RG - Who Is Eboo Patel?

Eboo Patel is the founder and Executive Director of Interfaith Youth Core (IFYC), a Chicago-based institution building the global interfaith youth movement. Author of the award-winning book Acts of Faith: The Story of an American Muslim, the Struggle for the Soul of a Generation, Eboo is also a regular contributor to the Washington Post, National Public Radio and CNN. He is a member of President Obama’s Advisory Council of the White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, and holds a doctorate in the sociology of religion from Oxford University, where he studied on a Rhodes scholarship.

Army Manual and Evangelicals:

in an official manual, the United States Army now lists evangelical Christianity, Catholicism and Islamophobia as forms of religious extremism, along with Al-Qaeda and Hamas (April 2013).

Eboo Patel said this long before Barack Obama appointed Patel as his "Adviser" on Religion. (2008)

Evangelicals as Terrorists:

President Barack Obama's "religion czar" and spiritual adviser has likened evangelical Christians to radical Islamists such as al-Qaeda. He has also been heard comparing Rev. Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network to Osama bin Laden.

Obama met Patel when they both lived and worked in Chicago. Patel was well-known locally as a Muslim activist and a friend to Rashid Khalid, a Palestinian historian of the Middle East who left Chicago to become the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University in New York City.

Van Jones praised by Patel:

In 2011 Patel depicted Van Jones, the revolutionary communist who had served several months as President Obama's “green jobs” czar, as an “American patriot,” a “faith hero,” and one of “the true giants of history.”

Patel's Radical Connections:

In 2005 Patel and several young radicals co-authored the book Letters from Young Activists: Today’s Rebels Speak Out. Among Patel's co-authors were Chesa Boudin (the adopted son of former Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers) and Ismail Khalidi (the son of Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi). The book's Preface was written by Ayers’ wife, Weather Underground co-founder Bernardine Dohrn. The back cover featured an endorsement from the convicted cop-killer and former Black Panther Party member Mumia Abu-Jamal. And on the Acknowledgments page, Patel and his fellow authors thanked Ayers personally for the “guidance” and “encouragement” he had provided.

In 2006 Patel published Building the Interfaith Youth Movement: Beyond Dialogue to Action. The book's Afterword was written by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, famous for having led an effort to construct a large mosque near the site of the 9/11 attacks in Manhattan.

Muslim Brotherhood Influence in the White House:

An Egyptian magazine claims that six American Islamist activists who work with the Obama administration are Muslim Brotherhood operatives who enjoy strong influence over U.S. policy.

The six named people include:

1. Eboo Patel, a member of President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships.
   Rose El-Youssef says Patel maintains a close relationship with Hani Ramadan, the grandson of Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna, and is a member of the Muslim Students Association, which it identifies as "a large Brotherhood organization."
2. Arif Alikhan, assistant secretary of Homeland Security for policy development.
   Alikhan is a founder of the World Islamic Organization, which the magazine identifies as a Brotherhood "subsidiary." It suggests that Alikhan was responsible for the "file of Islamic states" in the White House and that he provides the direct link between the Obama administration and the Arab Spring revolutions of 2011.
3. Mohammed Elibiary, a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council.
   Elibiary, who has endorsed the ideas of radical Muslim Brotherhood luminary Sayyid Qutb, may have leaked secret materials contained in Department of Homeland Security databases, according to the magazine. He, however, denies having any connection with the Brotherhood. Elibiary also played a role in defining the Obama administration's counterterrorism strategy, and the magazine asserts that Elibiary wrote the speech Obama gave when he told former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave power but offers no source or evidence for the claim.
4. Rashad Hussain, the U.S. special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
   According to Rose El-Youssef, Rashad Hussain maintained close ties with people and groups that it says comprise the Muslim Brotherhood network in America. This includes his participation in the June 2002 annual conference of the American Muslim Council, formerly headed by convicted terrorist financier Abdurahman Alamoudi. He also participated in the organizing committee of the Critical Islamic Reflection along with important figures of the American Muslim Brotherhood such as Jamal Barzinji, Hisham al-Talib and Yaqub Mirza.
5. Salam al-Marayati, co-founder of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).
   Regarding al-Marayati, who has been among the most influential Muslim American leaders in recent years, the magazine draws connections between MPAC in the international Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure.
6. Imam Mohamed Magid, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).
   Magid heads ISNA, which was founded by Brotherhood members, was appointed by Obama in 2011 as an adviser to the Department of Homeland Security. The magazine says that has also given speeches and conferences on American Middle East policy at the State Department and offered advice to the FBI.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - Fast food medicine in Canada

When Obamacare was only a fantasy in the mind of a President with far-fetched ideas, I'd joke: "If government-run healthcare ever manifests, Americans can look forward to a complimentary Big Gulp with a throat culture at 7-11." Who would have thought the outrageously absurd would become an actual option?

Take, for instance, Canadian doctor Alan Lund realizing an "end of life" discussion he was having needed a more private location. Dr. Lund's creative solution gives credence to Washington DC eventually being capable of instituting a low quality, cost-cutting bureaucratic package by mandating that filing taxes be done while getting an annual physical.

Before discussing where Lund's dying patient ended up, maybe Americans should contemplate a potential Obamacare nightmare: For lack of a hospital bed, you expire in a waiting room on a stretcher, with Family Guy blaring on the overhead flat screen as a roomful of moderate to deathly ill people try not to stare.

Up north at New Westminster's Royal Columbian Hospital, Dr. Lund was "trying to have a private conversation with [a] patient...near the end of life." Lund said, "Everybody in the waiting room was sitting with their eyes on the television, trying to pretend that we were not doing patient-care right underneath them."

That's when Lund came up with the brilliant idea to ferry the man, along with some other "overflow patients," into an "adjacent coffee shop." Dr. Lund said he felt he had to do something for the dying, as well as those waiting for more than 90 minutes to receive "medications and treatments."

Lund wheeled the ailing into a location where catheterizations and café au lait provided the terminally ill both "privacy and dignity." Patients able to tolerate solid foods were probably ecstatic about the availability of Tim Horton coffee and donut favorites like Sour Cream Glazed and Canadian Maple.

