Thursday, March 1, 2012

MICHAEL SAVAGE ON THE DEATH OF ANDREW BREITBART


Posted by BH 11:30 pm 3-1

FROM FREE ZONE MEDIA 

Noting that the cause of Andrew Breitbart’s unexpected death yesterday was being examined by the Los Angeles County Coroner’s office, talk-radio host Michael Savage raised the question of whether the conservative media powerhouse – who recently announced he had videos that could politically damage President Obama – was murdered.  On his top-rated show today, Savage played an audio clip of Breitbart telling an audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington last month that he had obtained videos that shed light on Obama’s ties to radicals in the early 1980s who helped propel him to the presidency.  “Maybe my overly active imagination kicked into overdrive,” Savage told his listeners of his decision to raise the question. “But you heard what Breitbart said – he has videos … we’re going to vet the president.”  Breitbart reportedly was walking near his home in Brentwood, Calif., just after midnight this morning when he collapsed. A neighbor saw him fall and called 911. Emergency crews tried to revive him and rushed him to the emergency room at the UCLA Medical Center.  It’s entirely plausible, Savage acknowledged, that Breitbart simply collapsed of a heart attack because of overwork and a reported history of health problems.  “I’m asking a crazy question,” Savage said, “but so what? We the people want an answer. This was not an ordinary man. If I don’t ask this question, I would be remiss.”
Breitbart told the CPAC crowd last month that the videos would reveal Obama during a time when he was meeting a “bunch of silver ponytails” – referring to Weather Underground terror group members Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.  Ayers and Dohrn reportedly launched Obama’s political career with a fundraiser in their Chicago home.  Savage noted that Breitbart had dinner with Ayers and Dorhn three weeks ago at the couple’s Hyde Park residence on Chicago’s South Side, which is near Obama’s home. Breitbart was invited by Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson, who won an Internet auction for a dinner party with the couple.  “I’ve got videos – this election we’re going to vet him,” Breitbart said at CPAC, promising they would show how “racial division and class warfare are central” to the “hope and change” that Obama”sold in 2008.”  “He threatened the president at CPAC with video that could derail the president’s campaign,” Savage said.
“I pray it was natural causes, but we’ll never know the truth.”
Savage said that if Breitbart’s colleagues have the videos, they should post them as soon as possible and make them viral “or they’ll never see the light of day.”  Savage said he hadn’t spoken with Breitbart for the past two years, but he recalled the media mogul’s visited to his home in the Bay Area.  “He spoke for three straight hours,” Savage said. “I was unable to say a word.”  Savage also attended a party at Breitbart’s Los Angeles home.  “I told him two years ago to get a body guard. Never be alone in the street,” Savage said.  Savage, the author of the bestselling novel “Abuse of Power,” put on his novelist hat and speculated about ways a murderer could remain undetected by inducing a heart attack that didn’t leave any traces.  A caller from Savage’s native New York City said there’s a simple way to find out what happened.  “If the tapes come out, he died of a heart attack,” the caller said. “If the tapes don’t come out, they whacked him.”  “The Savage Nation” airs live Monday through Friday from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern. It can be heard online through stations such as KSTE in Sacramento.

HEY GEORGE W. - COME BACK AN HELP US FIX THIS MESS ? WE REALLY GOT IT SCREWED UP ? IT'S TIME TO KICK SOME ASS !

Posted by BH 10:15 pm 3-1

FROM FREE ZONE MEDIA
A push is under way by lawmakers, historians and educators to give George Washington his birthday back instead of "diminishing the memory of the greatest American" by honoring it with a three-day weekend.
Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., is sponsoring a bill to change the holiday to Feb. 22 from the third Monday in February. That date on the calendar is when the United States has marked Washington's birthday since 1971, when a law took effect making Memorial Day, Veterans Day and Presidents Day all Monday holidays to give Americans a three-day weekend.  "President Washington exemplifies the best that America and Americans have to offer the world: principled leadership, personal bravery, a sense of duty and public service, patriotism, recognition of our unique role in world history and a reverence for his Creator," Wolf said in prepared remarks during a House hearing on Wednesday. "His enduring service deserves to be remembered on his actual birthday."
Wolf said Feb. 22 marked Washington's 280th anniversary of his birth, yet most Americans celebrated a "generic" Presidents Day holiday two days earlier.  "Does anyone here today celebrate your birthday on the third Monday of a month? Of course not," Wolf said. "So why do we diminish the memory of the greatest American by turning his birthday into nothing more than a three-day weekend?"
Wolf was backed at Wednesday's hearing by lawmakers of both parties and a member of the Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, which cares for Washington's historic home in Virginia.  Anne Neal, president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, said she also supported restoring the holiday.  "As we move forward into the 21st century, too many of our future leaders are graduating with a profound historical illiteracy that bodes ill for the future of the republic," Neal said. "George Washington is no mere president to be jumbled with Millard Fillmore and Chester A. Arthur."  Not everyone is behind the idea, however.  David Blanchette, a spokesman for the Lincoln Presidential Library & Museum, told FoxNews.com the organization doesn't have a problem honoring Washington, but thinks the nation's 16th president should get equal treatment on Feb. 12.  If Washington is going to be singled out, we certainly think Lincoln should have his own day as well," Blanchette said Thursday. "The two presidents who have most shaped the country as we know it today are George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, so we think it's certainly appropriate to honor both individuals on their specific birthdays equally."  That does not mean, Blanchette said, that a separate push will be launched for a date to solely honor Lincoln's birthday.  According to C.L. Arbelbide, an author and historian specializing in federal holiday history, in 1968 the decision to move the federal holidays to Mondays was supported by business interests, including the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Association of Travel Organizations and the National Retail Federation.  Writing for the National Archives in 2004, Arbelbide recounted that labor unions also supported the plan, but educational organizations did not because of concern that it would prolong the school year since students are required to attend a certain number of days, which could be pushed into the summer break.  Now, however, since the school year has expanded and educational mandates have increased, the various federal holidays are used as backup days for "staff development time, teacher/parent meetings, or as a backup snow make-up day," Arbelbide wrote.
Asked about possibly moving the date yet again, both the United Federation of Teachers and American Federation of Teachers told FoxNews.com that this is not an issue on their radar.
While many have been concerned that learning about the first president has been diminished since the holiday was changed, also lost in many lessons is that the new date was never termed "Presidents Day" by Congress.  Also frequently lost in the history is that Washington was born while England still used the Julian calendar -- meaning his birthday was actually Feb. 11, 1732. Only when the calendar changed to the Gregorian calendar in September 1752 did his birthday change to Feb. 22. Ironically, the third Monday of the month never falls later than Feb. 21, so "Presidents Day" never actually occurs on his birthday.
FoxNews.com's Joshua Rhett Miller and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

