"What luck for the rulers that men do not think." -Adolf Hitler
"I will bring this war to an end in 2009. So don’t be confused." -- Senator Barack Obama

"If you don't like Obama, you is a racist!" -- Kelonda

Search This Blog

"If the government robs Peter to pay Paul, he can count on the continued support of Paul.

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Natural News: How toxic chemotherapy kills both cancer cells and cancer patients

The experts speak on chemotherapy:

"Chemotherapy poisons your body as a whole in an attempt to kill cancer cells"

As Duesberg explains, AZT had been designed to work as would any other chemotherapeutic drug. "chemotherapy," he says, "is a rational but desperate treatment for cancer." The toxic drug given in the process will kill any and all growing cells in the patient. After a short round of chemo, "the hope is the cancer is going to be totally dead, and you are only half dead and recover." Duesberg points out that the dangerous violence of the method, which is slaughtering cells wholesale, not targeting only cancer cells, is evident in the side effects. "You lose your hair, you lose weight, you get pneumonia, you get immune deficiency, because it's severe cellular intoxication. You kill a lot of good cells, too."
Aids A Second Opinion by Gary Null PhD with James Feast, page 429

"How chemotherapy harms your body"

In September 1986, Anne decided to stop chemotherapy despite the opposition of her oncologist. "My mind rebelled at the thought of another six months of that poison," she observes. "On several occasions the doctor couldn't perform chemotherapy treatments on me because my white blood cell count was dangerously low. I promised my body I would not undergo any further chemotherapy treatments."
The Center Prevention Diet by Michio Kushi & Alex Jack, page 131

Other treatments, with significant side effects, are being investigated for more serious forms of the disease. Immunosuppressive drugs that have been used for cancer chemotherapy and organ transplants may reduce the autoimmune response. These drugs are cytotoxic; that is, they kill cells that are extremely active, which in autoimmune disease are white blood cells.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 1373

Nausea is usually a passing symptom that will almost always go away by itself. In most cases, I recommend natural remedies for nausea because they are often as effective as some of the prescription antiemetic drugs, but they do not cause unnecessary side effects. The only exception to this rule, however, is in the case of cancer patients who are receiving chemotherapy; the kind of intense nausea they may experience can be so severe that stronger measures may be needed.
Secret Remedies by Earl Mindell RPh PhD, page 204

"The tri-fold approach to mainstream cancer therapy"

The mainstream medical establishment often prescribes mastectomy, radiation, and chemotherapy to treat breast cancer, an approach that has been described as a slash-and-burn strategy. This approach may be in for a reappraisal with the recent insight by the medical world that breast cancer is actually three different diseases, with indistinct boundaries, rather than one. In other words, only some breast cancers fit the image of a disease that is fast-growing and fast-spreading. Two other categories of this condition exist, the slowest-growing of which may never spread or be life-threatening at all. With this realization comes the idea that giving everyone with breast cancer chemotherapy may be unnecessary. Considering the harmful effects of chemotherapy, the belated nature of this realization is disturbing, to say the least.
Complete Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 72

Dr. Atkins regards chemotherapy as otherwise dangerous and best avoided in treating the majority of cancers. Only in situations in which chemotherapy is proven to be effective and curative would I recommend it, he says. In general, this might be testicular cancer …
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 595

Three days later, she had her breast lopped off. That was followed up with lots of chemotherapy. Her hair fell out and she vomited 24 hours a day. She couldn't keep any food down. Then they did radiation and her skin burnt up and two of her ribs broke. Most people don't know how dangerous radiation is. I had seen enough. I wouldn't touch any of that medicine with a 10-foot pole.
Get Healthy Now by Gary Null, page 762

I try never to use radiation treatment -- which is even more dangerous than most forms of chemotherapy -- without also using hyperthermia, says Dr. Atkins. Thanks to hyperthermia, we can shrink tumors with far less radiation to get the same therapeutic outcome, and our patients' immune systems and overall health are faring much better as a result.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 609

If prostate cancer develops, mainstream medicine typically offers prostatectomy, or removal of the prostate, chemotherapy, and radiation. All are ineffective and often dangerous. Surgery, like biopsy, can actual spread cancer cells, and often decreases sexual potency and urinary control. PACT, a prostate support group, advocates hormonal blockers to induce cancer shrinkage, which may hold the disease at bay for several years, followed by a prostatectomy or cryosurgery (freezing of the prostate). The most common hormonal blockers are Lupron and Fludamide. As prostate cancer is generally slow growing, patients, especially those in the early stages, have time to try less harmful methods of treatment.
Complete Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 308

Rufer and her husband sued Abbott Laboratories, UWMC, and the cancer specialist who treated her. UWMC and the doctor argued that they had relied on the Abbott test results. Abbott denied all responsibility, even though the literature distributed with its tests made no mention of the potential for false positives. What's more, according to a court opinion, it turned out that Abbott also had access to reports that false positive results on its assay led to unnecessary cancer treatment before 1998. It received over forty complaints of false positives, including multiple complaints of unnecessary chemotherapy and surgery before Jennifer Rufer's first treatment in April 1998.
Critical condition by Donald L Barlett and James B Steele, page 63

To reduce the need for steroids, immunosuppressants such as azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine (also used in the treatment of some cancers), or cyclosporine may be substituted. Various chemotherapy agents and organ transplant antirejection drugs are also used. Again, these medications have their own problematic or dangerous side effects. Therefore, thoughtful consideration of a treatment plan coordinated by the patient's physician is required.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 614

The diagnosis of bilateral lung cancer was confirmed by x-rays, a CAT scan, and a lung biopsy. Like Dr. Meshad, the physician at the center recommended against chemotherapy. Ruth's prognosis was not good: the cancer was aggressive and her history of liver disease made the use of chemotherapy dangerous.
Sharks Still Don't Get Cancer By Dr I William Lane, page 155

"Alternatives to chemotherapy and other forms of mainstream cancer treatment"

In other words, alternative therapies may pose a serious threat when a patient, if swayed toward alternatives, loses the opportunity to receive the (extremely) effective orthodox treatment? Run that by me again. Time and time again it has been confirmed that the proven medical treatments are not only ineffective but dangerous. The vast majority of patients with cancer live longer and better if left without the orthodox treatments. Oncologists will not accept these treatments for themselves. No scientific research is needed to prove that fresh vegetables, fruit, juices, medicinal herbs, vitamins, minerals, fiber, etc. are not harmful to the body. It would be nice if there were proof that surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy were not harmful.
Health In The 21st Century by Fransisco Contreras MD, page 224

Finally, if cancer specialists were to admit publicly that chemotherapy is of limited usefulness and is often dangerous, the public might demand a radical change in direction—possibly toward unorthodox and nontoxic methods, and toward cancer prevention. By constantly touting the promise of anticancer drugs, orthodox practitioners ward off this challenge to their expertise and scientists parry the threat radically new concepts represent to their long years of research. The use of chemotherapy is even advocated by those members of the establishment who realize how ineffective and dangerous it can be.
The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 84

Daniel Greenfield: Obama’s Hollywood Backers Stand Up for a Pedophile Rapist

"The Polanski case demonstrates the radical differences between absolute and relativist morality. Either rape is always wrong, or it’s only wrong when it’s 'rape-rape', as Whoopi Goldberg put it on the View. Either child abuse is always wrong, or it’s only wrong when you don’t have warm feelings toward the perpetrator. There are either absolute rights and wrongs. Or only things that are right or wrong depending on how you feel about those doing them. And that is the key point, without absolute morality, subjective morality in which there is one law for your allies and another for everyone else takes hold. We saw that same dual morality in action in the waning days of the Clinton Administration when formerly people who claimed to have no tolerance for sexual harassment, treated Bill Clinton as the victim, and his accusers as the criminals. Today those same people are at it again with Roman Polanski."

Dr. Paul L. Williams: Muslims now hunting Christians in Africa

PRAISE BREAK (Encouraging Word)

Steven Ertelt: Washington Times Confirms Baucus Health Care Bill has Rationing for Seniors

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- In their analysis of the Baucus health care bill, pro-life groups point out a section that rations health care for senior citizens. In an editorial today, the Washington Times confirms that to be the case, and members of a Senate panel will address it when they vote on amendments next week to fix the problems.

Borrowing from a controversial phrase first introduced by Sarah Palin, the Times says, "Yes, there are death panels. Its members won't even know whose deaths they are causing."

"But under the health care bill sponsored by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, death panels will indeed exist - oh so cleverly disguised as accountants," the Times editors write.

The offending provision is on Pages 80-81 of the bill buried deep in a section about Medicare payments to doctors that would take an attorney to decipher.

"Beginning in 2015, payment would be reduced by five percent if an aggregation of the physician's resource use is at or above the 90th percentile of national utilization," the Baucus bill says.

The Times translates the language into plain English, saying "it means that in any year in which a particular doctor's average per-patient Medicare costs are in the top 10 percent in the nation, the feds will cut the doctor's payments by 5 percent."

"This provision makes no account for the results of care, its quality or even its efficiency. It just says that if a doctor authorizes expensive care, no matter how successfully, the government will punish him by scrimping on what already is a low reimbursement rate for treating Medicare patients," the Times explains.

