It has been said that this is due to the founding fathers rolling over in their graves.

The other day I needed to go to the emergency room.
Not wanting to sit there for 4 hours, I put on my MAGIC GREEN HAT.
When I went into the E.R., I noticed that 3/4 of the people got up and left.

I guess they decided that they weren’t that sick after all.
Cut at least 3 hours off my waiting time.

Here’s the hat.

It also works at DMV. It saved me 5 hours.

At the Laundromat, three minutes after entering, I had my choice of any machine, most still running.

But..don’t try it at McDonald’s. The whole crew got up and left and l never got my order!

It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those that made him their president.”

Amazing that someone in eastern Europe can see what most Americans are blind to.

Dr. Michael Youssef – Guest
Columnist – 3/2/2011 10:20:00 AM
Most social scientists would agree that world events do not happen in a vacuum. Political forces,
whether they are accidental or deliberate, in succession or a single action,
give rise to political and social movements.

After the fall of the
Shah of Iran, Islamic expansionists began looking for ways and means by which
to accomplish their religious dreams. Empowered by “divine mandate”
and fueled with lots of oil, they believed the world must be dominated by Islam
and the Sharia. Yet, in order to claim victory, they had to overcome their
greatest obstacle: the power of the United States.

A common belief among these extremists was that American power is more
perceived than real, and in the 1990s they began to test their theory. It did
not take long to realize that President Bill Clinton’s “interests”
would distract him from acts of international terrorism. To the extremists, he
was simply a 60′s generation man who clearly wanted “love, not war.”
Thus, a series of tests began. Embassies in Lebanon, Kenya, and Tanzania were
bombed. The response of the “Playboy President” confirmed their
suspicions. Clinton issued many verbal threats but nothing happened.

Then the tests became more daring. The bombing of the USS Cole was designed
to reveal the vulnerability of the U.S. military. The response from the White
House was from the same chapter, same verse — “the perpetrators of these
heinous acts must be brought to justice.” And again, nothing happened. But
what was really telling to these Jihadists was that, if Clinton’s plan to
deflect the scandal of Monica Lewinski meant throwing a million-dollar bomb on
a ten-dollar tent in Afghanistan and bombing an aspirin factory in the Sudan,
they were free and clear to plan, plot, and scheme for bigger things.

Make no mistake about it: all of the long-term planning and maneuvering that
led to September 11, 2001, was going on during the Playboy President’s watch.
But these Islamists misread the domestic focus of the incoming “Cowboy
President” as weakness. All in all, the final exam took place on the
Cowboy President’s watch. Did they really know that he would respond with such
force in Afghanistan? I highly doubt it. They had become accustomed to verbal
threats without action. They assumed that the Texas governor promoting
education and a couple of other issues would not be willing to decimate their
centers of power. As they say “Give the devil his due,” he disrupted
their hornets’ nest and kept America safe for the remainder of his presidency.

All the while, the Islamic groups pressed their wealthy Muslim brothers to use
their investments in the West for Jihadi purposes. They pressed them to
strategically use their billions of dollars invested in Europe and Britain with
strings attached. What were these strings? Demand from European governments for
more mosques, more acceptance of Sharia law, more Islamic districts, more
visible Islamic symbols (including Islamic banking principles and openness to
immigrants from Islamic countries). Clearly, this strategy worked — and now
the Muslim expansionists smelled the air of success for the first time.

When our Cowboy President hit Afghanistan, many Muslim countries objected, but
not as strongly as when Bush’s neo-conservative team naïvely thought that they
could remove Saddam Hussein from Iraq and create an “Exhibit A” of
Islamic democracy. Bush and his team totally miscalculated the complication of
that place. They also failed to understand the very deep desire of the Shiites
in Iraq to unite with their brethren in Iran. They did not realize that
democracy and Islam cannot coexist. Islamic theocracy and Western democracy are
natural enemies. Allah rules through his prophet and his successors. The people
do not empower their political leaders as in a Western democracy.

Bush’s team also failed to understand that the Butcher of Bagdad was holding
the balance of power between the Shiites’ desire for domination and the Sunni
Muslims’ revulsion toward the Shiite’s design. They also wrongly believed that
pro-Western authoritarian regimes such as Hosni Mubarak’s of Egypt could
survive being lectured to publicly by American officials. Of course I am
referring to the speech given by Condoleezza Rice at Cairo University in 2005.

