Linswritings

Archive for October 2011

I’m sure you’ve heard Joe Biden, V.P comments in regard to Congress not passing the President’s Jobs Bill. He said that rape and murder will go up. But if you think this type of nasty rhetoric is just coming from Biden, you are wrong. This week, the First Lady, Michelle Obama,speaking at a fundraiser at a private residence in Tampa, FL, told the audience that a Republican victory in 2012 presidential election would result in curbs on freedom and speech and religion.

But she was just warming up. She claims that the power of the president to appoint members of the Supreme Court would cause these problems. Huh?

This is what she said: Let’s not forget about what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices — (applause) — and for the first time in history, our daughters — and our sons — watched three women take their seats on our nation’s highest court. (Applause.) But more importantly, let’s not forget the impact those decisions will have on our lives for decades to come — on our privacy and security, on whether we can speak freely, worship openly, and love whomever we choose. That is what’s at stake here. (Applause.)

Mrs. Obama’s contention that Republican justices would curtail people’s abilities to “love whomever we choose” appears to suggest Republicans would go beyond opposition to gay marriage and move to limit gay relationships. President Obama himself claims he opposes gay marriage, so her suggestion that Republican-selected justices would jeopardize the ability to “love whomever we choose” cannot possibly refer to gay marriage.

As she has previously, Michelle also posits racism on the part of Republicans, indicating their policies would lead to discrimination against children based on “what they look like.” Will we be a country where opportunity is limited to just the few at the top? Who are we? Or will we give every child a chance to succeed no matter where they’re from, or what they look like or how their money parents are — have. Who are we?

Oh yes folks, the nastiness is starting with this 2012 presidential election. But then, Michelle Obama for the first time in her life is proud of her country. Marie Antoinette couldn’t say it any better.

Advertisements

This idiotic situation has been on the news lately and quite frankly I don’t see what the problem is with the Muslim claim that their human rights were violated. After all they did pick a “catholic” university to attend. What were they thinking would be the ambience of the university? Secular – no there will be religious symbols that reflect the university’s theology.

The Catholic University in Washington, D.C. is being investigated by the Washington D.C. Office of Human Rights over allegations  that it violated human rights of Muslim students by not allowing them to form a Muslim student group and not providing rooms without Christian symbols for their daily prayers.

Except for the obvious this is a “private” school that really doesn’t need to be politically correct. I saw a debate on Sean Hannity  last night with a Muslim representative and he could not come up with a cogent explanation or rebuttal for this idiotic investigation.

A more recent article on TownHall written by Katie Pavlich says this case involves an overzealous, activist lawyer from George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf.  In fact, not a single Muslim student at Catholic University has signed on to Professor Banzhaf’s complaint and he admitted to her that he lodged the complaint against Catholic with the D.C. Office of Human Rights as a concerned individual, not on behalf of any student or group of students.

Professor Banzhaf teaches a course at GWU on “legal activism” — the practice of using legal maneuvers to drive social change.  “While most lawyers see the law as a means of living, the legal activist looks to see what kinds of problems I’m interested
in and how I can use legal activism as a weapon to address those problems,” Banzhaf says.

So what really happened here was that Banzhaf wanted his fifteen minutes of fame by bringing on a frivolous request for an investigation. Guess he doesn’t have much to do so he’s keeping not only himself but others with busy work.

I guess with all the problems we are having in this country someone had to come up with a ridiculous story of the week. I’m a Denver Bronco fan and I do like Tim Tebow. So now sports stars, fans and kids are doing what they call “Tebowing.”

If you don’t know what this is, it is the prayer position that Denver Broncos Quarterback Tim Tebow does after making a touchdown. Tebowing.com says tebowing is a verb that means “to get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.”

Now I’ve seen other football players doing the same thing. But someone with a weird sense of humor thinks this is funny. A Google search of tebowing shows firefighters, Marines, yoga practicers, kids, sports figures and even a teammate of Tebow’s tebowing.

In one picture, Broncos rookie Von Miller, wearing a No. 15 jersey (Tebow’s number), poses in the tebowing position in front of the Broncos logo at team headquarters.

A photo on tebowing.com shows Colorado Rapids star Omar Cummings tebowing after scoring a goal on Wednesday night in the MLS playoffs.

Tim Tebow is even tweeting about tebowing. On Wednesday night he tweeted, “Love it!”

You may not know but Tim Tebow is a very religious young man and thank goodness he has a sense of humor. But I guess whatever helps out the Broncos to win I’m all for it.

Here is a picture of tebowing:

Now this really boils my blood! I think my head is going to explode!

After a complaint from the Mexican government, a U.S. Border Patrol agent has been sentenced to two years in prison for “violating” the constitutional rights of a 15-year-old drug smuggling suspect by not “lifting his arms properly.” The Obama Justice Department has accused the agent of using “unnecessary force,” in handling the suspect while handcuffed.