"The incentive, therefore, is for the doctor always to provide less care for his patients for fear of having his payments docked. And because no doctor will know who falls in the top 10 percent until year's end, or what total average costs will break the 10 percent threshold, the pressure will be intense to withhold care, and withhold care again, and then withhold it some more," it continues. "Or at least to prescribe cheaper care, no matter how much less effective, in order to avoid the penalties."

The National Right to Life Committee analysis concludes that this provision will cause a "death spiral" by "ensur[ing] that doctors are forced to ration care for their senior citizen patients."

Even liberal columnist Nat Henthoff agrees, calls the provision "insidious," and writes that "the nature of our final exit" will be very much at risk.

Apart from the rationing concerns, the Times says the provision makes little financial sense.

"For all the trouble to the doctors and all the added risks to elderly patients, this provision will raise just $1 billion over six years for the federal Treasury. That doesn't account, though, for the added costs to the government - and thus to taxpayers - of tracking all this data per doctor and per patient, and then trying to collect the penalties from doctors after they already have been paid for their services," the editors write.

The Times notes that this isn't the only provision of the Baucus bill that leads to rationing of medical care for seniors.

The proposed "health care exchange" and the independent review panels and a national health board "will be empowered to make aggregate decisions - based on statistics, not on an individual patient's needs - about what sorts of care will be allowed and what won't," the Times writes.

"As it is in Great Britain, where thousands of cancer patients each year die prematurely due to lack of treatment, the inevitable result of government care could be the same for many Americans as if an actual panel decided case-by-case to euthanize them," the editorial says.

"The Baucus provision would only exacerbate this bureaucratic preference for death by proxy," it concludes.

Hollywood Defends Roman Polanski (Whoopi Goldberg Says He Did Not Commit "Rape-Rape")

JOHN D. MCKINNON: Group Tied to Obama Urges Tax Increase

"A liberal think tank with close ties to President Barack Obama says the administration and Congress should consider raising taxes on Americans to help close federal budget deficits, an opening salvo in what is likely to be a protracted debate on tax policy.

"In a draft report, the Center for American Progress says the size of projected budget gaps requires considering options including tax increases as well as curbs on annual spending and entitlement programs supported by Democrats.

"Such ideas could pose problems for Mr. Obama, who pledged during the campaign to not increase taxes on families making less than $250,000. The report, which will be released on Wednesday, said the administration can't rely on taxing richer Americans and companies to reduce the deficit to sustainable levels by 2014 because those groups would see 40% tax increases.

"'In all seriousness, responsible people know that additional revenue has to be part of the mix even if they believe in lower taxes in general,' the report concludes."

Mark Hemmingway: What’s Hiding in the Health-Care Bill?

"1. Democrats are hiding the true cost of the bill.

"The actual cost of the Baucus bill is $1.7 trillion over ten years, but Democrats prefer to say it will cost $900 billion over the next ten years — this is true, but only because the main spending provisions don’t kick in until 2013. The Democrats also aren’t advertising that the $838 billion in new taxes and fees in the legislation begin being collected next year.

"Further, the bill’s long-term deficit-reduction plans depend on cuts to Medicare — year after year — that Congress seems unlikely to support once Baucus’s bill is passed. Even when the Congressional Budget Office tallied up the costs of the bill based on the assumption that these cuts would be made, the CBO voiced doubts that they will be. “These projections assume that the proposals are enacted and remain unchanged throughout the next two decades, which is often not the case for major legislation. For example, the sustainable growth rate (SGR) mechanism governing Medicare’s payments to physicians has frequently been modified to avoid reductions in those payments,” reads the CBO score of the Baucus bill. That’s bureaucrat-speak for “Not gonna happen.”

"2. Democrats don’t know how much the bill will cost — and don’t want anyone else to know, either.

"So far, some 500 amendments have been proposed for the Baucus bill, many of which will make the legislation more expensive — how much more expensive, no one knows. Just last Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee approved a supposedly cost-neutral amendment by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.). A few hours later, the CBO informed the committee the bill would cost $600 million. Once the Finance Committee is done considering the amendments in the ongoing mark-up hearings, we could be looking at a radically different and far costlier piece of legislation. Remember all the giveaways that were required to secure enough House votes to pass the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill? Expect similar add-ons to Obamacare.

"And then, it will be hard to tell how much the legislation costs; the Senate Finance Committee doesn’t work with the actual legislative language. They work in “conceptual” language or what they call “plain English.” Senator Baucus himself admits, “This probably sounds a little crazy to some people that we are voting on something before we have seen legislative language.” It doesn’t just sound crazy, the CBO says that it is. Without the actual legislative language, any CBO review of the bill “does not constitute a comprehensive cost estimate” and makes it impossible to get an accurate sense of the cost. When CBO said they would need two weeks to do another formal cost estimate of the amended bill, Baucus balked.

"It's not just the CBO who won't get a chance to look over the bill. Senate Democrats voted down an amendment by Sen. Jim Bunning (R., Kent.) that would have required that, after mark-up, the final language be made available to the public for 72 hours on the Internet. Senator Baucus says he’s against putting the bill online because that, too, would take two weeks.

"Let’s say it would take (an implausible) two weeks to post the bill on the Internet — why would that be a problem? Even Senate moderates were taken aback by Baucus’s reasons for denying the public and the CBO a better look at the bill. “If it takes two more weeks, it takes two more weeks. . . . Is there something happening in two weeks that we can not wait? . . . I want to do our job and I want to sit here and do it as long as it takes,” said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R., Maine), whose support for the bill was once considered crucial. “We shouldn't be afraid of numbers and facts,” Snowe added.

"Apparently, Democrats are afraid that you'll find out what's in the bill and what it will cost.

"3. The Democrats aren’t telling the truth about getting to keep your coverage.

"The legislation contains over $500 billion in cuts to Medicare. That includes $122 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage, a program that allows seniors to receive Medicare benefits through private insurance plans rather than the typical fee-for-service arrangement in Medicare. The number of seniors enrolled in a Medicare Advantage program has nearly doubled from 5 million to 10 million in the last six years, or 22 percent of all Medicare recipients. That’s because Medicare Advantage plans make it easier to get access to doctors and often offer services that go beyond what the traditional Medicare plan does. But Medicare Advantage also costs more, so Democrats have targeted it for cuts. This could mean lots of seniors are kicked out of Medicare Advantage.

"Medicare spending is unsustainable, and Medicare Advantage in particular is expensive. It would be fine if Democrats acknowledged this as a matter of tough choices in the name of fiscal rectitude. Instead, Democrats insist that under the current legislation, “if you like your coverage you can keep it.” Noting the conflict between the specific rhetoric used to sell the bill and what it actually does, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) proposed an amendment to the bill designed to protect Medicare Advantage. It didn’t pass. Hatch proposed another amendment designed to ensure no more than a million people would lose their current coverage. It didn’t pass. And Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas) proposed another amendment to protect the coverage people currently have through their employers from becoming more expensive due to government mandates. It didn’t pass.

"4. The bill promises to provide more coverage to more people with less money and fewer doctors.

"The bill would put some 11 million more Americans into Medicaid. There’s bipartisan agreement that Medicaid doesn’t pay doctors enough. A 2009 survey by Merritt Hawkins and Associates on physician wait times found that over half of all specialists in many major metropolitan areas are refusing to take on new Medicaid patients. According to the survey, “Medicaid is not widely accepted in most markets surveyed, in at least some of the medical specialties reviewed, and, in some cases, all of them.”

"Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) proposed an amendment that would raise the reimbursement rates for children in Medicaid to 100 percent of Medicare levels. It was rejected, as was an amendment (from Wyoming Republican Mike Enzi) to give people enrolled in Medicaid the right to choose to enroll in private insurance plans.

"Until Democrats present a concrete plan for addressing doctor shortages, their promise to cover more Americans and keep costs down at the same time seems dubious at best. (And that’s not taking into account the fact the CBO says that the Medicaid expansion will force $37 billion in unfunded mandates on the states, even as most struggle to balance their budgets.)

"Further, the bill does nothing to address the fraud problem in Medicaid. The Baucus bill is expanding Medicaid even though the Government Accountability Office says 10 percent of all Medicaid spending is fraudulent.

"The bill also does nothing to staunch the hemorrhaging of health-care dollars that flow to the trial bar every year. The lawsuit industry annually imposes costs on the U.S. health-care system that run into the hundreds of billions, estimates Jim Copland of the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Legal Policy.

"This is just what we know about the Baucus legislation after one week of Senate Finance Committee hearings — without knowing which of the over 500 amendments will be tacked on to the bill, with the Senate actively preventing the public from seeing the legislative language, and without an accurate assessment from the Congressional Budget Office on what the final bill is going to cost."

Rev. Wayne Perryman: Lincoln & The Tea Party’s Fatal Mistake

In Lincoln’s memoirs, he was quick to point out that one of his fatal mistakes was thinking that he could win the war without the support of black soldiers. When he received first hand reports of the powerful impact that the black soldiers were having under the leadership of General Lorenzo Thomas, Lincoln wrote: “I desire that a renewed and vigorous effort be made to raise colored forces along the shores of the Mississippi.” Scholars say, Lincoln and his Secretary of War had forgotten that African-Americans had bravely fought in both the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812.

