Anne Rice quits Christianity. Here is her facebook declarations.

Facebook declaration (Wednesday past)

For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian. I'm out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being "Christian" or to being part of Christianity. It's simply impossible for me to "belong" to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outside. My conscience will allow nothing else.

Facebook declaration (Wednesday past - follow-up post)

As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I'm out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.


Facebook declaration (Thursday past)

Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.

But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me. But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been or might become.

Editor's notes: Understand that the very being of the church is Jesus Christ. If Anne Rice no longer cares to run with the Church, that is of her own will. But she cannot cease being a member of the body of Christ anymore than she can quit breathing. To argue that point is to press for a dualism that finds her at odds with the normative world of the revealed will of God. After all, it was God who is pictured as having constantly filled his prophets with words of rebuke and correction -- directed at his own, those who claim his knowledge, those who pretended to be under his influence (and were, at times).

We continue to love Rice as a sister. But, we are thankful that her God has more patience with his church than she.

J David Smithson

FoxNews falls into trap set by the Dems. The angry debate between Weiner and King was all Weiner's doing. Hannity draws out Weiner's true intentions.

Both King (a House Republican) and Wiener (a radicalized Democrat Socialist) voted for this bill. It would have set aside more than 7 billion dollars to aid first responders during 9/11. As usual, the Dems could not simply put this bill up for a vote. Rather, they added millions, if not a billion or two, to pet projects including aid to illegal aliens. What Weiner did, was to demand a 2/3 vote approval for this bill. Of course, that was not going to happen and he knew. His plan was to pretend to be concerned for bi-partisanship, something that has been foreign to this creep for the past 19 months, and after getting enough free press on the issue, pass the bill with a 218 vote majority - something the Dems did with all the previous bills including the idiotic healthcare bill. Midknight Review does not listen that much to Hannity. We care about teaching off news items, not airing the debate points of both sides. But you will appreciate Hannity on this one. He destroys Weiner, exposing him for the phony that he is. Its 9:41 minutes long. If you listen to the first 4 minutes, nothing much changes after that point. Weiner cannot defend himself. This is a great example of the intellectual prominence of the Liberal. Laughable.



mm

Arizona immigration controversy: A picture is worth a thousand words

http://www.investors.com/EditorialCartoons/Cartoon.aspx?id=542261

Cartoon is lead-in ad for http://editorials.com/?404=Y

Rangel is in trouble with Obama - Maxine Waters is not. We think we know why.

We begin with this "The Hill" headline: Democrat apologizes for talking about Rangel reprimand

The headline is the story. Understand the problem here: House Democrats are angry that the "beans have been spilled." At least, that is our theory. Apparently it has already been decided that Charlie Rangel's "punishment" will be some sort of reprimand. If this clown's punishment is more than this, we will make the correction, of course.

Obama has chimed in, recommending that Rangel resign. No doubt another Obama decision made without having actually read the charges. Maybe not. But this we do believe: Obama's separation from Rangel began when Rangel publicly criticized the Adolescent in Office (read: Charles Rangel slams President Obama for being like Dick Cheney - fighting in Iraq only for oil ).

We wonder if Obama will speak out against Maxine Waters, as well. Our theory leads us to say "no way, Maleka Mae."
.

Two House blacks on trial for ethics violations - first time in House history.

From POLITICO: Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) has chosen to go through an ethics trial, like the one lined up for New York Rep. Charles Rangel, rather than accepting charges made by an ethics subcommittee, a source familiar with the process tells POLITICO.

The back-to-back trials of a pair of black lawmakers represent an unprecedented use of an ethics adjudication system that has rarely been used by House members accused of breaking House rules.[red highlight for emphasis - jds]

Waters' case revolves around allegations that she improperly intervened with federal regulators to help a bank that her husband owned stock in and on whose board he once served. . . . . . . Read the full article here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40489.html#ixzz0vH07z7AR

Editor's notes: you are looking at one of the more bigoted Congressional figures in modern history. As to the impending trial, one she has requested, an aspect of her defense will include "I'm black and THAT is why this is happening to me." She is from our home state of California. We have listened to her racist rants for years. A fairly ignorant woman, she is a primary force in the current Democrat strategy of charging all non-Party members with racism. She is a member of the Black Progressive [code for "Marxist" -- jds] Caucus and has song the praises of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez on more than one occasion. She is a Marxist/Socialist to the core but without understanding the ideological arguments supporting this position. Her constituency deserves so much better. --- jds

Quote of the week:

Someone shouted out to Harry Truman, "Give 'em hell, Harry." Truman responded: " I just tell the truth and they think it's hell.
,

We have removed Capitol Eye/Open Secrets Blog from our blogroll.

Capitol Eye has written a number of articles, of late, that are insanely Left in their content and purpose. When Lefties write dialogue, more often than not, their intent is as important to discern as the actual content of the particle post or article. The authors at Capitol Eye / Open Secrets Blog have recently published articles that cast the Taxed Enough Already (TEA) Party as funded by big business and big oil. Moronic and we are done tolerating such nonsense.

The Left can tell their lies somewhere else. We will get our Congressional information elsewhere, as well.

J David Smithson
Editor
Midknight Review

Obama goes to Michigan and brags about GM before reading GM's 2nd quarter report - THEY LOST 15 BILLION

Obama touts:
$865 million in profit for GM during the first three months of 2010, a massive reversal from the $4.4 billion lost in the 4th quarter of 2009. The reasons: $50 billion in government aid; elimination of debt in bankruptcy; improved manufacturing; and fewer cash-back incentives for car buyers. GM cut 70,000 jobs from 2005 up to the time of the forced bankruptsy and take-over by Obama's Administration. Another 100, 000 jobs were lost because of restructuring. In addition to this, another 900,000 jobs were lost nation wide because of the auto industry's calamities.

Understand that Obama spoke at a Michigan GM auto plant, today, and touted the "success" of his industry restructuring. He claimed to have saved a million jobs but never mentioned the million jobs lost and never replaced.

We need to get this in our heads -- Obama math is not typical math. Look, what do you get when you add 1 million saved jobs to 1 million lost jobs ? If you said "zero," you were wrong. The correct answer is "minus one million jobs." If you dig a hole and save the dirt, you still have a hole.