Americans admire our people-friendly neighbors to the north, and Obama aspires to the type of single payer system that Canadians on stretchers in coffee shops enjoy. If instituted, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius can easily make cost-cutting recommendations such as coupling a soft-serve ice cream cone with a visit to a podiatrist.

Dr. Lund said his coffee shop "decision was made in consultation" with other hospital personnel. Sort of a DMV worker's conference on how to better provide hundreds of people the self-respect they deserve as they wait for hours for a two-minute eye test.

British Columbia critics contend that using "coffee shops for emergency patients raises concerns over so-called hallway medicine and whether inadequate government funding [compromises] patient care." We're talking a future filled with stitches at Dunkin Donuts, and drive-by EKGs at Mickey D's.

New Democratic Party Health Services critic Sue Hammell said, "I think it is outrageous. What are we coming to when we are serving up...health care in a fast food restaurant?" Americans on the cusp of coffee shop examining rooms should heed Hammell's single payer warning that "The problems of delay and cutbacks [show up] a number of years later."

Dr. Lund said overcrowding is so common that at times people clamoring to get free health care are "double parked" on stretchers in hospital hallways. Think Baby Boomers stacked against the counter at Starbucks.

About the coffee shop decision, Lund responded to detractors by saying "I think it was a good decision. We were able to move patients who were in a totally inappropriate space." Thus, if one day Obamacare falls short of "appropriate space," the original prediction about saying "Ahhhh" at 7-11 becomes a distinct possibility.

Jeannie DeAngelis

---

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Retired Geek - ObamaCare Regulations 2011 and Beyond

 David Lee "Dave" Camp (born July 9, 1953) is the U.S. Representative for Michigan's 4th congressional district, serving since 1991. He is a member of the Republican Party and the current Ranking Member and incoming Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Dave Camp has compiled this list of when different aspects of ObamaCare legislation will go into effect. Click Here for .PDF File

The premise that Barack Obama and Liberal Progressives have posited, is that Americans cannot afford to pay for Doctors, Nurses, Hospitals and their Medications.

The solution offered by Barack Obama and Liberal Progressives, is that Americans could afford to pay for Doctors, Nurses, Hospitals and their Medications, if almost 200 NEW Government Agencies, thousands of NEW Government bureaucrats, millions of NEW Patients that consists of Illegal Aliens and others who will NOT pay ANYTHING into the Health Care System were added to the original costs.

Liberal Cognitive Dissonance is the holding of two or more diametrically opposed views of reality as the singularity of reality, this is a serious 'Mental Disorder'.

What is obvious about ObamaCare is that those who are now dependent on Medicare WILL NOT be moved to ObamaCare, instead most of the ObamaCare funding will come from slashing funds from Medicare and directing those funds to ObamaCare.

Marxist/Socialists like Barack Obama and his Liberal Progressive 'Cabal' in Congress - have a long History of preying on the weak, helpless and defenseless in order to institute their Marxist schemes of 'Social Justice For The Common Good'.

The elderly and others dependent on Medicare will be left 'High and Dry' by ObamaCare and viewed as 'Useless Eaters' with a 'Quality of Life' not worth spending resources and using valuable assets on. This brazen action against the elderly, the severely handicapped and those dying from incurable diseases reveals what the future of the NOW Healthy under ObamaCare will be like.

Notice the reductions in funding directed towards the weak, frail and dying while reading the list compiled by Dave Camp.

Ronald Reagan's Comments on 'Socialized Medicine' are as pertinent Today as when he first made them.

2011

• Medicare Advantage cuts begin
• No longer allowed to use FSA, HSA, HRA, Archer MSA distributions for over-the counter medicines
• Medicare cuts to home health begin
• Wealthier seniors ($85k/$170k) begin paying higher Part D premiums (not indexed for inflation in Parts B/D)
• Medicare reimbursement cuts when seniors use diagnostic imaging like MRIs, CT scans, etc.
• Medicare cuts begin to ambulance services, ASCs, diagnostic labs, and durable medical equipment
• Impose new annual tax on brand name pharmaceutical companies
• Americans begin paying premiums for federal long-term care insurance (CLASS Act)
• Health plans required to spend a minimum of 80% of premiums on medical claims
• Physicians in “Frontier States” (N.D., Mont., Wyo., S.D., Utah) receive higher Medicare payments
• Prohibition on Medicare payments to new physician-owned hospitals
• Penalties for non-qualified HSA and Archer MSA distributions double (to 20%)
• Seniors prohibited from purchasing power wheelchairs unless they first rent for 13 months
• Brand name drug companies begin providing 50% discount in the Part D “donut hole”
• 10% Medicare bonus payment for primary care and general surgery (5 years)
• Employers required to report value of health benefits on W-2
• Steps towards health insurance administrative simplification (reduced paperwork, etc) begins (five year process)
• Additional funding for community health centers (five years)
• Seniors who hit Part D “donut hole “in 2010 receive $250 check (3/15/11)
• New Medicare cuts to long-term care hospitals begin (7/1/11)
• Additional Medicare cuts to hospitals and cuts to nursing homes and inpatient rehab facilities begin (fiscal 2012)
• New tax on all private health insurance policies to pay for comp. eff. research (plan years beginning fiscal 2012)

2012

• Medicare cuts to dialysis treatment begins
• Require information reporting on payments to corporations
• Medicare to reduce spending by using an HMO-like coordinated care model (Accountable Care Organizations)
• Medicare Advantage plans with a 4 or 5 star rating receive a quality bonus payment
• New Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/12)
• Hospital pay-for-quality program begins (fiscal 2013)
• Medicare cuts to hospitals with high readmission rates begin (fiscal 2013)
• Medicare cuts to hospice begin (fiscal 2013)

2013

• Impose $2,500 annual cap on FSA contributions (indexed to CPI)
• Increase Medicare wage tax by 0.9% and impose a new 3.8% tax on unearned, nonactive business income for those earning over $200,000 or $250,000 for families (not indexed to inflation)
• Generally increases (7.5% to 10%) threshold at which medical expenses, as a percentage of income, can be deductible
• Eliminate deduction for Part D retiree drug subsidy employers receive
• Impose 2.3% excise tax on medical devices
• Medicare cuts to hospitals which treat low-income seniors begin
• Post-acute pay for quality reporting begins
• CO-OP Program: Secretary of Health and Human Services awards loans and grants for establishing nonprofit health insurers
• $500,000 deduction cap on compensation paid to insurance company employees and officers
• Part D “donut hole” reduction begins, reaching a 25% reduction by 2020

