Not1b4me’s Blog



 by  Pam Geller


  Pamela  “Atlas” Geller began her publishing career at The New York Daily News  and subsequently took over operation of The New York Observer as  Associate Publisher.  She left The Observer after the birth of her fourth child, but remained involved in various projects including American Associates, Ben Gurion University and being Senior Vice-President Strategic Planning and Performance Evaluation at The Brandeis School.

  After  9/11, “Atlas” had the veil of oblivion violently lifted from her  consciousness and immersed herself in the education and understanding of  geopolitics, Islam, terror, foreign affairs and imminent threats the  mainstream media and the government wouldn’t cover or discuss.  To  wit:

I am a student of  history.  Professionally, I have written 15 books in six languages,  and have studied history all my life.  I think there is something  monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is just a banking  crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis.  Yes, these exist  but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only  now coming into a sharper  focus.

Something of  historic proportions is happening.  I can sense it because I know  how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it..  Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about 10 – 15 years.  The pace has dramatically quickened in the past  two.

We demanded and  then codified into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans  to people whom we knew could never pay back?  Why? We learned  recently that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real  oversight by anyone, has “loaned” two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months,  but  will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the  terms.   That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times  the $700B we all argued about so strenuously just this past  September.

Who has this  money?  Why do they have it?  Why are the terms unavailable to  us?  Who asked for it?  Who authorized it?  I thought  this was a government of “We the People,” who loaned our powers to our  elected leaders.  Apparently  not.

We  have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.   Why?

We have  intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no  longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we  are worth preserving.  Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate.  Parents are not revolting,  teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back  mediocrity.   Why?

We have now  established the precedent of protesting every close election (now  violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that  it wants marriage to remain between one man and one woman.  Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?).  We have  corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to  write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream  Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a  banana republic.  To what  purpose?

Now our mortgage  industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major  industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse,  Social Security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire  government.  Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and know precisely what I am talking about.)  The list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.  It is potentially  1929 x 10.    And  we are at war with an enemy we cannot name for fear of offending people  of the same religion who cannot wait to slit the throats of your  children if they have the opportunity to do  so.

And now we have  elected a man no one knows anything about, who has never run so much as  a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska.  All of  his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen  fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip,  is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak  about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense  force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No?  Oh, of course.  The media would never play that for you  over and over and then demand he answer it.  Sarah Palin’s pregnant  daughter and $150,000 wardrobe is more  important.)

Mr. Obama’s  winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change….radical  change.   Why?

I have never been  so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.  This man  campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever  done in his professional life.  In my assessment, Obama will divide  us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the  pieces into a new and different power structure.  Change is indeed  coming.  And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only  the beginning.

I thought I would  never be able to experience what the ordinary, moral German felt in the  mid-1930s.  In those times, the savior was a former smooth-talking  rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next  to nothing.  What they did know was that he was associated with  groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they  disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great  oratory and promises.  Economic times were tough, people were  losing jobs, and he was a great speaker.  And he smiled and waved a lot.  And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for  fear that his “brown shirts” would bully them into  submission.

And then he was  duly elected to office, with a full-throttled economic crisis at hand  [the Great Depression].  Slowly but surely he seized the controls  of government power, department by department, person by person,  bureaucracy by  bureaucracy.   The kids joined a Youth Movement in his name, where they were taught  what to think.  How did he get the people on his side?  He  did it promising jobs to the jobless, money to the moneyless, and  goodies for the military-industrial  complex.   He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe, and across the  world.

He did it with a  compliant media – Did you know  that?  And he  did this all in the name of justice and…change.  And the people  surely got what they voted for.  (Look it up if you think I am  exaggerating.)  Read your history books.  Many people objected  in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and made fun  of.  When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late  1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet  Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy  troublemaker.  He was right,  though.

Don’t forget that  Germany was the most educated, cultured country in Europe.  It was  full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and  universities.  And in less than six years – a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency – it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.  All with the best of intentions, of course.  The road to Hell is paved with  them.

As a practical  thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice:   I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me  (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history  is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope  I am wrong, close my eyes, have another latte and ignore what is  transpiring around  me.

Some people scoff  at me; others laugh or think I am foolish, naive, or both.  Perhaps  I am.  But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and  tell them exactly what I believe – and why I believe it.  I pray I  am wrong.  But, I do not think I  am.
Since  many of you enjoy senior citizen status or will sometime in the not too  distant future, I thought you might be interested in this information.


Everybody that is  on this mailing list is either a senior citizen, is getting close, or  knows somebody that  is.

