Monday, August 31, 2009

Messaging Democrats To Shelve Obamacare and Leave The CIA Alone

A timely post from www.hughhewitt.com on things you can do now! See his recent column here My new WashingtonExaminer.com column is up.

Messaging Democrats To Shelve Obamacare and Leave The CIA Alone
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt
I need ten minutes of your time and $30 of your hard-earned dollars to push the Congressional Democrats to shelve Obamacare and to push President Obama and Attorney General Holder to abandon the witch hunt of terrorist interrogators.
On Sunday former Vice President Dick Cheney will almost certainly make the case on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace that the special prosecutor named by Holder this week to consider criminal charges against American interrogators of al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects will be deeply damaging to the national security. Only a significant show of public disgust at the witch hunt will limit its breadth and scope. Adding your signature to the petition at IWillNotConvict.com is a simple and effective way of showing your agreement with Cheney and every other serious national security analyst on this crucial subject.
If you haven't done so already, please sign the petition to stop Obamacare sponsored by the National Center for Policy Analysis. Over 1,165,000 people have already signed, and with two weeks before the petitions are delivered to Congress, getting to 1,500,000 signatures is doable if you join and also e-mail your friends.
A contribution of $10 or more to the National Center for Policy Analysis also allows the Center to publicize the petition and the arguments against Obamacre in other forums, so please consider helping push that message forward.
Two other ways of communicating voter anger over the push for the embedded rationing and fiscally disastrous consequences of Obamacare is to send small but symbolically important contributions to GOP contenders challenging vulnerable Senate and House sponsors of Obamacare.
Nevada's Harry Reid is of course the most visible and also one of the most politically vulnerable Senate sponsors of Obamacare. Reid is facing a stiff challenge from Danny Tarkanian --a recent poll shows Reid trailing Tarkanian by 11 points-- and since the "$10 for Tark" campaign began this week, more than 5,000 new contributors have sent at least $10 to the GOP contender. That sort of groundswell will not doubt get Senator Reid's attention and push him towards the growing group of Democrats who want to shelve Obamacare rather than risk the political ruin it will bring them in November 2010. Please join the effort with a $10 or more contribution to Tark.
Colorado liberal Democrat Betsy Markey told voters this week that Medicare benefits will have to be cut and that all Americans are going to have make sacrifices under Obamacare. Seniors who want the Democrats to stop trying to insure the uninsured via cuts to Medicare and voters who like their private insurance and don't want to get dumped into the so-called "government option/public plan" at the center of Obamacare, should signal all House Democrats that there will be political hell to pay if Obamacre passes by a donation to Markey's opponent, Tom Lucero. Lucero was on my program yesterday and bring's a businessman's perspective to the health care debate and confirmed that all across Markey's district and Colorado generally, Obamacare is deeply unpopular, just as it is across the country as all the recent polling data shows.
A $10 or more contribution to Tom Lucero sends a message to every House Democrat feeling nervous about supporting Obamacare, so please join the hundreds of people who added Tom to their list of causes yesterday and Thursday via an online contribution.
The President and Nancy Pelosi are clearly worried that August has turned the tide of public opinion against Obamacare specifically and the spending binge and lurch to the left of the federal government generally, which explains the desperate attempt to urge increasingly worried Representatives and Senators to support Obamacare because Senator Kennedy would have wanted them to. (Perhaps the most inane of all arguments advanced to date on behalf of the deeply and obviously flawed plan.)
The way to maintain the momentum is through demonstrated support for the National Center's grassroots efforts and through specific support for two candidates whose surge in fundraising signals what's ahead if the Democrats continue to push single payer and deep Medicare cuts on an unwilling public.

THE PERFECT ALIBI ... I'LL DRINK TO THAT! (PART II)


A timely insightful archived article from www.anncoulter.com. Get the book that is referenced here http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/17953392&referer=brief_results


THE PERFECT ALIBI ... I'LL DRINK TO THAT! (PART II)

September 7, 2005

In light of the fact that Sen. Teddy Kennedy feels lawyer-client privileged materials should be produced in the case of a public servant — such as John Roberts — we now continue with my imaginary version of Teddy's confidential communications with his lawyer the day after he drove Mary Jo Kopechne off a bridge at Chappaquiddick.

Interview with client Teddy Kennedy, July 19, 1969 (based on the facts in Leo Damore's book "Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up":

Lawyer: Let's get back to the night of the accident. Why didn't you call the police?

Teddy: Stop nagging me! Mary Jo was driving. I wasn't even in the car.

Lawyer: No, Teddy. People saw you leave the party together.

Teddy: I had spurned her sexual advances and the poor girl was distraught. That's probably why she drove off the bridge. Lawyer: A police officer saw you behind the driver's wheel speeding toward the bridge with a blonde in the passenger seat shortly before the accident. Teddy: I asked Mary Jo to take the wheel after realizing I was too drunk to drive.

Lawyer: Now I know you're lying. Teddy: How would that cop like a new NASA facility named after him?

Lawyer: You were soaking wet when you got back to the cottage.

Teddy: I went for a swim.

Lawyer: Fully clothed?

Teddy: I like to go for a little dip after a night of drinking and attempted extramarital sex. It clears my head.

Lawyer: There were any number of houses with lights on near the bridge. These are people who like you, Teddy — but they can't understand why you didn't ask them to call for help.

Teddy: I can't remember anything that happened that night! It seems like I was wandering for days, dizzy from the loss of oxygen after my heroic attempts to rescue Mary Jo. If you think about it, it was a lot like my brother Jack's rescue of his men on PT-109. He was driving when the ship got hit, and he didn't save all of them either. (Teddy singing now) The car was in, the Chappaquiddick bay, fearless man, who jumps and swims, a man who means, just what he says ...

Lawyer: What are you doing?

Teddy: It's a song I'm writing. I call it "The Ballad of Mary Jo."

Lawyer: You already told your confidant Paul Markham and your cousin Joseph Gargan the truth.

Teddy: Yes, get those names. They'll back me. Mary Jo was driving.

Lawyer: You're going to ask all these people to perjure themselves for you?

Teddy: I already have. They're balking of course, but I left them no choice.

Lawyer: What do you mean you've left them no choice?

Teddy: When they dropped me at the dock after they tried diving for Mary Jo, I told them I would report the accident the moment I got back to my hotel. But they knew I was lying. An hour went by and no police had come by to question them? They knew I hadn't reported it. They're as guilty as I am!

Lawyer: Well, arguably, you are more guilty, inasmuch as you drove off the bridge —

Teddy: Mary Jo was driving. And I've been drowning my sorrows ever since. Get it? "Drowning my sorrows"? Can I at least have a beer?

Lawyer: — and then you went to absurd lengths back at the hotel to create an alibi for yourself — drying off and changing clothes, making a point of complaining to the hotel owner about the noise from the next room even though everyone was sound asleep at that hour, asking the hotel owner to tell you what time it was.

Teddy: That was a nice touch, wasn't it?

Lawyer: How can you explain that behavior as anything other than trying to create an alibi? Teddy: Are you listening? I'm a married man! Mary Jo was a babe! I was drunk, speeding toward a secluded beach with her. Do you think we were going to look for seashells? Now how would that look?

Lawyer: Hey — what are you doing with that neck brace?

Teddy: Look! Now it's a hat! Hey — there aren't any cameras in here, are there?

Lawyer: I don't know how I'm going to get you out of this ...

Teddy: Do you know who I am? I am a Kennedy! JFK, Jackie O, Camelot, Prohibition-era rum-running Kennedy clan — any of that ring a bell? The judge is a Democrat, and the weenie DA keeps sending me mash notes promising not to prosecute. Ha ha! He must think I need a new chauffeur!

