Tuesday, November 30, 2010

King: WikiLeaks Should Be Declared Terrorists

WikiLeaks, the group that released the sensitive documents on U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic policy, may end up causing the deaths of Americans and our allies through its actions. So it stands to reason that the government must do something to punish the organization. Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., the incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee calls for a strong response, The Hill reports. 

king, wikileaks, declared, terrorists"I am calling on the attorney general and supporting his efforts to fully prosecute WikiLeaks and its founder for violating the Espionage Act. And I'm also calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to declare WikiLeaks a foreign terrorist organization," King told 1010 WINS radio in New York.

"By doing that, we will be able to seize their funds and go after anyone who provides them help or contributions or assistance whatsoever," King explains. "To me, they are a clear and present danger to America."

Monday, November 29, 2010

Whistleblower website Website WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks is one example of why the American people are sick and tire of the government politicians. The first time these wikileak idiots let our classified information be known to the world someone in our government should have put a stop to it! What are the people in Washington waiting for? More of our soldiers, citizens, and friends to be killed before they act on this? The guy that runs this website should be shut down and arrested for murder & treason.
It's fine and dandy to tell the world about companies or countries that are doing things to harm human beings! But when you put out information that produces the same results, it's time your website should be shut down!

Saturday, November 27, 2010

Sharpton Wants FCC to Ban Limbaugh

Liberal firebrand Rev. Al Sharpton is telling audiences that the Federal Communications Commission should take Rush Limbaugh off the airwaves because of perceived offenses toward racial minorities and other groups.

The attack was only the latest in a series of attacks by Democrats, including President Obama, who suggest that America's political discourse is being crippled by talk radio and cable news shows.

al,sharpton,rush,limbaugh,fccSpecifically, Sharpton suggested that the FCC should establish "guidelines" or "standards" to regulate speech.

"You've got to remember that those stations that Rush Limbaugh is on and others are regulated by FCC, granted by FCC; they go back to them to get waivers," Sharpton said on his own radio show on Nov. 19th

"They go back to them to get consolidation," Sharpton continued. "They have the right to set standards. That does not impair your right to speak what you believe, but it does say that you are not going to do that to offend groups of Americans based on their race, their gender, their sexual status - none of that."

Sharpton's broadside followed a similar attack last week by Sen. Jay Rockefeller. The West Virginia Democrat went after both right-leaning Fox News and left-leaning MSNBC.

Said Rockefeller during a Senate hearing: "There's a little bug inside of me which wants to get the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, 'Out. Off. End. Goodbye.' It would be a big favor to political discourse; to our ability to do our work here in Congress; and to the American people, to be able to talk with each other and have some faith in their government and, more importantly, in their future."

And earlier this year President Obama himself lamented what he described as the sad state of political discourse hampered by iPods and cable TV shows.

"And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations - none of which I know how to work - information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation," Obama said during a commencement address at Hampton University in Virginia. "So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it's putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy."

Conservatives and civil libertarians are concerned by what they see as a growing tolerance by liberals to regulate and even censor the airwaves, especially as outlets like Fox News and shows like Limbaugh's grow ever more popular.

Limbaugh is the most listened to radio host in the nation with more than 15 million weekly visitors. Fox News continues to trounce its cable news rivals CNN and MSNBC in ratings.

"This is scary stuff," lamented an editorial in Investors Business Daily. "Strong speech has always been quintessentially American.

With the airwaves and cyberspace replacing soapboxes, it's more vital than ever to protect it against politicians favoring a new 'fairness doctrine' that would keep voters from being armed with the information and analysis that can be used to unseat them."