Most of you know  by now that the Senate version (at least) of the “stimulus” bill  includes provisions for extensive rationing of health care for senior  citizens.  The author of this part of the bill, former senator and  tax evader, Tom Daschle, was credited today by Bloomberg with the  following  statement.

Bloomberg:   “Daschle says health-care reform will not be pain free. Seniors should  be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of  treating them.”

If this does not  sufficiently raise your ire, just remember that Senators and Congressmen  have their own healthcare plan that is first dollar or very low co-pay  which they are guaranteed the remainder of their lives and are not  subject to this new law if it  passes.

Please use the  power of the Internet to get this message out.  Talk it up at the  grassroots level.  We have an election coming up in one year and  nine months.  We have the ability to address and reverse the dangerous direction the Obama administration and its allies have begun and in the interim, we can make our voices heard!  Let’s do  it!

If you  disagree, don’t do anything


June 15, 2009 Posted by | Government Sucks | | 1 Comment


If YOU dare!

April 17, 2009

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500
Mr.  Obama:

I have had it with you and your administration, sir.  Your conduct on your recent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequate representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.

You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that you have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America.  You are responsible to the citizens of the United States.  You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth.

I personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United States telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about their status in the world.  Sir, what do you think the First World War and the Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of Europe?  Are you brain dead?  What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about?  Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century?

Where do you get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country?  Have you not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States?
This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country, at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage.  Do you not understand this?

Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans.  Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia.  You do not show Great Britain, our best and one of our oldest allies, the respect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia.  How dare you, sir!  How dare you!

You can’t find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because you don’t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey.  You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germans more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves.  What’s the matter with you?

I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of yourselves, all of you.

You are so self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr.  Dodd, Mr.  Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses.  What do you intend to do about them?  Anything?  I seriously doubt it.

What about the U.S.  House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members – on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves?  I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus.  I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer.  You haven’t said anything about that.  Who authorized that?
I surely didn’t!

Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that’s $45 million more than the AIG bonuses.  In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million – not a bad take.  Who authorized that and why haven’t you expressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now.

I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and not caring about what you idiots do.  We are watching what you are doing and we are getting increasingly fed up with all of you.  I also want you to know that I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensive to every one of my sensibilities.  I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.

Every real American
 P.S.  I rarely ask that emails be ‘passed around’………….PLEASE SEND THIS TO YOUR EMAIL LIST……it’s past time for all Americans to wake up!

April 29, 2009 Posted by | Obama Crap | , | Leave a comment

“Bank on California” Money Laundering Scheme May Do for the State What Mortgage Meltdown Did for the Nation

