Category Archives: American Domestic Issues

Speaking of Obama being ‘way too busy to fend off Netanyahu…

This is an email I received today from a rather, ahem, conservative relative.  There is quite a lot being said lately about the way Glenn Beck has been taking on Obama and the Czars on radio and television and in print, and I won’t try to add to it or elucidate here, but I thought this writer had a great sense of humor.  Enjoy!

Glenn Beck Has Brass Gonads

Doug GilesResized Glenn Beck Twitter Icon

Don’t you know Obama and his ilk wish to God (or whoever the heck they wish to) that Glenn Beck would fall into adultery with an Argentinean newswoman, or cut his jugular vein while shaving, or show up drunk, high and naked to his FOX show and forever be publically vilified, marginalized and thus muzzled?

Beck has formally joined Rush as an Official Pain in Barack Obama’s Backside (OPIBOB). (Are you an OPIBOB yet?) Yep, not only has Obama’s administration called Rush out, but the White House has now phoned Beck during his TV show in an attempt to get him to dial the heck down.

Glenn said this past week that Barack’s minions were actually calling his show while he was on air because he was being a meany. When I heard this I was sitting there eating pretzels and drinking a martini thinking: Are you kidding me? Is Perez Hilton running the White House? The White House is actually calling Beck during his program in an attempt to get him to cease and desist his digs? Wow . . . sounds, pretty gay to me. No offense to gay people, of course.

So, what’s next, Whine House? Are you gonna post an angry note on Beck’s Facebook wall? Are you going to place Glenn’s picture on the White House website and draw naughty stuff on his forehead? Unbelievable. Not only do we have to contend with and check a radical Socialist-in-Chief at every point, but we also have to a field a cheeky, paranoid, oversensitive staff that makes Nixon look like Andy Griffith’s Aunt Bee.

So, what’s all the hubbub about? Why is Beck under their epidermis? Well, it’s principally because he asks questions. And if there is one thing that derails the Hope and Change Train, it’s questions. Oh, I almost forgot: Facts also get them purty PO’ed. Questions and facts . . . can’t have that. Yep, both of those little damnable ditties are detrimental to Obama’s oligarchical grasp.

For those who missed Beck’s week of must-see TV, he boldly parleyed into the President’s court questions several million of us want to ask but don’t have a top-ranked TV show on the most watched cable news channel to get the proper respect and response. Here’s a little sample of Beck’s mischievous queries. On Monday he inquired:

– We are in so much debt, why spend more borrowed money on cap-and-trade and healthcare programs before we stop the flow of red-ink?

– The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN. How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

– If it was so important for congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it, why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent 6 months later?

– Why won’t members of Congress read the bills before they vote on them?

– Why are citizens mocked and laughed at when they ask their congressman to read the bills before they vote on them?

– How did Van Jones, a self-proclaimed communist, become a special advisor to the president?

– Did President Obama know of Van Jones’ radical political beliefs when he named him special advisor?

– The Apollo Alliance claimed credit for writing the stimulus bill—why was this group allowed to write any portion of this bill?

– If politicians aren’t writing the bills and aren’t reading the bills, do they have any idea what these 1,000-page plus bills actually impose on the American people?

– If the “public option” health care plan is so good, why won’t politicians agree to have that as their plan?

– If town hall meetings are intended for the politicians to learn what’s on our mind—why do they spend so much time talking instead of listening?

– Is using the economic crises to rush legislation through congress what Rahm Emanuel meant when he talked about “not letting a crisis go to waste”?

– What are the czars paid? What is the budget for their staffs/offices?

On Tuesday Beck wondered aloud:

– Who is “surrounding” the President in the White House?

– Do any of the President’s advisers have criminal records?

– Are the President’s advisers working to better the country or their own ideals?

– Who are the anti-capitalists in Washington?

– What roles do they have in crafting bills?

– What was “STORM”? What happened to the founders, and where are they now?

– What qualifications must one have to be a Presidential adviser?

– Should a communist have the ear of the President of the United States?

– What role did the Apollo Alliance play in crafting bills?

– Does the President know the co-founder of the Weather Underground is a board member of the Apollo Alliance?

On Wednesday Glenn wanted to know:

– Why does the FCC have a diversity “czar”?

– Who is Mark Lloyd, and how does he plan to “balance” the airwaves?

– Will he bring back the Fairness Doctrine, or worse?

– Cass Sunstein once said he wants to balance the Internet; is that next?

– Will broadcasters who leave the airwaves be allowed to go to satellite or Internet without government regulation?

