With Obama in office, Liberals learn to love war

Liberals often talk about being anti-war, about promoting peace and love and togetherness, but when it comes down to it, liberals love war and conflict and get us into more than even neo-conservatives do. I know what you're thinking- "Iraq!" (if you are a liberal, you brain is probably shouting that word in some sort of knowledgeable self-righteousness, as if you know anything about anything). In reply I yell back- "Vietnam! WWII! WWI!" Oh, but that's old news, right- remember under Clinton, everyone just held hands and sang love songs? Oh yeah- Serbia, Bosnia, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan- Clinton had us involved in more conflicts than even that 'war-monger' Bush did. So, when I read the following story about how liberals are no longer protesting wars now that Obama is in office, I was not surprised- the only reason (THE ONLY REASON) liberals were against the War in Iraq is because they play petty political games with America to increase their personal power.

The story appeared in The American Conservative (link to it here), and goes like this:

The antiwar rally at the University of Iowa was sparsely attended. The below 30 degree weather might have had something to do with it...The big truth is that the antiwar movement has largely collapsed in the face of Barack Obama’s victory: the massive antiwar marches that were a feature of the Bush years are a thing of the past. Those ostensibly antiwar organizations that did so much to agitate against the Iraq War have now fallen into line behind their commander in chief and are simply awaiting orders.

Take, for example, Moveon.org, the online activist group that ran antiwar ads during the election—but only against Republicans—in coalition with a group of labor unions and Americans Against Escalation in Iraq. These donors are no doubt wondering what Obama is doing escalating the war in Afghanistan and venturing into Pakistan.

As Greg Sargent noted over at WhoRunsGov.com, a Washington Post-sponsored site, “Don’t look now, but President Obama’s announcement today of an escalation in the American presence in Afghanistan is being met with mostly silence—and even some support—from the most influential liberal groups who opposed the Iraq War.”

In response to inquiries, Moveon.org refused to make any public statement about Obama’s rollout of the Af-Pak escalation, although someone described as “an official close to the group” is cited by WhoRunsGov as confirming that “MoveOn wouldn’t be saying anything in the near term.” A vague promise to poll their members was mentioned—“though it’s unclear when.” Don’t hold your breath.

The Center for American Progress, a liberal-Left think tank that sheltered many foreign-policy analysts who opposed the Iraq War and was beginning to develop a comprehensive critique of global interventionism, has recently issued a report on Afghanistan that includes a number of short-term, medium-term, and long-term (ten-year) goals, including among the latter: Assist in creating an Afghan state that is able to defend itself internally and externally, and that can provide for the basic needs of its own people. Prepare for the full military withdrawal from Afghanistan alongside continued diplomatic and economic measures to promote the sustainable security of Afghanistan.

Simply substitute Iraq for Afghanistan, and what we get is the war policy of the Bush era. That the center is run by John Podesta, who served as Obama’s transition chief, is perhaps explanation enough for the complete turnaround. One wonders, however, if the center’s more anti-interventionist scholars, such as Matthew Yglesias, whose popular blog has attracted a substantial audience, will be forced to toe the new line—or be forced out.

One also wonders when this administration will decide to let the American people in on the news that the Af-Pak war is slated to last at least a decade, if not more. During the campaign, and well before that, Joe Biden was self-righteously denouncing the Bush administration and its journalistic amen corner for not “leveling with the American people” and admitting the magnitude of our commitment in Iraq. Yet the administration of which he is now part is just as evasive on the question of an exit strategy and timeframe in Afghanistan and now Pakistan.

Biden’s counsel of restraint apparently lost out in the internal debate, and the Hillary-Gates escalators triumphed. It is inconceivable that the vice president would go public with his criticisms—he’s no Cheney. And opposition among the Democrats in Congress is low-key, minimal, and effectively marginalized.

A recent headline in The Hill tells the whole sad story: “Anti-war Democrats remain silent about Obama’s policies.”

President Obama is often compared to FDR or John F. Kennedy, but I agree with Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, who worries that he’s more likely to turn out to be another Lyndon Baines Johnson—a president who triumphed against a perceived warmonger at the polls and embodied liberal hopes on the domestic scene but was then driven from office by a war-weary electorate and an insurgency within his own party. Add a rapidly expiring economy at home to an increasingly unpopular war—or series of wars—abroad, and you have a recipe for disaster: Obama’s Vietnam and the Democratic Party’s Waterloo.

Government Motors

As Daniel Howes says in his latest Commentary- Federal control of General Motors is game changer. You might know that GM is being 'bailed out' by the federal government- you might be upset that the government is taking a larger role in businesses in our country- but you might not realize how different and revolutionary the federal takeover of GM is.