April 27, 2009 Posted by | Government Sucks | | Leave a comment


March 25, 2009 Posted by | Obama Crap | , | 1 Comment

Obama and the rest of the Democratss false hope and change

Barack Obama Master of Hopenosis T-shirts

headup1copy-mediuminit_I'm Cold/Global Warming T-shirts & Gifts






  • House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “The American people deserve a government that is a fierce watchdog of their hard-earned tax dollars.  Congress and the new Administration will ensure that TARP funds are used for lending to American workers and small businesses – so we can lift our economy out of recession – and not for the enrichment of a privileged few.” (Press Release, 1/21/2009)
  • Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV):  “If the actions of the President-elect on TARP are any indication, a new day is dawning in Washington, DC, and a good day, a bright day…Barack Obama has also said there will be transparency, there will be oversight, and Barack Obama has said the disbursal of TARP funds will require his signoff; not a Secretary, not somebody in some clerk’s office, not a group of people, but every penny will require Barack Obama’s personal signoff.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD):  “It should strengthen our confidence to know that President Obama has learned from the mistakes that were made during the Bush administration in administering this sum of money. That is not a criticism. Mistakes are made. But we can learn from those mistakes, and we will learn from those mistakes.” (Congressional Record, 1/22/2009)
  • Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL):  “I am going to be voting with the faith that this new administration, with new leadership and new eyes and new vision and new values, will invest this money properly so that we can turn this economy around and build a strong American future.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA):  “We saw bankers saying, ‘I got the money. It’s none of your business what we do with it.’ We saw bonuses given that shouldn’t be given. I am confident that the Obama administration has learned from that.” (Congressional Record, 1/22/2009)
  • Senator Jim Webb (D-VA): “The situation now, in my view, is different. I spoke with the President-elect. He indicated he was totally comfortable with my coming to the Senate floor and saying that he personally guarantees closure on all of those issues…that there will be limits on executive compensation; and that there clearly are going to be strong proposals, to re-regulate the financial markets.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) (Again):  “We believe the Obama administration will abide by its commitment to follow this bill if it’s passed. I understand the skepticism on the Republican side because we’re telling them that we have a commitment which we accept as valid from a new administration that they will abide by the bill as it passes the House.” (Congressional Record, 1/14/2009)
  • Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT):  “That is what this President has asked for–both the outgoing and incoming one–to give this incoming President the tools necessary to move forward.  Now, I know, as well, there is going to be far better accountability, far more transparency.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX):  “And by the way, my friends, in this language it says so more of these big bonuses and compensation and grandstanding resort packages, no more of that.” (Congressional Record, 1/22/2009)
  • Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA):  “So I say to my constituents I will vote for this, and I will do it because of the assurances I have gotten from the President-elect himself that it will be different, that he will use these funds judiciously, that he needs to make sure he has this tool in his pocket. I hope my constituents understand that after hearing that from this President… I feel he deserves my trust at this time.” (1/15/2009)
  • Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA): “I felt a little bit, after the last one, like Charlie Brown and Lucy–she is always pulling the football out from under Charlie Brown. I said: That is not going to happen to me again. Well, Lucy is not holding the ball now. We have someone new holding that ball, someone by the name of Barack Obama and Joe Biden and their team.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • Senator Patty Murray (D-WA): “Today, I met with Timothy Geithner, the President-elect’s nominee to head the Treasury Department. He gave me his assurances that transparency and accountability will be improved…With those assurances, I believe the American people are finally going to get the investment and the honesty they deserve.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)
  • Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL):  “Today, the President will limit executive compensation for executives of companies that take advantage of taxpayer bailout funds. This is the right thing to do.” (Congressional Record, 2/4/2009)
  • Congressman James McGovern (D-MA):  “The Congress will not be a rubber stamp of the executive branch, unlike the first 6 years of the Bush administration…And I should say that the statement by the Obama administration, the statement by Larry Summers, is all very encouraging. It demonstrates a real appreciation of what average people are going through.” (Congressional Record, 1/14/2009)
  • Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR):  “…we have tried to redirect, to prod and push and probe to make sure that there is greater transparency and coax greater performance out of the Bush administration while dealing with the criteria by which we will be going forward.  This is the work that the Congress should be doing, and I think we are doing it in a reasonable fashion. It’s coming in the context of other tools that the new administration has sought and desperately needs.” (Congressional Record, 1/22/2009)
  • Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD): “We need to give President Obama the tools he needs to get our economy going again. We shouldn’t hold the misdeeds of the Bush administration against him…This week, the President-elect huddled with us, to talk about how his plan is different than the previous administration. We need vigilance and responsibility that’s what President Obama has pledged.” (Congressional Record, 1/15/2009)

March 21, 2009 Posted by | Assinine | , , | Leave a comment

How Timothy Geithner’s Bailout Plan Created the AIG Bonus Scandal’s_bailout_plan_created_the_aig_bonus_scandal/

Remember Timothy Geithner is Obama’s tax cheat that runs the United States Secretary of the Treasury…for you liberals that don’t know that.

The failure of a public-private bailout strategy.       

In order to protect its bailout plan, the Obama administration protected the bonuses.

Back in January and February, there were some votes to try and block excessive employee compensation at financial institutions receiving bailout money. In the Senate, this took the form of the Snowe amendment, which was supported by all 58 Democrats, and also by three Republicans. In the House, it took the form of the TARP Reform Act, which was favored by 242 Democrats and 18 Republicans. Overall, across the House and the Senate, only 10 Democrats, compared to 193 Republicans, voted against legislation that might have stopped the bonuses.

Unfortunately, despite overwhelming Democratic support for limiting executive compensation, in order to save their public-private partnership bailout plan, the Obama administration worked against these limits:

As word spread Friday about the new and retroactive limit — inserted by Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut — so did consternation on Wall Street and in the Obama administration, which opposed it.(…)
The administration is concerned the rules will prompt a wave of banks to return the government’s money and forgo future assistance, undermining the aid program’s effectiveness. Both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Lawrence Summers, who heads the National Economic Council, had called Sen. Dodd and asked him to reconsider, these people said.



This story is widespread now: Dodd weakened the language at the urging of Treasury officials. It has leaped from the blogosphere to places like CNN.