– Is there any place (that has a mass audience) where the government won’t regulate free speech?

– Why does it seem every member of the Obama advisory team hates capitalism, unless those companies (like G.E.) are in bed with the administration?

If Lloyd has his way, stations that don’t comply with the government’s definition of the “public interest” will have to pay a massive fine—which helps support public broadcasting:

– What will be the definition of “public interest”?

– Who defines “public interest”?

– Why should it be balanced? Because it’s public airwaves? (Well, there are public roads that go by my house, and I don’t count how many Republicans and Democrats are driving on them.)

On Thursday GB thought:

– Why do we need a civilian force?

– Who is posing a threat to us?

– Who will this “force” be made up of?

– Who is the real enemy?

– Does the president know of a coming event? If not, who builds an army against an unrecognized enemy?

– Why won’t the media get off their butts and look into these radicals in the White House? And into this civilian army?

(*For the full list visit: You see, Beck was just asking questions. Hey, White House . . . Can we not ask questions anymore? Is that verboten? Can we not ask our elected officials to explain themselves, elucidate a bit about their odd buddies and make clear their policies and proposals?

Can we not question you boys with boldness, hold to the truth, and speak without fear of reprisal? Huh?

In the words of my redneck hunting buddy, better known as the West Texas Warrior, “Why, hell we can!” Not only can we, ladies and gents, but we must.

Uh, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is our nation; this ain’t Cuba or Venezuela yet. We pay the government’s bills, and therefore they answer to us, they represent us—and if they don’t then we take their airplanes, limos, mistresses and five-star hotels away from them. Yeah, I believe that’s how it’s supposed to work.

Keep asking the hard questions, boys and girls. Don’t let them tread on you.

Great job, Mr. Beck.

If I ever quit my job as a lineman, can I sign up to be an OPIBOB?


Comments Off on Speaking of Obama being ‘way too busy to fend off Netanyahu…

Filed under American Domestic Issues, From my mailbox

Meet White House Doctor Death Number Two

John Holdren WH Science Czar

Or, Reproductive Rights Aren’t What You Thought They Were!

You mean you want to keep your baby? No, I’m sorry honey – that’s not allowed any more. We told you not to have children. Now, just come along like a good girl; it won’t hurt much. Just think of how you’re doing your part to save the planet from overpopulation! It’s such a small sacrifice for you to make.

What’s that you ask? Does Dr. Holdren let his granddaughters have children? Why that’s just not a question you should be asking. It isn’t any business of yours whether he chooses to have a family.

Don’t you give me that look! Look, we do this the easy way or the hard way…

What in the world am I talking about!? Am I trying to be a bad novelist?

I wish that were so, but this is an all too conceivable scenario with the appointment of the new White House Science “Czar”.

Now that Dr. Zeke Emanuel and his plans for end-your-life-sooner-than-you-thought services have been outed (oh, and he’s mighty unhappy about it ), another monster has surfaced from deep within the bowels of the Obamanation that maketh desolate.

Here are some excerpts from the writings of Dr. John Holdren, now Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy:

…it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution…

It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to… have abortions…

Somewhat more repressive measures for discouraging large families have also been proposed…

The third approach to population limitation is that of involuntary fertility control. Several coercive proposals deserve discussion…

A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child might be easier to implement… in China, mothers of three children are commonly “expected” [Dr Holdren’s use of quotation marks here – lm] to undergo sterilization).

The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule… opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births…

Some people—respected legislators, judges, and lawyers included—have viewed the right to have children as a fundamental and inalienable right. Yet neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution mentions a right to reproduce…

In the United States, individuals have a constitutional right to privacy and it has been held that the right to privacy includes the right to choose whether or not to have children, at least to the extent that a woman has a right to choose not to have children. But the right is not unlimited. Where the society has a “compelling, subordinating interest” …the right of the individual may be curtailed.

It is often argued that the right to have children is so personal that the government should not regulate it… In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern… Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?

And so on… I’m sure you get the picture. But it’s not a pretty one.

I would very much like to think that this is not the first time you’ve heard of this, but I didn’t know about it myself until yesterday. If this is as much news to you as it was to me, I suggest you start with the Wikipedia article from which I drew these quotes, if only because of Wikipedia’s generally acknowledged authoritative standing, and then progress to the Zombietime Blog post on the matter, including a rather common sense treatment of how the hell this man got past a nomination committee of the US Senate. Basically, he lied. Well, Zombietime didn’t actually say that, I did. I look at Zombietime as more of a ball carrier – maybe a tight end – and I feel it’s more my job as a lineman to add my shoulder to the push, to try to shout to the world, “Look out! Heads up, before it’s too late!”