(The Executive Branch of the US Government will now control) 50 percent of General Motors Corp. with the United Auto Workers set to gain another 39 percent of the automaker. The feds would select GM's directors, effectively giving this White House (and the others to follow) control over GM's strategic direction, top management and even high-level product decisions. That's just the beginning.

With or without bankruptcy, a Government Motors partnered with the UAW would be a whole new model for the global auto industry, a nationalized company whose labor union owners would be bargaining with themselves, their interests in positive cash flow to finance retiree health care obligations colliding with political interests to preserve wages and benefits.

Government Motors could be a bulwark of infinitely patient capital married to major stakeholders whose goals aren't shareholder return, operational efficiency and market penetration but the social goals of maximized employment, environmental trend-setting and political (damage) control.

"It is not our desire to either own or run one of the auto companies," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday. It may not be, as if saying so makes it so, but that's the practical effect.

Daniel Howes goes on to talk about how this is going to change the game for everyone, not just GM. How is a company like Ford supposed to compete with Government Motors- whenever they produce a better car, they have to worry that the government is going to subsidize cars produced by GM- or let's say the Ford F-150 does really well- maybe the government will get upset and pass laws that make the Ford F-150 'environmentally' incorrect? There are conflicts of interest all over the place with this arrangement, and no one is going to win.

No one, no country, has ever nationalized an industry in this manner- it is shocking. Not only that, but the deal that the government is forcing GM to take is also a mobster deal- the banks (who GM owes money to) and the shareholders (who invested in GM by buying its stock) get nothing out of this deal, and instead ownership of the company goes to the labor union and the government. This is organized looting of private companies by mobsters.

And all of this for what? To produce cars that are not competitive? To operate factories that are too expensive? To prop up a failing whip-and-buggy industry? It's not like this is the GM of years ago- this is a company already destroyed, already shed of jobs and capital and industry- we are sacrificing our morals, beliefs, and ideas about the role of government society to save the dried up dead husk of an industry that has seen its best days already. That deal, made in this manner, is shocking.

Those who voted for Change last election- all those who failed to vote Republican for President/Congress/County/local- you're getting it- nationalized Government Motors competing and driving private companies out of business all for the benefit of politically connected people in our nation. That is change that I can't believe is happening in the United States of America.

Obama too Busy to Appoint Public Officials

Influenced by Robert A. Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, I've often looked to the stars and wondered if the Earth going communist is a forgone conclusion and maybe the best bet is to flee to the moon and the planets and the asteroids, and build a conservative paradise there. Although I feel that getting to outer-space can best be accomplished by free-market entrepreneurs, I still feel that the government can play a role in this process, and that is why I still keep on eye on NASA news.

The big news regarding NASA is what to do with its $230 billion shuttle fleet. This is a big decision facing this executive agency, and after years of neglect by the Bush White House it is a decision that many expected Obama to demonstrate his incredible leadership skills in making. But sadly, as the article details, NASA still does not have an agency chief- in fact, "NASA seems so far off the White House radar, said one presidential expert, that it might as well be on Pluto." Apparently meeting with Chavez and Castro and touring the world bashing the United States is more important to President Obama than doing the real work of appointing qualified administrators to handle government agencies and bureaus.

So far, the Obama administration has nominated nearly 200 officials, including an undersecretary of agriculture for rural development, an assistant labor secretary for veterans employment and training, and actor Kal Penn as a White House liaison. But at NASA, Obama has not nominated a single manager who requires Senate confirmation.

McCain did not talk enough about how Obama is all talk or flash and no action or substance- this guy has been in office 100 days and only nominated 200 officials- and many of those have been tax cheats, unqualified, or otherwise scandal-plagued. Very poor work, and let's indeed judge him on his inability to do the job well.

I am Simon Jester

Welcome Back Carter

Via theblogprof, who always has great stuff:

So, if Obama is like Carter (and he is), what can we expect? High gas prices? Emboldened enemies? Allies in trouble? Inflation? Low growth? Rise in civil conflicts (race or sexuality)? Rise in crime? Rise in debt? I think all of these are coming- I'm sorry if that doesn't sound cheerful. There is good news though- after Jimmy Carter defeated the moderate Republicans, we responded by electing Reagan. I know we can't expect that again, but after the smashing the moderates took last election, maybe we indeed will go back to our roots and elect a good conservative. I suggest a former Governor in 2012, someone who lost his primary like Reagan did in '76, but someone who is educated and knowledgeable enough to lead us forward as a nation after the disastrous Obama years- I suggest we keep the Carter/Reagan analogy going by choosing Romney to run against Obama in '12.

