Who will Obama prosecute first, the Bush Administration or Al-Qaeda?

Here is where this is going and the left will not be satisfied until they complete their own mission accomplished.


Let me state this loud and clear, Barack Hussein Obama is not American enough to be President. He has shallow roots in this country. He was given a pass by the American people because he is black. He had no qualifications in leadership. He is not fit to serve as Commander in Chief. The first affirmative action president has the gall to attack real Americans that rose to the occasion to do what had to be done to protect our country. His actions and hints of prosecution against his betters deserve rebuke, contempt and will tear this country apart.

Pentagon computer system hacked. F-35 info stolen. Don't wait for the outrage.

Hackers steal JSF data from Pentagon computers
Published: Tuesday 21 April 2009 10:16 UTC
Last updated: Tuesday 21 April 2009 10:16 UTC Radio Netherlands

Hackers have stolen information on the Joint Strike Fighter from the Pentagon computer system. In The Wall Street Journal, US government officials say the computer system has been broken into several times in the last two years.

The hackers targeted companies involved in the development of the JSF. Although it is unclear what information was stolen, countries could use the information to improve their defences against the new fighter plane.

The JSF is America's most expensive defence project ever. The Netherlands is also considering buying the JSF to replace its F-16 fleet.

The homosexual thought police strangle-hold tightens.

"I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody there. But that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be" - Carrie Prejean

Gay is such a nice word, or it used to be... In true Orwellian fashion, it has been seized by the sad in the Homosexual community who wanted the right to be free in America.

A beautiful young (dare I say, once thought to be normal) American woman expresses the radical notion that marriage is between a man and woman and best left that way.

That impure, non-gay thought , offended a normally gay but now sad beauty queen judge, who is surely at a minimum a queen judge. Miss Prejean loses, because the once aberrant, but now mainstream queen, was visibly shaken, by the thought of marriage being a state sanctioned union between a man and a woman.

Still got hope?

_________________

Miss USA stirs controversy


The Internet was buzzing Monday about a Miss USA controversy.
Detroit Free Press

First runner-up Carrie Prejean (Miss California) was asked about legalizing same-sex marriage from judge Perez Hilton, the Internet blogger behind perezhilton.com.

"I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody there. But that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be," Prejean said during Sunday night's live telecast.

Hilton was visibly upset, and there was a mixed reaction from the live audience. Prejean ultimately came up short, losing the title to Miss North Carolina, Kristen Dalton.

On Monday, Keith Lewis, the executive director for Miss California USA/Teen USA, said he was saddened by Prejean's response.

This is the visibly upset judge, Perez Hilton, who was offended.

The Left wants to seize gun rights because you did not vote for Obama

Dionne seems to argue that polls trump the Constitution. He further argues that since Obama did not get the majority of votes from gun-owning households and that, by implication, gives him the right to take away constitutionally guaranteed rights.

Had McCain won the election and since blacks voted 93% for Obama, would it have been OK to ignore their rights?

It sure doesn't seem to take much to qualify to write a column for the Washington Post. Read this:

..."Obama, at least, should understand this: He was not elected by the gun lobby. It worked hard to rally gun owners against him -- and failed to stop him.

According to a 2008 exit poll, Obama received support from just 37 percent among voters in households where guns are present -- barely more than John Kerry's 36 percent in 2004. But among the substantial majority of households that don't have guns, Obama got 65 percent, up eight points from Kerry. Will Obama stand up for the people who actually voted for him?"

______________________________________

Who Will Face Down the Gun Lobby?
By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Monday, April 20, 2009

Try to imagine that hundreds or thousands of guns, including assault weapons, were pouring across the Mexican border into Arizona, New Mexico and Southern California, arming criminal gangs who were killing American law enforcement officials and other U.S. citizens.

Then imagine the Mexican president saying, "Well, we would really like to do something about this, but our political system makes helping you very difficult." Wouldn't Mexico's usual critics attack that country's political system for corruption and ineptitude and ask: "Why can't they stop this lawlessness?"

That, in reverse, is the position President Obama was in last week when he visited Mexico. The Mexican gangs are able to use guns purchased in the United States because of our insanely permissive gun regulations, and Obama had to make this unbelievably clotted, apologetic statement at a news conference with Mexican President Felipe Calderón:

"I continue to believe that we can respect and honor the Second Amendment rights in our Constitution, the rights of sportsmen and hunters and homeowners who want to keep their families safe, to lawfully bear arms, while dealing with assault weapons that, as we know, here in Mexico, are helping to fuel extraordinary violence. Violence in our own country as well. Now, having said that, I think none of us are under the illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy."

In other words: Our president can deal with all manner of big problems, but the American gun lobby is just too strong to let him push a rational and limited gun regulation through Congress.

It's particularly infuriating that Obama offered this statement of powerlessness just a few days before today's 10th anniversary of the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado -- and just after a spree of mass homicides across the United States took the lives of least 57 people.