And the alleged profitability of the GM? The Slickmeister had better slow down on this, as well. GM has not been profitable since 2007 . The first quarter of this year saw a $865 million dollar profit, but most of that was, once again, due to government funding, reduced inventory and some small car sales. One should read this article before getting too happy. Or maybe someone should read the 2nd quarter report for GM:

GM Loses $15.5B, Stuns Street

$27.33 per-share loss much worse than analysts predicted

(Newser) - General Motors stunned Wall Street today, reporting a $15.5-billion second-quarter loss—a figure far worse than anything analysts had predicted—as sales collapsed on the company's most profitable products, trucks and SUVs. Prognosticators had estimated the automaker would lose $2.62 per share, excluding items; instead the loss came... More

Ford, which took no money, recorded a 2.1 billion dollar profit margin for the first quarter and 2.6 billion dollars for the 2nth quarter of this year and the fifth consecutive quarter, overall. --- jds

Our question is this: is Obama lying or does he not know what is going on before he speaks? We think the latter.

Point of post: if Wall Street does not believe in GM, what does that mean about the projected material profitability
of the company? A first quarter report of $867 million
averages out to less than $300 million a month -- not good
at all for a company the size of GM. While Obama is bragging about GM, few people who matter (financially)
are buying into his rhetoric -- actually almost no one !!

Good news for Conservatives: the Arizona appeal in the 9th Circuit will be front page election week !!!!

Arizona Appeal To Be Argued Election Week

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has denied the State of Arizona's motion to expedite the appeal from the preliminary injunction enjoining key provisions of S.B. 1070. (h/t Michelle Malkin) The Department of Justice has objected to an expedited briefing schedule.

The case now will be argued the week of November 1.

That may make DOJ lawyers happy, because they will have more time to put together their brief.

But it will not make Democratic politicians happy to have the Arizona case on the front page as voters are walking into the voting booth on November 2.

Democrats wished too hard for something, and they got it. . . . . GO TO LEGAL INSURRECTION FOR THE RESTO OF THE STORY.

Shirley Sherrod exposed on Cooper 360

Shirley Sherrod on Cooper 360. No racism in here life, right ??? !!!!! She is talking about Andrew Breitbart, who has asked to meet privately with Sherrod. She has refused.

ANDERSON COOPER: I want to ask you about the -- the man who first posted this edited clip of you, Andrew Breitbart. He said today -- and I'm quoting him -- he said -- quote -- "If anybody reads the sainted, martyred Sherrod's entire speech, this person has not gotten past black vs. white." Do you think you have gotten past black vs. white?

SHIRLEY SHERROD: I know I have gotten past black vs. white. He's probably the person who has never gotten past it and never attempted to get past it. So, he can't see -- because he has never tried and because he hasn't, he can't see what I have done to get past it. And he's not interested in what I have done to get past it. I don't think he's interested in seeing anyone get past it, because I think he would like to get us stuck back in the times of slavery. That's where I think he would like to see all black people end up again. And that's why...

COOPER: You think -- you think he's racist?

SHERROD: ... I think he's so vicious. Yes, I do. And I think that's why he's so vicious against a black president, you know. He would go after me. I don't think it was even the NAACP he was totally after. I think he was after a black president.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2010/07/30/mea-culpa-360-cnn-anchor-says-he-was-wrong-let-shirley-sherrod-smear-and#ixzz0vE47NxwW

Weiner blames the GOP when his party owns 54 more votes than it needs to pass ANY bill it wants in the House.

Here is a 1:48 seconds of adolescent crap from a Congressman Weiner. He is furious that a bill given to aid for those who worked to save lives at the site of the Twin Towers did not pass. He is screaming about being humane and the like. What is not mentioned is the fact that this bill also includes aid offered to illegal aliens. That is why only 12 Republicans voted for this bill. It failed by the way -- in a House of Representatives where Republicans do not count. Weiner has a majority of 54 Congressmen. That means he has 54 votes MORE THAN HE NEEDS to pass legislation in the House. ANYTHING that fails in the House is the result of a Democrat breakdown. Again, in the House, the GOP has absolutely no voting power at all.



Over the top? Childish ? His party fails to support the bill and he blames the GOP. All we have to say is "The man is well named." ---- jds.
m

The Democrats have no concern for those who survived the TwinTowers destruction. Its about winning an election and nothing more.

ADL Condemns, Enables, Anti-Muslim Bigotry. — The Anti-Defamation League comes out against the proposed Islamic Center near Ground Zero: … Remarkable. An organization whose stated role is to “counteract hatred, prejudice and bigotry” nonetheless opposes people building where they please simply . . .

Editor's notes: here is the real deal. This is nothing but Leftist election strategy and little more. To imagine that opposition to this Muslim mosque is being marked out as bigotry is simply incredible. Democrats repeatedly remind us all of their limited abilities to extend debate perimeters or to sit at a table and have a simple discussion. They car nothing for unity and will twist any circumstance to their "advantage," In this case, "bigotry" is the word of the day. Of course, there are hundreds of families, some of them Muslim in religious belief, who oppose this mosque at its present location. It is the location and nothing else that is the question.

If you think that is "bigotry," we ask that you leave this blog and get your kicks elsewhere.

"Thanks" in advance.

J Smithson.

Obama is fine with Hasan, the Fort Hood murderer, making $6000 a month in military pay but some banks are not pleased,

Banks won't take Fort Hood shooting suspect's paychecks — BELTON — As he sits in the Bell County Jail, accused of the Nov. 5 Fort Hood shooting that left 13 dead, Maj. Nidal Hasan continues to receive his monthly U.S. Army paycheck, which based on his rank and experience is probably more than $6,000. . . .

Editor's notes: if the Obama government will not prosecute this Muslim murderer, the banks will. Understand that it has been nearly 10 months since this massacre. It took this Administration 9 months to decide which charges to file. If there was ever a case that is worthy of the notion of "slam dunk," it is this one. Besides killing 13 individuals while screaming the name of a "deity" named allah, Hasan shot another 42 persons, all of them witnesses to the killings. Slam dunk !!!!

In a related strategy, after being convicted of voter intimidation, this Administration let go three Black Muslims and has sworn off the prosecution of similar cases.

Then there is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, known more commonly as KSM, who has been imprisoned for 8 years but without charges. Under Bush, there was a reason. They were busy waterboarding this creep for information and he was singing [or should we say "gargling"] like a bird. After charges, Bush would not have been able to do this.

But what is Obama's excuse ? Last year, he was going to put this guy on trial in a civilian court in New York. What happened to that idea ? But there he sits, in jail, without charges, with no date in sight for his coming trial. The Obama Muslim criminal strategy continues to manifest itself, to the questioning eye of us all.
.