2014

• Individuals without government-approved coverage are subject to a tax of the greater of $695 or 2.5% of income
• Employers who fail to offer “affordable” coverage would pay a $3,000 penalty for every employee that receives a subsidy through the Exchange
• Employers who do not offer insurance must pay a tax penalty of $2,000 for every full-time employee
• More Medicare cuts to home health begin
• States must have established Exchanges
• Employers with more than 200 employees can auto-enroll employees in health coverage, with opt-out
• All non-grandfathered and Exchange health plans required to meet federally mandated levels of coverage
• States must cover parents /childless adults up to 138% of poverty on Medicaid, receive increased FMAP
• Tax credits available for Exchange-based coverage, amount varies by income up to 400% of poverty
• Insurers cannot impose any coverage restrictions on pre-existing conditions (guaranteed issue/renewability)
• Modified community rating: individual or family coverage; geography; 3:1 ratio for age; 1.5:1 for smoking
• Insurers must offer coverage to anyone wanting a policy and every policy has to be renewed
• Limits out-of-pocket cost-sharing (tied to limits in HSAs, currently $5,950/$11,900 indexed to COLA)
• Insurance plans must include government-defined “essential benefits ” and coverage levels
• OPM must offer at least two multi-state plans in every state
• Employers can offer some employees free choice vouchers for health insurance in the Exchange
• Government board (IPAB) begins submitting proposals to cut Medicare
• Impose tax on nearly all private health insurance plans
• Medicare payment cuts for hospital-acquired infections begin (fiscal 2015)

2015

• More Medicare cuts to home health begin

2016

• States can form interstate insurance compacts if the coverage with HHS approval (2016)

2017

• Physician pay-for-quality program begins for all physicians
• States may allow large employers and multi-employer health plans to purchase coverage in the Exchange.
• States may apply to the HHS secretary for a limited waiver from certain federal requirements

2018

• Impose “Cadillac tax on “high cost” plans, 40% tax on the benefit value above a certain threshold: ($10,200 individual coverage, $27,500 family or self-only union multi-employer coverage)

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

The Real Julia - NOT the Obama Julia

President Obama's composite American woman, Julia, tells her REAL backstory. Narrated by Kelly Maher.

Morning Joe Crew 'Blasts Obama Ad'

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Kevin McCullough - Obama Goes Nixonian

When did "hope and change" get traded in for "brass knuckles?"

According to some--the same day President Obama was sworn in as the leader of the free world. This correspondent has difficulty disagreeing with that conclusion.

This past week, the presumptive GOP nominee, Governor Mitt Romney, kept getting his hand slapped by syndicated media maven Michelle Malkin.

Her continual beef with Governor Romney? "Stop saying President Obama's a nice guy."

At the time I believed that Gov. Romney's attempt to stay above the normal pettiness of the election snark was well intended. I defended the strategy saying the Romney camp would gain little from insisting that a "like-able" man who happens to be President is a big meanie was going to do much in the way of explaining why his policies are so bad. I still largely feel this way, and for the most part I think Gov. Romney is on the right track to bring every question he is asked, every time he is asked one, back to the point of saying, "This economy is on the wrong track, President Obama can't fix it, but I promise you I will."

However... I feel that Malkin's point is all-too-valid and that for us to see with our own eyes what another four years of President Obama would mean to the nation's future is something that the average voter--especially those who are not political addicts--should have spelled out for them clearly.

Governor Romney's attempt not to be distracted into discussions that President Obama wants to have is actually a very smart move, but by purposefully giving the President a rather sizable "benefit of the doubt" on a good many things, he may appear to be going soft.

Hence Malkin's observation is well heeded.

For instance, in the Friday edition of the Wall Street Journal, writer Kim Strassel details--with painful precision--a campaign that is underway by the Obama campaign to identify and publicly intimidate high-dollar donors to the Romney campaign. Strassel points out that once Obama's subversives identify you, they then seek to publicly "shame you for 'betting against America'." Strassel also points out that Obama controls the Justice Department, the Securities Exchange Commission, and the Internal Revenue Service which combined can indict, fine, and audit you into oblivion.

The intended outcome for Team Obama is to prevent people from giving money to Romney.

She points out that all Presidents since Richard Nixon have avoided the practice of creating an "enemies list." Strassel argues that Presidents hold a unique trust and that their unique power to ruin lives is an area where great restraint should be showed.

Yet the Obama administration and specifically his executive branch, and even more specifically his justice department have done nothing but show a lack of restraint, upon most opportunities presented.

The scandals that have rocked this White House have been numerous, but when their ranks "merely" include ones such as an Attorney General facing contempt charges for not cooperating with Congress--we're breaking new territory.

Obama's team has multiple web-sites, grass roots groups, and constituencies that are collaborating against and outing people because of they're lack of support for President Obama and his policies. The sites throw around terms like "criminal" when the only crime any of them commit is not believing that the sun rises and sets with the current administration.

Long a tactic of the politically elite left, outing big donors Team Obama appears to be dedicated to stop the flow of cash going to the only reputable challenger left in the race. How very cold-war socialist of him.

It's no surprise, we saw him lecture the Supreme Court justices openly to their face in the State of the Union address to the nation.

This week it was also reported that campaign personnel have been shadowing the movements of Fla. Senator Marco Rubio, as the first term Senator is attempting to gain positive ground on the very tough issue of illegal immigration. The Obama operatives even calling activists in the Latino communities to attempt to smear the Senator's efforts and to debunk his motives for desiring to find a solution.

Funny... I thought that's what President Obama had promised us--solutions. Solutions that would return unemployment to under 8%, when in reality it is closer to 12% (when the shrinkage of the pool of workers eliminated from the numbers for giving up finding work is taken into consideration).

The White House is in a heap of trouble. Their Attorney General may be charged with contempt of Congress at any moment. Their biggest legislative success would be repealed in a heartbeat if 53% of the nation had its way. Their attempts at correcting a bad economy have made it insufferably worse. And now they are making threats, some of them veiled less and less, to anyone who opposes them in their path to re-election.

