Thought reform at U of Delaware = goose-stepping - how pathetic

When did the Universities take it upon themselves to indoctrinate the students rather than teach them? What gives them the right to change the student's individual belief system, their morality and their religious views? When did these "all knowing" University Gods decide that it was their duty to get all the students to believe like they do? Is it any wonder why so many graduates are so liberal in their point of view?

This is what I imagine the indoctrination program would be for Obama's "mandatory volunteers" in his Civilian National Security Force program (GIVE). Think about it. If a program like this was implemented as orientation and ongoing training, Obama's Civilian National Security Force (GIVE) wouldn't just be indoctrinating one generation at a time, but multiple generations at a time. It wouldn't take long before Obama's entire Civilian National Security Force (GIVE) would be goose-step marching in his honor.
Rees



from Hot Air.com
by Allahpundit
April 25, 2009

As documented by one of my favorite non-profits, a famously egregious example of an experience most righties with a B.A. have had. My freshman orientation wasn’t this bad but I do remember a class screening of “Thelma & Louise” with noisy applause whenever some male malefactor got his, as a sort of group affirmation that campus was officially a No Patriarchy zone. I’m not being cute with the Orwell reference in the headline, either. The description here of racial “sensitivity training” that does nothing but raise tensions by emphasizing differences is a nice adjunct to “Freedom is slavery.”

FIRE’s latest win came just two days ago, incidentally, in defense of a conservative newspaper. They’ll be busy forever.
Click to read the article and comments

BIG SISTER IS WATCHING YOU!

YOU'VE BEEN WARNED!...

from Breitbart.com
by Derek Broes
April 4, 2009

Over the past three months we have witnessed some truly amazing movements by the Obama administration.

- He has proposed more spending than all Presidents in history combined;
- He has trampled the Constitution by allowing the Treasury to take on a dictator style infringement on private companies, and now the democratically lead Congress has proposed the “Pay for Performance Act” which passed Thursday with even some Republican Congressman voted for it.

This bill essentially allows the Treasury to define “fair pay” for all employees, at any level. Worse, the Treasury would like to be able to take over any company it deemed as important enough to take over regardless of whether or not it had accepted bailout funds.

Worse still, the Serve Act proposes to make volunteering for the government mandatory (with pay, of course). Last time I looked, working for pay was called A JOB.

The scariest part of the bill is that while you’re serving as a “volunteer,” you’re prohibited from participating in worship and church activities, political rallies and being involved in a union. In short, your essential freedoms are gone. I keep hearing about Obama being a socialist but, I have to disagree. Based on these measures he appears to more like a person pursuing Communism or Fascism.

Let’s face it; if you wanted to tear down the Republic and install a Communist Oligarchy you would first have to take over all major industries where corporate power resides, then you must get the wealth away from the rich — but how would you do that? Well, you create an even larger economic crisis so the country thinks your massive debt spending is a way to help the country when your real plan is to incur so much debt that the only way to prevent the country from bankruptcy is to impose a tax system that depletes the wealth of the top 1% until we’re all equally “wealthy.” …Well, except for those wealthy people who helped you get there. You know the ones I’m talking about. I don’t mean to HARPO on the subject, but we seemed to have forgotten what we’re protecting. What about the Republic? Is it already gone?

When the government ignores legal contractual obligations because they judge someone’s bonus as unfair the law has been ignored, which means it was violated and this violation occurred at the highest level of government. I’m not saying the AIG bonuses weren’t excessive. My point is, we don’t know what these people did to deserve or NOT to deserve them because this was never mentioned or examined. Maybe some of those people brought in a billion dollars of business and their bonuses were based? Maybe the CEO is the main reason the company is failing? Does that mean that some guy who worked hard to bring in that billion dollars in business shouldn’t be rewarded? But Obama needs a way to regulate pay and the bill proposed doesn’t even stop at executives, it doesn’t even stop at dollar amounts. In fact, it has no specification whatsoever.

So we can all look forward to government cars, government jobs, paid civilian volunteers who watch our every move and the the loss of our ability to reach for our dreams. The sad part is that Obama told us exactly what he was going to do and 52% of you refused to hear what he said. In fact many of you cheered at these things. Let’s remember just of few of the things he said.

1. The Constitution is fundamentally flawed. It only protects the rights of the people but does not allow the government to do anything on your behalf.
2. He wants a civilian Army as large as our military, and as well funded ($650 billion annually).
3. He wants to “spread the wealth.” Oh, don’t pretend you don’t remember Joe the Plumber.

And let’s not forget good ole Reverend Wright whose teachings about America being evil and unequal ring in Obama’s ears. Funny … It’s equality that got Obama elected. Change? Oh yes, there’s change and if we don’t act soon the meaning of hope will have a very different meaning.

Click to read the article and comments

Senator Jim DeMint on GIVE - The National Service Act

U.S. bill seeks to rescue faltering newspapers - Is there anyone left whose head hasn't already exploded?

