Hi, everyone! I hope everyone is having a fantastic day! Yay, it's Friday, and an awesome Friday at that, with the news of Sarah Palin being picked for McCain's V.P.! There are so many things I love about this woman. Just to give you an idea, I just wrote this comment on Lain's post, It's Official, and here is the link if you would like to read her blog: http://teamsugar.com/user/Lainetm/blog/1901994 Lain, thanks so much for posting! Anyway, this is what I said in my comment on her post (then, we'll get down to business).

My comment if you're interested : I'm really happy and excited about Sarah Palin being picked! I read an article about her, around 3 or 4 months ago and thought she was awesome. Then, after hearing her speech about her very impressive accomplishments, her very positive demeanor (very refreshing because, she wasn't yelling), and how she gave credit to Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton while coming from a place of love in her heart, her genuineness...I obviously could go on and on! I think she is just a very intelligent woman, who gets the job done, all the while being graceful and classy. A very lovely and charismatic lady.

Okay, back to the topic at hand. Today is Part 7, Reparations By Another Name from The Audacity of Socialism by Investment Business Daily. As usual you can read Part 7 below, or you can choose to listen or read Part 7 from the direct link: http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303088377885894 Also, here is the link to all 12 Parts if you want to read ahead: http://www.ibdeditorial.com/series8.aspx

SOURCE

Reparations By Another Name

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, August 08, 2008 4:30 PM PT

Election '08: Barack Obama says Washington shouldn't just offer apologies for slavery, but also "deeds." Don't worry, he says, he's not talking about direct reparations. Relieved? Don't be.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'I consistently believe that when it comes to . . . reparations," Obama recently told a gathering of minority journalists, "the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds."

A few days later, he clarified his remarks, saying he's not calling for direct cash payments to descendents of slaves, but rather indirect aid in the form of government programs that will "close the gap" between what he sees as white America and black America.

He says government should offer "universal" programs — such as universal health care, universal mortgage credits, college tuition, job training and even universal 401(k)s — that "disproportionately affect people of color."

In other words, reparations by another name.

Obama knows that if he pushes too hard on reparations, he might scare off white voters. So he couches race-specific welfare as "universal" social programs that appeal to broad-based political coalitions — "even if they disproportionately help minorities," he confides in his book, "Audacity of Hope."

Obama has a name for his scheme: "universal strategies."

"An emphasis on universal, as opposed to race-specific, programs isn't just good policy," he wrote. "It's also good politics."

Maybe so. But not all his plans for reparations are roundabout. His book and Web site outline a separate plan calling for essentially a government bailout of the inner cities. Among other things, he proposes:

• Doling out faith-based grants "targeting ex-offenders."

• Subsidizing supermarket chains that relocate to the inner city to deliver "fresh produce" to blacks, helping wean them off unhealthy fast food.

• Imposing "goals and timetables for minority hiring" on large corporations whose work forces are deemed too white.

• Continuing to fund the Community Development Block Grant program, Head Start and HUD public housing subsidies.

• Funding Small Business Administration loans for minority businesses who train ex-felons, including gangbangers, for the "green jobs" of the future, such as installing extra insulation in homes.

• Doubling the funding for federal after-school programs such as midnight basketball.

• Subsidizing job training, day care, transportation for inner-city poor, as well as doubling the funding of the federal Jobs Access and Reverse Commute program.

• Expanding the eligibility of the earned income tax credit to include more poor, and indexing it to inflation.

• Adopting entire inner-city neighborhoods as wards of the federal government.

• Spending billions on new inner-city employment programs, including prison-to-work programs.

This is just a down payment on the "economic justice" Obama has promised the NAACP — financed by "tax laws that restore some balance to the distribution of the nation's wealth," he says in his book.

And the indirect aid he's proposing now could quickly turn into cash transfers once Obama is safely ensconced in the White House.