Tim Geithner’s public private partnership plan caused the AIG bonus scandal. This is because Geithner’s plan needs voluntary private participation and, as many of those private investors and institutions have made clear, they won’t join in if their compensation packages are threatened:

Officials at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department are increasingly worried that the controversy could discourage investors from joining a new government effort to revive consumer lending as well as a separate plan that relies on private money to buy toxic assets from banks, sources familiar with the matter said.(…)A senior executive at one of the nation’s largest banks said he had heard from several hedge funds that they would not partner with the government for fear that lawmakers would impose retroactive conditions on their participation, such as limits on compensation or disclosure requirements.

As such, on behalf of the Obama administration, Tim Geithner and Larry Summers joined with congressional Republicans to block legislation that would have retroactively blocked the bonuses. This was done in the hope of securing more private participation in the administration’s public-private partnership bailout plan.

This scandal is the direct outcome of Geithner’s bailout plan. Because the Obama administration is pursuing a public-private partnership bailout strategy, and because Wall Street wouldn’t participate in this plan if their bonuses were threatened, the Obama administration blocked legislation that would have blocked Wall Street bonuses. They really should have pursued temporary nationalization instead.



March 19, 2009 Posted by | Assinine, DumbAss Democrats, Obama Crap | | Leave a comment

Go 48 years without releasing any documents and you too can be President!

Obama has lived for 48 years without leaving any footprints — none!

There is no Obama documentation — no records — no paper trail — None.

Original, vault copy birth certificate — Not released

Certificate of Live Birth — Released — Counterfeit

Obama/Dunham marriage license — Not released

Soetoro/Dunham marriage license — Not released

Soetoro adoption records — Not released

Fransiskus Assisi School School application — Released

Punahou School records — Not released

Selective Service Registration — Released — Counterfeit

Occidental College records — Not released

Passport (Pakistan) — Not released

Columbia College records — Not released

Columbia thesis — Not released

Harvard College records — Not released

Harvard Law Review articles — None (maybe 1, unsigned?)

Baptism certificate — None

Medical records — Not released

Illinois State Senate records — None

Illinois State Senate schedule — Lost

Law practice client list — Not released

University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

March 18, 2009 Posted by | DumbAss Democrats, Government Sucks, Illegal, Obama Crap | , , | 2 Comments

Feds undercut civilian supply of ammunition

Feds undercut civilian supply of ammunition
WEAPONS OF CHOICEFeds undercut civilian supply of ammunitionPolicy leaves manufacturers without brass for cartridges
Posted: March 17, 20099:00 pm Eastern
By Drew Zahn© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Fired brass shell casings
A recent government policy change has taken a bite out of the nation’s already stressed ammunition supply, leaving arms dealers scrambling to find ammo for private gun owners.
Georgia Arms is a company that for the last 15 years has been purchasing fired brass shell casings from the Department of Defense and private government surplus liquidators
. The military collects the discarded casings from fired rounds, then sells them through liquidators to companies like Georgia Arms that remanufacture the casings into ammunition for the law enforcement
and civilian gun owner communities.
But earlier this month, Georgia Arms received a canceled order, informed by its supplier that the government now requires fired brass casings be mutilated, in other words, destroyed to a scrap metal state.
The policy change, handed down from the Department of Defense through the Defense Logistics Agency, cuts a supply leg out from underneath ammunition manufacturers.
Learn here why it’s your right — and duty — to be armed.
The policy has compelled Georgia Arms, for example, to cancel all sales of .223 and .308 ammunition, rounds  used, respectively, in semi-automatic and deer hunting rifles, until further notice. Sharch Manufacturing, Inc. has announced the same cancellation of its .223 and .308 brass reloading components.
“They just reclassified brass to allow destruction of it, based on what?” Georgia Arms owner Larry Haynie asked WND. “We’ve been ‘going green’ for the last dozen years, and brass is one of the most recyclable materials out there. A cartridge case can be used over and over again. And now we’re going to destroy it based on what? We don’t want the civilian public to have it? It’s a government injustice.”

