Cheney's Speech: Obama "Deserves an Answer" (transcript)

Dick Cheney continues to slam President Obama from his current attack mode.Just moments after Obama's address Thursday at the National Archives, Cheney was seen on news networks moving toward a podium where he was about to issue an involved rebuttal of the president's current policies.As Cheney moved forward with his speech, the  attacks, says Huffington Post's, Nico Pitney, "became more caustic, vicious, and personal."

read complete article   

There's more...

Going Galt -- Conservatives love Ayn Rand?

"Going Galt " - Conservatives Love Ayn Rand? by Al Bratton April 3, 2009 "What with all this economic turmoil of late, not to mention a suspected socialist in the White House, right-wing pundits like femmebot Michelle Malkin and fellow Fox-friendly cretin Glenn Beck are looking to `author, philosopher and female comb-over pioneer' Ayn Rand for guidance. Stephen Colbert thinks they should move to an island all their own, where less work gets done on purpose." 90312_colbert_report_conservatives_heart s_ayn_rand/ In almost every nook and cranny of the internet these days it seems there can be found some citation to Rand and her book Atlas Shrugged and "Going Galt"an allusion to John Galt the main character in the 1957 novel. In one instance, a web page was captioned "Conservatives Love Ayn Rand." The website The Democratic Strategists, posted an article by Ed Kilgore titled, "Rand & Conservatives: A Reminder to Galt Fans" March 15, 2009. read the complete article: ac/2009/03/rand_and_conservatives_a_remi n.php These are excerpts from Kilgore's article: One of the odder phenomena of contemporary public life is the enthusiasm of conservative gabbers and even elected officials for the idea of "Going Galt:" the suggestion that the oppressed wealthy of America withdraw their vast contributions to the commonwealth in protest against the supposedly confiscatory taxes and redistribution of income to the morally depraved underway at the behest of the Obama administration. The allusion is to John Galt, the hero of Ayn Rand's 1957 novel, Atlas Shrugged, that massive tome that represented the Summa of her rigorously capitalist, atheist, and anti-altruist philosophy of "Objectivism," which has captured a vast number of adolescents and an impressive number of adults over the last several decades. I've written about this in the context of U.S. Rep. John Campbell's (R-CA) claim that "we're living through the scenario" laid out in Atlas Shrugged, wherein the industrial leaders of the West, ..." drop out, take to the Rockies, and finally, through Galt's voice--...chastise an economically helpless nation. about "going Galt" has spread like kudzu. It's merged, ... with the Rick-Santelli-spawned Tea Party "movement" of "productive" people fed up with the poor-and-minority scum .... ... I also don't need to analyze the absurdity of well-heeled, not-going-anywhere conservative bloggers and pundits like Michelle Malkin ... to encourage others to "go Galt,"... ... I'd like to ... remind folks tempted to "go Gault" or to gush ignorantly about the subject in blogs or on Fox that they are flirting with a philosophy... expressly hostile to anything that could remotely be described as "conservative." ... Galt's speech, ...the inspiration for all this excited Tea Party chatter, was a distillation of Rand's ... philosophy of Objectivism, ... And Rand, ... would ... object to use of her words and character, ... by political "conservatives," whom she ... despised as life-hating slaves to an imaginary God, ... The following are a sprinkling of quotes from Rand's work:. --Conservatism: An Obituary" from Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal I consider National Review the worst and most dangerous magazine in America...[b]ecause it ties capitalism to religion. The ideological position of National Review amounts, in effect, to the following: In order to accept freedom and capitalism, one has to believe in God or in some form of religion, some form of supernatural mysticism." [...] Rand On Religion: Faith, as such, is extremely detrimental to human life: it is the negation of reason. Rand on Abortion: Abortion is a moral right--which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered. [...] Rand on Ronald Reagan: I am profoundly opposed to Ronald Reagan. Since he denies the right to abortion, he cannot be a defender of any rights. Since he has no program or ideology to offer, his likeliest motive for entering a Presidential race is power-lust. [...] "Going Galt"- Conservatives Love Ayn Rand? Do they really?