No other democratic country in the world has the foolish, ineffectual gun regulations that we do. And, unfortunately, what Obama said is probably true.

Earlier this year, when Attorney General Eric Holder called for a renewal of the ban on assault weapons -- he was only repeating a commitment Obama made during the presidential campaign -- the response from a group of 65 pro-gun House Democrats was: No way.

Their letter to Holder was absurd. "The gun-control community has intentionally misled many Americans into believing that these weapons are fully automatic machine guns. They are not. These firearms fire one shot for every pull of the trigger." Doesn't that make you feel better?

Those Democrats should sit down with Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania. "Time and time again, our police are finding themselves outgunned," Rendell said in Harrisburg last week. "They are finding themselves with less firepower than the criminals they are trying to bring to justice."

The Democratic governor told his own state's legislators that if they didn't support such a ban, "then don't come to those memorial services" for the victims of gun violence. "It's wrong," he said. "It's hypocritical."

And why can't we at least close the gun show loophole? Licensed dealers have to do background checks on people who buy guns. The rules don't apply at gun shows, which, as the Violence Policy Center put it, have become "Tupperware Parties for Criminals."

But too many members of Congress are "petrified" of the gun lobby, says Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), a crusader for sane gun legislation ever since her husband was killed and her son paralyzed by a gunman on the Long Island Rail Road in 1993.

Family members of the victims of gun violence, she says, are mystified by Congress's inability to pass even the most limited regulations. "Why can't you just get this done?" she is asked. "What is it you don't understand?"

Obama, at least, should understand this: He was not elected by the gun lobby. It worked hard to rally gun owners against him -- and failed to stop him.

According to a 2008 exit poll, Obama received support from just 37 percent among voters in households where guns are present -- barely more than John Kerry's 36 percent in 2004. But among the substantial majority of households that don't have guns, Obama got 65 percent, up eight points from Kerry. Will Obama stand up for the people who actually voted for him?

Yes, I understand about swing voters, swing states, the priority of the economy and all that. But given Congress's default to the apologists for loose gun laws, it will take a president to make something happen.

Obama gathers cabinet to save 14 minutes of federal spending per year.

Thanks Dad.

The headlines read: "Obama to gather Cabinet, seeking $100 million in cuts"

Here is the good news: Two top administration officials say president wants $100 million in expenses cut. Agencies would have to report how they saved on expenses after 90 days.

Here is the fine print: House and Senate returns from recess this week to work on $3.67 trillion Obama budget request.


Here is the context: $3.67 Trillion is $3,670 Billion. The Obama team proposes to spend $10 Billion a day. That amounts to $7 million per minute.

Listen up, Obama is going to be spending $7 million per minute, each and every minute, 24/7 for 365. He is gathering his cabinet to see how they can cut 14 minutes of government spending per year.

We now learn that The Department of Homeland Security plans to save $52 million over five years by purchasing office supplies in bulk.

Just so you know that I shit you not, here is how CNN reports the 14 minutes of savings:

Obama to gather Cabinet, seeking $100 million in cuts

CNN, By Suzanne Malveaux

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama returned to Washington on Sunday night with his eye back on his domestic agenda and a plan to save government money.


President Obama arrives by Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House on Sunday.

On Monday, Obama will gather his full Cabinet together for the first time as president and challenge it to cut a total of $100 million in the next 90 days, two senior administration officials said.

The officials spoke anonymously because the announcement had yet to come from the president, who returned Sunday from the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago.

The agencies would have to report how they saved on expenses after 90 days, the officials said.

A senior administration official described the edict as part of Obama's "commitment to go line by line through the budget to cut spending" and "reform the government."

As House and Senate lawmakers return from recess this week, they are expected to start reconciling their versions of the fiscal 2010 budget resolution. The president's budget request is $3.67 trillion.


In context of the federal budget, $100 million in savings is a small amount, but the White House wants to demonstrate fiscal responsibility.

On Monday, Obama will offer examples of how various agencies have started cost-cutting measures, including:

• The Department of Homeland Security's plan to save an estimated $52 million over five years by purchasing office supplies in bulk.

• The Department of Agriculture's effort to consolidate 1,500 employees from seven locations into a single facility in 2011. It's estimated to save $62 million over a 15-year lease.

• The Veterans Affairs Department's move to cancel or delay 26 conferences, saving nearly $17.8 million. Veterans Affairs also will use video-conferencing to cut costs.

Antony and Cleopatra

Egypt, thou knew'st too well: is Cleopatra's final secret out?
Archaeologists believe they are on brink of discovering queen's final resting place

By Kunal Dutta
Monday, 20 April 2009 Independent

Just as he did fictitiously with Romeo and Juliet, William Shakespeare immortalised Antony and Cleopatra as a tragic tale of a defeated couple. But unlike Verona's star-crossed lovers, Marc Antony and Cleopatra's final resting place has remained a mystery.

