1) Obama Could Attack Rush Without Fairness Doctrine... Democrats/Facism
2) Economic Meltdown Could Threaten Chinese Regime... China/Economy
3) Obama’s 'Birth Certificate' Deception Exposed... Obama/Secrets
4) Swing State Voter Fraud Crosses Country... Democrat/Voter Fraud
5) How Obama blocked the wealth generators in Pueblo, Colorado... Obama/Economy
6) FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate... Liberal Lies/Depression
7) The Election The Media Won.. USA/Democracy/Media
8) Saul Alinsky Takes the White House... Far Left Liberalism/Election
9) Court to decide whether campus evangelism a crime... Christianity/Education/Freedom of Speech


1) Obama Could Attack Rush Without Fairness Doctrine... Democrats/Facism
e-mail alert

Barack Obama has said he won’t seek to reinstate the so-called Fairness Doctrine requiring broadcasters over the public airwaves to give equal time to opposing political views. But he could instead mount a "far more dangerous attack" on free speech and conservative talk radio, a media watchdog discloses.

The tactic: Using a vague rule already on the books to threaten any radio station that airs conservative programs with the loss of it broadcast license, according to Jim Boulet Jr., founder of the Web site KeepRushontheAir.com.

The Federal Communication Commission rule in question is called “localism,” and it requires radio and TV stations to serve the interests of their local community — by covering local issues and providing an outlet for local voices — as a condition of keeping their licenses. Writing on the American Thinker Web site, Boulet observes: “Obama needs only three votes from the five-member FCC to define localism in such a way that no radio station would dare air any syndicated conservative programming,” such as Rush Limbaugh’s top-rated show.

In September 2007, Obama submitted a statement supporting localism to an FCC hearing. The head of his transition team is John Podesta, whose organization, the Center for American Progress, issued a report last year complaining that there is too much conservative talk on the radio because of “the absence of localism in American radio markets” and urging the FCC to “ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.”

Podesta’s choice as head of the FCC’s transition team is Henry Rivera, whose law firm is also the former home of current FCC Chairman Kevin Martin — himself an advocate of more stringent localism requirements, Boulet points out. He warns that a single complaint from anyone can hinder a station’s license renewal process or even lead to the loss of the license. To protect free speech and conservative talk radio, “station owners need to become engaged in the localism issue and then take the time to educate their own congressman and senators about the dangers of the FCC’s proposals,” Boulet urges.

“If broadcasters get involved, it just may be possible to block implementation of any localism rules during the few months remaining of the Bush administration. “This delay is critical, since once it is the Obama administration leading the fight for rules which would shut down conservative talk radio, Republican congressmen and senators will find it easier to fight back.”

Me: We can expect the Democrats to seek means to silence their political foes. They have always done with while speaking with forked tongues about embracing free speech they then seek to silence those who they disagree with. For the average liberal they are ok with this kind of activity. As for the method used be it a "Fairness Doctrine" or "Localism" or audits or hate crime laws or what ever method they will take out their revenge.


2) Economic Meltdown Could Threaten Chinese Regime... China/Economy
e-mail alert

After years of stupendous economic growth, China is suffering a downturn that has sparked widespread labor protests and could ultimately threaten the Chinese regime. Some 10,000 factories have closed in the Pearl River Delta, a manufacturing center in southern China, and angry workers — many owed back pay — have taken to the streets in protest. In one incident, around 300 suppliers and creditors attacked a factory whose owners had vanished, “looting warehouses in the hopes of salvaging something,” USA Today reported. This unrest is likely to spread, according to China-watching writer Joshua Kurlantzick, and “could mean the breakdown of the entire political order.”

Writing in The New Republic, Kurlantzick observes, “For years, the Beijing regime has stayed in power using a basic bargain with its citizens — tolerate our authoritarian rule and we’ll make you rich. And for years, this seemed to work . . . “But as the financial crisis shows, that bargain rests on weak foundations. And if Beijing breaks its end of the deal, its people, already holding rising numbers of protests, may well break theirs.” Newsmax reported that the Chinese government announced a $586 billion economic stimulus package, seeking to boost its economy through a mix of spending, subsidies, looser credit policies, and tax cuts. But the signs remain ominous, according to Kurlantzick:

... Foreign orders for Chinese products are plummeting, and exports account for 40 percent of the country’s gross domestic product — compared to 10 percent for the U.S. for most years.