Finally, Bush’s neo-con team did not understand that there is an Islamic
principle which calls for an agreement with your enemy until you get the upper
hand — then you renege on your agreement. And that is why the Muslim
Brotherhood in Egypt welcomed the Cowboy President calling for democracy,
knowing full well that, like Hamas, Hezbollah, and even Iran in 1978, once they
are elected to power, they will discard democracy like a used paper napkin.

And now we come to the current reign of the “Wonder Boy” President.
This young man who has no tangible achievements that have not been handed to
him, swept into power with a teleprompter and a desire to be liked. Wanting to
be adored by the masses is a very dangerous characteristic in any leader, let
alone the leader of the free world. Such leadership often waits to see which
way the wind is blowing and then jumps on the bandwagon. That would explain the
seemingly conflicting statements that came from the Obama administration during
the recent Egyptian youth uprising.

But let’s step back
for a moment. During Obama’s 2008 campaign, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, in a
speech in France, tried to open a window into Obama’s soul, exposing his
“lukewarm-ness” toward Israel and his love for Islamic
revolutionaries. As soon as these comments leaked into American media, the
Obama campaign operatives clobbered Rev. Jackson, making it clear that he
“has nothing to do with us or our campaign.” This was immediately
followed by a hastily arranged visit to Israel by candidate Obama which was
never repeated as president, despite the fact that he went to the region at
least four times.

To make things worse, Muslim expansionists not only took comfort from President
Obama’s 2009 speech in Turkey during which he declared that America is no
longer a Christian country, but also from his Cairo speech in which he gave all
the possible signals that if the Islamic revolutionaries would rise up, he
would hold hands with them and sing “Kumbaya.”

This unmistakable signal to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was followed by
both well-publicized and secret meetings between the American ambassador in
Cairo and the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. There can be no doubt: the
Muslim Brotherhood is a radical, global-dominating, Sharia-implementing,
Jihad-oriented, Israel-hating group. I think if I were Hosni Mubarak, I would
have known right after Obama’s speech in Cairo, and all of the signals that he
gave to the Muslim Brotherhood, that my goose was cooked.

The tragedy is that each of these three presidents contributed to the rise of Islamic
expansionism and to the total failure of Diplomacy 101. That all-important work
of diplomacy should have taken place behind the scenes, in back rooms,
forcefully but quietly.

In many ways, when history is written we will discover that the Playboy set the
stage, the Cowboy danced on it, and the Wonder Boy brought it all down

Recently, an old friend who’s been a vegetarian for more than 15 years shocked us with a story: Last weekend, she ate bacon. Several strips. Straight out of the frying pan where her boyfriend was cooking it.
This wasn’t the first time she’d encountered it sizzling there, in all its glistening glory. But for some reason, this time it overpowered her. She was guilty yet gleeful when she told us that she’d allowed bacon back into her life.
But she’s not alone. We’ve heard this story before from many people. It seems that bacon has a way of awakening carnivorous desires within even some of the preachiest of vegetarians. And we set out to find out why.
Our story was familiar to Johan Lundstrom. He’s a scientist who runs a lab at the Monell Chemical Senses Center. He studies how the brain processes sensory information, like smell, for a living. He also told us he had an ex-girlfriend who became an ex-vegetarian once she tasted bacon.
Because bacon is one- to two-thirds fat and also has lots of protein, it speaks to our evolutionary quest for calories, Lundstrom says. And since 90 percent of what we taste is really odor, bacon’s aggressive smell delivers a powerful hit to our sense of how good it will taste.
“There’s an intimate connection between odor and emotion, and odor and memory,” Lundstrom says. “When you pair that with the social atmosphere of weekend breakfast and hunger, bacon is in the perfect position to take advantage of how the brain is wired.”

This is apparently the norm for huge events where supply and demand are the order of the day. The Texas Attorney General’s office “says Texas is second only to california when it comes to trafficking.” At the 2009 Super bowl in Tampa, 24 children were trafficked to Tampa for sex work. In the past, prostitution crackdowns have sometimes doubly victimized trafficked girls, imprisoning them instead of finding them help.

