What Chase did with it's TARP money

Here's a picture of your TARP funds at work, utilized by Chase Bank to purchase an actual tarp with which to cover the Washington Mutual signage on the building that apparently came with the purchase of that banking institution. I work in this building in North Hollywood, CA. As you can clearly see, this particular tarp FAILED!

Shameless coverup: The Flight 93 mosque, Part 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8GoejBgPt4&eurl=http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2009/01/caught-on-video-shameful-cover-up-of.html

Rush's Speech at Hillsdale College Churchill Dinner in Washington, DC

Reagan roots. Reagan roots is not anti-Communism and low taxes and the Laffer Curve and all the other things that Reagan was dealing with at the time. Reagan roots are the roots of our founding. And the primary leg on that stool is individual liberty. This is a nation founded on the concept that we are individuals. We are not a collective. We are individuals. And that we do our best when we are working in our own self interest, not selfishness, but our own self interest, improving our lives, our families' lives; improves everybody's lives around ours in our communities, cities, towns, the nation at large. Individual liberty will never go out of style because as our founders correctly noted, it is part of our creation. It's what sets this country apart from every other collection of human beings in the history of the world. We have acknowledged that our creation comes from God, not from government, that our freedom is a natural yearning of our creation. And that is the natural yearning of our spirit, to be free, all humanity, all human beings. And as such, liberty will never go out of style. Freedom will never go out of style. We will never, ever say hopefully "the era of freedom is over." We will never say "the era of liberty is over." And as such, we will make a huge mistake if we fall in line with these dummkopfs, who think they're the smartest in our room, who say "the era of Reagan is over." Because the era of Reagan is basic Conservatism 101 which believes, what? The best in everybody. It does not look across a room of people with contempt. It does not look and see incompetence. It doesn't see black, white, male, female, gay, straight. It sees human beings.

Conservatism sees Americans, sees potential, sees great opportunity, sees an opportunity for people to be the best they can be using whatever ambition and desire they have. Reaganism conservatism does not need to be adapted to issues of the day. There's no such thing as the conservative version of Big Government. That is a sellout of conservatism. [Applause.] What we need to stand true on -- we have to have the courage to continue to teach people that sometimes the way they're going and the way they're voting is not good for them, not good for their family, not good for the country. It may feel good at the moment. It's always going to be a battle. I forget who said this, but it's true. Any group of two people or more, any organization that is not, by definition, conservative, will be liberal. Because liberalism is the most gutless choice you can make. Liberalism's following a cult figure. Liberalism is following a demagogue. Liberalism is doing whatever thinking -- you have to do anything with a liberal, you just have to think in a way that makes yourself feel good. Walk outside the hotel tonight. See a couple homeless people on the grate and go, "Oh, that's so bad. Wow, am I a great person, I care." Yeah? What did you do for them? Well nothing, but I care. Yeah, well where's your homeless ribbon? I don't see it.  

Read the whole thing

It could happen here, too...

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.
Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At
least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With
your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.
You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes
it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both
thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to
the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call
police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are
privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours
was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar
has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of
a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry:
authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing.
"Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.
Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you
shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find
an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities
acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times.
But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve
to Die."
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably
win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several
times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their
lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you
told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District
Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as
your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your
anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a
picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury
to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison...

This case really happened.
On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term.

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law
forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun
sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of
1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except
shotguns.

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by
private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the
Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man
with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.
When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable,
or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up
law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up
all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The
Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearm still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took Away
most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed
self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant
gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was
no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or
robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,
"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several
elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no
fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen
most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given
three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British
subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by
police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered
and licensed. Kinda like cars.

Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA , THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." --Samuel Adams

If you think this is important, please forward to everyone you know.

Please Vote McCain

Lookit: I'm a nutjob w/ the politics, and I get that, but this election is just too damned important for America. For the America you've grown up in. What we're talking about here is the unchecked reign of liberal socialism taking over this country. That might sound like hyperbole. It isn't.

