Homeland Security Less a Priority than Homage to the Chosen One?

Although the Director of Homeland Security quickly reversed herself, Napolitano’s initial statement that the “system worked” should serve as a clear indication that she is not fit for the position of Homeland Security Director.

You should also remember that Napolitano also previously said we were not to use the word terrorist anymore — and use the term “man-made disaster.”

No longer does our government speak of a "war on terror", rather we are required to refer to "overseas contingency operations!"

Director Napolitano is also a steadfast supporter of anti-terrorist measures that are completely free of even a hint of “Muslim” profiling despite the fact that all known terror suspects to date have been Muslims!

Earlier this year, she even released a report that seemed to imply that returning veterans and pro-life individuals pose a possibly greater threat to our homeland security than that of Muslim terrorists.
Of course Napolitano’s boss, our own Commander in Chief, has made some very, very serious blunders as far as I am concerned.

The decision to move KSM’s [Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] trial to New York City, the decision to close Gitmo, where he may end up sending 80 to 90 detainees from Gitmo to Yemen is nothing short of profoundly dangerous as was his decision to entertain the possible prosecution of CIA staff who did “enhanced interrogations.”

Most recently he is allowing the prosecution of several Navy Seals to go forward where al-Qaida has alleged they punched one of their terrorists who was in the custody of the Navy Seals.

Keep in mind also that the two federal agencies charged with keeping potential terrorists off airplanes and out of the country have been without their top leaders for nearly a year.

It took the Obama administration more than eight months to even nominate anyone to lead the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Customs and Border Protection agency.

Bogged down with health care reform, the Senate has yet to set a date to hold hearings for the Customs position and Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., has placed a hold on the president's choice to head the TSA over the senator's concern that the new leader would let TSA screeners join a labor union.

Obviously, Health Care, Global Warming, Cap and Trade and keeping he unions happy are a higher priority than the security of our country to Obama and his democrat majority congress. I was surprised he took the time to fly off to Europe to accept his well deserved Nobel Peace Prize!

But in all fairness to the Chosen One, Obama has much more important issues to worry about and deal with than our national security. Like raising the dead, changing water into wine, multiplying loaves of bread and fish, and the like.

What am I talking about?

An editorial in a Danish newspaper, Politken, published today, stated unequivocably that Barrack Obama is greater thean Jesus Christ himself!

He is provocative in insisting on an outstretched hand, where others only see animosity.

His tangible results in the short time that he has been active – are few and far between. His greatest results have been created with words and speeches – words that remain in the consciousness of their audience and have long-term effects.

He comes from humble beginnings and defends the weak and vulnerable, because he can identify himself with their conditions.

And no we are not thinking of Jesus Christ, whose birthday has just been celebrated - - but rather the President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama....Obama is, of course, greater than Jesus – if we have to play that absurd Christmas game. But it is probably more meaningful to insist that with today’s domestic triumph, that he has already assured himself a place in the history books – a space he has good chances of expanding considerably in coming years. 

My fear is that this well spoken, sharply dressed, community organizer and inexperienced politician from Chicago, possessed with a fierce global ambition, is beginning to believe his own press at the expense of our nation's security.

Peter J. Mahon

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and the The Left's Selective Memory

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a democrat from Rhode Island, took to the floor of the Senate to present what I had thought would be an argument in defense of the Senate’s Health Care Bill.

Unofortunately, I was wrong.

Rather than arguing he merits of the bill, Senator Whitehouse instead used his time at the Senate podium to label all those republicans and conservatives and the majority of the American people who are opposed to this massive legislation with such words as “crazy”, “shameful”, “lunatic fringe”, “being poisoned with hate”, etc.

Not surprisingly, Senator Whitehouse then resorted to the left wings political playbook of “playing the race card” when he stated that…

“They are desperate to break this president. They have ardent supporters who are nearly hysterical at the very election of President Barack Obama. The birthers, the fanatics, the people running around in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups, it is unbearable to them that President Barack Obama should exist.”

All polls to date indicate that the majority of the American people do not want this massive piece of legislative fiscal foolishness to pass. Rather than address the concerns of this majority, Senator Whitehouse has simply dismissed those concerns by callously representing such concerns as nothing more than a “deep rooted hatred towards Barrack Obama, our first Black President!”

What Senator Whitehouse coveniently forgets is that the same majority of American people cheered by the democrat left for voting for President Obama back in November of 2008 now are expressing their concerns about this liberal democrat health bill and he and his leberal democrat colleagues are throwing them "under the bus" in favor of a liberal political agenda.

Hopefully the memory of the Amican majority will not be as selective as Senator Whitehouse's in November of 2010!

Peter J. Mahon

Howard Dean - Says What He Means and Means What He Says?