Lawyer: You are in a lot of trouble, Teddy. Teddy: I've got it all in hand. Hey, I'm feeling a little loaded. Which side of this neck brace is up? My press conference is in 10 minutes.



ALIPAC's Guide to Activism

An article you should find interesting if you'd like activism pointers! h/t www.alipac.us
Friends,
ALIPAC's online activism has been proven effective and at times quite legendary on the web. Prior to the recent malaise affecting some of our team members, we were known for getting the job done on the web and breaking new ground in the field of web activism. Please keep in mind that the illegal alien supporters have been studying ALIPAC closely for several years now because we helped hand them stunning defeats of their AMNESTY bills in 2006 and 2007.

Since that time they have invested millions and hired top minds in the fields of activism and web marketing. They have deployed their counter measures based off of their research and study of what many of you, or your predecessors, here at ALIPAC have done.
PLEASE REVIEW THIS TRAINING MATERIAL AND POST BELOW THAT YOU HAVE READ IT OR IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU RESPOND AND TAKE THIS INFORMATION TO HEART BECAUSE ONCE COMPILED HERE IN THE OPEN THE ENEMY HAS IT. THIS MEANS IF YOU DO NOT RESPOND WELL, WE HAVE JUST MADE A STRATEGIC MISTAKE BY COUNTING ON YOU TO RESPOND. Here are some basics:
For New ALIPAC Activists LEVEL 1 Goals: ALIPAC's primary goals are to educate the public and combine American activism and funds into focused efforts that achieve the goals of our platform.
Step 1: All ALIPAC Activists should begin by making sure they are on our e-mail alert list. While hundreds of activists participate here in the discussion groups where many of our best activists congregate, our real power is in the alert lists. Our alert lists can keep you be informed, familiarize you with our operations, and give you a chance to participate in our heavy hitting "focus campaigns." Please read each e-mail alert carefully and please respond to as many of the requests you receive as possible. Help is always here for you during email alert focus campaigns. WHILE THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF ACTIVISM GOING ON HERE IN THE DISCUSS GROUPS, AN EMAIL ALERT BLAST SHOULD BECOME YOUR TOP PRIORITY.

Step 2 Prioritize: ALIPAC wants our activist to be constantly involved in their own activism online and in their local communities. The battle against illegal immigration is far too complex and vast for our central organization to handle alone. An ALIPAC activist should seek a good blend between personal activism pursuits and ALIPAC's planned focus campaigns. However, please realize that when a call for help is posted in Announcements and/or goes out by e-mail, everyone is expected to orient on those goals. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT EVERYONE FOCUSES ON THE ALERTS WHEN CALLED AND THAT PROGRESS REPORTS, QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK, AND ENCOURAGEMENTS ARE POSTED IN THE WORKING THREADS.

Step 3 Walk vs. Talk, and getting the work done. As in most things in life, when the tough work comes around there are certain people that will be scarce. We have seen it a million times here at ALIPAC. Some people are all about talk, instead of the walk. ALIPAC is for the work horses, not the show horses. Power goes to those who show up. Influence goes to those who get the work done. It's not like ALIPAC asks people to get up and lift weights, carry boxes, or run around the block. Most of our requests involve a few dollars or a few minutes of time and short conversations and pushes of buttons. Is this really to much to ask of anyone to save our nation from what illegal immigration is doing to us? When the alerts are called, we need you to fall into formation, learn and know what to do, make posts in the open to show you and others you are responding to our requests. If you fail to muster behind our email alerts or just cherry pick the ones you really get excited about then our team is going to get clobbered and our win record is going to fall into complete disarray. It is fine to have everyone running around doing their own thing, but when the alerts are called we must fly in formation or the Open Borders Lobby is going to plow us under. Our opposition has vast amounts of money and influence. We have the numbers and favor of the public. Should our responsive numbers fall, we are lost and will lose terribly. The outcome depends on how many of you focus when called.

Step 4: Checking In We need more of our supporters to use, read, know, and utilize the information and resources they find here at ALIPAC. ALIPAC.us maintains the largest archive of information in existence. At a bare minimum, we want our supporters to check and read the homepage articles every few days, if not daily. We want people to discuss, forward, circulate, and post links into the materials we post on the homepage. If you have a little more time, please review the Discussion Groups announcements and polls section or the news section for more involvement. If you have the time and motivation, please explore our Discussion Groups area and consider becoming a core online activist who interacts with the ALIPAC website on a strong and regular basis.
These are our Level 1 "The Basics" activism suggestions for ALIPACers. Many of these will seem remedial to some of you, but please read and sign in here and we will proceed to Level 2 soon.
William Gheen President,
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC
www.alipac.us

Saturday, August 29, 2009

TED KENNEDY'S PRIVATE PARTS: PART I

A very interesting archived post from Ann Coulter at www.anncoulter.com! I encourage you to click the links.!

TED KENNEDY'S PRIVATE PARTS: PART I
August 31, 2005
Sen. Teddy Kennedy has demanded that the Bush administration waive attorney-client privilege and release internal memos John Roberts worked on while in the solicitor general's office 15 years ago, all of which were supposed to be held in the deepest confidence. Apparently, Kennedy thinks public officials have no right to keep even their attorney-client communications secret.

This surprised me because the senator is such a strong advocate of the (nonexistent) "right to privacy." And not just in the way most drunken, Spanish quiz-cheating, no-pants-wearing public reprobates generally cherish their own personal right to privacy. I mean privacy in the abstract.

I know as much about the "right to privacy" as I know about any other made-up, nonexistent right, but I would have thought that any "right to privacy" would protect confidential attorney-client conversations at least as much as, say, abortions in public buildings.
But I'll have to defer to the expert.
Consequently, applying the principle even-handedly to members of the executive branch as well as the legislative branch, I demand that Kennedy immediately waive all attorney-client privilege relating to his communications with his lawyer after he drove Mary Jo Kopechne off the bridge at Chappaquiddick. It's time to clear up, once and for all, the many questions that have swirled around Kennedy since Chappaquiddick.
Oops — "swirled" may have been a poor choice of words there. How about "floated"? Nope. "Surfaced"? Oooh — even worse, in terms of irony. "Come to light"? OK, now I'm just being obtuse. "Beset"? Yes, that's better. Youth is no defense. John Roberts was 26 years old when he wrote the documents that Kennedy demands on behalf of the Senate. Kennedy was 36 when he drove Mary Jo Kopechne off a bridge. If the Senate needs to know what Roberts thought about the law at age 26, then the Senate certainly needs to know what Kennedy thought about the law at age 36, when he drowned a girl and then spent the rest of the evening concocting an alibi instead of calling the police.
This isn't a "rehash" of Chappaquiddick; it's never been hashed. The Senate needs to know whether Kennedy was guilty of manslaughter. How else can the Senate be expected to carry out its constitutional duty to expel Kennedy unless Kennedy makes these key documents available?
We'll pick them up in the same van we send to collect John Kerry's military records and Bill Clinton's medical records. While we wait, here's my guess as to what those attorney-client conversations sounded like, based on the facts in Leo Damore's book "Senatorial Privilege: The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up": Interview with client Teddy Kennedy, July 19, 1969:
Teddy: May I approach the bench?
Lawyer: It's not a bench, Teddy. It's my desk. And no, you can't have another Chivas Regal. Teddy: (Hiccup)
Lawyer: Let's start at the beginning.
Teddy: I'm going to say you were driving.
Lawyer: No, you are not saying I was driving.
Teddy: OK, someone in your family was driving.
Lawyer: They weren't even in Massachusetts that week. Can we move on? Why didn't you call the police after the accident, Teddy?
Teddy: I had to protect my political career, obviously. But this wasn't just about me! I was thinking about future drunk, philandering U.S. senators who may or may not have just drowned some chick they met at a party.
Lawyer: But what about Mary Jo — Teddy: Yes, precisely! How would it look if I, a United States senator, were driving off to a secluded beach at midnight with a beautiful, nubile female after a private party? How would that look?
Lawyer: But Mary Jo was still alive for two hours —
Teddy: Did I mention my wife was pregnant? You think I should have reported the accident now, Mr. Smartypants?
Lawyer: She was trapped in that car, struggling to breathe!
Teddy: Do you know that two of my brothers were assassinated?
Lawyer: She was still alive! You could have saved her!
Teddy: Yeah, and say goodbye to my presidential ambitions. There was the future of the country to consider — as well as the future of the Chivas Regal company and all their employees. I am a Kennedy. I have a divine right to the presidency. I had to put that ahead of my lawyer's conscience. Anyway, Mary Jo was driving.
Lawyer: Teddy, we can't say Mary Jo was driving.
Teddy: What if some phony witness claimed that the driver stopped to ask for directions. Wouldn't that prove it was a woman driving?
Lawyer: But what about the witnesses?
Teddy: We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Hey, what's so funny? Did I just say something funny?