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Crisis, What Crisis? Time For a New U.S. Strategy On the Korean Peninsula


North Korea assaulted its southern neighbor today, its latest act of war against U.S. treaty ally South Korea 
and fresh on the heels of news of a previously undisclosed uranium-enrichment facility. Last March, 
North Korea sank a South Korean naval vessel without provocation, killing 46 sailors.
Today’s incident involved sustained shelling of a South Korean island by Pyongyang’s military, and resulted in at least two deaths.
This is likely part of an effort by Kim Jong Il to bring the North Korean military closer to him as he works 
through the installation of family members to surround him in power and eventually succeed him. It is also 
North Korea’s tried-and-true method of scaring us back to the negotiating table, where Pyongyang has 
gotten so much largesse over the years in exchange for false promises to disarm.
The response taking shape in Washington is insufficient.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/11/23/crisis-crisis-team-obama-comes-short-korean-peninsula/#ixzz16Cm064e7

Bailey: Maybe Obama should meet with the North Korean Leader and bow down to him like he has to several of the other Communist Leaders!




Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Newsmax Poll: O'Reilly, Beck Could Rival Obama in Head-to-Head Presidential Race

By Jim Meyers
In a clear sign of voters’ disdain for President Barack Obama’s policies, several media personalities with no political experience, including Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck, would be within striking distance of defeating Obama in a head-to-head race, according to a new Newsmax/SurveyUSA poll.

Newsmax, O'Reilly, Obama, Beck,Newsmax conducted the survey to find out how several well-known political and "dark-horse" celebrity figures, ranging from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to businessmen Bill Gates and Warren Buffett to O’Reilly and Beck, would fare if they ran against Obama for the White House.

The survey of 1,000 registered voters was conducted Nov. 3-4, after Republicans won the House and gained six seats in the Senate in the midterm elections — results widely interpreted as a rejection of Obama and raising questions about his chances for re-election in 2012.

In the Newsmax poll, respondents were asked: “If there were an election for president of the United States today, and the only two names on the ballot were Bill O’Reilly and Barack Obama, whom would you vote for?” They also were asked that question with other leading media figures in place of O’Reilly.

Glenn Beck, O'Reilly, Obama, President, NewsmaxOverall, O’Reilly got 46 percent of the vote and his fellow Fox News Channel host Beck received 45 percent.

Those percentages are remarkable considering that a prominent political figure, Sarah Palin, got 48 percent of the vote in the Newsmax poll.

O’Reilly even outpolled Obama among men with 52 percent of the vote, among Republicans (79 percent), and conservatives (82 percent).Beck tied Obama among men at 50 percent, and won among Republicans (78 percent) and conservatives (80 percent).

Both Beck and O’Reilly received 49 percent of the vote among white respondents.

Radio talk show host and former CNN anchor Lou Dobbs got 44 percent of the vote in the hypothetical head-to-head race against Obama, and top-ranked radio host Rush Limbaugh got 42 percent.

Other media personalities in the poll were “Tonight Show” host Jay Leno, who got 40 percent of the vote, Comedy Central host Jon Stewart (39 percent), and Oprah Winfrey (37 percent).

But all of the media figures in the poll, including Winfrey, defeated Obama among Republicans and conservatives.

SurveyUSA is an independent research company that conducts public opinion polls for media and academic institutions, and conducts private market research for commercial clients and nonprofit organizations.

Monday, November 22, 2010

More Voters Say No Obama Second Term: Poll

Almost half of voters say President Barack Obama doesn’t deserve a second term, and he is in a statistical tie with two top possible Republican challengers, a Quinnipiac University poll shows.
By 49 percent to 43 percent, poll respondents say Obama shouldn’t be re-elected in 2012. If a contest were held today with Republican rival Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, Obama is supported by 44 percent of those surveyed and Romney by 45 percent.
In a race with former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Obama garners 46 percent to Huckabee’s 44 percent. Obama does the best in a race against former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, winning 48 percent to 40 percent. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.
Palin “is very unpopular among independents, and although she recently said she thought she could defeat Obama, the data does not now necessarily support that assertion,” Peter Brown, assistant director of the Hamden, Connecticut-based Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, said in a statement.
Palin responded “I believe so” when asked in an interview with Barbara Walters of ABC News whether she could defeat Obama in 2012. ABC has released portions of the interview, which is scheduled for broadcast Dec. 9.
Democrats, by 64 percent to 27 percent, say they don’t want another member of the party to challenge Obama in a primary race.
Men Less Supportive
Obama’s support lags among men, with 39 percent saying he should get a second term. Independents also disapprove, with only 35 percent saying the president should be re-elected.
“His weakness among independent voters at this point makes his 2012 election prospects uncertain,” Brown said.
Among the possible Republican contenders, Palin is viewed most negatively, with more than 50 percent of voters saying they have an unfavorable opinion of her. By comparison, 25 percent have an unfavorable opinion of Huckabee and 26 percent of Romney. Newt Gingrich of Georgia, the former Republican speaker of the House, is viewed unfavorably by 43 percent.
Obama’s approval rating is split at 48 percent favorable and 48 percent unfavorable.
The telephone poll, conducted Nov. 8-15, surveyed 2,424 registered voters nationwide.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Obama Says He Understands Ire Over Airport Screenings