ALLEN WEST SPEAK'S OUT ON APOLOGIES ?

Posted by BH 9:43 pm 3-1
From Free Zone Media and WFZR
 

By: Rep. Allen West

"I want to extend my sincere condolences to the families of the Army Colonel and Major who were killed by Afghanistan security forces over this 'burning Koran' episode.  If we had resolute leadership, including in the White House, we would have explained that Islamic terrorist enemy combatants being detained at the Parwan facility had used the Koran to write jihadist messages to pass to others. In doing so, they violated their own cultural practice and defiled the Koran. Furthermore, they turned the Koran into contraband.  Therefore, Islamic cultural practice and Parwan detention facility procedures support burning the 'contraband'. Instead, here we go again offering apology after apology and promising to 'hold those responsible accountable.' Responsible for what ? ? When tolerance becomes a one-way street, it leads to cultural suicide. This time it immediately led to the deaths of two American Warriors.  Rep Allen West

SUPER DUPER TUESDAY BY THOMAS SOWELL

Posted by BH 8:46 pm 3-1
SUBMITTED BY DON MARKI

By:  Thomas Sowell

Many people are looking to the many primary elections on March 6th -- "Super Tuesday" -- to clarify where this year's Republican nomination campaign is headed.
It may clarify far more than that, including the future of this nation and of Western civilization. If a clear winner with a commanding lead emerges, the question then becomes whether that candidate is someone who is likely to defeat Barack Obama.
If not, then the fate of America -- and of Western nations, including Israel -- will be left in the hands of a man with a lifelong hostility to Western values and Western interests.
President Obama is such a genial man that many people, across the ideological space, cannot see him as a danger.  For every hundred people who can see his geniality, probably only a handful see the grave danger his warped policies and ruthless tactics pose to a whole way of life that has given generation after generation of Americans unprecedented freedom and prosperity.  The election next November will not be just another election, and the stakes add up to far more than the sum of the individual issues. Moreover, if reelected and facing no future election, whatever political constraints may have limited how far Obama would push his radical agenda will be gone.  He would have the closest thing to a blank check. Nothing could stop him but impeachment or a military coup, and both are very unlikely. A genial corrupter is all the more dangerous for being genial.  The four remaining Republican candidates have to be judged, not simply by whether they would make good presidents, but by how well they can cut through Obama's personal popularity and glib rhetoric, to alert the voters as to the stakes in this year's election.  Ron Paul? Even those of us who agree with much of his domestic agenda, including getting rid of the Federal Reserve System, cannot believe that his happy-go-lucky attitude toward Iran's getting a nuclear weapon represents anything other than a grave danger to the whole Western World.  Rick Santorum has possibilities, but can he survive the media's constant attempts to paint him as some kind of religious nut who would use the government to impose his views on others? And, if he can, will he also be able to go toe-to-toe with Obama in debates?  I would not bet the rent money on it. And what is at stake is far bigger than the rent money.  Mitt Romney is the kind of candidate that the Republican establishment has always looked for, a moderate who can appeal to independents. It doesn't matter how many such candidates have turned out to be disasters on election night, going all the way back to Thomas E. Dewey in 1948.  Nor does it matter that the Republicans' most successful candidate of the 20th century -- Ronald Reagan, with two consecutive landslide victories at the polls -- was nobody's idea of a mushy moderate.  He stood for something. And he could explain what he stood for. These may sound like modest achievements, but they are very rare, especially among Republicans.  Newt Gingrich is the only candidate still in the field who can clearly take on Barack Obama in one-on-one debate and cut through the Obama rhetoric and mystique with hard facts and plain logic.  Nor is this just a matter of having a gift of gab. Gingrich has a far deeper grasp of both the policies and the politics than the other Republican candidates.  Does Gingrich have political "baggage"? More than you could carry on a commercial airliner.
Charges of opportunism have been among the most serious raised against the former Speaker of the House. But being President of the United States is the opportunity of a lifetime. If that doesn't sober a man up, it is hard to imagine what would.  Do any of the Republican candidates seem ideal? No. But, the White House cannot be left vacant, while we hope for a better field of candidates in 2016. We have to make our choice among the alternatives actually available, of which Obama is by far the worst.
Thomas Sowell

POKEING AROUND IN TIMES SQUARE WITH A CAMCORDER

Posted by BH 6:26 Pm 3-1

Conservative warrior Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012) 'Lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully'

Posted by BH 12:06 pm 3-1


FROM FREE ZONE MEDIA NEWS 
 Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)
 