Lincoln openly admitted that not recruiting black soldiers to participate in the fight for their own freedom was a big mistake, the same fatal mistake that many of the organizers of Tea Parties are making when they fail to recruit and encourage conservative blacks to partnership with them in the fight to preserve our freedom and traditional values.

As a well known “independent” conservative and author, I have been ask to speak at several conservative events, while other Black, Latino and Asian conservatives are often overlooked and/or ignored. Fighting to preserve and maintain conservative values is not a white fight, it is a fight that all conservatives must participate in regardless of their color. Like white conservatives at the grass-root level, Black, Latino and Asian conservatives have a responsibility to stand up for conservative values whether they are invited to participate or not. It is not at the grass-root level that I am concern with, it is at the speaker level and far too many Tea Party organizers (not all), for one reason or another have not included conservative speakers of other ethnicities.

We are in a cultural war and like the United States Military, we must use all branches of the military to accomplish our mission. In our cultural war our Air Force, Marines, Navy, Army, and Special Forces are conservative women, men, college students and persons from every ethnic group.

Lincoln thought blacks would not fight, could not fight, and weren’t interesting in fighting for the cause. I think many of the Tea Party organizers may feel the same way about blacks. After hearing from the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other inner-city African American ministers over the years, I know that many were shock to find an inner-city minister like myself who was not only willing to publicly stand up for conservative values, but would invest substantial amounts of money publish books to support his position. (Recent books by Rev. Perryman include: The Drama of Obama, Unfounded Loyalty, and Unveiling the Whole Truth - www.wayneperryman.com).

Like the beautiful young lady standing alone in the corner waiting for some one to ask her to dance, many Blacks, Latinos and Asians are also waiting for someone to invite them to the dance of the Tea Parties (figuratively speaking). But like the beautiful girl, no thinks they will say: “yes.” The Glenn Becks, the Rush Limbaughs, the Sean Hannity and the Governor Huckabees along with local Tea Party organizers must take the risk and reach out to partnership with conservative Blacks, Latinos and Asians if we are to win this cultural war. Lincoln took a risk and recruited blacks to win his war, we must take a risk to win ours as well. If we fail to do so, the liberals like the Confederacy, will kill us all. Contact Rev. Perryman at: Doublebro@aol.com.

I have a question for Whoopi Goldberg....



Whoopi, you feel that you should give a elegant pedophile a pass because he did not commit "rape-rape", a dumb-dumb statement, and it was 30 years ago.

Suppose it was a white Republican who raped a 13 -year-old girl 30 years ago. How would you feel about him? Should we give him a pass too?

If Roman Polanski thought that Sarah Palin was a great choice for Vice President, would you still give him a pass?

(By the way, Sandra Bernhard thought that we black men are experts in gang rape-rape. She wanted Sarah Palin to be our victims. Would you give me a pass too?)

Check this out http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0928091polanskiplea1.html

Tasha Easterling: Michael Moore Gives Democrats A Warning

"'I and a lot of other people have every intention of removing you from Congress in the next election if you stand in the way of health-care legislation that the people want,' the beefy filmmaker roared. 'We will come to your districts, and we will work against you, first in the primary, and if we have to, in the general election. . . . You think we're going to go along with you just because you're Democrats? You should think again!'"

Just words. Just speeches.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Mychal Massie: There's good reason not to trust Obama

We cannot trust Obama or his congressional minions. Not even his loyal surrogates can trust him – just ask New York Gov. David Paterson. Paterson followed the Obama talking points and played the race card, only to watch Obama pretend to be above such thoughts. To further show his appreciation, Obama attempted to secretly undermine Paterson's candidacy and force him into not running – because he believed Mario Cuomo (a white candidate) has a better chance of winning.

and

"Obama's resorting to the tired old lines blaming Bush is simply the desperate rhetoric of an unqualified man cracking under pressure."

WND: Roman Polanski's defenders

Walter Williams: Is disagreement with Obama racism?

"Obama's presidency is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we've come in resolving matters of race. Obama convincingly won votes in states with insignificant black populations, such as the New England states, Iowa and Minnesota. For the nation as a whole, he managed 53 percent of the popular vote and 365 of the Electoral College votes when he only needed 270 to win. So now Jimmy Carter, Dowd, Rangel and other race-carders want us to believe that the massive discontent with Obama is racism. I say nonsense!

"Speaking for the president, Robert Gibbs, White House spokesman, in no uncertain terms said that the president did not think the criticism directed at him and his policies was based on the color of his skin. President Obama refused to answer a reporter who queried him about Carter's comments. When Obama did respond, and much to his credit, he insisted that the 'biggest driver' of the vitriol was distrust of government. His response was not only correct, but the nation is better off as a result of it. We don't need the kind of divisiveness that would surely arise if Obama himself played the race card."

EDITORIAL: Sex scandal double standard

"What if Kevin Jennings were a Republican?"

Big Hollywood: Whoopi Defends Polanski: ‘It wasn’t rape-rape.’

You got to read all of the comments.

Here too: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2350662/posts

To: DogBarkTree

Little 13 year old WHITE girl= Not RAPE rape.(she was asking for it)

Little 13 year old BLACK girl= RACIAL HATE RAPE (Hang the white ba$tard)

MMMM MMM MM

55 posted on Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:51:22 AM by RetSignman (Townhalls ..."We have seen the Patriots and they are us")

How Obama steals elections one at a time



Alice Palmer was a friend of mine.

Obama Superstar

Who is Watching Government Spending

Obama Mia!

Remember your HISTORY

It's Time to drill

ZoNation: SHOOT AGAIN!!!

Introducing AlfonZo Rachel as President Zo-bama

Mac vs PC_obama - PJTV Promo

Under My Bus: ZoBama's 100 Days & Throwing People Under the Bus

President ZoBama does the Tonight Show with Jay Leno

In Pursuit of Happiness: Beating Back Socialism

PJTV: Reminding Pres. Obama Where He Lives

PJTV: How Breitbart Conquered ACORN (and the MSM)

Liberal Dems seek health care access for illegals



"Sheila Jackson Lee (D - TX) proves Joe Wilson (you lie) was right about the Dems trying to insure illegals on health care reform. And she also says that she wants to back door illegals."

Harry R. Jackson, Jr.: Health Care and the Poor

"Under the proposed plan, I am concerned that others in dire straights will not be able to receive the speedy life saving care to which I was afforded. As we discuss the importance of providing affordable access to medical insurance for the millions who do not currently have it, I hope we do not lose sight of the fact that doctors and surgeons also need to be in a position to provide the best treatment measures for their patients.

"Our responsibility, as pastors, is first to preach a holistic healing message to our members and then to provide services to our broader communities that promote wellness and prevention. The message of the Gospel must enrich the mind, soul, and body.

"The Encyclopedia Britannica tells us that: The modern concept of a hospital dates from AD 331 when Constantine, having been converted to Christianity, abolished all pagan hospitals and thus created the opportunity for a new start. Until that time, disease had isolated the sufferer from the community. The Christian tradition emphasized the close relationship of the sufferer to his fellow man, upon who rested the obligation for care. Illness thus became a matter for the Christian Church.

"Europe’s first medical schools came out of the Church. Not surprisingly, most cities still have hospitals that are attached to the faith community. The involvement of people of faith in this arena is both historic and pervasive. The development of hospitals in America followed a very similar path as the Christian community helped establish infirmaries that developed into hospitals. Although no biblical directive about modern healthcare, many Christians believe that concern about healthcare falls under the general principle of 'loving your neighbor.'

"With the community in mind, I would advocate a healthcare system that responsibly reaches out to the poor and needy. Unfortunately, the administration’s proposals (as it now stands) would result in lessening the overall quality of care. While this sounds acceptable in theory, it is impractical. The delay or denial of surgery or treatment for some patients would become a death sentence.

"Let’s be responsive to the needs of the poor and advocate for a healthcare plan that includes both quantity and quality."

Planned Parenthood Killing Fields: Black Genocide

Andrea Lafferty: A Tale Of Two Child Sex Crimes

"Kevin Jennings has admitted covering up the sodomizing of one of his high school students by an older man. By law, Jennings was supposed to have reported this statutory rape of a child to the proper authorities. What did he do? He 'counseled' the boy to continue engaging in sex with an older man and to use a condom. And, he's rewarded by President Obama with a key government post.

"Roman Polanski raped and sodomized a girl 32 years ago; Kevin Jennings deliberately covered up the sodomizing of a young boy. They are both criminals."

Susan Ferrechio: Democrats unable to quell health care revolt among seniors

"Outraged over Democratic plans to cut between $400 billion and $500 billion from Medicare in the next decade, voters over the age of 65 are poised to make the party suffer even steeper losses at the polls than have already been predicted for the midterm election.

"'Seniors bear the brunt of these bills as they are currently funded,' said Betsey McCaughey, a former Republican lieutenant governor of New York and conservative health care policy expert. 'It's a medical assault on seniors.'"