What a sick world we live in, please pray against this horrendous crime and the traffickers. please pray for the victims and their families.

The person in this video is a professor (Ph.D.) at Yavapai College (pronounced yeah-va-pie) in Prescott, Arizona. He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to help Arizona and he repeats the important parts and speaks slow enough to allow you to follow what he’s saying; must be why he’s rated highly by his students – 3.8 on a 4.0 scale.
This may be the best video produced on the illegal alien problems that are being experienced.

According to a February 2010 Gallup poll, “61% of liberals say their image of socialism is positive” and “53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism.” Overall, 36% of Americans view socialism favorably.

Winston Churchill aptly described socialism as “a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” As economist Thomas Sowell put it, “Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”

A U.S. Senator, Bernie Sanders, is an avowed socialist. Many more stealth socialist and similarly minded legislators walk the halls of our Capitol (like Rep. Maxine Waters, who threatened to “socialize” the oil industry, Chavez-style). In the White House, the condition is as bad or worse. Most socialists take a more secretive tack than Sen. Sanders and MSNBC anchor Lawrence O’Donnell, the latter of whom recently declared on the air, “I am a socialist.” Newsweek alleged “we are all socialists now.”

Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, Friedrich von Hayek and other notables have warned about “creeping socialism” and its undesirable outcomes. Recall that Reagan said, prophetically, “one of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine…” Why and how this failed political theory and its variants, including Marxism, are metastasizing in this country have been and continue to be well documented.

Despite its apparent prevalence and increasing “popularity,” the word socialism has a negative connotation to a majority of Americans — for good reason. Upton Sinclair, author, socialist and Communist dupe, once wrote: “The American people will take socialism, but they won’t take the label.” Modern-day socialists and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party know this, as does their dear leader. Stanley Kurtz, in his new book Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism, wrote

At every turn, Obama has disguised his socialist past, sometimes through grievous sins of omission, sometimes through opaque and misleading pseudo-confessions, and at other times through outright lies.

In Alinskyite fashion, most American socialists mask their true ideology by using populist-sounding rhetoric (political euphemisms) while incrementally imposing their radical anti-American agenda without identifying it as socialist. As Sun Tzu taught, all war is based on deception.

In politics, language is key and he who controls the language controls — or at least better influences — the debate. Constitutional conservatives, by nature, don’t typically seek “control” and, in this realm, they’ve too easily ceded ground. Socialist forces are winning the word war. And it’s imperative that they do, considering the poisonous snake oil they’re trying to sell to the electorate. As George Orwell, a socialist, wrote:

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible…Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism., question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness…Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, “I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so.” Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

“While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.”

Populist-sounding rhetoric. Political speech. Euphemisms. Phraseology. Deception. Manipulation. I’d add propaganda and agitprop. This is how the socialist infection is spreading. A steady dosage of disinfectant is needed to combat it. The battle for the hearts and minds of Americans is on.

Barack Obama is already gearing up for the 2012 election, with a report last week that his campaign will be headquartered in Chicago. Don’t be surprised if he sticks with the theme of “change,” which at first glance makes no sense coming from an incumbent. But it makes perfect sense when one realizes the change he champions was never simply from Bush to himself or from a Republican to a Democrat. No, President Obama seeks fundamental change — transformation — from core American principles, like free enterprise, self-reliance, sovereignty and liberty, toward socialism “in the name of economic fairness.”

So “change” in this context is a euphemism, though many know exactly what it means. Many other euphemisms for socialism (including its various strains) are being deployed to varying degrees.Watch and listen for these words and ones like them. Republicans and non-socialist Democrats mustn’t be duped. They must be vigilant and identify and quash socialist incursions, disguised or not.

Additionally, a prolonged offensive is overdue to counter the socialist scourge. At every opportunity, our elected conservative representatives should use their public positions to make a clear and convincing case for liberty, limited constitutional government, personal responsibility and, as David Limbaugh wrote, “the wonders of America’s free-market system, which has produced unprecedented prosperity for Americans and contributed to the advancement of civilization throughout the world.” It’s not a difficult case to make, given that history and the facts are on our side.