Here is a little bit of good news on the Khalid Sheik Mohammed front; Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has stated that he believes congress,in a bipartisan effort, will deny any funding to try the mastermind of the September 11th attack in a criminal court.
Mitch McConnell claims that any support Barack Obama once had for trying Mohammed as a common criminal instead of the terrorist that he is, is collapsing all around the president.
The administration has backtracked under pressure from the original plan of trying Mohammed in New York, and while they are still making an effort to find a suitable location to try him, this news deals a further blow to the administration’s plan.
I can only hope that Mitch McConnell is right when he states that Democrats and Republicans alike are ready to withhold funding for this man’s trial in a criminal court of law. This man planned an act of war against the United States and he should be tried in a military commission and hanged once he is found guilty.
Evidentially there is public support behind trying this man in a military commission, otherwise there is no way that McConnell could be this confident that Democrats would go along with denying funds to try this man in a criminal court.
Khalid Sheik Mohammed does not deserve the rights that are granted to United States citizens under the constitution; the same constitution that he was fighting against. Yet the Obama administration has granted him these very rights. But support for this ridiculous idea is waning and we may just see Mohammed tried in a military commission before all of this is said and done.
Barack Obama may not like it, but congress may just force him to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed as the enemy combatant that he is.
If the IPCC had any credibility left after the Climategate scandal– I don’t think they had any before the scandal, but that’s just me– it certainly has to be called into question after reading this article about false claims the organization has been making about melting glaciers.
First we had the Climategate scandal itself where it was learned that “scientists” were manipulating the data to “hide the decline,” but the scandal did not stop there, and it was learned that these same “scientists” were only taking temperatures from the world’s warmest locations while ignoring temperatures in colder climates. This was being done in an effort to make the “global temperature” appear to be rising when in fact it has been declining for the last decade.
Still not to be outdone, the latest revelation in this scandal happened at the infamous global warming summit at Copenhagen. Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, stood in front of the Copenhagen invitees and told the world that if we did not curb global carbon emissions soon the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by the year 2035. Naturally this will cause untold disaster and widespread panic across the globe. There was just one problem with Pachauri’s claim; it simply isn’t true, in fact it is a lie.
And the IPCC has now admitted that it is not true. The only question remaining is who knew what, and when did they know it? When confronted about the news that the information Pachauri was using was false, and asked when he knew about it he replied, “I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known.” When he was asked specifically if he had known about the evidence being false before the Copenhagen summit, he vehemently denied such a claim stating, “that’s ridiculous. It never came to my attention before the Copenhagen summit. It wasn’t in the public sphere.”
So Pachauri is claiming that while he stood up in front of the world and spouted lies about the melting Himalayan glaciers, he was unaware that he was telling lies. But it has now come to light that he did in fact know the data was not true BEFORE he went to Copenhagen. Back in November he was told that the 2035 date was off by, oh, only 300 YEARS! He shrugged this news off as “voodoo science.”
Can you believe that a climate change “scientist” has the balls to call anything voodoo science after what we have learned about the global warming hoax! This whole scam is based on voodoo science, made up and ignored data, and outright lies and fabrications. These people are more than just frauds, they have stolen millions and millions of dollars in taxpayer funded grants for their own selfish interests and profits– THESE PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS, that’s what they are!
How anyone in their right mind, and well informed, can still look at global warming as a real and legitimate threat is beyond me. This issue has been rigged from the start; these “scientists” are working backwards in an effort to find their desired results. Instead of using data to come to a conclusion, they found their desired conclusion first and are working backwards using cherry picked information to ensure that the conclusion they want reached, is reached. If that is not voodoo science, I don’t know what is!
And yet, our president stood in front of the American people last week during his State of the Union address and mocked those of us who do not believe the “overwhelming evidence” that climate change is real. He called for congress to pass his cap and trade bill. He doesn’t seem too concerned about the fact that what he called “overwhelming evidence” is actually made up and manipulated evidence.
