To be clear, no one is questioning whether or not people have a right to build a house of worship on any private property which they own. This issue does not concern rights or laws. Rather, it concerns propriety.

The World Trade Center site and its immediate surrounding area is hallowed ground, consecrated with the blood of innocents. Those innocents were murdered by radical Islamic terrorists who believed that by killing these innocents their God would honor them. Upon learning of the events of September 11, 2001 the vast majority of Muslims world-wide looked the other way and kept their mouths shut. Whether they meant to or not, by doing so they gave their tacit approval to the atrocity.

The Muslims involved with this project claim that they are building this “community center/mosque” to foster understanding and facilitate dialog between all faiths and peoples. Yet, by insisting on building this mosque on the Ground Zero Site, these very same Muslims display a complete lack of sensitivity towards the feelings of a majority of the people of New York as well as America. It seems that Muslims, for the most part, are unwilling to show a sensitivity to the culture of Americans, while at the same time demanding that Americans show sensitivity to Islamic culture.

None of this even begins to cover the Islamic tradition of building mosques on the sites of their conquered enemies.

If you must build a mosque, build it elsewhere. Just as with a Christian church, a mosque is nothing more than a building. What counts is what the people inside the building are doing.

12 Weeks from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped the first atomic bomb in the history of warfare says the Obama administration’s decision to send a U.S. delegation to a ceremony in Japan to mark the 65th anniversary of the attack on Hiroshima is an “unsaid apology” and appears to be an attempt to “rewrite history.”

Gene Tibbets, son of Brig. Gen. Paul W. Tibbets, Jr., says Friday’s visit to Hiroshima by U.S. Ambassador John Roos is an act of contrition that his late father would never have approved.

“It’s an unsaid apology,” Tibbets, 66, told FoxNews.com from his home in Georgiana, Ala. “Why wouldn’t it be?  Why would [Roos] go? It doesn’t make any sense.

“I know it’s the anniversary, but I don’t know what the hell they’re trying to do. It needs to be left alone. The war is over.”

While controversial, America’s use of the Atomic Bomb to end World War II has been almost universally acknowledged to have ended the war sooner than other strategies available at the time, while at the same time saving thousands of American soldiers’ lives.  Apparently, Obama is ashamed of this and feels the need to apologize to a country who, at the time was guilty of killing a couple thousand Americans in a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

When asked about it, the Obama Administration did what it does best; it passed the buck:

White House officials on Wednesday referred calls to the State Department, which did not  respond to several inquiries about how the decision was made or if national veterans organizations were contacted prior to the announcement that a delegation would attend the commemoration.

Would you expect anything else from someone who spent most of his time in political office voting “Present” on important issues? This is yet another example of how the Obama Administration’s lack of Foreign Policy experience is destroying America’s reputation and credibility around the world. By the time The Obamasiah© leaves office in January of 2013, the world’s sole remaining super-power will be regarded as no more than a third-world banana republic by other world powers. This will be the lasting legacy of  Barack Obama.

14 Weeks from Republican Governors Association on Vimeo.

Health Care Reform as a Tax Increase
Who can forget Barry mixing it up with George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s This Week over whether or not the mandate to purchase health insurance was a tax or not?

STEPHANOPOULOS: You were against the individual mandate…

OBAMA: Yes.

STEPHANOPOULOS: …during the campaign. Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t

How is that not a tax?

OBAMA: Well, hold on a second, George. Here — here’s what’s happening. You and I are both paying $900, on average — our families — in higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now what I’ve said is that if you can’t afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn’t be punished for that. That’s just piling on.

If, on the other hand, we’re giving tax credits, we’ve set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we’ve driven down the costs, we’ve done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you’ve just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances. And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that’s…

STEPHANOPOULOS: That may be, but it’s still a tax increase.

OBAMA: No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase.

People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it may be fair, it may be good public policy…

OBAMA: No, but — but, George, you — you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase. Any…

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here’s the…

OBAMA: What — what — if I — if I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 or 8 or 10 percent next year and you say well, that’s not a tax increase; but, on the other hand, if I say that I don’t want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then…

STEPHANOPOULOS: I — I don’t think I’m making it up. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: Tax — “a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.”

OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean what…

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, but…

OBAMA: …what you’re saying is…

STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that.

Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.  [Emphasis added]

Here, Barry quite clearly and emphatically says that the mandate is not a tax increase. Of course, that was 2009.  This year, things are a little different…

When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance  or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

So remember folks, when Barry Two-Face is selling you some piece of legislation you can’t believe a word he says. Just think of him as a used car salesman or liberal journalist.

Release of the Lockerbie Bomber
Regarding the release of the Lockerbie Bomber, Barry Two-Face said this:

President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron today both agreed that the decision to release Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al Megrahi last year was a bad decision, and Obama said he fully supports Cameron’s efforts to learn more about the about the release.

Turns out, maybe Barry Two-Face doesn’t want the Prime Minister to learn too much more about this…

THE US government secretly advised Scottish ministers it would be “far preferable” to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.

 Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Times reveals the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison.

The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer.

The document, acquired by a well-placed US source, threatens to undermine US President Barack Obama’s claim last week that all Americans were “surprised, disappointed and angry” to learn of Megrahi’s release.

Scottish ministers viewed the level of US resistance to compassionate release as “half-hearted” and a sign it would be accepted.

The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future “frank and open communications” with other governments.

Remember, real American citizens were murdered when this guy blew up Pan Am Flight 103. Barry Two-Face, as usual, had no problems lying to the families of the victims of this terrorist, as well as the rest of us.

How in the world can this degenerate sleep at night? Has he no honor? Or is this just more of “The Chicago Way” that Democrats have been following for years.

In emotional and personal testimony, an ex-Justice official who quit over the handling of a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party accused his former employer of instructing attorneys in the civil rights division to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims.

J. Christian Adams, testifying Tuesday before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, said that “over and over and over again,” the department showed “hostility” toward those cases. He described the Black Panther case as one example of that — he defended the legitimacy of the suit and said his “blood boiled” when he heard a Justice official claim the case wasn’t solid.

“It is false,” Adams said of the claim.

“We abetted wrongdoing and abandoned law-abiding citizens,” he later testified.

If you’ve seen the video from the polling station that was the center of the investigation, you can’t help but wonder what else the higher-ups in the Justice Department think they needed to proceed with the case, especially given this:

The Bush Justice Department brought the first case against three members of the group, accusing them in a civil complaint of violating the Voter Rights Act. The Obama administration initially pursued the case, winning a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panther members did not appear in court. But then the administration moved to dismiss the charges the following month after getting one of the New Black Panther members to agree to not carry a “deadly weapon” near a polling place until 2012.

That’s correct — the Justice Department had already won default judgments in the case before it dismissed the charges. You say, “Maybe they were just observing the polls to make sure everything was on the up-and-up”? Here is a picture of what we’re talking about:

Notice, please, the night-stick and military-style footwear the thug in front is wearing.

Yeah, he isn’t trying to intimidate anyone.

The attorney in charge of the case was ready to go to trial, but word came down from above that cases involving black defendants would not be prosecuted. So, the Civil Rights Commission is investigating. I can’t wait to see what they find, especially given the Holder is refusing to let his lawyers testify to the commission. Adams says that the other lawyers from his section will verify what he has claimed. How convenient is it that Holder won’t let them testify?

For many years, whenever the left wanted to discredit someone on the right, all they did was start calling them racist whether it was true or not. Then, by shear repetition the perception was created. Now, when it is leftists who are black, and who are leaving no doubt that they are racist, what do they do? Are they denouncing them on the TV? No. Writing posts and articles denouncing them? No. Instead, they are ignoring them and continuing to smear people on the right:

The statement, which was submitted by the NAACP’s Kansas City, Mo., branch, did much to get a hot debate going. It says members of the movement have “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically” and says “the racist elements” within the tea party are “a threat to progress.”

Authors of the statement cite as examples the reports by some black members of Congress that they were spat upon and subjected to racial epithets before they voted on the health-care overhaul. No charges were filed, and some tea party supporters have denied the claims, saying there is no evidence that they occurred.

Desperate times require desperate measures, I guess. Ever since Obama won election, the NAACP has been trying to prove that they are still relevant and should still exist. It seems that they have chosen to gin-up charges of racism against whomever is prominent on the right, to wit Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

Why is it that people on the left seem hell-bent to destroy Martin Luther King’s dream of people being judged on the content of their character and not the color of their skin? Why is it that people on the left are so quick to ignore or overlook things done by blacks which, if done by whites, would be immediately chastised? Why are blacks getting a free pass when they engage in racism by liberals and the press? These, my friends, is the $64,000.00 questions.

The first story that caught my eye was at the beginning of June when the White House announced that McCartney would be awarded the George Gershwin Award by the Library of Congress. Wow, I thought, he sure deserves that. I mean, few people have had the effect on popular music that he has had, both individually and as a member of the Beatles. So then, the day after the award ceremony and performance for the President and his guests, the story comes out that McCartney said this:

“It’s a fantastic honor (for) the Gershwin family to give me this incredible award and for me to be awarded it by the Library of Congress. And in fact, after the last eight years, it’s great to have a president who knows what a library is,” McCartney said, drawing cheers from the audience.

Now, at first blush, this didn’t surprise me much. After all, McCartney was not only a big part of the liberal drug and peace protest culture of the Sixties, he was a leader of that group. Its no surprise that a far left celebrity like him would think or feel this way. However, upon reflection it started to bother me. I mean, here was this foreigner welcomed as a guest and honoree to a non-political event in our nation’s capital to be honored with an award. What right did he have to inject politics into a ceremony like this? Especially being that he isn’t even a citizen of this country? To me, it smacked of a unusually high lack of class and respect for his hosts, a lack of class I had not formerly associated with him.

The next story that caught my attention was this one:

The Beatles legend said: “Sadly we need disasters like this to show people. Some people don’t believe in climate warming – like those who don’t believe there was a Holocaust.

