It's Called Karma, Stupid

Between 2003 and 2005 the Democrats filibustered all ten of President Bush's nominees for the federal appeals court. Yesterday, the Republicans returned the favor:

If there's one place where what goes around comes around, it's the United States Senate. Goodwin Liu, the Berkeley law professor nominated by President Obama to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, is the latest to learn that lesson.

Liu's nomination was blocked by a Republican filibuster Thursday -- the first successful filibuster against a judicial nominee since Democrats stopped all 10 of George W. Bush's appeals court nominees from 2003 to 2005. Although no one back then could have predicted that today's fight would be about Liu, everyone knew it was going to happen sometime. Once Democrats crossed the line to filibuster those Bush nominees, you could bet Republicans would strike back. And now they have.

Indefensible Comments - Indefensible Borders

Obama has overturned decades of US foreign policy today by suggesting that Israel return to her pre-1967 borders. Even with his history of bad judgement, this President leaves me speechless. Obama should have followed my lead and also remained speechless yesterday.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was quick on the draw Thursday in voicing clear displeasure with President Barack Obama’s mideast policy speech.

“Israel appreciates President Obama’s commitment to peace,” the response began, curtly. “Israel believes that for peace to endure between Israelis and Palestinians, the viability of a Palestinian state cannot come at the expense of the viability of the one and only Jewish state.”

“That is why Prime Minister Netanyahu expects to hear a reaffirmation from President Obama of U.S. commitments made to Israel in 2004, which were overwhelmingly supported by both Houses of Congress.”

“Among other things,” Netanyahu reminded Obama, “those commitments relate to Israel not having to withdraw to the 1967 lines which are both indefensible and which would leave major Israeli population centers in Judea and Samaria beyond those lines.”

“Those commitments also ensure Israel’s well-being as a Jewish state by making clear that Palestinian refugees will settle in a future Palestinian state rather than in Israel.”

“Without a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem outside the borders of Israel, no territorial concession will bring peace.”

“Equally, the Palestinians, and not just the United States, must recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, and any peace agreement with them must end all claims against Israel.”

Is there anyone in the US who still believes that Obama is not a Mohammedan?

It's What You Call ... Ironic

The CIA sends a memo to its employees warning them not to leak anything about the Osama Bin Laden action to the press. And the memo is then promptly leaked.

WASHINGTON — CIA director Leon Panetta is warning his employees that leakers will be investigated and possibly prosecuted after a flurry of reports in the media about the technology and methods used to track and ultimately kill Osama bin Laden.

In a memo obtained by The Associated Press, Panetta told staff Wednesday that the disclosure of classified information to anyone not cleared for it — reporters, friends, colleagues in other agencies or former CIA officers — can endanger lives.

Most Transparent Administration EVAH!

Brian Terry is pictured above. He was murdered last December in a border gunfight by illegals armed by the US Government.

This is another episode in the continuing saga of high ranking federal bureaucrats trying to hide their roles in a risky, foolhardy law enforcement exercise that lead to the death of a Border Patrol Agent. The stonewalling and foot dragging of the Obama administration is starting to look very foolish criminal. Again the questions start with, "What did he know and when did he know it." From Breitbart's BigPeace:

Imagine a scenario in which the media outlet most afflicted with Barack Obama Sycophancy Syndrome (BOSS) – the place Chris ‘thrill up my leg’ Matthews calls home – presented a ’smoking gun’ that could implicate the Obama White House in a cover-up akin to that of Watergate but with the added scarlet letter of murder. The notion of such a thing would be like Woodward and Bernstein ignoring Deep Throat. Impossible, right? Yes, unless it did so unintentionally.

It looks like that honor may just go to none other than Michael Isikoff who, in September of 2010, wrote about an ATF strategy that involved targeting gun dealers in the United States as a means to prevent weapons from ending up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Included in Isikoff’s article is a link to what Mike Vandergoegh of Sipsey Street Irregulars – who unearthed this amazing find – refers to as the “field manual” of the Project Gurunner scandal that led to the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry last December.

The "field manual" can be viewed here.

The “field manual” likely seemed innocuous at the time but that was before two of the weapons ATF placed in the hands of straw purchasers – who then placed them in the hands of Mexican drug cartels – showed up at the murder scene of Terry. It was also before ATF agent John Dodson blew the whistle in March on the ATF operation known as Fast and Furious; that operation was run under the larger Project Gunrunner umbrella and is allegedly what allowed guns to ‘walk’ into Mexico.

Agent Dodson speaks to CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson.

Like Burritos Stuffed In A Shoebox

Mexican officials stopped two trucks crammed full of people trying to sneak into the US.

Police stopped the trucks, carrying 240 and 273 people, on the outskirts of state capital Tuxtla Gutierrez early Tuesday, after they accelerated through a vehicle scanner at a police checkpoint, the statement said.

That's 513 sardines packed without oil. It must have been under extraordinarily inhumane conditions but I'm to the point where I really don't care. They'll be catapulting them over the Rio Grande next. Or maybe a trebuchet.

God's Grace And Man's Scam?

No matter what your opinion is on homosexuality, the following is good news for suffers of AIDS. From San Francisco (where else?):

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) — A 45-year-old man now living in the Bay Area may be the first person ever cured of the deadly disease AIDS, the result of the discovery of an apparent HIV immunity gene.

Timothy Ray Brown tested positive for HIV back in 1995, but has now entered scientific journals as the first man in world history to have that HIV virus completely eliminated from his body in what doctors call a “functional cure.”