These people need to be investigated and brought to justice, not glorified as heroes. But it looks like the justice department has bigger fish to fry; they are too busy deciding whether of not to investigate the BCS and college football’s post season system. Apparently the BCS system is more important to the country than either investigating the global warming hoax that is being perpetrated on the American people and the world, or figuring out where to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
One has to have priorities, I guess. Barack Obama’s priorities just don’t have the best interests of America at heart. How he can continue to push this cap and trade legislation in light of all of the controversy surrounding the data without at least ordering an investigation into the scandal is beyond me.
Obama administration may target college football
Utah Republican Orrin Hatch was so upset that his favorite college football team was not allowed to play in the BCS National Championship game last year that he wants to open an investigation into college football and their post season system.
He sent a letter to the president asking that the BCS be investigated to see if they were violating anti-trust laws, and today we learned that the Obama administration is looking at several different options regarding the BCS. The justice department has sent Orrin Hatch a letter confirming this.
The administration shares your belief that the current lack of a college football national championship playoff with respect to the highest division of college football … raises important questions affecting millions of fans, colleges and universities, players and other interested parties
My question would be, doesn’t the justice department, the Obama administration, and Orrin Hatch have more important issues to worry about than whether the college bowl system is fair? This is almost, but not quite, as asinine as when congress decided to hold hearings into steroid use in baseball so that senators could fawn over their heroes and get their pictures taken with them.
The justice department cannot even decide where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should be tried yet they can take the time to look into the college football bowl system? Something is wrong here, but misplaced priorities are becoming a staple of the Obama administration.
Flight 253 fallout: Janet Napolitano misses meeting on the Christmas day bomber; Democrats ask, “Where the hell is she?”
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano sleeping at the State of the Union address
On Wednesday the House Homeland Security Committee held a meeting to discuss the failed Christmas day bombing aboard Flight 253. Janet Napolitano was notable for her absence. She was apparently too busy getting ready to attend Barack Obama’s State of the Union speech to be bothered with a briefing about national security so she sent her Deputy Secretary to speak on her behalf.
Apparently she was too busy getting ready for primetime, and she deemed it more important to be seen on primetime television than it was to appear at a meeting on national security.
At this meeting it was discussed what went wrong in Homeland Security that allowed a known potential terrorist to board a plane bound for the United States, yet she didn’t think that this meeting needed her presence? She felt is was more important to appear at the State of the Union address?
The House Homeland Security Committee oversees Janet Napolitano’s department and the least that she could do would be to appear at a meeting that was being held to see where the breakdowns were that allowed this terrorist to almost pull of this attack. Of course according to Janet Napolitano, the system worked so maybe that is why she didn’t feel the need to show up at this meeting.
Democrats on the committee were lessed than pleased at Janet Napolitano’s snub. Chris Carney asked, “I am very dismayed that the Secretary herself isn’t here. I mean it’s probably fair to ask: “Where the Hell is Secretary Napolitano?”
He was not alone in voicing his displeasure with the out of touch Janet Napolitano, Jane Harman was pretty pissed off: “I would like to welcome our witnesses but comment on the absence of Secretary Napolitano. This is the committee with primary jurisdiction over the Department of Homeland Security. She is the secretary of Homeland Security. She is in Washington, D.C. She was invited to testify at this very important hearing, and she should have been here. … I am very personally disappointed that she isn’t here.”
Much like Barack Obama, it appears as if Janet Napolitano does not take the issue of terrorism seriously and that is very concerning considering that she is in charge of the department that is supposed to keep us safe. This woman is incompetant, unqualified, out of touch, and a disgrace; and she should be held accountable for her inactions on national security.
America is less safe with this woman in charge of Homeland Security; she needs to either step down or be fired.
