There has been a lot of unearthing of the falsehoods behind claims of man-made global warming. Climategate was just another nail in the coffin. Blatant indifference to fact came to light earlier this year as well.
In late spring, there was a vast cover up at EPA over science that didn’t fit the administration’s agenda. View the video from Fox News:
Alan Carlin: ” My view is…there is not currently any reason to regulate carbon dioxide. Global temperatures are roughly where they were in the mid-20th century. They’re not going up. If anything, they’re going down.”
The document prepared for the EPA is available online at Carlin Economics and Science . Carlin said:
On June 25th the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) released a draft copy of my report critical of the science underlying EPA’s proposed position on Endangerment under the Clean Air Act and the role of CO2 in global warming saying:
“The released report is a draft version, prepared under EPA’s unusually short internal review schedule, and thus may contain inaccuracies which were corrected in the final report. While we hoped that EPA would release the final report, we’re tired of waiting for this agency to become transparent, even though its Administrator has been talking transparency since she took office. So we are releasing a draft version of the report ourselves, today,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman.
CEI noted that: Internal EPA email messages, released by CEI earlier that week, indicate that in their view the report was kept under wraps and that I was silenced because of pressure to support the Administration’s agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.
How much evidence do we need the government is cooking the science? What better way to confiscate funds that to initiate a “breath tax”?
It is apparent our government cares nothing of truth, integrity, or acting in the public interest.
Is it any wonder the majority of American’s are not willing to trust them with our environment, our money or our health care?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
Since when is our Constitution up for debate? I am disgusted by the constant attacks on the very foundation of our country. There are those in government, our president for one, who would just as soon see all weapons stripped from law abiding citizens. The second amendment is clear:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
President James Monroe said: “The right of self-defense never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals.”
President Thomas Jefferson said:
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” — Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” — Jefferson‘s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
Can it be any clearer than that?
Progressives, Fascists and Marxists strive to remove from the citizenry the ability to defend themselves.
Those same persons and groups are determined to legislate “We The People” back in to slavery for the servitude of the government.
Alan Keyes has a very clear stance on the Second Amendment :
Presently, pending in the House, are two diametrically opposed bills:
H.R. 17 Citizens’ Self-Defense Act of 2009
In correlation with the restrictions outlined by the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, this bill protects and provides context for the possession and use of fire arms, namely in defense of the self or family (or, when relevant, the home) against a reasonably perceived threat of unlawful bodily injury or violent felony.
This bill is sponsored by Roscoe Bartlett (R) MD and has 21 co-sponsors, including Michele Bachmann.
Please check the link above to ensure your Representative is a co-sponsor, and if not, get on the phone!
The other bill, which seeks to impinge upon our second amendment rights, is H.R. 45 Blair-Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009
The Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act would establish a nationwide system for prohibiting unlicensed gun-ownership. If approved, the law would require gun owners to apply for five-year licenses to own firearms, and would give the U.S. Attorney General broad authority over the program.
This bill is sponsored by Bobby Rush (D) IL and the good news is it has zero co-sponsors. This man MUST GO!
I have received, as have many of my friends, an email circulating regarding fictitious SB 2099. Open Congress says:
Over the past six months or so, I’ve seen an occasional e-mail about SB 2099, a bill that would supposedly require gun owners to declare their firearms on tax forms. During the past few days, however, the volume of questions about the bill has increased. So, I thought I would write a bit about SB 2099 to try and set the record straight…In short, an inaccurate rumor from 2000 is still running the rounds today, and still scaring people into writing the NRA and their lawmakers to stop it, despite ample evidence to the contrary.
Even Archie Bunker had the right idea:
Some enlightening recent articles on the subject:
by Bob Heinritz Posted at HumanEvents.com
For the first 150-years of the existence of the U.S.A., the right of citizens to carry arms was so fundamental it was not considered worthy of debate. The Founders considered their right to keep and bear arms the ultimate and most fundamental guarantee of life and freedom against crime, foreign invasion, and as a last resort, a despotic government. No knowledgeable American–from the founding of the United States through the mid-1950’s–would have questioned that the Second Amendment to the Constitution meant exactly what it says, “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This was not a right of a Militia. The “Militia” was–and under current law still is–all able-bodied adults, who are expected to keep their privately-owned arms similar to what is used by the military at the time.Nineteenth-century U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Joseph Story, called the American right to bear arms “the palladium of the liberties of the republic.” Our Founders believed that in a free society good citizens must always be prepared to defend themselves and their country. Thomas Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life, gave us freedom to defend life.” Being armed was more than a right. It was a moral obligation of citizenship.