SEC begins its reprisals against conservative donors. Don't agree ? Since FinReg makes SEC screcy policy, you can't prove us wrong.

S.E.C. Charges Brothers With $550 Million Fraud — WASHINGTON — Samuel and Charles Wyly, the billionaire brothers from Dallas who are large donors to philanthropies and to conservative causes, were charged Thursday with conducting an extensive securities fraud that the Securities …

Editor's notes: here is the problem with this story -- because of the secrecy provided to the SEC as a result of the wording of the recent FinReg financial reform legislation, we will never know if this investigation is reprisal for the brother's political views or not. We all know that the current Administration is fully capable of such corruption. As long as secrecy is institutionalized within the content of FinReg legislation, the SEC is not to be trusted and charges against anyone should be viewed with suspicion. Understand that FinReg provides the SEC protection from having to answer requests under the "Freedom of Information Act." As incredible as it may sound, we, "the people," are no longer able to investigate this agency and this is all Obama's doing. This is part of the reason why the Obama Congress has an approval rating of 11%. The ONLY people left who believe in Congress are blood relatives and a few staff members. Geeeeeeze.

Reid and Angle are tied - Reid losing 7 points since last week. Yes, he could lose an election against a pure novice.

U.S. SENATE RACE: Poll: Reid, Angle neck and neck — Sixty percent of Nevadans see nation on wrong track — Sen. Harry Reid and Sharron Angle are locked in a dead heat, says a new poll for the Las Vegas Review-Journal and KLAS-TV, Channel 8 that shows the GOP challenger regaining ground …

Editor's notes: first, Angle was ahead in the polls by a huge margin, then by 6. Two weeks ago, she fell behind by 7 and today, she is tied. It appears to Midknight Review that Reid is the one who wins or loses this election. If he continues with his radicalized agenda, he will lose to Sharron Angle. It is that simple.

Understand that Reid can court the NRA all he wants, but if he continues to be concerned for advancing a national opinion of his Socialist Party, he cannot win at home in Nevada. Make no mistake, Reid will try to split his concerns. We believe that his comments of last week regarding the implementation of the "Public Option" are part of the reason for his recent decline in polling numbers. He is fully capable of lying his way back into office, however. Time will tell and we are stuck with that reality. -- jds.

The Schlafly controvery used this chart from CNN. How far off base could she have been ??

Before reading the following post, dealing with the Schlafly "controversy," review this chart, based on an exit poll by none less than CNN that supports the conclusion that single women supported Obama in huge numbers. Most of these single moms are young, without professional experience or qualification, and - consequently - on some level of public assistance.

The point? These women care about one thing, survival. And the promises of Obama gave them hope. Of course they voted for Mr. Obama.

In the end, they are beginning to realize that cannot do what he promised but, still, the promises were made. In that, Obama is no different than other politicians except in the avalanche of promises he made for the single purpose of getting elected.

Midknight Review is not familiar with Phyllis Schlafly and has no intentions of making that connection. She does not speak for anyone other than herself. What she does with the facts of the CNN chart is of no concern to this writer.
Almost no one knows who she is and even less care about her point of view.

One thing for certain, if McCain had increased his margins by just 3% in each of the categories on the chart, he would have buried Obama in the election. Never forget that Obama outspent McCain by $400 million dollars to win an election by just 6.5 percent of the vote. Still think Obama is not in trouble with the electorate?? ---- jds

The Dems demand others clean house before they do. Is that a good campaign strategy???

Dems Call On GOPers To Renounce Phyllis Schlafly Over Remarks About ‘Unmarried Women’ (AUDIO) — Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly took aim at “unmarried women” at a recent fundraiser and in an interview with TPM, saying that they overwhelmingly support President Obama and are all on welfare. . .

Editor's notes: this is what Dems do when they have nothing of importance to say. Any of you conservatives ever heard of Phyllis Schafly? We didn't think so. And while these Socialist revolutionaries in charge of Congress want this woman sequestered by the GOP, will the Dems do the same for the racist/bigot's in their own party, i.e. the Progressive Black Caucus, Maxine Waters and her black's verse white's rants of which there are many, the billion of dollars of destruction leveled by the environmentalists in their party, the murders of pro-lifers, the thuggery of SEIU violence at the Town Hall meetings last year, the bigotry of Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, the moral corruption of Barney Franks, Charles Rangel, Timothy Geithner and the blatant racism of Shirley Sherrod (her true feelings coming out since the dust up over the Breitbart video ???

Understand this: Midknight Review is not saying "it is the Dems who are wrong." Not at all. We are not a partisan blog. We could not care less as to the continuance of the old guard within the GOP and we have a number of friends who are Democrats. But, if the Dems are going to insist on campaign strategies that find them every bit as guilty as the people they self-righteously condemn, well, we have plenty of evidence of their malfeasance and immorality.

Why do they stoop to such nonsense? Because they have a major media and wannabe bloggers willing to parrot their talking points and carry their water.

Was Phyllis Whoever wrong in her statement? Probably not entirely !!! Does she speak for the GOP ? Of course not. More importantly, does she represent Conservative folk and the general themes of the Tax Enough Already [TEA] Party. Not even close.

MoveOn.org debated by Midknight Review. They say SS is not in trouble. We think otherwise. We won the debate !!

Editor's notes: this bit of nonsense came to one of my email boxes from MoveOn.org. That's right. They think I am on their side. We offer three reference articles. Understand that the national debt, at whatever level, is a complicated matter. And, it is complicated for a reason - the people who drive our debt do not want any of us to understand exactly what is going on. Our economy is a debt driven beast. Take "debt" out of the equation, and the beast dies. Can a nation exist without debt ? Not really -- no more than any of us, on an individual basis, can. Can a nation survive if it spends more money than it's annual obligations ?? Probably not -- no more than you and I could, on an individual level. It's Economics 101, folks. They want you to believe that it is much more complicated than that... jds

Top 5 Social Security Myths

Myth #1: Social Security is going broke.

Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.6 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.¹ After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits—and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers' retirement decades ago.² Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

The truth: in a report written by none less than Timothy Geithner, payments will exceed income by 2016. Which means, of course, that there is no surplus. Such is a ridiculous lie, one that borders on stupid. Of course, if we have a surplus, if we can pay all scheduled benefits until 2035, we do not need to adjust the retirement age and that is the suggestion of libs and conservatives. Understand the problem is so serious that it will take 75 years to bring actuary balance into effect IF SS taxes are raised sufficiently (reference 1) As is the case with such discussions arguments can be involved and quite confusing. As you study this out, keep in mind Geithner's conclusions as well as the information in this article (reference 2 and reference 3)

Myth #2: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.