Republican Booed off Stage at Tea Party for Voting to Raise Spending

Responding to comments made in the papers and elsewhere, I would like to correct a misconception about the recent Tea Party events- they were not Republican events.

Although many Republicans jumped on the Tea Party movement, the Tea Parties themselves were not 'Republican' events- in fact, I would contend that a good percentage of those who attended the Tea Parties didn't vote Republican for President last election, and many voted Libertarian, voted Constitution, or just sat home and grumbled about Ron Paul.

This statement comes from my own interviews with those students of mine who went to the Tea Party in Lansing, MI- I had over 40 of my students attend this event after I let them know about it. As more proof, I saw this video over at theblogprof where South Carolina Republican Congressman Gresham Barrett was booed off the stage for voting in favor of stimulus bills and TARP and other spending packages.

Those who were booed- those who raised taxes and spending. Those who were not- those who didn't. The Tea Parties were not partisan.

If you want to watch the video yourself (there is one guy in the crowd who impressively shouts 'go home' the whole time), here it is on youtube.

Michigan Constitutional Convention July 2011

The Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land is proposing legislation to establish procedures for a possible Constitutional Convention, a move that prepares Michigan if next year voters call for one.

Voters decide every 16 years whether a convention will be convened to revise Michigan's Constitution, and that means that the question will be on the 2010 general election ballot. Land's proposal ensures that a process is in place should the ballot question be approved.

You can read the proposed rules here, but I would like to comment that they seem fair and acceptable. Michigan has had 4 Constitutions since it became a state- 1963, 1908, 1850, and 1835, so as you can see, we are due for a new Constitution that updates our government and refocuses it.

As a side note, I would like to point out that voters in the 1850 Constitution took away the state's power to make internal improvements because of the disasters of state boondoggles such as a canal across the state- apparently, we are now ignoring this directive from the voters and letting the state government direct the economy in our state through the MEDC and other unconstitutional state-endorsed boondoggle creators (SEBC's?).

It is going to be important that if we do have a Constitutional Convention, we get the right people there- it is going to be important that voters put aside their partisan differences and vote for the candidates who promise lower taxes, lower fees, less regulation, more freedom, more liberty, more justice, and a better society- it is going to be important that voters vote this election.

Earth Day: A Communist Plot?

Happy Lenin’s Birthday! Oh, is it just a coincidence that Earth Day is the same day as former Soviet dictator Vladimir Lenin's birthday? I don’t think so. Earth Day arrives on the exact same day as Lenin’s Birthday. In fact, the very first Earth day celebrations took place exactly on the 100 year anniversary of Comrade Lenin’s birthday. Many former communists saw Earth Day, with its goals and interests, as being very similar to the goals and interests of the great communist Lenin. So, are you convinced that Earth Day is a big communist plot, or do you need more evidence?

The group that founded Earth Day was a group called Friends of the Earth. This group also promotes socialism- just as strongly as it does environmentalism. Some of its stated goals are economic redistribution of wealth, government regulation of nearly all aspects of peoples' lives, communal land ownership, and control of production in the hands of the masses. According to its website, its main bogeymen are: “evil” corporations (especially the Fortune 500 companies,) Big Oil, Wall Street, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization and (naturally) George Bush. It is not far-fetched to think that by promoting and celebrating Earth Day, perhaps some of the other aims of Friends of the Earth will be advanced. Still not convinced that Earth Day is a big communist plot? Need more evidence?

The symbol of the first Earth Day is a circle with a broken cross, with the bars pointing downward. It is a New Age symbol meaning the rejection of Christianity. The goal was to replace the worship of the Christian religion with the worship of Mother Earth. Communist ideology demand you worship the state and not a Christian god, and so communists frequently also attack the church. Still not convinced that Earth Day is a big communist plot? Need more evidence?

According to some, the goal of Earth Day is to push for: Total state control of society, especially businesses and industry (to help the environment, I guess), recognition of the sacred nature of Mother Earth, including an almost reverent worship of anything ‘green’ (to help the environment, I guess), the use of force to change people’s behavior (to help the environment, I guess), and stopping or slowing ‘development’ or ‘progress’, to return to a utopian world of equality (to help the environment, I guess). Sounds pretty communist to me- and not the version of communism that naive college students practice- no, this stuff is right out of the Soviet Union. But you say you are still not convinced that Earth Day is a big communist plot? Need more evidence?

Here are some of the goals, issues, and beliefs on http://www.earthday.net/- the official Earth Day website. Those who most support Earth Day want you to “Join the Revolution” and pass laws that give more power to the government in order to ‘stop global warming’, stop building any new energy producing plants of any kind, and “Protect the poor and middle class from unfairly bearing the cost of climate crisis” by increasing taxes on the rich and redistributing that money to the poor and middle class. Also you are encouraged to unite all religions in the name of global warming and teach children in schools less about rights and more about the environment. Somehow fighting poverty is also central to Earth Day. You're still not convinced that Earth Day is a big communist plot? You're kidding me! You need more evidence?