To be continued ...

Continued here http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=75

Friday, August 28, 2009

The TeaPartyExpress.org Tour Schedule


Below is the schedule of the Tea Party Express. For more information, click the locations below or http://www.teapartyexpress.org/ !
August 28
Sacramento, CA - 12:00 noon

Reno/Sparks, NV - 5:30pm
--> -->August 29
Winnemucca, NV - 12:30pm•

Elko, NV - 4:30pm
--> -->August 30
Ely, NV - 11:30am

--> -->--> -->--> -->--> -->August 31

Las Vegas, NV - 11:00am

Flagstaff, AZ - 6:00pm

--> -->--> -->September 1

Albuquerque, NM - 1:00pm

Las Cruces, NM - 6:30pm

--> -->--> -->September 2

El Paso, TX - 10:00am

--> -->September 3

San Antonio, TX - 11:00am

Waco, TX - 5:00pm

--> -->September 4

Dallas, TX - 11:00am


Little Rock, AR - 6:00pm

Memphis, TN - 10:00pm

--> -->--> -->September 5

Lousiville, KY - 5:30pm

--> -->--> -->September 6

Bloomington, IN - 11:00am


--> -->--> -->September 7

Joliet, IL - 10:00am


Battle Creek, MI - 7:30pm

--> -->--> -->September 8

Jackson, MI - 12:00 noon

Brighton, MI - 3:30pm

Troy, MI - 6:30pm

--> -->--> -->September 9

Canton, OH - 10:00am


Johnstown, PA - 6:00pm

--> -->--> -->September 10

Scranton, PA - 12:00 noon

Albany, NY - 5:30pm

--> -->--> -->September 11

Hartford, CT - 10:00am

Bridgeport, CT - 1:30pm

Toms River, NJ - 6:00pm

--> -->
Ends at www.912dc.org

The TeaPartyExpress.org Tour Schedule

Below is the schedule of the Tea Party Express. For more information, click the locations below or http://www.teapartyexpress.org/ !


Sacramento, CA - 12:00 noon
Reno/Sparks, NV - 5:30pm --> -->
Winnemucca, NV - 12:30pm
Elko, NV - 4:30pm --> -->
Ely, NV - 11:30am --> -->
--> -->
--> -->
--> -->
Las Vegas, NV - 11:00am
Flagstaff, AZ - 6:00pm --> -->
--> -->
Albuquerque, NM - 1:00pm
Las Cruces, NM - 6:30pm --> -->
--> -->
El Paso, TX - 10:00am --> -->
San Antonio, TX - 11:00am
Waco, TX - 5:00pm --> -->
Dallas, TX - 11:00am
"Whistle Stop" Rally, TX - 2:45pm
Little Rock, AR - 6:00pm
Memphis, TN - 10:00pm --> -->
--> -->
Lousiville, KY - 5:30pm --> -->
--> -->
Bloomington, IN - 11:00am
Champaign/Bloomington, IL - 5:00pm --> -->
--> -->
Joliet, IL - 10:00am
South Bend/Mishawaka, IN - 4:30pm
Battle Creek, MI - 7:30pm --> -->
--> -->
Jackson, MI - 12:00 noon
Brighton, MI - 3:30pm
Troy, MI - 6:30pm --> -->
--> -->
Canton, OH - 10:00am
Pittsburgh/Cranberry Township, PA - 2:30pm
Johnstown, PA - 6:00pm --> -->
--> -->
Scranton, PA - 12:00 noon
Albany, NY - 5:30pm --> -->
--> -->
Hartford, CT - 10:00am
Bridgeport, CT - 1:30pm
Toms River, NJ - 6:00pm --> -->
Ends at www.912dc.org
--> -->

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Ted Kennedy: “destroyed the greatest country that ever was” - Old Atlantic Lighthouse

Another obituary. This one is from http://blog.vdare.com/

26 August 2009
Ted Kennedy: “destroyed the greatest country that ever was” - Old Atlantic Lighthouse
[Patrick Cleburne]
As far as I can make out, no Conservative leader has had the courage or brains to dissent in the MSM from the tidal wave of drivel being poured out about Senator Edward Kennedy. Orrin Hatch has made a fool of himself - again.
So, as so often nowadays, the task of being serious devolves to the Blogosphere. Old Atlantic Lighthouse has risen to the challenge.
Ted Kennedy legacy median wages same 1973 August 26, 2009is another of OAL’s trademark briefing books. This one deals with Kennedy’s historical significance:
Kennedy’s legacy is 3rd world immigration that is bankrupting the country. He destroyed the greatest country that ever was. But he had many helpers…
Ted Sorensen ghost wrote Nation of Immigrants for Jack Kennedy. But it fed into their Irish Catholic resentment of Wasps. Their revenge are the above statistics. Obama has the same revenge need. Medicare, Social Security, safe communities all are being lost to immigration. That immigration comes from envy, resentment and hate. Same with affirmative action.

(We at VDARE.com are so accustomed to furiously patriotic Catholics, who could easily man the site with no other help, that it is useful to remember the alternative reaction exists.)
A usual, Old Atlantic Lighthouse’s portfolio of links would adequately equip any Patriot to handle public discussion of this disastrous man
Included is an incisive essay from the British National Party’s website:America’s Greatest Traitor Dies by BNP News August 26,2009
Modern America’s greatest traitor, Edward Kennedy, has died, after nearly destroying European America. He leaves behind a scandalous political career which was laced with lurid tales of drugs, sexual abuse and moral degeneracy
Which is a very well informed discussion of Kennedy’s
attempts to utterly destroy the country of his birth.

As I said this morning, this lie about the 1965 Immigration Act should be his epitaph:
“First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same… Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset…. Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia….
In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.”
Death is no excuse.

VDARE.com: Blog Articles — proudly powered by WordPressThe articles on VDARE.com are brought to you by the VDare Foundation.We are supported by generous donations from our readers.

The First Thing We Do, Let’s Abolish The Hispanics!

A very interesting post on Preferences from http://www.vdare.com/ 's Steve Sailer, author of America's Half Blood Prince as it says at the end of this post.