Reality: This is a red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than they did 70 years ago.³ What's more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly—since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half.⁴ But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut.

The truth: look at the moronic conclusion in the above: MoveOn says - people are not living longer, it is just that more of them survive infancy !! Hmm. Last time I looked, "surviving infancy" is the very definition of "living longer." The fact of the matter is this: there are many more people in the SS system at retirement age than there were back in the '30s. We are not going to quote "evidence" to support this conclusion. It isn't necessary because the fact is not disputed in normal circles - it is a fact commonly held.

Myth #3: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security.

Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come.⁵ Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income.⁶ But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

The truth: MoveOn wants you to think that fixing Social Security is different from "strengthening" Social Security. In fact, they want you to think that SS does not need "fixing," while admitting in the same paragraph of thought (above) that it is not sustainable without an increased soaking of the rich. Finally, conservatives do not think that cutting benefits is all that is needed to fix on Social Security. MoveOn gives no references, here, because none exist !!!

Myth #4: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs

Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't full of IOUs, it's full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.⁷ The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market—which would have been disastrous—but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.

The truth: the "treasury bonds" MoveOn refers to are "special treasury bonds," not real treasury bonds. All of the monies "invested" on these bonds has been spent on general budget items. Indeed, these "treasury bonds" are nothing more than I.O.U.s. This is an accounting trick of the Left. Look, if a government fund (SS) "invests" in government treasuries, government is borrowing money from itself. Let's not become morons during the reading of this post. Also, the MoveOn assessment of Bush's plan is a flat out lie. Bush wanted to put only a relatively small percentage of the monies collected for SS into private investment programs. Social Security for the 55 year old crowd and older would not have been effected by the Bush plan.

Myth #5: Social Security adds to the deficit

Reality: It's not just wrong—it's impossible! By law, Social Security's funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.⁸

The truth: what an idiotic statement. Indeed, Social Security is not figured into the budget. Neither is Medicare. Neither is emergency aid for national disasters, either here in the US or in foreign countries. But it all applies to the public debt. So, "why are these financial matters not budget items?" There are several reasons, but the first that comes to mind is the fact that if these issues are not counted, the reported annual deficit is better than it really is. Understand that there is annual debt, public debt and structural debt, to name a few of our deficit considerations. Apparently, MoveOn knows nothing of any of this . --- jds

Democrats keep door open for dangerous Lame Duck Session: plan to pass Card Check, Cap/Trade and more - after they lose midterm elections !!!

Midknight Review has been predicting this event -- the use of the Lame Duck Session (between November 2 and January 21) to pass the rest of their Marxist agenda. If that happens, it is time for impeachment precedings. The fact that they are talking about this, now, is reason alone to never elect another Democrat to national office against -- seriously.

From the National Republican Study Committee

Washington, Jul 29 - Republican Study Committee Chairman Tom Price (R-GA) issued the following statement after offering a resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives calling on Congress not to hold a lame duck session after Election Day for the purpose of passing hugely unpopular legislation like a national energy tax, enormous deficit spending bills, and the kickback to Big Labor known as “Card Check.”

“Americans are sick and tired of their elected leaders making backroom deals to ram through unpopular, 2000-page bills that no one has read,” said Chairman Price. “They are sick of out-of-touch politicians, and they are tired of being ignored. A number of Democrats, including members of their leadership, have recently expressed a desire to ignore the public will and use a lame duck session to pass liberal legislation Americans do not want. Today I gave my Democrat colleagues an opportunity to show they are finally ready to listen to the American people.

“Our system of government rests upon the consent of the governed, but it is quite clear that Democrats no longer have Americans’ consent. The public’s trust in this Congress has been repeatedly broken. Voting for a national energy tax and other items on the liberal wish list in a lame duck session would shatter it beyond repair. Republicans are fully prepared to do what is necessary to restore Americans’ trust in their elected representatives. We know it will be a long road, but it is one well worth traveling.”

Note: Instead of taking a clear stand on this issue, House Democrats chose to delay a vote on the Price resolution. The text of the resolution is available here.

From the mind of Paul Ryan. He and the others in the New GOP have ideas and plans for the nation, plans that will actually work. See you in November.

Unfunded Liabilities. Another way of viewing the government’s disastrous budgetary situation is by looking at its fiscal position the way a private company would. To do so, analysts focus on the “unfunded liabilities” of the Federal Government’s major benefit programs. These liabilities reflect the excess of projected spending in these programs over the amount of revenue currently estimated to be available for them.

The problem is most acute in Medicare. Like Social Security, Medicare faces the daunting demographic challenge of supporting the baby boomers as they retire. But its much larger problem is that of medical costs, which are rising at roughly double the rate of growth in the economy. Today Medicare has an unfunded liability of $38 trillion over the next 75 years (see Figure 1). This means that the Federal Government would have to set aside $38 trillion today to cover future benefits for the three generations of Americans: retirees, workers, and children. This translates to a burden of about $335,350 per U.S. household. Moreover, the problem worsens rapidly: in just the next 5 years, by 2014, Medicare’s unfunded liability is projected to grow to $52 trillion – or about $458,900 per household.

When Social Security and Medicare are taken together, the total unfunded liability is
$43 trillion, or about $379,475 per household (see Figure 2). In the next
5 years, that total will grow to $57 trillion, or $500,414 per household.

Without fundamental changes, the government would have to finance these obligations with higher taxes, higher debt, or a combination of the two. Either way, the results would be crippling for the U.S. economy: they would entail shifting unprecedented amounts of economic resources away from growth-generating activities of the private sector . . . .

YOU WILL WANT TO READ MORE FROM REP. PAUL RYAN >>>>>

Editor's notes: the new GOP has ideas and they have been posted for well over a year. Surprised? Maybe that has to do with the Minion Media's concerted effort to repress such information, giving the illusion that the GOP has no ideas and has not "been at the table " with solutions and a bi-partisan willingness to get something done. That, of course, is a lie.

It has not gone unnoticed by some that the new FinReg financial reform legislation did not address Fannie and Freddie and the malfeasance clearly present in those organizations. Neither was the problematic issue of transparency addressed with regard to "the Fed."