The shine is off, the luster has faded, the White House knows it and is desperate to do anything it can to stop the bleeding.

It might be the makings of good drama to imagine a White House using government branches, campaign operatives, and manipulable pressures of every kind to wiggle their way back into power. But this is no movie and we the people must realize this.

Obama has channeled the inaction of Jimmy Carter while governing, but in this campaign his new approach begs comparison to Richard M. Nixon--and I'm not sure, but in my lifetime, that's never been a good thing!

Kevin McCullough

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays (7-9am EST) & "Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11pm EST) on 289 stations & Sirius/XM . His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change" is in stores now.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

NRA President David Keene on President Obama's Use of Executive Powers

Ginny Simone talks to NRA President David Keene.

April 2012

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Doug Giles - The Media That Ignored Obama’s Beliefs Goes After Mitt’s Mormonism

When the former junior state senator from Chicago, one Barack Obama—a man no one knew diddly about—decided, “Hey, I’m gonna run for president!” people were eager to learn more about this promising upstart. Uncle Joe Biden was curious about Barack. Joe said at first blush that Obama seemed “clean” and “articulate,” which, I think, would be a hate crime if a conservative said that about him.

Anyhoo, Obama impressed many chiefly because he could enthusiastically read vague, cliché-riddled speeches off a teleprompter that included lots of big words like nobody’s business! This ability to read hazy political speeches in public without putting folks into a full-on level IV coma left the bedazzled masses wondering, “Who is this masked man? Who are his buddies?” and … “Are there more like him? He’s a doozy!”

Yep, people wanted to know from whence he came, what books he read and what groups supported him because he was three words: A-May-Zing! As the various news outlets started finding out that BHO’s buddies were sordid, anti-American fellows of the baser sort; his favorite book was dedicated to Lucifer; his endorsers included Communists and Hamas; and his folks weren’t exactly the Huxtables, the mainstream media decided, “Eh, let’s not talk about his past and his present friends and philosophy but rather how inspiring his fuzzy speeches are and how skinny he is.”

Indeed, everybody was like, “Well, those are some strange playmates, and those books are interesting—really not the ones we would read, but who are we to judge? And haven’t we all had, at one time or another, one or two friends in our past who dedicated riot-inducing books to Satan, set off a bomb in the Capitol Building and hated Israel with a passion? Would we like it if people painted us with our friends’ bizarre brush?”

Gadfly Sean Hannity wouldn’t leave well enough alone in ‘07 and decided to investigate not only Obama’s pals but Barack and Michelle’s pastor/mentor and religion that they had enjoyed for the last two decades. Boy howdy, did Hannity and others stumble onto some interesting revelations about Obama’s church. Stuff like ...

· Anti-Semitic conspiracy theories

· The advocacy of bizarre, pseudo-scientific racial ideas

· Opposition to interracial marriage

· Praising Communist dictatorships

· The denunciation of black “assimilation”

· The belief that the American government created AIDS to kill black people

· Preaching that America deserved 9/11 terrorists attacks

· The fact that Reverend Wright was, according to the Chicago Sun-Times, a “close confidant” of Obama

When common folks discovered Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s religious views were racist, Marxist and nuttier than a squirrel’s turd, some rightly wondered if BHO also believed this bogus smack, and if not, why he would sit for twenty years listening to those race-baiting beliefs if he fundamentally and radically disagreed. Why, they wondered, did he not vehemently condemn this cuckoo stuff?

The media, however, decided for us cattle that Reverend Wright’s racially-charged sermons, his black liberation theology and the fact that Obama sat for two decades under this slow drip of heresy wasn’t newsworthy and bypassed those tasty morsels. Instead, they crucified anyone who dared question Obama’s affiliation with his class warfare junkie Jeremiah (who was swiftly tossed under BHO’s campaign bus).

Fast-forward to 2012 and Mitt Romney and his religion.

The same media that ignored information about Obama’s racist religious roots steeped in Marxism is already queuing up with queries about Romney’s Mormonism as somehow being weird and a tad white. MSNBC led the charge this past week wondering aloud if and when Mitt would rebuke Mormonism’s disallowance of blacks into the Mormon priesthood until 1978. The duplicitous journalists who saw no story in the well-documented anti-honky rhetoric of Wright’s/Obama’s “religion” now want to paint Romney with the racist brush? How convenient.

As an evangelical I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t get Mormonism, but I do get Marxism, and we’re now seeing the political fruit coming from Obama’s ignored and divisive theological roots. Which leads me to this conclusion as an evangelical: I don’t care if Mitt is crazy rich and wears magic Mormon underroos. In 2012 I will take a quasi-conservative Mormon who has been ridiculously successful over an uncompromised Marxist any ol’ day.

And lastly, a word of advice for the MSM: I would leave Mitt’s Mormonism well enough alone unless, of course, you want Obama’s religious roots to be exposed, as well. I believe Americans will find in Mormonism more pro-traditional American sentiments than they will in Reverend Wright’s greatest sermon collections.

Doug Giles

Doug Giles’ new book “If You're Going Through Hell, Keep Going!" is now available. Ann Coulter says "Doug Giles is a substantive and funny tour de force for traditional values.” Doug’s talk show and video blog can be seen and heard at www.ClashRadio.com.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Mike Adams - The Frequent Bomber Program

Dear Bill (Ayers):

I try not to use the word “jack***” too often. Whenever I start writing about you, however, that word just seems to fit into every sentence – sort of like Selah fits into a Davidic Psalm. In fact, found myself using a little profanity when I heard about your recent remarks at an occupy Wall Street gathering in New York City. Here they are in their unedited stupidity:

“We are living in a militarized society. That, that, it's clear what the message is from power. The message is that Occupy represents violence, and marginalization and insanity, when in reality it's the 1% that represents violence, and insanity and militarism. We've got a militarized society and it’s become so common sense that, getting on the airplane coming out here, the first thing they said was ‘let all the, let all the, you know, uniformed military get on first’ and ‘thank you for your service.’ And I say as I always do: let's let the teachers and nurses get on first and thank them for their service. I mean, why is it that everything military has got to be good and everything that has to do with actual work, real work, not jobs, real work for people, that stuff gets discouraged and marginalized?"