The First Thing We Do, Let’s Abolish The Hispanics!
By Steve Sailer
As Peter Brimelow and Edwin S. Rubenstein pointed out in their 1997 National Review cover story Electing a New People, the demographic changes ushered in by the 1965 Immigration Act and the simultaneous collapse of immigration controls portend major trouble for the Republican Party (if anyone cares) and, more seriously, for America.
I will be writing a number of VDARE.COM columns on this fundamental topic in coming weeks.
First, though, Republicans/ Americans need to grasp that the conventional wisdom that they must never speak out on demography—race and ethnicity—was invented by their enemies to defeat them.
John McCain, for instance, followed the Main Stream Media’s advice on these topics slavishly. How’d that work out for him?
Conversely, the decline in Barack Obama’s political fortunes over the last three months has been the result of the President’s reflexive reactions undermining David Axelrod’s carefully-constructed campaign image of him as the post-racial transcender. (I deconstructed this myth in my America’s Half-Blood Prince: Barack Obama’s "Story Of Race And Inheritance")
Obama chose to interject race back into politics—first by his nomination of Affirmative Action beneficiary Sonia Sotomayor of Ricci case notoriety; then by his obviously heartfelt but disastrous intervention in the ludicrous Skip Gates affair, and finally by his announcement in Guadalajara of his timetable for illegal immigrant amnesty.
Obama shot himself in the foot by raising the fundamental question of all politics—Whose side are you on?—just as he was asking voters to trust him on the infinitely complex health bill.
Moral: a key for the Republicans is to get Obama, and the Democrats in general, talking about race and ethnicity at every opportunity.
Like we do at VDARE.COM!
OK, now I’ll make my first modest proposal for dealing with demographic doom:
Let’s abolish the Hispanics!
(If you don’t get it, that’s a disguised allusion to Shakespeare’s to Dick the Butcher’s famous line about lawyers in Henrv VI, part II, act IV, scene ii. Lines 84-84 http://shakespeare.mit.edu/2henryvi/full.html#speech40)
Not literally, of course. I mean the “ethnicity”. I am suggesting a fairly novel policy for halting the Hispanic ethnic political juggernaut that we hear so much about: a national campaign for Ethnic Equality.
Although we are constantly instructed in the teeth of all the evidence that race is “just a social construct”, the reality is that “Hispanic” ethnicity is certainly less of a natural inevitability. Instead, it’s just a bureaucratic construct of the Nixon Administration’s Office of Management and Budget.
While the government allows all individuals to self-identify as a member of a wide selection of races (including “Guamanian or Chamorro” on the 2000 Census short form), it only recognizes a single ethnicity: Hispanic. Nobody else is allowed an ethnicity. All others get lumped together as a nullity: merely Non-Hispanics.
As the Census Bureau says in Racial and Ethnic Classifications Used in Census 2000 and Beyond: “There are also two minimum categories for ethnicity: Hispanic or Latino and Not Hispanic or Latino”.
The Bureau tried to explain its system in 2003:
Race and Hispanic origin are two separate concepts in the federal statistical system.
People who are Hispanic may be of any race.
People in each race group may be either Hispanic or Not Hispanic.
Each person has two attributes, their race (or races) and whether or not they are Hispanic.
The Census Bureau’s arcane delineation of ethnicity turns out to be crucially important, both in the job market and in politics, because numbers count. Most quotas today are the result of the threat of discrimination lawsuits over statistical disparities in performance rather than lawsuits over actual discrimination. That can only be done if numbers are collected.
Ethnicity may seem like race’s seemingly boring little brother. But those granted an ethnicity are blessed with privileges, such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s presumption that they are being illegally discriminated against when their hiring rate is less than “Four-Fifths” as high as that of any other legally recognized group. This leads to covert hiring quotas, weakened standards, and other gimmicks that benefit members of the One True Ethnicity at the expense of the unprotected.
Simple fairness demands that the state instead acknowledge either everybody’s ethnicity (just as the government counts virtually everybody’s race) or nobody’s ethnicity (just as it counts nobody’s religion).
In particular, with the 2010 Census approaching, Americans’ attention should be focused upon ethnicity. The federal government’s indefensible definition of ethnicity is a very weak link in the chain holding together Obama’s divisive Diversity Coalition. Ethnicity should be a timely issue to raise in time for the November 2010 elections.
How is this unequal treatment of Hispanic vs. “other” ethnicities morally or politically defensible?
It’s not.
Especially because the beneficiaries of this bureaucratic construct and the concomitant quota spoils system are primarily post-1965 immigrants (many of them illegal) or their descendents—people who chose America, warts and all.
Because it’s indefensible, almost nobody ever defends the federal government’s ethnicity system.
Unfortunately, almost nobody ever attacks the current ethnicity system either.
For decades, opponents of racial and ethnic preferences have mostly ignored ethnic preferences for Hispanics while obstinately butting their heads against preferences’ emotional bastion: special breaks for blacks.
To be frank, preferences for the descendants of slaves are more or less the Slavery Tax, a drawn-out form of reparations that white Americans could very well wind up paying forever.
But when the Nixon Administration formalized racial preferences for blacks in 1969, there was roughly one potential beneficiary for every eight white benefactors—a costly burden, but not an unbearable one.
What America can’t afford in the long run, however, are ethnic preferences for fast-growing immigrant groups. The Census Bureau projects that Hispanics will increase by 97 million from 2000 to 2050. Among 15 to 19 year olds in 2050, there would be 99 Hispanic legal beneficiaries of ethnic preferences for every 100 non-Hispanic white benefactors.
How is that supposed to work?
Answer: it won’t. It’s nuts. But almost nobody has stopped to think about it. It’s just been assumed that “ethnic” preferences automatically tag along with their big brother, racial preferences.
Yet why should that be? After all, there are no religious preferences in American law. Yet, for example, as Pat Buchanan among others has pointed out, Catholics are seriously underrepresented in the Ivy League. [Our Self-Selecting Elite, by Patrick J. Buchanan, January 1, 1999]
Thus Robert Weissberg’s excellent August 23, 2009 VDARE.com column—Is The Affirmative Action Frankenstein On Its Last Legs?—makes a powerful case against racial and ethnic preferences, but most of his examples attack racial quotas for blacks, even though ethnic preferences for immigrants rest on much shakier political grounds.
Granted, in the past, ethnic preferences have been less economically debilitating than racial preferences, for three reasons:
Latinos don’t need quite as much of a thumb on the scale as blacks do. (For example, in the latest average SAT scores released today, Hispanics trailed whites by 75 points on the Math SAT, which is 68 percent as large as the white-black gap of 110 points.
Latinos have been less aggressive than blacks about pushing into sit-down jobs and about filing disparate impact lawsuits. (But Hispanic activists are strenuously laboring to assimilate Latinos toward African-American norms.)
Until earlier in this decade, African-Americans outnumbered Latinos.
Still, the tide is turning. The California mortgage meltdown, in which Hispanic homebuyers played the largest role in defaults, indicates this clearly. By 2050, according to the Census Bureau, there will be about three times as many Hispanics in America as there were blacks in America in 2000, so the cost of Hispanic preferences will be enormous.
Moreover, the political costs of assaulting racial preferences directly are much greater than taking on ethnic preferences. The media, for example, finds blacks fascinating but Mexicans boring.
Moreover, the implications of the legal existence of this pan-Hispanic ethnicity are as dire in politics as in economics.
For instance, earlier this month, we were told over and over that the Republican Party had permanently sealed its fate when 31 of the 40 GOP Senators voted against Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina (wise or otherwise) Supreme Court justice.
Hispanics will never forget, thundered reporters’ sources (who were, typically, Hispanic politicians, political consultants, marketers and others who make their livings out of being Hispanic).
It’s not clear, though, that many Mexicans even noticed.
Sotomayor is a “Nuyorican”, a Puerto Rican born in New York. (Her self-identification, all by itself, is an example of the failure of the post-1965 American assimilative mechanism).
A high school teacher in Nevada tells me that he brought up Sotomayor’s nomination a half-dozen times to his mostly Mexican students:
“Normally, the students instantly seize every opportunity to get me off task and onto what teachers call a “bird walk.” But each time I mentioned Sotomayor, I was greeted with blank stares. One boy did say that he heard she was from Cuba, but that was about it for a response. The students even seemed happy when I went back to drawing diagrams on the blackboard.”
These Mexican kids’ reaction is perfectly natural. None of them have any Puerto Rican relatives.
The Hispanic electoral tidal wave you always hear about actually consists of an artificial agglomeration of people who don’t share the elemental ties of race, looks, national origin, cuisine—or even language (Linda Chavez's son was placed in “bilingual” i.e. Spanish-language classes by public school bureaucrats simply because his first name was Pablo. Chavez’ family have not spoken Spanish for generations.)
In fact, many “Hispanics” dislike each other due to national, racial and class divides. Honduras, for example, was invaded by El Salvador in 1967 after a World Cup qualifying soccer game. Thousands died. And, as the recent coup in Honduras showed once again, Latin Americans are sorely divided along overlapping lines of race and class. Just ask Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez—he’ll tell you!
What “Hispanics” do share now is legal privilege. By granting Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, Paraguayans etc. etc. preferences for being “Hispanic”, Nixon and the federal bureaucracy conjured up a pan-Hispanic political class dedicated to uniting together to defend this special treatment. As Peter Brimelow wrote in Alien Nation back in 1995:
"Symptomatic of the American anti-idea: the emergence of a strange anti-nation inside the United States—the so-called "Hispanics". [Page 218]
As long as Hispanic preferences exist, this Hispanic elite will side overwhelmingly with the party more favorable to affirmative action, the Democrats.
Thus, while Republicans typically lose about 2 to 1 among Latino voters, they are outnumbered 12 to 1 among Latino elected officials.
From the perspective of the long-term health of the Republican Party, the only solution is to abolish “ethnic” preferences—and the sooner the better.
Of course, as Christopher Caldwell has noted in his recent book Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West:
"One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can't be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can't be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong."
Nevertheless, decisive action can declaw and defund a seemingly powerful lobby. For example, for 30 years “bilingual” educators grew more numerous and better organized off the taxpayers’ money. Essentially no politicians, least of all the hapless California GOP, dared take on this ever-growing lobby. In 1998, though, Ron Unz’s Proposition 227 put the abolition of bilingual education directly to the voters of California. And they agreed with Unz 61-39.
With the bilingual Ed lobby’s myth of inevitable triumph punctured, the Bush Administration’s 2001 No Child Left Behind Act—otherwise so softheaded—cut back on bilingualism’s federal mandates. Today, bilingual Ed is far from dead, but Unz’s well-placed blow has left it close to dead in the water politically.
How should we offer Ethnic Equality?
· Either—everybody should be allowed to choose an ethnicity—Italian, Okinawan, German, Guatemalan, Barbadian, Navajo, or whatever—and all laws and regulations, including the Four-Fifths Rule should apply equally to all ethnicities.
(Administratively, data collection would be simple: the Census Bureau currently asks about “ancestry”, which could simply be renamed “ethnicity”.)
· OR—nobody should have a legally recognized ethnicity. Ethnicity would be treated by the government like religion, rather than like race.
You can win a discrimination lawsuit over disparate treatment due to your religion, but you can’t win one based on disparate statistical impact on your co-religionists. Hence, there are no religious quotas.
Note that the public doesn’t have to understand the concept of “disparate impact”. (How many New York Times columnists do you think understand it?) All that voters need is to have an opinion on the unfairness of one ethnicity being more equal than all other ethnicities.
And unfairness is something that people can’t help having feelings about.
Which form of Ethnic Equality should we have: Ethnicity for Everybody or for Nobody?
Well, in the spirit of bipartisanship upon which Barack Obama ran for President, I think we should let him should make the choice between Everybody and Nobody.
What could be more just than that? It’s like when you have to divide one desert between two children. The fairest way is to announce that one will cut and the other will pick which piece he wants.
To make the deal even better, I’d go so far as to offer the President a historic compromise: permanent racial preferences for the descendants of American slaves (and for tribally registered American Indians, while we’re at it) in return for Ethnic Equality.
Mr. Obama, you can achieve a historic victory for the black race, you can fulfill the “dreams from your father”, just by choosing either Ethnicity for Everybody or Ethnicity for Nobody.
Take your time, Mr. President. Talk it over with the public! Let’s have a national conversation on ethnic preferences!
After all, as an old discrimination lawyer, that’s your field of professional expertise.
Seriously…taking preferences away from Hispanics in return for preserving them for blacks is the last thing David Axelrod wants Obama to talk about—an “alliance of the diverse” always threatens to dissolve into an oxymoron (which is exactly why making him talk about it should be a GOP priority).
The Republicans are never going to win a majority of Latinos. But they can definitely point out dispiriting reasons for Hispanics to not trust black Democratic politicians.
For years, the Main Stream Media promoted the assumption that the GOP must increase its share of minority votes to survive.
But achieving that’s unlikely (which is why the MSM recommends it). A more plausible strategy is for the GOP to mobilize a higher white turnout and get a greater share of the white vote, while diluting minority voting through a divide and conquer strategy emphasizing issues that spotlight minorities’ conflicting interests.
Of course, in 2008, McCain managed to do the exact opposite by running away from all racial and ethnic issues, thus deflating the white turnout rate, while Obama excited a broad increase in turnout among nonwhites.
Question: What if Obama picks the “Ethnicity for Everybody” option? Then the EEOC’s idiotic Four-Fifths Rule for determining disparate impact would have to be applied to scores of different ethnicities—which we couldn’t possibly afford?
My answer: Of course you’re right. We couldn’t afford it.
Still, you have to admit, the unaffordability of disparate impact is an excellent topic for public discussion. If applying disparate impact law to a majority of Americans would bankrupt the country now, wouldn’t it also bankrupt the country in the future when whites are a minority?
Don’t worry, though. Obama can’t pick the “Ethnicity for Everybody” option.
Why not?
Because Jewish groups would figure out that, if “Everybody” gets an ethnicity legally protected from disparate impact, that would squeeze Jews very badly.
Jewish neoconservatives took the lead in fighting racial quotas in the 1970s. They saw them as posing the same threat to Jewish success as did the quotas limiting Jewish admissions to the Ivy League in the 1920s. Moreover, many Jews back in the 1970s had lower-level civil service jobs, such as the public school teachers who were threatened by black political empowerment—witness the ferocious late 1960s Ocean Hill-Brownsville black-Jewish showdown in which black politicians in Brooklyn tried to fire hundreds of Jewish teachers.
About a decade or so ago, however, neocon flagship Commentary Magazine largely lost enthusiasm for decrying racial quotas. (Search “Affirmative Action” on Commentary’s website here). Perhaps that was because the editors realized that Jews have largely moved on to higher level jobs where preferences typically aren’t yet sizable enough to threaten Jewish primacy. Or perhaps they figured out that nobody would dare propose applying quotas to Jews, even if there was a quota on whites overall. (Ask Commentary).
But this is exactly what the “Everybody” Option, applying the Four-Fifths Rule to white ethnicities, would do.
Emphatically, it would not be good for the Jews.
These calculations would therefore drive Jewish opinion toward what is actually the best solution: the “Nobody” option, in which ethnicity is treated like religion, not race.
Instructive parallel: in 1956, when the Census Bureau announced it would ask Americans about their religion in its next survey, it was Jewish organizations who objected so strongly that the plan was scrapped.
Revitalizing Jewish opposition to preferences and quotas would be decisive.
Deconstructing Nixon’s legal concoction of Hispanic ethnicity certainly won’t eliminate all the problems caused by mass immigration from south of the border.
But it would be a start.
Abolishing the “Hispanic” ethnicity from government purview would be good for America, good for the GOP—and bad for Barack Obama.
What’s not to like?