Most amazingly, Obama and Comrades have had two excellent opportunities to deal with the growing liability issues in Medicare and Social Security. Rather than deal with the impossible debt of Medicare, ObamaCare decided to add 16 million more people into that program, all of us poor and old folks, but not provide for increased medical staff -- all the while claiming there will be no rationing. Lies and more lies. This should have been addressed in the healthcare idiocy but wasn't. "No time." "We had to act fast." And, my favorite, "Doing something is better than doing nothing." Understand that all of these statements could have been written by someone with an I. Q. of a piece of shoe leather. The actual reason why real solutions were not offered is this: the Dems have no solutions if the answers do not have anything to do with spending money, greasing palms, increasing legacy packages and earmarks for the hometown crowd.

Funny how we have time to create more debt - at four times the rate of Bush but not enough time to deal with the problems that "got us into this mess." As an aside, let's not forget that Obama VOTED FOR ALL OF THE BUSH SPENDING and took time out of his campaign to support the TARP legislation, making him as responsible for that spending nut as Bush.

Point of post: the Dems have nothing and the GOP is being ignored. There are good ideas out there, on the left and the right, but the Marxist Media is not interested in anything but the "fundamental transformation of the United States."

Beginning today, a continuing theme of Midknight Review will be the documentation of racism on the Left. It is real, rampant and deadly.

The black movement of Dr. King's day compared to the black movement of today. Dr. King versus "fight the power." We are talking about "racism, straight up."



m

Here is a great chart recording housing values from 1800 to the present.

mmmm

The NY Times jumps the gun on the Arizona decision and here is why . . . .

Ruling Against Arizona Is a Warning for Other States — A federal judge in Arizona on Wednesday broadly vindicated the Obama administration's high-stakes move to challenge that state's tough immigration law and to assert the primary authority of the federal government over state lawmakers in immigration matters. . .

Editor's notes: this is a NY Times story and it could not be more misplaced. No one "in the know," believed that a Clinton appointed activist judge would have decided differently. OF COURSE she struck down the law's primary clauses. And, OF COURSE, this is only the first step. The article uses the term "vindicated" in its appraisal of the Court's decision. The purpose of the Times article ?? To do what the author could to influence the outcomes of advancing national opinion. "Vindicated" bears a sense of finality, does it not? And there is nothing final about this decision.

We all know there are at least two additional judicial steps in this vetting process: the 9th District Court's review and the Supreme Court. While the clowns at the White House and the NY Times are giving each other "high fives" over this decision, there is the distinct possibility that after the High Court's decision, their faces will be sullen and their rhetoric will be something other than gracious. Such is the M.O. of this adolescent corp of "leaders."

Point of post: "vindicated" is hardly the word of the day. There are 18 other states currently writing similar laws. Why have they waited to get their legislation on the books? Well, they were waiting for this particular decision. They are not giving up. They see no "vindication" of the Feds position. They only see the official judicial debate framed in concrete legal opinion. Let the revisionist writing begin !! The coming avalanche of state legislation will reflect "corrections" to the "weaknesses" of the Arizona law. For the conservative onlookers, we are saying the "best is yet to come."
.

Palin is busy doing much more than Twittering her way to fame and glory. Here is her endorsement list.

Editor's notes: if you are a serious conservative blog, you have to deal with Sarah Palin. Why? Well, for one thing, in the most recent polls, she scores as the front runner in the GOP. Her willingness to take positions that are not popular but well-informed (unlike Mitt Romney) is a wonderful trait. Her refusal to be vetted by a corrupt media is to our liking, as well. A conservative cannot read her varied commentary without nodding in agreement. She understands the issues and knows how to use the media to her advantage.

Understand that Sarah's appeal is found in the fact that she represents the successful pursuit of the American dream. Standing in the kitchen, with children at her feet and Mr Macho out somewhere killing moose, she decides to do something about the corruption in her state and the rest is history. She is Miss Middle America on steroids.

Her quitting political office? Well, that is easy to defend. Look, state law prohibited the state from helping Palin defend herself against many of the ethic charges filed against her. She had to go it alone. This fact provided her opponents, fiends of the darkness, a strategy: bury the woman under hundred of thousands of dollars of legal debt, force her to sell her home, take everything from her in a destructive and malicious effort to rid the planet of her influence. At the time of her resignation, she owed 1/2 a million dollars in legal fees, on her way to $3 million or more in the coming 18 months.

I coach wrestling. I always tell my students to never carry the fight into the "opponent's backyard." You fight on your terms or not at all. Palin knew this as a matter of instinct. Rather than play the game "their" way and die a slow death, she put herself in a position to fight back AND WIN. She was right, you know. If she had remained in office, what would the past months be about with regard to Palin? "Palin did this" and "Palin did that." But she quit that game.

What is the worst thing that can happen to evil? Give the object of its scorn money and fame and sympathy. That is what happened. Anyone notice that the frivolous lawsuits stopped ? If we had been her advisors, a job we would love by the way, a job we would be good at, we would have told her to do exactly what she did.

Now, to this list. Understand that is contains endorsements we would not have made. But if Palin is going to be presidential in her efforts, she needs to be inclusive to a degree. On a few seriously important votes, including the filibuster vote of yesterday, Brown, Collins and Snowe helped save the day --- maybe the nation. We trust in Palin's instincts. Her endorsements are not nearly as important as her personal beliefs.

She speaks for this editor more so than anyone out there.

25 endorsements - maybe more.

Lindsey Graham - OK, say what you will. Midknight Review has not made up its mind on this Senator. When we actually listen to Graham defend his point of view, it usually makes sense.

Carly Fiorina - comes from 3^rd to win GOP primary after Palin’s endorsement

Meg Whitman – wins GOP primary

Terry Branstad - wins Iowa gubernatorial race GOP primary. His opponent was Bob Vander Plaats, a favorite of the Tea Parties, Focus on the Family and Mike Huckabee -- a very important endorsement victory for the Governor.

Arkansas state Sen. Cecile Bledsoe - he narrowly loses

South Carolina state Rep. Nikki Haley - gubernatorial race (Haley was firmly in 4^th place in the GOP primary before Palin’s endorsement.)

Rand Paul - a GOP primary winner in Kentucky

Vaughn Ward, an Idaho House hopeful -- loses in his primary bid because of campaign problems.

Scott Brown - a disappointment to some. We think the jury is still out on this Senator.

Bob McDonnell in his successful bid for Virginia State Governor

Doug Hoffman (NY ‘s 23^rd) - Hoffman loses a very close race.