The article goes on to detail what has happened in other countries on the subject of guns and gun control and is one of the most concise pieces I have seen on the subject. Extremely poignant and interesting. It concludes:
…You won’t see this data on the American evening news or hear our President, governors or other politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property. Guns in the hands of honest citizens preserve freedom and dignity — from both criminal and government predators. And, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. The gun-control party is now in the majority in Congress. Take note before it’s too late. The next time a politician talks in favor of gun-control, please remind all who are listening of the lesson of history. All credible scholarship indicates so-called “gun-control” laws never work, are dangerous to the rights of the law-abiding, and are inconsistent with the values on which the United States were founded. The Founders of America had it right. With guns, we are “citizens.” Without them, we are “subjects.” Please spread this civil-rights message — the right to life — to all of your friends, and especially all your government servants. You don’t work for them. They work for you.
Another fantastic article I recently came upon was through the Buckeye Firearms Association:
Reuters is reporting that the Obama administration has reversed U.S. policy and said it would back launching talks on a United Nations treaty to regulate arms sales, a move that is pro-gun activists warn is one giant leap toward side-stepping Congress and overturning the Second Amendment.
From the story:
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush’s administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, “operates under the rules of consensus decision-making.”
“Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly,” Clinton said in a written statement.
Although President Obama is clearly doing their bidding, gun control extremists are still not happy, saying they are opposed to the proposed concensus rules because decisions on the treaty be made by consensus “could fatally weaken a final deal.”
“The shift in position by the world’s biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers,” Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.
However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus “could fatally weaken a final deal.”
“Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause,” said Oxfam International’s policy adviser Debbie Hillier.
The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.
Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.
The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better.
The change in policy is opposed by the National Rifle Association, as well as by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which is quoted as saying the treaty will not restrict the access of “dictators and terrorists” to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people…….
Stand tall America and defend your second amendment rights!Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
On October 24, 2009, President Obama signed a proclamation declaring the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic a National Emergency to facilitate our ability to respond to the pandemic by enabling – if warranted – the waiver of certain statutory Federal requirements for medical treatment facilities. In particular, this proclamation is aimed at providing HHS the ability to waive legal requirements that could otherwise limit the ability of our nation’s health care system to respond to the surge of patients with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus. Here is the official declaration .
Does this mean anything? I can not answer that question. It does illicit curiosity, however. Due to the government’s power grab over the past several years, and exacerbated by the fact the “H1N1” flu does not seem important enough at this point to illicit such a powerful response, I became interested in learning more.
I have noted a brief summary of the National Emergency Powers Act, a report to Congress on Martial Law and National Emergency, and listed the Executive Orders that brought us to a place where, by the stroke of the President’s pen, our rights, our property, our freedom could be gone without due process or consideration of the Constitution.
At one point in life I had trust in my government. Those days are long gone. Our government no longer deserves our trust. We must stay vigilant and look to the future from a base of knowledge. It is to that end I present the following information.
The National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651) is a United States federal law passed in 1976 to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize the power of Congress to provide certain checks and balances on the emergency powers of the President. The act sets a limit of two years on states of national emergency. It also imposes certain “procedural formalities” on the President when invoking such powers.
The perceived need for the law arose from the scope and number of laws granting special powers to the executive in times of national emergency (or public danger).
At least two constitutional rights are subject to revocation during a state of emergency:
- The right of habeas corpus, under Article 1, Section 9;
- The right to a grand jury for members of the National Guard when in actual service, under Fifth Amendment.
In addition, many provisions of statutory law are contingent on a state of national emergency, as many as 500 by one count.
It was due in part to concern that a declaration of “emergency” for one purpose should not invoke every possible executive emergency power that Congress in 1976 passed the National Emergencies Act. Among other provisions, this act requires the President to declare formally a national emergency and to specify the statutory authorities to be used under such a declaration.
There were 32 declared national emergencies between 1976 and 2001. Most of these were for the purpose of restricting trade with certain foreign entities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. 1701-1707).
CRS Report for Congress: Martial Law and National Emergency
Crises in public order, both real and potential, often evoke comments concerning a resort to martial law. While some ambiguity exists regarding the conditions of a martial law setting, such a prospect, nonetheless, is disturbing to many Americans who cherish their liberties, expect civilian law enforcement to prevail, and support civilian control of military authority. An overview of the concept of, exercise of, and authority underlying martial law is provided in this report, which will be updated as events warrant.
