Arena Football League Ending Operations?

A fledgling cable sports network that claimed it was "Everything Sports" televised the games of the new Spring football league, during which time a handful of football enthusiasts saddened that the NFL season had come to an end enjoyed the hard hitting antics of Arena Football. Teams like the Iowa Barnstormers thrilled the growing fan base, and players like Kurt Warner brought more notoriety to the league after claiming his beginnings in the small football league of quick play. ESPN may have been a large part of the growing popularity of Arena Football, indoor football with an attitude, but it was the hard hitting, small market appeal that truly made the Arena Football League fun.

My first live game was in Anaheim, for the short-lived Anaheim Piranhas. It only took one live game to hook me. This was a sport best served cold, live, and in your face. Later, I became a fan of the Los Angeles Avengers. With the loss of the NFL in Los Angeles, the AFL Avengers became LA's team. I loved going to the Avenger games, wearing red, and cheering on the brave gladiators on the arena floor. My wife got to the point that we were catching at least few games every season, sometimes taking guests and converting them into Arena Football fans in the process simply because of the awesome experience of AFL live.

This year my contact with the team's operations department was not so enthusiastic. The staff explained to me that the season had been suspended, and the future of Arena Football was possibly at risk.

This morning the doubts became official. ESPN, the network that was such a large part of launching the exciting spring football league, reported that the league is suspending operations, without any plans to bring back the old friend that accompanied me through the months between the Super Bowl, and Major League Baseball's mid-season.

Deep inside I hope that Arena Football returns to its prior glory, entertaining the fans of minor league football, and hard hitting indoor pigskin. But, like the USFL, and World League of American Football, even though the Arena Football League enjoyed a longer life than those others, and never tried to take on the NFL head-to-head, with the crumbling economy the death of the Arena Football League was imminent.

Fair thee well, AFL, fair thee well.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama's Birth Certificate: Something Fishy

I received an Email recently asking a number of questions regarding my opinions on the Obama Birth Certificate Controversy. My response, I believe, was a better clarification of my position on the issue. Note that I do report often on events surrounding the issue, but I have repeatedly issued the statement that despite the circumstantial evidence, I do not know enough to form a definite position. However, based on the evidence, I do think something is fishy. The following is my response to that Emailer, and I hope a clear enough representation of my position on the issue:

Thank you, Sir, for your feedback. I am trying to remain objective, but I do have the opinion that something is fishy when it comes to Obama's eligibility. This is why I constantly remind people that this issue contains allegations, at this point, not a whole lot of facts, and it should be continued to be treated as such: An accusation that is not fully supported by facts at this present time.

I made a comparison to the WMD question not too long ago. It seems interesting that when Democrats said the absence of WMDs means they never existed, the Right went nuts, yet those same folks on the Right claim easily that no birth certificate must mean none exists. As I have said, I believe it is a possibility that there is something being hidden, and it may be eligibility - but to me the big question is why Obama has not addressed it, or put it to rest with his proof.

I understand that normally the burden of proof is on those that present the accusation, but I think of it this way: I am a big rig truck driver. I have a Class A License. Normally, simply telling you, or anybody else, that I possess such a driver's license is adequate. You have no reason to doubt me, and will believe me by simply hearing my words. However, when applying for a job, my employer needs more than an assurance. If I refuse to show the potential employer my Class A License, that does not necessarily mean that I don't have one, but it would make the employer wonder what I am hiding, and assume that it is a reasonable possibility that I don't have a Class A License since I refuse to show them the genuine article. That doubt, regardless of whether or not I am a licensed Class A Driver, would be enough to lose the job. My honesty, integrity, and character would be judged as poor. I could complain later that I have a license, and that the burden of proof was on them to prove I don't, so I was unfairly treated - but since they are my potential employer, that attitude really doesn't apply. The American People are Obama's employer, and they are simply asking for verification. All he has to do is show proof, and be done with it. The fact that he doesn't do so, and that the birth certificate that was presented is a computer generated one presented by a third party (liberal website) creates doubt. Based on that doubt, the American People has a right to demand clarification, and verifiable proof.


-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama: Government Health Care Will Eliminate Private Insurance

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Responding to Critics of Obama's Kenyan Birth Certificate

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire, has released what she believes to be a legitimate birth certificate for Barack Obama that was issued in Kenya. Tonight I entertained the idea that it may possibly be authentic on Political Pistachio Radio. As explained on the radio show, and in my last post about this, the document is "allegedly" the birth certificate of Barack Obama. It may in fact be a hoax like the last one. If that is the case, so be it. If not, then Obama has a lot to answer for.

As I have been continually saying, and the Leftists seem not to understand this, I don't know if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or on the moon. I wasn't there. I will not take a position that states I know for sure Obama is ineligible for President of the United States. That said, the reason I entertain the possibility that he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States is not primarily driven by the spurts of evidence, but by Obama's response to the challeng. His response to the accusations have been to seal all of his records, spend $900,000 on defending himself, and refusing to supply documentation to verify eligibility and be done with it.

A man with nothing to hide does not take these kinds of actions.

This issue is not just about birth certificates and the U.S. Constitution, but about the honesty, integrity, and character of Barack Obama. I believe he fails on all counts. The man wasn't even willing to help Gates down the steps at the White House before the Beer Summit - instead walking ahead of them as Sgt. Crowley assisted Gates.