... In addition to the 10,000 factories already shuttered in the Pearl River Delta, another 20,000 are likely to close by next summer, and worker demonstrations — some of them violent — are spreading, Radio Free Asia disclosed.

... In one main exporting city, Wenzhou, about 20 percent of the workforce has been idled, Reuters reported.

... In the third quarter of 2008, China reported its fifth consecutive quarterly drop in growth, and a sharper slowdown is forecast for next year.

... The Shanghai stock market has dropped from 6,000 points to just over 1,800 in the past year, dwarfing the downturn in U.S. stocks.

... Chinese banks are said to be holding some $1 trillion in bad loans.

... The value of homes — the only major asset held by many Chinese — has dropped more than 50 percent in some cities within the past year.

Kurlantzick concludes, “China has granted enough freedoms that average Chinese now demand wages, fair housing, and other rights. So, unless Beijing can get its economy going again, [China is] likely to face the first sustained wave of protests in decades [and] its first serious threat to the regime.” Ironically, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao recently said rich nations must abandon their "unsustainable lifestyle."

Me: So I guess China isn't doing all that well.


3) Obama’s 'Birth Certificate' Deception Exposed... Obama/Secrets
http://www.therant.us/daily_columns/11012008.htm

November 1, 2008
Over the past few weeks there has been a firestorm of controversy surrounding the question of whether or not Barack Obama is truly a citizen of the United States. The problem this issue causes for Barrack is that the Constitution only allows natural born citizens of the United States to run for the nation’s highest office. His questionable status in this regard puts a dent in his credibility and has affected how many people will vote on Tuesday. When the first ripples of this controversy started to reverberate during this election, the Obama camp released a copy of his birth certificate in order to end any questions about his constitutional right to run for President. A copy of this birth certificate is displayed below:



The New Media Journal has gained possession of a copy of a Hawaii birth certificate from the same year that Barack was born; 1961. As the reader will see, this certificate is dramatically different from the one that Mr. Obama is claiming is the proof of his birth. The birth certificate shown below was provided to the New Media Journal by a source that prefers to remain anonymous. All their personal information has been removed at their request. The reason for this is that they fear reprisals from Obama surrogates. Here is the copy of genuine Hawaii birth certificate from 1961:



The difference between what Barack is claiming is his birth certificate and this 1961 original are striking. Barack should have to answer the question about why the document he provided is so much different from a legitimate Hawaii birth certificate, and why he can’t produce a genuine original copy. Until he answers these questions, people will continue to question his right to run for President.

Me: And what is the big deal? It is just a birth certificate why the secrets?


4) Swing State Voter Fraud Crosses Country... Democrat/Voter Fraud
http://palestra.net/blogs/read/18083

2008-11-03
Obama campaign staffers are voting in swing states across the county – and it appears they are bypassing state residency requirements. Palestra.net’s voter fraud investigation started in Ohio where the law entitles only permanent residents, who intend to remain in the state, the right to vote in Ohio. In the past two weeks, 14 temporary Obama staffers who registered to vote have withdrawn their ballots. The individuals did not meet the legal requirements to cast a ballot in Ohio. When this was brought to their attention, they pulled their ballots. The Prosecuting attorney believes this was a misunderstanding by some “very excited and loyal volunteers.”

On Thursday October 30, Palestra.net turned our attention west to New Mexico. We found a former California delegate to the Democratic National Convention, Shayne Adamski, registered to vote in Albuquerque. New Mexico’s Secretary of State, Mary Herrera (D), said she would turn Adamski’s information over to the FBI to investigate. Two swing states with similar stories sparked my curiosity. So I checked into the other prominent states in play: North Carolina, Florida, Missouri, Virginia and Nevada. The trend continued. From swing state to swing state, some out-of-state campaigners are casting ballots without following election law.

Meet Farah Minwalla, an Obama field organizer in North Carolina. She registered to vote in Mecklenburg County, NC on October 4. According to county auditor reports, the address Minwalla used belongs to a Wanda Nabors. But oddly – Minwalla is also registered to vote in New York AND Nevada. All three registrations are listed as active. So, is she a resident of North Carolina, Nevada or New York? Technically, it appears she could vote in all three. Minwalla's online bio for NextGenNow says she is currently pursuing a degree in English and Journalism in New York City. As recently as July, Minwalla wrote a review for a band in Brooklyn, but now she's registered to vote in swing state North Carolina. The latest RealClearPolitics poll shows Obama ahead by 0.3 percent, in New York Obama leads by 29.7 percent. As I’ve heard so often from campaigners, every vote counts.