Conservative media powerhouse Andrew Breitbart, founder of BigGovernment.com among other websites, died unexpectedly this morning in Los Angeles at the age of 43, according to his websites.
His websites announced he died shortly after midnight of natural causes. “We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior,” the statement said.
“Andrew lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully, and fight for the fragile liberty he showed us how to love.”
The announcement cited a new conclusion Breitbart recently wrote to his book “Righteous Indignation”:
“I love my job. I love fighting for what I believe in. I love having fun while doing it. I love reporting stories that the Complex refuses to report. I love fighting back, I love finding allies, and – famously – I enjoy making enemies.
“Three years ago, I was mostly a behind-the-scenes guy who linked to stuff on a very popular website. I always wondered what it would be like to enter the public realm to fight for what I believe in. I’ve lost friends, perhaps dozens. But I’ve gained hundreds, thousands—who knows?—of allies. At the end of the day, I can look at myself in the mirror, and I sleep very well at night.”
Breitbart was walking near his home in Brentwood, Calif., just after midnight Thursday when he collapsed, his father-in-law Orson Bean told the Associated Press. A neighbor saw Breitbart fall and called 911. Emergency crews tried to revive him and rushed him to the emergency room at UCLA Medical Center, Bean said.
Breitbart had suffered heart problems a year earlier, but Bean said he could not pinpoint what happened.
“I don’t know what to say. It’s devastating,” Bean told AP.
The Los Angeles Coroner’s Office confirmed to ABC News Radio that Breitbart died shortly after midnight at UCLA Medical Center. No foul play is suspected, a source close to Breitbart told WND today.
He is survived by his wife and four children.
“I have known Andrew for nearly 15 years and considered him a friend. His passion and energy for seeking the truth will be greatly missed by the nation. It’s almost incomprehensible that he left us so soon,” said Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND.
In a column today, Farah recalls meeting Breitbart years ago when he worked as a backup editor for the Drudge Report.
Matt Drudge paid tribute to his colleague and friend with a posting on the Drudge Report:  “In the first decade of the DRUDGEREPORT Andrew Breitbart was a constant source of energy, passion and commitment. We shared a love of headlines, a love of the news, an excitement about what’s happening. I don’t think there was a single day during that time when we did not flash each other or laugh with each other, or challenge each other. I still see him in my mind’s eye in Venice Beach, the sunny day I met him. He was in his mid 20′s. It was all there. He had a wonderful, loving family and we all feel great sadness for them today.”
Sean Hannity told WND: “Andrew was a warrior, though a happy warrior, who relished political combat. He cared deeply for his friends, his family and his country. The movement has lost a passionate advocate. And I have lost a good friend. Andrew and his family are in our prayers.”
“I’m stunned,” wrote Michelle Malkin. “He was kinetic, brash, relentless, full of fight, the bane of the left, and a mentor to the next generation of right-wing activists and citizen journalists. Please keep his family in your prayers.”
The tweets started immediately on word that Breitbart was gone at age 43.
Ed Morrissey: “Incredibly sad to say farewell to Andrew Breitbart.”
Monica Crowley: “I can’t believe this: conservative activist & friend Andrew Breitbart has died. this is a huge loss. Prayers to his family”
In a tasteless Twitter post, the Anonymous hack group announced Andrew Breitbart’s death by calling him a “conservative loudmouth” and reminding followers that Breitbart recently confronted Occupy protesters.
“Conservative loudmouth Andrew Breitbart dies at 43 from natural causes,” read a post in Anonymous’ main Twitter feed.

A second Anonymous post read, “Andrew Breitbart dead at 43 – Hey, remember this?” linking to an article about how Breitbart confronted an Occupy crowd at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference.
The embattled Media Matters for America posted a more tasteful message, telling followers: “Media Matters has a long history with Andrew Breitbart. We’ve disagreed more than we’ve found common ground, but there was never any question of Andrew’s passion for and commitment to what he believed.”
“Andrew was a workaholic. He was online nearly 24/7. He lived and breathed the news cycle. In fact, this morning, 10 hours after his untimely death, he is still on Instant Messenger – with an ‘away’ message,” said Farah.
Learning the news, Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum called it “shocking.”
“What a powerful force,” he said of Breitbart. “It’s almost – you think of anybody out there who’s just got more energy, and just, out there constantly, driving and pushing. What a huge loss, in my opinion, for our country, and certainly for the conservative movement.”
Mitt Romney via Twitter: “Ann and I are deeply saddened by the passing of @AndrewBreitbart: brilliant entrepreneur, fearless conservative, loving husband and father.”
Newt Gingrich via Twitter: “Andrew Breitbart’s sudden death is a tragedy for his family and for conservatism. Callista and I send our prayers and our condolences. / Andrew Breitbart was the most innovative pioneer in conservative activist social media in America. He had great courage and creativity.”
Talk-radio host Mark Levin posted on his Facebook page: “Like most, I am totally stunned and deeply saddened by Andrew’s passing. He was a wonderful person and patriot.  He loved his family and country. I will miss him. Many of us will. Andrew had enormous energy and courage. He was a pioneer. He was only 43 years old. I wish I had known him longer. The last time I was with Andrew was in November, when we both spoke in Washington at an Americans for Prosperity event, where Occupy DC was outside the convention center making all kinds of accusations and bullying people. Andrew loved the battle and he knew the stakes. May he rest in peace. May his family find peace. May God bless him.”
Breitbart, in addition to publishing websites devoted to repudiating what he saw as the liberal-dominated coverage of politics and culture, once served as an editor for the Drudge Report and helped Arianna Huffington launch the Huffington Post website.
Breitbart also founded his own news network, acting as the publisher of several news websites including Breitbart.com, Breitbart.tv, Big Hollywood, Big Government, Big Journalism and Big Peace.
Big Government broke the ACORN child-sex trafficking scandal by posting a series of undercover videos taken by filmmaker James O’Keefe. The videos showed ACORN employees giving advice on how to avoid taxes and get away with child prostitution. In response to the videos, Congress voted to defund ACORN, essentially putting the community organizing nonprofit out of business.
In 2011, Breitbart was the genesis of the “Weinergate” photo scandal that led to the resignation of New York Rep. Anthony Weiner. Partially nude photos Weiner tweeted of himself were plastered across Breitbart’s websites.
Breitbart was an outspoken opponent to the Occupy Wall Street movement. At the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this month, he blasted the protesters as “filthy, filthy, filthy, horrible freaks.”
Breitbert was known for publishing controversial exposes and wrote a best-selling critique of celebrity culture, “Hollywood, Interrupted.” His newest book “Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World!” was on the New York Times best-seller list.