Lady Liberty: I Am, You Are, We All Must Be Racists

"When all somebody can think about is skin color, they're a racist. When people are treated differently because of skin color, that's racist. Isn't it racist, then, for those who want a black president to get the benefit of the doubt where his policies are concerned when they weren't inclined to do the same for a white president? In fact, isn't it racist to even consider skin color when we're talking about such color-neutral things as national security or public policy? And what about real racism? Where are all of the liberals now that a school in Arizona is actually implementing a race-based discipline policy? Apparently, they're busy in Washington calling everybody who says anything negative about Barack Obama a racist."

Jack Kelly: Sarkozy's Contempt for Obama

"What infuriated President Sarkozy was that at the time Mr. Obama said those words, Mr. Obama knew the mullahs in Iran had a secret nuclear weapons development site, and he didn't call them on it.

"‘President Obama dreams of a world without weapons...but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite,' Mr. Sarkozy said.

"'Iran since 2005 has flouted five Security Council resolutions,' Mr. Sarkozy said. 'North Korea has been defying Council resolutions since 1993.'"

Richard Cohen: Time to Act Like a President

"Sooner or later it is going to occur to Barack Obama that he is the president of the United States. As of yet, though, he does not act that way, appearing promiscuously on television and granting interviews like the presidential candidate he no longer is. The election has been held, but the campaign goes on and on. The candidate has yet to become commander in chief."

Michael Collins: The G-20 Announces the "New World Order"

"The people who brought the world to this state of decline and struggle are still in charge. They're fixing the very problems they created."

Chuck Baldwin: U.S. TO BREAK UP SOON?

"A historian and linguist from South Africa recently wrote me a fascinating letter, in which he chronicled the major world empires of history, dating the time of their rise and fall. Here is what his calculations look like:

"Assyria (859-612 B.C.): a 247-year reign.
Persia (538-330 B.C.): a 208-year reign.
Greece (331-100 B.C.): a 231-year reign.
The Roman Republic (260-27 B.C.): a 233-year reign.
The Roman Empire (27 B.C.-180 A.D.): a 207-year reign.
The Arab Empire (634-880 A.D.): a 246-year reign.
The Mameluke Empire (1250-1517 A.D.): a 267-year reign.
The Ottoman Empire (1320-1570 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Spain (1500-1750 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Romanov Russia (1682-1916 A.D.): a 234-year reign.
Great Britain (1700-1950 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
The USA (1790-2009 A.D.): 219 years and counting.

"My honorable historian-friend calculates America's reign using its post-Revolutionary War years. He notes that America's reign is currently at 219 years. He further notes that the average duration of every world superpower listed above is a little over 238 years.

"One does not need to be a master mathematician or possess a Ph.D. to realize that America is fast approaching the mark in which every major world power in history has either collapsed or, at a minimum, lost its world leadership and power."

Salon: Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child

"Can we do that? Can we take a moment to think about all that, and about the fact that Polanski pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, before we start talking about what a victim he is? Because that would be great, and not nearly enough people seem to be doing it."

and

"Wow, OK, let's break that down. First, as blogger Jeff Fecke says, 'Fun fact: the age of consent in 1977 in California was 16. It's now 18. But of course, the age of consent isn't like horseshoes or global thermonuclear war; close doesn't count. Even if the age of consent had been 14, the girl wasn't 14." Also, even if the girl had been old enough to consent, she testified that she did not consent. There's that. Though of course everyone makes a bigger deal of her age than her testimony that she did not consent, because if she'd been 18 and kept saying no while he kissed her, licked her, screwed her and sodomized her, this would almost certainly be a whole different story -- most likely one about her past sexual experiences and drug and alcohol use, about her desire to be famous, about what she was wearing, about how easy it would be for Roman Polanski to get consensual sex, so hey, why would he need to rape anyone? It would quite possibly be a story about a wealthy and famous director who pled not guilty to sexual assault, was acquitted on 'she wanted it' grounds, and continued to live and work happily in the U.S. Which is to say that 30 years on, it would not be a story at all. So it's much safer to focus on the victim's age removing any legal question of consent than to get tied up in that thorny 'he said, she said' stuff about her begging Polanski to stop and being terrified of him.

"Second, Polanski was 'demonized by the press' because he raped a child, and was convicted because he pled guilty. He 'feared heavy sentencing' because drugging and raping a child is generally frowned upon by the legal system. Shore really wants us to pity him because of these things? (And, I am not making this up, boycott the entire country of Switzerland for arresting him.)"

and

"Drugging and raping a child, then leaving the country before you can be sentenced for it, is behavior our society should not tolerate, no matter how famous, wealthy or well-connected you are."

Wake Up America: Eugene Robinson Takes On Hollywood Pigs Uniting Behind Polanski

"Pleading guilty to unlawful sex with an underage girl — the drugging, raping and sodomizing of a 13 year-old — isn’t stopping Hollywood from ginning up an indignation campaign over the possibility of fugitive director Roman Polanski being held accountable for his crimes. Yes, these are the values of those who control the most powerful propaganda device ever created. Which begs a question: If his unspeakable deed doesn’t meet the standard, what exactly would Roman Polanski have to do in order to become a pariah in this town … I mean, besides vote for Sarah Palin?"

False Charges From Carville and Rolling Stone - Real Conflicts at AARP

NEW YORK, Sept. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Betsy McCaughey:


On CNN, James Carville claims that Phillip Morris paid me to "plant a story in the New Republic" on the dangers of the Clinton's health plan in 1994. Carville cites an article in Rolling Stone magazine relying on a memo written by an unknown source. He calls this "breathtaking evidence." In fact, the magazine's claim and the unidentified source on which it is based are a patent lie. Carville and CNN should check their facts before making such charges.


When I wrote my prize-winning essay for the New Republic, I was supported by an academic fellowship from the Olin Foundation, a not-for-profit charitable organization. I did not receive any other payment for my work. Nor did I consult with anyone at Phillip Morris.


The Manhattan Institute, where I was a senior fellow, has already issued a statement that I was in no way connected to or influenced by Phillip Morris. Therefore James Carville's claim is cruel and libelous.


The Obamacare partisans choose to attack me personally rather than addressing the issues. If they could win the public debate on the merits of their legislation, they wouldn't have to resort to personal attacks against me. Their health legislation will be dangerous to patients, especially the elderly.


Though I do not have a financial stake in the debate, another strong voice in the current debate does have financial conflicts. AARP, the organization that is supposed to advocate for the elderly is instead conducting a huge campaign for "universal coverage," which would require everyone to buy health insurance. AARP makes over $300 Million a year, from selling insurance bearing its logo. That's about 30% of its billion dollars in annual revenue. No wonder AARP wants buying insurance to be mandatory. It's a giant insurance company. For the details of where AARP gets its money, check its consolidated financial statements, audited by PMG, at www.aarp.org.

Inflation Could Spell End of U.S. Financial System

FORT LEE, N.J., Sept. 25 /PRNewswire/ -- The National Inflation Association today released the following statement to its http://inflation.us/ members:


"It's unbelievable how Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said that the U.S. recession is "very likely over", but once again this week the Federal Reserve has left interest rates at a record low of 0%. If the economy was truly rebounding, wouldn't you think now is the time for Bernanke to raise interest rates to 1% or possibly even 2%? He refuses to do so because he knows without the free money that is flooding the system, our financial markets would once again collapse to new nominal lows. While that would be the politically unpopular move, at least it would ensure the survival of our country. By giving in to political pressure and keeping interest rates at 0%, soon the flood of dollars will break the dam and collapse the U.S. financial system.


We as Americans must stand up now and express out outrage about the Federal Reserve's destruction of our nation. While we are huge supporters of the tea party movement, we must work to focus the movement on exposing the Federal Reserve. The reason why half of the nation still supports Obama is because no matter how many trillions of dollars get spent on health care reform, Obama has promised not to raise taxes for the poor and middle class. These Americans don't understand that inflation is a tax and they will get taxed to death by inflation.


Most of today's youth in America learned at an early age from their parents that back in the 1950's, it cost $0.50 for a movie ticket, $0.16 for a box of Corn Flakes, and $0.05 for a candy bar. A kid's first reaction after learning this normally is, "Wow, I wish I was alive back then when everything was so cheap! I would be able to go to the movie theater every day and eat candy all day long!" Kids were taught that prices have gone up and to be jealous of their parents. They were never taught that prices have gone up only because of the dollar going down. Instead of being taught to envy their parents for being so lucky to buy things cheap, they should've been taught to be furious at the Federal Reserve for stealing their parent's wealth through inflation.


It took 25 years for our national debt to double from $257 billion in 1950 to over $533 billion in 1975. Most recently, our national debt has more than doubled from $5.8 trillion in 2001 to its current level of $11.8 trillion in just eight years. Our national debt is now growing three times faster that it did decades ago, which means we should expect a very minimum of three times faster inflation. Therefore, if it took 60 years for a movie ticket price to rise from $0.50 to $7.50, it will most certainly rise to at least $112.50 within the next 20 years.


