PDX Car Bomb Plot Should Raise Questions

When Mohamed Osman Mohamud walked away from his car bomb to detonate it using a cell phone, what if a Portland police officer who was not in on the sting tried to act? Portland has been plagued with public outcry over police shootings and the atmosphere surrounding the the use of deadly force makes officers question themselves before they act. If an officer had reason to believe there was a threat I would hope he would act without restraint to protect the innocent lives. Unfortunately, the likes of Jessie Jackson and Police Chief Mike Reese create a real threat when they punish officers for taking action to protect the public.

Portland Police Chief Mike Reese fired Officer Ronald Frashour for the fatal shooting of a suicidal man who failed to follow police instructions. Although the man was later found to be unarmed, repeated requests to stand down, and the initial shooting of non lethal rounds also failed to stop the suspect. Aaron M. Campbell was killed and Rev. Jessie Jackson stepped into the media spotlight to further prosecute the Portland cop and make a national sensation of the situation.

Fast-forward to Friday night, during the November 26th Portland tree lighting ceremony and think about who you have running your Police department. The leadership will fire officers for using deadly force, and here you had a potential situation where an unarmed man had the intent to kill 1000's of innocent lives.

Fortunately this situation was all a sting, the explosives were fake, and the FBI had control of the situation. Remember Portland withdrew from the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in 2005. God help us if we need to rely on Mayor Sam Adam's leadership or Police Chief Mike Reese for protection in any future attempt.

A big thanks to the FBI for catching this terrorist, but as for your fearless Portland leader, don't worry, he is on the Q-Patrol,

New EPA Disinformation Stickers

The Environmental Protection Agency is now propping up it's car company, GM with new fuel rating stickers to convince consumers that Hybrid and Electric cars will save the planet.

With a 37% government stake in GM, is this not a a conflict of interest? Why allow the EPA to be the credible source for fuel efficiency data on a company the government holds a large share?

Notice how they use a 60MPG claim when doing a comparison to "compact cars" yet this 60MPG economy rating is a composite of using a plug in charging source, and not purely gallons of fuel. This is totally bias and an unfair comparison to real world economic measures, especially when considering how there are little to NO all electric or plug in charging vehicles on the road.

The real numbers are the tiny energy cost numbers in the lower right. When you compare the "Never Charge" numbers you only get 9 cents per mile. An economy diesel fuel vehicle will cost you between 6 and 8 cents per mile depending on the price diesel of fuel in your area.

What is sad about this farce is they want you to be environmentally conscious but fail to inform you that the majority of electricity in this country is produced by burning coal. The EPA won't promote diesel engines because they want you to believe the are a bigger pollutant, but when you calculate the extra miles you go on a gallon of diesel it actually pollutes less than gas.

The other major flaw in this EPA sticker is the price per uses 11 cents per kilowatt hour and $3.20 per gallon of gas. At the time of this post, the US average kWh is 12 cents and the gas price is less than $2.87 per gallon. This EPA sticker grossly mis-represents both energy costs to favor the electric vehicle. If you live in CA you will pay 15 cents per kWh to charge yet only 3.14 for a gallon of gas. New Yorkers will pay 19 cents for each kWh of power, yet only $3.00 for a gallon of regular gas. Worse yet, they show a cost per year if you use the car exclusively Electric OR Gas further swinging the bias of this sticker. How can they reliably publish this information considering the volatile energy market and regional differences in cost?

Now consider that Obama hopes to electric rates "necessarily skyrocket" and his administration supports banning oil drilling and exploration, no matter what you use to power your car you will be paying more than ever before. Obama has no interest in america's energy independence, but is more focused than ever on killing any effort to develop domestic oil supplies. What does you car run on? What can you afford to buy? At a $41,000 price tag, I won't be buying a "VOLT" any time soon.

Don't get fooled folks, until we get serious about developing affordable energy supplies, it won't matter if your car runs on hopes or dreams, it will cost you plenty.

Mr. K's Doomsday Plan

John Kitzhaber's Plan For Oregon

"Create the fundamental conditions for long-term job creation and prosperity. Achieving these conditions will require transformational changes in a number of major systems including education, public finance, health care and energy."

If I understand this correctly he will create jobs simply by "Changing" our education, "PUBLIC" finance, health care and energy systems? Since when did ANY of these systems create substantial job growth or reverse economic recessions? Were DOOMED!