As a teacher, I looked for resources out there for teachers to teach about Earth Day. One of the first searches turned up a group called The Wilderness Society. Here are some of the resources that they provide to teachers and that teachers use in the classroom to teach about Earth Day- they provide a coloring book for 3rd graders with the theme of “Stop drilling in ANWR”, a timeline that 7th graders can construct of all the laws controlling society and business that government passed to see the “progress” of government in 'fighting' global warming, and they publish stories to read about ‘environmental heroes’- also (coincidentally) all good revolutionary communists- that 10th grade English classes can read. Sounds pretty communist to me!

Of course, the official government version of Earth Day is a bit different. According to the EPA website (under President Bush), Earth Day was more about celebrating the gains we have made in protecting the environment, achieving meaningful results in protecting the environment, encouraging volunteer efforts to save energy, reduce or recycle, and educate yourself to be more friendly to the environment, and taking pride in America by maintaining our public lands. This is the official version, and what most people think they are observing. But that's like saying that Christmas has nothing to do with Jesus and is all about Santa- you can't separate Earth Day from its founding and biggest promoters, and all of those clearly are communicating that Earth Day is a big communist plot, and don't kid yourself otherwise.

Oh, I just took a peak over at the new EPA website, where there is a video from a speech by Obama's choice for EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, in which she promises to have the government seize control over production and private business in our nation in order to build a more fair and equal centrally planned green economy. Apparently she wants to make Earth Day into Earth Month, and then Earth Year, and then you can spend every waking moment worshipping the state and giving all of the political and economic power to the state in order to 'protect the Earth.' What a watermelon- green on the outside, but red in the middle! Looks like Obama is unaware that Earth Day is a communist plot- or is he?

Happy Lenin's Birthday everyone!

Miss California Should Have Won Miss America

Okay, so maybe I am not a beauty pageant expert, but I've watched most of the Miss USA's over the years, and although my first choice of West Virginia didn't make the final 10, to me the clear choice for Miss USA was Miss California. She looked great in a swimsuit, looked incredible in an evening gown, and gave a mature and honest answer to the interview portion. The story is here. So why wasn't she chosen? Because she personally does not believe in gay marriage.

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked by openly gay gossip blogger and pageant judge Perez Hilton when he thought the US would destroy the religious institution of marriage between man and women and start actively encouraging people in the United States to be gay (this is my loose interpretation). That he was allowed to ask this question in such a manner like this upset me quite a bit- it was a set-up. She also seemed taken aback, but gave a good answer- Ms. Prejean said:

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

Let's deconstruct this- she thinks it is great that we live in a country of choice and opportunity. But she also would point out that she personally thinks that marriage is between man and women, and doesn't mean to offend anyone out there, but that's how she thinks. What is so freaking wrong with that statement?

"The way miss California answered her question lost her the crown, without a doubt!" Perez Hilton told Access Hollywood after the pageant. I guess Miss USA does not support truthful and honest answers- he was upset that Ms. Prejean didn't just parrot back the line he wanted to the pleasure of the adoring masses. Liberals and leftists don't like free speech and free thought, you know, and by not bowing to his will, he punished her by not giving her the crown- how is that for women's empowerment?

Many people, Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, tells FOXNews.com that he was "saddened and hurt" by Prejean's statement- apparently he does not think it is a good thing that people can choose traditional marriages in their states, apparently he does not think it is okay for someone to personally not believe in gay marriage, and darn it, he is going to be offended if you don't totally support his lifestyle- he does not want gay marriage, he wants to control your beliefs on the issue. And that's wrong.

No offense to Miss North Carolina Kristen Dalton who was crowned Miss USA, but she did not stand out in any way in this competition. Miss California did, and she should have won Miss America, and I think the reason she did not was because she refused to compromise her personal beliefs on gay marriage, and that's wrong.

UPDATE: I watched the interview from the Today show with Carrie Prejean and Perez Hilton, and you know what- Ms. Prejean is a moral and good person, and did not deserve to be treated that way by the foul-mouthed dirty-minded Mr. Hilton. I don't care if he is straight or gay- he is intolerant, small-minded, petty, and cruel, and I don't care if Ms. Prejean is straight or gay, she is honest, open-minded, intelligent, humble, and nice. My support of her grew after watching the interview- I encourage you to do so too. Women can be religious, intelligent, and beautiful, and Miss California Carrie Prejean should have been Miss USA.