This is so unbelievable, it's unbelievable. (Yeah, I know it sounds stupid)
Rees

from Reuters
By Thomas Ferraro
March 24, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With many U.S. newspapers struggling to survive, a Democratic senator on Tuesday introduced a bill to help them by allowing newspaper companies to restructure as nonprofits with a variety of tax breaks.

"This may not be the optimal choice for some major newspapers or corporate media chains but it should be an option for many newspapers that are struggling to stay afloat," said Senator Benjamin Cardin.

A Cardin spokesman said the bill had yet to attract any co-sponsors, but had sparked plenty of interest within the media, which has seen plunging revenues and many journalist layoffs.

Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies.

Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.

Click to read the rest of this article

E.P.A. Expected to Regulate Carbon Dioxide - "will have a profound impact on transportation, manufacturing costs and how utilities generate power."

Wow! This is great. Two slippery slopes in one day.

This is just another tax on the American People. When will this Financial Rape of the American People end?
Rees

from The New York Times
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: February 18, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.

The decision, which most likely would play out in stages over a period of months, would have a profound impact on transportation, manufacturing costs and how utilities generate power. It could accelerate the progress of energy and climate change legislation in Congress and form a basis for the United States’ negotiating position at United Nations climate talks set for December in Copenhagen.

The environmental agency is under order from the Supreme Court to make a determination whether carbon dioxide is a pollutant that endangers public health and welfare, an order that the Bush administration essentially ignored despite near-unanimous belief among agency experts that research points inexorably to such a finding.

Lisa P. Jackson, the new E.P.A. administrator, said in an interview that she had asked her staff to review the latest scientific evidence and prepare the documentation for a so-called endangerment finding. Ms. Jackson said she had not decided to issue such a finding but she pointedly noted that the second anniversary of the Supreme Court decision, Massachusetts v. E.P.A., is April 2, and there is the wide expectation that she will act by then..

“We here know how momentous that decision could be,” Ms. Jackson said. “We have to lay out a road map.”

She took a first step on Tuesday when she said that the agency would reconsider a Bush administration decision not to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from new coal-burning power plants. In announcing the reversal, Ms. Jackson suggested that the E.P.A. was considering additional measures to regulate heat-trapping gases. The White House signaled that it fully supported Ms. Jackson’s approach, deferring to her to discuss the administration’s response to the Supreme Court case.

If the environmental agency determines that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant to be regulated under the Clean Air Act, it would set off one of the most extensive regulatory rule makings in history. Ms. Jackson knows that she would be stepping into a minefield of Congressional and industry opposition and said that she was trying to devise a program that allayed these worries.

“We are poised to be specific on what we regulate and on what schedule,” Ms. Jackson said. “We don’t want people to spin that into a doomsday scenario.”

Even some who favor an aggressive approach to climate change said they were wary of the agency’s asserting exclusive authority over carbon emissions. They say that the Clean Air Act, now more than 40 years old, was not designed to regulate ubiquitous substances like carbon dioxide.

Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming, warned Ms. Jackson during her January confirmation hearing that she should not undercut Congress’s authority by using the agency’s regulatory power to address global warming. Mr. Barrasso called the use of the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon “a disaster waiting to happen.”
Click to read the rest of the article

Barack Backmouthin' - A Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name Meets A President That Dares Not Speak Off Script...

from the website America is an Obamanation!

Candidate Obama vs. President Obama: Change We Can Believe In?

Obama's Brown Shirts - Coming To A City Near You!

This is a must read for everyone. HR 1388 as already passed the house. We must ensure that it doesn't pass the Senate. If it does pass, Obama will be off to the races with his National Security Force of Brown Shirts.

This video should give you the creeps when you watch it!

Rees


This is a great article from Joshua Pundit
March 22, 2009

Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act.
Obama's vision of a domestic security force "just as strong, just as well funded as our military" ( and presumbly loyal to him personally) just got a lot closer.

The House of representatives has just passed HR 1388 otherwise known as the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act. This reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.

However, it not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes "new programs and studies" and an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

When you look at the language of the bill closely,it gets even more interesting.The bill specifically mentions possibilities if "all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."

If these requirements were made mandatory, the bill says it "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."

And it mentions "The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives."

Those groups of volunteers would according to the bill, be "grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp."

Take a minute to think about the implications of all this, given the sort of person who's in the White House.

All of these things were hidden away within the 200 pages of legislation..and the bill itself was mainly billed as federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as "a National Day of Service and Remembrance."

Some of the smarter boys like Duncan Hunter weren't fooled, but a number of others were..and the bill passed with an enthusiastic yes from every Democrat who's been on record as consistently voting against anything to do with our military or national security...Neil Abercrombie, John Conyers, Jim McDermott,George Miller, Jim Moran, Nancy Pelosi..and of course Keith Ellison.The whole crew was there, unfortunately joined by a number of people who I expected would know better.

Paranoid? Perhaps, but this bears close watching.Why spend six billion on this just now?