I called Minwalla's cell phone on Sunday and she answered. When I asked when she arrived in North Carolina and why she registered, she handed the phone to an Obama spokesperson. The Obama spokesperson took my questions but gave me no answers. North Carolina election law says you must be a permanent resident to vote. Let's travel a little further south to Florida. In September, Julietta Appleton took a leave of absence from work to support Obama. On a TravelObama.org posting Appleton writes, "I knew Florida was a swing state…and I am fluent in Spanish. So I left my job (unpaid) for 6 weeks." She moved to Miami to get out the vote. Now, she's out of money and requesting help to get back to New York. Appleton’s post continues, "The next four days I will be working 24/7, then celebrating victory, then resting for a day, and then flying home to NY." Appleton included a picture of herself voting for Obama in Miami. Florida election laws only allow permanent residents to vote.

Warren Throckmorton (see link above) discovered Appleton's story on TravelObama.org – a site devoted to matching swing state volunteers in need of money with donors willing to cover their expenses. Have other individuals used this site to mirror Appleton's own story? Crossing the country to Missouri now, we meet William Jay Urquhart. Will is a field organizer for the Obama campaign in Missouri. Along with getting out the vote, Urquhart decided to register to cast a vote of his own in Boone County. His current cell phone has a Washington, D.C. area code. I called the number, left a message and sent him an email. No response.

Missouri election laws are almost exactly the same as Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and New Mexico. All of these swing states have the same guidelines in determining residency – you must be a resident, a resident is defined by the intent to remain in the state permanently or to return to it when you leave. In other words, where you tell people you are from and where you tell people you voted, should be the same place. Further, in these states, election law states you cannot gain residency by temporarily working in the state. Did I mention voting records show Urquhart is also registered to vote in Massachusetts? I found voter registration records of a William Jay Urquhart registered to vote in Connecticut and Massachussets. Is this the same individual? If not, William please contact me so we can straighten this out.

Virginia last elected a Democratic president in 1964. Obama's campaign is emphasizing the state known as "the Mother of Presidents" so much, that his final rally will take place in Manassas Park. When I tried to cross check names of out-of-state campaigners and volunteers with the state voter registration database, I hit a wall. The database required name, locality, date of birth and the last four numbers of an individual's social security number to access so checking or verifying information is near impossible. While there may be a lack of access to information, there's no shortage of out-of-state volunteers trying to 'turn Virginia blue.' A July 24 Washington Post article entitled, "Obama Seeks Out-of-State Volunteers" states Obama's campaign is calling for out-of-state support, despite its claims that 10,000 volunteers are already active in Virginia. Obama Voter Protection Program, Counsel for Change is the mirror group to a Facebook group for lawyers in Ohio. The founder for the Ohio Facebook group, James Cadogan, graduated from Princeton and Columbia then practiced law in New York City. This year, Cadogan registered to vote in Ohio. After Palestra.net's investigations, Cadogan withdrew his ballot. The Virginia Counsel for Change group has 213 members. Are any of them following in Cadogan's footsteps?

Nevada is a bit of an outlier. The swing state’s law only requires a 30-day residency to vote. I didn't find a clause that mentions intent to remain or the requirement of permanency. According to the campaign’s "Drive for Change" website, "Barack needs support not just from all Nevadans, but also from Nevada's neighbors – especially California. This is the chance for Californians to have a major impact on this historic race." So, technically the many Southern Californians helping to get out the vote in swing state Nevada could vote in Nevada – as long as they stay for 30 days. It all appears legal. As for the McCain campaign, the numbers aren’t there. Anecdotal evidence and my personal experience of visiting campaign offices around the country do not reflect the same efficient grassroots, get-out-the-vote machine. But we have been looking and we will continue to look. Tomorrow is Election Day and Palestra.net doesn't have the time or resources to document every individual voting in every swing state. But something is going on and for every person I profiled, I have additional names in queue. Out-of-state temporary campaign workers are registering and voting in swing states around the country without meeting the letter of Election law. Election Day is tomorrow, what do we do now?