New Hampshire Governor John Lynch is your typical tax and spend liberal. During his time if office he has consistently raised spending; naturally to pay for this he has raised various taxes and fees. He was warned by Republicans that his last two budgets were not sustainable and that his revenue projections were inflated in a trick to balance the state budget. He did not listen; he, and the rest of the state Democrats, continue to claim that they have passed responsible budgets over the last two years.
It turns out that the Republicans were right; his revenue projections were vastly inflated and we are faced with a budget deficit. A $65 million deficit in the 2009 budget and a $45 million deficit in the current budget. New Hampshire’s constitution requires a balanced budget so the governor had to resort to trickery in order to “balance” last year’s budget as well as the current budget. Governor Lynch came up with a plan to find additional revenue to use to balance the budget that was honestly more than just trickery– it was outright theft.
Mine, mine, mine, all mine
Governor Lynch decided to steal $110 million from the Joint Underwriting Association, a private fund used to protect New Hampshire doctors from malpractice lawsuits. He claimed that the state had the right to seize unused funds, but it was challenged in court and he lost. Governor Lynch appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court and yesterday, on a 3-2 decision, the court ruled that John Lynch could not steal these funds.
New Hampshire is now left with a two year budget deficit of $110 million, with no backup plan on how to pay for the governor’s irresponsible spending. Most people realized that the theft of this money was going to be ruled unconstitutional and urged the governor to come up with another plan just in case, but the governor refused to do so.
New Hampshire taxpayers now appear to be on the hook for an additional $110 million. Where is this money going to come from? I think we all know the answer to this.
Governor Lynch has been fiscally irresponsible and New Hampshire residents are sure to pay the price for this; if there is any justice in this world, Governor Lynch will also pay the price in November.
It is time to vote this man out of office. It is time to teabag Governor John Lynch.
Barack Obama’s State of the Union snub
Much has been made about the president scolding the Supreme Court’s decision on McCain/Feingold and Alito’s reaction to it, and I did find this to be an awkward moment but there was one other moment–or non-moment– that I found even more interesting.
Barack Obama found the time to send two shout outs to an obviously miffed and angry Michelle Obama, yet Jessica Mundley and Mark Todd– the two heroes who stopped the Fort Hood terrorist– who were guests of the first lady, were never even acknowledged by the president.
I kept waiting for the moment when Barack Obama would mention these two heroes so they could be applauded for their actions at Fort Hood but it never came. I found it strange that he would invite these two to the State of the Union and not even bother to tell the congress or the American people that they were there. Yet he found the time twice to remind viewers that his wife was there.
Why is this? Is this another example of Barack Obama trying not to offend terrorists by giving two people who stopped a terrorist act while it was in progress a little publicity to a grateful nation?
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial to be moved out of New York City
Nobody in their right mind, other than Barack Obama, thinks that it is a good idea to try the mastermind of the September 11th attack in a criminal court in New York City.
Recently two Democrat senators, Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb, sent the president a letter which was also signed by Joe Lieberman, John McCain, Susan Collins, and Lindsey Graham asking that the president reconsider moving the trial out of New York City and into a military commission.
And then yesterday Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee– who also knew beforehand that the CIA was going to use waterboarding and asked if it went far enough, before feigning disgust at the practice once it became politically adventurous to do so– stated that the trial should be moved out of New York as well.
Now it appears as if Barack Obama is going to listen to these requests; he has asked Attorney General Eric Holder to begin looking for other places to try the September 11th mastermind. The pressure from his own party became too great and he appears ready to cave in on this foolish idea.
This is good news, but he still seems prepared to try this man in a criminal court with full rights guaranteed under the constitution, and therefor this news isn’t nearly as good as it should be.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed does not deserve constitutional rights. He masterminded an act of war against the United States; he was fighting against the very constitution that is now protecting him. This is unacceptable. Barack Obama has granted this man constitutional rights as a way to show the world that we are better than the terrorists are, he is trying to show the extremists that we are above them, but all he is showing them is that as long as he is president we will be weaker than they are. He is showing the world that he does not take the issue of terrorism seriously.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed should not be tried as a criminal, he should be tried in front of a military commission, once he is found guilty he should be hanged.