Howard Dean appeared on today's Meet the Press show and when aksed about his intentions to emain with the Democratic Party, Dean responded,

"Of course!  Absoulutely!  I've already said I have every intention of vigourously supporting President Obama's re-election in 2012..."

Unfortunately, only three days ago, while appearing on Joe Scarborough's "Morning Joe" show, Dean had stated that,

"Sometimes  the country is more important than the party.  I intend to support President Obama, not vigourously, but I will vote for him

Nothing like a politician who says what he means and means what he says, right?

Peter J. Mahon

Climate Change and Population Control

Back in August of this year I posted a blog on President Obama’s “Science Czar”, John Holdren, and his radical views on population control.  At that time I wrote...

I have a very big problem with Obama's appointment of an individual who, for whatever reason(s), thought that the United States Constitution would allow for forced abortions, forced marriages, large scale sterilization of the population, and an accompanying massive campaign to "de-develop" the United States! Mr. Holdren stated that his previous espoused policies back in 1977 were a result of his being "preocupied" with the problem of population growth in the United States. In light of the Obama administration's continuing grab for power via nationalization of our health care system, I ask the following question...What if Mr. Holdren suddenly becomes preoccupied with "population control" again?

I received numerous emails in response to my posting on Mr. Holdren admonishing me for cloaking Mr. Hldren's radical activist background in a shroud of "conspiracy", contending that Mr. Holdren's radical views on population control could be easily explained by his youthful inexperieince and that in "this day and age", such views would certainly not be enterained.

As recently as this past October, I posted another article regarding the liberal left's fascination with population control when Alex Renton, a writer for Britain's Guardian newspaper, penned a column in this past Sunday's edition advocating population reduction as the only viable means of addressing the planet's alleged limate change poblems.  Mr. Renton tated that...

"The worst thing that you or I can do for the planet is to have children. If they behave as the average person in the rich world does now, they will emit some 11 tonnes of CO² every year of their lives. In their turn, they are likely to have more carbon-emitting children who will make an even bigger mess. If Britain is to meet the government's target of an 80% reduction in our emissions by 2050, we need to start reversing our rising rate of population growth immediately.

And if that makes sense, why not start cutting population everywhere? Are condoms not the greenest technology of all? After all, based on current emissions and life expectancy, one less British child would permit some 30 women in sub-Saharan Africa to have a baby and still leave the planet a cleaner place.

It is certainly true that "fewer people equals a greener planet" is simplistic. In 2050, 95% of the extra population will be poor and the poorer you are, the less carbon you emit. By today's standards, a cull of Australians or Americans would be at least 60 times as productive as one of Bangladeshis."

Once again I received numerous emails describing my concerns in this matter as "crazy", referring to Mr. Renton as a "crackpot" of no significance or credibility.

Are you with me so far?  Everyone thinks Obama's "Science Czar" is harmless and that Britain's Alex Renton is a "crackpot!" and I'm crazy for being concerned about them.  Now follow me closely on this....

Earlier today, Canada's National Post published an article entitled The Real Incovenient Truth which stated...

The "inconvenient truth" overhanging the UN's Copenhagen conference is not that the climate is warming or cooling, but that humans are overpopulating the world.  A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days.

Additionally, the China Daily yesterday published an article wherein China's Vice-Minister of Population and Family Planning finally made the xconnection between the liberal left's advocacy for climate change initiatives and population control.stating...

"Dealing with climate change is not simply an issue of CO2 emission reduction but a comprehensive challenge involving political, economic, social, cultural and ecological issues, and the population concern fits right into the picture..."

Finally, CNN's Jack Cafferty broached the question of population control yesteray with his viewers.

Still think I am crazy?

Peter J. Mahon

Harry Reid's Revisionist History

Harry Reid took the floor of the United States Senate this past Monday and complained about the lack of republican support his Health Care Plan was receiving. 

Of course Harry made no mention of his "democrat only" closed door meetings while putting his plan together or his "democrat only" meeting with the President the other day when Obama stopped by Congress to rally his party members to finalize the plan.

But the Harry, either abetted by copious amounts of intoxicants or perhaps just plain mendacity, likened those republicans and others who oppose his Health Care Plan to those who, according to Reid, opposed an end to slavery... opposed women's right to vote ...and those who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

If Harry's remarks were meant to foster a spirit of bi-partisanship among his senate colleagues, he obviously has not read the book How to Make Friends and Influence People.

Additionally, Reid's grasp of American political history is also faulty as...

1.  Reid has obviously forgotten that Abolition was the cause upon which the Republican Party was founded, and that the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, is known today as the Great Emancipator.