At this point, I don't trust the current occupant of the White House in the least. But you can't say I didn't give him a chance.
Click to read the article and comments

Is it illegal for a Constitution-loving citizen to chastise a Constitution-scorning judge?

photo by Rees

Apparently so! This man who is waging the verbal back-and-forth with the Judge has the most eloquent sarcasm I've ever read.
Rees

from WND
By Bob Unruh

Man critical of Obama case judge visited by marshals:
"I told your Gestapo goons we had nothing to talk about"

A Washington, D.C., man who believes Barack Obama probably isn't eligible to be president – and colorfully stated as much to a federal judge who dismissed a case challenging Obama's residency in the White House – says he got a visit from U.S. marshals for his exercise of free speech.

Jesse Merrell told WND he was reacting to Judge James Robertson's decision to throw out a case challenging Obama's eligibility because the issue had been thoroughly "twittered."

Merrell sarcastically gave the judge a "good-for-you."

"How dare people use a flimsy thing like the Constitution to darken your sanctimonious door!" he wrote to the judge. "The insane idea that a blue-gum baboon slashing our Constitution has to prove U.S. citizenship – as our silly old Constitution demands – is too absurd to consider in the sacred chambers of the tiny tin gods of the Potomac, adorning the royal purple and sipping Jim Jones Kool-Aid.

"Thanks to smug, slimy shysters like you, Obama gets a free ride – snootily stomping on our foolish Constitution, which supercilious idiots like you have long ago shredded for their own stupid opinions!" Merrell continued in the letter, a copy of which he provided to WND.

He finished with his speculation on what "ought" to happen to the judge, a physical act not appropriate for a family-oriented report.

A short time later, he said he found two U.S. marshals on his doorstep.

"After reading your story about Federal Judge James Robertson dismissing a suit challenging Obama's natural born citizenship, and suggesting sanctions, I wrote him a very critical letter," Merrell told WND. "Two U.S. marshals came to visit me, making threats to silence me.

"I told them unless the First Amendment had been repealed, or they had a warrant for my arrest, we had nothing to discuss," he continued. "But they insisted on coming in, and making further threats.

"I responded with another letter, with firm language, but nothing I haven't used for 30 years, and quoting Thomas Jefferson's warning to bind judges with the 'chains of the Constitution' to prevent mischief."

WND called the U.S. marshals service for comment, but there was no comment on the specific case. A WND message left for one of the officers involved also was not returned.

A media office spokeswoman who took the message did confirm that "anyone who may write a letter referencing a judge or put something in a letter causing the marshals to be concerned about the well-being of a judge, they would look into it."

Merrell told WND his particular dislike of "government tyranny" has existed "since my fourth-great-grandfather, Captain Benjamin Merrell, was hanged – hanged, drawn and quartered – by the British Royal Governor of North Carolina in 1771 for protesting high and unjust taxes."

In his followup letter to the judge, Merrell's language was a little more salty.

"I told your Gestapo goons, of course, that unless the First Amendment had been repealed, or they were there to arrest me, that we had nothing to talk about.," Merrell's letter said ."One of your Brown-Shirt Nazi bullies, however, could not resist threatening me with some obscure law – one he didn't know where it was, or when it was created – which he said made it a crime to say something that caused a federal judge 'emotional distress.'

"Emotional distress? What unbelievably unadulterated horses---!" Merrell wrote. "What about the repulsive, stomach-turning 'emotional distress' you black-robed baboons speciously dish out to the American people daily – haughtily spitting on our precious Constitution with your nauseating, decency-stomping, judicial-jack--- slobber!

"If it is illegal for a Constitution-loving citizen to chastise a Constitution-scorning judge, who has spitefully spat on America's consecrated moral bedrock, then the slimy, steel-laden tentacles of unspeakable tyranny are already wrapped tightly around helpless citizens – awaiting the final hideous strangulation.

"But not as long as one end of my red-blooded tongue is loose!" Merrell's letter said.

He put the challenge directly to the judge:

"The Constitution clearly states, with no possible ambiguity – in Article 2, Section 1 – that 'No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President,'" he wrote.

"America is going down the drain – economically and Constitutionally, with terrorists and illegal aliens pouring across our borders like invading armies practically unopposed – but our insufferable, over-bloated, dictatorial government, while turning a blind eye to all that, has time and money to send two high-paid federal marshals – probably $130,000.00 each – to harass a citizen daring to exercise his precious First Amendment rights, which you want to destroy," he wrote.

"When you solemnly swear to uphold and defend the Constitution – then loathsomely lacerate and despicably desecrate that hallowed document – perhaps you should fear for your safety, for you have stopped being a dutiful servant of the people, and started arrogating unto yourself the venomous trappings of their tyrannical slave-master," he wrote.

"Oh, and my ancestor, Captain Benjamin Merrell, wasn't just hanged – but hanged, drawn and quartered: which means he was hanged, but taken down while yet alive, his abdomen violently sliced open and his entrails cruelly cut out and brutally thrown in his face and set afire...and then his body barbarically slashed into four quarters," Merrell wrote. "So, naturally, I'm more than a little suspicious of dictatorial power such as you brandish. And I'm not alone."
Click to read the rest of the article