[Steve Sailer (email him) is movie critic for The American Conservative. His website http://www.isteve.blogspot.com/ features his daily blog. His new book, AMERICA’S HALF-BLOOD PRINCE: BARACK OBAMA’S "STORY OF RACE AND INHERITANCE", is available here.]

The End of the Kennedys?

Another obituary about Ted Kennedy from http://www.badeagle.com/ See also http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2009/08/read-this-one-in-memoriam-senator.html for another take on this.

The End of the Kennedys?
by David Yeagley · August 26, 2009
“The Democrats need to reorganize their whole party,” I once charitably remarked to my elderly Comanche mother. “Well, they’ll have to get rid of Ted Kennedy,” she replied. “Get rid of the Kennedys.”
But, as Chris Matthews has already opined, Obama is the last Kennedy brother. Why, we’ll never be rid of the Kennedys. The liberal Democrats idolize them, dead or alive. Ted himself bestowed the mantle on “Obama” back in January, 2008, after Caroline Kennedy had already endorsed the alien. Liberals swooned. And CBS/AP reported:

Two generations of Kennedys - the Democratic Party’s best-known political family - endorsed Barack Obama for president on Monday, with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy calling him a “man with extraordinary gifts of leadership and character,” a worthy heir to his assassinated brother.
So, all the treachery, the Communism, the anti-Americanism, the sheer self-aggrandizing liberalism of a career liar we associate with the alien “Barack Hussein Obama” (Barry Soetoro) is to be attributed to John F. Kennedy? This is Ted Kennedy’s assessment, declaration, and last will and testament?
In this Jan. 23, 2007, file photo, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., left, and Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. watch President Bush’s State of the Union address on Capitol Hill in Washington. Kennedy will endorse Obama for president, party officials confirmed on Sunday, Jan. 27, 2008. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Ted Kennedy, who evaded conviction for murder (in the Chappaquiddick case), is now himself removed from the scene. At the age of 77, Ted Kennedy passed on.
Ted Kennedy, after the drowning of Mary Jo Kopechne.

Perfect timing for Obama. “Providential,” the Democrat devotees are sure. They can try to pass the health reform bill now under the ’saintly’ auspices of Ted. It will be “The Ted Kennedy Health Reform Bill.”
Himself the heir of a big-time Irish ganster’s bootlegger fortune (according to Dope, Inc.) Ted Kennedy was always bent on twisting American values into some demented European socialist labor uprising. The multi-millionaire of ill-gotten gain was always campaigning for the ‘little guy,’ the ‘forgotten worker,’ as if the American population was in some perpetual state of inebriation after working in a factory for 16 hours–much like the Irish immigrants of the 19th century.

What a legacy, indeed. There’s ethnic pride for you, for weal or woe.
But I don’t rejoice in his death. I lament his life. I don’t dance on his grave. That’s for Democrats–who are constantly looking for a new gig to prop up their boy Barry (who is constantly sinking). I decry the influence of Ted Kennedy’s life. He represents everything that’s really un-American. His political concepts were as alien as Barry’s professional name, “Barack Hussein Obama.” And, through blind emotionalism and sentimentalism, Ted Kennedy’s influence will remain strong, no doubt.

However, the way Barry Soetoro burns up ‘political capital,’ the way he foolishly squanders the unlimited powers given him by the Democrats, perhaps Ted Kennedy’s actual political influence will wane after all. Barry wastes political favor as profligately as he spends imaginary money. He is immature to the point of abandonment. He has no experience whatsoever as a leader, or even a politician. He first road the waves created by white liberals for the American Negro. Now he has to make his own waves–borrowing completely from white liberals.

And yet he hates whites. I’m sure Barry hates the Kennedys. His appointment of someone like Eric Holder as Attorney General shows just how deep his hated is of the white race, of white America, and of white government. Barry and company are doing everything they can to destroy what white men have made. Their target is the United States of America. That is the prize for the black power mongers. That is the goal of the black politician: destroy what white men created. “Change” is the word they use, but they mean seek and destroy. It is black revenge. Black people at large may not ascribe to any such demonic purpose, but, they seem to be blindly following, like a giant herd of black sheep.

Ted Kennedy is gone, but, having blessed Barry Soetoro, the alien, (a.k.a. “Barack Hussein Obama”), Kennedy’s true values are apparent. His true legacy is evident. This is an awesome epigraph. Yet, is it obviously true and appropriate. It his his last will and testament: Barry’s pure racist anti-Americanism is the legacy of the Kennedy family. It is low, mean, and in the street, with the European gangster origins of the Kennedy family.
http://www.badeagle.com/2009/08/26/the-end-of-the-kennedys/

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Read This One - In Memoriam Senator Edward M. Kennedy—Joe’s Early Obituary

A post from Joe Guzzardi of Edward M. Kennedy's death from www.vdare.com

August 07, 2009
In Memoriam Senator Edward M. Kennedy—Joe’s Early Obituary
By Joe Guzzardi
When word leaked out that the Associated Press wrote Britney Spears’ obituary in December 2007, the news caused a minor debate among journalists. [Exclusive: The AP Has Written Britney Spears’ Obituary, US Magazine, January 17, 2008]
While writing early obits about famous figures like Frank Sinatra or Ted Williams who are old or in poor health is common, the feeling in some quarters is that premature death notices about young personalities like the 26-year-old Spears is ghoulish.
AP defended its action by correctly saying that the singer was an emotional wreck who could at any moment commit suicide or, given her terrible driving record, pile her car into a telephone pole.
Obviously, Spears’ obituary was never published.
But I’m not going to let the risk of bad taste accusations stop me from posting my obituary of the still-living Edward M. Kennedy. I’m quite certain our loyal VDARE.COM readers will not be offended.
Kennedy, of course, was the floor manager of the 1965 Immigration Act, which unleashed mass immigration again after a forty-year lull in which there was virtually no immigration at all. He gave the most explicit assurances that this would not happen, but it did, and he has never shown the least remorse. In fact, he was a key ally of the Bush Administration in its efforts to amnesty illegals and further expand legal immigration.
And over the span of several years, our letter writers have been at least as critical of Kennedy as VDARE.COM’s editorial collective.

  • Here’s a sampling.
    A California lawyer recalled when Kennedy cheated on a basic Spanish test while a Harvard undergraduate.
    A Maryland blogger reminded us that as much as Kennedy loves refugees, you won’t find any on Martha’s Vineyard.
    A Colorado photographer found Kennedy’s philandering with women half his age disgusting
    A New Jersey programmer speculated that Kennedy is one of few Americans who don’t have to wait in emergency rooms. His beloved illegal aliens have overcrowded hospital waiting rooms making delays inevitable for citizens
    A Massachusetts reader confirmed that Kennedy didn’t have to wait—but her sister did.
    A Michigan Roman Catholic wondered why Kennedy’s immigration enthusiasm wasn’t dampened when Sirhan Sirhan killed his brother Bobby.
    An Arizona senior citizen doesn’t understand why Kennedy’s Senate colleagues admire him.
    A Nevada reader thinks that Kennedy has little influence outside New England.
    An Alabama reader called Kennedy a "bloated leech" and a "limousine liberal."
    A Texas Reader said the Irish illegally in America who can’t get amnesty should blame Kennedy for his role in the 1965 Immigration Act that gave preference to the Third World residents over white Europeans.