Barack Hussein Obama has said (out loud, and in public) that he wants to take more money from people that have earned too much of it (in his opinion), and give it to people who don't earn enough. He's thrown 3 newspapers that don't agree with him off of his campaign plane in order to make room for Ebony & Jet magazines. He had two TV stations that asked hard questions of Joe Biden removed from the list of "approved" news outlets allowed to interview his campaign. Operatives and donors for the Obama campaign dug through Ohio state government records for dirt on Joe "The Plumber" Wurtzelbacher (such as his tax records, criminal records, child support records, etc.) simply because Joe asked Obama if he would raise taxes on his small business, to which Barack responded, "When we spread the wealth around it's good for everybody," which exposed Obama as a socialist, and so Joe had to be destroyed.

Think about this for a second: Newspapers, TV stations, and private citizens shut out & investigated for simply criticizing Obama. The democrat party wants to bring back the "Fairness Doctrine," which would shut down talk radio, and possibly even political blogs on teh internets. Imagine a Pelosi, Reid, and Obama trifecta w/ a veto proof majority in the Senate. Now think about what will happen if they can replace 3-4 Supreme Court justices in the next few years. That would mean unchecked power to socialize medicine, banking, the auto and energy industries, and the ability to silence any criticism, shut down conservative and Christian talk radio, censor the internet, and reallocate wealth from those who've earned it to those who have not (including illegal aliens). All of this without any Supreme Court oversight w/r/t the Constitutionality of any laws enacted against the 1st (or 2nd) amendment. Are we really prepared to do this to the United States of America? One party rule with an eye towards socialism? I don't believe that, but I'm scared I might be wrong. I have a tremendous lot of faith in the American people, and in my opinion they have to be smarter than that, but I'm still worried, because the media charged with informing the electorate about Presidential candidates has been completely in the tank for Obama.

Ask yourself, what do you really know about this man? Assuming for a moment that everything we all think we know is a Republican lie. He didn't spend 20 years in a black liberation theology church run by a racist Marxist, and even if he did, he never heard the preacher yell "G-d Damn America" "The US of KKK A" "America's chickens are coming home to roost" about 9-11, etc. He didn't get his first big job out of college from unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers, and Billy didn't have Obama distribute $100,000,000.00 to Chicago area schools & community organization groups like ACORN to radicalize the youth. Obama never worked for ACORN ever, and certainly didn't train their volunteers to commit voter fraud, and his campaign didn't pay them $800,000.00 to "get out the vote" (wink wink) in swing state urban areas. He never said anything about spreading the wealth by taxing rich people so he could give their money to poor people. He certainly never pledged to cut military spending dramatically, to surrender in Iraq, to sit down and talk w/out preconditions w/ an avowed Jew-hating Holocaust denying head of Iran. He doesn't admire Hugo Chavez and the way he nationalized Venezuela's oil companies. Of course Bill Ayers didn't ghost-write "Dreams From My Father," and all of that terrorism he did was way before Barry launched his political career in his living room. He didn't take the extraordinary step of suing his opponents in state legislature races to eliminate black signatories to their petitions to be added to the ballot against him in primaries, or have anything to do with the sealed divorce records of his challengers for IL state legislature & U.S. Senate. Barack Obama did not, I repeat, did not vote 3 times (Three Times!) against the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act," a measure designed to ensure medical care for babies that had survived botched abortions. He never bemoaned as a tragedy the fact that the court system was ill equipped to overturn the Constitution and begin administering "Social & Economic Justice" of the victims of American capitalism, and he certainly never compared the story of America w/r/t African Americans to Nazi Germany. Michelle Obama never said that for the first time in her life she's proud of her country, which in 2008 is downright mean, and her college thesis had nothing to do with lying about her beliefs to fit in with white people at Princeton. No, Barack Obama didn't vote present 150 times instead of taking a stand on positions affecting his district in Chicago, which is not a slum to this day, no matter what the right-wing press is saying. He didn't spend his entire U.S. Senate career (all 2 years of it) running for President, just like he didn't spend his 2 years as editor of the Harvard Law Review w/out writing a single thing for them (nor are the rumors that Rashid Khalidi got him in to Harvard and paid his tuition in any way credible, even if the LA Times has decided not to release the tape of that former spokesman for the PLO being praised by Obama at an Israel-bashing dinner in Chicago (again, with Bill Ayers & Bernadine Dohrn (unrepentant domestic terrorists who bombed the pentagon, U.S. Capitol, NYPD HQ, and planned on blowing up the officer's club @ Fort Dix until the people putting the bombs together ("Use carpentry nails for anti personnel purposes," said Ayers) blew themselves the hell up)). Barack Hussein Obama would never trash talk his own country in Berlin just to drum up angry anti-American world support for his campaign, and he never threatened to invade Pakistan to get Bin Laden, nor did he suggest that U.S. forces in the region were air raiding villages to kill civilians.