Me: And you wonder how the democrats can suddenly find all sorts of votes during recounts? The create them. Democrat fraud in elections isn't new and is far more common then fraud on the other side. ACORN is a central player in this but they are by far not alone. Now unlike the Democrats I will not say McCain had the election stolen from him... I am not a liberal and thusly in no need of a lie. But I will point out that the Democrats are two faced hypocrites when they claim elections were taken from them.


5) How Obama blocked the wealth generators in Pueblo, Colorado... Obama/Economy
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/03/how-obama-blocked-the-wealth-generators-in-pueblo-colorado/

November 3, 2008
Barack Obama held a campaign event in Pueblo, Colorado over the weekend. The entire city was shut down — and many businesses were prevented from opening. As Obama reminded the nation during his amber waves grain infomercial last week, people are hurting. Obama made them hurt even more. Welcome to spreading the wealth by blocking wealth generation. How did he compensate the small business people impeded from making money? By giving them tickets! Narcissus shrugged:

""Barack and Michelle Obama will be in Pueblo Saturday. They will hold a rally at 3 p.m in the Union Avenue district. But the doors to some of those businesses will be closed. For security reasons the secret service has ordered some of them to shut down from 10 a.m. To 5 p.m. Saturday. But some owners say they lost money Friday, too, because of construction work to build platforms and stages. “You shouldn’t just meet Joe the plumber, meet Julie the salon owner, who is mad that you closed me and ten of my girls down for two days,” said Julie Aragon, owner of Studio 127 salon on Union Ave. Aragon and other business owners estimate they’ll lose hundreds of dollars Saturday because of the secret service restrictions. “I can’t even open my door tomorrow,” said Rhonda Murry, the owner of an antique shop on Union Ave. Murry spent $150 to attract customers in town this weekend for a large antique fair. “This was a big antique weekend and we’ve lost our revenue for basically two days,” said Murry.

The small business owners in the area wanted to know–”Who planned this?” said Aragon. According to the city of Pueblo, the Obama campaign selected this site. The campaign office wouldn’t comment on their site selection process, but members of the Obama campaign gave the affected business owners VIP tickets to the rally to make up for the inconvenience. For some, that wasn’t enough. “Although it may be a nice picture on the wall, how is that going to change our financial status, it doesn’t,” said Terre Heath, owner of Studio 127 salon on Union Ave.""

Ross Kaminsky and Face the State hear from Democrat Sheila Conlee, a Pueblo business owner who protested Obama and was shut down and shut up:

""Sheila Conlee, proprietor of Amore Antiques & More, is one such aggrieved business owner. She tells us this weekend is typically one of her busiest, as Pueblo plays host to a twice-annual antiques fair. The only problem is, she had no choice but to shutter her shop for the day. So, as any good patriot is wont to do, Conlee exercised her First Amendment rights in protest. She adorned the front windows of her shop with signs exclaiming, “I am Sheila the Shop Owner and I lost my wages today thanks to you Obama”, “Socialism is not Democratic,” and “I am Proud of my Country.” The Obama campaign didn’t take the criticism lightly. Event setup crews parked two porta-potties in front of Conlee’s store, using them to anchor a white tarp hung to obscure the storefront from view. “I guess this is a sign of things to come if he is elected,” wrote Conlee in a Sunday e-mail to FTS.""

Yup, just more gangland tactics from the Obama machine.

Me: This is the great and powerful Obama.


6) FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate... Liberal Lies/Depression
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx

8/10/2004
Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt. After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years. "Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

In an article in the August issue of the Journal of Political Economy, Ohanian and Cole blame specific anti-competition and pro-labor measures that Roosevelt promoted and signed into law June 16, 1933. "President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services," said Cole, also a UCLA professor of economics. "So he came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies."

Using data collected in 1929 by the Conference Board and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Cole and Ohanian were able to establish average wages and prices across a range of industries just prior to the Depression. By adjusting for annual increases in productivity, they were able to use the 1929 benchmark to figure out what prices and wages would have been during every year of the Depression had Roosevelt's policies not gone into effect. They then compared those figures with actual prices and wages as reflected in the Conference Board data. In the three years following the implementation of Roosevelt's policies, wages in 11 key industries averaged 25 percent higher than they otherwise would have done, the economists calculate. But unemployment was also 25 percent higher than it should have been, given gains in productivity. Meanwhile, prices across 19 industries averaged 23 percent above where they should have been, given the state of the economy. With goods and services that much harder for consumers to afford, demand stalled and the gross national product floundered at 27 percent below where it otherwise might have been. "High wages and high prices in an economic slump run contrary to everything we know about market forces in economic downturns," Ohanian said. "As we've seen in the past several years, salaries and prices fall when unemployment is high. By artificially inflating both, the New Deal policies short-circuited the market's self-correcting forces."

