Cleaning out the Occupiers one by One…..Makes one reappreciate the noon day Sun

Adios, Occupiers

by John Hinderaker at PowerLine:

“Occupiers have been cleared from a number of parks and public spaces over the past few days, most recently in New York, where, early this morning, the NYPD cleared out the Occupiers, arresting 200 in the process, so that Zuccotti Park could be cleaned. (The New York Post, which shares our view of the Occupiers, headlines “NYPD raiders roust OWS rabble.”) The battle, however, is not over in New York, where the Occupiers apparently have obtained a court order from a friendly judge, allowing them to return to the park with their tents. Naturally, the Occupiers are represented by the National Lawyers’ Guild, a long-time Communist front.

Here is a lovely sight–Zuccotti Park, emptied of Occupiers, cleaned and, one hopes, sanitized:

Here in Minneapolis, something similar is happening. Our Occupiers have been camping out on the plaza adjacent to the Hennepin County Government Center. Last week, the Hennepin County Board ordered that, while the Occupiers and all others are free to protest on the plaza, they will no longer be allowed to stay there overnight. Some of the Occupiers have said that they will defy this order, and a few slept on the plaza last night. As I was leaving my office around 6:30 yesterday, I heard a group of Occupiers marching through the streets of downtown Minneapolis, chanting and banging on drums–making a good impression on local voters, no doubt:

Personally, I hope that the Occupiers in New York, Minneapolis and elsewhere stick to their guns. The longer their crime wave continues and the more the public learns about them, the better for the conservative movement. I had lunch yesterday with a group that included the Hennepin County Sheriff. Among other things, he talked about the Occupiers. He said they have been trying hard to get themselves arrested, but his office is highly professional and has avoided giving the protesters their wish.

That’s a good thing, in my view. I want a handful of Occupiers to still be on hand the first time the thermometer dips to twenty degrees below zero, so that, rather than getting themselves on the evening news by goading the authorities into arresting them, they will slink quietly away to avoid frostbite.”

A Call for Support from Prager University

Dear Friends:

 

“The United States is an Imperial Power;” “Profits are bad;” ”Israel is the cause of terror;” “Big government is good government;” “Gender doesn’t matter;” “God is a fiction.” The list of destructive ideas and downright nonsense taught at college and university today (and reinforced by the media) is almost endless. 

Click here to make a donation.  

We are in a war of ideas and our side is in danger of losing. That’s why I started Prager University: to articulate and preserve the Judeo-Christian values that have made our country great.

Our compelling five minute video courses like “The Middle East Problem,” “Happiness is a Moral Obligation,” “The Four Big Bangs” and “The American Trinity” employ the viral power of the Internet to reach millions of people all over the world.

Great teachers like economist Tom Sowell, political analyst Bruce Herschensohn, historian Paul Johnson, relationship expert Alison Armstrong, theologian Joseph Telushkin and others are joining me to create a world class faculty. 

But in order to grow and have maximum impact, we need generous contributions from thoughtful people like you. 

Whether it is $10, $100, $500, or more, your generous tax-deductible donation will go toward more video courses, student outreach and national 

pro-America educational initiatives like our highly-successful

“4th of July Declaration.”

 

Will you honor us by supporting our efforts? 

It’s easy to do. 

 

Thank you in advance for your support.

Sincerely,

Dennis Prager 

President, Prager University

Checking the Facts isn’t necessarily fact checking at a Liberal fact checker

 Prager fan, Mark Waldeland sent in the following opinion article from the Weekly Standard:

Just the Facts

“Herman Cain was the source of a controversy last week .  .  . well, a controversy other than the one you were probably thinking of. On October 30, Cain reaffirmed to CBS’s Bob Schieffer on Face the Nationthat it was his belief that Planned Parenthood was founded with the purpose of aborting black children in disproportionate numbers. 

Wherever would Cain get such a crazy idea? Well, let’s start with Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, who was a well-known advocate of eugenics. Her writings are littered with talk of birth control as a matter of “racial hygiene,” “cultivation of better racial elements,” “a cleaner race,” and “the solution of racial .  .  . problems.” There’s also the small matter of that time when Sanger fretted, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.” (Sanger’s defenders say the context suggests that she didn’t actually want to exterminate the entire black race, just its less desirable elements, or something.)

It’s long been one of liberalism’s most inconvenient facts that the modern family planning movement was largely founded on an ideology that Hitler also found agreeable. Naturally, whenever someone has the temerity to point this out, and heaven forfend it be done by a black man, out come the spin doctors. 

Or rather, the “fact checkers.” The Scrapbook has a hard time telling the difference these days. Glenn Kessler, author of the Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog, gave Cain “four Pinocchios” for stating (accurately) that Sanger “did talk about preventing the increasing number of poor blacks in this country by preventing black babies from being born.” 