John Kitzhaber's "Actions"

"Create Access to Capital" Isn't that what the Obama stimulus and bank bailouts were for? More loans and debts for business will not create jobs. Cutting taxes, red tape, and eliminating bureaucratic roadblocks will.

"Promote Energy Efficiency" How does this create jobs in Oregon? Will someone explain this to me? Sure saving energy saves money, but not when the global warming mafia will then tax your use of energy to off set any savings you may gain.

"Connect Oregonians to work through training for high demand jobs." What does that mean? Is that even a sentence? I had to click through his website to figure it out.Mr K will get out-of-work Oregonians, specifically those in the construction trade to learn how to do commercial insulation and weatherization work, build windmills and install solar panels. Some may become nurses and Dr's too because you know the health care industry will need all those unemployed people after they complete their 8 years of training.

I have to hold back my urge to use profanity as I read the Kitzhaber plan for Economic Prosperity. We are DOOMED, if we don't get this state off the backs of the small business. I am still in shock that this election was decided by Multnomah and Lane counties. Even more disappointing is how so many don't understand how continuing these business hostile policies do nothing but kill jobs and stifle economic growth.

Those of you unemployed, or underemployed, better jump on one of John's job programs soon. There are nearly 400,000 unemployed Oregonians that will be looking to John for a job thinning forests, something tells me those jobs will go quickly.

If your suffering like me from lack of inspiration, read his plan for yourself. I did because were now stuck with him, I want to know what to expect. As I feared, my it is worse than I originally thought.

Empathy Kills

Empathy, the understanding and entering into another's feelings, according to Webster, is being used today to peddle everything from judicial activism to nationalized universal health care. The problem is empathy sounds great, but in the wrong hands can kill you.

The health care debate is heating up and the opponents are accused of greed and lack of empathy, while the backers believe the only way to care for those who don't have insurance is to give it to them freely. As if all of those without health insurance just can't afford it. That last part is the biggest of the lies, but without it, you the people will lack the empathy to support his radical and final turn to communism.

Yes, I used the word communism, because that is exactly what is being proposed. Government ownership and control of our economy. Don't take my word for it, that is not the subject of this post, but it is real and it is here.

Back to empathy, you will notice that Obama picked Sotomeyer because of her empathy. He uses empathy to stir up emotional accounts of folks without health coverage going bankrupt and not able to care for their kids illness, ignoring facts that most states already have provisions for these people. The illusion that government will fix the problem is fueled by your fear of being labeled greedy and lacking empathy.

Empathy by definition is understanding someone else feelings but the rising costs of health care is partially the result of jury's empathy towards patients in malpractice suits that result in obscene judgements against doctors and hospitals. The cost of malpractice insurance had annual increases at times as much as 25%, and the trial lawers who profit as much as 50% on these large settlements then blame this on greedy insurance providers. Let's be clear, insurance companies compete for business to keep costs down. Lawyers don't have to compete for plaintiffs, they pick and choose the most profitable cases and then use the system to win big. John Edwards made his fortune and fooled the whole nation that he was driven by empathy not greed, while he cheated on his cancer ridden wife during his presidential campaign, but enough about trial lawyers.

Let's get back to more lies about empathy, health care, and insurance. Congress has empathy, but they won't sign on to the same health care they propose to give the people. Several years ago the talking points of the DNC was that every American should be able to have the same coverage that they have, but they then wrote into the law the exclusive exclusion of congress from conforming to the plan. While law will dictate what health coverage you must have, they get to keep theirs as is and paid for by you and me.

Now for my final point, and this is where the words matter. We don't' need everyone to have the benefit of health care coverage. We need to create incentive to purchase insurance not hand out free benefits. Benefits are services you get for free, a 20 something healthy student needs insurance in the event of an injury or catastrophic event, not regular Dr. visits, and coverage for everything from mental health to chiropractic care. There is no way congress can draft legislation to both cover those who need it without paying for those who don't. In the end we will be paying for 'benefits' to those who will suck off the system, while then having to ration needed care for those who may require immediate and live saving treatments. Cancer mortality rates are much higher in nations with socialized medicine precisely because free health care is not sustainable. The private sector and a safty net approach is a rational answer but while congress has full power to create more government programs, and control another 20% of our GDP. That's what this is about, CONTROL, not empathy.