Let’s be clear about something, Bill. You’re a tenured professor and that means you are the last person in the world to be lecturing anyone about real work. Tenure operates like socialism. There is no penalty for underperformance. There is only the reward of continued employment. That means you can say stupid things with regularity and never have to worry about occupying Wall Street with the chronically unemployed. You can just fly in, say a few stupid things in front of a fawning press, catch a Broadway show that evening, and head back to campus whenever you feel like it.

Teaching education does not really qualify as real work. Unlike military service, teaching education classes does not usually involve having people shoot at you. In fact, it would never happen if liberal educators were familiar with the research showing that concealed weapons permits reduce crime and should therefore be valid on campuses. Of course, most tenured educators don’t know this because they do not keep up with research after they get tenure.

Tenure also means that other radicals can hire you to fly in to speak at other universities for thousands of dollars per hour. And they cannot be fired for wasting taxpayer money on speeches by self-proclaimed domestic terrorists. Nor does it matter if the self-proclaimed domestic terrorists are incompetent and conspire with terrorists who sometimes blow up their own friends because they do not know how to properly assemble a pipe bomb.

I understand, of course, that your brothers and sisters in the Weather Underground never really meant to blow up their friends. They really meant to blow up their enemies. This is largely because they could not achieve significant political influence otherwise. No one really wants to follow the kind of people with whom you associated in your prime. Your crowd has always hovered about a half a step above Charles Manson. And your crowd is only slightly better groomed.

It should be self-evident that no one really deserves to follow you when you board a plane in an American airport. It makes good sense that you should board dead last. Nonetheless, you seem to question why our military are allowed to board before teachers like you board. The answer is simple, Bill. But, fearing you may still miss the point, I’ll print it in big, bold letters:

Soldiers bomb our foreign enemies. You, on the other hand, bomb your fellow citizens. And the teaching profession still defends you and embraces you.

I hope this helps you better understand the situation. Jack***!

Sincerely,

Mike S. Adams

Mike Adams

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Feminists Say the Darndest Things: A Politically Incorrect Professor Confronts "Womyn" On Campus.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Wild Bill for America - Angry Black Men?

The New Black Panthers are angry. Do they have a reason?

Visit the Wild Bill for America Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

PJTV Trifecta - Barack Obama, Professor of Unconstitutional Law

President Obama has declared war on the Supreme Court in advance of the Court's ObamaCare decision. Declaring the Justices of the Court "unelected," Obama seems eager to create a constitutional crisis. Why is Obama insulting the integrity of the judiciary and not making the constitutional argument for his health care legislation? Find out.

April 3, 2012

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

The Real Barack Obama Betraying Israel

It's time for our next installment of "The Real Obama" as we continue to vet the president. Tonight, we look at how this administration continuously disrespects and undermines America's long- standing ally, Israel.

Now according to ABC News, some Israelis are accusing the White House of leaking extremely sensitive information to reporters in order to prevent an Israeli strike on Iran. Here is an example.

"Foreign Policy" magazine is reporting that Israel has gained access to several air bases in Azerbaijan, which shares a border with no other than Iran.

Now the story goes on to say, quote, "According to several high level sources that I've spoken inside the U.S. government, Obama administration officials now believe the submerged aspect of the Israeli Azerbaijan alliance, and the security cooperation the two countries is heightening the risk of an Israeli strike on Iran.

Now in fact, the White House dodge questions about that report at a State Department briefing.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Wild Bill for America - The Obamacare Monster

One big sneaky money grab, surprised?

Visit the Wild Bill for America Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Jeannie DeAngelis - Whatever happened to 'bring us together'?

Originally posted at American Thinker

---

In April 2009, less than three months after Barack Obama took office, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

The super-duper-specialized Extremism and Radicalization Branch of the Homeland Environment Threat Analysis Division prepared the document, to help law enforcement officials on every level understand, "deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States."

The findings of the report did not address the threat of terrorist attacks from Muslim extremists who have infiltrated our military, our government and our neighborhoods. Instead the report clumped together what they called 'rightwing extremists' into a terrorist threat group that included "hate-oriented" individuals such as disgruntled ex-military personnel, Second Amendment advocates, and pro-lifers.

Also identified were individuals who could potentially pose a problem based on their concerns over the overreaching arm of federal government, the economic downturn, joblessness, the growing radical Muslim problem, and illegal immigration. In essence, the Department of Homeland Security document was linking people with everyday anxieties to white supremacist nuts the government claimed were gearing up for violence because they resented an African-American president.

In the three-plus years that Barack Obama has occupied the office of president, he has actually exacerbated every trigger listed in the right-wing extremism document. Thanks to Obama's policies, the American economy and job market have both deteriorated and worldwide Muslim unrest and radicalization has accelerated at lightning speed.

His handling of the war and national security and making the military a staging ground for gay issues has had a profound effect on military morale. Second Amendment rights have been threatened and pro-life taxpayers are being forced to shoulder the cost of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion. Barack Obama has pushed illegal immigration buttons on every front from suing Arizona to vetoing the state of Texas' right to ask for identification before voting.

But above all President Obama has aggravated racial tension in this country. His inappropriate involvement began with his impulsive remarks concerning the Henry Louis Gates incident in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Moreover, it continues to this day whenever he allows Attorney General Eric Holder and his Department of Justice to demonstrate racial partiality on issues such as not prosecuting the New Black Panther Party for threatening voters with billy clubs during the 2008 election in Philadelphia.

The DHS report said:

Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

Which raises the question: Why would the President, in what can only be described as an underhanded and manipulative way, not to mention identical to his Henry Gates "acted stupidly" comment in both its tone and intended effect, stir the volatile racial unrest surrounding the heartbreaking shooting death in Florida of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin? It's beyond comprehension.

The investigation into the incident has barely begun. But if, at this early juncture, Obama has already made up his mind and if addressing senseless violence was why he initially spoke out, then why hasn't he also condemned 20-year-old Tyrone Dale David Woodfork for sexually assaulting and beating to death 85-year-old Nancy Strait in Tulsa, Oklahoma who, quite frankly, could have been Obama's maternal grandmother?