Comments Off on Meet White House Doctor Death Number Two

Filed under American Domestic Issues

“Death Panels?” Why, dear, whatever do you mean by that?

“We recommend an alternative system—the complete lives system—which prioritises younger people who have not yet lived a complete life…”

Do you find those words chilling? I do.

This is an exact quote published earlier this year by the respected medical journal Lancet in the summary of a proposal by Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, M.D., et. al.

Surely you’ve heard of Dr. Emanuel. Key White House health adviser and brother of the White House Chief of staff. Oh, that Dr. Emanuel? Yes, dear, that Dr. Emanuel.

There have been numerous strong objections raised by the American public to the so-called health care reform measures proposed in HR3200, not the least of which concern the “end-of-life services” provisions as outlined in the bill, starting on page 426. America’s sweetheart Sarah Palin recently caused a ruckus when she used the term death panel in reference to those proposed measures, and pointed out the involvement of Dr. Emanuel. Oh, what a ruckus she caused!

There have been many excellent blog posts written on this topic, for example this one by William A. Jacobson, Associate Clinical Professor of Law, Cornell Law School, Ithaca, NY, or take a look at this handy graph posted on a blog no less authoritatively entitled Mommy. Basically, if you’re under 10 or over 60, your chances aren’t real good, and if you’re disabled, or if you otherwise don’t measure up to the standards of “promoting and rewarding social usefulness” (yes, also Dr. Emanuel’s words), well then — good-bye, I suppose.

I’m not trying to duplicate all the comments that have been by these and other writers, but what I do wish to point out here is that, granted, the term “death panel” is not contained in the proposed legislation, but the phrase “end-of-life services” definitely is, and when you mix that in with Dr. Emanuel’s own words — well, doesn’t that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?

Not me. I find it scary, very scary.


update: reports are breaking out all over that the Senate is going to drop the end-of-life service provision. So that’s a first down, ten to go. Perhaps the reports of the demise of republican government are premature. But we’re not done yet.

Comments Off on “Death Panels?” Why, dear, whatever do you mean by that?

Filed under American Domestic Issues

Israel stands on high ground while Obama digs himself a hole

Something caught my eye today in Arutz7 News. While a delegation of Democratic Congressmen is visiting Israel, the folks back home are more concerned with Obamacare than they are with the Middle East right now. I’m not saying that should or shouldn’t be the case, but that’s the reality at the moment.

I’ll get back to that in a minute, but consider for a moment that the US has been taking a very aggressive role against Israel lately, telling Israel where they may or may not construct housing, or whether municipal authorities may enforce local court decisions regarding eviction of non-paying tenants, that sort of thing.

That takes a little audacity, if you ask me. To reach into the domestic matters of another sovereign nation is not commonly accepted practice in the international community, last time I checked.

Have there been any evictions in Washington DC or NYC or Chicago lately? Oh, there have? Yes, well then why hasn’t the government of Germany or England or Israel stepped in and told them to stop? Surely the eviction of squatters in Cook County Illinois is not merely a domestic issue…

The response of the Netanyahu government has been laudable. One of the world’s smallest democracies is standing up to the world’s biggest current bully. (Now, please note that it’s not America which is the bully here, but a government that is for the present neither of the people, by the people, nor for the people – but we won’t go into that.)

Israel, though small, is one of the most significant players on the field. Why is that? Why is the attention of the whole world focused on such a tiny speck of real estate? Well, that’s a very good subject, but perhaps for another post. Or book. Like maybe this one. Just throwing the thought out there.

Now, what this all has to do with the Obamacare debate is this: player to player, the Obama government is very much off balance right now, reeling from an unanticipated negative reaction to its attempt to lock down its hold on the American people’s health and lives. So, on the play field of international politics, wouldn’t this be an opportune time for Israel to go the offensive and take advantage of the situation?

Perhaps so, if Israel saw the need to be on the offense. But Israel stands the high ground. Israel has always stood the high ground. And that doesn’t look like it’s going to change any time soon.


Comments Off on Israel stands on high ground while Obama digs himself a hole

Filed under American Domestic Issues, U.S. against Israel

ObamaCare from the viewpoint of an orthopedic surgeon

[update: for those of you who haven’t seen the actual bill, here is the latest link for the 1.7 mb pdf download that I’ve tested and found to be good. It seems to be moving around, for some unknown reason 😉 – lineman]

Although blocking the deceptions that attempt to undermine the existence and well being of Jerusalem and Israel is my main focus here, there are also domestic issues that cannot be ignored by any American who values his or her own existence and well being.