The policies were contained in the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. Because protection from antitrust prosecution all but ensured higher prices for goods and services, a wide range of industries took the bait, Cole and Ohanian found. By 1934 more than 500 industries, which accounted for nearly 80 percent of private, non-agricultural employment, had entered into the collective bargaining agreements called for under NIRA. Cole and Ohanian calculate that NIRA and its aftermath account for 60 percent of the weak recovery. Without the policies, they contend that the Depression would have ended in 1936 instead of the year when they believe the slump actually ended: 1943. Roosevelt's role in lifting the nation out of the Great Depression has been so revered that Time magazine readers cited it in 1999 when naming him the 20th century's second-most influential figure. "This is exciting and valuable research," said Robert E. Lucas Jr., the 1995 Nobel Laureate in economics, and the John Dewey Distinguished Service Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago. "The prevention and cure of depressions is a central mission of macroeconomics, and if we can't understand what happened in the 1930s, how can we be sure it won't happen again?"

NIRA's role in prolonging the Depression has not been more closely scrutinized because the Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional within two years of its passage. "Historians have assumed that the policies didn't have an impact because they were too short-lived, but the proof is in the pudding," Ohanian said. "We show that they really did artificially inflate wages and prices."

Even after being deemed unconstitutional, Roosevelt's anti-competition policies persisted — albeit under a different guise, the scholars found. Ohanian and Cole painstakingly documented the extent to which the Roosevelt administration looked the other way as industries once protected by NIRA continued to engage in price-fixing practices for four more years. The number of antitrust cases brought by the Department of Justice fell from an average of 12.5 cases per year during the 1920s to an average of 6.5 cases per year from 1935 to 1938, the scholars found. Collusion had become so widespread that one Department of Interior official complained of receiving identical bids from a protected industry (steel) on 257 different occasions between mid-1935 and mid-1936. The bids were not only identical but also 50 percent higher than foreign steel prices. Without competition, wholesale prices remained inflated, averaging 14 percent higher than they would have been without the troublesome practices, the UCLA economists calculate. NIRA's labor provisions, meanwhile, were strengthened in the National Relations Act, signed into law in 1935. As union membership doubled, so did labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate. Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years.

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found. "The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened." -UCLA-

Me: It is a commonly held liberal socialist lie and thusly a commonly held lie thought in colleges that the Great Depression was ended thanks to Big Government programs, spending, and socialism. In truth it did nothing to help the depression but thanks to this kind of lie a generation of "educated" political leader actually think this is how you should deal with a depression, and thusly we can expect the same from the great and powerful Obama.


7) The Election The Media Won.. USA/Democracy/Media
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/archives/2008/11/04/the-election-the-media-won/

November 4, 2008
The 2008 Presidential Election is going to go down in history as the election that was decided by the Main Stream Media and you lemmings fell for it. Republicans as a Party allowed the New York Times to select our Nominee. McCain was dead before the Times endorsed him in the Primary. CNN threw softballs to McCain before he became the apparent nominee. In the end, his friends in the press played pit bull on McCain and attacked him. Shortly after securing the necessary delegates to win the Nomination, the same New York Times attacked the very candidate they endorsed.

Barry Obama’s path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue was paved with the dead bodies of aborted babies and heralded by the Main Stream Media which did nothing but cover-up and make excuses for Barry and his ultra liberal (and even terrorist) buddies. The electorate of this nation has shown with this election that they haven’t the capacity to learn from our own history. There was another young man who ran for the Presidency and won without defining himself. He too was elected on the heels of an unpopular Republican President. That President went on to be THE most ineffective chief executive in our nation’s history. Under Jimmy Carter’s watch the unemployment rate skyrocketed to double digits, interest rates were in excess of 20%, and inflation was also in double digits. Jimmy too got himself elected without definition. A ‘Change’ candidate from the ‘corruption’ of an unpopular President Nixon.

When you fail to define your candidate before electing him to a position of power, you are playing with some dangerous elements. In Germany there once was a very charismatic character who ran for Chancellor based on ‘Change’. Germany too was in dire economic straights due to its loss in the first world war. Adolf Hitler led Germany out of its economic woes but at what cost? Over 100 million dead.