Kessler defended and downplayed Sanger’s statements in support of eugenics. His sourcing leaned so heavily on Planned Parenthood it wouldn’t be surprising if they dictated the response to him. Kessler even called Sanger​—​we’re not making this up​—​a “racial pioneer” for her work with black organizations in the early 20th century. Of course, Kessler doesn’t mention that many of the black leaders she worked with at the time, such as W.E.B. DuBois, were eugenicists themselves. 

It further goes unsaid that Sanger tried to realize her birth control ambitions by speaking to that other hearty band of racial pioneers, the Ku Klux Klan.   As Planned Parenthood would have us believe, Sanger was really a uniter, not a divider. 

At the very least, Margaret Sanger still has the power to bring the liberal media together, if only to shore up the façade that Planned Parenthood has the best of intentions. In addition to Kessler, Factcheck.org and PolitiFact also seized on Cain’s comments with equally mind-bending sophistry. 

Here are some facts that almost no one in the major media saw fit to raise in relation to Herman Cain’s comments. According to the Centers for Disease Control, black women get 40 percent of the nation’s abortions even though they comprise only 13 percent of the population. Fully 60 percent of all black pregnancies in New York City last year ended in abortion. Whether the media want to confront it or not, there are dramatically fewer black Americans thanks to the legacy of Margaret Sanger.”

Comment:  In the glory days of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics…..do you remember?…..that dictatorship atrocity which managed to murder about 50,000,000 of its own citizens as a matter of government policy…remember?……the nation with which our America was competing during the Cold War…….remember?……the ‘war’   the professors of  American Academia have been propagandizing to American youth fought  between moral ‘equals’:  America vs Communist Soviet Union, and that there isn’t any real difference between good and evil……remember the professors who created  Barack Hussein Obama!

Snopes and Wikileaks regularly report Leftwing facts at their ‘fact’ sites.

One of the most popular saying among Soviet citizens during this very Cold War was:   “The future is known.   It’s the past that keeps changing.

Facts keep changing because Marxists invent so many of them.

A View of the Supreme Court’s Review of Obamacare Offenses against American Liberty

The Extreme Supreme Court?

by Steven Hayward   at   PowerLine

The news out today that the Supreme Court will hear the Obamacare case this term is not a big surprise (they might have punted on “ripeness” grounds, as more than one lower court judge argued), but Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute points out why this is no ordinary case–it’s beyond even an extraordinarycase:

What was unexpected — and unprecedented in modern times — is that it set aside five-and-a-half hours for the argument.  Here are the issues the Court will decide:

1. Whether Congress has the power to enact the individual mandate. – 2 hours
2. Whether the challenge to the individual mandate is barred by the Anti-Injunction Act. – 1 hour
3. Whether and to what extent the individual mandate, if unconstitutional, is severable from the rest of the Act. – 90 minutes
4. Whether the new conditions on all federal Medicaid funding (expanding eligibility, greater coverage, etc.) constitute an unconstitutional coercion of the states. – 1 hour

In addition to the length of argument, which we can expect to be heard over multiple days in March or April, perhaps the biggest surprise is the Court’s decision to review that fourth issue.  There is no circuit split here — in large part because 26 states are already in this one suit — and no judge has yet voted to uphold what also be described as a claim that the federal government is “commandeering” the states to do its bidding. . .  As a practical matter, this could be a bigger deal than the individual mandate because, while Congress had never before tried an economic mandate, it certainly does attach plenty of strings to the grants it gives states — and the spending power is thought to be even broader than the power to regulate commerce.

It is impossible to overstate how remarkable this is.  Usually the Supreme Court allows only an hour for a whole case to be argued.  They didn’t even extend the time limit for the two Bush v. Gore cases in 2000. Prediction: If the Court strikes down Obamacare, and especially if its opinion goes beyond just the individual mandate, as these issues suggest is possible, look for the Left to start calling it “the Extreme Court.”

UPDATE:  From the comments below, a good analysis from Gary Gross.

Comment:  The problem with the Supreme Court is that the four extreme lefties led by the three females don’t pay much attention to  the writings of the Constitution.   Regarding the Obamacare  mandate  that forces  Americans to buy health insurance from Obama and Company, the Court vote should be unanimous against this intrusion into personal citizen lives.    But the lefty women will swell up with worry about security, and to hell with ones personal life.  

For lefty women, liberty is a dead horse.    Marxist dictatorship  is   just fine for them…..Government knows best beats Father knows best……By the time gals discover they can’t divorce government, it will be too late to save any liberties.