"I understand people's frustrations," Obama said, while acknowledging that he's never had to undergo the stepped-up screening methods.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/11/20/obama-says-understands-ire-airport-screenings/



Bailey: I thought the best leader were the ones that lead by example? I think Obama and his family should go through these airport screenings like everyone else. What makes him think he's better then any other American?

Friday, November 19, 2010

one-term president

The crazy way the Democrats have been doing things in the last few years, and a lot of american voters that go right along with them make me wonder if Obama is a one-term president? Many Americans thought that we'd be seeing the last of Pelosi & Reid this last election, but they're still there and still in power! All of the Democrats that were not voted out are still pushing Obama's agenda and are still in Washington. So what is wrong with that picture?

Thursday, November 18, 2010

We didn't lose the election because of me

We didn't lose the election because of me

Welcome back, Nancy

Despite 'shellacking,' Democrats re-elect Pelosi as House minority leader.


Bailey:  Remember my post yesterday morning saying if they re-elect Nancy then we could vote out the rest of the idiots in 2012?
Well guess what, SHE'S BACK!

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Pelosi Expected to Remain Democratic Leader


WASHINGTON -- Despite suffering near-historic election losses this month, House Democrats appear ready to keep their leadership team intact, with Nancy Pelosi of California still on top.
Both parties will hold closed-door House leadership elections Wednesday. But the main focus will involve the soon-to-be minority party, the Democrats.
Pelosi, the nation's first female speaker, appeared to soothe enough angry colleagues Tuesday to ensure her election to the top post. Barring a surprise, she will become minority leader in January, when the new Congress convenes. The second- and third-ranking Democrats seem likely to hold their positions as well.
Republicans, meanwhile, are expected to keep Rep. John Boehner of Ohio as their leader, putting him in place to become speaker in January.
By quarreling among themselves and sticking with Pelosi, House Democrats are departing from the example set by Republicans, who quickly closed ranks around a new leader, Boehner, four years ago when they lost the majority.
Pelosi let her supporters and critics vent their emotions Tuesday at a four-hour closed meeting in the Capitol. She got an earful at times from colleagues who said a party must change leaders when it suffers the type of losses Democrats absorbed Nov. 2.
Rep. Allen Boyd of Florida was particularly pointed in his remarks, according to people present, saying Pelosi is the wrong person to represent Democrats as they try to rebuild. But others defended the San Francisco liberal, and even her toughest critics said she is likely to defeat Rep. Heath Shuler, a moderate from North Carolina.
Shuler told reporters he's trying to make a point. After a whopping election defeat, he said, it's not wise "to go back and put the exact same leadership into place."
Bailey Comment: " I hope that the Demos put Nancy back in because she and Reid are one of the reasons we voted out so many Demos."  That way when 2012 comes around we can vote the rest of the dumbcrats out!

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Muslims Reach Out To Christians?


CAIRO-- Muslims set fire overnight to at least 10 houses belonging to Coptic Christians in a village in southern Egypt over rumors that a Christian resident had an affair with a Muslim girl, security officials said Tuesday.
The officials said security forces have sealed off the village of al-Nawahid, in Qena province some 290 miles south of Cairo, to prevent the violence from spreading to neighboring towns. They said several people were arrested.
The attacks started after locals spotted a young Copt and a Muslim girl together at night inside the village cemetery, the officials said. They added that both were put under police custody as authorities investigate.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.
Clashes between Christians and Muslims occasionally occur in southern Egypt, mostly over land or disputes over church construction. But sectarian tensions have also been on the rise recently in the capital.