My take on Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address
I found Barack Obama’s State of the Union Address to be interesting to say the least. Most political experts, and amateur political bloggers like myself, thought that Barack Obama would move to the center in this speech in an attempt to reconnect with the American people in the wake of Scott Brown’s election to the senate.
He did try to move to the center on some issues; he tried to claim that he is a tax cutting president and that there will be more tax cuts coming in the future. He also claimed that he is in favor of increasing nuclear power and drilling for more oil off of our shores– positions that President Bush also held, but were mocked by the Democrats in congress. These are all issues designed to appeal to the people that are to the right of the president. He even tried to compare himself to Ronald Reagan at one point.
But he didn’t move to the center on all issues; as a matter of fact he remained true to some of his more leftists ideas. He urged congress to continue to work towards passing the healthcare reform bill that he knows the American people oppose and he also announced that he still supports the cap and trade bill that the House passed earlier this year. These are leftists ideals that are out of touch with the American people, yet he continues to support them.
He also announced that he would work towards appealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy of the military. This is an issue in which I may differ with most conservatives. I don’t give a damn what anyone does in their personal life– it is none of my business, I suppose that is the libertarian in me. If a person is gay, and that person wants to defend the United States of America and her ideals, I will stand behind that person and say thank you for your service.
In the end, I see this speech as Barack Obama once again trying to be all things to all people. He moved to the center on some issues while remaining on the left on other issues, hoping to try to gain support of the tea party people without alienating his far left base.
This may have worked during the campaign, when most of the voters didn’t know who he was, but now that he has a record people know exactly who he is and what he stands for.
It is time for him to stop blaming President Bush– it really is unbecoming of the president– for all of his problems, and accept responsibility for his problems. Until he takes this basic step there is no way the American people will take him seriously. Barack Obama needed to nail this speech in order to stave off huge losses in the midterm elections. Did he pull it off? I don’t think so, what do you think?
Harry Reid on healthcare reform: “There is no rush”
While reading this article about the chaos surrounding the Democrats in relation to the healthcare debacle, I saw a quote by Harry Reid that I found interesting.
Democrats appear to be putting healthcare reform on the back burner to focus on the economy and this is what Harry Reid had to say about healthcare: “We’re not on health care now.” As for the schedule to get it done, there is no rush.”
There is no rush. Really? When did that happen? For months the administration tried to convince us that healthcare reform is directly tied to the economy. We were told that there was a healthcare crisis and that without immediate action on healthcare the economy could collapse. But now suddenly there is no rush? I thought there was a healthcare “crisis.” Has it suddenly passed?
It should now be painfully obvious to all of those who believed the nonsense about healthcare reform truly being about the economy, that it was nothing more than a shell game. Democrats were ignoring the economy to push a far left healthcare bill when they should have focused on the economy, and in order to justify their misplaced priorities they tried to tie the two issues together.
Now that healthcare appears dead– or at least on life support– the Democrats want us to forget that they were ignoring the economy all this time.
Harry Reid’s statement has exposed the truth, by turning to the economy Democrats are admitting that they were ignoring it while attempting to pass healthcare– not trying to save the economy as they were claiming. After the stimulus bill was passed the Democrats took their eye off of the economy and turned to healthcare, now they realize it was a mistake.
The Democrats in congress may have finally gotten the message that we have been trying to send them all along– we do not want this bill. All it took was for them to lose their super majority. So now they will focus on an issue that Americans care about– the economy– and they will ignore the healthcare “crisis” that they manufactured in the first place.
Democrats are having trouble trying to keep their stories straight; that is what happens when you are not telling the truth.