By all accounts, Kennedy is near his end. The tabloids, chillingly accurate in their death predictions, give him a few weeks at the most.
One year ago when the announcement came that Kennedy’s inoperable brain tumor put him on the death watch list, immigration reform patriots found themselves in the awkward position of having compassion for a fellow human suffering from terminal cancer and quiet relief that one of our worst enemies would no longer take his Senate seat to vote in favor of keeping the alien floodgates open.
Not many of us, I’m sorry to surmise, prayed for Kennedy’s miraculous and speedy recovery.
As I wrote in my May 2008 column, Kennedy has lived a blessed life that began at birth and continued right up to his last days. No matter Kennedy’s sexual, boozy transgressions, most Americans always found a way to forgive him.

Kennedy’s first political opponent, 1962 Senate candidate Edward McCormack summed up Teddy best: "If your name was simply Edward Moore instead of Edward Moore Kennedy, your candidacy would be a joke." [The Ascent of Ted Kennedy, Time Magazine, January 10, 1969]

Only five years after Kennedy trounced McCormack, the new Senator’s wealth, fame and connections allowed him, infamously and unjustly, to avoid a vehicular manslaughter charge related to Mary Jo Kopechne’s tragic death.
Kennedy’s plea to a lesser charge of leaving the scene of an accident resulted in a suspended sentence.
During the four decades since Chappaquiddick, Kennedy has never been able to convince the public or investigative reporters to believe the hole-filled story he told the day afterwards. [Fortieth Anniversary of Mary Jo Kopechne’s Drowning at Chappaquiddick...Kennedy’s Story Still Doubtful, by Dave Gibson, Examiner.com, July 17, 2009]

While Mary Jo Kopechne is the female most often associated with Kennedy, she is not the only woman whose life he ended. His first wife Joan, an accomplished pianist with a master’s degree in education, also fell victim to Kennedy’s destructive ways.

Joan was part-time model used in television commercials by Coca-Cola and Revlon. Kennedy men nicknamed Joan "The Dish" because of her striking looks. But her sheltered upbringing in upscale Riverdale, NY did not prepare Joan for her future life as a Kennedy.
During her 24-year marriage, Joan miscarried three times including one child in the aftermath of the Chappaquiddick tragedy.
The cause of her third loss may have been that Joan, confined to bed during her latest pregnancy, nevertheless dutifully attended Kopechne’s funeral and Teddy’s court appearance three days later.
Summarizing the Chappaquiddick experience that she believes started her deep personal decline, Joan told Laurence Leamer, the author of The Kennedy Women, "For a few months everyone had to put on this show, and then I just didn't care anymore. I just saw no future. That's when I truly became an alcoholic." [The Fall of Joan, by Michelle McPhee and Dave Wedge, Boston Magazine, August 2005]
What followed for Joan were several public incidents of drunkenness and DWIs. As a result of her ongoing struggles with alcohol, her three children were eventually granted legal guardianship.
Since Joan’s parents had also been alcoholics, no one can determine with certainty what role Teddy may have played in Joan’s tragic downfall. But we can be sure that life with Teddy might have precipitated Joan’s decline from a young woman who was once described by Leamer as "a total innocent" to a falling-down street drunk.
I have written a frank account of Kennedy’s failings which mainstream posthumous tributes will gloss over.
However, I must warn you that maudlin Kennedy obituaries have already started. Last month, HBO broadcast it 90-minute documentary titled Teddy: In His Own Words.
In its promotion for the special HBO advertised it this way:
"...deftly combines the Senator's own voice culled from past commentary, speeches and public and private sources with archival newsreel and television footage, iconic photographs and rarely seen archival footage, such as home movies and photographs, to tell the sweeping saga of Teddy Kennedy.
"What emerges is a portrait of a crusader who has kept his eye on the most important public goals, from civil rights and desegregation to minimum wage and health reform, despite a series of personal tragedies and crises.
"As the film shows, none of these setbacks derailed his career, and the rejuvenating bonds he shares with members of his illustrious family continue to this day."

If you share my interest in presidential political history, you’ll enjoy HBO’s perspective especially as it pertains to John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
And you’ll get a timely laugh out of Kennedy’s 1978 prediction that the Democrats under his leadership would bring national health care to Americans.
But to call Kennedy a "crusader," or a "minimum wage" and "civil rights activist" is ridiculously far off the mark.
Kennedy "crusaded" for illegal immigration (he promotes it in two different clips in the HBO special) which directly conflicts with the interests of working Americans and keeps the minimum wage at artificially low levels.
Illegal immigration also hurt black Americans by limiting their access to blue collar jobs. That’s hardly the route a true civil rights "crusader" would take.
In addition, Kennedy voted for every non-immigrant worker visa bill put in front of him.

And as far as Kennedy’s "illustrious family" goes, VDARE.COM readers have weighed on this subject also.
A retired New York government worker found Caroline Kennedy sorely lacking in all respects in her thwarted Senate bid.
A New York accountant pointed out that Caroline’s cousin Patrick, an eight-term Rhode Island U.S. Representative, has an F immigration grade.

As Kennedy nears the end of his life, our objective is first to steel ourselves against the mawkish propaganda that will follow his death.
The task will be challenging. But we can take comfort in knowing that while Kennedy may have fooled Massachusetts voters and his Democratic Senate cronies, we’ve known the truth all along.

Joe Guzzardi [email him] is a California native who recently fled the state because of over-immigration, over-population and a rapidly deteriorating quality of life. He has moved to Pittsburgh, PA where the air is clean and the growth rate stable. A long-time instructor in English at the Lodi Adult School, Guzzardi has been writing a weekly column since 1988. It currently appears in the Lodi News-Sentinel.

New Spencer book coming September 22: The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran!


A book review from http://www.jihadwatch.org/!


New Spencer book coming September 22: The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran!

My ninth book, The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran, will be available September 22 from Regnery Publishing. (Get info on the first eight here -- make room on your bookshelf, Zawahiri!)
Here is what it says on the back cover:
What does the Koran really say?
It may be the most controversial book in the world. Some see it as a paean to peace, others call it a violent mandate for worldwide Islamic supremacy.
How can one book lead to such dramatically different conclusions? The truth is, not many Westerners know what’s in the Koran, since so few have actually read it—even among the legions of politicians, diplomats, analysts, and editorial writers who vehemently insist that the Koran preaches tolerance.
Now, New York Times bestselling author Robert Spencer unveils the mysteries lying behind this powerful book, guiding readers through the controversies surrounding the Koran’s origins and its most contentious passages. Stripping out the obsolete debates, Spencer focuses on the Koran’s decrees toward Jews, Christians, and other Infidels, explaining how they were viewed in Muhammad’s time, what they’ve supposedly done wrong, and most important, what the Koran has in store for them.
And here is an impression from a reader who received an advance copy. I'll be bringing you more of these over the next few days.
"Meticulous, comprehensive, indispensable. ‘I read the Koran so you don’t have to,’ Spencer writes—but even for those of us who have read the Koran, this is a richly illuminating work.” —


Monday, August 24, 2009

ACTION ALERT: El Paso to legalize Homosexual Marriage? *UPDATED*

ACTION ALERT
The city of El Paso may try to use this incident to leglaize homosexual marriage. It would be okay if this was what the Mayor and Council ran on, but instead they are using an incident to make Executive decisions.