Super PAC donors acting as kingmakers in presidential contest

Posted by BH 10:05 am 3-1


By  The Washington Post

When Communists and sympathizers made excuses for Stalin’s terror, they said, “You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.” To which George Orwell responded, “Where’s the omelet?”
The Washington Post, dismayed about super PACs, reports “a rarefied group of millionaires and billionaires acting as kingmakers in the GOP contest, often helping to decide, with a simple transfer of money, which candidate might survive another day.” Kingmakers? Where’s the king? If kingmaking refers to, say, Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson keeping Newt Gingrich’s candidacy afloat with large infusions to the super PAC supporting Gingrich, then kingmaking isn’t what it used to be. Notice that the fellow with the most muscular super PAC, Mitt Romney, has failed to vanquish a weak set of rivals. Might the power of political dollars be finite, and utility of the last dollar be less than that of the first? Who knew? Every melodrama requires a villain, and the people hysterical about super PAC money in politics blame the 2010 Citizens United decision, in which the Supreme Court held that corporations and unions can spend unlimited amounts on political advocacy as long as they don’t coordinate with candidates or campaigns. The court’s unremarkable logic was that individuals don’t forfeit their First Amendment speech rights when they come together in corporate entities or unions to speak collectively. This decision’s practical effect is primarily in empowering unions and nonprofit-advocacy groups such as the Sierra Club and the National Rifle Association. But The New York Times says (Jan. 10) Adelson’s spending “underscores” how Citizens United “has made it possible for a wealthy individual to influence an election.” Many columnists and commentators embrace this solecism. Actually, Citizens United  has nothing to do with Adelson and others who are spending their own money, not any corporation’s. People have done this throughout the nation’s life, and doing so was affirmed as a constitutional right in the court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision. Critics of super PACs — critics who were remarkably reticent in 2004 when George Soros was lavishing his money on liberal advocacy — often refer to them as “outside groups,” much as Southern sheriffs used to denounce civil-rights workers as “outside agitators.” Pray tell: Super PACs are outside of what? Is the political process a private club with the parties and candidates controlling membership?
It might be more wholesome for the money that’s flowing to super PACs to go instead to the parties and candidates. But the liberals who are horrified by super PACs (other than Barack Obama’s) have celebrated the laws that place unreasonable restrictions on such giving.  Washington’s pre-eminent campaign lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, predicted all this 11 years ago in a report with a section titled, “OK, Fine, Let George Soros Replace the DNC” [Democratic National Committee].  Writing before the McCain-Feingold speech restrictions, Mitchell presciently said: Pass them and money will still fund political advocacy. It will, however, flow into special committees that, forbidden to coordinate with candidates, will spend money for speech for which candidates can’t be held accountable.  The threshold choice is this: Americans can keep the system they have — campaigns financed by voluntary contributions of after-tax dollars from individuals funding the dissemination of political advocacy they favor. Or they can choose government funding of politics.  The latter is what many critics of Citizens United want.  The one certainty about campaign-finance laws is that all of them are, and ever will be, written by incumbent legislators. Were Congress to write laws establishing government financing of campaigns, Congress would be uncharacteristically parsimonious, setting the government funding low enough to handicap challengers to well-known and entrenched incumbents.  Happily, such laws will never be written because voters don’t want a new entitlement program — welfare for politicians. We know this because every year Americans can check a box on their tax returns to give $3 — without increasing their tax liability — to fund presidential campaigns. More than 90 percent refuse to do so.
Perhaps they object to funding candidates they oppose. Who knew?

 
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/the_not_so_great_super_pac_menace_uzd9cmiYxLnjrZndFgSdKL#ixzz1nrvKGYDW

JUDGE BLOCKS DAY LABOR RULES IN ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW

Posted by BH 9:43 am 3-1

http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1087&ArticleID=103854 

PHOENIX (AP) - A federal judge blocked police in Arizona from enforcing a section of the state's 2010 immigration enforcement law that prohibited people from blocking traffic when they seek or offer day labor services on streets.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton (over-turned parts of 1070) ruled Wednesday that groups seeking to overturn the law will likely prevail in their claim that the day labor rules violate the First Amendment. She rejected arguments by the state that the rules were needed for traffic safety and pointed out that the law, also known as SB1070, says its purpose is to make attrition through enforcement the immigration policy of state and local government agencies. "This purposes clause applies to all sections of SB1070, and nowhere does it state that a purpose of the statutes and statutory revisions is to enhance traffic safety," the judge wrote. The ban was among a handful of provisions in the law that were allowed to take effect after a July 2010 decision by Bolton halted enforcement of other, more controversial elements of the law. The previously blocked portions include a requirement that police, while enforcing other laws, question people's immigration status if officers suspect they are in the country illegally. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear Gov. Jan Brewer's appeal of Bolton's decision to put the most contentious elements of the law on hold. Another appeals court has already upheld Bolton's July 2010 ruling. Three of the seven challenges to the Arizona law remain alive. No trial date has been scheduled in the three cases. Some of Arizona's biggest law enforcement agencies have said in the past that they haven't made any arrests under the sections of the law that were allowed to take effect. Brewer said in a statement that she was disappointed with Bolton's "erroneous decision," which she said has further eroded the state's ability to regulate public safety. Also, Wednesday's ruling is just one more reason to look forward to the Supreme Court's scheduled consideration of SB1070 in April, she said.