Very telling of the narcissism possessed by Barack Hussein Obama.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama Birth Certificate from Kenya Found?

Orly Taitz, the lawyer that has been at the forefront of the "birther" movement to prove that Barack Hussein Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen has allegedly obtained the "Smoking Gun." Orly has filed for a motion for rogatory discovery to authenticate a Kenyan Birth Certificate of Barack Hussein Obama that has surfaced. If this new document is in fact Barry's birth certificate from Mombasa, Kenya, the eligibility controversy has been broken wide open, and it will be exposed that Barack Obama is a usurper of the U.S. Constitution - "if" the document is valid.

Forensic experts are working on determining if the document is legitimate right now, but if it turns out it is the real deal, the reaction by the populace will be explosive.

Tonight on Political Pistachio Radio we will discuss the issue, along with other "birther" arguments. Andrea Shea King will join me to discuss the discovery of the alleged "Kenyan Obama Birth Certificate," and the repercussions its authenticity could create. We air live at 7:00 pm Pacific Time tonight. Join us live, or later on the archive, at BlogTalkRadio.com/PoliticalPistachio.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Motion for rogatory discovery to authenticate Kenyan Birth Certificate of Barack Hussein Obama - Dr. Orly Taitz Esquire

The Smoking Gun? - Radio Patriot, Andrea Shea King

Is this really smoking gun of Obama's Kenyan birth? - World Net Daily

Seniors and Veterans oppose Obamas Healthcare Plan.

Republican Candidate Ousted From GOP Booth in Illinois

At the Lake County Fair it is tradition that all Republican candidates are welcome to present their information and make contact with the voters. Even primary challengers to Republican incumbents have historically been welcomed there.

This year that tradition is no more.

Originally, the Lake County GOP central committee said that all candidates were welcome. Only a week before the event that was the case.

Then, suddenly, the rule changed.

Why?

Is the incumbent, Sandy Cole, unwilling to share the booth with a more conservative Republican? And if so, why?

Tonight, my guest is Republican State Representative Candidate Paul Mitchell, one of those candidates barred from the Lake County GOP Booth.

Illinois politics returns to Political Pistachio - tune in live tonight at 7:00 pm Pacific, or by archive later, at BlogTalkRadio.com/PoliticalPistachio.

Note: I am also co-hosting The Founding Truth: U.S. Constitution Examined at 5:00 pm Pacific at BlogTalkRadio.com/Founding-Truth.

Porn Receives Stimulus

Explain to me how a bailout for porn and The Arts stimulates the economy?

Don't get me wrong, I grew up appreciating The Arts. From Broadway to Art Galleries, I was exposed quite a bit. I appreciate The Arts (and I don't think I am somehow above anyone for appreciating them, either). But as interesting, and important to society as The Arts may be, "Stimulus" awarded to the National Endowment for the Arts may not necessarily be only going where you think they are going.

The funds may be used to produce pornographic material.

$80 million out of the $787-trillion stimulus bill approved earlier this year by Congress and President Obama has been alloted to the National Endowment for the Arts. But rather than be used to create economic activity, the funds are being used for the production of pornography. According to Alliance Defense Fund special counsel Pat Trueman, the funds are going "primarily to homosexual pornography."

Trueman also says that it is an "outrage" that federal monies are being given to porn-producing organizations while families are more in need of those funds.

Remember, these are monies promised by Obama to do to the citizens that are hurting most.

I say just give everyone a true tax cut, and maybe even a tax holiday for a few months. The extra money in folks pockets will stimulate the economy in more ways than Obama's schemes.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

'Stimulus' grants going to porn producers? - One News Now, Charlie Butts and Jody Brown

Read Obama's Health Care Bill For Yourself

H.R.3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (Introduced in House), is available for you to read. This is the bill the politicians will not read, and Democrat Conyer claims should not have to read before passing it.

Also available is a quick rundown of what is in H.R. 3200 by the Liberty Counsel.

As you read it, notice all of the opportunities for government to tell you how to live your life, and whether or not you are allowed to live.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Douglas V. Gibbs

US Soldier Demands Apology From Senator Claire McCaskill at Town Hall

regarding Obamacare. . .



-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Obama Popularity Going Down in Flames

and the media is scrambling. . .



Get Liberty

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Walid Shoebat joins Political Pistachio Radio

Former Palestinian Terrorist Walid Shoebat is the author of "Why We Want To Kill You," and "God's War On Terror." Tonight he joins the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution to discuss if Islamic Terrorists are behind the Riots in China, and to talk about the rise of homegrown terrorist cells in the United States. Join us live at 7pm Pacific, or listen to the archive later on BlogTalkRadio.com/PoliticalPistachio

Pelosi Criticizes Insurance Companies

If any company or persons, like Insurance Companies, Bankers, Doctors, or Automobile Corporation Executives (to give a few examples) dare to be profit-minded, or gain too much riches or power, they are automatically greedy, unethical, and immoral, according to the Left.

However, if you are a Democratic Politician trying to nationalize America with government-run programs, which in turn will solidify the power of the politicians in place, that is perfectly fine, and moral.

The loss of liberty to the American People is a necessary piece of collateral damage, according to the leftists. No big deal. Uncle Sam, or should that be Uncle Barry, taking control of everything is for your own good . . . or at least that is what the Democrats say.

Anyone opposing the Liberals are the bad guys. Immoral villains, you could say (or in my case, a crazy rightwing extremist).