Rick Perry -- winner in his re-election bid as Texas governor.

Jan Brewer – current governor of Arizona. She is up for election this fall, as well.

Susana Martinez for Governor in New Mexico

Marsha Blackburn for Congress (Blackburn seems to be surprisingly liberal in her views. Just sayin')

Oklahoma, Mary Fallin for governor (she wins the GOP primary).

John McCain -- we understand her support here, although it sickens us to no end.

Michele Bachmann -- Minnesota US Congressional Representative. Pelosi and Comrades have decided to invest heavily in Bachmann’s defeat.

Richard Burr -- US Senator from North Carolina

John Thun - running for Senator in South Dakota

Chuck Grassley - Senator out of Iowa - a great conservative.

Gomez - for NY Congressional seat.

Jim DeMint -- Senator out of South Carolina - another great conservative influence.

Rob Portman -- for US Senate seat out of Ohio.

Sharron Angle -- US Senate seat out of Nevada against Harry Reid. Correction: apparently Palin did not endorse Angle during the primary. We received a note from one of our readers to this effect. Thanks for the correction. In fact, as late as June 18, there was no Palin endorsement. Perhaps we missed it.

Editor's note: Palin did not attend CPAC, sending a message that she intended to be her own person with the help of the “good old boys” of the GOP. Good for her.-- research and text by jds.

Also, see Texas for Sarah Palin and their list of endorsements.

cBS's Bob Schieffer looks like a good guy. Who knew he was a political bigot ???!!!

Brent Baker: Four months after leading Face the Nation with uncorroborated allegations from left-wing bloggers about racist and homophobic outbursts by anti-Obamacare protesters, spread in an effort to discredit President Obama’s opponents, CBS’s Bob Schieffer cited the Shirley Sherrod case to propound on the superiority of his fact-checking “Old Media” over the careless “New Media.”

In his commentary on Sunday, Schieffer boasted of how “we still call people involved in a story to get their side; editors fact check; and we never publish or broadcast anything unless we think it's true.” In contrast, he lectured, “last week, we saw what can happen when it's done the other way. A partisan blogger with an agenda -- not a journalist -- put the heavily edited, totally out of context, now infamous soundbite of Shirley Sherrod on the Internet. Some of the cable folk picked up the story, and demanded the woman's ouster.”

Schieffer scolded: “No calls to those involved, no checking of any kind -- just throw it out there and leave it to the woman to defend herself.” Very much like Schieffer left the conservative citizens he smeared at the top of the March 21 Face the Nation:

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/07/26/hypocritical-schieffer-lectures-superiority-old-media-over-new-media#ixzz0v2BNqzhd

Conservatives need to read the legal review at Legal Insurrection. Thoughtful and, sadly, accurate.

Arizona Law Upheld In Part - Order and Analysis Here (Update: Strikes Most Key Provisions)

. . . . The decision has to be viewed as a near complete victory for opponents of the law, as it restricts the state from routine and compulsory checks of immigration status as a matter of legislative mandate.

The decision would not, as I read it, prevent police from checking immigration status in a particular case, but would prevent a statewide system to do so.

The result of the decision will be to have a chilling effect on law enforcement officers who, in the absense of the law, would have checked immigration status based on reasonable suspicion anyway. Enforcement of immigration laws in Arizona, as a result of the decision, will be even more difficult than prior to S.B. 1070. . . .

Editor's notes: as conservatives, we must never be afraid to admit [temporary] defeat. And that is what we are doing here, in this article. The Court's decision, actually determined yesterday, but revealed today, was against the State's case. Legal Insurrection is a great site. We have only just recently featured it in our blogroll. click on the linked headline above. The analysis worth the read. -- jds.

PM Cameron spends time with Obama behind closed doors, goes to Turkey, and does his imitation of a PC Moron.

In Speech to Turkey, PM David Cameron Goes Full Idiot — Cameron gives a begging, blubbering pander of a speech to the Islamist goons in Turkey. (Also read Claudia Rosett: “Prime Minister, It's Not a ‘Prison Camp’” — British Prime Minister David Cameron's July 27 speech in Turkey will not live on in history . . . .

Editor's notes: the story, above, is found in Pajamas Media. Yes, a goofy sounding name. Perhaps that was the point, but this is a seriously large website. When you finish reading the article, you will be tempted to think of the new English Prime Minister as a majorly disturbed individual. We have nothing to add to the story except to note that the PM did not visit Turkey, a radicalized Muslim nation, until after spending some time with our president behind closed doors. Cause and effect ??? Disturbing.
.

The filibuster rule remains in effect. Here is why this is critical to the survival of the nation.

Filibuster reform is short of needed votes — Senate Democrats do not have the votes to lower the 60-vote threshold to cut off filibusters. — The lack of support among a handful of Senate Democratic incumbents is a major blow to the effort to change the upper chamber's rules. . . . .

Editor's notes: this current crop of Marxist/Socialists have done all they could to change the course of history for this great nation. Their efforts have ranged from the monumental to the minute. Healthcare is an example of the former; changing the filibuster rule is an example of the later.

Without the filibuster rule, legislation could pass through the Senate on the basis of a 51 vote majority rather than a 60 vote rule. One would think the Dems, soon to be out of power, would want to preserve this rule. In fact, they do not. Why?

Their working majority in the Senate will be weakened as a result of the midterm elections. The change in the filibuster rule would give them the ability to ram through more legislation, especially if they maintain control of the House. The effort to destroy the filibuster is an indication of future plans.

If the filibuster remains in effect and the Senate margins for the Dems are reduced, bi-partisan cooperation will be required in order to get anything done. If the filibuster is gone and the 51 vote becomes the rule, the radicalism of this current bunch of Marxist reformers will continue. A change in the filibuster rule would mean that they would, again, own a super majority in the Senate.

We all know that a total transformation of this country will happen if they are not defeated at every turn. With that in mind, this election will be more important to this nation than even the 2012 presidential election.

The filibuster change was defeated, for the time being. Will they try it again in the Lame Duck Congress? And if that happens, can they put into place the remainder of their agenda in the three short months before they are escorted out of Congress.

Understand that a change in the filibuster rule will mean that the Marxist revolution will continue, even after the elections. The Lame Duck Congress will not care who won the midterms. This is a very serious time for the United States of America because, for three months, this nation will be ruled by a group of reformers who are unaffected by public opinion.