A Mississippi Blue Dog DemoRepub Misfit

Letter to the Editor

A Mississippi Blue Dog DemoRepub Misfit

April 1, 2009

by Al Bratton

On Mar. 18, 2009 an article appeared in the Tupelo Mississippi Daily Journal titled "Senators, Childers Voice Opposition to Card Check Bill" by Joe Rutherford.

Republican Sens. Thad Cochran , Roger Wicker and Democrat Rep. Travis Childers of the Northeast Mississippi First District congressional delegation all confirmed they plan to vote no on the proposed Employee Free Choice Act [EFCA], Rutherford wrote.

There's more...

Major Biology Conference Shuns Louisiana

"The executive committee of the Society of Integrative and Comparative Biology decided not to hold any future meetings in New Orleans owing to 'the official position of the state in weakening science education and specifically attacking evolution in science curricula,' according to a February 5, 2009, letter (PDF) from SICB's president, Richard Satterlie, to Louisiana's governor Bobby Jindal. Noting that the last SICB meeting, held in Boston, attracted over 1850 scientists and graduate students to the city for five days, Satterlie observed, 'As you might imagine, a professional meeting with nearly 2000 participants can contribute to the economic engine of any community.' But in 2011, those economic benefits will accrue to Salt Lake City rather than to New Orleans."read more

More On Solo Earmarks

More on Solo Congressional Earmarks Al Bratton March, 14, 2009 In a front page March 5, 2009, Tupelo Mississippi Daily Journal article by Editor Joe Rutherford, titled "Bill has $80 million in Miss. earmarks," Rutherford writes in reference to President Obama's $410 billion omnibus appropriations bill: In defining "earmarks," Rutherford explains: "Earmarks, simply stated, are Congressional provisions directing approved funds to be spent on specific projects.""Senators Thad Cochran (R) and Senator Roger Wicker (R) remain the leaders in directing money to their state." Describing Wicker's tenure "as Mississippi First District Congressman and seven term member of the House Appropriations Committee", Rutherford pointed out that, "Wicker and Cochran, ...were the leading earmark users in Congress." Earlier, Rutherford wrote "simply stated" as he defined earmarks which seems a little too "simply stated" when one considers the whole story, the whole ball of wax where more should be known: According to the Washington Post, "Wicker's Earmark Elicits Criticism" in 2007, he apparently took it upon himself to obtain a solo "$ 6 million earmark for Aurora whose executives were among his top campaign contributors and were represented in the process by Wicker's former congressional chief of staff according to federal records." ticle/2008/01//15/AR2008011503355.html

Coulter Defends White Supremacists

I dare say all Liberals are familiar with far-right Ann Coulter and her notorious, rabid rant. But, at any rate, here are a few chosen examples to help refresh your memory: Bill Clinton is a "very good rapist,"Al Gore is a "total fag," Democrats are "gutless traitors," Muslims are "ragheads" and America should "kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity," Jews need to be "perfected," the New York Times building including its editorial staff should be bombed, Justice John Paul Stevens needs to have "rat poison" mixed in his food, Princess Diana "had sex in front of her children, Al Sharpton is a "fat, race-baiting black man," North Korea should be "nuked."and more.

According to a recent report by Mark Potok Feb. 13, 2009, from the Southern Poverty Law Center's white supremacist/hate watch group, Coulter has, in her latest book, Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America, devoted the better part of three pages bolstering a white supremacist hate group known as the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) which the New York Times has described as a "thinly veiled white supremacist organization." Coulter, on the other hand, wholeheartedly disagrees: The CCC she says, " is a conservative group that has been unfairly branded as racist because some of the directors of the CCC had, decades earlier, been leaders of a segregationist group." Continuing, Coulter says, "There is no evidence on its web page that the modern incarnation of the CCC supports segregation.""Apart from some aggressive reporting on black-on-white crimes -- the very crimes that are aggressively hidden by the establishment media -- there is little on the CCC website suggesting" that the group is racist. Indeed, its main failing is "containing members who had belonged to a segregationist group thirty years earlier."

Coulter could hardly be more wrong. And even if she can't find time to read beyond a page of the CCC's website, she really ought to know -- after all, the organization where she frequently speaks, the Conservative Political Action Committee, has publicly banned the CCC from its annual gathering because it is racist. Also in the late 1990s, Jim Nicholson, then-chairman of the Republican National Committee, asked GOP members to stay away from the CCC because of its "racist and nationalist views."