[...]UCSF’s Dr. Jay Levy, who co-discovered the HIV virus and is one of the most respected AIDS researchers in the world, said this case opens the door to the field of “cure research,” which is now gaining more attention.

“If you’re able to take the white cells from someone and manipulate them so they’re no longer infected, or infectable, no longer infectable by HIV, and those white cells become the whole immune system of that individual, you’ve got essentially a functional cure,” he explained.

UCSF’s Dr. Paul Volberding, another pioneering AIDS expert who has studied the disease for all of its 30 years cautioned that while “the Berlin Patient is a fascinating story, it’s not one that can be generalized.”

Both doctors stressed that Brown’s radical procedure may not be applicable to many other people with HIV, because of the difficulty in doing stem cell transplants, and finding the right donor.

While doing some background for this post, I ran across something which I had never seen before, a group of scientists and their supporters who believe that AIDS has little or nothing to do with HIV and that the HIV virus will be readily defeated by any healthy immune system.

These skeptics claim HIV/AIDS is the biggest medical catastrophe ever adopted by the medical-pharmaceutical establishment. They have evidence that those supposedly dying of AIDS are really dying from pre-existing diseases, well-known health risks such as drug abuse and malnutrition, the psychological stress of a fatal diagnosis and the AIDS medicines themselves.

More Hope N' Change In The Near East

Once again we are blessed with the foresight of a community organizer as the seams of the Near East threaten to come apart again. The plan is simple: ignore Israel and her security needs while at the same time winking at radical Islamic incursions in Egypt, Tunisa and Libya. The guaranteed result - unrest and chaos

Palestinian protesters clashed with Israeli security forces in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem on Sunday during protests to mark the anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel in 1948, a day many Palestinians call "nakba," meaning "catastrophe."

Dozens were wounded in those protests, which come after Palestinian rival political groups Hamas and Fatah recently signed a reconciliation deal in Cairo, making an already-dormant peace process appear even further away. But attention is already turning to deadly clashes that erupted on Israel's borders with Lebanon and Syria, reportedly resulting in the deaths of eight people.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) accuse Iran of orchestrating two waves of fighting along its northern borders, as Palestinian protesters tried to infiltrate from Syria and Lebanon during nakba protests, reports the Israeli daily Haaretz, citing IDF spokesman Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai as saying the protests bore Iran's "fingerprints."

Diversity v. Perversity

The argument for "Adam and Eve Only" versus "Adam and Steve" continues apace. On one side the claim is that legalizing homosexual marriages will weaken the institution of marriage itself. On the other side, the claim is that Americans have the "right" to marry anyone they please and that any counter claim is irrational and homophobic.

Last December, Matthew J. Frank wrote an article for the Washington Post where he criticized liberals for their incessant use of the "hate card", which is nothing more than a canard to avoid open discussion. After receiving volumes of hate mail, Mr. Frank revisits this subject.

In the contemporary debate on the future of marriage, there appears to be, amid many uncertainties, one sure thing. Those who publicly defend traditional marriage can count on being denounced as haters, bigots, or irrational theocrats—and perhaps all of these at once.

But the danger to this course of conduct runs deeper, for not only is marriage at stake, but freedom of speech and thought, for ought we not be allowed to speak as we think? Therefore all religious expression is in peril. In July, 2010, a Boston Federal District Judge Joseph Tauro, ruled against the Defense Of Marriage Act by stating that the difference between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples is a “distinction without meaning.” A San Francisco Federal District Judge, Vaughn Walker, did the same thing by declaring that California's Prop 8 outlawing homosexual marriage was based only on tradition and without legal merit.

So the beliefs of federal judges sans any rationale was enough to counter the will of an entire State and the will of Congress. We are now subjects, not citizens for our will can no longer be reflected through our elected representatives at any level of government.

Last February the Obama fell into lock-step with these cretins by refusing to enforce the provisions of DOMA prohibiting same sex marriages.

As human beings we are all faith-based creatures. Atheism is the exception, not the rule and yet we are to be ruled by the exception.

... “The simple reality of life is that all of us, irrespective of our views about God, base our lives on beliefs—on things that we cannot prove to be true, but believe to be trustworthy and reliable.” Understood in this way, “faith” is indispensable to all of us, whether we are recognizably “religious” or not. Belief is “not blind,” says McGrath, “it just tries to make the best sense of things on the basis of the limited evidence available.” It is perhaps a touchingly blind faith in the sufficiency of narrow scientific reasoning that fails to recognize this obvious fact of the human condition.

We see what is happpening in England and throughout all of Europe where unpopular opinions are labelled as hate speech and the speakers are interned as criminals. In England, Christian couples who are explicit in their faith are now demmed unacceptable as prospective parents by adoption agencies. This was upheld by English courts. It will eventually happen here.

Now return to the way in which opposition to same-sex marriage is increasingly treated in this country. As we have seen in rulings like that of Judge Walker in California—or the Iowa Supreme Court in 2009—the argument made against the defenders of conjugal marriage is that they want to enact a religious agenda as public policy. As religious people, we are assured, they’re entitled to think “privately” whatever they please about such matters—but not to enact their view as law because, as a religious view, it is somehow by definition “irrational.” Even the possibility that their view of morality could be rational, and be rationally accessible to people not sharing their religion, is dismissed out of hand. The moral is collapsed into the religious; the religious is declared to be the irrational; and the irrational is declared to have no place in public policy.

We have allowed the perverts to put us on the defensive. The questions is not "Why are we denying equals rights to homosexuals." The question is this:

"Why should the social mores of an entire society be cast aside in order to accomodate the wishes of a very small minority who want to openly engage in high risk sex?".