I could go on and on about what we need to assume isn't true about Obama, but let's just say none of that stuff is true either. It's all lies generated by the Republican Attack Machine. But what do you know about him other than that? Can anybody vouch for this guy who wouldn't immediately need to be denounced by the campaign for political expediency? What were his grades like at Columbia and Harvard? Can we read some of his papers to get a glimpse into how his mind works? Will he tell the LA Times to release the Khalidi tape, or release the gag order on his illegal immigrant deportation fugitive aunt living in that slum in Boston, who says she's not allowed to discuss their relationship w/ the press? Why have the press been camped out outside the home of Joe the Plumber, and no one thought to interview William Ayers on the candidate? I'm asking you to ask yourself, "What do we know about this man?" I know what I know about him, and not too much of it recommends him for the job. Is it possible that we are about to elect a man Commander in Chief that not even Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden thought was ready for the position until after they lost the primaries to him? What do you really know about Barack Obama? I'm asking you to stop and think about that before you vote, and if the answer is, "Not much," to do the responsible thing and vote the other way. This election is too important for America to find out (too late) that they've selected an unknown quantity.

Whatever you think about McCain, you know he loves this country and will be loyal to whatever's best for her no matter what the Republicans or the Democrats have to say about it. This is a man who wouldn't leave the Hanoi Hilton early because the code of conduct said "1st in, 1st out" and was beaten and tortured unrepentantly for 7 years longer as a result. This may be why military personnel support him by like 80%. John McCain wants to cut taxes, win the war on terror, keep Iran away from nuclear weapons, and eliminate our dependence on foreign oil. Governor Palin wants to drill for oil in ANWR and build a pipeline through Canada to deliver Alaskan oil to the lower 48 states. A vote for McCain/Palin is a vote for lower gas prices and lower taxes. These policies will secure this country's economic future, and a vote for his opponent is a vote for the failed socialist policies of Europe & China (although, in fairness to China, they've essentially admitted failure and embraced capitalism (just ask Walmart, another of Obama's targeted enemies list)).

I don't usually do this sort of thing, but I'm asking you to ask yourself if the U.S.A. can afford to take this chance on someone about which we know nothing. I'm asking you to ask yourself, what has Barack Obama ever accomplished other than his meteoric rise to political power? If everything we think we know about him isn't true, then what is? No one in the media dares ask this question for fear of being removed from the inner circle of access to "The One," but shouldn't we know this sort of thing before voting for a President?

I know the last 8 years have been unpleasant in a number of ways. What am I gonna say about W? He stinks on ice, I get it. But the thing is, he’s not running. We get change no matter what happens, so let’s make sure it’s the change we need and want. Yes, adopting socialism and appeasement would be a change, but is that what we want? That’s what Hamas wants. That’s what Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi want. That’s what Hezbollah wants. That’s what Europe wants. That’s what China wants. That’s what John Kerry & Al Gore want. Do we as Americans want to be on the same page with these people, or do we want to stand as one for the principles of American Exceptionalism: Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness? Barack Obama does not believe that America is as great a country as we all think it is. He disagrees fundamentally with a number of the principals upon which this country was founded, and he wants to change them. Do you?

If any of the people on this list were already planning on voting McCain, then I hope this diatribe made you feel better about your decision. You are doing the right thing, and every vote counts. If you were planning on voting Obama, please don’t. If you can’t bring yourself (for whatever reason) to vote for McCain, please just don’t vote. Please don’t vote for someone about which you know nothing simply because he’s clean and well spoken like his crazy running mate says. Please don’t vote for a man who hung out with people who hate our country for the last 20 years. Please don’t vote for a socialist just because he has a “D” after his name. Please don’t vote for raising taxes in a tumultuous economy for the purpose of taking money from achievers and giving it to non-achievers. Please don’t vote for someone who wants to gut the U.S. military in order to appease our enemies. Please don’t.

These are precarious times for our country, so I’m asking you to think of yourselves.

Please don’t do this.

Vote McCain.

Algore's Bullshit!!!

Penn & Teller RULE!