The U.S. government is now estimating its budget deficit over the next ten years to be $9 trillion. We all know they are trying to downplay the potential deficit and be as optimistic as possible. It wouldn't surprise us if the budget deficit reaches $9 trillion over just the next three years because as the dollar loses its purchasing power, government workers and soldiers will all demand higher wages as they did in Zimbabwe. This will lead to more money printing and further precipitate a downward spiral in the dollar.


We are at the point where our national debt simply cannot be paid back and once inflation spirals out of control in the form of rising prices, interest rates will likely rise to over 20% once again. Most of our national debt today is made up of short-term t-bills and when we reach a point where the Federal Reserve must print trillions of dollars per year just to make interest payments on our national debt, that is when the financial system will truly collapse and only those with physical gold and silver will be able to survive. The current standard of living and way of life in America is unsustainable and coming to an end. Those who thought we could continue on with increasing our budget deficits and national debt forever without ever paying for it, will feel very foolish soon."


To receive our latest articles and updates in advance, sign-up for the free NIA newsletter at: http://inflation.us/


About us:


The National Inflation Association is an organization that is dedicated to preparing Americans for hyperinflation. The NIA offers free membership at http://www.inflation.us/ and provides its members with articles about the economy and inflation, news stories, important charts not shown by the mainstream media; YouTube videos featuring Jim Rogers, Marc Faber, Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, and others; and profiles of gold, silver, and agriculture companies that we believe could prosper in an inflationary environment.

PJTV Debuts 'Medically Incorrect' Show, Puts Health Care Reform Under the Microscope

LOS ANGELES, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today Internet television media company PJTV (www.PJTV.com) is proud to announce a partnership with world-renowned doctor Peter Weiss and the premiere of his new fall program on PJTV, "Medically Incorrect."


Dr. Weiss is an OB/GYN at Cedars Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, Medical Director of Rodeo Drive Women's Health Center and Rodeo Drive Dermatology and Aesthetics, and an Assistant Clinical Professor at the UCLA School of Medicine. He has appeared on CNN, Fox News Channel, NBC's "Today Show" and "Extra," TLC's "A Baby Story," E! News, Discovery Health Channel, and more.


As the "Medically Incorrect" host, Dr. Weiss will take a straight-forward look at the real health care problems in the U.S. In addition to lively discussion of the latest health care headlines and political developments, PJTV viewers will actually see Dr. Weiss at work, interacting with patients, explaining forms and procedures, and describing what the differences would be under alternate medical systems. The show will be produced by Hollywood filmmaker and screenwriter Craig Haffner.


"The MSM is barely scratching the surface of the complex health care debate so PJTV is filling that void for concerned citizens with Dr. Weiss' in-depth, clear-cut commentary and analysis on 'Medically Incorrect,'" said PJTV CEO Roger L. Simon. "Who better to address, exhibit and offer realistic solutions to our country's key health care problems than a highly-acclaimed, board-certified, published medical doctor, consultant, and professor working on the front lines at one of America's best hospitals?"


"Medically Incorrect" is the latest component of PJTV's ongoing effort to cover all angles of the health care reform debate. For more information about "Medically Incorrect" and to view the premiere episode of the program, please visit http://pjtv.com/v/2488.


About PJTV


PJTV (www.PJTV.com) is a conservative and center-right Internet TV company. Working with conservative think tanks and bloggers, PJTV started production in September 2008 as the first online TV venture to be given a sky box at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis. The PJTV headquarters studio is located in El Segundo, Calif., with remote studio locations in New York City and Washington, D.C. In addition, PJTV brings in many contributors via web cams.

World Vision to G20: More Influence Must Equal More Responsibility Toward Global Poor

PITTSBURGH, Sept. 25 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The move to make the G20 the world's leading economic body holds potential for broader coordination in the global fight against poverty and hunger, though it may also pose risks for achieving promises made by G8 leaders at previous summits, say aid policy experts at humanitarian agency World Vision.


The Group of Twenty's shift to prominence as a top global forum raises questions for the international development agenda and accountability for meeting goals, says World Vision, a relief and development organization working in 100 countries including most G20 nations. While a more-empowered G20 could become a stronger voice for the poor, aid policy experts note that the group's failure to prioritize the needs of the poor during this week's summit is concerning.


At the same time that the G20 affirmed a commitment to achieving Millennium Development Goals, it is crucial for the Group of Eight to also remain committed to past promises addressing poverty, the Christian humanitarian agency says. G20 leaders must make more room on the agenda to tackle development-related issues.


"There is some peril, as the two groups sort out priorities between focusing on economic issues and security, that implementing targeted global assistance for the world's poorest and most vulnerable could fall through the cracks," said Robert Zachritz, World Vision's director for advocacy and government relations in the United States.


"Global poverty clearly was not a main focus of the G20 leaders in Pittsburgh this week, and that has consequences for the 1.4 billion people living in extreme poverty, including citizens these leaders represent," said Zachritz.


G20 nations together represent two thirds of the world's population and as much as 90 percent of its economic output. As such, this group of leaders has a responsibility to fuel action against the poverty-related problems of preventable disease, child and maternal deaths, malnutrition and hunger, which economic crises magnify.


While the leaders' final statement recognized the importance of food security, education and closing the development gap for the world's most vulnerable, the communique lacked urgency and a clear, specific plan of action. Meantime, one of six people in the world go to bed hungry each night, and malnutrition underlies a third of the 8.8 million preventable child deaths annually. Some 1.4 billion people are living on less than $1.25 a day.


World Vision calls on developing and industrialized countries alike to tackle the causes of extreme poverty and hunger, and boost progress in reducing child and maternal deaths. As emerging countries become more influential through the rising pace and weight of G20 summits, they must be held responsible for efforts to both meet their own country's needs and the needs of others. As World Vision has seen from its work in communities in dozens of developing countries, each nation's government and communities bear primary responsibility for addressing the rights and needs of their citizens.


Success in achieving goals to reduce hunger, preventable deaths and extreme poverty depends on countries meeting their existing aid commitments, making themselves accountable for action, and developing specific strategies and timelines for executing plans. We urge leaders to adopt these priorities as they prepare for their joint "transition" summit to be held in Canada in June 2010, as announced today


World Vision is a Christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. Visit worldvision.org/press.

Venezuela's Political Prisoners Join Student Hunger Strike

CARACAS, Venezuela, Sept. 28 /PRNewswire/ -- A public hunger strike being held by some 34 students on the steps of the Caracas office of the Organization of American States (OAS) was joined by six more people on Sunday night, as the political prisoners Ivan Simonovis, Lazaro Forero, Juan Guevara, Gustavo Azocar, Leocenis Garcia, and Eligio Cedeno published a statement announcing their solidarity.


The students protesting in front of the OAS have been on a hunger strike for three days now (with their numbers steadily growing), requesting that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) send a delegation to investigate the situation and secure the release of political prisoners, including the 22-year-old student leader Julio Cesar Rivas, who was arrested in early September for participating in a protest against a new controversial education law. When the young Cesar Rivas was incarcerated in open population at a notoriously dangerous prison facility, public outrage ensued.


"It says a lot about where President Hugo Chavez's revolution has gone when he has lost all support of the youth, boasting about using tear gas against them, and now, throwing the sons and daughters of Venezuela into the most violent prisons in Latin America," said Robert Amsterdam, the international attorney for Eligio Cedeno, one of the hunger striking political prisoners. "The international community has a responsibility to act upon this hunger strike, and immediately break its silence over Venezuela's treatment of political prisoners."


According to a statement published on Cedeno's website and in the Venezuelan media, the six political prisoners have joined in solidarity with the students "to call attention of all of the Americas represented in the OAS, as well as global opinion, to the lack of rule of law in Venezuela." The statement emphasized, "Our children are not alone!"


The broad range of participants in this hunger strike shows how Chavez's repression affects all sectors of society, says Amsterdam. The police chiefs Ivan Simonovis and Lazaro Forero were arrested and tried on trumped up charges for doing nothing more than carrying out the duties of their positions during the events of April 2002. In a recent letter to the former attorney general and current ambassador to Spain, Isaias Rodriguez, Simonovis wrote, "you have manipulated evidence, changed stories, distorted witness testimonies, and using your broad political power, intimidated and manipulated judges and prosecutors to persecute, disparage, and imprison many Venezuelans."


Juan Guevara was arrested and imprisoned in 2004 on charges of being involved in the controversial murder of Prosecutor Danilo Anderson, which is widely denounced as a frame job to cover up the true authors of the crime. Gustavo Azocar is a journalist who has been imprisoned for more than two months accused of financial charges - three judges have already abstained from hearing his case, while most recently another was suspended by the state. Leocenis Garcia is another journalist who was imprisoned and allegedly tortured in 2008, leading the UK-based NGO International PEN to denounce his treatment.


Eligio Cedeno, accused of foreign exchange fraud, was first imprisoned in February of 2007 under pre-trial detention, though the state had not yet charged him with any offense of such grounds. His first trial was abruptly suspended the night before the final verdict once it was clear he would be acquitted of all charges. Over the course of the state's handling of the Cedeno case, most rights to defense have been denied, more than 17 prosecutors have resigned, and the only judge to issue a favorable verdict was forced to seek political asylum in the United States after an attempted kidnapping of her son. Cedeno's treatment, like that of several other political prisoners, stands in open violation to domestic and international law, as well as Venezuela's international treaties, his lawyers say.