Latino Obamaling Plays Race Card against Marco Rubio and Republicans

“Hispanics would not flock to Marco Rubio

 as a vice presidential pick”, Reports Obamaling Reyes

Paul Reyes identifies with the Christian Science Monitor and reports his  following opinion in it:

He was toying around in politics when young, and opines……….”Not only am I a more informed voter, it is no longer a novelty to see Latino names on a ballot. So I am baffled by the hoopla over Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who is being touted as the GOP’s Great Hispanic Hope. Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, and top Republican strategists all speak of Senator Rubio as a top contender for vice president.

These Republicans see Mr. Rubio as their bridge to Latinos, who have deserted the GOP because of its hardline immigration rhetoric. But trust me, a former ethnic voter: Rubio has limited appeal to Hispanics, and a whole lot of baggage. 

An October poll by Latino Decisions found that immigration reform continues to be the top issue among Hispanics. Yet Rubio supports Arizona’s infamous “papers, please” law. He is against the Dream Act, which would allow undocumented youth who were brought here as children to become citizens if they serve in the military or attend college.

Though Rubio is popular among Cuban-Americans, they constitute only 3.5 percent of Hispanics. His conservative immigration positions will be a hard sell among Mexican-Americans, by far the country’s largest Hispanic population.

When I look at Rubio, I see a charismatic speaker whose actions contradict his words. He supports English-only legislation even as he campaigns in Spanish. He champions limited government, yet supports reauthorizing E-Verify, which would require employers to clear, through a national database, every person who applies for a job.

And although Rubio says that Americans need to live within their means, he has had trouble doing so. Last year, The Wall Street Journal inferred that his financial troubles are “epic,” and he nearly lost one of his homes to foreclosure. He is hardly the best spokesman for the Republican message of fiscal discipline.

Rubio has been compared to President Obama, another relatively young politician who quickly became a rising star within his party. Unlike “No Drama Obama,” however, Rubio seems to attract controversy.”

Comment:   This racist Obamaling  in Latino flavor claims Obama is “no Drama?”     That this Obama, Barack Hussein does not “attract controversy”?     Nearly everything about this foreign president is controversial every time he opens his eternally disingenuous mouth.

Reyes opines:  “When I look at Rubio, I see a charismatic speaker whose actions contradict his words.”  Is Reyes a nut?   Is he suggesting that his worshipful Barack Hussein  is not a charismatic speaker and that he does not contradict his words? 

 The Monitor, Mr. Reyes notes as proof of Rubio contradiction:  “ He supports English-only legislation even as he campaigns in Spanish.”

Its a better idea  for  Mr. Rubio to speak Spanish rather than  Russian or Yiddish  to Latninos, don’t you think?

I admit I  like Mr. Rubio very much.   He is bright, conservative and an American and even Obamalings like Paul Reyes can’t claim   that Senator Rubio spent 22 years at a racist hate-spewing temple of ‘religion’  led by a fanatic known for his “Goddamn America”  sermons, whom Barack Hussein Obama claimed as his father figure.

I don’t know much about Senator Rubio’s means, whether he is living within them or not.   How should we size his troubles  up with the “FIVE  TRILLION DOLLAR SPENDING BABY” called PRESIDENT OBAMA LIVING BEYOND THE NATION’S MEANS?

What a hack, this Paul Reyes!   What a yes boy with the Obamaling Press!   Unfortunately, these Obamaling propagandists are a dime a dozen diverting the evils of racism and Marxism  away from their antiAmerican  leader, Senor Barako Obamio.

Lefties at Daily Kos Announce: “Dennis Prager Advocates Marital Rape”

         Does a Full-Time Homemaker

         Swap Her Mind for a Mop?

 

(Direct from Dennis Prager)

 

“I periodically write and regularly broadcast about male-female issues because I want to help men and women, especially husbands and wives, get along better. But I have developed a secondary reason: to elicit left-wing reactions. They reveal an enormous amount about how the left thinks. For example, one of the biggest left-wing websites (Daily Kos) wrote that “Dennis Prager advocates marital rape.” Why? Because I wrote a column in which I suggested that if a woman loves her husband, and if he is a loving and good man, she might not want to be guided solely by “mood” in deciding whether and when to have sex with him.And just a few weeks ago, the same website declared me a misogynist for my column on what I believe to have been four negative legacies of feminism for women. I actually wrote the column on behalf of women, yet I was labeled a misogynist. Why? Because I suggested that feminist pressure on women to emphasize career over finding a husband, career over marriage and career over child rearing has not been good for most women or for society. That means, according to the Daily Kos writer, that “basically Prager is upset with contemporary women because they seek a life beyond being confined to domestic space and swapping their brains for a mop.”To suggest that children benefit from having a full-time parent — which will usually be the mother — is, in the eyes of the dominant intellectual culture, equivalent to advocating suppression of women and “swapping their brains for a mop.” The left views full-time homemakers as individuals who, because of patriarchy and other nefarious forces, have abandoned their minds to the lowest intellectual activity the human being can engage in: homemaking. Being a full-time homemaker, mother and wife is the left’s vision of hell.