As WND reported, firearm sales have spiked since the election of a perceived anti-gun president, and Americans stockpiling bullets have produced a stressed ammunition market.
The Orlando Sentinel reports months of steady, heavy buying have left gun dealers in Florida facing shortages of ammunition.
“The survivalist in all of us comes out,” John Ritz, manager of a Florida shooting range, told the Sentinel. “It’s more about protecting what you have.”
“People are just stockpiling,” said a spokeswoman for Georgia Arms, which has seen bullet sales jump 100 percent since the election. “A gun is just like a car. If you can’t get gas, you can’t use it.”
WND contacted the Defense Logistics Agency, the Department of Defense’s largest combat support agency, several times seeking comment or explanation for the policy change but received none.
The National Rifle Association confirmed to WND that the DLA had been instructed to require the scrapping of the brass casings but declined further comment at this time.
Other gun advocates, however, have sounded off on the issue, eyeing the change in government policy with suspicion and filling the blogosphere with speculation that the effects of the policy change may be deliberate.
“It is an end-run around Congress. They don’t need to try to ban guns – they don’t need to fight a massive battle to attempt gun registration, or limit ‘assault’ weapon sales,” writes firearm instructor and author Gordon Hutchinson on his The Shootist blog. “Nope. All they have to do is limit the amount of ammunition available to the civilian market, and when bullets dry up, guns will be useless.”
A writer named Owen at the Boots & Sabers blog suspects the policy change is an effort by an anti-gun administration to raise the cost of ammunition.
“This policy didn’t come out of the blue,” writes Owen. “The Commander in Chief is clearly sending a message to gun owners that they should be paying more for ammunition. If he can’t do it through regulatory action, he’ll do it by forcing ammunition manufacturers to spend more on production.”
Hutchinson reports Georgia Arms was manufacturing over 1 million rounds of .223 ammunition every month, but without the ability to purchase expended military ammunition, the company may be forced to lay off up to half its workforce.

Special offers:
When it’s time to shoot back – Get ‘Armed Response,’ the guide to firearms, self-defense
Perfect gift for pistol-packin’ mama – ‘Stayin’ Alive’ shows guns are indeed for girls
“Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense”
Related stories:
Obama seeks ‘assault weapons’ ban
Is bill lying in wait to ban handguns?
Big Brother’s new target: Tracking of all firearms
Congress’ plan would let AG ‘ban guns at will’
Group asks states to track citizens’ ammo
Ban lifted on loaded guns in national parks
NRA’s next target: Re-arming Chicago
NRA aims big-budget blitz at Obama
Supremes: Individuals have right to bear arms
Obama election triggers national gun rush
Chuck Norris: Thugs can look down barrel of my gun
Christian college to allow students to carry guns?
Feds pirate investor’s gun-shop software
Feds suppress evidence in ‘broken gun’ conviction?
Man jailed for broken gun getting defense fund help
Gunmaker to feds: Make my day!
Gun expert claims feds punishing him
ACLU blasted on own blog over 2nd Amendment stand
Owner of broken rifle surrenders for 30-month sentence
30 months in jail for broken gun
Drill instructor convicted after rifle jams
Bloggers attack feds after agent forgets gun in airport
BATF rebuked for attacks on gun dealers
Gun shop: Complaint could have been ruse
Gun-shop owner gets ‘breath of fresh air’
‘Blog’ puts fear into gun shop inspectors
New gun control: Shut down shops
Your doctor could put you on no-gun list
Expert offers teachers free weapons training
State quashed bill allowing handguns on campuses
Trial will debate 2nd Amendment rights
Buy a house, get a gun free
New use for schoolbooks: Stopping bullets
New Yorkers rally for ‘illegal’ guns
Clinton-era war on guns revealed
U.N. gun confab ends in frustration
The U.N.: Gunning for more power
NRA warns of U.N. gun control
Michael Douglas backs U.N. gun ban
‘Anti-gang’ bill endangers gun rights?
County drops homeowner gun charges

March 18, 2009 Posted by | Government Sucks, Socialist, Traitor List | , , , | Leave a comment

Clownish Rachel Maddow Rewrites History of Great Depression

Clownish Rachel Maddow Rewrites History of Great Depression, Reinforces Liberal Creation Myth
By Jack Coleman (Bio | Archive)December 15, 2008 – 15:13 ET