Instead of Jews Barry Obama blames unborn babies and they are his target for extermination. Barry will be in a position to appoint 2 replacements for the very liberal Ruthy Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens - who has one foot in the grave and another on a banana peel). So America, during the next 4 years as jobs are eliminated due to Barry’s aggressive tax plan and interest rates begin to climb to combat inflation, and the cost of living rises as a result of the rise in taxes Barry is seeking to pay for his massive social experiment, as health care in this country goes the way of the British and Canadian systems where you have to wait 6 - 12 months to have a medical procedure, remember one important thing. YOU ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN.

You people disgust me. Because you could have prevented the screwing that we are all about to receive. But instead you allowed yourself to be influenced by Chrissy Matthews and his tingly feeling up his legs. You spineless lemmings allowed your guilt for America’s past influence your vote and voted for a man’s skin color in spite of his lack of character. America, you truly deserve what we are about to receive.

Me: The Media did play a major role in this election but the good news is it took them eight years of negative reporting and spinning, two losses to Republicans getting their message out to the public, and then a charismatic political figure that they could spins a web of lies around so people would see him as something magical. This tells me that when they try to spin the activities of this "Obama" they have created they will have a real hard time explaining the truth from the myth they created.


8) Saul Alinsky Takes the White House... Far Left Liberalism/Election
http://www.spectator.org/archives/2008/11/06/saul-alinsky-takes-the-white-h

11.6.08
Conservatives may not realize just how difficult it might be to recover from this week's elections. The day after the big defeat, the conservative chatter everywhere was about how the "movement" and the Republican Party (two different things) could finally unshackle themselves from the bad old habits that brought them down, and about how the ability to draw a sharp contrast with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid triumvirate would allow us to focus attention, rally the faithful, and re-storm the castle in 2010 and 2012.

Fat chance.

Too many conservatives think we've seen all this before -- in 1964 and 1974 and 1992 -- and that we know how to handle it. Fly, meet ointment: We're not dealing with the same sorts of opponents. These New Alinskyites who are taking over the White House, combined with the most leftist congressional leadership in memory, will not let us play by the same rules under which conservatives recovered from those earlier debacles. They will try to drastically tilt the playing field, seed our side of the field with land mines and, in short, rig the process to make it next to impossible for the political right, or Republicans, to recover. And they are likely to succeed in at least some of these designs. It will begin with their efforts to secure a filibuster-proof majority of 60 senators (including the two independents). Right now the libs (and yes, all the Democratic senators, with the possible exception of Nebraska's Ben Nelson, are libs) have 56, with three Republican moderates and one conservative leading their races but awaiting recounts or runoffs. Watch for the Alinskyites to try stealing all four, and to succeed in at least two. We've seen this game before. They did it in Indiana's "Bloody Eighth" congressional district in 1984. They almost succeeded in 2000 in Florida. They did succeed, outrageously so, in the Washington State governor's race in 2004. Those are just the most obvious of many similar examples. And now they are even more ruthless, more lawyered-up, and in a more powerful position to pull it off than they were in any of those instances.

Next, watch what happens if they regularly can't peel off enough Republicans (or hold their own semi-fairminded people like Nelson and Joe Lieberman) to overcome whatever filibuster attempts Republicans do mount. Watch for an assault on the filibuster itself. Watch how they use as precedent the GOP "nuclear/constitutional option" on judges in 2005 -- except instead of just using it for judges, watch them use it against all filibusters. It's easy: Make the ruling from the chair that the filibuster is out of order for some reason. Instruct the parliamentarian to rule in their favor. Win the appeal of the parliamentarian's ruling by simple majority vote. And watch the courts pronounce it an internal matter of the legislative branch and thus outside of courtroom purview. Watch a cheerleading establishment media -- the Fourth Estate as a veritable Fifth Column -- actually back these lefty maneuvers. It's all in the name of one-man/one-vote democracy, dontcha know? The filibuster once served its purpose, they'll say, but as a vestige of Southern "massive resistance" to integration it is now being used for massive resistance to the first black president, which invalidates it (suddenly) as a legitimate tool. Watch the left use these tactics and others to pass even more liberalized voting laws -- an open invitation to even more fraud that is more creative, easier to hide, and less challengeable in court. Watch what Michael Barone called the Obama "thugocracy" use the Justice Department to stifle dissent. Anybody who complains about vote fraud will be charged with "vote suppression." Anybody who complains about DoJ's actions will be charged with interfering with an investigation. Anybody who denies having interfered will be charged with perjury. Likewise, anybody who peacefully protests abortion clinics or the use of state-sponsored racial quotas will be charged with a civil rights violation. And the accused won't be able to look to the Supreme Court for help: Anthony Kennedy's "evolving standards" of justice will evolve to match the new zeitgeist, providing a 5-4 majority for the administration. Meanwhile, of course, Obama's other appointments will be filling up the rest of the judiciary at a rapid clip, with nobody able to stop them.