For ongoing information and updates on the Eligio Cedeno case, please visit http://www.eligiocedeno.com/ and Robert Amsterdam's new Venezuela-focused blog, at http://www.robertamsterdam.com/venezuela

California Healthy Marriages Coalition Says Helping Couples With Marriage Can Also Help Cut the Cost of Juvenile Crime

SAN DIEGO, Sept. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The LA Times recently highlighted a study from the California Dropout Research Project which identified an increase of $1.1 billion in costs associated with crime due to higher numbers of juveniles dropping out of school. Several studies now link high divorce rates with increases in juvenile delinquency and academic decline, pointing the way to an innovative marriage-strengthening solution that reduces these spiraling costs.


Pennsylvania State Professor Paul A. Amato summarized results in 2005 from 93 studies confirming that children with divorced parents are on average worse off than those with continuously married parents on measures of academic success, conduct, behavior problems, aggression, psychological well-being, self-esteem, and peer relations. Similarly, the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, Waves I and II found "20 percent of students in Grades 7-12 who lived with their married, biological parents experienced suspension or expulsion from school, in contrast with rates higher than 50 percent among adolescents who lived with a single, never-married parent." A 2005 study from the Center for Marriage and Families found "Children growing up with non-intact families engage in more adolescent misbehavior harming both grades and test scores, and concluded that "Family structure substantially influences high school dropout rates and graduation rates."


California Healthy Marriages Coalition (CHMC) President Dennis Stoica believes that Marriage and Relationship Education can reduce these problems. "If we want to reduce dropout and delinquency rates, we need to look at broad scale means for teaching parents the skills for creating healthy marriages and families. Research clearly shows that relationship skills programs help keep families together. By making these programs more widely available throughout the state, we would be able to keep more kids out of the juvenile justice system and significantly lower social services costs that our State now struggles with."


In the LA Times article, California's Dropout Research Project Director Russell Rumberger estimates that reduced crime will save the state $2 for every $1 invested. Responding to this, CHMC's Stoica says "We welcome a partnership with legislators, law enforcement officials and the Department of Education to educate the public about healthy relationships as a means for lowering juvenile delinquency rates and the cost of juvenile crime. Together we can tackle this problem with an innovative educational approach with widespread benefits."


CHMC is the recipient of the Federal government's largest Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant. For the past four years, CHMC has taught proven relationship-building skills to California individuals and couples. Local class information is available at www.CaMarriage.com.

California Pro-Lifers Launch Human Rights Amendment Petition Campaign

WASHINGTON, Sept. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- California has joined the race to recognize human rights and personhood for all human beings from the biological beginning of development.


The state's most outspoken pro-life advocates submitted the California Human Rights Amendment to Attorney General Jerry Brown following a press conference Monday in Sacramento.


"The preborn, while demonstrably alive and demonstrably human, are not protected 'persons' under our state constitution," said Lila Rose, the 21-year-old student pro-life activist, president of Live Action and cosponsor of the amendment. "Our laws must protect each person's basic human right to life, from the beginning of his or her life until the end."


The push is backed by the California Civil Rights Foundation, a coalition of pro-lifers including Rose and sponsor Walter Hoye, the pastor arrested and imprisoned in 2008 for standing in silent witness outside an abortion mill.


"The California Human Rights Amendment recognizes that valuing human life is fundamental to life itself," Hoye said at the press conference, "and is the cornerstone of peace and prosperity for any society."


Hoye and Rose were joined by Judie Brown, president of American Life League and Keith Mason, founder of PersonhoodUSA.


The activists stressed that personhood fulfills the dream of the civil rights movement.


"The injustice of denying the personhood of whole classes of human beings is an injustice that cannot go unchallenged," Brown said. "Now is the time for justice. Nothing less is acceptable in a republic based on the principle of equal justice for one and all."


California joins personhood movements in Missouri, Florida, Montana and Colorado. California state law requires a petition be circulated and signed by a number of people equal to at least 8 percent of votes cast for governor during the last state election.


The California Human Rights Amendment reads:

Article 1, Section 7


(c) The term "person" applies to all living human organisms from the beginning of their biological development as human organisms -- regardless of the means by which they were procreated, method of reproduction, age, race, sex, gender, physical well-being, function, or condition of physical or mental dependency and/or disability.


American Life League was cofounded in 1979 by Judie Brown. It is the largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States and is committed to the protection of all innocent human beings from the moment of creation to natural death. For more information or press inquiries, please contact Katie Walker at 540.659.4942.


FOR MORE INFORMATION:

California Civil Rights Foundation:
http://civilrightsfoundation.org/

PersonhoodUSA:
http://www.personhoodusa.com/

American Life League: Personhood
http://all.org/personhood

What's it Take to Be a Racist?

Master Of Puppets: Don't Fear Obama, Fear the Puppeteer

Why the Left Needs to Keep the Poor Poor

The Secret Code of Right Wing Racists...Exposed!

MoveOn Activists At An ObamaCare Rally: Scare Tactics, Illiterate Republicans & Socialist Lies

Hope Can Change A Lot in 8 Months

Laugh Clowns: Nero Fiddled As Rome Burned ... Now America Suffers as Hillary & Co. Laugh It Up

Yid with Lid: Trial Lawyers Own The Democrats--That's Why There's No Tort Reform

"The accounting firm Pricewaterhouse Coopers says about 10 percent of the cost of medical service is attributable to medical malpractice lawsuits. Roughly 2 percent is caused by direct costs of the lawsuits; an additional 5 percent to 9 percent is due to expenses run up by defensive medicine.

"So why the lack of tort reform in ObamaCare? Start with the campaign dollars the president received from the legal industry...."

Byron York: Without Bush, media lose interest in war caskets

"In April of this year, the Obama administration lifted the press ban, which had been in place since the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Media outlets rushed to cover the first arrival of a fallen U.S. serviceman, and many photographers came back for the second arrival, and then the third.

"But after that, the impassioned advocates of showing the true human cost of war grew tired of the story. Fewer and fewer photographers showed up. 'It's really fallen off,' says Lt. Joe Winter, spokesman for the Air Force Mortuary Affairs Operations Center at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, where all war dead are received. 'The flurry of interest has subsided.'"

and

"With casualties mounting, the debate over U.S. policy in Afghanistan is sharp and heated. The number of arrivals at Dover is increasing. But the journalists who once clamored to show the true human cost of war are nowhere to be found."

Monday, September 28, 2009

Vickie Winans "Long As I Got King Jesus"

Ron Christie: The numbers don't lie

"Here's what Vice President Joe Biden noted in a speech released yesterday by the White House quoted by the Post:

"'The Recovery Act has played a significant role in changing the trajectory of our economy and changing the conversation about the economy in this country,' Biden said in a speech at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. 'Instead of talking about the beginning of a depression, we are talking about the end of a recession.'

"Well, the Labor Department just released the unemployment numbers a few moments ago and unemployment is now at 9.7 percent — the highest level in our nation since June 1983. More than 216,000 Americans lost their job last month and nearly one out of every 10 Americans is out of a job, and the administration is crowing about how the pork-laden stimulus bill is 'changing the trajectory of our economy and changing the conversation about the economy?'

"So far as I can see, the trajectory of unemployment continues to rise and the conversations I hear about people keeping their jobs remains tense. As for the White House? Its numbers and rosy optimism just don't add up."

NWO & Kingdoms Of This World Will Lose

Goverments Should Be Afraid of their People

ALEX ISENSTADT: In the race from race, Democrats rebut Jimmy Carter

"From the White House to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Democrats raced to distance themselves from the former president’s claim that racism was behind Rep. Joe Wilson’s 'You lie' outburst and other attacks on President Barack Obama.

“'Listen, he’s the former president, and he’s entitled to his point of view,' said Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). 'I personally believe President Obama and his administration are focused on the issues, and I agree with that.'

“I don’t see this as a racial issue,' added Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.). 'There are a lot of people upset about how we on the Democratic side can engage like we have been, and there’s a lot of anger out there. So, I don’t see it as a racial issue.'

“'I didn’t agree with it,' Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) said of Carter’s remarks.

"Congressional Democrats have no interest in starting a racial argument that could turn off swing district voters whose support the party will need if it plans on keeping its grip on Congress in 2010. And the current occupants of the White House made it clear Wednesday that they have no interest in bringing race back to the fore of any discussion about Obama."



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27248.html#ixzz0STFeXkRJ

Hilmar von Campe: The real threat to America: Godlessness

"Nazi society was based on lies, and lies are in the process of taking over America. I try to clarify for the American people that the ideological attack on America is part of the global attempt to eliminate God everywhere, replace Him with arbitrary rule of (leftist) man and destroy freedom. Godlessness brought Germany down. Godlessness is America's and freedom's No. 1 enemy."

and

"Socialist philosophy is rooted in the concepts of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a French political philosopher in the 18th century: that man is good but exposed to the corruption of society, and that it is the corruption of the political and social environment that is responsible for the evil in society. Therefore, justification for the socialists' policies is the pretense that they are out for justice and want to change the social and political structures to free mankind. That, of course, is a lie because evil is within every person, and their political praxis is reduced to the brutal fight for power by all means, playing up, lying to and enlisting the underdog. Only the means are different for the various socialist branches, but the principle is the same for all: the end justifies the means. Joseph Goebbels, propaganda minister of Hitler, is quoted in Germany with the statement '… it is not for nothing that we have chosen the name National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP), because at heart we are Communists.' Briefing his generals before the invasion of the Soviet Union in June of 1941, Hitler told them that he wanted to bring them 'real socialism.' His declared intention was to destroy the Christian churches after victory."