Instead, rather than quell the strife, Barack Obama saw fit to throw $5-a-gallon gasoline on an already raging fire by encouraging national "soul searching." The President deliberately personalized the tragedy and made a comment that can only be described as either shockingly narcissistic or shamefully pandering when he said, "If I had a son he'd look like Trayvon Martin."

In response to Trayvon's death Reverend Jesse Jackson chimed in saying, "there is a mistaken assumption in some corners of America that all racial problems went away with the election of President Obama. There was this feeling that we were kind of beyond racism. That's not true. His victory has triggered tremendous backlash."

Along with "no justice, no peace," the words of Jesse Jackson carried with them the following veiled threat: "The indifference to this kind of pain is just going to intensify the protests." Jackson also shared his observation that in America "Blacks are under attack."

Well if that's the case then 90-year-old Caucasian Bob Strait being shot in the face with a BB gun and struggling for his life in an Oklahoma hospital indicates that whites are under attack too.

Someone should inform predictable race-baiters like Jesse Jackson, shameless rally-organizer Al Sharpton, and Barack Obama that every day, regardless of skin color, innocent people are harmed in all kinds of violent incidents. If these men were responsible leaders, what they all would be saying is, 'Let's wait for the police to do their job and finish the investigation, and stop jumping to conclusions.' But they won't cuz' they're not.

And despite an eyewitness report that may now cast the Zimmerman-Martin incident in a whole new light, the militant New Black Panther Party is still busily stapling posters on telephone poles demanding Trayvon Martin's Hispanic shooter, George Zimmerman, be taken by citizens "Dead or Alive."

So, while Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano tracks down 13,000 "unsafe hair dryers" on the border and Barack Obama, in between attending $38,500-a-head fundraisers, does his small part to help stoke racial turmoil, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are openly "capitalizing, recruiting, mobilizing, propagandizing and planning potential attacks." But so far neither the DHS nor the President of the United States have addressed the danger being posed to homeland security by left-wing extremists stirring racial unrest in America's already unstable black communities.

Jeannie DeAngelis

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Institute for Justice on the Individual Mandate

If government-mandated health insurance is upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) case is argued in March 2012, the Institute for Justice warns in its amicus brief that there will be dire and predictable threats to individual liberty and voluntary relations that have been the foundation of American contract law for centuries.

Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, who is the executive director of the Institute's Florida Chapter and who co-authored IJ's brief, said, "The individual mandate violates a cardinal rule of contract law—to be enforceable, all agreements must be voluntary. The Framers understood this, and would never have given the federal government the power to force individuals into lifelong contracts of insurance. The Court should not allow the government to exercise this unprecedented and dangerous power."

As IJ's brief shows, the principle of mutual assent, under which both parties must consent for a contract to be valid, is a fundamental principle of contract law that was well understood during the Founding era and is still a cornerstone of contract law today. Indeed, contracts entered under duress have long been held to be invalid. Yet the mandate forces individuals to enter into contracts of insurance that would never be valid under this longstanding principle. (For a copy of IJ's brief, visit: www.ij.org/PPACAbrief.)

If the U.S. Supreme Court fails to strike down the individual mandate, there will be nothing to stop Congress from forcing people into other contracts against their will—employment contracts or union membership, for example. If we still have a constitutional republic in which the federal government's powers are limited, then the Court should strike down this law.

The Institute for Justice's brief is the only amicus brief filed with the Court that examines this case in the context of the history of contract law. The brief illustrates how the Supreme Court has recognized the principle of consent in commercial relations in its Commerce Clause and Tenth Amendment cases, and it explains why the U.S. Supreme Court has a key role in acting as a check against this unconstitutional power grab by the federal government.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Kevin McCullough - The Face of Obama's Son

I was in the green room on the 12th floor of Fox News building in New York on Friday when I heard the soundbite the first time, "If I had a son he'd look like Trayvon..."

That simple statement had been preceded by nearly two minutes of stating deep and profound "outrage" and "seriousness" in the need to "insure" that "this matter would be investigated to the fullest."

I asked commentator Cal Thomas who was sitting on one of the sofas in the room, "How many child murders have taken place since he took office?"

Cal shrugged his shoulders as if to say, "I have no idea."

"And how many press ops did the president use to comment on a single one of them before now?" I continued.

"Ah yes, but it is an election year," replied Thomas.

Admittedly the Trayvon Martin case had not soaked up a ton of my conscious awareness prior to this week's "1,000,000" er "1,000 hoodie march." But the danger this case poses--I fear--is that it makes a mockery of a good law (Stand Your Ground), serves to foist a false fear on the American people (that suddenly armed citizens will be blowing away innocent teenagers), and is an utterly disgusting display of political hypocrisy. President Obama, Rev. Al Sharpton, and whatever pool of otherwise non-productive citizens can be rallied to chant, scream, and even get a police chief to resign, but none of that makes their cause just, much less necessary.

From the beginning of the Trayvon Martin case it appears as though there is an outrage over the police response to the teen's killing. A police department--it should be pointed out--that employs numbers of African Americans in their ranks.

There is no argument here for police brutality, so Sharpton and the race hustlers must gin up outrage based on timelines, and hearsay based on evidence that may or may not be reflected in the official findings once the full story is known. That's why it's being investigated...

President Obama was right, Trayvon's death is a tragedy. All his bluster Friday in the Rose Garden, ending with the campaign pander of the century--that Trayvon would look just like "my son"--was more or less a side show. All he said, was all the police in Florida, and reasonable pundits in the press have said, "We need to investigate what happened here."

I've lost a child to death, and let me be the first to say that no one can empathize exactly with the family of Trayvon because it's hard to know how to walk a mile in their shoes. We can wish them all the best, but none of it matters when you no longer have your son's smile greeting you as he saunters through the door.

But one thing that is distinctly unhelpful to the Martin family is to claim the investigation, the findings, the evidence, or the process is rigged, prior to the answers being released from the multiple investigations that are still currently in process.

But another thought also strikes me...

Trayvon was shot on February 26. But the son of Melissa Coon was set on fire by two assailants in their late teens on his way home on March 4. The woman's son was only two blocks from his home when two assailants ran him down, doused him in gasoline, and lit him on fire.

The two assailants are thought to be classmates of the boy in the local high school.

The boy's future may hold an outlook that is rather dismal, and filled with pain. It appears he may in fact yet survive and pull through, but to what quality of life?