In fact, the following is what Nancy Pelosi had to say about how the unethical insurance companies are working to kill the plan to create a government-run health plan:

"It's almost immoral what they are doing. Of course they've been immoral all along in how they have treated the people that they insure. They are the villains. They have been part of the problem in a major way. They are doing everything in their power to stop a public option from happening."

I am not saying that the insurance companies are a bunch of angels. And I truly believe that insurance companies are a large part of the problem. Putting anyone between the patient and the provider is a bad idea. But rather than attack the insurance companies, why don't the Democrats address the real problem: Trial Lawyers?

Instead of creating a massive government-run system that wreaks of Marxism, how about Tort Reform instead, which would ensure that frivolous lawsuits suing the doctors for even hiccuping wrong would come to an end?

The answer, my friends, is not because the Democrats wish to improve health care. The answer is that the Democrats wish to replace those immoral, unethical, power hungry insurance companies with themselves, so that they can be the immoral, unethical, power hungry controllers of the American People.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Pelosi lashes out against insurance companies - Reuters

Understanding the term: Natural Born Citizen

As the Obama Birth Certificate argument reaches the mainstream, and while the Left argues the issue should be over and done with because it has been proven that Obama was born in Hawaii, while the Right argues Barack Hussein Obama may very well not have been born in Hawaii, I propose a third possibility: Despite his birth place, Obama is not eligible because of his dual allegiance, which exists because he does not fall within the parameters of being a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America.

To understand this argument, one must understand the term, Natural Born Citizen.

Breaking it down, let us first think about the first word, "Natural." The founders used Natural for a specific reason. Natural means, basically, not of man. So, natural would be a condition that happens outside of law, since law is something created by man. Therefore, simply being a citizen by legal means, like naturalization, does not make one a "Natural" born citizen.

The word "Born" pertains to birth. Birth is important not just because of the "where," but because of the "who." Birth is the natural way to be a citizen, outside of the law, giving both place, and parentage, an important role.

"Citizen." A citizen is someone belonging to a particular nation. To be naturally born as a citizen means the person must be a citizen by birth, and by means outside of man's law.

In American society during the time of the founding of this nation, it was not only important to be born in America. Loyalty was an important factor. Dual loyalty was a dangerous thing, especially during a time of revolution. Therefore, a man with a father that was not born in America, but of British birth, would be considered to have dual allegiance. So, in addition to being born in the colonies, and later the states, one's father must have been born an American as well. Women were, at the time, not as important of a factor. Heirs are sons of their fathers. Citizenship was something, in a sense, you inherited from your father. So, to be a Natural Born Citizen was a person born in America of an American father. Later, as the importance of women grew in society, it became important that a person was the child of two American parents in order to be a Natural Born Citizen.

One reader has repeatedly asked what court cases support my argument, as if the judiciary is the end all of legal matters. Before 1803 the courts were not the arbiters of the U.S. Constitution, and were not originally meant to be. The creeping incrementalism of an ever increasingly powerful judiciary followed to the point that today people think the decisions of 9 people in black robes should always overpower the decisions of the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the People.

The founding fathers never intended for the courts to have that kind of power, which is why law was not made by the courts when these questions arose. In fact, often times they depended on common law which was enforced by the people's actions and voting tendencies. In the case of a Natural Born Citizen, it was apparent to the founders what was meant by the term, so little was done to clarify it. This is not to say there were not writings, and some legal clarifications made. I am only saying that a lot of explanation was not presented because the founding fathers felt that the words, "Natural Born Citizen" was clarification enough.

Now, we find ourselves living with a liberal slant to our society, and with a liberal interpretation of the U.S. Constitution that basically says, "It means what we say it means by our own definition."

I prefer to stick with the original intentions of the founding fathers.

With all of this said, it becomes apparent to me that by the very fact that Barack Obama's father was born in Kenya, and held a Kenyan loyalty, Barack Obama does not fit the definition of Natural Born Citizen.

In short, even though I still believe there is something fishy going on regarding Barack Obama's Birth Certificate, in the end it really doesn't matter.

Obama did not inherit Natural Born Citizenship from his father because it was not his father's to give. If Obama's father had been born on American soil, despite a Kenyan lineage from his grandfather, then it would be an entirely different situation. But in the case of our current President, Obama's father was born in the nation of Kenya, making the elder Obama a non-American.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Defining Natural-Born Citizen - The Federalist Blog, P.A. Madison

OF OUR NATIVE COUNTRY, AND SEVERAL THINGS THAT RELATE TO IT, Section 212, Citizens and Natives - Vattel: The Law of Nations: Book I

Vattel: The Law of Nations: Prefaces to the various editions

Rep. Brian Baird’s (D-Wash.) H.R. 3247, Behavior Research

When does behavior research become behavior modification?



Simply put, in today's political environment, if you do not agree with liberalism, then there must be something wrong with you. As a result, the powers that be (the Democrats) wish to study your behavior patterns so that they can modify them in order to make you think more like them.

Does that sound like science fiction?

All of us are guilty of saying that there is something wrong with the world today. I am a firm believer that we have moved away from the original intention of the U.S. Constitution, and as a society we suffer from a secular-humanistic drive to immobilize morality, as well as any code of standards that could have anything in common with religion, especially Christianity. In other words, morality based on biblical standards has become a bad thing.