Montana Firearms and the Interstate Commerce Clause

Over at No Left Turns I spotted this interesting post (originally from The Volokh Conspiracy):

Montana's staunchly pro-Second Amendment Governor, Democrat Brian Schweitzer, has signed Montana HB 246, the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. The bill declares that a firearm which is manufactured in Montana, and never leaves the State of Montana, "is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce."

Will this mean anything? Most likely, no. The courts will probably use their imperial power of royal decree to force this democratically elected representative of the people to follow the liberal line- mostly likely by applying Wickard v. Filburn or some other court case.

Still, it does show that in spite of the DHS believing that those who support federalism are right-wing extremists, the tide may be going back in favor of federalism as people realize again the wisdom of our founding fathers. The Governor of Texas Rick Perry recently said at a Tea Party that federalism needs to be strengthened in this nation, and I agree with him.

This issue isn't so much political as practical: federalism diffuses political power, reducing the chance of tyranny and improving protection of individual rights; federalism lets local governments deal with local problems, not remote bureaucracies; federalism allows more people to get involved in the democractic process- more offices, more levels of government, more people can get involved- so that our country is not run by unelected bureaucrats, and federalism allows for experimentation and innovation in public policy- more units of government can try innovative solutions to societies problems (laboratories of democracy stuff). This is why federalims should be supported.

Shorter Version of DHS Report- Fear Bitter Gun-Clinging Christians

Many people are writing and talking about that DHS report (I wrote about it in Tea Partiers- Homeland Security Views You As a Threat), but via The Corner on National Review comes the best comment:

That DHS report warning about all manner of "right-wing extremists" could be considerably shortened if it simply alerted law-enforcement officials to be on the lookout for people from "small towns (who are) bitter (and) cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment."

UPDATE: If you want to see some more coverage of the DHS report, check out the analysis and comments at Hot Air- as they say there, the report is "every bit as bad as reported" and that "the DHS fails to provide any specifics at all (no actual data whatsoever), preferring instead to smear half of the country or more as kooks for criticizing the government’s handling of the economy."

UPDATE II: My brother forwarded me this story- this DHS report has real teeth to it and is not just something to laugh off as right wing extremist paranoia- apparently a report from a government agency ordering law enforcement officials to do something is real (surprise). In Iowa, the National Guard is now training to combat right wing extremist gun dealers, conducting exercises where our military goes door-to-door looking for guns. See the story yourself by clicking here.

Obama in Council of Wisdom

No clue who put this together, but this is some of the funniest stuff I have seen. Via Mad Puppy comes this clip that imagines how Obama goes about deciding major issues of the day:

Tea Partiers- Homeland Security Views You As a Threat

Via theblogprof, there is this interesting article From World Net Daily today:

A newly unclassified Department of Homeland Security report warns against the possibility of violence by unnamed "right-wing extremists" concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty and singles out returning war veterans as particular threats.

The report from DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines right-wing extremism in the U.S. as "divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

Those of you attending the Tea Parties, here is what you stand for: America, federalism, 2nd amendment, pro-life, and the military. Here is who opposes your views: the US government, particularly bureaucrats.

This is getting weird- it is almost as if these tea parties were being held back in the pre-revolutionary days, when King George and his bureaucrats and their anti-freedom, anti-liberty, pro-bureaucracy policies were the norm. King George wanted you to stay home and sit out the pro-freedom events like this one- he didn't support federalism, gun ownership, and America. King George is the bad guy.

Today, it is King Obama- to be honest, it's not just Obama and it's not just the Democrats- it's also the big government Republicans and liberal RINO's who collaborate with those who would take our freedom. It is those out there who do not believe that I was given by God the right to own property (as much property as I want and it's a good thing!), that I was given by God the right to liberty, and that God gave me and others the right to live. Liberals and those who oppose these tea parties do not believe that governments were created by men to protect those rights, and that whenever they no longer protect those rights, they are no longer moral, they are no longer good, and they deserve to be changed.

Those of you who are going to Tea Parties this Wednesday- and here is the information you need for that- you are the good guys, you are the freedom fights, you are the right in this world. You are the ancestors of those who fought in our Revolution, you are the sons and daughters of the Revolution, and cheer with pride in knowing that by attending these Tea Parties, forget what the Department of Homeland Security says, you are doing the right thing.

UPDATE: Hot Air has a good story about the DHS report and other issues. Check it out, but don't be too worried- remember, aim to misbehave.

Give Me Liberty and Yoga

Republicans aren't perfect, but they aren't your biggest threat to life, liberty, and property- the Democratic Party is. Democrats, who run the state and national government, are out to take away your freedom and liberty- and your freedom to learn yoga.