Claiming "blacks were forced into ghettos," Obama is certainly sympathetic to the idea of reparations. His church has actively petitioned for them for decades. And he's strongly suggested there's a legal case to be made for them.

"So many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow," he said. "We still haven't fixed them."

He assumes the economic gap is a legacy of discrimination and largely unrelated to personal responsibility. He also makes it seem things haven't gotten better for blacks.

In this, Obama is intellectually dishonest. In his book, he cites statistics showing a 70% rise over the past two decades in the number of "Latino families considered middle class," but never cites one stat showing the even more impressive gains of the black middle class. He complains about low black wages, but never mentions the quantum leap in black home-ownership rates.

Why? Such stats would undermine his case for roundabout reparations. Even if it were true, he says, "better isn't good enough."

"The problems of inner-city poverty arise from our failure to face up to an often tragic past," Obama said.

Now it's payback time.

I know this looks familiar. I am reposting it from IER, because Pipeline (where I copied the first post from) got it from here. This is where I should have copied it from. *Kicks self* It's better read here. This is the link, if you'd like that instead.
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2008/08/25/dont-know-much-abou...

By, Brian Kennedy

In an August 16 radio address, the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives outlined a plan “to take our country in a New Direction for our energy future.” Last week, the Institute for Energy Research (IER) issued an analysis of that plan, entitled, Don’t Know Much About Energy. And yesterday, the Speaker demonstrated that she may not, in fact, know very much about energy in an appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press. It appears as though the Speaker believes natural gas is an “alternative to fossil fuels” that can be produced “naturally” like wind and solar power. From the transcript:

REP. PELOSI: You can have a transition with natural gas. That, that is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels. So, so there is a way to transition this instead of doing more of the same.

REP. PELOSI: I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

REP. PELOSI: The fact is, the supply of natural gas is so big, and you do need a transition if you’re going to go from fossil fuels, as you say, you can’t do it overnight, but you must transition. These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives.

Fossil Fuels 101: Fossil fuels – coal, petroleum (oil), and natural gas — are concentrated organic compounds found in the Earth’s crust. They are created from the remains of plants and animals that lived millions of years ago in the form of concentrated biomass. According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), fossil fuels meet around 85 percent of U.S. energy demand.

Natural Gas 101: Natural gas is colorless, odorless fossil fuel that is prized for its cleanliness and its many uses - including energy. It is produced in much the same way as oil – by drilling for it – and is often produced in conjunction with oil. Natural gas is a principal component of modern chemistry and, as such, plays a central role in our quality of life. It is an essential material in such products as paints, plastics, fertilizer, antifreeze, dyes and medicines.

As one of the most versatile building blocks of our way of life, it is consumed by industry as both an energy source and a basic feedstock. Families and businesses depend on it for heating and cooling. It has increasingly been viewed as a dependable and clean transportation fuel, powering urban mass transportation systems reliably and safely. It also holds great promise as a reliable source of hydrogen. Few Americans go a day without its use in some form or fashion.

American Supplies: While her position on this may change when she learns that natural gas is actually a fossil fuel produced by ‘Big Oil’ companies, the Speaker is actually correct in stating that America’s natural gas supply is big. It’s massive, in fact. The United States has enough natural gas onshore and offshore to meet all of its natural gas needs (industrial, residential and commercial, electric, transportation) for at least another 50 years. Developing these supplies in the future will require access to federal lands, and exploration and production drilling activities.

Lesson Summary: Natural gas is a fossil fuel that is both abundant in the U.S. and integral to our quality of life. Drilling is required in order to produce it.

So, if the Speaker of the House supports new drilling for natural gas (mostly done in conjunction with drilling for oil) maybe there’s hope for this Congress after all, right? Don’t count on it. More from the transcript:

MR. BROKAW: Sounds like we’re going to have offshore drilling.

REP. PELOSI: No, no, no.

I posted this already, but neglected to make it to the group, so I'm resubmitting.