Most younger American's pay more per month to have internet access and a cell phone than what a catastrophic health insurance premium would cost. What is the incentive to be responsible when you can use the system that exists, and get that care for free or worst case file bankruptcy.

If we open the door to government provided care it is a door we cannot close, just like Canada, and the UK, the care will be rationed, waiting lists and reviews will slow the system down, and when we are talking about medical issues, it is LITERALLY a life and death decision.

Federal Medical Malpractice

National universal health care sounds so appealing. My employer provides coverage but I pay a big portion of the cost, and the cost keeps increasing. Why wouldn't I want the government to bail me out of this expense too?!

What the media and your power hungry representatives fail to show is how this model has failed in nearly every place it was attempted, and on top of that, the current plan is designed to force out all all other forms of health insurance and medical coverage.

To sum up what is going on, imagine if you were offered a free car insurance program that covered all your liability and comprehensive needs regardless of your driving record. You would jump all over that, cancel your current plan and be driving all over the road with no concern about your rates because, your not paying for it! Now imagine that to get this program affordable, the insurance program only paid a fraction of the actual cost of the body work or claims made on your insurance. Who would accept this insurance policy as payement? Nobody right? Well not if your the government was to force everyone to accept your coverage, and mandate all claims be covered at the terms the governments program dolls out as payment in full. Government run car insurance may be a fantasy but government run health insurance already exists and Obama plans to make it universal.

This is the latest wealth redistribution plan being pushed and everyone has a hand out ready for it. Insurance companies are eager to get the subsidy to look the other way. Hospitals are eager for a solution to pay for losses they get for caring for the uninsured so they have a hand out the the government. Dr's are stuck ither not practicing or accepting insurance terms. It's already the model used in Medicare & Medicaid, Dr's, hospitals and clinics just pass the losses they suffer off on other patient care costs pushing up eveyone elses costs and premiums. It is unsustainable, and once the private insurance plans are bankrupt, then the government steps in to take them over next.

While with one hand the Obama administration pushes "Green" and "Sustainable" living, the other blowing through the green on unstustainable policy and programs that will destroy our country, our world class medical system, while bankrupting our nation. Did we not learn a thing from the fall of the soviet union?

If you really want to understand this issue talk to your Dr. chances are he knows what would happen if we nationalized our health care system. Or read this blog, it has solutions not just rants. (Unlike Here!)

Words Matter Don't Change the Subject

Words matter, they can change the meaning of a sentence, they can change our recorded history. If a historian writes about our war against terror, while our politicians try and change the words and their meanings, our history becomes meaningless. When they try to harden or soften a story by redefining the words that are used they not only bend the truth, they bend it into a lie.

The United States does not torture, however our enemy does. That's a fact, not an opinion. If we want to talk about waterboarding, instead of the quadrupled budget deficit and socialized economy then lets stick to facts not fiction. If waterboarding is torture, then we have tortured our own men and women in uniform. Special ops soldiers must endure enhanced interrogation techniques, exactly the ones we used to extract information from terroists that have saved lives. If Nancy Pelosi is so eager to attack Bush administration officials and CIA operatives who have given us seven years of terror free soil then why doesn't she call expert witnesses such as Navy Seals and Green Berit soldiers to testify about this so called torture method? Because it's political bull. Period. And when political bull bleeds into national security secrets it becomes treason.

The Obama spin machine has called war on terror a conflict with extremists, renaming terrorism as "man caused disasters", redefining everything from the word jihad to the word investment. If the American people and the complacent media don't begin to defend our words, our language, and our country's long history as the greatest nation, the nation itself will need a new definition. No longer will we be home of the free and the brave, but we will be the oppressed and the afraid.

Get your ISM

An offer you can't refuse...

The BO Administration will use any means necessary to achieve it's goal of nationalization all while catering to the unions who backed the campaign.

They Got Our Money!

WE GOT YOUR MONEY

WE GOT YOUR MONEY

GONNA SPEND YOUR MONEY

GONNA PRINT SOME MORE MONEY

Today's Tea Party Image

How The Stimulus Will Fail

Macho Sauce Update

Stimulate This

DemoMemo, a blog by Cheryl Russell has this fascinating post titled The Great American Shopping List that I have clipped the 10 bullet points below. They are listed from the largest to the smallest top 10 expenses for American earners. Now consider where our money is spent and the Obamanomics agenda for economic stimulus. Spending our way to prosperity will result in an increase for the rest of us who are footing the bill.