Why that is so is not my subject here. Rather, I seek to refute the idea that full-time homemaking is intellectually vapid and a waste of a college education.

Let me first state that I have no argument with those mothers who need to or even just wish to work outside the home. My argument is with those who believe that staying at home is necessarily mind-numbing.

Nor do I wish to romanticize child rearing. As a rule, little children don’t contribute much to the intellectual life of a parent (although older children who are intellectually curious can spur a parent to seek answers to challenging questions they may not have considered before). Any intellectually alive woman who is a full-time mother must therefore find intellectual stimulation elsewhere.

The point is that she can find such stimulation without leaving her house. Furthermore, the intellectual input she can find is likely to be greater than most women (or men) find working outside the home. There is a reason that about half the audience of my national radio show is female — they listen to talk radio for hours a day and broaden their knowledge considerably. To the left, the notion that talk radio enhances intellectual development is akin to fish needing bicycles. But that’s because the left’s greatest achievement is demonizing the right and because they never actually listen to the best of us.

I am syndicated by the Salem Radio Network. My colleagues are Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Michael Medved and Hugh Hewitt. Two of us attended Harvard, one Yale and one Columbia. One of us taught at Harvard, another at the City University of New York. And a third teaches constitutional law at a law school.

In addition to reviewing the news and discussing our own views, we all routinely interview authors and experts — left and right — in almost every field. The woman who listens to us regularly will know more about economics, politics, current events, world affairs, American history and religion than the great majority of men and women who work full-time outside of the house.

Lest the latter seem a self-serving suggestion, there are many other opportunities for full-time homemakers to broaden their intellectual horizons: recorded books and a few television networks, for example. And if a woman can get help from grandparents, neighbors, older children or a baby sitter, there are also myriad opportunities for study outside the house — such as community college classes, book clubs, etc. — and for volunteer work in intellectually more stimulating areas than most paid work.

Let me give an example of the woman I know best: my wife. She is a non-practicing lawyer with a particular interest in and knowledge of taxation and the economy. She decided to stay home to be a full-time mother to her two boys (one of whom is autistic) and her two nieces (who lost their mother, my wife’s sister, to cancer, when they were very young). Between talk radio, History Channel documentaries, BookTV on C-SPAN2, recorded lectures from The Teaching Company/The Great Courses, and constant reading, she has led a first-class intellectual life while shuttling kids, folding laundry and making family dinners.

So it is not only nonsense that full-time homemaking means swapping the mind for a mop. It is also nonsense that the vast majority of paid work outside the home develops the mind. One may prefer to work outside the home for many reasons: a need or desire for extra income; a need to get out of the house; a need to be admired for work beyond making a home; a need for regular interaction with other adults. But the development of the intellect is not necessarily among them.

Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show and is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of four books, most recently “Happiness Is a Serious Problem” (HarperCollins). His website is DennisPrager.com.

The Dennis Prager Radio Show is aired in the Twin City area on Salem Radio, 1280fm, from 11am to 2pm, Monday-Friday.

Dennis does broadcast on state  holidays.

Obama Sneer is Here Again…..Krauthammer says “Obama has Ill-concealed contempt” for America

Krauthammer: Obama Has “Ill-Concealed Contempt” For America

video  below from RealClearPolitics:

Syndicated columnist and FOX News contributor Charles Krauthammer responds to President Obama calling the U.S. “lazy.”

“Well, no one is asking him to go out there and asking him to be a jingoistic cheerleader. But when you call your own country ‘lazy’ when you are abroad and you call it unambitious and soft when you’re home, I think what you are showing is not tough love, but ill-concealed contempt,” Krauthammer said on FOX News’ “Special Report.”

“Obama is ready to blame everybody except himself for the lousy economy. And the lack of investment. Look, why are people reluctant to invest? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, in the industrialized world. Obama has spoken about it. It’s the one issue on which the Republicans would have agreed on lowering that rate, eliminating loopholes. In three years in office, he’s done nothing. He has an NLRB trying to shut down a $1 billion plant Boeing has constructed, as a favor to Obama’s union allies. People look abroad and say this isn’t a place I want to do business. Its his issues, his over-regulation over taxation and all the red tape he has added. And now he blames Americans’ laziness. I think it’s unseemly.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/11/14/krauthammer_obama_has_ill-concealed_contempt_for_america.html