New Hampshire Rep. Carol Shea-Porter on healthcare reform: “If we sent the men home we would have healthcare done this week”
A few days ago I saw the headline on Drudge about a congresswoman who declared that if the men were sent home the women in congress would have a healthcare reform bill done within a week. I ignored the headline and didn’t even bother to read who had said it, figuring that it was just another out of touch politician who doesn’t understand the fact that the American people do not want this bill to be passed and that is why the bill has hit a snag, culminating in the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts.
Image my surprise when I read this article in the New Hampshire Union Leader earlier today and found out that it was none other than my United States “representative” Carol Shea-Porter that had been the out of touch congresswoman who had made that remark!
Here is what Carol Shea-Porter said at a recent town hall meeting:
We go to the ladies room, the Republican women and the Democratic women, and we just roll our eyes at what’s being said out there.”And the Republican women said when we were fighting over the health care bill, if we sent the men home we could get it done this week
Before getting into this issue I would like to say that it is amazing that Carol Shea-Porter even bothered to show up for a town hall meeting in person; over the Summer she only held telephone town hall meetings so she wouldn’t have to face her constituents face to face on an issue that was drawing the ire of the people she is supposed to represent.
But here she was at a town hall meeting and she made the comment that if the men were sent home a bill would be done. In fairness, she claims to be quoting Republican members of congress, yet Republicans are denying that this bathroom conversation ever took place:
the National Republican Congressional Committee released a statement by nine GOP women members of Congress saying “the conversation Congresswoman Shea-Porter claims to be referencing has never taken place with any of us.”
Let us give her the benefit of the doubt. Let us assume that this conversation did indeed take place. Even if she did not make the statement herself, she obviously agrees with the sentiment.
You know why?” Shea-Porter continued. “I’m not trying to diss the men but I’m telling you it’s the truth that every single woman there has been responsible for taking care of a (relative) and so we think we can find a common ground there.”She pointed out that Maine’s two women U.S. Senators, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, “work very well together.”
She added, “There are issues we believe in being collaborative about
This tells us all that we need to know about Carol Shea-Porter; she is out of touch with her constituents. State Senator Sharon Carson sums it up best when she says the following:
The congresswoman’s ridiculous attempt to blame her male colleagues of both parties for the failures of her big government health care agenda shows that she is completely detached from reality.”Apparently Ms. Shea-Porter is too clueless to understand that the overwhelming opposition to ‘ObamaCare’ has nothing to with gender. A majority of Americans have rejected the Democrats’ health care agenda because they know that it will bankrupt our country and do nothing to improve the quality of care or reduce skyrocketing costs
And she continued:
has refused to listen to the concerns of her constituents or pay attention to the clear message sent by the voters — both male and female — in the Massachusetts Senate election. She continues to support a disastrous government takeover of health care, and has now decided to blame men for the lack of public support for her reckless agenda.
While it is unknown whether this conversation actually took place, and while it is not known if a Republican actually made the comment that Carol Shea-Porter is referring to, it certainly appears as if Carol Shea-Porter agrees with this comment. She is guilty by association. This shows us what she really believes.
Carol Shea-Porter is blind to the fact that the American people are rejecting this healthcare reform bill. She believes that it is male congressmen who are holding up this bill, and while that may be true, she is ignoring the reason why this bill is being held up by those male congressmen. It is being held up because the people that she is supposed to represent do not agree with this bill.
The American people have made their opinions known to their representatives and the election of Scott Brown has confirmed what we already knew, and that is that this bill is not popular with the people.
But Carol Shea-Porter does not care what the people want. She was only elected because of a huge backlash against President Bush in 2006 and she was able to ride that same wave to re-election in 2008. She has fallen in total lock step with the Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid agenda, and as that agenda becomes less popular with the American people, Carol Shea-Porter has decided to stay in lock step with the party leadership and has abandoned her constituents.
If she does not realize this now, she will realize it in November when the voters of New Hampshire rise up and vote her out of office. In November Carol Shea-Porter will be one of many in congress who get teabagged.
America's Watchtower 