1. Social Security payroll taxes
2. Mortgage payments
3. Car payments
4. Groceries
5. Restaurant meals
6. Gasoline
7. Federal taxes
8. Property taxes
9. Health insurance
10. Electricity

Read her blog and then consider that 3 of these items are TAXES, lower those taxes and consider your budget stimulated. Now consider that your gas and your car are heavily burdened by taxes and government regulation. Lower the gas tax and ease the regulation on car manufacturers and you provide a double stimulus. Lower car prices and lower price of fuel for the cars will stimulate the auto industry far more effectively than government handouts. With half of the top 10 household expenses now stimulated consider us on our way to recovery.

Now let me squelch your enthusiasm. The Obama energy plan calls for the bankrupting of the coal industry with no feasable stratagy to replace it. I predict #10, cost of electricity in this list could quickly offset any stimulus benifit we could possibly employ. 70%-80% of our electricity comes from a source our current adminstration admitedly wants to eliminate. If you thought the price of gas was an issue in 2008, just wait for the carbon off-set tax to start effecting your electric bill. Secondly, consider how the latest policy Obama has to allow states to indipendantly regulate car emission standards and his plan to increase regluation for fule economy standards you can kiss the US auto industry goodbye.
Feeling stimulated?

Judgement in Leadership

We choose our leaders based on the ability they have to echo the goals of we the people in shaping our government policy and making decisions on our behalf. When we go to the polls we make the decision based on what we know about the candidate, the judgment they have proven in the past, the issues that align with our own, and the causes that we wish them to champion. We vote with the belief that they will be a leader we proudly represent our community, our neighbors, and our children. A leader who we would follow, who we would trust, and who will lead by example.When our leaders fail, when they fall, and when they falter, we must hold them to the standard that we set when we elected them. To do anything else is to ask less of ourselves, and to lower the standards we set on our society. Leaders should be held to the highest standard. Above all, they should represent the majority of our views, our values, and our principals. While there is always a minority opinion and view equally respected, the moral standard should never be lowered. The expectation of a greater sense of responsibility and judgment should never be altered, excused, or forgiven. We are speaking of our leaders, roll models, and the people we look to for guidance. When these leaders reveal a lack of judgment or character, no matter if in there private or public life, they should be called to account, and if they fail to voluntarily resign, they should be replaced.

We the people expect better than ourselves in our leaders!
Why would anyone support Mayor Sam Adams of Portland? Would you ask him to run your local high school after admitting to a sexual affair with a 18 year old that started when that person was only 17? Not only should he resign, those fostering support for him should be put on notice that they too lack judgment to lead.

Party Tonight - Compulsory Service Tomorrow

Part of the Obama Administration policy calls for a national civil defense program that requires community service. A civil defense training course described in 2006 by Rahm Emanuel suggests a militarized training program aimed at preparing Americans to deal with terrorist attacks.

Now imagine for a moment as the US Military was strained by our conflict in Iraq then President Bush suggests we require military training of our college students. Why does this get swept under the media rug when it is part the Obama plan for national defense?



"The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start."

Compulsory Service as well funded as our US military? Sounds like a similar youth program started in 1939 by another charismatic leader.

See also the "Real Patriot Act"

Public Gay Sex ok With Newsom

[WARNING - THE FOLSOM STREET FAIR LINK BELOW IN THIS POST- NSFW]No matter what your view of homosexuality is, you might find it shocking how far some fringe elements of the GLBT community will go to promote the idea of free sexual expression in the name of diversity. My opinion has been constant: straight or gay, Keep your PDA to yourself, much more, your sex to yourself. It is intolerable enough to see heterosexual teens sucking face at the bus stop, now if you want to attend the Folsom Street Fair, you might see more than what is even legal in your neighborhood strip club. Public gay sex. Consider the risk of lawsuit if a school so much as permits a prayer, now the San Fransisco police won't even prosecute public indecency! What used to be considered normal and decent is now disgusting, what is considered disgusting by most is being called and expression of diversity.