This story is about the state of Michigan has decided that Yoga instructors now need to be licensed. The 1.3K license comes with increased state supervision, rules, and red tape, all designed to make the yoga experience of stretching, breathing, and letting go of tension be more safe. It seems that yoga schools and training is getting popular, and the Democrats who run Michigan are opposed to anything that is popular or profitable, and so has decided to do their best to ruin the 5000 year art of yoga with bureaucratic licensing, fees, and oversight. If yoga instructors do not immediately put their name on the official government list and pay the fee, they will go to jail. This is what Democrats do to yoga:

"At first I wondered if it was some kind of scam. I needed to get more info on what this was. I talked to a lawyer," said (Sondra O'Donnell, owner of Sun Moon Yoga in Ann Arbor, which operates a yoga school), who was out of the country on a yoga retreat when her letter came.

She ended up paying for a license -- reluctantly.

"They said if I didn't take care of it I could be incarcerated or they could shut down my school with the sheriff. I was afraid. That's why I paid it," she said.

ACORN Helping Count 'Americans' For Obama Census Department

In my post 200,000+ non-existent Detroiters registered to vote I said "our nation should go after" ACORN and "crack down on them and limit their influence in our society for the good of our nation"- sadly, the Obama administration is going another direction- instead of limiting the influence of this group because of their perpetuating of fraud and breaking of election laws, they are instead going to be put in charge of the US Census.

Via The Khaki Elephant comes this little blurb about how ACORN (a group responsible for some of the worst voter fraud in American history) has been tasked by the federal government (Obama) to assist with the official U.S. Census, thus employing a politically partisan and corrupt arm of the current administration to assist with the formerly neutral but critical job of counting people to allocate funds and representation.

Here is the report that Fox News put together on this:

POTUS PUMA

Via The Corner on National Review comes this, from a reader:

My only comment is "Yes we can."

UPDATE: Okay, my next comment is "Be the Change".

UPDATE II: Last comment "Hope!".

200,000+ non-existent Detroiters registered to vote

Over at RightMichigan, some numbers were recently crunched. Here is the story:

Check out these numbers courtesy of this morning's Ivory Tower:
Detroiters 18 and older: 603,000
National voter registration:67.6%
National African American voter registration: 60.7%
Projected Detroit voter registration: 375,000 (approx.)
Number of bad registrations flagged for removal: 47,000
Total projected voter roll plus acknowledged bad entries: 422,000 (approx.)
Detroiters registered to vote: 633,000
Phantom voters: 211,000

Over the last several voting cycles, 95% of voters voted Democrat. By my math, that is 200,450 phony Democrat voters- that is not a number to sneeze at. That is voter fraud, and represents a rising problem in our country- the fact that our 'free elections' are becoming a sham, where the 'voters' are just manipulated numbers. These sham voters that make a mockery of our elections almost always vote Democrat (you can tell the quality of a person by the company they keep), and probably are increasingly the difference in elections.

At the heart of this problem is a group called ACORN- I wrote about some of their tactics in the past here (ACORN Turns in 5,000 New Voter Registrations- and All of Them Are Fraudulent) and here (Former Student Reports Voter Fraud on College Campus)- probably our nation should go after this group and crack down on them and limit their influence in our society, for the good of our nation.

Obama the CEO, on SNL

Via theblogprof, I saw this recent clip from Saturday Night Live making fun of Obama as CEO of our nation:

Is it just me, or was this not so much as 'funny', but sad? I didn't laugh at the idea that Obama will start to personally control businesses in our country- I really didn't find it humorous when he said that he hoped businesses that he deemed fiscally bad would go bankrupt 'voluntarily, but by force if necessary'. I know there was a joke there- I know that some in the audience were laughing- but I wasn't.

Maybe it was easier to mock Bush- everyone could call him names, mock his accent, mock his personality, mock his policies, because they were doing so from a safe place- they knew that he wasn't going to really do those outrageous things and they knew that he wouldn't take personal offense at the jokes. Maybe it's just because I'm a conservative- I could laugh about Bush, but I am scared that the jokes might be true about Obama.

What would be really funny is if this joke was true- if the joke was on the American people, and that the joke about Obama being CEO and running companies and saying 'yes' and 'no' to winners and losers in the marketplace was true. That would be funny, in a sort of gallows humor sort of way.

Coon Hunting, A Bear Named Obama, Teleprompters, Queen Touching, and Bush Fighting Zombies

Since my my last post (My Personal Experience Fighting the Worship of Earth Hour) was so serious, I'm going to follow it up with a lighter post today, about stuff that I find funny.