The folks on the Left disagree with me on what is wrong, but like me, believe that in one way, or another, we are doing it all wrong when it comes to government and society. It doesn't matter that we also disagree with each other on what is wrong, or how to fix it. All that matters for the point of this argument is that each and every one of us believes that something is wrong, and to become a better nation it needs to change.

Behavioral science has pinpointed that people like change, and they like to follow change when they think everyone else is doing it too. Hence, the basics on how Obama got elected.

After the successful demonization of the previous administration, and the constant hammering on the American People that anyone that did not believe in Obama's change really didn't want any kind of change, which meant by default they wanted the same old politics of the past, which had been successfully hammered on as a failure; Obama not only won the election, but with a rabid following that was eerily devotional on a near-religious level.

Now that the Democrats have control, they could care less about pesky little things like the U.S. Constitution, or anyone that dares to disagree with them. Dissent is but a minor obstacle. Obama's team has set out to make the changes Barack promised. Problem is, the "change" he wants is not anything like the "change" many of his devotees expect. His change is more than anyone could have ever believed possible. Barack Obama's hope and change is a well orchestrated change to the American Form of Government from a Republic, to a Socialistic Democracy.

he Obama team, however, has this slight little problem. Not everyone mindlessly fell for his rhetoric. Believe it or not, there are those out there that actually disagree with him, and believe what he is doing is potentially harmful to not only the America of today, but to the America we hope to give to our children, and grandchildren.

No problem, says the Democrats. Label them right-wingers as anti-government extremists, get the people to turn on them, and then use behavior research and modification methods to ensure the people begin to believe and act as the government desires.

Excuse me, could George Orwell please stand up, and step up here to the front? It seems your nightmare, Mr. Orwell, is coming true after all.

Where is Winston when we need him?

What is especially sneaky about this plan of behavior research is it will be used under the guise that these researchers, and government, knows what is best for the collective, and to not follow the findings of this research that will be enacted upon the passing of H.R. 3247, you will be found to be against change, against growth, and against the betterment of society. Off to a re-education camp to you.

Are you are phobe? Your time is coming. Islamophobes, Homophobes, Environmentalism-phobes, and Hope and Change Phobes, you are the true enemy, and President Obama's Brownshirts will ensure you cooperate and integrate. Otherwise, you are an enemy of the state.

H.R. 1913 Hate Crimes legislation will be the law that allows the government to lock you away. H.R. 3247 will determine you are an obsolete citizen that is not willing to play ball. The Health Care legislation will determine who lives and dies by who gets treatment - and guess you doesn't get the medical care they need to survive?

It will get to the point that any opinion of dissent will not be allowed, and will be forced to be stricken from the record.

Don't believe me? Think I am being paranoid?

Ken Calvert, California U.S. Representative, had a few things to say about the Left's health care plans in his newsletter, and the Democrats made him remove an Obama quote from it. How dare he not follow their lead. How dare he have independent thoughts. That's right, you have read this correctly. The Democrats are censoring the Republicans. The GOP has even been told they are not allowed to use the words, "government run health care."

Write what we want you to write, or we will do it for you.

The same has happened to Rep. John Carter (R-TX), Kevin Brady (R-TX), and Joe Barton (R-TX). How the censorship was accomplished was through the franking approval system (Franking Commission).

This type of strong arm tactics by the Democrats should even have lefty voters concerned - because once the freedoms start being taken away from one group, other groups are always next.

The thought police will take care of those GOP scum soon enough. You will be next, "whether you like it or not" (Gavin Newsom, Mayor of San Francisco, declaring Gay Marriage was coming to California, November, 2008).

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Changing Consumer Behavior is Crucial to Reducing Energy Use, Baird Says at AAAS - AAAS

Big Goverment Spends Taxpayer Dollars to Study Energy Behavior - The Heritage Foundation

H.R. 3247 - The Library of Congress, THOMAS

How Obama Is Using the Science of Change - Time, Michael Grunwald

Carter & Co. Kick House Censors - Human Events, Connie Hair

Behavioral Science - Glenn Beck Video, Fox News

Gavin Newsom - Whether you like it or not - YouTube

Same-Sex Movement Demands Tolerance But Won't Show Any - Human Events, Gary Bauer

Socialized Medicine a la Obama and the Democrats is on the way

VIDEO

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Douglas V. Gibbs

Neda Lives

Neda has become the icon for the drive for freedom in Iran. Neda was a 27 year old woman shot to death on June 20 during the riots in Tehran. Her death was filmed and circulated across the Internet. Now, her name is the rallying cry for the opposition to Iran's brutal government.

Thousands of Iranians were gathered around Neda's gravesite changing "Neda Lives!" As the memorial ceremony grew, Iranian police fired tear gas and beat a number of the protesters in order to disperse them.

This new wave of unrest exhibits the opposition's continued drive for freedom, regardless of the crackdown, using the government's intolerance of their movement as kindling for more eruptions of protests. The episode at Neda's gravesite comes less than a week before President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is inaugurated.

Demonstrations drawing thousands later spread to other parts of Tehran. As in the last string of protests, police fired tear gas, shots in the air and paintballs at the hundreds of protesters.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Police beat mourners in new wave of unrest in Iran - Associated Press/Yahoo News, Nasser Karimi

Most Trusted News . . .

Walter Cronkite was often called the most trusted newsman in America. Now that he has passed away, I began to wonder if there was a replacement. Is there, now, in today's wide world of news, a name more trusted over all of the others?