Must have been that full moon. Or “fool full moon” as Rachel Maddow stumbled in referring to it.
If the Newseum is accepting suggestions for exhibits, a possibility comes to mind — the Pantheon of Unfortunate Punditry. First submission — Maddow’s hilarious revisionism of Herbert Hoover on her MSNBC show Friday. I’ve watched the segment several times, each time in awe at Maddow’s supreme confidence, unrivalled since Ted Baxter in his heyday. I plan to preserve it for posterity, to share with my children as a cautionary tale — This is what happens when a person makes an utter fool of herself in public.
Maddow told of Vice President Dick Cheney visiting Capitol Hill earlier in the week and warning congressional Republicans that if the GOP blocks the auto bailout, “… We will be known as the party of Herbert Hoover forever,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Here’s where Maddow kicked into gear, emboldened by the keen awareness that nearly all her viewers and hardly anyone at MSNBC know enough history to refute her assertions —
That’s a bad thing! Hoover is a political epithet in bad economic times because his response to the Depression (pause) was to first do nothing and then do stuff that made it worse. The country needed massive federal spending to stimulate demand and keep people working.
Hoover cut spending.The government had an economic responsibility to borrow some money and get credit moving. Hoover picked that awesome time to balance the budget. Everything was going the wrong direction economically, so the government needed to make some big, bold moves in the opposite direction.
Hoover picked that time to proclaim his own impotence, telling Congress in 1930, ‘Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement.’ (Maddow holds photo of Hoover to her face and mimics him) I’m Herbert Hoover, I can’t do anything helpful. How about I hurt the economy some more instead because of my dumb, moralistic, ideologically-driven, ignorant, short-term, self-serving, bad ideas? I’ll take this Depression and make it not just good, but great! That’s the ticket — the Great Depression!
What made Maddow’s puppetry all the more insipid is that she’s been on a tear of late condemning — you guessed it — revisionist history, specifically where she sees it emanating from the Bush administration on Iraq. Maddow has apparently decided to fight firefighters with fire, responding to her fantasies of revisionism where none exist and providing examples of the real thing.
For example, her claim that Hoover “cut” spending. By this, Maddow must mean Hoover did not increase federal spending at a rate preferred by liberals, who have resorted to this rhetorical sleight of hand for decades.
But as conservatives and Republicans are well aware, Hoover did the opposite — he increased spending, and not by a little.
In his book “The Herbert Hoover Story,” written by Reader’s Digest senior editor Eugene Lyons and published in 1959, Lyons wrote this about Hoover’s alleged tightwad tendencies —
He sought to provide jobs through public works; more was spent for this purpose in his administration than in the preceding thirty-six years, including the building of the Panama Canal. (emphasis in the original)
Surely Maddow has heard of at least one of these projects, which bears the name of the man instrumental in initiating it — the Hoover Dam — the largest public-works behemoth of the era. Other public projects begun by Hoover include the San Francisco Bay Bridge and the Los Angeles Aqueduct.
How’s this for irony? Hoover’s response to the stock market crash in 1929 was to call for massive federal spending on public works, which is exactly what Maddow wants Obama to do (though Maddow prefers to fetishize it as “infrastructure,” a word she can’t utter without squirming in her seat).
In an Oct. 5 article for National Review Online, Jonah Goldberg wrote
William Leuchtenburg, possibly the greatest authority on the FDR era, wrote some years ago, “Almost every historian now recognizes that the image of Hoover as a ‘do-nothing’ president is inaccurate.”
After the stock market crash in 1929, Hoover browbeat business leaders to keep wages and prices high. He invested heavily in public works projects. He pushed for an international moratorium on debts. He created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which later became a home for many of FDR’s Brain Trusters. Hoover increased farm subsidies enormously.
Some of Hoover’s interventions were good but ineffectual. A few were very, very bad and very effective.
In 1932, Hoover in effect repealed Calvin Coolidge’s tax cuts, increasing the rates for the poorest taxpayers by more than 100 percent and hiking the top rate from 25 percent to 63 percent. Worse, contrary to his own better instincts, Hoover signed the disastrous Smoot-Hawley trade bill that raised protectionist walls at precisely the moment the world needed trade the most.
That Maddow knows little of Hoover is not surprising, despite the fact she earned a doctorate — in political science at that — from Oxford. For many liberals, American history starts on March 4, 1933 with Roosevelt’s inauguration and FDR uttering the words, “We have nothing to fear …”
But you’d think their knowledge of history would extend a tad earlier, to include the 1932 campaign and Roosevelt’s criticism of Hoover — as a spendthrift hellbent on enlarging the breadth and cost of goverment. Doing so, however, could prove problematic for liberals’ foremost creation myth — that Hoover caused the Great Depression, “Did Nothing” in response, and Roosevelt rode to the rescue. As mythology goes, this one is Homeric in its longevity and as accurate in its depiction of actual events.
Here’s what Roosevelt said in accepting the Democratic presidential nomination —
I know something of taxes. For three long years I have been going up and down this country preaching that government — federal and local and state — costs too much. As an immediate program of action we must abolish useless offices. We must eliminate unnecessary functions of government — functions, in fact, that are not definitely essential to the continuance of government. We must merge, we must consolidate subdivisions of government, and, like the private citizen, give up luxuries which we can no longer afford.
Roosevelt’s concern was understandable, given the nation’s economic crisis and federal spending under Hoover. As pointed out by former Business Week bureau chief Andrew W. Wilson in a Nov. 4 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, “Five Myths About the Great Depression” —
After declining or holding steady through most of the 1920, federal spending soared between 1929 and 1932 — increasing by more than 50 percent, the biggest increase in federal spending ever recorded during peacetime.
I mentioned Maddow’s commentary to a friend over the weekend, who told me he’d also seen it. That’s the perception of Hoover, he sighed, and my friend was right. Just as it was global “perception” for millennia that the world was flat. Agreed, perception often trumps reality in politics, but perception cannot trump truth. This remains as true today it was in 1774 when a Boston lawyer named John Adams pointed out the stubborn nature of facts while defending British soldiers from an earlier pernicious perception.
Updated by N. Sheppard at 2:50 PM: To confirm what Andrew W. Wilson wrote on November 4, and to demonstrate just how wrong Maddow is about spending under Hoover, all one need do is examine the Historical Tables of the U.S. Budget available at OMB. 
What most folks — especially liberals! — don’t understand today is that prior to the Great Depression, the U.S. government didn’t like to spend a lot of money except in times of war. As such, spending declined precipitously in the years following World War I, and then basically remained flat from 1924 through 1928.
Then, contrary to Maddow’s assertion, in 1929 spending rose $166 million, or 5.6 percent. This may not seem much, but it was the biggest increase in spending since the end of World War I.
The following year, spending increased $193 million, or 6 percent. In 1931, it increased $257 million, or 7.7 percent. In 1932, it increased $1.08 billion, or 30 percent. 
Add it all up, and annual spending increased by almost $1.7 billion dollars or 57 percent while Hoover was President.
Is this what Maddow believes to be a spending cut?