The Official Palin Press Release ...
Posted by: Matt Lewis at 11:22 AM
From the McCain campaign:

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today announced that he has selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate and to serve as his vice president.

Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has a record of delivering on the change and reform that we need in Washington.

Governor Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources. She leads a state that matters to every one of us -- Alaska has significant energy resources and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent.

In Alaska, Governor Palin challenged a corrupt system and passed a landmark ethics reform bill. She has actually used her veto and cut budgetary spending. She put a stop to the "bridge to nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million dollars.

As the head of Alaska's National Guard and as the mother of a soldier herself, Governor Palin understands what it takes to lead our nation and she understands the importance of supporting our troops.

Governor Palin has the record of reform and bipartisanship that others can only speak of. Her experience in shaking up the status quo is exactly what is needed in Washington today.

http://townhall.com/blog/g/6da32d23-438f-4a98-8b64-5f7a392ca73c

Friday, August 29, 2008
The Official Palin Press Release ...
Posted by: Matt Lewis at 11:22 AM
From the McCain campaign:

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today announced that he has selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his running mate and to serve as his vice president.

Governor Palin is a tough executive who has demonstrated during her time in office that she is ready to be president. She has brought Republicans and Democrats together within her Administration and has a record of delivering on the change and reform that we need in Washington.

Governor Palin has challenged the influence of the big oil companies while fighting for the development of new energy resources. She leads a state that matters to every one of us -- Alaska has significant energy resources and she has been a leader in the fight to make America energy independent.

In Alaska, Governor Palin challenged a corrupt system and passed a landmark ethics reform bill. She has actually used her veto and cut budgetary spending. She put a stop to the "bridge to nowhere" that would have cost taxpayers $400 million dollars.

As the head of Alaska's National Guard and as the mother of a soldier herself, Governor Palin understands what it takes to lead our nation and she understands the importance of supporting our troops.

Governor Palin has the record of reform and bipartisanship that others can only speak of. Her experience in shaking up the status quo is exactly what is needed in Washington today.

Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

i.am

I would like to start by clarifying my reason for this post. As I see much of America's innocent youth thrown into governmental clean-up programs and my paycheck being taxed to keep "dangerous" pot smokers off the streets and in state prisons or rehab programs (or both), it is disturbing to think of how much money and effort is wasted to keep these people off the "streets" when they are too stoned to even get off the couch in the first place. Am I contradicting myself by pointing out how lethargic and stupified one gets after enjoying a fat joint? Absolutely not. Way before drugs became illegal, they were used as tools of recreation and relaxation. Why punish the citizens of America for merely enjoying themselves? If marijuana disturbs society as implied by lawmakers, then why is it the most widely used drug amongst Americans? AND, if it is so widely used and common amongst us, why don't we recognize this on a daily basis, especially in the loud mouths of the media? Rarely does one hear of an instance in which a marijuana-poisened individual goes ramped on another person or object and cause mahem amongst the community. For this reason, I would like to point out why marijuana is illegal and share some thoughts about the unjust illegalization of the natural, pain relieving plant, Marijuana.
For those who are appaled by American's effort to re-legalize weed, those who are misinformed, or those who are just plain curious, here is a little understanding as to why Marijuana was deemed illegal beginning in the District of Columbia in 1906. Interestingly, the US government, at one time, actually encouraged the use of hemp for rope and paper, and later used cannibas widely in pharmaceuticals. In fact, George Washington grew Indian hemp in his farm. Grew it all over the place. Anyways, the illegalization of marijuana began in the early 1800s, justified by racism, poverty and competition. The first law we see passed is in 1925, and it was merely to regulate the use of "Indian Hemp" and was confined to medial uses only. In this case, however, only Indian hemp is regulated, but European hemp is still allowed pass borders and for general use. In 1925, after this and many other minor laws outlawed the drug, the Federal Beurau of Narcodics was introduced under the Roosevelt administration which developed strict laws still in effect today. It is said that Roosevelt's intention of introducing this committie was due to some fierce compettition. As hemp was used to make paper cheaply, many newspapers used this paper to cut costs and keep prices low. Roosevelt, with his own newspaper company under his belt, felt the pressures of these competitors and was losing money to cheap-print. As any ruler of the free captialist world would do, he created this organization to outlaw hemp products, therefore, putting his newspaper at the front line of the competition. Later, laws were inacted to completely illegalize any possession of the drug, alledging that people become sex-craved, violent, and irrational when under the influence of the drug (sounds more like intoxication of alcohol if you ask me). Bringing us to today's ongoing debate of the legalization of cannibis.
To me, one runs the same risk of acting foolishly under cannibis or under alcohol. One runs an even larger risk of death, due to respitory cancers, mouth cancers and heart failures, when smoking tobacco over smoking marijuana. If strawberries can be consumed, so can weed. Save hard working police officers the headache and let them tend to much more important matters - murder, robbery, tourists. AND save us, the hard-working, underpaid, insurance depleted citizens of the "free"(tortured) world from the worries of arrest and ridicule (or else we will need to go have a smoke).