Please visit here http://www.elpasotexas.gov/community/meetings.asp and visit the webpages of the Mayor and Council Members to at least ask them to put this vital issue to a citywide vote.
Also you can call them at 915-541-4000

Two gay men kicked out of Chico's Tacos restaurant for kissing
The expansion of homosexuality in El Paso as a result of the Supreme Court overturning the state's law in Lawrence v. Texas (h/t El Paso Times). Supreme Court appointees do matter!!

Two gay men kicked out of Chico's Tacos restaurant for kissing
By Andrew Kreighbaum and Darren Meritz / El Paso Times
EL PASO -- Two gay men kissed at a Chico's Tacos restaurant, prompting guards to eject them and a police officer to endorse their ouster.Civil-rights lawyers say the security staff was out of line. Police, though, contend that a business such as a restaurant can refuse service to anybody, any time.In all, five men were ordered to leave the restaurant. They say they were forced out by homophobic guards."It was a simple kiss on the lips," said Carlos Diaz de Leon, a gay man who was part of the group.He called police at 12:30 a.m. June 29 because he said the guards and restaurant had discriminated against the group after two of his friends kissed in public.The five men, all gay, were placing their order at the Chico's Tacos restaurant on Montwood when the men kissed. All five sat down, but the two guards at the restaurant told them to leave.De Leon quoted one of the guards as saying he didn't allow "that faggot stuff" in the restaurant.De Leon said they refused to leave and called police for help. He said an officer arrived about an hour later in response to calls from his group and the guards.As they waited for police, the guards directed other anti-gay slurs at them, he said.Already angry at the guards, de Leon and his group became angrier at the two police officers who arrived."I went up to the police officer to tell him what was going on, and he didn't want to hear my side," de Leon said. "He wanted to hear the security guard's sidefirst."Police declined to identify the officers who responded, but department spokesman Javier Sambrano described one officer as relatively inexperienced.De Leon said the officer told the group it was illegal for two men or two women to kiss in public. The five men, he said, were told they could be cited for homosexual conduct -- a law the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas.That same year, the El Paso City Council approved an ordinance banning discrimination based on sexual orientation by businesses open to the public.An assistant manager at Chico's Tacos declined to comment Wednesday, except to say the owners of the restaurant were out of town and could not be reached. An official with All American International Security, the firm contracted by Chico's Tacos to supply guards, said one member of the security crew was contacting a lawyer. He would say no more.El Paso police Detective Carlos Carrillo said a more appropriate charge for what happened at Chico's Tacos would probably be criminal trespass."The security guard received a complaint from some of the customers there," Carrillo said. "Every business has the right to refuse service. They have the right to refuse service to whoever they don't want there. That's their prerogative."Briana Stone, a lawyer with the Paso del Norte Civil Rights Project, disagreed.She said the city anti-discrimination ordinance protects people on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation in public places. Perhaps more troubling, she said, was that the police officer chose not to enforce that ordinance and might have contributed to discrimination."This is such a blatant refusal to uphold the law on account of discrimination," she said. "The result is devastating. The Police Department is allowing that and even participating in it by refusing to enforce an anti-discrimination ordinance, which is what their job is."Lisa Graybill, legal director for the ACLU of Texas, said that businesses can ask patrons to leave for lewd conduct, but that those standards would have to apply to all customers."If a straight couple wouldn't have gotten kicked out for it," she said, "a gay couple shouldn't."The police officers involved did not file a report about the confrontation at Chico's Tacos. Carrillo said no report was made because officers thought the situation was under control and neither side requested a written account of the incident.De Leon said he and his friends left the restaurant after an officer threatened to issue a citation for "homosexual conduct."
Andrew Kreighbaum may be reached at akreighbaum@elpasotimes.com ; 915-546-6137.
Darren Meritz may be reached at dmeritz@elpasotimes.com ; 915-546-6127.

See also http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/seven-reasons-why-presidency-matters_18.html
www.tombrown.org
www.cielovista.org

*UPDATE* The COUNTY of El Paso rejected homosexual benefits due to your pressure. You can make the CITY of El Paso do the same!!!!!

This Week's Cultural Challenge: Miley Cyrus and Trampy Teen Idols‏ *BUMPED*

A cultural article from Rebecca Hagelin of www.HowToSaveYourFamily.com about the Teen Choice Music Awards.

Culture Challenge of the Week: Miley Cyrus and Trampy Teen Idols

Moms everywhere are aghast at teen idol Miley Cyrus' recent pole dancing and exaltation of Britney Spears as her hero. The "Hannah Montana" superstar morphed overnight from a bubbly starlet into just another trashy singer, leaving moms feeling betrayed.Many thought they had finally found a "Hollywood type" their daughters could look up to.

I visited a friend last year and marveled at the wall-to-wall posters of Hannah Montana that adorned her 10 year-old daughter's room. Like millions of other little girls, Hannah was her hero. From her clothes, music, and dance moves, to her hairstyle, this little girl (and her mom) were really "in to" Hannah.Then came the photo of Miley sprawled across a boy, with her bright green bra in clear view. Next, the 15-year-old posed in nothing but a sheet for the cover of Vanity Fair. After a public outcry, the teen and her superstar dad Billy Ray apologized saying the photographer had tricked them. Right. The sorrow only came when parents protested en masse.Given that moms are desperate for role models for their daughters, we quickly forgave, only to be let down again this week when Miley pole danced her way as the heir apparent of the cute-girl-gone-trashy super star phenomenon.
Left in her wake? Millions of pre-teen girls who are left thinking they have to be sex objects to "make it" in life.
How To Save Your Family and daughters from being used
Face the facts: There is a pattern here that will not change as long as we fail to recognize that our little girls are being used.The mass marketers of Hollywood-hype know that today's youth spend some 200 billion dollars a year of their own money on trinkets, music and all the accessories that go with it. They also know that pre-teen girls are easily manipulated and that more than anything else, they want to be popular as they grow into young adults. So, they discover cute, talented young girls, and make them superstars by playing on your daughter's dreams of glitz. They then morph the "wholesome" starlets into trampy sex stars as they grow older, hoping to take the dollars of your girls with them.They aren’t just turning the star into a tramp; their goal is to morph your daughter, too.The transition happens at lightning speed. After all, there are only four years between the innocence of 12 and the sultriness needed by age 16 to keep the big bucks flowing.
History repeats itself.
You know what happened to teen idol Britney Spears. America's little girls and their moms swooned and spent millions on Britney fashions. However, just as the Britney wannabes reached critical mass, the star's light started to short circuit. Her sexy ways quickly turned into bizarre behavior, drug problems and a raunchy attitude.
Not to worry, "High School Musical's" Vanessa Hudgens was there to take her place. But just as Vanessa hit her zenith in the eyes of our little girls, explicit photos and other sexual revelations about her captured the headlines.
Down came Vanessa, and up went the posters of the twinkling, sparkly Miley Cyrus.Miley has made the transition to tramp, too. And millions of preteen girls have, once again, been manipulated into believing that being trampy is not only normal, but is the only way to succeed.

It's time for moms to wake up and protect our little girls from being used. Find other moms who are sick of the abuse. It only takes a few friends to create your own sub-culture within the madness of the crazy pop culture. Finding allies is one of the most effective ways to fight back and win. My book, 30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family, is designed to help you do just that.

Find out more at www.HowToSaveYourFamily.com.
See also http://www.verticalthought.org/vertical-thought-rss.htm