Mark Potok outlines some of the CCC's racist commentary that has appeared on their website:
The CCC's columnists have written that black people are "a retrograde species of humanity," and that non-white immigration is turning the U.S. population into a "slimy brown mass of glop." Its website has run photographic comparisons of pop singer Michael Jackson and a chimpanzee. It opposes "forced integration" and decries racial intermarriage. It has lambasted black people as "genetically inferior," complained about "Jewish power brokers," called gay people "perverted sodomites," and even named the late Lester Maddox, the baseball bat-wielding, arch-segregationist former governor of Georgia, "Patriot of the Century."


But to Ann Coulter, there is "no evidence" on its website that the CCC "supports segregation." Mostly, she says, the group -- which was formed from the debris of the White Citizens Councils that Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall once called "the uptown Klan" -- is about "a strong national defense, the right to keep and bear arms, the traditional family, and an `America First' trade policy." Indeed, she says, The New York Times and other critics of the CCC are simply liberals "who have no principles."

read the complete article ist-ann-coulter-defends-white-supremacis t-group/

The following excerpt is from the CofCC website is typical white supremacy, white nationalist rant:

<Obama Nation- Whose America? What Now?<p>

When I was in the airport yesterday, the first thing I saw after finding out that Barack Hussein Obama was elected President was a Black man holding hands with a trashy White woman. The first thing that came to my mind was, "after my ancestors came here on the Mayflower, served in every war our country has fought, and founded this great country on White ideals; these race-mixers have taken it over with one fowl swoop."

That's right. It doesn't matter that Hussein Obama's mother was a trashy White gutter-tramp, his heritage has nothing to do with ours'. I love this country. I love my people. And if you think Hussein Obama has any regard for the well-being of my people, our history or our heritage, just read his Black manifesto "Dreams From My (Deadbeat) Father" or ask his raving, Black nationalist lunatic wife Michelle or Pastor Jeremiah Wright.

I'm proud that Alabama voted overwhelmingly for John McCain, and more importantly for Sarah Palin. I'm proud that the Deep South voted as a block. Many believe that our region is backward, but that's because they don't have enough sense to pour pee out of a boot with somebody reading them instructions.>


read more obama-nation-whose-america-and-what-now

The following excerpt is a comment on segregation of the races and secession from the website American Renaissance Secession & Racial Nationalism which is linked to the Council of Conservative Citizens (Cof CC) home site:

<"One can defend or attack the desirability of secession; examine and criticize past or present secessionist movements from a racial nationalist perspective; evaluate existing secessionist and partition proposals (e.g., Wilmot Robertson's The Ethnostate, Harold Covington's Northwest Quartet, the proposals of Michael Hart, Edgar Steele, and others); address specific problems that secessionist movements must solve, etc."

There is no need for this, none at all!

I am a white man and an American, and this is my country, end of discussion!

These: blacks; Asians; "Latinos;" Arabs; and all the other assorted individuals "of color," or otherwise "differently aggrieved" political positions, can simply get lost as far as I am concerned!

I do not see splitting this country up and handing chunks of it to the nonwhite breeders and feeders, as an "equitable" solution. Quite the contrary, my position is the same as that of the late and great Dr. Samuel T. Fancis; this being, that whites should reconquer their country.
As Dr. Francis himself noted in his March 1995 article for American Renaissance, "Prospects for Racial and Cultural Survival:"


The answer is, quite simply, the reconquest of the United States. This reconquest does not involve any restoration of white supremacy in the political and legal sense that obtained under slavery or segregation, and there is no reason why nonwhites who reside in the United States could not enjoy equality of legal rights. But a white reconquest of the United States would mean the supremacy of whites in a cultural sense, or in the sense of what is nowadays called "Eurocentrism." There are essentially three things that whites must do in order to carry out this reconquest of the nation and culture they have almost lost:

(1) Whites must formulate a white racial consciousness that identifies racial and biological endowments as important and relevant to social behavior, and their own racial endowments as essential to the continuing existence of Euro-American civilization. The formation of a white racial consciousness does not mean that whites should think of themselves only as whites, to the exclusion of ethnic, national, religious, regional, class, or other identities, nor that individuality should yield to the collective category of race. It means merely that we recognize racial realities, that we recognize that racial-biological endowments are necessary to certain kinds of human behavior (e.g., the political and civic behavior appropriate to stable self-government, the work habits and life-styles appropriate to a dynamic economy; the intellectual behavior that is necessary for science and scholarship, etc.) and that because these endowments are largely unique to whites, the behavior they make possible cannot be replicated by most nonwhites.