2.  Harry also conveniently forgets that women already had the right to vote in many states, including Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and Idaho, before the passage of the 19th Amendment, and it was the former Republican president Teddy Roosevelt, running on the Bull Moose ticket in 1912 against both Taft (who had succeeded him) and the Democrat, Woodrow Wilson, that made the right to vote for women part of its platform. It was the southern states, all controlled at the time by Democrats, which had adamantly opposed ratification each time it was proposed, starting in 1878. So, for that matter, did the Virginia-born southerner, Wilson, who largely ignored the issue until 1917, when suffragettes picketed the White House and even went on a hunger strike. In the end, Wilson used the pretext of World War I to get behind the 19th Amendment, which became law in 1919.

3.  Reid really shows his ignorance of our country's history with his assertion that republicans opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In fact, it was the Republicans who pulled President Johnson’s fat out of the fire, voting in greater percentages for passage than the Democrats.

Now one would think that such caustic falsehoods emenating from the Majority Leader of such an austere body as the United States Senate would get a mention in the main stream media but alas, all the objective journalists toiling for our nation's free press are too busy counting up and reporting on the ever growing number of Tiger Woods' mistresses.

Michael Walsh, writing for Andrew Breitbart's biggovernment.com wrote that...

One of the reasons the press is the only private institution explicitly protected

by the Constitution is that it is supposed to act on behalf of the people, keeping those in power both responsible and in check. Today’s media, however, has almost entirely

abandoned that ideal in favor of frank partisanship or, worse,

stories like this, that appear to have been written by somebody born yesterday

and too lazy to check even the simplest “fact.”

For once, I have to applaud Michael Steele, the chairman of the

Republican National Committee, who said:

“Having made this disgraceful statement on the floor of the United States Senate,

Mr. Reid should immediately apologize on the Senate floor to his colleagues,

to his constituents, and to the American people. If he is going to stand by these statements, the Democrats must immediately reconsider his fitness to lead them.”

Unfortunately, I won't be holding my breath waiting for Harry Reid to apologize for his ignorant statements and absurdly revisionist version of our nation's political history on the floor of the Senate, or for the mainstream press to report them, anytime soon.

I can only hope that the citizens of the great state of Nevada vote this disgraceful and sorry pretense of a United States Senator out of Office next November in the 2010 elections!

Peter J. Mahon

Obama goes to Copenhagen bearing gifts!

‘Tis the season for giving and despite the seriousness of the questions that have been raised regarding the validity of the science used to perpetuate to advocacy religion of climate change by the liberal left, President Obama has apparently caught the Christmas spirit.

Not wanting to arrive in Copenhagen for the World Climate Conference empty handed, the White House has stated that Obama is now seeking a “meaningful” climate deal at the United Nations summit involving a “commitment” for “rich” nations to provide $10 billion dollars a year by 2012 to help poor nations fight “climate change”, adding that the taxpayers of the United States are prepared to pay their “fair share” of the $10 billion!

Obama also has another gift that he will present to the U.N. attendees at Copenhagen later this month. It seems that Obama has become annoyed that the Senate has not moved fast enough with his proposed climate change legislation (the cap and trade bill) so he enlisted the aid of his Enviromental Protection Agency Director, Lisa P. Jacskon, who issued the following statement regarding green house gases yesterday.

“After a thorough examination of the scientific evidence and careful consideration of public comments, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that greenhouse gases (GHGs) threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. EPA also finds that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat.”

The above finding by the EPA constitutes the legal trigger for regulating green house gases ( read that CO2) under the Clean Air Act and Obama figures that by announcing this finding prior to his trip he will increase his “green awareness” status at the summit. It could also pressure members of the U.S. Senate to speed up work on legislation to cap U.S. emissions.

In any event, these actions on the part of Obama are simply one more step on his march towards interjecting his socialist centered philosophy of an ever increasing government involvement/regulation of the private sector with the end view of taxing our free market economy into oblivion in his quest to "redistrubute the wealth" of our nation.

Peter J. Mahon

Global Warming Professor calls skeptic "Asshole"!

During a debate of the climate warming issue on BBC television Andrew Watson, a professor at the University of East Anglia, told the BBC host moderating the discussion that the controversy surrounding e-mail messages obtained from his school's computers is "a real setback not because there's anything wrong with the science, but because the character assassination and the temperature of the debate which you can just see from our colleague in America is just obsuring the important issue."

Professor Watson denied that there now exists questions regarding the validity of the science of global warming and chose rather to complain about the charcater assasination and heated debate surrounding the leaked emails.

At the end of the interview, Professor Watson summed up his his opinion of crtics of global warming by calling Marc Marano, a global warming skeptic, an "asshole!"

Peter J. Mahon

Rex Reed - "Climate Science has gone to bed with Climate Advocacy"

It has been over two weeks since the story about "climategate" and the leaked e-mails broke and none of the major mainstream media outlets here in the United States have chosen to cover the story.  Fortunately, that is not the case in other countries.