 Rachel Maddow Still Can’t Get it Right About Hoover

By Jack Coleman (Bio | Archive)March 10, 2009 – 08:48 ET

How can you tell when MSNBC cable-show host Rachel Maddow utters falsehoods about Herbert Hoover? If she talks about him.This is becoming enough of a pattern for Maddow, as I’ve described previously at NewsBusters, to border on the pathological.Here she goes again, this time during her show Friday night while condemning Republicans calling for a “freeze” on federal spending for the rest of the fiscal year —
You know who else had the excellent idea to freeze government spending during a recession? This guy! (holds up photo of Hoover) H.H., President Herbert Hoover. His fundamental misunderstanding of how to shore up a failing economy was so celebrated that the great armies of homeless and jobless Americans gave him naming rights for the shanty towns where they all lived in cardboard boxes and burned-out cars during the Great Depression — Hoovervilles. Hoovervilles. And now, (House Minority Leader) John Boehner and congressional Republicans are advocating the same policy.
Enboldened by smarm, Maddow went on to say —
In this context (referring to the recession), the Republicans are proposing a spending freeze. They’re saying the government should stop spending. And also, rather than put your house fire out with water, they’re going to switch the liquid in the firehose over to gasoline.
Much like that alleged tightwad Hoover during the Depression. Maddow at the same fire resolutely douses the blaze with water, regardless of whether it was electrical in origin. 
Certain left-wing myths are so impervious to reality — McCarthy chasing phantom communists, Reagan as amiable dunce, the doomed surge in Iraq — that arguing with liberals about these sacrosanct beliefs is like trying to convert house plants. The best you can do is open them to sunlight.
When it comes to federal spending during Hoover’s single term in office, 1929 to 1933, what actually happened? According to the Office of Budget and Management Web site, Table 1.1, just the opposite of what Maddow repeatedly claims.
Federal spending increased $166 million in 1929, or 5 percent. In 1930, it rose by $193 million over the preceding year, at 6 percent. The pattern continued in 1931, with an increase of $257 million, nearly 8 percent. And for 1932, it rose a whopping 30 percent, by $1.08 billion. All told, federal spending increased 57 percent in this four-year period, according to the OMB. 
It was a “freeze” on spending much the way bitter cold is evidence of global warming, another laughable claim from the left. Not surprisingly, Maddow relies on anecdote to make her shabby claim — shanty towns dubbed “Hoovervilles” during the Depression — instead of the “empirical evidence” she touted but never produced, given its pie-in-face potential for besmirking her dogma.
Maddow also gets it wrong about what current-day Republicans in Congress are proposing — they want to “freeze” spending, which beyond MSNBC is universally understood to mean maintaining spending at current levels. This is hardly suggesting we “stop” spending.  An actual example of a politician determined to follow Hoover’s lead by vastly increasing federal spending in an economic slump? Barack Obama.