The governor signed the measure into law in the spring of 2010. Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, one of the group's representing people who filed the lawsuit, said the judge saw through the government's ruse that the day labor rules were about traffic safety, when the goal all along was to get at day laborers.
"There are clear laws now that allow any cop to unclog (the streets) well before they had this law," Pochoda said.
The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and other opponents had asked the judge for a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the day labor rules, arguing they unconstitutionally restrict the free speech rights of people who want to express their need for work. Brewer's lawyers had opposed attempts to halt enforcement of the day labor restrictions. They argued the restrictions are meant to confront safety concerns, distractions to drivers, harassment to passers-by, trespassing and damage to property. Brewer's lawyers have said day laborers congregate on roadsides in large groups, flagging down vehicles and often swarming those that stop. They also said day laborers in Phoenix and its suburbs of Chandler, Mesa and Fountain Hills leave behind water bottles, food wrappers and other trash. The judge wrote in her latest ruling Wednesday that the law appears to target particular speech rather than a broader traffic problem. "The adoption of a content-based ban on speech indicates that the Legislature did not draft these provisions after careful evaluation of the burden on free speech," the judge wrote.
 

ILLEGALS ARRESTED IN RALEIGH NC FOR INTRUPING HEARINGS

Posted byBH 9:24 am 3-1

ByBERTRAND M. GUTIERREZ 
 
“UNDOCUMENTED : UNAFRAID-WE WILL NO LONGER REMAIN IN THE SHADOWS” said the orange shirts on latino protestors that tried to disrupt the 3rd meeting of NC House immigration committee. ACLU and various liberal groups were present in force. We conservatives that oppose illegal immigration were outnumbered 4 to 1.



By: BERTRAND M. GUTIERREZ Winston-Salem Journal 
Published: February 29, 2012
Updated: February 29, 2012 - 11:53 PM
Federal immigration authorities have placed a detainment order on three young protesters, including a Winston-Salem man, arrested in Raleigh on Wednesday after they interrupted a state House special committee on immigration to declare themselves undocumented.
Video provided by the immigrant advocacy group N.C. Dream Team showed the three protesters standing up as the committee was in session. They shouted their opposition after Rep. George Cleveland, R-Onslow, equated illegal immigration with drug and gun crime.
"My name is Uriel Alberto. I am undocumented, unafraid and unashamed! I refuse to be bullied and intimidated by this committee and choose to empower my community," he said, according to the video and Viridiana Martinez, co-founder of N.C. Dream Team.
Some audience members shouted expletives and "go home!" as the protesters were escorted out of the meeting, according to Martinez and video of the protest.
Alberto, 24, of Winston-Salem, Estephania Mijangos-Lopez, 20, of Sanford, and Cynthia Martinez, 21, of Broadway were charged with disorderly conduct, according to General Assembly Police Chief Jeff Weaver. None has legal permission to be in the U.S., according to Martinez.
Alberto is a member of El Cambio, an immigrant advocacy group with chapters in Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and Yadkin and Surry counties. Because he and the other two protesters do not have legal permission to be in the U.S., they risk being deported.
They were booked at the Wake County Jail, which has officers authorized to check immigration status and turn over non-citizens to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Late Wednesday, Martinez said ICE had requested the detainment order, which is a standard tool the agency uses as it determines whether to move ahead with deportation proceedings.
Similarly, ICE placed detainers on Dream Team and El Cambio protesters who last September in Charlotte held a sit-in, but the agency opted not to initiate deportation proceedings, a move that is in line with ICE's standing guidelines to pursue the most serious criminal offenses.
Regardless of what happens, the protest was worth it, Martinez said.
"We can't pretend that our community is not being attacked. The goal for this is that everyone needs to understand that we can't be on the sidelines. … We're your neighbors. We're your classmates. We're your daughters' friends. We're North Carolinians. This is our home," said Martinez, 25, who has been in the U.S. since she was 7 but does not have legal permission to be in the country.
The Select Committee on the State's Role in Immigration Policy heard from representatives of the home building, construction, farming industries and other businesses that seek to hire cheap labor.
North Carolina Home Builders Association lobbyist Lisa Martin said her group supported Congress, not states, addressing immigration. While government should back training and retraining programs for the construction trades, "the homebuilding industry needs a strong and ready workforce," she said.
The testimony signaled the balancing act facing lawmakers who aim to deter illegal immigration.
Rep. Dale Folwell, R-Forsyth, a committee member and a supporter of legislation that he says would deter illegal immigration from affecting North Carolina, could not be reached for comment Wednesday afternoon.
The protest in Raleigh was one of several staged by N.C. Dream Team, which supports the DREAM Act — proposed federal legislation that would give those who are not authorized to be in the U.S. a pathway to legal residency as long as they have not committed serious crimes and pursue a college education. The legislation has been stalled in Congress for years.
Opponents say the DREAM Act gives immigrants backdoor amnesty, and supporters say immigrants such as Martinez, her sister Alberto and Mijangos-Lopez are assets to society and should not be punished for decisions made by their parents.

STATE SENATOR DAVID ROUZER FAILS TO ATTEND THIRD STRAIGHT NC IMMIGRATION COMMITTEE HEARING, DESPITE TAKING THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AS A LOBBYIST TO ADVOCATE FOR AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS

Rouzer was paid to lobby for Amnesty and a Path Toward Citizenship for Illegal Aliens – even for those who have committed crimes. Yet Rouzer refuses to attend any of the state legislature hearings designed to inform lawmakers and the public on the costs of Illegal Immigration – estimated to be $2.1 billion in North Carolina alone.
Wilmington, NC: Today, Author, Businessman, Marine Veteran of two wars, and Conservative Republican Candidate for U.S. Congress Ilario Pantano attended the third straight meeting of the Committee on the State’s Role in Immigration Policy. Pantano’s closest competitor for the 7th district seat, State Senator David Rouzer, however, failed yet again to attend the newly created Committee’s meeting designed to inform the public on the costs of illegal immigration to North Carolina – estimated at $2.1 billion per year. 
Rouzer refuses to attend any of the Committee’s meetings, despite having been paid thousands of dollars to lobby for the amnesty-granting AgJobs Act of 2007, introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and cosponsored by a collection of the most liberal Democrats in the U.S. Senate, including then Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Hillary Clinton (D-NY), and Joe Biden (D-DE); and Senators John Kerry (D-MA), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY).  The AgJobs Act – dubbed “immigration amnesty revived” and “stealth amnesty” by the conservative Heritage Foundation – would have granted amnesty to 3.3 million illegal immigrants, including those that have committed crimes. Predictably, not a single North Carolina Republican supported the bill. 
Pantano was quoted as follows: “As the son of a legal immigrant to the United States, a Marine veteran of two wars, and a former deputy sheriff, I feel I am uniquely qualified to understand and address the risks and dangers associated with illegal immigration. And I find it astounding that an elected official like Senator Rouzer would once again refuse to take two hours out of his day to learn about the costs of illegal immigration, after accepting thousands of dollars to lobby for it. He has an obligation to the public and a duty as a North Carolina elected official to learn of the harm of the policies for which he lobbied. I look forward to challenging David on this issue at each of our four upcoming debates.”
For details and supporting materials on Rouzer’s record of supporting amnesty, go to www.RouzerForAmnesty.com
For more information and the NC-7 debate schedule, seewww.PantanoForCongress.com

Jan Brewer Smacks Down Piers Morgan: 'You Don't Know What I Was Saying' to Obama on the Tarmac

Posted by BH 9:15 am 3-1

BY  Matt Hadro

After Tuesday's Arizona GOP primary, CNN's Piers Morgan accused Gov. Jan Brewer (R-Ariz.) of "jabbing him [Obama] in the chest and threatening all sorts of things," in reference to Brewer's tarmac meeting with President Obama where she was photographed pointing her finger at him. Brewer immediately called Morgan out for embellishing the story, during the interview early Wednesday morning.

