparent defense of the proposed mosque at Ground Zero has Republicans howling. ED ROLLINS: First, Bob, it was probably the dumbest thing that any president has said or candidate has said since Michael Dukakis said it was okay to burn the flag. 7:01AM ET SEGMENT ERICA HILL: First, though, we do want to get you to this. President Obama heading to Wisconsin this morning. The purpose of his trip, though, could end up taking a backseat to the controversy over the building of a mosque in New York City. CBS News chief White House correspondent Chip Reid has the details. CHIP REID: The President heads out this morning on a three-day cross-country trip. He’ll be talking about the economy and raising money for fellow Democrats. The White House hopes this trip will help change the topic after a weekend of controversy over the President’s comments about building a mosque near Ground Zero. [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Obama & The Mosque; President’s Comments Could Derail Economic Message] The First Family spent a quick weekend on the Gulf coast of Florida, swimming, mini-golfing and boating. The visit was intended to highlight the fact that on most of the Gulf Coast, the water is clean and the beaches are open. But the President’s own comments over the weekend overshadowed the trip. Speaking at a White House dinner Friday celebrating Ramadan, the President waded into the already deepening political controversy over whether to build a mosque two blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks in New York City. BARACK OBAMA: Let me be clear, as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. REID: Saturday, the President seemed to back off from his initial comments, saying that while Muslims have the right to build the mosque, that doesn’t mean they should. OBAMA: I was not commenting, and I will not comment, on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there. REID: White House officials insist the President is not backing down from his original statement, but some Republicans say the White House is trying to have it both ways. PETER KING [REP. R-NY]: The inference or the clear impression everyone came away with is that he was saying he was supporting the mosque at Ground Zero. And he can parse it later on, and sort of back away, but the fact is, that is clearly the impression, I believe, he wanted to leave. REID: The White House says the President has no regrets about his comments even though they turned a local issue into a national debate. Traveling with the President, Chip Reid, CBS News, Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.          HILL: And joining us from Washington now is CBS News chief Washington correspondent and host of Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer. Bob, always good to have you with us. BOB SCHIEFFER: Thank you, Erica. HILL: We know and you know, of course, from talking about this on your show yesterday morning, the firestorm that these comments have ignited, and really, shots coming from both sides. So, why would the President, especially in this time when Democrats are really fighting to hold control of Congress in November, why make these comments at this point? [ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Obama & The Mosque; Will Comments Impact Midterm Elections?] SCHIEFFER: Well, that’s just the question I asked White House officials and some people in the administration last night. The story they tell is the President thought this Ramadan dinner – these were dinners that were started after 9/11 by President Bush as an outreach to demonstrate that our problems are with terrorists, not with people who are Muslims – he thought this was an appropriate place to say what all Americans believe, in that everyone has a right to practice their religion in this country. But the response to this has, even from some Democrats, has been, ‘why did he have to say it at this particular time and about this particular site?’ ‘Yes, intellectually that is the correct argument,’ they say, ‘but is it entirely appropriate at this very special place, to try to link a Muslim worship center with this 9/11 ground?’ And clearly, Republicans are trying to take every advantage of this they can. Now, what White House officials say is, ‘look, this next election is going to be about the economy. It’s not going to be about whether they should build a mosque at Ground Zero.’ But a lot of – a lot of candidates around the country are saying, ‘look, with the economy in the shape it’s in, we need all the help we can get. And we really wish the President had not said this.’ The White House will say, ‘if you do the right thing, the politics will take care of itself.’ Clearly, there are some Democrats who are worried about that, though. HILL: They are a little worried. And this could feed into the criticism of this current administration, that this is an administration that is out of touch, that is, in many ways, seen by folks across the country as being elitist. Is that what you’re hearing? SCHIEFFER: Yes. Well, that’s exactly the spin that Republicans are trying to put on it, is that – you know, that the President’s not paying attention. What really bothers some Democrats, though, is that when the President gets into something like this, when he makes a statement like this, it elevates it to a national issue and every single Democratic candidate running for office is now going to be asked about it and will now have to take a position on something that they were hoping they would be able to say, ‘this is just a local issue. It’s up to the folks in New York to decide what to do about this.’ Yes, I would agree with the White House. The President said and made the right intellectual argument, but I’m not sure that it was great politics for him to say it at this particular time. HILL: Bob Schieffer, always good to have you here. Thanks. SCHIEFFER: Thanks, Erica.