First, take a look at the picture of the bear- according to the US Fish & Wildlife Service office in Kalispell, Montana, that little fella has taken to sitting every day at the picnic table apparently waiting to be fed and to have his winter den dug by government employees. Although he once was self-sufficient, he now begs for a handout every day from our generous government. Because of this, residents have taken to calling him Bearack Obama!

Next, according to the Detroit News, a new industry is starting up in Detroit, and I suspect that it actually is the fast-growing industry in the city (other than working for the government). The new industry is urban hunting and skinning. Yes, like a scene out of I Am Legend, the wilderness is retaking the city of Detroit, and the animal population is moving into areas that were once inhabited by productive men. Years of Democrat control in action!

The story in the Detroit News is the story of a young 69-year old entrepreneur, who has to supplement his Social Security checks by hunting raccoons in the city of Detroit. Apparently this guy kills coons with the help of his rifle and coon dog, butchers the meat, and sells it to local residents, and he also sells the skins- but doesn't pay taxes on these sales (must be a Democrat). The meat is not USDA approved (probably something to do with rabies), but the video about the story (go to the link for the article to watch it and howl with laughter) shows coon meat being served with liver and onions and Faygo red pop- just the way mom made it!

In other news, Obama recently was in England, and since he had to talk to people over there, he brought with him 5 speech-writers and 12 teleprompters for the weekend. I don't think that was enough- I heard some of his stammering and stuttering in a press conference- but still- 12 teleprompters? Can't you just bring one and move it from place to place? Or do they have to put a separate one up everywhere he goes and load it with his thoughts?

Sadly the teleprompter didn't let his wife know that you aren't supposed to touch the Queen of England- it's apparently a big no-no. Doesn't anyone on his staff do any research on this stuff? I guess not- Michelle put her arm around the Queen and gave her a noogie on national television- probably not a good idea, but at least her arms were fantastic!

Lastly, least we forget how low the bar was for Presidents (and yet Obama still gets under it), here is a hilarious clip from a George W. Bush press conference where he is talking about fighting the biggest threat to our lives- zombies. That's right- laugh if you want, but apparently zombies are a big threat, and I am glad our President did everything he could to wipe them out- click on the link if you don't believe me. Enjoy!

NOTE to NEW READERS: New readers, please feel free to also check out some of my recent good posts like Obama is a Caudillo, The Inside Deal: Obama's Economic Program, Employment-Population Ratio Drops to 58.5%, Earth Day: Is it just one big Communist Plot?, Gifted Programs in Schools Training Future Liberals, or Obama On Inner and Outer Circles of Leadership. Also feel free to link to aconservativeteacher.blogspot.com on your blog, and bookmark conservativeteacher.blogspot.com so you can become a regular reader of the battles of a conservative teacher's attempt to advance the principles of liberty and freedom.

My Personal Experience Fighting the Worship of Earth Hour

Earth Hour is a global event organized by World Wide Fund for Nature, and asks households and businesses to turn off their lights and appliances one hour to raise awareness towards the need to take action on climate change. Covered in the media and supported by the UN, it was said that turning off your lights during this hour would be a 'vote' in favor of the agenda laid out by the UN's Climate Change Conference.

Personally, I voted in favor of advancement of human prosperity by using energy to cook my food, celebrating technological progress of our society by watching TV while playing a video game on my computer, and was proud to have all my lights on, shining away in the darkness of the world. Thank you Competitive Enterprise Institute for suggesting this Human Achievement Hour. I wasn't the only one that celebrated Earth Hour this way- apparently the great prophet of global warming himself, Al Gore, didn't turn off his lights- see this post for yet another example of the hypocrisy of the left.

But this post isn't really about Earth Hour- it's more about personally how Earth Hour affected me. I'm going to share with you a personal story of my life the past week, when I made the choice to stand up to the Green Thugs who worship the Green God here at my school- please pass this story on, because it is a good example of what is to come in our nation.

It all started last week with an innocent email that was sent out by an administrator, telling our entire staff all about Earth Hour and encouraging people to "support the fight against global warming by turning off your lights for one hour tomorrow night- together , we can create change in our world and bring peace to all."

Don't be surprised- staff get emails like this all time- even here, in a rural community that votes strongly Republican, a public school financed by taxpayer dollars uses its technology to send frequent emails from superiors encouraging staff to support the fight against man-made evil global warming. As I was working on preparing my lessons for the next day, I received this 'important' email from my boss, and honestly, a look of annoyance flashed across my face.

In a fit of frustration, I replied to this email- pecking out a reply between hours- and sent it to the whole staff. I felt that if it was okay to get emails about Earth Hour, it was okay to respond to these emails- and I did. I sent the following message "As you can see from the attached graphs, there is no correlation between keeping your lights on and the Earth warming. But, because you asked, I'll turn off some lights to lower my energy bill."