Your witnessing the end of civilization not just in your lifetime but today.
WND EXCLUSIVE
-- READ FULL STORY HERE --San Francisco fest features public sex with no arrests LINK
'This is what the gay agenda is all about'

Season of Giving

The media and liberal pundits like to suggest the United states is out of favor with the rest of the world. Even the republican party began to fall into the media trap using buzz words like corporate corruption, and wall street greed to fault our long proven system of capitalism. The facts support that capitalism and freedom of religion (not freedom from religion) has made America the most generous nation in the world, more than twice as giving by percentage of GDP as the number 2 spot the UK.


The following numbers from MSNBC

World's most charitable nations

A country's social and political cultures influence how much money citizens give to charity, according to a November 2006 study by England's Charities Aid Foundation that ranks philanthropic donation as a percentage of gross domestic product. Among nations surveyed, these 10 are the most generous.

• 1. United States, 1.67 percent of GDP • 2. United Kingdom, 0.73 • 3. Canada, 0.72 • 4. Australia, 0.69 • 5. South Africa, 0.64 • 6. Ireland, 0.47 • 7. Netherlands, 0.45 • 8. Singapore, 0.29 • 9. New Zealand, 0.29 • 10. Turkey, 0.23

Federal tax laws -- notably low income tax, plus breaks for donations -- are often cited for American's generosity. As is religion, which drives one-third of U.S. charitable giving.

With this type of generosity why do we get such bad press from the media complex? This is the season of giving, all I want for Christmas is for the media to give me a break! Quit trying to be entertainment and report the facts. If I want drama and intrigue I will watch the Lifetime Channel.

And here is another interesting trivia question about US generosity, guess who gives the most? Read and learn.

One Dose of Sarin Can Ruin Your Day

How safe will we be under an Obama administration? The majority of the press coverage of the war and the standing opinion seems to be that the liberation of Iraq has put us in greater danger than had we left Saddam in power. What should be remembered, is one dose of sarin gas can ruin your whole day.

When you live your life in denial that you have made any mistakes, then you fail to accept them, fail to learn from them, and fail to improve your judgment in future matters. This can be said of both the Bush administration and the policy to be set in Obama Nation. GW neglected to administer the war in the early stages as he did in the latter, relying on Rumsfield's bad strategy, and to top it off, mishandled the media and the information that mattered to the public. Why we went to war, and what the results were, the insurance that no chemical weapons get into the hands of terrorists.

We all buy insurance, even though none of us plan to burn our homes down, or crash our cars. We all have airbags, not because we scheduled a head on collision, but because even the remote possibly exists and the safety measure may one day save our lives. For this logical reason alone, the invasion and destruction of the military capability of Iraq was good insurance for the safety of our future.

Since Obama was opposed to the war, opposed to the surge that proved to bring a successful end to the war, how can we be assured he will continue to pay the premiums of the insurance policy that has kept our nation safe for the last 8 years?

Obama's national security policy is akin to keeping your hands on the wheel, and looking both ways before crossing an intersection. Trusting that the other drivers are as safe and courteous as we are. He plans to release or prosecute terrorists as if they are simply criminals in our legal system, he wishes to withdraw completely from Iraq, when it would be in our best interest to keep a close eye on the region, and his policy of diplomacy with rouge dictators is naive and dangerous.

It will take just one munition smuggled into our country and detonated in a public place to show the world how weak the US has become under new leadership, and this is the test that Joe Biden was likely speaking of. Even Joe the senator knows what we may be facing.

Will Obama Continue The "LIE"?

A recent reminder I received about the movement of Iraq's uranium stockpile to Canada made me think harder about the future of our foreign policy now with Hillary Clinton soon to be running the State Department. The big BUSH LIED-PEOPLE DIED story about WMD has been a lost due in part the success we now have in Iraq, and with the Economy taking front page. While it was a major platform for the anti-war movement that put Obama in the political spotlight, the war and why we went in to Iraq will be debated for years to come. Will Obama continue the fiction, or will he, now that he is privy to the truth, also protect the former administrations from public scrutiny? This is the problem with the new Clinton administration sequel. The truth that we supplied Saddam, a vicious dictator with the means to mass murder his own people with weapons we provided, and the fact that it took a war to insure those same weapons would not come back to our soil and kill us, becomes a public relations hot potato for any president. Even Bill Clinton knew the truth. Don't let history get overwritten, take 10 minutes and watch the video I have posted below. In his own words Bill Clinton, husband to our future Secretary of State, and former celebrity president tells us all how serious the threat Saddam was, now multiply that times 911.

We Are A Republic!