UK Telegraph: Andy Williams accuses Barack Obama of following Marxist theory

"But Williams had a less favourable opinion of the current president.

"'Don't like him at all,' he said, 'I think he wants to create a socialist country. The people he associates with are very Left-wing. One is registered as a Communist.

"'Obama is following Marxist theory. He's taken over the banks and the car industry. He wants the country to fail.'"

Lloyd Marcus: Open letter to white liberals from a black American

"Dear White Liberal America,

"Thank you very, very much. You see us poor helpless inferior blacks, oh forgive me, I must be politically correct, 'African Americans,' and you want to help us using your superior intellect. After all, we could not possibly succeed in this racist, homophobic and greedy country without your assistance.

"I first met you guys in the 70s when I attended the prestigious Maryland Institute College of Art on a scholarship. A black kid from the ghetto, I found myself amongst white kids from well to do families. I worked a part-time job to cover my books and art supplies. You guys did not have to work.

"And yet, I remember many conversations about how you would never bring a child into this 'freaking world' and how 'freaking screwed up' this 'freaking country is.' You told me how 'freaking selfish' your 'freaking parents' were and how they only cared about 'freaking money.' Then, you drove off in your convertible given to you by your 'freaking parents' as I stood at the bus stop.

"I can not thank you enough for the numerous times you shared your expensive premmo weed with me. While I enjoyed the free weed (of which I've long ceased to indulge) and rebellious chicks, in all honesty, I could not figure out what you were so p-o-ed about.

"So, now you former hippie boomers are in total control of government, colleges and public schools, still selling your Utopian message of peace and love. Thanks for getting rid of black dads in the home via your welfare programs. I mean, everyone knows dads are cruel chauvinists who beat and molest their kids.

"Oh, and thanks for encouraging schools to accept black kids speaking Ebonics rather than English. It would be racist to expect us simple minded colored folks to learn to speak English correctly. And besides, we don't want our black kids sounding too white. Authentic blacks must sound like the hood, love rap and Kentucky Fried. I would never trust any black that eats 'sushi'; which is probably what those traitors, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas eat. If Justice Thomas would have answered his phone with a 'What up!' and a heartfelt 'A-muri-ka sucks,' the NAACP would have championed him as a true brother faithful to his blackness. Sadly, Rice and 'Uncle Thomas' as we call him, chose the character, education and hard work route to success. How disgusting!

"Yes, you libs are soooo good to us. I really appreciate 'b' actresses like Janeane Garofalo putting that Uncle Tom, RNC Chairman, Michael Steele in his place when she said he suffered from Stockholm Syndrome. How dare he not view himself as a victim of white America. How dare he empower young blacks with the knowledge that they can achieve without liberal intervention. What an ungrateful, well, you know the word I'm thinking. It begins with an 'N.'

"In closing, you libs, please keep up the good work. With your continued diligence, we minorities and most Americans will not have to work or be responsible for anything. Your president is in the process of confiscating the wealth from those greedy rich white SOBs and redistributing it to us. Right on!

"Now, if I can just figure out how to tie my shoes all by myself. But if I can't, I know you libs are there for me. Fighting back tears of overwhelming gratitude, again, I thank you."

Lloyd Marcus: Stop allowing the left to set the rules

"New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd called Congressman Joe Wilson a racist for saying, 'You lie' to president Obama. Using her psychic powers, Dowd said Wilson was really saying in his mind, 'You lie, BOY!' And yet, liberal commentator Julianne Malveaux, saying she hopes black conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife 'feeds him a lot of fatty foods so he will die early from heart disease like many black men', was not considered racist. I am a black conservative singer, songwriter, entertainer and columnist. Liberals have posted comments all over YouTube and C-Span freely using and calling me the 'N; word. Because they are libs and I am an uppity, off the liberal plantation, run-away black, all tactics to restore me to my owners are acceptable."

Ercille I. Christmas: Are We There Yet?...Reason v. Racism

"Am I a racist because:

"I disagree with seeing, hearing the president apologize to a bunch of two bit dictators for America, on his extended 'blame America,' tour?

"I disagree with his increasing the US debt more in six months than was done in two centuries?

"I disagree with the take over of private industries with a stroke of a pen, and we are still presumably living in a democratic republic?

"I disagree with a proposed a healthcare plan that could be run the same as those other government agencies with their overwhelming record of success, a health care plan under whose mandate, I and my fellow citizens will be forced to pay for healthcare for those who voluntarily invaded the country? Isn’t 2017 'B Day,' as in Bankruptcy day/year for Medicare?

"I disagree with the cavalier description of myself as one who 'clings' to God, or I am a 'right wing fanatic' because I oppose abortion?

"I disagree with hearing my fellow citizens consecutively and concurrently described as 'derisive,' 'arrogant,' a 'mob,' to be 'called out,' by the president, and now 'racist' as the piece de resistance?

"I am foreign born and when I see this 'War of the Roses,' I am thankful that I grew up elsewhere, unencumbered by the need to view every thing through the prism of race. I was raised in an atmosphere with a mother who had quite a few pints of white blood in her. The younger version of her with her hair pulled back in an upsweep looked like a young Jackie Kennedy. Although my Mom was very light skinned, she married two dark skinned black men. The other woman in my life, my adopted Mother, did not have time for the crap that skin color is a barrier to achievement.

"With that background, when I immigrated here, legally, and for the first time heard about affirmative action and the double standard based on race, I was puzzled. My puzzlement turned to bewilderment, and now rage. This life is difficult enough without adding an unnecessary bogey man. My interpretation of the 'double standard' is a situation where too many Caucasians are so afraid of being labeled “racist” that behavior that would be unacceptable when exhibited by another white, is perfectly fine, if the perpetrator is black. So if a white kid is pummeled within an inch of his life, move along…nothing to see here.

"Turn the tables, and a black kid is pummeled by some white kids, the hunt is on for these junior versions of the KKK! Want to find an example of 'reverse racism,' in the very recent past? Call up one of those Duke University lacrosse players. I hope that those players have found it in their hearts to forgive the race baiters who came after them with a vengeance. To further add insult to injury, the race baiters were not men enough to apologize to the players, when the alleged racial component vanished. I won’t even dwell on the famous 'Beer Summit,' when the president invited the black professor and the white cop to have a beer at the People’s House. Those suds have long since fizzled.

"When I first heard about affirmative action, I thought someone must have been soft in the head to come up with such a cockamamie idea of effectively telling one race of people 'you are inherently inferior.' Therefore, we are going to lower the bar so that you can get into college and get jobs for which you qualify – not because of the contents of your resume or experience – but because of the color of your skin? Thank God I never found myself in that situation. Although a non-violent person, I would have probably thrown a textbook or computer at anyone approaching me about making me a quota kid. I got where I am through God-given ability, and I would not have it any other way! Affirmative action is evil and racist.

"Skip the hate mail. I am in a protected status. I am a triple minority. I am black, female and a foreigner. And since I am a foreigner, I have more rights than an American born citizen. Had I played my cards right and set up shop here illegally, I would have had even more rights, with American citizens paying through the nose for me! That is the social, financial structure that has been deliberately set up by power-drunk immoral politicians. Allowing the sovereignty of the US to be broken down by encouraging the “immigration” of about 20 million illegal aliens is no 'mistake.' It was a deliberate act to put 'uppity' US citizens, white and black, with all of this talk about liberty and freedom, in their place. Is the ultimate goal to have the country downgraded to third world status? If that is the goal, then the current plan is foolproof. Ask California.

"That is not to say that there is not white racism. There is. There will always be a small minority of whites who feel that blacks are inferior, because of the color of their skin. Sometimes the rage of these white racists, erupts in vituperation and vengeful acts. Even so, in a country of 300 million, they are not even a blip on the radar. Truthfully, they have been marginalized, by the combined actions of blacks and whites. They are irrelevant and powerless. If we stand up to them, like many bullies, they slink away when there is a chance that they could be on the receiving end of what they are trying to dish out.

"Their fellow racists, black in color, are now much more successful than the white racists, in plying their 'trade.' The black racists have been thriving and surviving on 'white guilt.' They have perfected the art of turning almost every incident into a racial one. They live on 'payback' laws, supposedly designed to bring about 'equality,' but which boil down to: 'Whites for about a century and a quarter or so, you had your way. It is our turn now, and boy, are we going to make you pay, and pay, and pay, and pay!' These black racists keep preaching their 'gospel' of the white man as the devil walking the earth in an overall or Brooks Brothers suit, while ironically wearing those same Brooks Brothers suits, or Armani, as they preach reverse racism!