Rangel Storms Out of Ethics Trial

By Jim Meyers
Embattled Rep. Charles Rangel stunned a House ethics panel weighing charges against him by walking out of the hearing room as the proceedings were about to begin Monday morning.

Despite having had months to prepare for the hearing, the New York Democrat showed up without a lawyer and claimed he had not had enough time to set up a defense fund and did not have the money to hire an attorney.
“I respectfully remove myself from these hearings,” 80-year-old Rangel said before bolting from the eight-member subcommittee.

Rangel, who is charged with 13 ethics violations, told the panel that he had already spent $2 million on his defense and insisted that moving ahead with the hearing would be unfair, ABC News reported.

“I don’t think it’s fair,” Rangel said, asserting that he needed time to raise $1 million to retain new counsel for the hearing.

charles,rangel,house,trial,lawyer,irs,taxesAfter leaving the hearing room, Rangel — who was first elected in 1970 — was asked if he walked out of the hearing to delay the proceedings, the New York Daily News reported. Rangel responded: “I would say that’s a stupid question.”

After he departed, the ethics panel comprised of four Democrats and four Republicans met behind closed doors and decided to continue with the proceedings.

“We recognize that Mr. Rangel has indicated that he does not intend to participate, and that is his right,” said committee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat.

“These matters have been underway for quite some time. We are prepared to proceed today . . .

“Mr. Rangel has repeatedly sought and received legal guidance as to how he can pay [for legal counsel]. Mr. Rangel was provided with all the material and evidence on June 17 of this year.”

Lofgren has said the proceedings need to be completed by the end of the current Congress, according to ABC News.

As a series of allegations of ethics violations, including tax questions, came to light, Rangel in March stepped aside as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which writes the nation’s tax code. And three months ago, Rangel demanded a hearing before the ethics panel and dared his colleagues to kick him out on the ethics charges.

In February, the House Ethics Committee concluded that Rangel had violated House gift rules by accepting payment from corporations for reimbursement for travel to conferences in the Caribbean, and required him to repay those expenses.

The ethics panel is also looking into allegations that Rangel was improperly living in several rent-stabilized apartments in Manhattan while claiming his Washington, D.C. home as his primary residence for tax purposes.

The New York Times reported in July 2008 that Rangel rents four apartments in Harlem at below-market rates and has used one apartment as a campaign office, which violates city and state regulations requiring that rent-stabilized apartments be used only as a primary residence.

Rangel was also accused of failing to report income from the rental of a villa he owns in Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, which he rented out for as much as $1,100 a night.

In September 2008, Rangel paid back taxes of $10,800 owed from rental income on his Punta Cana villa.

Also in September 2008, the New York Post reported that Rangel “has been using a House of Representatives parking garage for years as free storage space for his old Mercedes-Benz, a violation of congressional rules and a potential new tax woe for the embattled lawmaker . . . The spaces are valued by the House at $290 per month.”

Rangel has also been charged with using his official congressional letterhead to solicit funds for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of New York, and failing to reveal more than half a million dollars in income and assets on financial disclosure forms.

On July 22, a four-member investigative subcommittee of the House Ethics Committee indicated it had “substantial reason to believe” that Rangel had violated ethics rules. And on July 29, Rangel was charged by the committee with 13 counts of violating House rules and federal laws.

The last ethics trial in the House was in 2002 for Rep. James Traficant, an Ohio Democrat later expelled from Congress.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Krugman Backs Death Panels for Elderly to Solve Debt Crisis

Breaking News from Newsmax.com

Krugman Backs Death Panels for Elderly to Solve Debt Crisis
New York Times columnist and economist Paul Krugman told ABC's 'This Week' that 'death panels' will stop rising medical costs and continuing deficits. He also called for a VAT national sales tax to solve the debt crisis.
Read the Full Story -- Go Here Now

Friday, November 12, 2010

Feds Pay Millions to 'Sanctuaries' That Flaunt Immigration Laws

They bill themselves as 'sanctuaries' for illegal immigrants, but a recently released report shows that more than two dozen communities that openly defy immigration enforcement also take millions of taxpayer dollars to cover the cost of — immigration enforcement. 