"Now Piers, you don't know what I was saying," she corrected her host. "I was not threatening him." It certainly was not the
first time Morgan had characterized the President as a victim of Republican behavior.
Brewer then tried to set the story straight about her meeting with the President.  "I was talking to him, and he was a little bit taken – he took offense to the book that I wrote, which is a truth-telling book, by the way," she told Morgan. "I think he was a little thin-skinned."
[Video below the break. Click here for audio.]




~~~~


Brewer recounted how she "welcomed" the President and asked for a sit-down conversation with him. According to her, Obama replied that the last time they did so she portrayed it in a negative light in her book.

"And I indicated that it was a truth-telling book, and he walked away from me. And I said did you read my book? And he said, excerpts," she stated.

A transcript of the segment, which aired on February 29 on Piers Morgan Tonight at 12:11 a.m. EST, is as follows:
PIERS MORGAN: I mean if your man Mitt does win the nomination, he takes on Barack Obama. We've already seen you in spectacular fashion on the tarmac jabbing him in the chest and threatening all sorts of things. Is that what you want to see from Mitt Romney when the battle royale starts?

Gov. JAN BREWER (R-Ariz.):  Now Piers, you don't know what I was saying. The President and I know what I was saying, but you weren't there. I was not threatening him. I was talking to him, and he was a little bit taken – he took offense to the book that I wrote, which is a truth-telling book, by the way. And I went there with a happy heart to welcome him to Arizona, and to tell him about the Arizona turnaround, which I'm so very proud of, of what we've been able to accomplish here in Arizona. You know, growing our employment and growing our job growth, and everything that we've done with education has been marvelous.
And I asked him, when he came down off the plane, I said I welcomed him to Arizona, and I said to him you know I would like the opportunity if we could, to sit down and talk about the good things that we've done here. And he said that the last time we sat down, I went out and I told the press that it was cordial, when I wrote my book, that he didn't like the way I portrayed him. And I indicated that it was a truth-telling book, and he walked away from me. And I said did you read my book? And he said, excerpts. You know, I -- the book is truthful, you know I was a little bit unnerved. I think he was a little thin-skinned. And no, but he did help the economy. The book sales went up, so I'm grateful for that.
(Laughter)

MORGAN: Just to be serious, but if Mitt Romney does win and is the nominee, and he gets to take on Barack Obama, should he be making some kind of advantage of the apparent thin-skin that you've identified?


BREWER: Oh, no. I don't think that would be nice, and I don't think that it would be the right thing to do, unless he exhibited thin skin. You have to call them like you see them. You have to be a truth-teller.


MORGAN: Well I had to laugh when you said that Mitt Romney would, you know, wouldn't play on this apparent vulnerability, because it wouldn't be nice. Mitt Romney has done some of the most vicious, far-from-nice commercials we've ever seen in election politics. So he's got it in him, doesn't he, to really stick the knife in?
-- Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center

DEBBIE SCHLUSSEL,- OY FRICKIN' VEY: PERES AND " THE VIEW "

Posted by BH 8:54 am 3-1

Oy Frickin’ Vey: Israeli Prez Shimon Peres on Yenta Hag-Fest, “The View”

By  Debbie Schlussel

I’d like to know which teepshee [Hebrew for dummy] at Israel’s Ministry of Public Affairs agreed to book 89-year-old left-wing Israeli President Shimon Peres on ABC’s pro-Muslim yenta hag-fest, “The View,” this morning.

barbarawalterskevorkian.jpg
Shimon, Yasser & Baba: Three People “Dr.” Kevorkian Missed

There’s another Hebrew word I have in mind that the Israelis apparently did not:  hasbarah.  It has several meanings, primarily public relations or public diplomacy.  But it can also mean propaganda.  Peres’ appearance on “The View,” this morning did neither.
Baba Wawa thankfully spared us her fellow co-airheads on the show and chose to question Peres–the architect of every failed, murderous “peace” deal Israel has ever had, including the disastrous Oslo Accords–by herself.  Peres, as he always does, spoke with a thick accent and wasn’t too sharp.  He’s no Binyamin Netanyahu in the speech department.  But Netanyahu (whose party is in power, NOT Peres’ Labor Party) is smart enough never to go on this show watched mostly by ditzes, welfare queens, and gay stay-at-home dads. He knows in advance that Wawa will be tougher on him than she is on terrorist host and human rights abuser Bashar Assad.  It’s truly a new low for Israel, and I thank G-d that HRHSBotU [Her Royal Highness Supreme Being of the Universe] Oprah’s daytime show is now off the air.
Wawa repeatedly cajoled Peres about a possible Israeli attack on Iran and asked about Israel’s nukes.  She also harped on him that “we don’t want to be pulled into a war.”  Um, who is “we?”  She doesn’t speak for me.  And, in poll after poll, the majority of the American people support Israel in an attack on Iran.  He sheepishly answered, “Well, we don’t want to hurt anybody.”  Oy Frickin’ Vey.  Golda Meir and Menachem Begin and a gazillion Israeli soldiers who gave their lives for this schmuck are turning over in their graves.  Soooo weak.  Um, what about the statements by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that he wants to wipe Israel off the map?  Peres barely alluded to it.  What about Hezbollah and HAMAS–both proxies of Iran that are not only on two of Israel’s borders, but actually all of its borders (HAMAS has a large base in Syria and Jordan and both HAMAS and Hezbollah–which now controls Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades–have a large presence in the Palestinian Authority)?  Never mentioned. Does this guy know anything about what’s happening in and around his own country?!
I was sickened, but I couldn’t decide who made me sicker:  Peres or Wawa.  I say, lock ‘em up in a Cairo falafel hut and let some Egyptian/Libyan/Syrian (take your pick) “democracy” protesters finish ‘em off.  Then ask their ghosts about the Iran nukes.
Guest co-host and fakest-”Christian”-non-supermodel-who-posed-topless-ever, airhead Kathy Ireland, began the show by telling us how impressed she was with the story Peres told her backstage about how he’s a shepherd and how upset he was as a kid when his parents violated the Jewish Sabbath by listening to war news on the radio.  Um, Kathy, here’s a tip:  Shimon Peres is NOT a religious Jew.  He does not keep the Sabbath, and his biggest “accomplishment” was when he headed the Labor movement public school “education” and stripped most of the kids of Sephardic Jewish immigrants to Israel of their Jewish religious observances, calling them backward.  These kids were also never taught about the Holocaust or the history of the Jewish people and instead reprogrammed to understand the “plight” of the invented Palestinian “people” and their “history.”  Oh, and Kathy, since you don’t read a paper and don’t know much, here’s another tip:  Shimon Peres ain’t a shepherd of anything . . . except mindless appeasement policies that have eroded and destroyed Israel for decades.  At 89, it’s long past time for this “shepherd” to retire and join his grandchildren, most of whom are in America trying to become actresses.
Whatever happened to the good old days, when Kathy Ireland was relegated to scantilly-clad St. Patrick’s Day beer ad cut-outs and forced to keep her mouth shut?  And whatever happened to the good old days when daytime TV was for game shows and soap operas?  Those are Shakespearean classics compared to what’s replaced them.
Attention, Israel:  stay away from moronic ABC personalities who brag about their Fourth of July vacations with the leader of Syria It might be a hint.

STRATFOR GLOBAL INTELLEGENCE REPORT FROM FREE ZONE

Posted by BH 8:43 am 3-1


STRATFOR

Geopolitical Weekly

Detection Points in the Terrorist Attack Cycle

By Scott Stewart | March 1, 2012
Last week's Security Weekly discussed the fact that terrorism is a tactic used by many different classes of actors and that, while the perpetrators and tactics of terrorism may change in response to shifts in larger geopolitical cycles, these changes will never result in the end of terrorism. Since that analysis was written, there have been jihadist-related attacks in Afghanistan, Nigeria, Yemen and Pakistan, an assassination attempt against the president of Abkhazia, and a failed timed-incendiary attack against the Athens subway. (The latter incident, which militant anarchists claimed, reinforces that jihadists are not the only ones who practice terrorism.)