J Smithson

Arizona Appeals Court drastically limits the effect of the Arizona law.

Editor's notes: In this morning's court decision, the Arizona Appeals Court has placed an injunction on the part of the Arizona law that requires state and local law enforcement to ask for proof of legal entry. For the time being, this portion of the Arizona law is on hold.

It appears that most of the law's content remains in force, however.

Understand that all reporting on this news item is premature, at best. It will be days before the full effect of this decision is known. For one thing, the decision needs to be read. Secondly, it needs to be interpreted and finally, it needs to be given anecdotal and theoretical application. All this will take some time.

From our vantage point, Midknight Review believes that nothing is added to the current discussion until the legal decision is fully vetted. For example, FoxNews saw more positives in the remaining law for Arizona than did CNN. In fact, if one listened to one network and then the other, he would not know which Federal Court would review the Arizona law next. FoxNews sees the 9th Circuit in review while the prognosticators at CNN (at the 10:30 am report) referenced the 10 th Circuit. As it turns out, CNN was wrong in their reporting -- something they may not know as we write this post.

In the end, it does appear that the open border opponents of the law will be somewhat pleased with this decision. All parties on both sides of the equation believe this law is destined for Supreme Court review. Further, it is clear that this legal decision has postponed a planned violent protest from the Marxists/Open Borders Crowd driving this debate. These folks are anarchists and allied with Marxist revolution the world over. If the Feds were enforcing their own immigration law, on the books since 1996, these revolutionaries would be protesting Federal involvement rather than the State's.

This is our report. We doubt the need for further clarification until we actually know more about the legal consequences of this decision. Understand that the State of Arizona is currently evaluating its stance as relates to this decision. Without this review, there is little point in further comment at this time.

Text by J Smithson

Obama's Security Exchange Commission no longer has to respond to "freedom of information" demands. You Dems must be so proud.

From FoxNews:

So much for transparency.

Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission

no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

The law, signed last week by President Obama, exempts the SEC from disclosing records or information derived from "surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities." Given that the SEC is a regulatory body, the provision covers almost every action by the agency, lawyers say. Congress and federal agencies can request information, but the public cannot. That argument comes despite the President saying that one of the cornerstones of the sweeping new legislation was more transparent financial markets. Indeed, in touting the new law, Obama specifically said it would “increase transparency in financial dealings."

The SEC cited the new law Tuesday in a FOIA action brought by FOX Business Network. Steven Mintz, founding partner of law firm Mintz & Gold LLC in New York, lamented what he described as “the backroom deal that was cut between Congress and the SEC to keep the SEC’s failures secret. The only losers here are the American public.” . . . . READ THE FULL FOX REPORT >>>>

Editor's notes: there can be no justification for secrecy within the boundaries of any Federal agency. THEY WORK FOR US and we need to send a message to these Subversives that the days of closed door negotiations and blatant secrecy are over. Those who supported the new FinReg law need to be drummed out of office for this legislation alone. The Wall Street Reform law did not address the real cause of the current financial recession (Fannie, Freddie, the Fed., and the idiocy of the Socialist/Democrat "Affordable Housing" policy), and provided protections for increased Federal control (via regulations). As far as Midknight Review is concerned, this legislation borders on criminal activity.

What we have here, is another example of an Obama lie. Understand that parts of this FinReg law may be needed, but the secrecy embedded within its wording renders the law a force for evil . . . . . . period. -- jds.

Real Clear Politics Poll : Obama disapproval numbers at 49%. As things stand today, he cannot win re-election and here is why.

Editor's notes: The RCP poll is the first national poll to put Obama's disapproval numbers at 49%. Understand that while other presidents had low approval numbers at the midterm mark of their first term, Obama's circumstance is different. He is most often compared to Clinton and Reagan.

With Clinton, the midterm disaster that put both houses of Congress in the hands of a Newt Gingrich led GOP, was countered by Clinton with a move back to the right. The move not only saved Clinton for a second term but benefited the nation in terms of accomplished bi-partisan policy. There is no indication that such will be the case for Obama. Midknight Review believes that if Obama loses his power base as it appears that he will, his partisan confrontational manner will further drive the two parties from each other. The next two years will find Obama framing the political debate in his favor. After the Lame Duck Congress is gone, the 2012 presidential election cycle will begin.

With Reagan, the economy continued to suffer coming out of the idiocy of the Carter years, his tax cuts had not yet kicked in and, like Clinton, he lost the Congress to the Dems at the first midterm. Like Clinton and because of the success of his economic policies, Reagan won reelectons in one of the most one sided elections in history.

Neither Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan came to the White House as novice politicians. Both men were long term governors and understood the nature and importance of bi-partisan behavior and the fickleness of public opinion. Obama understands neither and has no administrative experience whatsoever.

And why would Obama be anything but partisan. He is a Marxist/Liberationist revolutionary who came into office with a majority in both houses, a majority he interpreted as allowing him to ignore the "opposition. And he governed in precisely that manner.

His agenda was far more important to him than getting along with the other side or, as it turned out, the will and desires of the people. Such is the nature of a committed revolutionary. As an example, he promised his Mexican constituency "comprehensive immigration legislation" by the end of his first year. While he could have accomplished this, he chose, rather, to reward his supporters (unions, bankers buds and individual politicians) with TARP money (trillions of dollars), the February Stimulus, the Spring '09 Omnibus allocation ($460 billion), donations to the Muslim organization in Gaza ($1.3 billion in two gifts) and the concerted effort at taking over healthcare. As a result, he lost 20% of his Hispanic voting base with no indication that he will be able to bring these folks back into the fold.

With Independents, his campaign numbers included a 57% approval within their ranks. Some publications have this total as high as 65%. He has lost a full 20 percentage points with these folks and cannot win reelection unless he repairs this breech. Independents constitute nearly 40% of the electorate (which equals more than 20 million votes using '08 election numbers as a baseline) and vote their pocket book. More than any other polling demographic, this is the single most important number and in all polls, the Independent approval numbers for Obama hover around 35%. This is in contrast to the national approval number of 44%.

Clinton and Reagan lost in the popular opinon market, but hung onto the Independents. Obama has not. The coming midterm elections will tell us all just how serious this exodus is to Democrat electability.

Understand that Independents are an extremely fickle bunch. If the economy where to turn around during the next two years and Obama recovered his losses within this segment of the population, he would have a chance to win reelection.