Nor does the formation of white racial consciousness mean that we should conceive of ourselves only as biological beings to the exclusion of religious or metaphysical identities. Racial consciousness means that we add recognition of biological and racial factors to our traditional concepts of human nature and modify both our biological and non-biological conceptions of what man is, as evidence and reason dictate. It may be true that some traditional religious and metaphysical conceptions would not survive recognition of the scientific realities of race, just as some did not survive earlier scientific discoveries in astronomy, geology, and biology.

But the formation of white racial consciousness does mean that whites would recognize themselves as a race and their racially based behavior as legitimate, and hence it would mean the end of tolerance for nonwhite assaults on white people and the norms of white civilization. Whites would simply no longer countenance nonwhite aggression and insults or the idolization of nonwhite heroes, icons, and culture; white children would be raised in accordance with what is proper to being white, and norms openly recognized as appropriate to whites would be the legitimizing and dominant norms of American society as they were prior to the 1960s. Racial guilt and truckling would end.

(2) Based on this racial consciousness, whites must counter the demographic threat they face from immigration and nonwhite fertility and whites' own infertility. This means (a) an absolute halt to all future legal immigration into the United States, deployment of the armed forces on the appropriate borders to cut off illegal immigration, and deportation of all illegal immigrants (and perhaps many recent legal immigrants); (b) the end of subsidies for the nonwhite birth rate through welfare programs, obligatory use of contraception by welfare recipients, and encouragement of its use among nonwhites, and (c) encouragement of increases in white fertility.

(3) Whites must correct the political and legal order to end the political power of nonwhite minorities and their white anti-white allies. This political effort would involve a radical dismantling of all affirmative action and civil rights legislation as well as a good part of the federal governmental superstructure that entrenches minority power. It also would require recovering an understanding of constitutional law that permits local and state governments to govern, and private institutions to function independently of government.

In short, as I see it, the legalized and enforced development of a "white racial consciousness," that is unapologetic. Moreover, that also employs, for lack of a better term, "punitive ostracism" against all whites who refuse to comply with it as a governing policy of the USA. That would be the overriding key element here, the total smashing of the totalitarian "multicultural" dynamic that we now live under.

From there, and as Dr. Francis also notes, white majority preservation and enhancement should be embarked upon. Along with ever tightening and strict reductions in nonwhites' pernicious influences on our culture and country at every measurable level. It does not have to be bloody, or even require excessive force, as a break-up might; it only requires a determined understanding that "freedom" for nonwhites has limits in the USA. These limits being, `live by our established rules and standards, or get out.'

Enough said!>

very interesting and there is more: say_competiti.phf

But Coulter insists there is no white supremacy on the Council of Conservative Citizens website. Well, the old girl is the "queen of misinformation" for sure. She proves it every time she takes up her pen to write or opens her mouth to speak.

And, there are many more revelations that can be exposed by tracing the activity of certain right-wing individuals on the network of white nationalists/supremacists internet sites.

There's more...

Ann Coulter Defends White Supremacists

I dare say all Liberals are familiar with far-right Ann Coulter and her notorious, rabid rant. But, at any rate, here are a few chosen examples to help refresh your memory: Bill Clinton is a "very good rapist,"Al Gore is a "total fag," Democrats are "gutless traitors," Muslims are "ragheads" and America should "kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity," Jews need to be "perfected," the New York Times building including its editorial staff should be bombed, Justice John Paul Stevens needs to have "rat poison" mixed in his food, Princess Diana "had sex in front of her children, Al Sharpton is a "fat, race-baiting black man," North Korea should be "nuked."and more.

There's more...


Advertise Blogads