One graph showed a correlation between the heat coming off the sun and the rise in temperatures, and the other showed the cyclical rise and fall of global temperatures. I don't think it was unfair or wrong of me to send out that email- I have data supporting my point, and the tone of the email was light and friendly. After sending the email, I was a bit apprehensive, but I honestly expected some light-hearted replies to it- but what I got in reply stunned me.

Our staff isn't a far-left staff- our teachers are not outright communists- and most people would call our staff 'balanced' or 'moderate.' But question the religion of global warming, question the beliefs of liberals, and be prepared for a firestorm- now I know. My inbox was instantly filled with emails blasting me, stunning me with their viciousness and vileness.

Other teachers and administrators sent me emails that said that my arguments were "sad defeatist" arguments, that I was giving up on the world and was unwilling to fight to make the world a better place. I was called "unintelligent," "uneducated," "immature," "backward," and "crazy." Like most liberals do, rather than debate my ideas and thoughts and data, they went straight for name-calling.

Even worse, many began to question my teaching ability. For the record, my students have the highest scores in the district on our common assessments and high-stakes tests, and I have frequently been recognized by students, other teachers, and administrators for being an outstanding teacher. But question the global warming religion once, and I get emails saying such things as "I am concerned that you could be convincing our students of the same fallacies" and "I seriously question what you are teaching our students."

Even today, days later, I am still getting emails ripping into me. Perhaps it is because I have been replying to these attacks on my character and teaching ability- other teachers in the building have encouraged me to roll over and just take the blows- they suggest I just hide in my classroom like they do. They also criticize me- they said I brought it on myself when when U opened my mouth in the first place and that in the future I should just just say "Heil" along with the rest of the staff. But I refuse to- because that's not what our founding fathers did- they fought when threatened- fought with their ideas- and I aim to do the same. I aim to be bad- I am to misbehave.

The most frequent argument that has been advanced to me by those who follow the Green Religion (the earth is warming, the warming is bad, the warming is caused by man, that government must control man, and that man must sacrifice to government) is that there is a consensus on the issue- that "most of today's highly educated scientists agree with global warming," and that my ideas "are like saying that the Earth is flat."

My reply to this was to question the proposition that most scientists feel this way- there are plenty who don't buy into some or all of the global warming litany. Further, I pointed out that the system now financially encourages scientists to espouse at least some of the global warming agenda- that there is now money subsidizing scientists who promote this, and no money for those who oppose it, so to rely on 'numbers' alone is not a good measure of the quality of the argument.

The reply for those on the left, those green worshippers, has been to mock me and call me more names. My arguments to them are childish. One email claims that "I suppose next you are going to tell me that the government was responsible for hurricane Katrina and 911?"- as if me not believing that turning my lights off will save the globe is the same thing as other crackpot theories.

Look- I don't put up with disrespect- I don't in my classroom, I don't from fellow teachers. So I told them to quit calling me names and quit disrespecting my views- liberals claim to be open-minded, they claim to be accepting, they claim to be morally superior. The reply- "I'm not calling you sad, stupid, ignorant, or unintelligent- I'm calling your views that." I am what I believe- are liberals not the same? Or are liberals something other than their views? I pondered these questions, sitting at my desk, typing out emails defending myself and my position, for some time.

Eventually, I just begin to hit delete. Logic, reasoning, and calm calculations, supported by data and clear thinking, had run up against religion. Global Warming (or climate change) is a religion, not a policy position. It's too bad that this religion is allowed to flourish in schools, that education can have study classes on the tenets of global warming, that we erect alters to worship global warming (a 'green garden' was built at our school last year), and that there are places to sacrifice to the green gods all over schools (the recycling symbol is omnipresent, as our recycling boxes and bins). It's too bad that schools are against religions such as Christianity and Judaism, as public schools continue their war on "he who can not be named in schools" (God).

Perhaps what was most upsetting to me about this incident was the reaction I got from my wife when I told her all this stuff. Excited about fighting the good battle, energized from my attempts to reason, I told my wife what I had done. Her face got pale, and she became fearful and scared- she was frightened that in this world, this new country of change, that I would be fired for believing the wrong things, for having the wrong views on global warming. My wife was scared that schools have become so much like a 3rd world dictatorship that saying the wrong view could mean the loss of my job. And the scary thing, she is right.

By taking this stand, by sending out one little email questioning global warming, by defending myself from insults and questions as to my ability, I have put myself personally in danger of being fired. I may now be let go from my job for questioning global warming. That is scary. Things are changing in this world, hope is dimming, and life is not fair anymore- and my small attempt to fight back at this, to push the darkness back by lighting the light of logic and reasoning on Earth Hour, may very well be the end of me as a teacher.