What we all forget is this: Mr Obama promised the Moon during his first campaign but violated all of his major promises including taxation of the middle class, GITMO, the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, recovery of the economy (jobs), the Public Option, Cap and Trade (the Marxist version of "environmental" law) comprehensive immigration legislation, deficit reduction, transparency reform, line by line spending review and cuts and the end of partisan rule. He will not be able to make such promises again. No one will believe.

Further, let's not forget that he won election by only 6.5 % (9 million plus votes) after spending twice the money of the McCain camp and having the major Marxist media at his beck and call. As things stand today, he cannot win reelection even if running against Joe Biden.

(C) J David Smithson
Midknight Review

Appease the Left and allow the secret documents to be aired. That was Obama's plan. Time will tell if it worked.

WH: No attempt to stop WikiLeaks news reports
WASHINGTON (AP) - The White House says it didn't try to stop news organizations who had access to secret U.S. military documents from publishing reports about the leaks. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs says he met with reporters from The New York Times, one of the outlets with the documents,...

Editor's notes: Gibbs also tells us that Obama knew of the leaks a week before they made the news; that the White House thought they were problematic but saw nothing that was not previously known. Military leadership disagreed and some in Congress believe the release of these documents is nothing short of treason. Understand that the release of these documents is part of an effort to press criminal charges as relates to the Iraqi war by Congressional leaders who unanimously approved of that war. These clowns think that one can start a war and then simply appologize for that action after the war has begun and young men and women have died.

Obama's decision to not oppose the revelations must be seen for what it is -- an effort to appease the hardcore Left after disappointing them on a number of issues. Bush and Cheney will never be "brought up on charges." Nor will there ever be any criminal prosecutions for "crimes against humanity." It just is not going to happen. For one thing, the Dems will not have the power to pursue this type of action after the midterms.

Target Corp begins a process the Dems fear the most -- donations from their enemies !!!

Target Corp. defends Minn. political donation
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - Target Corp. on Tuesday defended the use of its new freedom to spend money on political campaigns as employees and gay organizations criticized a $150,000 donation that will help a Minnesota GOP gubernatorial candidate who opposes gay marriage. Chief Executive Officer Gregg...

Editor's notes: the Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. FEC , that drew the ire of the Marxists currently in power, gave Target the opportunity to [finally] have a say in what goes on its world -- as it should be.

Mass. votes to bypass the Electoral College. In so doing, they oppose the benefit of the minority, as well.

By Martin Finucane, Boston Globe Staff

The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.

Supporters are campaigning, state by state, to get such bills enacted. Once states accounting for a majority of the electoral votes (or 270 of 538) have enacted the laws, the candidate winning the most votes nationally would be assured a majority of Electoral College votes. That would hold true no matter how the other states vote and how their electoral votes are distributed.

Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland, and Washington have already approved the legislation, according to the National Popular Vote campaign's website. The new system would only go into effect once a sufficient number of states have passed laws that would make it work. . . . . READ MORE >>>>

Editor's notes: not to worry --- 3/4 of the States need to ratify such a change not to mention a 2/3 vote in each house of Congress. Ain't going to happen. Without the Electoral College, candidates would campaign in the 20 largest population centers in this nation and the election would be won in that fashion. Without the Electoral College, it would be just a matter of time before certain states in the union and whole population centers would no longer matter when it came time to choose a president.

Understand that ours is not a "democracy." It is a representative republic. Democracies do not represent the will of the minority because the minority, by definition, never wins an election. Socialist leaders always tout the benefits of "democracy" because in a democracy, the opportunity for social revolution is most effectively presented. The majority rules the minority and, in time, the majority gives it power over to a leadership that only cares for itself -- ala, Iran, N Korea, China, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia and any number of countries within Africa.

Point and counter point for balance in the world of political propaganda.

From the left leaning Wikipedia:

The Center for American Progress was criticized by conservative commentators for its 2007 report titled "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio."^[17] The report states: "Our analysis ... of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive." The report did not include analysis of the content of other radio providers, such as universities and public radio. The report suggests three steps to increase progressive radio voices in talk radio: restoring local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations; ensuring greater local accountability over radio licensing; and require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.

Some open government groups, such as the Sunlight Foundation and the Campaign Legal Center, criticize the Center's failure to disclose its contributors, particularly since it is so influential in appointments to the Obama administration.^[18][19]. . . . . READ MORE IF YOU CARE TO >>>

Editor's notes: what we have here is the rhetorical strategy for limiting conservative talk radio. There are a number of missteps within the above statement. These "missteps" are intentional and done with the hope of framing the debate in the favor of the Left. They include the following:

There are actually some 700 stations carrying talk radio but only 257 were singled out, most if not all have non-stop conservative talk. The other 400 plus ? They include stations with non-conservative programing as well as liberal talk.

No mention is made of the televised media. Here, the Progressive Marxist Media dominates news broadcasting time. If talk radio is attacked for imbalance, conservatives will defend their status by pointing to this serious inequity. For example, Fox News stands alone against CNN, HLN, MSNBC, Current T.V.

Also, the Marxist Progressives make no mention of the serious imbalance existing in the world of print media. Virtually all major-city-papers are left leaning.

Another area overlooked but mentioned are the radio outlets of universities and public radio. This editor lives 3 hours south of San Francisco. One of our son's graduated from the University of California at San Francisco Medical Center, one of the more prestigious teaching hospitals in the nation. When we traveled to the Gay City, we were always surprised to find public radio on perhaps 10 different stations with no local conservative talk to be found on the radio dial. In LA, the choices between conservative and liberal talk, including NPR stations favors the Left but only marginally. Ditto for Sacramento in the north and San Diego in the south.

We have a lawyer son in Washington State. Our trips to his part of the country finds a majority of stations presenting the liberal agenda.

Which brings to mind this consideration: if we contrast the number of people who have access to conservative or liberal radio talk, what would be the results. All of the population centers on the West Coast have more access to liberal talk than conservative, but conservative is well represented. We suspect this would be the case in all of the nation's major population centers, as well.

Let's not leave out university talk. You live in Lala Land if you think that conservative talk is given equal time on our campus situations.

Midknight Review does not believe it would be to the advantage of the Dems to push this issue. The counter push would be a demand for equal time in all venues. Conservatives would think this a positive event.

Point of post: as to balance, radio influence would not be the only battle ground. Network televised news wold be included. Population counts, university influence and print media would come into play as well. To our liberal imperialists opponents, we say, BRING IT ON.

(C) J David Smithson
Midknight Review