One of them right now is the great threat to the life and health of every American, being foisted on the nation as “health care reform.” There is at this moment a wonderfully raging debate throughout the country. Mr. Obama and the Machine apparently thought that the American people would roll over and play dead just because he snapped his fingers, but it hasn’t turned out that way.

There are many great blogs being created right & left (well, the great ones are on the right – I wouldn’t say that about the left) that focus on this matter, and I won’t try to duplicate them here, but there are a few things I’ve seen that have not received as much attention as I’d thought they would. Here is an email I received a couple of days ago, a physician’s view:


Written by Dr. Dave Janda
Thursday, 23 July 2009

As a physician who has authored books on preventative health care, I was given the opportunity to be the keynote speaker at a Congressional Dinner at The Capitol Building in Washington last Friday (7/17).

The presentation was entitled Health Care Reform, The Power & Profit of Prevention, and I was gratified that it was well received.

In preparation for the presentation, I read the latest version of “reform” as authored by The Obama Administration and supported by Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid.

Let me summarize just a few salient points of the above plan. First, however, it should be clear that the same warning notice must be placed on The ObamaCare Plan as on a pack of cigarettes: Consuming this product will be hazardous to your health.

The underlying method of cutting costs throughout the plan is based on rationing and denying care. There is no focus on preventing health care need whatever. The plan’s method is the most inhumane and unethical approach to cutting costs I can imagine as a physician.

The rationing of care is implemented through The National Health Care Board, according to the plan. This illustrious Board “will approve or reject treatment for patients based on the cost per treatment divided by the number of years the patient will benefit from the treatment.”

Translation…..if you are over 65 or have been recently diagnosed as having an advanced form of cardiac disease or aggressive cancer…..dream on if you think you will get treated…..pick out your coffin.

Oh, you say this could never happen? Sorry…. this is the same model they use in Britain.

The plan mandates that there will be little or no advanced treatments to be available in the future. It creates The Federal Coordinating Council For Comparative Effectiveness Research, the purpose of which is “to slow the development of new medications and technologies in order to reduce costs.” Yes, this is to be the law.

The plan also outlines that doctors and hospitals will be overseen and reviewed by The National Coordinator For Health Information and Technology.

This ” coordinator” will “monitor treatments being delivered to make sure doctors and hospitals are strictly following government guidelines that are deemed appropriate.” It goes on to say…..”Doctors and hospitals not adhering to guidelines will face penalties.”

According to those in Congress, penalties could include large six figure financial fines and possible imprisonment.

So according to The ObamaCare Plan….if your doctor saves your life you might have to go to the prison to see your doctor for follow -up appointments. I believe this is the same model Stalin used in the former Soviet Union.

Section 102 has the Orwellian title, “Protecting the Choice to Keep Current Coverage.” What this section really mandates is that it is illegal to keep your private insurance if your status changes – e.g., if you lose or change your job, retire from your job and become a senior, graduate from college and get your first job. Yes, illegal.

When Mr. Obama hosted a conference call with bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible, a blogger from Maine referenced an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance.

He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” Mr. Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.”

Then there is Section 1233 of The ObamaCare Plan, devoted to “Advanced Care Planning.” After each American turns 65 years of age they have to go to a mandated counseling program that is designed to end life sooner.

This session is to occur every 5 years unless the person has developed a chronic illness then it must be done every year. The topics in this session will include, “how to decline hydration, nutrition and how to initiate hospice care.” It is no wonder The Obama Administration does not like my emphasis on Prevention. For Mr. Obama, prevention is the “enemy” as people would live longer.

I rest my case. The ObamaCare Plan is hazardous to the health of every American.

After I finished my Capitol Hill presentation, I was asked by a Congressman in the question-answer session: “I’ll be doing a number of network interviews on the Obama Health Care Plan. If I am asked what is the one word to describe the plan what should I answer.”

The answer is simple, honest, direct, analytical, sad but truthful. I told him that one word is FASCIST.

Then I added, “I hope you’ll have the courage to use that word, Congressman. No other word is more appropriate.”

Dr. Dave Janda, MD, is an orthopedic surgeon, and a world-recognized expert on the prevention of sports injuries, particularly in children. His website is

Comments Off on ObamaCare from the viewpoint of an orthopedic surgeon

Filed under American Domestic Issues