The government owned Canadian Broadcasting System has been on top of this story since the beginning and I came across this clip of Rex Reed, who served wih the liberal party of Newfoundland, who provides what I think is the most honest and thoughtful commentary on this issue to date.

Peter J. Mahon

Bill Ayers: "Apalled and Alarmed" at Obama's Afghanistan Plan

You remember Bill Ayers don't you?  Activist Professor, former member of the 60's terrorist Weather Underground group and, oh yes, former friend of Chicago Community Organizer and Illinois State Senator Barrack Obama.

You may recall Obama threw Ayers "under the bus" (along with his Grandmother, a "typical white person", and his Pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright ) during his presidential campaign.

It appears that Mr. Ayers is not happy with Obama's decision to send additional troops to Afghanistan
with an accompanying withdrawal start date which, just by chance I am sure,  coincides with the next  Presidential election cycle.

It appears that Mr. Ayers doesn't lend too much credence to Obama's "In today - Out tomorrow" exit strategy!

How's that "Hope and Change" thing going for you Bill?

Peter J. Mahon

Howard Dean -"We need Capitalism and Socialism"

If I had any lingering doubts regarding the possibility that Barrack Obama and the liberal left are attempting to transform our nation from one of capitalism to that of socialism, they are now gone!.


Last April, while making a speech in Paris, France, Howard Dean, the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the contest between Socialism and Capitalism in America is over. Speaking for all of us, Dean declared that Americans have decided to have both!   Dean stated:

" Capitalism is always going to be with us because capitalism represents part of human nature. But the other part of human nature is communitarianism. The debate for the new generation is instead of capitalism or socialism, is we're going to have both and then which proportion of each should we have in order to make this all work."

[Note: When Howard Dean refers to “communitarianism” he is speaking about a political and social philosophy that emphasizes the importance of community in the functioning of political life, in the analysis and evaluation of political institutions, and in understanding human identity and well-being, affording much less importance to the concepts of individual freedom and autonomy.]

America is already a nation that functions both as a capitalist and a socialist society.  This has been true in the US at least since 1933 and FDR’s New Deal. It became even more true during LBJ’s “Great Society” efforts. We have had a mix of socialism funded by capitalism for several decades, and not coincidentally, we have the national debt to show for it.

The debate now is whether we want to extend governmental corporatism in the finance, energy, and health-care fields, which will be an entree to complete government control of those industries in the long term, or whether we want to pursue the free-market solutions that actually create and expand prosperity.

The simple fact of the matter is that all of our nation's "socialism" from FDR's "New Deal", to LBJ's "Great Society", to the "Welfare State" and "Food Stamps", were only possible via funding by capitalism.

Unfortunately, Obama's election has been accompanied by a full court press by the left in this country to expand socialism at the expense of capitalism.  TARP, the stimulus bills, the bail outs of failing private corporations, the cap and trade energy tax, national health care, etc., will all serve to drive our deficit into an area from which we will not be able to recover beause the government will have hammered the private, free market segment, of our economy into oblivion.

If we allow this to take place, we will truly be left with a communitarianism society.

Peter J. Mahon

CBS Corrupts "Frosty" the Snowman!

CBS TV, the "Tiffany" netwok, must have worked long and hard to come up with this piece of holiday garbage!

In an attempt to push it's network sitcom, "How I Met Your Mother" CBS has managed to portray the time honored Christmas season character of "Frosty the Snowman" into some sort of sleazy, low brow, sado-masochistic snowball in an adverisement currently found on the network's Web site.

As CBS explains on its Web site...

"What do you get when you take one of the most beloved Christmas characters and mix it with Barney from How I Met Your Mother? A very inappropriate snowman!! Oh Christmas will never be the same!"

Speaking to a young girl CBS's Frosty opines,“We’ve got to have a bro’s night at a strip club from time to time…because it’s healthy…and harmless.”  The young girl responds by asking “Frosty”, “Did one of your whores tell you that?”

CBS's Frosty goes on to speak about his “porn collection” and his “Dominator 8000, the best bullwhip on the market!”

CBS's Frosty then claims that he has “…been with a lot of women. Blondes, brunettes, redheads, big boobs, small boobs, mediun boobs, some boobs that were big but kind of in a bad way.”

CBS's Frosty then eggs a small white rabbit's sexual fantasy by saying “Dude, you should have hit that, your pants were down and you couln’t knock her up cause its only a dream!”

As far as physical vilence is concened, CBS's Frosty states -“That’s my thing, I’m always punching guys, girls, hey, I’ll punch a baby, I don’t care!”

And finally, as CBS's Frosty flys off in the back of Santa’s sleigh he tells us “My guy in the DA’s office score us seats to a lethal injection!”

All I can say is - Class act CBS!  You truly deserve Katie Couric!

Peter J. Mahon