Everyone is questioning the motive of the shooter in the Trayvon Martin case, he had opportunity, he had access, and he was a lawful owner of a concealed carry weapon.

He also did clearly disobey the police dispatch directly, and probably on that charge alone should be in jail. But if that is the case, the investigation will show that to be the case. The shooter also may have purely shot the boy because he merely hated the color of his skin, and if so--I believe he would be eligible for the death penalty. (A sentence Rev. Al Sharpton regularly campaigns against.)

And though that is a possible theory, there is no evidence of bias or malice towards race uncovered yet.

Eight days later, in the case of the child who was burned, the victim was white, the assailants black, the media silent, and the President indifferent.

But the assailants repeatedly told the victim, "You deserve to die. You get what you deserve white boy."

Even though the victim had made it to the porch of his own home, the black youths rushed him, and burned his face in a huge fireball from the gasoline, fumes, and a pocket lighter. Will the lighter control activist groups take up this hate crime in earnest?

Unlike President Obama I actually am the father of both an African-American and a Caucasian son, if either of these crimes had been perpetrated against either of them, my outrage would've been the same--even equal.

But President Obama's selective outrage seems to follow the television cameras--and in this instance--the trail of rent-a-mobs that accompany Rev. Sharpton.

And as my new friend Cal said, "Ah yes, but it is an election year!"

Kevin McCullough

Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays (7-9am EST) & "Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11pm EST) on 289 stations & Sirius/XM . His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas Nelson Publishers, "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change" is in stores now.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Stanley Kurtz - Barack Obama - Radical-In-Chief

President Barack Obama surprised many voters during a pre-election interview when he approvingly noted that Ronald Reagan had “changed the trajectory of America” in a way that other presidents had not. In effect, Obama was saying that he, too, aimed to transform America in some fundamental way. Yet while Americans in 1982 may have been divided over Reagan’s politics, at least they knew what he stood for. Do we really understand Obama’s vision for our country?

In his controversial new book, veteran journalist Stanley Kurtz culls together two years of investigations from archives and never-before-tapped sources to present an exhaustively-researched exposÉ of President Obama’s biggest secret—the socialist convictions and tactical ruthlessness he has long swept under the rug.

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

Doug Giles - The Seven Videos That Could Destroy Obama’s Reelection Bid

This past week Breitbart.com released a video of a young Obama singing the praises of a race-baiting prof from Harvard. I hate to say this, but I don’t think that particular video is going to dissuade the Obama zombies or the blissfully disengaged from voting for four more years of this fetid mess.

Why the pessimism, you ask? Well, it’s not because the incriminating video is not significant; it clearly is, as it once again establishes BHO’s deep allegiance to the lunatic fringe on the Left. However, his step-n-fetch voting block shares his diehard Euro-socialistic beliefs and does not mind 48 more months of an economic maelstrom at all if it means free candy for them for the rest of their mediocre, jealous lives.

Therefore, not only is that video not going to convert any of them, it will probably have the adverse effect of inciting more economic stupidity and racial bigotry by turning the ones who can read onto the mad scribblings of Derrick Bell and his bellicose beliefs.

Those of the apathetic middle who are paying minimal attention to our political milieu are not going to care enough to watch a 1991 video of Obama talking about crap they’re dispassionate about; they’re more concerned about whether or not Kim Kardashian’s butt is real, and besides, Soledad O’Brien has already told them that there is nothing to the videos. Move along, cattle. Move along.

What Breitbart.com and others have to dig up on Obama has to be so outlandish (like the infamous ACORN videos) that it completely derails the Obama love train and causes his fawners and the American Idol idiots to say, “Ew,” when it comes to voting for him this November.

For example, I’d be on the lookout for pictures, videos or documents such as the following …

1. A photograph of a young Obama kissing a Sarah Palin poster in his dorm room.
2. A video of a 22-year-old Barack clubbing a baby seal with a ball-peen hammer and/or shooting a polar bear with a .416 Rigby.
3. A video of a youthful BHO slow dancing with Lynne Cheney to Air Supply’s 1980 hit, “I’m All Out of Love.”
4. A dredged-up Occidental essay of Obama’s praising de Tocqueville’s tome, Democracy in America.
5. A 1999 video of Barack sitting in the front row of a Blue Collar Comedy show in D.C.
6. A photograph of the interior of Obama’s house with décor from Anthropologie.
7. A video of Barack stealing Sandra Fluke’s condoms she has stockpiled in her dorm then poking a hole in her waterbed and cutting the electric cord to her bedside lava lamp.

These videos, photos and documents alone would be the only empirical evidence that would shatter the spell the Obama machine has used to voodoo the gullibale GP.

No, it doesn’t matter that communist groups, terrorist organizations, or race-baiting preachers and professors endorse him. It’s not important that his economic policies are the failed derivatives of Karl Marx’s, or that gas is heading toward six bucks a gallon, or that his favorite author actually dedicated his book to Lucifer. None of these things faze the Obama fanatics, so I’m afraid investigative journalists are going to have to try harder and dig deeper.

Doug Giles

---

Doug Giles’ new book “If You're Going Through Hell, Keep Going!" is now available. Ann Coulter says "Doug Giles is a substantive and funny tour de force for traditional values.” Doug’s talk show and video blog can be seen and heard at www.ClashRadio.com.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Star Parker - An America Built to Be Last

The theme President Obama gave to his State of the Union address was “An America Built to Last.”

But his vision would be better described as an “An America Built to Be Last.”

As the president asked us to be patient and keep drinking the same kool-aid he’s been serving up for three years, the New York Times reported that the Federal Reserve’s latest assessment of our economy is that “…a full recovery is years away.”

Even his most loyal constituency, black Americans, is losing patience. In Gallup’s latest tracking poll, black approval rate for Obama was 79 percent. This is seventeen points under the 96 percent of blacks who voted for him in 2008, and the first time that black approval has dropped under 80 percent.

The debate will go on for many years about what caused the horrible economic collapse from which we are still trying to recover.

The president continues to sell the idea, which serves his agenda to continue to expand government, that the cause was insufficiently regulated business.

There is much convincing research, in which the president shows little interest, that government caused it, by mandating expansion of low quality mortgages and enabling this expansion because taxpayers ultimately guaranteed these loans.