Read more:
CBS’s Schieffer: Obama Right ‘Intellectually’ on Mosque, Just Bad Politics

Water Scarcity Facing 1/3 of US Counties

One out of three U.S. counties is facing a greater risk of water shortages by mid-century due to global warming, finds a new report by Tetra Tech for the Natural Resources Defense Council. For 412 of these counties the risk of water shortages will be “extremely high,” according to the report, a 14-fold increase from previous estimates. In the Great Plains and Southwest United States, water sustainability is at extreme risk finds the report, which is based on publicly available water use data from across the United States. “This analysis shows climate change will take a serious toll on water supplies throughout the country in the coming decades, with over one out of three U.S. counties facing greater risks of water shortages,” said Dan Lashof, director of the Climate Center at NRDC. “Water shortages can strangle economic development and agricultural production and affected communities.” “As a result,” he said, “cities and states will bear real and significant costs if Congress fails to take the steps necessary to slow down and reverse the warming trend.” Counties shown in dark red are at greatest risk of water shortage by 2050. (Map courtesy Tetra Tech) The report, issued Tuesday, finds that 14 states face an extreme or high risk to water sustainability, or are likely to see limitations on water availability as demand exceeds supply by 2050. These areas include parts of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Sujoy Roy, principal engineer and lead report author, Tetra Tech, said, “The goal of the analysis is to identify regions where potential stresses, and the need to do something about them, may be the greatest.” “We used publicly available data on current water withdrawals for different sectors of the economy, such as irrigation, cooling for power generation, and municipal supply, and estimated future demands using business-as-usual scenarios of growth,” Roy explained. “We then compared these future withdrawals to a measure of renewable water supply in 2050, based on a set of 16 global climate model projections of temperature and precipitation, to identify regions that may be stressed by water availability,” Roy said. “These future stresses are related to changes in precipitation as well as the likelihood of increased demand in some regions.” The report also is based on climate projections from a set of models used in recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change work to evaluate withdrawals related to renewable water supply. Water withdrawal will grow by 25 percent in many areas of the United States, including the arid Arizona-New Mexico area, the populated areas in the South Atlantic region, Florida, the Mississippi River basin, and Washington, D.C. and surrounding regions, the analysis projects. added by: JanforGore