The Department of Justice has spent tens of millions of dollars this year to compensate more than two dozen states, counties and cities for their costs of jailing illegal immigrants -- even though those communities have adopted policies that obstruct immigration enforcement, according to a recently released report.

"Subsidizing Sanctuaries: The State Criminal Alien Assistance Program," a report from the Center for Immigration Studies, found that the federal grant program commonly known as SCAAP allocated $62.2 million -- more than 15 percent of its $400 million total -- to 27 jurisdictions that are widely considered to be "sanctuary communities."
Some of those jurisdictions -- including San Francisco, Chicago and California's Santa Clara County -- are even trying to opt-out of Secure Communities, a program that automatically alerts Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials when criminal illegal immigrants are booked into jail, according to the report.
Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies and a co-author of the report, said that the grant system as currently structured makes little sense.
"Basically, the federal government is subsidizing through this grant program jurisdictions that on the one hand are complaining about the cost of illegal immigration and demandingreimbursement from the federal government, while at the same time they have policies in place that make their locality a magnet for illegal aliens," Vaughan told FoxNews.com. 
"And that's just illogical," she said.
According to Department of Justice figures cited in the report, five of the top 10 SCAAP grants to localities and two of the top 10 grants to states went to jurisdictions that are considered sanctuaries. That includes $14.2 million to Los Angeles County, $13.4 million to New York City and $88 million to the state of California.
Rather than award SCAAP grants to jurisdictions that incur costs of incarcerating undocumented criminal aliens, Vaughan said federal officials should use the grant program as an incentive for communities to participate in immigration enforcement programs like Secure Communities or the 287(g) program, which trains deputies to check the immigration status of individuals they arrest and has identified more than 180,000 illegal immigrants for deportation nationwide since 2006.
In a statement obtained by FoxNews.com, U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., said he disagreed with funding sanctuary cities using SCAAP grants and called on the Obama administration to take action.
"In its lawsuit challenging the Arizona immigration law, the Obama administration claims that the law creates a patchwork of immigration enforcement," Miller's statement read. "If this is the case, then the Obama administration should also sue sanctuary cities, for their policies are arguably a 'patchwork' of immigration enforcement as well. It is time for the administration to end its double standard."
To that end, Miller has authored legislation -- the Loophole Elimination and Verification Enforcement Act, or LEAVE -- that would prohibit sanctuary communities from receiving both Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security funds.
"I hope the next Congress will take up this commonsense proposal and penalize sanctuary cities for their irresponsible policies," Miller's statement concluded.
In a statement to FoxNews.com, the Department of Justice said it administers the SCAAP grants in accordance with legislation authorizing the program and passed by Congress.
"Funding under this program is provided to any eligible jurisdiction that incurs costs associated with detaining criminal aliens," the statement read. "SCAAP does not inhibit, but rather supports the accountability process by reimbursing local agency costs for detaining illegal aliens who commit crimes."
The statement continued, "Making any jurisdiction ineligible for these funds could have an unintended consequence -- creating a disincentive to detain criminals  who are greater flight risks and pose a danger to our communities. The Department of Justice is committed to providing support to our state and local partners to protect the safety of communities."
Bob Dane, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, suggested that the number of sanctuary communities would reduce significantly if the DOJ grants were discontinued.
"One of the best fixes is to deny state and federal funding to the places that harbor illegal aliens," Dane said. "The entire country is slowly but surely moving from a sanctuary mentality to a 'fix it' mentality, but you've got these remaining pockets of resistance, many of them in big cities."
Dane continued, "You hit 'em where it hurts, in the wallet, and maybe they'll get it. We're reimbursing cities for a problem of their own making."

CartoonsTrashyDemsRinos