Still time to see 2016: Obama's America

Can't figure out why President Obama is spending us into oblivion? or apologizing for America's greatness in the world? What about refusing to let American oil companies drill offshore but loans money to Brazil to drill there? How about why he doesn't help out his half brother George in Kenya?

Well, if you go see Dinesh D'Souza's documentary movie 2016: Obama's America, these and other perplexing questions about why Obama does what he does will all make sense. Spoiler Alert: One reason is Obama's hatred of colonialism.

Though I rarely see a movie (unless it's at the budget theater), I did go see the movie at the AMC Mayfair Mall 18 theater, and it was well worth the $6 early admission price. The movie is still here in the Milwaukee area and I urge you to see it whether you are a Conservative, Republican, Independent or Democrat.
 
Because I am rather a news junkie, I was at least familiar with much of the information presented. However, D'Sousa skillfully weaves all these facts and background stories together into a tapestry that clearly reveals just why Obama believes "No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed..." Why he is willing that America no longer have nuclear preeminence and why a nuclear Iran isn't a concern. The interview with half brother George was particularly telling.

In light of this weeks spreading Middle East unrest, the map of the United Arab States now becomes all the more chilling.

The movie isn't an emotionally charged hit piece, but rather a systematic, logical account of Obama's life that illustrates why he doesn't believe in American exceptionalism or even desire that America be the best in the world. It was a real eye-opener.

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Mr. Obama, illegal immigration isn't funny in southwest

This week, President Obama visited El Paso, Texas, and in his typical say anything manner, proclaimed the border fence basically complete. Of course, the people of southwestern states know this is not true, for only 5% of the mandated 700 mile double fence has been constructed: 32 miles under Pres. Bush and 4.3 miles of it built under Pres. Obama. (The entire border is nearly 2,000 miles in length.)

Obama went on to quip about Republicans never being satisfied on securing the border--that if he built the fence, they would want a moat and alligators. He treated this very serious subject as if it were a joke.

Well, to the people of the southwest, who live with this constant threat, illegal immigration is not at all a laughing matter. The people living in the southern portion of the border states are reminded of the gravity of their situation every day. With news stories of illegal drug traffickers, helicopters sweeping certain areas as far north as Phoenix, Border Patrol SUVs cruising their highways, and roadblocks with drug sniffing dogs, they know the problem of illegal immigration is far from solved.

We recently spent a few weeks in New Mexico and Arizona, visiting most of the National Parks and Monuments these states had to offer. But there were some we avoided on the border of Mexico and Arizona and others because of the safety warnings from the U.S. Department of Interior that the parks have become "drug smuggling routes".

This is America and we have to avoid 1,000s of acres of our own land because they have been taken over by criminal illegals? Sen. Jim DeMint stated it well, "Our nation’s borders are fundamental to our national security and sovereignty. Americans shouldn’t be forced to live under the threat of kidnappings, drug violence, and gang activity because of political posturing in Washington. Security must be at the crux of any credible immigration policy."

We also encountered traffic stops by the border patrol, while traveling on US 70 to Las Cruces, NM, and on AZ 80 coming back from Tombstone, AZ. Both times the patrol was hoping to turn back Mexican illegals entering the U.S. via wilderness areas.

So if that fence is so complete, Mr. President, why the road blocks? And by the way, during our stops, I didn't observe anyone laughing.

Speeches and Summits Won't Secure the Border by Sen. Jim DeMint

Arizona seeks cash for border fence "Arizona lawmakers want more fence along the border with Mexico - whether the federal government thinks it's necessary or not. They've got a plan that could get a project started using online donations and prison labor. "

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

I don't often quote Jon Stewart, but "Poor Al Gore" cancels Copenhagen

You know an issue has traction when the the lib comics start jabbing their own on the left. This week, Comedian Jon Stewart threw this zinger at Global Warming Guru Al Gore. (I don't watch Jon, but Vicki McKenna mentioned it on her radio program. It is funny--raunch removed):

"Poor Al Gore, global warming completely debunked by the very Internet you invented. OH, OH the irony, the irony."

He also chided the CRU for throwing out raw data.

"But here's what's great about science, in disagreements we go back and look at the raw data (clip showing data destroyed) ... ...Why would you throw out raw data from the 80's?...", after all, he still has his girlie magazines from the 1970s!

This morning, I learned** that the Guru himself, Al Gore, CANCELED his special Copenhagen $1,209/ticket book promo, photo op, and snack with Al event!

Why?