But economists are still debating what caused the Great Depression of the 1930’s.

What Americans must come to terms with now is what we choose to believe this country is about, why in the past it seemed to work so well, and why today things are falling apart.

According to the president, everything will be okay if we allow him and his government to continue to build and consolidate power over our lives.

He gave more reasons to grow government and barely lip service to what is tearing our nation apart today and dragging it down.

The major factors driving us into insolvency, spending on entitlement programs – Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid – and covering the interest on our nation’s debt, which is now surpassing the size of our entire economy, got attention in two sentences in an hour plus long speech.

The unraveling of our social fabric doesn’t seem to bother our president a whit.

You would think our nation’s leader would be concerned that today four of every ten of our babies are born to unwed mothers.

He called on “every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn eighteen.”

Rather than addressing broken families and why poor kids don’t care about learning, our president thinks he’ll solve this problem by turning our failing public schools into prisons.

It’s nice to know that the president believes what “Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: That government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves, and no more.”

But unlike our president, Lincoln was the Great Emancipator. Lincoln’s agenda was freedom.

According to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation, 54 percent feel that the Supreme Court should find the Obamacare mandate forcing every American to buy government defined health insurance unconstitutional. Only 17% agree with this flagrant violation of individual freedom.

Now the Department of Health and Human Services has ruled that religious institutions must, like all employers under the new Obamacare law, provide free birth control and sterilization services as part of health coverage.

Catholic universities and charitable organizations are now left with the choice of violating their religious convictions, not offering health insurance and pay millions of dollars in fines, or just shut down.

Catholic charities serve over 10 million of America’s poor.

Diminished freedom and moral relativism is no way out of the morass we’re in.

An America built on government, as President Obama sees it, severed from our roots as a free people under God, is surely an America “built to be last.”

Star Parker

---

Star Parker is founder and president of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of the newly revised Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can do About It.

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---

Jeannie DeAngelis - 'Menacing' Barack Bullies Jan Brewer

Originally posted at American Thinker

---

Apparently, sexist "menacing" behavior is only sexist and menacing if the accusation involves a Republican male and a Democratic female. Who can forget back in 2007 when Rick Lazio was accused of aggression against Hillary Rodham Clinton when, during a New York Senate debate, in a display of staged showmanship, Rick Lazio came out from behind his podium waving a piece of paper demanding Hillary concur in the form of a signature.

Liberals went absolutely wild after Mrs. Clinton complained that Lazio "invaded her personal space." The media used the opportunity to reduce the woman in the perpetual pantsuit to a blithering damsel in distress. Despite Hillary making light of the incident and shaking Lazio's hand in agreement, after the fact her spokesman, Howard Wolfson, exploited the situation and called Lazio's behavior "menacing."

Never once mentioning Mrs. Clinton's assertive demeanor during the debate, the New York Times reported that "[m]any supporters of Mrs. Clinton said they found Mr. Lazio to be pushy and disrespectful during the debate in Buffalo -- bullying her in a way that he would not have bullied a male opponent."

Lazio responded by saying, "The idea that somehow that there's a double standard because you're a man or a woman, and you can't make a point forcefully if you're a man, and the person you're making the point with is a woman, I just think that's sexist."

Lazio added, "I don't think people in the Senate worry about whether you're a man or a woman," which is usually true, unless of course a Democratic woman being tied to the tracks by a villainous conservative male stands to gain liberal carpet-bagging political points.

New York voters were manipulated into believing that fearless Hillary recoiled in fear because her opponent, on a stage in Buffalo in front of hundreds of people, walked a few feet from his podium over to hers. In an attempt to depict the always-smiling Rick as a threat to women, the left milked the incident by portraying Hillary as a powerless victim, which ultimately cost Lazio the election.

Fast forward five years and a male liberal president is peeved over a book written by a conservative female Arizona governor. Stepping off Air Force One onto the tarmac in Phoenix, Arizona, rather than being handed a contract similar to the one Lazio attempted to get Hillary to sign in Buffalo, Barack was given a handwritten letter by Governor Jan Brewer inviting him to lunch and a visit to the beleaguered border.

Instead of accepting the invitation, "It's All About Me" Obama felt it was imperative to let Governor Brewer know, right there on the tarmac, that he didn't appreciate her not treating him cordially in her book "Scorpions for Breakfast," where she said that during her tense 2010 meeting at the White House, Obama made her feel "like a little kid."

Six-foot-plus Obama voiced his disapproval of Brewer's account in the book as he towered over the tiny woman. And although when Obama later spoke to Diane Sawyer he shrugged off the incident as inconsequential, Brewer shared that during the confrontation "she felt a little threatened by the exchange."

Ms. Brewer said that in a tense one-on-one interaction, the President "indicated at that point in time that he was a little uncomfortable, a little unappreciative, if you will, of my book in the way that he was portrayed in it. And I felt a little unnerved by the way that he spoke to me about it."

In other words, in this case it was a Democratic male who, according to Brewer's interpretation of what happened, was indeed "menacing." Under other circumstances, even without corroborative proof, a similar accusation by a female would be instantly met with righteous indignation and vocal concern by the defenders of feminine sensibility residing on the left.

Hypocritical liberals who, if a conservative man is involved, will always defend a liberal woman, are now saying that Barack Obama was put upon by a disrespectful, finger-wagging "racist" named Jan Brewer. What does it say about Democrats when a conservative woman accuses a man of intimidating behavior and the duplicitous left, quite out of character, is willing to disregard the allegation of male hostility and give the benefit of the doubt to a menacing bully?

The difference is obvious when compared to the way the left reacted to Hillary Clinton being approached on a fully-lit stage in front of hundreds of people who heard every word Rick Lazio said. Now, rather than defend a pint-sized woman's claim that she was verbally smacked down by a powerful man historically known to be "thin-skinned," the left is more than willing to abandon their usual condemnation of perceived sexist aggression toward women and side with a hypersensitive bully merely because he's a liberal.

Jeannie DeAngelis

---

Jeannie DeAngelis writes almost exclusively for American Thinker and has been published on the conservative website Pajamas Media, as well as hosting a blog. See Jeannie's Blog

---

NOTE: To share or email this 'Specific' article, you must click on the Title of the article.

---