Agent Jesus E. Diaz Jr. was named in a November 2009 federal grand jury indictment with deprivation of rights under color of law during an October 2008 arrest near the Rio Grande in Eagle Pass, Texas, in response to a report that illegal immigrants had crossed the river with bundles of drugs.

Defense attorneys argued that there were no injuries or bruises on the suspected smuggler’s lower arms where the handcuffs had been placed or any bruising resulting from an alleged knee on his back. Photos showed the only marks on his body came from the straps of the pack he carried containing the suspected drugs, they said.

The defense claimed that the smuggling suspect was handcuffed because he was uncooperative and resisted arrest, and that the agent had lifted his arms to force him to the ground – a near-universal police technique – while the other agents looked for the drugs.

The allegations against Diaz, 31, a seven-year veteran of the Border Patrol, initially were investigated by Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which cleared the agent of any wrongdoing.

Despite being cleared of any wrong doing by the I.C.E.  Office of Professional Responsibility and the DHS Inspector General, the Obama Justice Department went forward with prosecution against Diaz.

Considering the Obama Justice Department is full of former ACLU lawyers, this situation is extremely disappointing but not surprising. After all, this is the same Justice Department that wanted to prosecute Navy SEALS for “punching terrorists in the stomach,” prosecute CIA agents who conducted water boarding and the same department headed by Attorney General Eric Holder who thinks terrorists deserve the same rights as law abiding American citizens. The Obama Justice Department has made it clear they are more concerned with fulfilling the interests of foreign countries, in this case Mexico, than protecting American citizens. In addition, the Obama Justice Department has made it clear they have no respect for our Border Patrol agents in light of Operation Fast and Furious, the lethal gun running operation that resulted in the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Terry’s family still hasn’t received an apology from the Justice Department for their role in the operation.

Once again, I’m calling for Eric Holder’s resignation or firing and I’m now including all of his goons in his Justice Department. Who
are they protecting? Not U.S. citizens. This man has got to go and we have to clean out this dirty Justice Department.

I saw this video on YouTube by Bill Whittle entitled: Three and a Half Days. In the video Bill Whittle explains his theory about the Occupy Wall Street protesters. He says that the protesters have been raised as entitlement babies and now feel that they have lost the entitlement because of the economic times.

He further says how he would fix the entitlement mentality by making everyone from the age of 10 to 60 years old spend at least three and a half days in the woods. In this way, they would understand that it takes hard work to survive and not whine about when they are getting everything they want in life.

You can see the video here: Three and a Half Days – warning there is a commercial just before the video that you can click out of to watch the video.

Once again President Obama is planning to come to Denver to pitch his American Jobs Act and of course to do fund raising for his
campaign. Why am I writing about his visit? Because the Denver area is expecting a huge snow storm when he plans to visit Denver. Oh the irony!

Also there are limited tickets that will be given only to students, faculty and staff at certain Denver colleges and universities. I don’t see tickets given to the Occupy Denver protesters. I think they should move their protest to the University of Colorado Denver. Wouldn’t that make it interesting news at five?

As I have said multiple times, follow the money and you’ll find out the truth about this Occupy Wall Street protest. It seems that in New York the money takes you to some of the country’s largest labor unions. This is according to an article in the Washington Post by Peter Wallsten.

And in return, Occupy activists are pitching in to help unions ratchet up action against several New York firms involved in labor  disputes with workers. In one case, Occupy activists have helped union workers disrupt Sotheby’s art auction house, which is engaged in a contract dispute with about 40 of its art handlers.  Another is a joint demonstration of Occupy activists and telephone
workers is planned for Friday to target Verizon, and Occupy organizers say more unions are reaching out to a newly formed labor relations committee to ask for help in planning future actions.

The coordination represents a new chapter for the anti-Wall Street activists, who have expressed anger at establishment forces in both major political parties and eschewed the traditional grass-roots organizing tactics long deployed by labor unions.

It also suggests an evolution for organized labor, which retains close ties to President Obama and the Democratic Party but sees the
Occupy protests as a galvanizing moment. Some union officials concede that their efforts to highlight income inequality and other economic concerns have fallen short, scoring few victories with a White House that many on the left see as too close with Wall Street.

Leaders in both camps acknowledge that joining forces does not necessarily make for an easy marriage. Some Occupy activists consider it a chance to push the increasingly weak union movement into a more aggressive posture.

“We’re hoping this will inspire them to take on more militant tactics,” said Jackie DiSalvo, an Occupy Wall Street organizer who has
been coordinating with labor. “The fact that they’re willing to support more militant tactics might mean that they’re willing to start doing more.” Sounds like calling for violence to me.

What does this mean about these protesters? What happened to the “99%” they were protesting for? All of a sudden, they are now looking for bigger fish to fry by linking up with unions and wanting to use violence to get their message across. But what was their message? It was never clear, just a bunch of punks who want to protest for protest sake and disrupt good citizens’ lives as well as cost money for law enforcement to protect them.

The sooner New York and other cities kick these protesters out the better.