March 11, 2009 Posted by | DumbAss Democrats | , , , | Leave a comment

US To Give $900 Million To Hamas (via Gaza)…

You have got to be kidding me. Obama wants to spend $900 million of taxpayer money to strengthen Gaza. Gaza is run by Hamas, an organizaton whose objective it is to eradicate Isreal from the face of the earth…

Ok, let me rephrase. We are going to give $900 million to an area which is totally controlled by an organization which is committed to wiping Israel  off of the face of the earth?I guess it was to be expected, afterall, Gaza was a hotbed of Obama support…

Either way, help, my country has been hijacked…  AP


The United States plans to offer more than $900 million to help rebuild Gaza after Israel’s invasion and to strengthen the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, U.S. officials said on Monday.

The money, which needs U.S. congressional approval, will be distributed through U.N. and other bodies and not via the militant group Hamas, which rules Gaza, said one official.


“This money is for Gaza and to help strengthen the Palestinian Authority. It is not going to go to Hamas,” said the official, who asked not to be named as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton planned to announce the funding at a donors’ conference in Egypt next week.

Neither the United States nor Israel have direct contact with the Islamist Hamas movement which runs Gaza and remains formally committed to the destruction of the Jewish state.

The official said the pledge was a mix of money already earmarked for the Palestinians and some new funding.

“The package is still shaping up,” he said, when asked for specifics over how the money would be spent and a breakdown of old and new funding.

In December, the former Bush administration said it would give $85 million to the U.N. agency that provides aid to Palestinian refugees in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

The March 2 donors’ conference in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh resort aims to raise humanitarian and rebuilding funds for Gaza after Israel’s invasion last December to suppress rocket fire against its cities.

Preliminary estimates put damage from the offensive, in which 1,300 Palestinians died, at nearly $2 billion.

Clinton’s bid to get “substantial” funds could face an uphill battle in Congress because Hamas continues to rule Gaza and the U.S. focus is on its own souring economy.


February 24, 2009

U.S. to Give $900 Million in Gaza Aid, Officials Say

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration intends to provide some $900 million to help rebuild Gaza after the Israeli incursion that ended last month, administration officials said Monday.

In an early sign of how the administration plans to deal with Hamas, the militant Islamist group that controls Gaza, an official said that the aid would not go to Hamas but that it would be funneled through nongovernmental organizations.

By seeking to aid Gazans but not Hamas, the administration is following the lead of the Bush administration, which sent money to Gaza through nongovernmental organizations. In December, it said it would give $85 million to the United Nations agency that provides aid to Palestinian refugees in the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

The United States considers Hamas a terrorist organization, and the Bush administration refused to have any formal dealings with the group.

The aid will include new spending as well as money already set aside for the Palestinian Authority, and it will be formally announced next week when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton travels to a Palestinian donors’ conference in Sharm el Sheik, Egypt, the officials said.

The aid, first reported by Reuters, would have to be approved by Congress, where many lawmakers are skittish about even appearing to help Hamas until it renounces violence and recognizes Israel’s right to exist.

“None of the money will go to Hamas, it will be funneled through NGOs and U.N. groups,” said an administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk about the aid before Mrs. Clinton announced it.

The donors’ conference in Egypt is seeking to raise close to $2 billion to rebuild Gaza, which was devastated by the three-week war with Israel. Some of the $900 million from the United States will go to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, officials said.

But even if the bulk of the money goes to Gaza, it will do little good unless Israel first opens the border crossing into the territory, said Daniel Levy, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, a research organization in Washington.

“It’s a good effort, but the money can’t be spent unless materials can get into Gaza,” Mr. Levy said. “The next step is opening the border crossings, and that requires more than just signing a check.”

Hamas has demanded the opening of the crossings as part of truce negotiations being conducted through Egypt. Israel, which imposed an embargo after Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, demands an end to rocket fire from Gaza, a halt to weapons smuggling and the release of a captive Israeli soldier.

After the donors’ conference in Egypt, Mrs. Clinton will make her first trip to Israel as secretary of state, Israeli officials said. She is expected to meet with Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister-designate.

Mrs. Clinton is also expected to travel to Ramallah in the West Bank for meetings with Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, and Salam Fayyad, the prime minister, whose Fatah organization is the principal rival to Hamas. Administration officials said it was unlikely that Mrs. Clinton would go to Hamas-controlled Gaza.

March 11, 2009 Posted by | Government Sucks, Illegal, Jihad Watch, Obama Crap, Traitor List | , , | Leave a comment