Names like Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Bill O'Reilly, Larry King, and Charles Gibson are people that come to mind that America may consider. Brian Williams might be an outside shot. My favorite used to be Brit Hume before he stepped down. None of the alphabet network anchors, be them among those listed above, or not, impress me a bit.

In my research, however, the answer to the question was stunning. When I entered the key words "America's Most Trusted Newsman," the name that came up is not even a newsman - or at least he is not to sane people.

According to The Huffington Post, and a myriad of other sites, based on an online poll, the most trusted newsman is . . .

Wait for it . . .

Jon Stewart of the Daily Show.

How many of you slapped your forehead and rolled your eyes?

That's right, the goofy wannabe of Comedy Central topped the poll. The guy is a frickin' idiot. He is a comedian with leftward leanings, and an uncanny ability to say B.S. without tipping his hat that what he is saying is B.S., even though he is out front in telling everyone that everything he says is for entertainment, and has little or no news value whatsoever. I mean, he advertises what he vomits is humor, and a bunch of crap, but people out there actually believe that his broadcasts are somehow newsworthy.

Do people actually tune in to The Daily Show to learn the news of the day?

Heck, I hardly even watch news on television anymore, since it is so biased - and that includes much of the Fox Network too.

I actually had a conversation with a leftist acquaintance recently that told me Steven Colbert was the only conservative he could stomach to watch.

Are some people that stupid? Gosh, I hope that people with that low of a mental capacity does not rank as the majority.

Then again, Obama got elected.

Hoo boy, this is getting scary.

These American citizens, educated by American schools, actually believe the idiocy.

Kids, I know the lunatic public school system ruined you for life, but listen carefully: Colbert is a libtard pretending to be O'Reilly-ish as a joke. Bill O'Reilly isn't even a Conservative, though he is definitely not a far left crazy. And Jon Stewart, your champion of news, is a comedian, and a very liberal one at that. He only got the gig because the other guy, Greg something or other, decided to take a stab at alphabet network late night. Most of what Jon says is idiotic, void of facts, and not meant to be taken seriously. It's a big frickin' joke, and for some reason, you have fallen for it. Take the jar of kool-aid away from your lips, take it back over to the kitchen, and pour it out.

Oh, as an added funny, Brian Williams actually came in second in that poll.

So much for the poll being worth trusting.

Whew, at least the top two weren't one of those major scumbags - Bill Maher, Chris Matthews, or uber-freak Keith Olbermann.

And what a surprise - The number two freakishly liberal website Huffington Post reported this, landing at the top of my Yahoo search when I hit the button. Daily KOS would be the number one freakishly liberal website.

The Daily KOS and The Huffington Post are two of the least trustworthy sites on the Internet. I suppose, then, it would be fitting that those kinds of mental midgets are reporting that Jon Stewart is a king among newsmen.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Online Poll: Jon Stewart Is America's Most Trusted Newsman - Huffington Post, Jason Linkins

Beer Summit Joke

What do you get when you put together a Black Harvard Professor trying to get into his home, a White cop told he is breaking into the house, and an ignorant U.S. President that has a history of jumping to conclusions?

You get a joke of a Beer Summit that is obviously being used to elevate Obama once again since everything is crumbling around him.

I just finished watching Sgt. Crowley's press conference after the completion of the Beer Summit between he, Professor Gates, President Barack Obama, and late entry Vice President Joe Biden at the White House. Listening to the broadcasters yapping about it, and listening to the questions and answers by Sgt. Crowley, I realized what a big joke this thing was.

Obama is being portrayed like he is some kind of great moderator bringing together the White and Black halves of America over a beer. A non-racial situation has been turned into one, and the President of the United States is suddenly the great race-arbitor.

The press is making a big deal over whether or not the gal who called dispatch said it was two Black men, or just two people. People are worried about if Crowley and Gates got along at the beer summit too, and what Crowley meant by saying he and Gates agreed to disagree.

My response is, "Who cares?"

By the way, Biden was added because they didn't want nobody feeling like a third wheel.

Like usual, the Democrats are so worried about upsetting someone, or offending someone, because they see America as a nation of groups. They think we are all touchy about race, and Obama wishes America to see him (after his "stupid" remark) as a great mediator in the liberally perceived out of control war on race.

We are individuals. It is up to us to be responsible to ourselves, and to others. There was no race controversy until Gates and Obama decided to make it so. Who cares if the dispatcher said the suspects were black. If she did, it was to better enable the cop to better identify the perpetrator. Stating the color of a person who is believed to break into a home is not being racist - it is simply applying indentifying factors.

Who's fault is it that this became a big issue?

I heard that in a poll it is pretty split. Some say Crowley's, some say Gates, other say both. I think that it really was neither of their faults. It is the fault of the idiot that asked Obama his opinion on it in the first place. Nobody knew much about the situation at that point, and it was simply an attempt to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Hopefully we are done with this garbage, but I doubt it.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Child of Krakatoa

The most famous volcano outside of the State of Washington (Mt. Saint Helens is pretty famous in America) erupted in 1883. Krakatoa exploded with a force 13,000 times more powerful than the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan by American Forces during the waning days of World War II. The eruption in 1883 killed over 36,000 people. Anak Krakatoa is a new volcano that is emerging from the remains of the former giant beast which blew itself apart over one hundred years ago.