Senate Bill S510 Makes it illegal to Grow, Share, Trade or Sell Homegrown Food

Update: Since the story first broke, a lot has happened. One reason for this could be that food is being poisoned. Collecting rainwater is now illegal in many states. Your intake is being controlled. For more information, visit the following articles as well: “Raiding organic food stores. A sign of new times?” at: http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/05/raiding-organic-food-stores-a-sign-of-ne… “Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water.” at: http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/collecting-rainwater-now-illegal-in-many-states… “Why do people in America refuse to take active interest in their future?” at http://www.firetown.com/blog/2010/08/03/why-do-people-in-america-refuse-to-take-… ———————————————————————————————————— S 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the US. It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money. “If accepted [S 510] would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.” ~Dr. Shiv Chopra, Canada Health whistleblower It is similar to what India faced with imposition of the salt tax during British rule, only S 510 extends control over all food in the US, violating the fundamental human right to food. Monsanto says it has no interest in the bill and would not benefit from it, but Monsanto’s Michael Taylor who gave us rBGH and unregulated genetically modified (GM) organisms, appears to have designed it and is waiting as an appointed Food Czar to the FDA (a position unapproved by Congress) to administer the agency it would create — without judicial review — if it passes. S 510 would give Monsanto unlimited power over all US seed, food supplements, food and farming. History In the 1990s, Bill Clinton introduced HACCP (Hazardous Analysis Critical Control Points) purportedly to deal with contamination in the meat industry. Clinton’s HACCP delighted the offending corporate (World Trade Organization “WTO”) meat packers since it allowed them to inspect themselves, eliminated thousands of local food processors (with no history of contamination), and centralized meat into their control. Monsanto promoted HACCP. In 2008, Hillary Clinton, urged a powerful centralized food safety agency as part of her campaign for president. Her advisor was Mark Penn, CEO of Burson Marsteller*, a giant PR firm representing Monsanto. Clinton lost, but Clinton friends such as Rosa DeLauro, whose husband’s firm lists Monsanto as a progressive client and globalization as an area of expertise, introduced early versions of S 510. S 510 fails on moral, social, economic, political, constitutional, and human survival grounds. 1. It puts all US food and all US farms under Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, in the event of contamination or an ill-defined emergency. It resembles the Kissinger Plan. 2. It would end US sovereignty over its own food supply by insisting on compliance with the WTO, thus threatening national security. It would end the Uruguay Round Agreement Act of 1994, which put US sovereignty and US law under perfect protection. Instead, S 510 says: COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS. Nothing in this Act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party. 3. It would allow the government, under Maritime Law, to define the introduction of any food into commerce (even direct sales between individuals) as smuggling into “the United States.” Since under that law, the US is a corporate entity and not a location, “entry of food into the US” covers food produced anywhere within the land mass of this country and “entering into” it by virtue of being produced It imposes Codex Alimentarius on the US, a global system of control over food. It allows the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the WTO to take control of every food on earth and remove access to natural food supplements. Its bizarre history and its expected impact in limiting access to adequate nutrition (while mandating GM food, GM animals, pesticides, hormones, irradiation of food, etc.) threatens all safe and organic food and health itself, since the world knows now it needs vitamins to survive, not just to treat illnesses. 5. It would remove the right to clean, store and thus own seed in the US, putting control of seeds in the hands of Monsanto and other multinationals, threatening US security. See Seeds – How to criminalize them, for more details. 6. It includes NAIS, an animal traceability program that threatens all small farmers and ranchers raising animals. The UN is participating through the WHO, FAO, WTO, and World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) in allowing mass slaughter of even heritage breeds of animals and without proof of disease. Biodiversity in farm animals is being wiped out to substitute genetically engineered animals on which corporations hold patents. Animal diseases can be falsely declared. S 510 includes the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite its corrupt involvement in the H1N1 scandal, which is now said to have been concocted by the corporations. Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad) 7. It extends a failed and destructive HACCP to all food, thus threatening to do to all local food production and farming what HACCP did to meat production – put it in corporate hands and worsen food safety. 8. It deconstructs what is left of the American economy. It takes agriculture and food, which are the cornerstone of all economies, out of the hands of the citizenry, and puts them under the total control of multinational corporations influencing the UN, WHO, FAO and WTO, with HHS, and CDC, acting as agents, with Homeland Security as the enforcer. The chance to rebuild the economy based on farming, ranching, gardens, food production, natural health, and all the jobs, tools and connected occupations would be eliminated. 9. It would allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and GMOs. This would industrialize every farm in the US, eliminate local organic farming, greatly increase global warming from increased use of oil-based products and long-distance delivery of foods, and make food even more unsafe. The five items listed — the Five Pillars of Food Safety — are precisely the items in the food supply which are the primary source of its danger. 10. It uses food crimes as the entry into police state power and control. The bill postpones defining all the regulations to be imposed; postpones defining crimes to be punished, postpones defining penalties to be applied. It removes fundamental constitutional protections from all citizens in the country, making them subject to a corporate tribunal with unlimited power and penalties, and without judicial review. It is (similar to C-6 in Canada) the end of Rule of Law in the US. … Continued at http://www.theworldsprophecy.com/senate-bill-s510-makes-it-illegal-to-grow-share… http://i499.photobucket.com/albums/rr360/ourhomeremedies/NaturalCureHomeRemedies… added by: Dagum