Now archaeologists believe they are on the cusp of a conclusive discovery. Three sites buried deep underneath the crumbling limestone of a 2,000-year-old temple are thought to contain a series of complex systems of tunnels which archaeologists believe could lead to the tomb of the two lovers.

And to prove it, Zahi Hawass, director of Egypt's Superior Council for Antiquities, showcased a range of items yesterday that have been found at the site at Burg El-Arab, nearAlexandria. They include 22 coins bearing Cleopatra's image, a fragment of a mask – with a cleft chin which he believes could belong to Antony – and 10 mummies of apparent nobles. "The discovery of the cemetery this week really convinced me that there is someone important buried inside this temple," he said. "No one would be buried outside a temple without a reason. We saw in the pharaonic days, they were always buried beside pyramids."

Urging caution, he added: "If you look at the face of Mark Antony, many believed he had this cleft on his chin and that's why I thought this could be him."

The discoveries follow excavations that started last week on three sites along the tunnels by teams from Egypt and the Dominican Republic. It is hoped that one of the deep shafts, identified by a radar scan, will lead to a burial chamber where the tomb will be found. Dr Hawass believes that the tomb could be "bigger than that of King Tutankhamen's", discovered in 1922.

It was more than two millennia ago when Mark Antony and Cleopatra challenged Caesar Augustus for control of the Roman Empire. Their armies were defeated and in 30 BC, rather than surrender, the two lovers committed suicide – Mark Antony by his sword, and Cleopatra with a poisonous asp.

The Roman historian Plutarch said Caesar allowed the two lovers to be buried together, but thelocation of their tomb was kept secret. "If this tomb is found, it will be one of the most important discoveries of the 21st century because of the love between Cleopatra and Mark Antony, and because of the sad story of his death," said Dr Hawass.

Kathleen Martinez, the Dominican archaeologist who has been working at the site for the past three years, said the Taposiris Magna temple was chosen after 12 years of studying the life of Cleopatra. Describing it as the "most sacred temple of its time", she argued that the lovers were "buried in a temple rather than a public tomb to protect them from the Romans".

But John Baines, an Egyptologist at Oxford University asked why Augustus, who defeated Antony, would have chosen such a distinguished burial place. "I don't see a particular connection between that site and Antony and Cleopatra," he said.

Several discoveries have already been made at the site. Last year, archaeologists unearthed a bronze statue of the goddess Aphrodite, the alabaster head of a Queen Cleopatra statue and another mask believed to belong to Mark Antony.

For most, Cleopatra will forever be imagined as the stunning seductress portrayed by Elizabeth Taylor, opposite Richard Burton in the 1963 Hollywood classic Cleopatra.

However, academics from the University of Newcastle recently poured cold water on this, claiming that the Egyptian Queen was a pointy-nosed, thin-lipped woman with a jutting jaw. Dr Hawass believes that the discovery of the coins that show Cleopatra with an "attractive" face, argued otherwise. "The findings reflect a charm ... and indicate that Cleopatra was in no way unattractive," he said.

Is spending billions and billions for high speed rail a good idea?

The reality of train travel.

The idea a minute crowd in the Obama administration has seized on to the idea of high speed rail as a transportation solution. I assume this has the backing of Joe Biden, who has been using Amtrak for twenty years and has never spent five cents of his own money doing so.

He also has a driver meet him at the station in Washington, gets to the office when he feels like it, and Union Station is within blocks of the Senate. Driving into and out of DC is a nightmare and taking the train from Philadelphia or Wilmington makes sense. Unfortunately that is the exception and not the rule.

In order to have high speed rail in America, a lot has to change. The first thing is new track has to be put down. It is unsafe, unwise and impractical to have passenger and freight sharing the same track. Passenger service to be effective requires speed and convenience of schedule. Freight requires inexpensive transport and many transfer points.

A successful inter city system between New York and Washington make sense if you are going from Georgetown to Manhattan, but what if your final stop is in Queens, Brooklyn or the Bronx. That requires transfers to some fairly unpleasant stations and subway trains, where there is neither glamour nor romance and often inconvenience of schedules.

Wishing they were in an SUV?

What if it rains or snows or you miss a connection?

It is next to impossible to go from station to station and still be convenient to and from your home to your destination which  may be blocks or miles away from the high speed station. No high speed line will offer the convenience, privacy, comfort and safety of your own automobile. No train will match the speed of an airplane.

The only way high speed train service makes sense is to open new satellite cities for development, and that is centralized planning on a massive scale and has nothing to do with time or fuel efficiency. Just the opposite may be true. You very well may end up with more development, more destruction of the natural environment and ironically more automobile traffic in areas where today there is little.

This idea is best forgotten.

More Susan Boyle