Steadily growing out of its predecessor's remains since 1927, Anak Krakatoa is currently half the size of Krakatoa was in 1883. The volcano lies between Java and Sumatra on the Sunda Strait, and has recently been providing a light show that reminds us how beautiful nature can be, and how dangerous. A repeat blast seems imminent, and locals are bracing for the worst.

In 1883, Krakatoa destroyed itself when it exploded, causing a tsunami of tremendous proportions while spewing poison gases and hot ashes on the surrounding lands.

Prior to 1883 there are records of volcanic activity in the same area, one eruption during the 1500s is said to have been a factor in global climate changes. In 1927, now underwater, Krakatoa sprang back to life, and a new island rose out of the waters. Three times islands rose out of the water, and was eroded away by the waters. In 1930, a fourth attempt was successful, as the volcano provided lava faster than the waves could erode them. The island was named by locals Anak Krakatau ("Child of Krakatoa").

Since the 1950s the rate of growth of the island has increased, and in 1994 the Child of Krakatoa experienced an episode of eruptions. The island has been constantly rumbling ever since, going through an eruption sequence in April 2008 that released rocks, lava and gases.

The Spring of 2009 began the most recent episodes of rumblings, with lava spewing, and the island growing. So far this year plumes of smoke and the release of lava has contributed to the darkening of the skies, and the growth of the island.

I wonder how long it will take the liberals to find a way to tax the volcano for contributing to the green house gases being added to the air?

For spectacular photos, go to the link below at The Daily Mail.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Fiery images as killer volcano that claimed 36,000 lives stirs once more - The Daily Mail

Obama Selling Out American With Health Care Insanity

Barack Obama figured the selling out of America through a Health Care takeover by the government would occur as smooth as silk. He figured he could sell slavery in the guise of "needed assistance" with ease, while convincing the populace that with more slavery comes freedom.

It isn't going as well as King Obama once thought.

Now, this whole health care thing is getting personal.

President Obama's pitch is now that a sweeping overhaul in the health care industry will help the people of America, and will be sure to include consumer protections.

But how do you protect the consumers when the brightest minds in America begin to shy away from medicine because the profitability has been killed by government intervention? How do you protect consumers when insurance companies begin to increase rates because of a severe loss of customers they know they will never get back once more than half of their customer base runs over to Obamacare? How do you protect consumers when bureaucrats in Washington DC begin to issue "priorities" based on your behavior, and can deny you life-saving surgeries so that they can give it to somebody else that just jumped into line, but is more deserving to live? How do you protect the consumer when wait times for critical care increases because there are less doctors, less incentive to give quality care, and a bunch of government workers deciding who gets what, when? How does the government protect the consumer when the government is the problem?

Rather than setting annual caps on how much insurers can charge consumers for out-of-pocket expenses, how about offering them tax breaks for bringing those charges below a certain number? Rather than barring insurers from refusing coverage due to pre-existing conditions, how about granting the insurers incentives to accept such patients into their system by implementing a relaxation in particular fee schedules should the insurer accept these patients, or tax deductions for each patient accepted that falls under this category?

Rather than trying to control the industry, how about incentivising it?

The way to bring down the cost to consumers is not to increase cost to the insurance companies. Increased costs to the insurer will be transferred to the consumer. The way to decrease the cost of medical care for the consumer is the decrease the cost of doing business for the insurers and the health care providers.

Ultimately, in his implementation of a government paid health system, Obama will push the private industry over a cliff, and the government will become the sole provider of coverage. As a result the cost to many will go down, but taxes will rise across the board, and the quality of care will drop like a rock.

In the name of affordability, are we willing to turn the greatest medical system in the world into one that can barely compete with the medical care in Third World Nations?

People will die because rationing (you know, giving people priorities based on their behaviors, age, body type, and benefit to society) will only allow care to be given to the youngest, most productive members of society. Private medical care will only be available to the richest people (so much for closing that gap between the rich and the poor, Mr. President). In the end Government will have the ultimate power over you. They will be able to decide whether you live, or die.

The Democrats know this will be the ultimate result. This is what they want. Obama's stupidity is not by accident. Government control over the populace by putting a socialistic system in place is the goal. They understand that a totalitarian socialistic state must be put into place. Liberals believe, however, that it is essential in the evolution of humanity, and that eventually a big government system will magically melt away, giving way to a world where we won't need government at all - where society becomes some sweet, peaceful place where everybody lives happily ever after - by the way, this utopian society they are striving for is called COMMUNISM.

And we are supposed to believe this socialist state rising in America, which will inevitably become a powerful dictatorship, will happily give up its power and step aside for the liberal utopia?

The goal of Obama with his so-called sweeping reform in the Health Care industry is not to make sure you have better medical care. Your protection is no more the goal of Obamacare than is Cap and Trade to help the environment. All of these policies, from the takeover of the auto industry, to the bail out of any business system they can get their hands on, is about bringing the reins of power into their own hands. The idea of all of this is for the liberal left to seize permanent power of the government. Realizing the American People would never allow this willingly, the Democratic Party (and much of the GOP) has become populated with accomplished liars and thugs. It was no accident when Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

Barack Obama has retooled his speeches, just as he did during his presidential campaign. He was the most liberal candidate in the hunt for the presidency, and we all knew it, yet he fooled a majority of Americans by sounding conservative - offering tax cuts, and even sounding a little less liberal when it came to the social issues. Obama knows from eperience that the truth will not work, so he must now convince folks that Obamacare is good for them, even though in the long haul it will be disastrous for America.