"They actively work to keep their 'community,' in an eternal state of 'victimhood.' Absent that 'victimhood' status quo, they would be forced to find a new line of 'employment.' Down the tubes would go the mansions, the appropriate wheels, and prodigious bank accounts. Yep, this working 'tirelessly' on behalf of 'victims of racism,' is a lucrative gig. Just once, I want to hear the race baiters, 'get religion,' and begin preaching the gospel of 'loving one another.' Just once I would love to hear them preach and follow the Martin principle of judging folks by the content of the character, and leave color out of the equation. Just once."

Warner Todd Huston: What’s the Difference Between a Conservative and a Liberal?

"Here are some brief rules of thumb:

"•If a conservative sees a U.S.flag, his heart swells with pride.
•If a liberal sees a U.S. flag, he feels shame.

"•If a conservative doesn’t like guns, they don’t buy them.
•If a liberal doesn’t like guns, then no one else should have one either.

"•If a conservative is a vegetarian, he won’t eat meat.
•If a liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

"•If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat it.
•If a liberal see an enemy he wonders what he can do to appease him.

"•If a conservative is homosexual, he’ll quietly enjoy his life.
•If a liberal is homosexual, he’ll demand everyone get involved in his bedroom activities.

"•If a successful conservative is black or Hispanic, he’ll see himself as having succeeded on his own merits.
•Successful liberal minorities still claim “racism” and want government to give them even more.

"•If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to work to better his situation.
•A liberal wants someone else to take care of him.

"•If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
•If a liberal doesn’t like a radio show, he demands that the station be shut down or censored.

"•If a conservative is a non-believer, he just doesn’t go to church.
•Non-believing liberals demand that everyone cease believing and demands churches be censored.

"•If a conservative needs health care, he shops for it, or chooses a job that provides it.
•Liberals demand that everyone else provide him with healthcare for free.

"•If a conservative sees a law, he thinks long and hard before suggesting a change.
•If a liberal sees a law he assumes it is just a suggestion and does what he wants anyway.

"•Conservatives feel there is a right and wrong.
•Liberals feel that nothing is really wrong… unless it is believed by a conservative.

"•Conservatives believe in freedom, responsibility, tradition, and self-reliance.
•Liberals believe in license, government restrictions, upending tradition, and collectives."

Frank J. Fleming: Making Conservatives Less Angry

How to make conservatives less angry


"Actively ignore them: The most basic strategy to try and keep conservatives from being so angry is to never, ever listen to them. If they try to discuss an issue with you, just cover your ears and scream, 'Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!' If they realize there is no chance we’ll even listen to them, maybe they’ll decide to just give up trying to have their uneducated viewpoints.

"Call them racists: If we shout 'Racist!' every time they say something, maybe they’ll finally reflect on the racism that motivates them against a black president and give up whatever silly cause they think they’re pushing. If they dispute the racism accusation, point out how sensitive they are about the charge and how that further proves it’s true (people who really aren’t racist shouldn’t have any problem with being called racist). If further evidence is needed, point out to them that the president is black and they are white and that it’s obvious to everyone that a white person saying bad things about an underprivileged black person is quite racist. If the conservative isn’t white, though, this can be confusing. Make sure to give that person a pamphlet describing the political views he is supposed to have based on his race. If the person doesn’t read the pamphlet, you might have to try using a racial slur. It’s okay, if the person deserves it.

"Point out how much smarter Obama is than they are: Obama is obviously very smart (obviously!), but somehow conservatives are overlooking that simple fact. Maybe they’ll be less angry if we keep emphasizing how Obama and his staff are much, much smarter than they are, and in fact they are very stupid compared to Obama and other liberals. Then conservatives will realize that Obama, being smarter than them, probably knows what he’s doing, so there is nothing to fear and be angry about unless you’re a really stupid person.

"Use sexual slurs: Conservatives are made uncomfortable by sex talk because of their Jesus person, so associating sexual slurs with everything they do might make them uncomfortable and cause them to give up their protests. For example, when conservatives started having 'tea parties,' we started using the slur 'tea baggers' to describe them. Any good liberal should know tons of terms describing lewd sexual acts, so be creative!

"Make sure no one in the media addresses their concerns: If conservatives can’t get any confirmation of their silly, angry views in the media, maybe they’ll give them up. This has been a problem since talk radio and Fox News came along, though. Still, a boycott of people like Glenn Beck seems to have had some effect. If we can force him off the air, maybe then conservatives will instead watch Keith Olbermann and learn to be calm and reasoned.

"Disparage their values: Everyone wants to have popular values, so if we ridicule their values maybe they’ll discard them and instead have the more popular values of the smart people on TV. So always laugh at them if they bring up the invisible sky fairy they worship so they know that’s a dumb belief. Also laugh at any patriotic beliefs they have. Yes, it seems like patriotism should be okay since Obama is now the leader of their country, but somehow it still makes me uncomfortable. Anyway, liking the country is a conservative thing and is part of what makes them angry, so let’s make them stop that.

"Threaten them with violence: Finally, we can always use physical threats to get them to not be angry. I don’t mean we should shoot them like when those anti-choice people were shot recently (though that is understandable since conservatives are so dangerous and violent that they have to be stopped by any means necessary), but we could at least rough them up. Yes, most liberals are kinda, well, too puny to do that, but there are always union thugs who are smart enough to do whatever liberals tell them."

Michael Morris: Ten Good Reasons to switch from the Democratic and Republican parties to the Communist Party (Satire)

"1. First and foremost I could wake up everyday without any surprises. I would no longer be under the delusion that I am free and master of my own destiny. I would not expect to hear the truth from the President I vote for, the representatives I vote for and so on. I would no longer believe that my vote counted or my opinion mattered. I know that my voice would never be heard under any circumstances or even considered, even if hundreds of millions agreed with me. I would know each and everyday that I am screwed and there would be no surprises. I would live under no delusions, false hopes or beliefs. How wonderful would that be!

"2. Being in the Communist Party I would not worry about retirement or saving money and anyone stealing it because I would not be paid a fair wage for a fair days work. I would not have to work my whole life to better my family in the foolish belief that what little I could amass to leave for them would ultimately end up in the hands of others. Those in power would just steal it without so much as a whimper from the victims, anyone held accountable and the propaganda that 6 trillion in wealth simply vanished into thin air would keep the sheep grazing and be accepted as the truth. I would know that the house I live in can be taken at any time because a shopping mall must be built so that what little I have is spent at the 'must have from the new mall advertising or I am a loser' so that I run up debt far and above what I will ever be able to payback in my lifetime.

"3. Being in the Communist Party I would not believe that justice could be found in the judicial system. I would not think that right and wrong were the basis of the laws written by the people I elected and enforced by people I would not sit to dinner with. I would expect to have my views suppressed and only the propaganda of disinformation on every channel. I would be fully aware that no matter what the crime committed against me or a family member, unless the powers that be felt threatened, no justice would be had. I would never get angry, feel oppressed, expect fairness or even that I had any God given human rights because I would know that I only exist to serve those in power of which I am not one.

"4. If the Communist Party won the Presidential election the Constitution and Bill of Rights would just become just another piece of paper with no value whatsoever. Being that the new party would rewrite the history books to say that the Founding Fathers were terrorists who through terrorist tactics defeated the British, I would never know freedom. I would not have to worry about any rights or get upset because my Government would be violating the law; I already know they will violate the law.

"5. If the Communist Party won the general election I would never have to worry about religion, wars related to religion or the God I worshiped. Being that I would be told what is politically correct and what to believe and that it would be drummed into us in our education system the religious beliefs of the agenda seekers and those in power that they are the Gods of our lives. I would bow and genuflect to those in black robes, political office and anyone who with power demands that I bow and worship those graven idols. That one would be a hard one for me to do.

"6. If Communists were in power I would not have to worry about what is in my best interest, the best interest of my family or the best interest of the children. I would know that the only interest is the interest those in power have in themselves and not me and my family.

"7. If Communists had control of this nation, I would not have to worry about health care. I would work till I drop and my son would take over and work till he dropped and his son and so on. Even if the masses revolted and had the courage to speak up, those in power would just blame each other that no actual heath care plan could be agreed upon when the real agenda was that one half of the power wanted more power for the Communist party and the other half wanted more wealth for the Communist party. I would know this in advance and never be foolish enough to believe that any type of real health care plan would ever be mine or my families. Maybe I will be able to barter food for care.

"8. If Communists had control of this nation, I would not have to work for over half the year to pay taxes to line others pockets. I would work the whole year to line others pockets, but at least I would know the truth up front.

"9. By joining the Communist Party maybe I can gain a little power prior to the Communist Party taking over and if I am too late it is no big deal as there is only to gain and nothing to lose.

"10. And finally, I would never have to wake with dreams, delusions or false hopes. I know that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are just words on an old piece of paper. That freedom, choice and God given rights are just delusions of bands of rebels in Philadelphia in 1776. I will not have to muster any courage to fight back as there I is no hope to change things as our founding fathers did. I will know that I will be oppressed and controlled with fear, both verbal and physical. I know that should I find the courage to stand and fight, the KGB will come to my door and I will be put into a prison off the coast of Florida and I will be labeled a terrorist, foreign or domestic."