Other ways the Obama axis will tilt the playing field: "card check" legislation to eliminate secret ballots in unionizing and to force union victories in contract negotiations. Provision after provision giving favors to the trial bar so it can sue enemies into submission. Copious new regulations, especially environmental, to be used selectively to ensnare other conservative malcontents. Invasive IRS audits of conservative think tanks, other conservative 501 organizations, and PACs. What Ohio officials did in rifling through so many of Joe Wurzelbacher's files will serve as ample precedent. (Just watch, by the way: Nobody ever will be effectively disciplined for the violation of Wurzelbacher's rights.) And, only when the time is right and the ground (or air) has been well prepared, will come the grand-daddy of all fights, the re-enactment of the misnamed "Fairness Doctrine."

Oh, they'll be clever. They'll pick their spot. They'll wait until Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Mark Levin says something innocent they can twist out of context and call "hate speech" -- and then they'll highlight some schoolyard fight where a member of a "victim group" gets the worst of it as if the "attack" were caused by talk-rad…no, make that "hate radio," which will be the new moniker the Fifth Column/Fourth Estate hangs on the talkmeisters. (Even before imposing the Fairness Doctrine, they'll use the Federal Communications Commission in other ways to put a muffler on their opponents.) And, always, a few carefully calibrated street demonstrations, splashed with just the right headlines across the East Coast newspapers and captured by just the right camera angle on CBS News, will be used any time, on any issue, to make the point that civil unrest would be the price of resistance to the benevolent desires of the Obama regime.

The erosions of conservative rights will be incremental. Each one will have its own justification. Each one will be supported by the establishment media. Each one will be timed so as to allow the general public to become accustomed to it, to accept it as unremarkable, or even to come to regard it as a public good for the sake of keeping conservative "troublemakers" from fomenting disorder. And the Obamessiah, still speaking frequently to stadia full of admirers, will provide a tone of reasoned moderation, combined with further appeals to hope, in order to justify it all. These are the sorts of things Alinskyites do. These are the sorts of tactics used by ACORN, at whose conferences Obama himself regularly taught seminars on "power." These are the sorts of policies favored by the academic left, Obama's old milieu -- the policies that favor speech codes and stolen campus newspapers and the firing of faculty for "offensive" remarks.

Conservatives have fought things like this for years already, of course. But they've never fought it while the left controlled so many of the levers of power, and certainly not when the left was led by such a charismatic and near cult-inspiring leader who was so smart, so well steeped in these stratagems, and so fully supported by a Fourth Estate up whose legs warm feelings run every time he waxes eloquent. It will take very focused, very intelligent, very skillful action by conservatives to stop this creeping subversion of a free society. This is a whole different political battlefield than any on which we've fought before. And we haven't yet found our Omar Bradley.

Me: Well said.


9) Court to decide whether campus evangelism a crime... Christianity/Education/Freedom of Speech
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=328186

11/23/2008
The so-called "free-speech code" of Yuba Community College District is under federal court scrutiny. California student, Ryan Dozier, decided to spend some time on campus sharing his faith and handing out tracts to fellow students, generating conversations about Christianity. Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) attorney Heather Hacker comments on the situation.

"A campus police officer came over and told him that if he continued to do so without a permit that he would be possibly expelled or arrested, and so Ryan stopped immediately," she explains.
Hacker says Dozier thought the case was closed, but he was apparently mistaken. "Three weeks later he got a certified letter from the president of the college stating that his actions were the subject of a campus crime report," she adds. "Last time I checked, sharing your faith on a public college campus was not a crime." But the letter informed him he could face expulsion if he shared his faith on campus again. ADF filed suit, and a federal judge has ordered the college to suspend enforcement of its highly restricted free speech policies until the lawsuit is resolved.

Me: I sure hope he wins this as it could form a precedent that can be used to silence religious freedom.