He must use lies to convince us to allow him to implement the disastrous system of socialism.

His speeches about this monstrosity of a health care bill that the legislators aren't even going to read are becoming rosier and more reassuring with each day.

He wants it passed, and he wants it passed quickly, before anyone realizes the long term damage to the American System it will cause.

Remember, this is the same party of Democrats that accused Bush, and the Republicans, of moving too fast with their legislation and war effort.

My, how opinions change when you have the chance to inject more statism into Washington while holding the reins of power as you change America into a socialist state.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Reading Bills Before Voting On Them

How insane is it that Democrat politicians are arguing that they have no need to read any bills before voting on them?

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Michigan) actually said during a speech at a National Press Club luncheon that he sees no point in lawmakers reading the health care bill. Not only is there no time, but they would need to have two lawyers with them to interpret it.

Aren't a large portion of politicians lawyers? Suddenly they can't understand their own bills?

Conyers specifically said, "What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?"

Two days? Why rush such an important piece of legislation? Take a load off. Take a few weeks to read it. Voting "yes" on a piece of legislation without even knowing what is in it is asinine one would think.

Then again, liberals have done worse.



Here's Rep. Brian Bilbray's (R-CA) opinion on this:



-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama The Racist

I have repeatedly told people that Barack Obama chose Sotomayor as his judiciary pick because she is a perfect reflection of him, right down to the racism.

Don't believe me that Obama is a racist? Have you read "Dreams of my Father?"

My opinion catches a lot of flack, and that is fine. I know what I see. Problem is, many folks think that only white males can be racist. Everyone else has an excuse for their racism.

When someone agrees with me, but come to their conclusion for a different reason, it always catches my attention. When it comes to Obama being a racist, the opinion came from a place I hardly expected. The accusation came from Israel.

The fuel for the racist charge against President Obama comes regarding his policies against Jewish construction in eastern Jerusalem, and the West Bank. In a rally in front of the U.S. conslate in Jerusalem, 2,000 Israelis proclaimed that Obama is a racist, and that Obama's envoy to the conflict over Jerusalem, and outer territories, George Mitchell, needs to go home.

"Obama should not be pressing Israel to compromise and freeze building in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem," a protest organizer by the name of Yaacov Steinberg told World Net Daily.

The belief is that Obama's policies, if followed by Israel, would show Israeli weakness, and embolden Palestinian terrorists. Obama dictating to the Jews in the area where they can and can't live didn't go over too well either.

Mort Klein, president of the Zionist Organization of America, said of the issue, "It's absolutely an outrageously racist policy. Especially in light of how Obama should be sensitive when it comes to anything that would remotely constitute discrimination of people based on ethnicity or religion."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu strongly rejected the American demand.

"Imagine what would happen if someone were to suggest Jews could not live in or purchase [property] in certain neighborhoods in London, New York, Paris or Rome," he said.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama slammed as 'racist' at Jerusalem rally - World Net Daily, Aaron Klein

Beer Party At The White House!

Feeling bad that Obama was stupid when he called the Cambridge Police Department "stupid," and figuring he can get everyone to "just get along" over a couple of beers, and his charming charisma, Obama has declared that on Thursday he will host a "Suds Summit" with Professor Henry Louis Gates, and Cambridge Police Sergeant James Crowley.

Nobody could come up with a "one size fits all" beer (liberals aren't too big on individual choice), so Obama had to settle for allowing everyone to individually choose what they want to drink. The final tally? Obama will drink a Bud Light, Gates will have a Red Stripe and Crowley a Blue Moon.

As long as the weather permits, the three will enjoy a cold one together on the picnic table next to the White House's new swing set around 6:00 o'clock in the evening Thursday night.

I am not much of a beer drinker. I have more fingers than the number of beers I drink per year. Nonetheless, I have had enough beers in my lifetime to be a good judge of good beers, and there is not a single light beer on that list (okay, okay, Michelob Light and Amstel Light are drinkable, though not nearly as good as having a full bodied beer with hair).

Dark lagers and Mexican beers usually catch my fancy.

Here is the interesting thing about light beers: Dropping off a couple calories doesn't necessarily make a beer less fattening. Alcohol slows down your metabolism, so dropping a few calories may seem noble, but does not actually address the problem. Besides, light beers, because of that loss, has a weaker, almost watered-down taste to them. Light beers are sort of like light cigarettes - not necessarily any better for you, but a definite compromise on taste.

I quit smoking a few years ago, and haven't drank more than two beers in one night since I was in my early twenties, so I am not saying to folks it is good to smoke up and drink up - but, if you are going to enjoy these products, why sacrifice taste for a lesser product that does not save your gut, or lungs, as they claim?

Anyway, the whole point of this post is not really about beer or smokes. Heck, I don't even care if the president is having this little get together - though I am chuckling because it makes me wonder if he thinks he can do the same with Ahmadinejad and the midget in North Korea with wonderfully peaceful results. The point of this all is it is funny that Obama likes light beer.

Like his presidency, light beer comes across weak, watered down, and the "less calories is less fatty for you" claim is a big fat lie, but people buy it anyway.

See the similarity?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Red, Lite and Blue: The Beers Obama, Gates, Crowley Will Drink at White House - ABC News, SCOTT MAYEROWITZ

Obama's Eligibility and WMDs

A recent post right here on Political Pistachio, Definition Natural Born Citizens, drew a lot of interesting feedback. Within a few hours I had a whole handful of comments, every one of them filled with name calling and profanity. I received Emails too from people angry I was willing to write about such a topic, again.