COMMENTS LOVED.
Let me know your opinion! Do I know what I'm talking about? Any supporting/contrasting views?

I'm somewhat addicted to reading the Starbucks Gossip blog. I don't know why, I've never worked there (though I've often thought about it). I think I just like behind the scenes stuff about anything and as a corporation I find Starbucks very interesting. Anyways! One of the posts I just read was asking baristas to write in with any celebrities they've met and what they ordered. I came across this gem and had to post it here:

"John McCain was stumping in our city, and his posse came into our store. When I told them that I admired him because my daddy is a Vietnam Vet, they asked if I would like to meet him. I said "YEAH!" only because he's famous.

I was surrounded by his people and escorted to a van in the parking lot to meet him. He was super nice, told me to tell my dad how much he appreciates his sacrifice to our country, and was introduced to his wife. She was botoxed and tv make-uped within an inch of her life and had a frozen smile on her face. She may have been really sad that day, but you'd never know.

A few weeks later, two men came to the register and asked if I was a coffee master. When I told them I was almost done with my certification (I thought they were from corporate so I pretty much forgot everything I'd learned), one of them started asking me a bunch of random questions about coffee, like where does the word "coffee" come from? Where were the original beans smuggled in from? When I didn't know the answers, he looked at his friend and said "Hm. Looks like SOMEONE needs to work a little harder during her training." He was the rudest customer I've ever had.

A minute later as I was making their drinks (and calling them names in my head) I asked them where they were from and one of them whispered "We're with the OBAMA campaign", like he woud be rushed for autographs and baby kisses if someone heard him. Without thinking, I said "WOW!! I got to meet JOHN MCCAIN the other day and he was SO NICE!! I so love that man!!"

The look on their faces were priceless; the beauty of it all was that I didn't even connect the fact that my comment would "offend"... I was just namedropping that I'd gotten to meet someone famous.

BTW, I met McCain the morning that a pit bull attacked one of our customers in the store parking lot.

It was the best. day. at work. ever."

"Freudian Slip"

party

Hi, I hope everyone is having a wonderful day. Today is part 6, Obama Finds An ACORN, from The Audacity of Socialism by Investment Business Daily. As usual you can read Part 6 below, or you can choose to listen or read Part 6 from the direct link: http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=302914868143810 Also, here is the link to all 12 Parts if you want to read ahead: http://www.ibdeditorial.com/series8.aspx

SOURCE:

Obama Finds An ACORN

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, August 06, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Election '08: The man who includes being a community organizer on his short resume has a long association with a far-left group that would organize our communities into socialist gulags.

IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism

In 1995, Illinois Gov. Jim Edgar balked at implementing the federal motor voter law out of concern that letting people register via postcard and blocking the state from pruning voter rolls might invite vote fraud.

A young lawyer, a community organizer himself, sued on behalf of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn) and won. The young lawyer was Barack Obama. Acorn later invited Obama to train its staff.

When Obama served on the board of the Woods Fund for Chicago with Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, the Woods Fund frequently gave Acorn grants to fund its agenda and voter registration activities.

Acorn has been in the lead in opposing voter ID laws and other efforts to ensure ballot integrity. Acorn has been implicated in voter fraud and bogus registration schemes in Ohio and at least 13 other states. Acorn staffers will presumably be out registering voters again this year.

Obama also opposes voter ID laws. He believes they disenfranchise voters. Last year, Obama put a hold on the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky for a seat on the Federal Election Commission. It seems von Spakovsky, as an official in the Justice Department, had supported a Georgia photo ID law. Acorn espouses the leftist view that voter ID laws are racist.

In addition to subverting American democracy to promote a leftist agenda, Acorn's radical agenda amounts to "undisguised authoritarian socialism." wrote Sol Stern in the 2003 City Journal article, "Acorn's Nutty Regime for Cities."

Acorn opposed welfare reform and opposes securing American borders to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. Acorn was heavily involved a few years back in opposing Rudy Giuliani's efforts to privatize failing New York schools.

Acorn also has been in the lead supporting the "living wage" and opposing efforts by big-box retailers such as Wal-Mart to bring the bounty and benefits of free-market capitalism to inner cities.

Wal-Mart has faced resistance to its plans to expand into urban centers — most notably Chicago and Los Angeles — where unions and liberal orthodoxy remain strong. Opponents there charge that such big-box stores exploit workers, depress wages and drive out community businesses.

Acorn, Obama's former client, supported a big-box living-wage ordinance vetoed by Chicago's Mayor Richard Daley to require stores of at least 90,000 square feet operated by firms with $1 billion or more in annual sales nationwide to pay workers a minimum of $10 an hour plus $3 in benefits.

Critics such as Acorn, who complain that Wal-Mart employees live paycheck to paycheck, forget that many of Wal-Mart's customers also live paycheck to paycheck and seek quality merchandise at decent prices, which is why 100 million people shop there every week.

How can they oppose "low" wages for Wal-Mart employees while in effect supporting higher prices for Wal-Mart customers? They can because they believe the socialist orthodoxy that capitalism is bad, government is good and that the solution to poverty is to make everyone equally poor.

Wal-Mart gives people what they want at a price they can afford. It believes a fair wage is one agreed upon between employee and employer. It is the poster child for roll-up-your-sleeves capitalism. It is efficient, innovative, successful and nonunion — everything government is not — and is opposed for all these reasons.

Advocates of the so-called living wage see their efforts as putting money directly into workers' pockets. But it merely transfers money from one person's pocket to another person's pocket. This is classic socialist income redistribution — not economic justice, but economic extortion.

In the real world, companies that pay workers more than the value of the goods and services they produce go out of business. Workers should be paid what their labor is worth, not what their lifestyle requires.

On his Web site, Obama embraces Acorn's socialist goal, pledging to "raise the minimum wage and index it to inflation to make sure that full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation and housing."

That money would come from taxpayers and business owners or, as Marx would say, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

I've been looking for a REAL CHOICE for the upcoming elections, and I've settled on a choice, at least for a NJ (US) senator. The more I hear from Mr. Scheurer and the more I hear about him, the more I like.
http://www.jasonforsenate2008.com/

I'm not saying that (if you're in New Jersey) that you have to vote for him, but I am saying that you should put a lot of thought into any candidate who will get your vote. Don't be a sheep and follow along with others, unless you are happy with that choice. My boys (age 10 and 12) listen to NJ1015 http://www.nj1015.com with me, and they are getting more informed about how politics really work. Get informed and vote with your head.