“But the facts indicate that there’s something going on and we’ve got to be aware of it if we want our kids to inherit a decent world, not a complete nightmare of a planet – clean, renewable energy is for starters.”

In truth, the facts show that something may or may not be happening, and exactly what that something is nobody knows. The smartest people on the planet cannot decide what the facts prove or disprove, so forgive me if I don’t think some celebrity who didn’t even finish high school should be commenting on something he clearly has no understanding of whatsoever.

Oh, as far as comparing Global Warming to the Holocaust, he should call me when he can demonstrate that Global Warming has killed 6 million people from a single ethnicity maliciously. Having lived in Europe most of his life, can he really be this ignorant and cavalier about the slaughter of Jews by the Nazis? After all, pictures, artifacts, and first-hand accounts of the Holocaust abound; there is absolutely no doubt that the Holocaust happened. Global Warming, on the other hand, has produced no dead victims, no destruction on anything like a measurable scale, and lacks any sort of credible, undeniable physical proof of its existence. In fact, its just a scientific theory which has yet to be proven. Quite a bit different from the Holocaust, wouldn’t you say? Certainly, at this stage of the game, there is more than enough reason to doubt the existence of Global Warming without having to endure mental midgets like McCartney equating you to a Holocaust denier.

So, to sum up: Mr. McCartney, thanks for all of the great music and inspiration over these many years. However, you should really learn how to be gracious to people who are honoring you, and you should really learn to shut your freaking mouth when you have no clue what you’re talking about.

A lot of people will read the preceding and say, “Wait a minute. Incompetence is a little harsh, isn’t it?” In response, I say, “It isn’t nearly harsh enough given the damage Obama has done to the economy, the country itself, and the people of the United States.”

Exhibit A: Health Care Reform
Health Care Reform was Obama’s signature issue; the issue most responsible for his election. The reason it got him elected was because regardless of party, most people agree that the Health Care industry needs reform. The problem came when Obama and his willing accomplices in Congress put forth a proposal which may very well bankrupt the most prosperous country on the planet, while at the same time creating a huge shortage of doctors and lowering the standard of care for every American. When Americans finally got to see the actual legislation (no small feat, given that the Democrats in Congress did everything to keep it hidden as long as they could), they were shocked at the cost and its attempts to reduce costs through rationing of care and reducing reimbursements to doctors. They were shocked that Obama’s constant promise that, “if you like your current insurance plan, you can keep it” turned out to be yet another outright lie.

Americans from all walks of life protested all over the country against ObamaCare. So, being the “great leader” that the Democrats claimed he was, what did Obama do? He ignored close to 60% of the American public and pushed his plan through. What will he do for an encore? He’s going back into campaign mode (if, indeed, he even left campaign mode) and will travel around the country to try to sell his plan to America. He thinks that once he gets out there, and just makes the American people realize how great his plan is, we’ll all change our minds and begin to love the plan. What he is too stupid to see is that there isn’t enough lipstick in the entire world to make this pig a beauty queen.

Exhibit B: Gulf Oil Spill
Natural disasters and industrial accidents cannot be blamed on politicians. These incidents happen when natural events take their course or industrial components fail. Given this, Presidents throughout history have had to take the blame for things which they had no way to prevent. How a President reacts to the event, and manages the crises subsequent to the event, is how a President is judged.

The Deep Horizon oil rig exploded on April 20, 2010. Nine days later, Obama pledges “every single available resource,” including the U.S. military, to contain the spreading spill. 12 days after the explosion, Obama makes his first visit to the Gulf Coast. He has since made two more photo ops visits. While all of this was going on, Obama made time to spend $10 million dollars on three lavish parties with musical guests such as Paul McCartney and Beyonce, go on vacation, attend several Democratic fundraisers, and film a Democrat campaign ad. What he didn’t make time for were the memorial services of the people who died in the explosion. But hey, Paul McCartney doesn’t offer to serenade your wife every day, does he?

I understand from Mr. McCartney that Obama knows what a library is. Good. Maybe Obama should actually go to one and read a book or two on leadership.

Exhibit C: Pissing on our Allies
By the time Obama leaves office, he may very well have alienated every valuable ally the United States has in the world. Let’s begin with England. Barely in office, he insults the Queen by giving her an iPod pre-loaded with his speeches. Then he gives the Prime Minister a set of DVDs which are not viewable in the UK. Next, Obama declared that America was “neutral” over the sovereignty of the Falklands, ignoring the clear wishes of the islands’ population. Then his Assistant Secretary of State, Philip Crowley, snubbed Britain by failing to use their proper name and instead calling them the “Malvinas”.

And then there is Israel. Obama has pretty much sided against Israel and with Hamas and the Palestinians every time he could. At the same time, he has visited many Middle-Eastern countries and bowed to their leaders, all the while apologizing for America at every opportunity.

This is what incompetence in the White House gets you. It may very well take several subsequent Presidential Administrations, headed by competent Chief Executives, to fix the mess this empty suit has left.