But while terrorism is a continuing concern, it can be understood, and measures can be taken to thwart terrorist plots and mitigate the effects of attacks. Perhaps the most important and fundamental point to understand about terrorism is that attacks do not appear out of nowhere. Individuals planning a terrorist attack follow a discernable cycle -- and that cycle and the behaviors associated with it can be observed if they are being looked for. We refer to these points where terrorism-related behavior can be most readily observed as vulnerabilities in the terrorist attack cycle. Read More »

ISLAM AND THE NEW YORK POLICE - A MUSLIM SPEAKS PRO NYPD

Posted by BH 8:29 3-1

BY Dr. Qanta Ahmed 

Dr. Qanta Ahmed practices medicine in New York 
The relentless campaign to paint the NYPD as Islamophobic is itself an offense to Islam. In fact, our faith compels American Muslims to stand with the NYPD — both to protect the faith, and by its direct dictates.
Let me be clear: By investigating Islamist sympathizers who seek to curtail the freedoms of all Americans, the NYPD is aggressively protecting the freedoms and privileges that Muslims enjoy in America (freedoms that aren’t available even in the birthplace of Islam).
Islamism is distinct from the beliefs the majority of Islam’s 1.6 billion followers hold dear. The cry of “Islamophobia” is often merely an effort to silence those of us who seek to communicate this distinction, or to express concerns about Islamism.
Most Muslims are spiritually private, committed persons active in their societies without a subversive political agenda. Think of them as pluralistic Muslims. Because America’s religious freedom is protected by constitutional ideals, Muslims can pursue this pluralistic life — an American life that makes private space for faith, in parallel to public roles. Indeed, Muslims in America are freer to do this than Muslims in Pakistan (where my family is from), Saudi Arabia (where I have lived) or even Indonesia, because each of these Muslim-majority countries imposes laws restricting the practice of religion. In many ways, Muslims are best able to follow their Islam — to become Muslim in the fullest sense — here in America, because of this nation’s astonishing, constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. Political Islamism — variously called radical Islam, jihadism or Islamic fundamentalism — is completely different. In contrast to our centuries-old faith, it’s a modern political project that seeks to return any society to a supposed “scriptural foundation” of the Muslim community, removing existing forms of government and laws. Sound like a war? Well, in the wider world and here in America, there is indeed a war afoot — a war of ideas, a “Battle for the Soul of Islam,” as my colleague, American Islamic Forum for Democracy president Zudhi Jasser, has termed it. In this battle, the Islamist thrives — citing freedom of speech, claiming disadvantaged civil rights, exploiting the privileges that a liberal democracy accords him. Often operating via advocacy groups or “Islamic societies” that purport to represent mainstream Muslims, he or she truly serves a political agenda centered on replacing liberal democracy with fundamentalist theocracy. In fact, the Koran is explicit on the loyalties a Muslim must accord his host nation, mandating a Muslim’s duty to be an unwavering and loyal patriot:
O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey His Messenger and those who are in authority from among you. (Ch.4: V.60).
That verse demands the Muslim express loyalty to any ruling authority. This isn’t a suggestion, this is mandated Islamic duty. The Koran does not state leadership specified as Muslim. Leadership is whomsoever is empowered in the society where the Muslim finds himself. For us here, that includes loyalty to the NYPD, the FBI and their work to safeguard our highest authority — the principles of our liberal democracy. Can any one group speak for the entire American Muslim community? Islam is diverse — especially in America. Islamism isn’t. The sooner we understand this, the better — because at stake are America’s ideals. America’s extraordinary freedoms afford us an ability to define our own expressions of Islam as Muslims in a way that no Muslim-majority nation secures for any Muslim anywhere today. We must preserve these values, and join the NYPD, in understanding the Islamist threat to these values. This means we must support, not vilify, our policemen and -women, our federal agents and our police commissioner — especially when they gather and interpret information they need to preserve us and our values. How many devout Muslims were among the thousands killed on 9/11? Let us never forget that Islamists — moving among the broader Muslim and secular communities — have wrought atrocities in this city and around the world, and seek to do so again.
If you choose to smear the NYPD for its work to protect us and our society, so too you choose to smear me, a pluralistic patriotic Muslim in America, for demanding an honest discourse.
Dr. Qanta Ahmed practices medicine in New York. She is the author of “In the Land of Invisible Women.”http://myrtus.typepad.com/myrtus/dr-qanta-ahmed/
 
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/islam_the_nypd_wgVYH7k6WWSKmwRGFg1IOM#ixzz1nrrYbqgg
 
 

DEFENSE SECT PANETTA UNAWARE OF $750,000 GITMO SOCCER FIELD ?

Posted by BH 7:25 am 3-1

 

 
IN the wake of the revelation that the Department of Defense has spend $750,000 on a soccer field for detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp pressed Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta on his knowledge of the expenditure at a Budget Committee hearing on Wednesday.
Panetta denied knowledge of the project.
“Did you know that apparently federal taxpayers are paying for a $750,000 soccer field at Gitmo? Is that something that the Department of Defense knew about?” Huelskamp asked Panetta.
“I’m sorry, what was that?” Panetta replied.
“A $750,000 soccer field at Gitmo that was just announced by the Department of Defense — is that something you were aware of?” Huelskamp reiterated.
“No, I wasn’t,” the defense secretary said.
On Tuesday, Fox News first reported that the military was just wrapping up construction on a $750,000 soccer field for detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

FAST AND FURIOUS "ABOUT FACE" ?

Posted by BH 7:18 am 3-1
FROM FOX NEWS

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Bernanke: Job Market ‘Far from Normal,’ Slow Growth Expected Through 2012

Posted by BH 9:07 pm 2-29
By Matt Cover
In this Jan. 7, 2012 file Photo, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, before the Senate Budget Committee. Ben Bernanke is likely to face pressure this week over the Federal Reserve's plan to hold interest rates near zero until late 2014. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)
(CNSNews.com) – Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said that the labor market “remains far from normal” and that the economy is expected to grow much slower than the Fed had previously estimated through the presidential election.
“Notwithstanding the better recent data, the job market remains far from normal: The unemployment rate remains elevated, long-term unemployment is still near record levels, and the number of persons working part-time for economic reasons is very high,” Bernanke told the House Financial Services Committee Wednesday.
The central bank chair said that if the job market is to continue its slow pace of improvement, economic growth will have to improve.
“The decline in the unemployment rate over the past year has been somewhat more rapid than might have been expected, given that the economy appears to have been growing during that time frame at or below its longer-term trend; continued improvement in the job market is likely to require stronger growth in final demand and production.”
Bernanke also said that economic growth projections for 2012 will be lower than the Fed had previously estimated – growing somewhere between 2.2 to 2.7 percent. Bernanke said that slow domestic growth and financial problems in Europe are expected, in combination, to hobble economic recovery.
“The members of the Board and the presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks recently projected that economic activity in 2012 will expand at or somewhat above the pace registered in the second half of last year,” he said.
“Specifically, their projections for growth in real GDP this year…have a central tendency of 2.2 to 2.7 percent. These forecasts were considerably lower than the projections they made last June.”
Because of the reduced economic growth projections, Bernanke said that the Fed does not expect significant improvement in the job market.
“With output growth in 2012 projected to remain close to its longer-run trend, participants did not anticipate further substantial declines in the unemployment rate over the course of this year.”

On the same day Bernanke testified, President Obama was hosting a luncheon at the White House for congressional leaders of both parties -- "to discuss ongoing efforts to find common ground on legislative priorities that will create jobs and strengthen America's economy," the White House said.

May your HOST and ALL YOU CONGRESSMAN EAT, DRINK, AND BE MERRY - START LOOKING FOR A JOB - YOU GONNA NEED ONE..

 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...