The Danish ticket coordinator stated, "'great annoyance' was a factor in the cancellation, along with unforseen changes in Mr. Gore's program for the climate summit." Gore's cancellation affects 3,000 believers, um, make that ticket holders.

"Great annoyance"? "Unforseen changes in Mr. Gore's program"? Could it be Mr. Gore doesn't know how to incorporate eating crow into his slide presentation?

Al Gore's credibility was already on thin ice. Remember Gore has photo-shopped some of his pictures for greater affect in his movie and on his book cover. He won't debate any naysayers--he says he will, but then he cancels. And he will not answer pointed questions. Most recent example, when Gore was in Madison, WI, he would not respond to a simple question about polar bears being considered threatened when their population is growing*.

Whatever you might believe about man made global warming, this latest cancellation is HUGE. Certainly in a crowd of 3,000 believers, willing to pay $1,200 just for the privilege of being in his presence, Gore was on friendly turf.

The man made global warming believers will still believe because it is a religion, not science, but canceling was a major faux pas, in my opinion. As any religious leader knows, you don't disappoint the faithful.


More reading: ClimateGate Overview
Houston braces for about 2 inches of snow, earliest ever!
Take back Al Gore's Oscar, two Academy members demand in light of Climategate

*I know "threatened" is a matter of semantics and doesn't have so much to do with population as with thriving habitat. Still, increasing by 20,000 in 30 years shows polar bears are faring better.

**Thanks to Jay Weber's link page

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, RandyMelchert, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, The Right View Wisconsin, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

UN Convention on Rights of Child...it's back, AGAIN! Argh

Ever notice how you can never totally kill a bad idea? No matter how many people contact their representatives requesting a NO vote, and the measure is defeated, the bad idea never goes away. It may lie dormant for awhile, but almost always it comes back.

Well, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is one of those bad ideas set to make a comeback.

Do you remember it? It was a U.N. measure seemingly designed to protect children. In reality, it took children out of the jurisdiction of their parents and constitution of their home country and put them under the authority of the United Nations! Because of the outpouring of negative calls to our Senators, the measure failed to pass back in 1989.

This [UNCRC, also called CRC] poses a serious threat both to parental rights and to U.S. sovereignty, as the UNCRC dictates not only that the federal government must intrude into the family sphere to an unprecedented degree, but also how the federal government is to monitor and govern the actions of our families. Parental rights would be replaced by "the best interests of the child" as defined, ultimately, by an international committee of 18 people in Switzerland.

The Convention was adopted by the UN in 1989. It has since been signed or ratified by 193 countries in the WORLD and every member of the United Nations, EXCEPT the United States and Somalia.

Treaties or Conventions are ratified by the Senate. A 2/3 majority is required for passage. Senator Barbara Boxer is now pushing for the UNCRC to be ratified. (FoxNews, Feb. 25, 2009)

U.N. Treaty Might Weaken Families

Due to the recent election, however, there are rumblings from Capitol Hill that there will be an effort to seek ratification of the CRC during the next congressional cycle. Hillary Rodham Clinton is a strong supporter of the treaty, and as secretary of state, would have direct control over the submission of treaties to the Senate.

Why should passage of the CRC be of concern? It likely would have a negative impact on domestic law and practice in the United States. Article VI of our Constitution makes treaties—and remember, conventions are viewed as treaties—“the supreme law of the land.” The CRC would be treated as superior to laws in every state regarding the parent-child relationship. This would include issues regarding education, health care, family discipline, the child’s role in family decision-making, and a host of other subjects.

What can you do?

ParentalRights.org is urging the adoption of a Parental Rights Amendment: "The only solution to the attack on the child-parent relationship is the Parental Rights Amendment -- securing the rights of parents to raise their children."

So you can sign the petiton.

ParentalRights.org is also urging that we keep the issue in the public eye. They are asking that concerned Americans email conservative talk show host Glenn Beck and ask he talk about the UNCRC. Email him at me@glennbeck.com and request that he cover the Parental Rights Amendment, talk about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and invite Michel Farris on his show. (Michael Farris is both the President of Parental Rights and Chairman of HSLDA, a homeschool legal defense organization.)

You could also contact our Senators Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653 and Russ Feingold (202) 224-5323.

I know, I get tired of calling and contacting too, but the alternative is too unthinkable for me to just sit back and let things fly under the radar to passage.

Links:
Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, CNS News, Jay Weber, Mark Levin, Vicki McKenna, Jay Weber, The Right View Wisconsin, The Heritage Foundation