Interestingly, not a single comment or Email addressed what I actually wrote in the post.

The title of the blog post was enough to anger the hateful liberal tools. But, based on the fact that none of the attacks addressed what I wrote, it told me they were reacting to the subject matter, not about what I actually had to say on the topic. (I will admit, however, that on Facebook one of the commenters doubting my position did address what I had to say directly - therefore, telling me that she, at least, read the entirety of the article).

How objective can one be when at the mere mention of a topic the blood veins in the neck begin to burst, but none of the evidence presented is even considered.

Sounds like Congress voting on the nationalization of the private sector - nobody is reading the bills, they are just voting for them because Obama said to.

Tools.

My favorite commenter, who I normally ignore (I say favorite because of how insane and obsessive he is) because his comments are usualy filled with vile hatefulness, left a comment that is a pretty good example of what all of the outcry against me was like:

"Just a couple days ago, the officials in Hawaii responsible for keep track of such things have stated that the birth certificate is correct, and have affirmed over and over and over again that Obama was born in Hawaii. You people are just f***ing jokes..You do know that.. don't you? We're pointing and laughing at you most of the time.. but every so often, you get irritating as f**k as well. This who stupid-as-f**k "birther" thing is just irritatin now. You're not "touching a nerve". You're just stupid as f**k, pushing the same debunked stupid crap over and over and over."

And this is a person that also likes to criticize my writing skills. His writing is barely intelligible.

Notice, not a word was presented in his inane comment about what I specifically wrote. His offering was just a reactionary, recycled, eye-bleeding, maniacal, angry attack filled with talking points fed to him by all of the other crazy liberals.

The mere mention of the words "Obama" and "birth certificate" in the same sentence makes these people's heads explode. Notice, too, they are now calling folks who question Obama's eligibility "birthers" in an attempt to denigrate the issue (same tactic they use on just about everything else, too - jeez, they never change).

Non-birthers that launch into profanity-laced rants of hate and discontent anytime someone dares to speak out against their precious Obama, I have a message for you: "They have trained you well. You are like a show dog rolling over on command."

How does it feel to no longer be an independent thinker?

I am still wondering what happened to those Hippie Liberals that used to proclaim that they would defend my right to free speech no matter what, despite their disagreement with me. I guess their willingness to defend the freedom of political speech only applies when they say it does.

Now, if conservatives dare to voice a few words of dissent against the Obamessiah, we are attacked in ways that are so vile and hateful that I feel more sorry for these people, than feeling any anger.

The point of view I took in that article that these liberals failed to catch (and I am assuming by this point in this particular post none of them are still reading) was that it may be very well that whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii does not matter. Don't get me wrong. I think there is something being covered up based on Barack's shady response to this issue, but what if the definition of a Natural Born Citizen is such that by having a non-citizen father, it doesn't matter where Obama was born because in order to be a Natural Born Citizen both parents must be American Citizens?

Hmmmm, something to think about.

Having a parent from another country opens up the opportunity for dual loyalties, and the founding fathers desired that the president's loyalties be 100% to the United States of America.

So, what has all this to do with WMDs?

If you will remember, the Democrats claimed that Bush's whole excuse for going into Iraq was Weapons of Mass Destruction. When no actual WMDs were produced, the Democrats and liberals claimed that the absence of WMDs was proof the WMDs never existed. Verbal testimony by General Sada, who was formerly of the Hussein Regime, that the WMDs were moved to Syria in 2002 was rejected by the Left. Verbal verification was not good enough. Then, when evidence was found, primarily mustard gas, the liberals argued that the chemical weapons were not the real thing. They wanted proof of major weapons of mass destruction, not a history of using such weapons, or evidence of mustard gas.

Regarding Obama's birth certificate, note that no actual birth certificate has been produced, but regardless, the Democrats and liberals claim that Obama's word is proof enough of his eligibility. Verbal testimony by Obama's paternal grandmother that she was in the delivery room in Kenya when Barack Obama was born is not good enough, but the testimony of a Hawaii state worker is enough for them to declare that without a doubt Obama was born in Hawaii. When a birth certificate is produced, it was not produced by Obama, but by a liberal website, and it is a computerized short-form that does not include pertinent information such as the name of the hospital, or the name of the attending physician. However, they were willing to accept this questionable birth certificate as undeniable proof of eligibility, regardless of a history, Obama's actions to fight the issue, or mounting evidence pointing to the contrary.

In short, when it comes to WMDs, they need to see the real thing. When it comes to Obama's birth certificate, they don't.

Verbal testimony by a high ranking official in Saddam Hussein's government was not good enough for them regarding the WMDs, nor is the testimony of Obama's paternal grandmother regarding the location of Obama's birth. However, a state worker's testimony that she has "seen" the real birth certificate (while still not producing the real thing) is good enough for the liberals.

Proof of mustard gas weapons of mass destruction was unacceptable to the liberals, but a computerized, incomplete birth certificate provided by a biased liberal web site is absolutely acceptable as the real deal.

The history of Hussein's past use of WMDs was not enough to convince the Democrats that the presence of WMDs in Iraq may have been possible. A lack of history of Obama's past, and the sealing of all of his records, is not enough to convince Democrats that it is possible he is not eligible.

Makes one wonder, doesn't it?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

By Douglas V. Gibbs