http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ Creativity is an individual act. The act of building something, whether with hammers, blueprints, words, boards or plans is individualistic. Collectives can build, but not creatively. A mass has no vision because it has no personality. It can follow rules but not dreams. American exceptionalism emerged out of a society which empowered the creative […]
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/mccain_vs_the_wacko_birds.html
McCAIN, ONCE SO HEROIC, NOW OBVIOUSLY SUFFERS FROM PTS (POST TRAUMATIC STUPIDITY)….RSK
McCain VS The Wacko Birds Richard Butrick
Senator McCain, has called Senator Ted Cruz and his ilk in Congress “wacko birds.” Ted Cruz’s reply?
WASHINGTON – Slammed by Sen. John McCain as one of his party’s “wacko birds,” Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is embracing the epithet.
“It is wonderful to be among friends or, as some might say, fellow wacko birds,” Cruz said Wednesday night at Coalitions for America’s Weyrich Awards Dinner, named for the late conservative icon Paul Weyrich.
McCain’s slur seems to have backfired. The epithet “wacko bird” has now become honorific among those in Congress who honor the Constitution — especially the 1st Amendment (free speech) and the 4th Amendment (privacy, unlawful searches and seizures). Leading wacko birds include Cruz, Ron Paul, Mike Lee, and Justin Amash.
Elected over the past three years, Republican Sens. Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz have had a meteoric impact in Washington, soaring to grassroots stardom, crashing into the Democratic majority and raining down on the old bulls of the Republican Party.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/06/two_gop_turncoats.html Last week was an exceptionally ignominious one for Americans who care about the U.S. House of Representatives (granted, an endangered species). Not one but two epic new lows were recorded in that body’s tormented history. First, let’s talk about the dingbat. The area north of the City of Detroit, from the western bank of […]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324809804578511213977903512.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion
WARREN KOZAK IS AUTHOR OF ONE OF THE BEST BOOKS ON WW2 THAT I EVER READ:
Product Details
LeMay: The Life and Wars of General Curtis LeMay by Warren Kozak (Oct 17, 2011)
Fifty years ago, on June 11, 1963, the United States opened a new chapter regarding a pivotal matter—race—that had been a source of contention from the nation’s beginning. At the center of this watershed moment for America were the president, a governor, two 18-year-old college students and one of the leading civil-rights activists of that era. The dramatic 24 hours played out in three separate locales, with repercussions that are still felt half a century later.
The day began in sweltering heat at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, when two black students, James Hood and Vivian Malone, tried to enter Foster Auditorium to register for classes. They couldn’t because the governor of the state, George Wallace, physically blocked the door in a desperate attempt to stoke the dying embers of the segregated South.
Television news cameras were rolling when Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, from the Justice Department, asked Wallace to step aside. He refused. But President Kennedy, foreseeing Wallace’s refusal, had federalized the Alabama National Guard. Gen. Henry Graham, the head of the Alabama Guard, ordered the governor, who was essentially his commander, to move.
Before the governor grudgingly surrendered, he delivered a thinly veiled racist speech for the TV cameras in which he denounced the “unwelcomed, unwanted, unwarranted and force-induced intrusion . . . by the central government.” The moment established Wallace on the national stage, and he would go on to make four racially charged runs for president.
In Ted Sorensen’s 1965 Kennedy biography, the writer described JFK as mildly and quietly in favor of civil-rights legislation as a senator in the 1950s. But Kennedy’s own views had evolved by the early 1960s, and he became a major force in the struggle. At risk to his political career, he had decided to send a federal civil-rights bill to Congress. Kennedy asked the three TV networks for time on the evening of June 11 to announce it to the nation.
Enlarge Image
image
Governor George Wallace speaks in the doorway of a campus building at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa, publicly refusing to allow African-American students entry to the school despite a federal mandate.
The president, who faced re-election the following year, understood that the bill would cost him the Southern states. Since he was elected by the thinnest of margins in 1960, giving up five or six states could mean no second term.
In one of the strongest speeches of his presidency, Kennedy laid out the case for ending all forms of racial segregation in America. “We are confronted primarily with a moral issue,” Kennedy said. “It is as old as the Scriptures and as clear as the American Constitution.”
Some of his arguments were practical. How could the U.S. promote freedom abroad, the president asked, when millions of its own citizens were by law less than free?
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/350699/clappers-lie-charles-c-w-cooke By dint of a widespread preference for politeness, human beings tend to trip over themselves to find euphemisms for the word “lying.” The questionable among our public servants are charged with “misleading,” “hedging,” and “evading”; they are accused of disseminating “falsehoods,” and they are presumed guilty of “ambiguity” or of being “slippery” and “smooth.” […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/350692/diagnosis-kathryn-jean-lopez Governor Andrew Cuomo’s recently released Women’s Equality Act is a “radical deregulation of abortion in New York,” says Dr. Elissa Sanchez-Speech. A family physician in Rochester, N.Y., she opposes the governor’s push, calling the abortion component to his legislation both “unnecessary for and harmful to women’s health.” Dr. Sanchez-Speech talks about her opposition to […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/350673/pick-your-scandal-victor-davis-hanson All can agree that the Obama administration is mired in myriads of scandals, but as yet no one can quite figure out what they all mean and where they will lead. Benghazi differs from all the other scandals — and from both Watergate and Iran-Contra — because in this case administration lapses led to […]
Home Prices at gas pumps are at some of the highest levels ever and rising. Americans want answers. In particular they want the names and numbers of those to blame. To answer that question perhaps they should simply consult the phone book or look in the mirror. Because the main culprits in the rising […]
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/10/veteran-tv-reporter-who-was-fired-for-alleging-possible-irs-targeting-speaks-out-i-wouldnt-do-that-to-my-worst-enemy/ Last month, we told you about Larry Conners, a veteran St. Louis reporter who was fired after he alleged that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may have unfairly targeted him following an interview he did with President Barack Obama. Now, weeks later and after much silence, Conners is opening up about the odd purported […]
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=23262&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ncpadpd+(Daily+Policy+Digest)
At the turn of the 21st century, biofuels appeared to be a solution to mounting concerns over greenhouse gas emissions, climate change, skyrocketing fuel prices and dependence on foreign energy. When Congress passed the Energy Policy Act (EP Act) in 2005 with a renewable fuel standard (RFS) provision mandating that producers add ethanol to gasoline, it is unlikely that lawmakers thought the act would increase hunger and social unrest in the world’s poorest countries. However, unintended consequences frequently accompany even the most well-intentioned policies, says Sherzod Abdukadirov, a research fellow with the Mercatus Center.
The EP Act simply ramped up the already increasing use of ethanol as a fuel additive with the hope of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The law’s proponents expected higher ethanol use to offset rising oil prices by filling at least some of the domestic demand for fuel.
Further, because most ethanol in the United States comes from domestically produced corn, policy advocates hoped the act would make the country less dependent on imported oil. As an added bonus, the policy would benefit U.S. farmers.
At the time, the policy seemed perfect. As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented the policy and further increased its production in 2007, scholars and environmentalists began to question its environmental and energy benefits. Beyond ethanol’s questionable viability as a fuel, the negative environmental impacts of corn production undermine ethanol’s benefits. Scholars and environmentalists claim that ethanol production leads to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, offsetting some of the environmental gains from its use as a fuel.