Here are the executive orders I could identify by scouring the web. There may be more and if you know of any, please leave a comment with the information.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows government to seize control of communication media.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows government to take control of all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows government to take control over all food resources and farms.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows government to mobilize civilians for work brigades under government supervision.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows government to take control over all health, education and welfare functions.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows government to take control over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows government to take control over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11490 assigns emergency preparedness functions to federal departments and agencies, combining EOs 11001-11005 and 11051 into a single executive order.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
Executive Orders 12127 & 12148 creating FEMA :
FEMA was established under the 1978 Reorganization Plan No. 3, and activated April 1, 1979 by Jimmy Carter in his Executive Order 12127. In July, Carter signed Executive Order 12148 shifting disaster relief efforts to the new federal level agency. FEMA absorbed the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities from HUD. FEMA was also given the responsibility for overseeing the nation’s Civil Defense, a function which had previously been performed by the Department of Defense’s Defense Civil Preparedness Agency.
Executive Order 12656 gives National Security Council authority to determine use of requisite emergency powers
Executive Order 13010 gives FEMA control over all government agencies in cases of national emergency.
Recently I came across an article which tied all this together:
Remember President Obama’s Executive Order basing 80,000 active troops at home for the first time in the history of the peacetime military establishment to “help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack….”
Now connect that information to the recent announcement that the military has established regional deployment locations all across the United States to “assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials.”
Civil unrest and crowd control? Significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall? What do they know that we don’t?
Swine flu has been made into a crisis in the minds of the public, even though swine flu, or H1N1, is the most non-lethal “killer” virus ever uncovered. As a cataclysmic event demanding military assistance, it ranks near zero. It is doubtful whether swine flu could even be classified as an “epidemic,” much less a “pandemic.”
Regular influenza, the common flu, kills 36,000 people every year. The 1918 flu pandemic killed an estimated 50-100 million people worldwide over a period of two years, approximately one-third the population of Europe at that time. Global swine flu deaths topped just 1,000 this year.
But President Obama is predicting death tolls of 90,000 and possible infection of up to half the US population.
While every life matters, in statistical terms swine flu is a comparatively minor problem, which makes the hype by those in government and the military all the more suspicious.Washington certainly seems to be looking for some rationale for enhanced domestic military involvement, whether credible or not.US military at home—in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. With impeccable timing, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has gone before Congress asking for the unprecedented authority to base 400,000 soldiers in communities all across the United States.
A recent US Army War College Report even outlined the conditions under which martial law could be introduced, listing:
…unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock. [Emphasis added.]
The CDC is finalizing quarantine regulations formulated during the Bush years that provide for quarantining “a large group of persons” suspected of having swine flu or other illnesses listed in an executive order. This means that President Obama can quarantine anyone as long as they have an illness he determines to be dangerous. These new regulations even permit “provisional” quarantine of persons not actually carrying any virus. In one section, the regulations empower the president to quarantine anyone that does not agree to be vaccinated, an ominous condition since recent investigations have revealed that swine flu vaccines can cause serious medical complications. Thousands of doctors have voiced strong opposition to the proposed swine flu vaccine, due to its association with neurological disorders. No matter, a bill before the Massachusetts State Senate would permit authorities to enter homes and detain without warrant citizens who do not agree to be forcibly vaccinated. Iowa just released a new Orwellian quarantine policy directive that states in the event of a swine flu outbreak, “your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable.” These moves appear to be the result of federal incentives advancing mandatory vaccination.
The Army hasn’t missed a step, putting out ads for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists.” And, though most of the wild claims about “FEMA camps” have been appropriately and properly discredited, the fact remains that the Homeland Security Department has signed a $385 million contract with Halliburton subsidiary KBR Construction to build such facilities on an “as-needed” basis.
If you’re not already feeling nervous, revisit President Obama’s spine-chilling campaign pledge:
We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
With the Serve America Act, this alarming proposition has become reality. The broad authority given to this force is staggering. Section 1505 gives the newly created National Civilian Community Corps the power to address national “needs” related to “natural and other disasters,” “infrastructure improvement,” “environmental stewardship and conservation,” “energy conservation,” and “urban and rural development.” The legislation reiterates that the corps will “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service.”
Nowhere have these two spheres ever been combined that tyranny has not resulted.
We need to all pay attention and know what Martial Law entails. We will keep an eye on events and declarations from the government and from what I call “State TV”. We should not panic at this point over the flu or over the declaration of National Emergency. Keep your eyes and ears open and know going forward suspicion may be warranted.
Lastly, here is what I found through Dept of Health and Human Services:
HHS will be guided by the following principles in initiating and directing its response activities:
1) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will work with federal, state, and local government partners and the private sector to coordinate pandemic influenza preparedness activities and to achieve interoperable response capabilities.
2) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will encourage all Americans to be active partners in preparing their states, local communities, workplaces, and homes for pandemic influenza and will emphasize that a pandemic will require Americans to make difficult choices. An informed and responsive public is essential to minimizing the health effects of a pandemic and the resulting consequences to society.
3) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the
pharmaceutical industry to develop domestic vaccine production capacity sufficient to provide vaccine for the entire U.S. population as soon as possible after the onset of a pandemic and, during the pre-pandemic period, to produce up to 20 million courses of vaccine against each circulating influenza virus with pandemic potential and to expand seasonal influenza domestic vaccine production to cover all Americans for whom vaccine is recommended through normal commercial transactions.
4) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners and in collaboration with the States, will procure sufficient quantities of antiviral drugs to treat 25% of the U.S. population and, in so doing, stimulate development of expanded domestic production capacity sufficient to accommodate subsequent needs through normal commercial transactions. HHS will stockpile antiviral medications in the Strategic National Stockpile, and states will create and maintain local stockpiles.
5) Sustained human-to-human transmission anywhere in the world will be the triggering event to initiate a pandemic response by the United States. Because we live in a global community, a human outbreak anywhere means risk everywhere.
6) The US will attempt to prevent an influenza pandemic or delay its emergence by striving to arrest isolated outbreaks of a novel influenza wherever circumstances suggest that such an attempt might be successful, acting in concert with WHO and other nations as appropriate. At the core of this strategy will be basic public health measures to reduce person-to-person transmission.
7) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the
pharmaceutical industry to procure vaccine directed against the pandemic strain and to distribute vaccine to state and local public health departments for pre-determined priority groups based on pre-approved state plans.
8 ) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in collaboration with the states, will begin to distribute and deliver antiviral drugs from public stockpiles to healthcare facilities and others with direct patient care responsibility for administration to pre-determined priority groups.
HHS will follow the WHO published guidance for national pandemic planning, which defines pandemic
activities in six phases. WHO Phases 1 and 2 are the Interpandemic Period, which includes phases where no
new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans.
The Pandemic Alert Period includes a phase when human infection with a novel influenza strain has been identified but no evidence has been found of transmission between people or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact (WHO Phase 3) and includes phases where person-to-person transmission is occurring in clusters with limited human-to-human transmission (WHO Phases 4 and 5). WHO Phase 6 is the Pandemic
Period, in which there is increased and sustained transmission in the general population. (Appendix C describes the WHO pandemic phases in detail.)
Each pandemic phase is associated with a range of preparedness and response activities directed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, after consultation with international authorities and others, as necessary. Given that an influenza pandemic may not unfold in a completely predictable way, decision-makers must regularly reassess their strategies and actions and make adjustments as necessary. This section highlights
critical pandemic preparedness and response activities to be implemented by HHS.
Table C-1: Summary of WHO Global Pandemic Phases (WHO Global Influenza
Preparedness Plan, 2005) – As of April, we are at Phase 5
Phase 1. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. An influenza virus subtype that has caused human infection may be present in animals. If present in animals, the risk of human infection or disease is considered to be low
Phase 2. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. However, a circulating animal influenza virus subtype poses a substantial risk of human disease
Pandemic Alert Period
Phase 3. Human infection(s) with a new subtype but no human-to-human spread or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact
Phase 4. Small cluster(s) with limited human-to-human transmission but spread is highly localized, suggesting that the virus is not well adapted to humans
Phase 5. Larger cluster(s) but human-to-human spread is still localized, suggesting that the virus is becoming increasingly better adapted to humans but may not yet be fully transmissible (substantial pandemic risk)
Phase 6. Pandemic phase: increased and sustained transmission in the general population
An influenza pandemic may require activation of the National Response Plan (NRP), especially if the first
appearance of the disease in the United States occurs in one or a few isolated communities and an intense multi-party containment effort led by the federal government seems feasible. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in collaboration with HHS and other response partners, developed the NRP and the associated
National Incident Management System (NIMS) pursuant to the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) #5 – Management of Domestic Incidents. Full descriptions of the NRP and the NIMS, respectively, are available at www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRP_FullText.pdf and
The intent of the NRP is to reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies;
to minimize the damage resulting from these emergencies; and to facilitate recovery. The NIMS aligns the special-purpose incident management and emergency response plans of federal government agencies into a unitary structure. Together, the NRP and the NIMS provide a conceptual and operational framework to
integrate the capabilities and resources of various governmental jurisdictions, incident management and emergency response disciplines, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector into a cohesive, coordinated, and seamless national framework for domestic incident management. The federal government can invoke the NRP partially or fully in the context of a threat, anticipation of a significant event, or the response to a significant event.
Other sources you may want to consult:
Selected Executive Orders on National Security
Federal Registry Database on Executive Orders
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
Let’s Take A Look At Mark Lloyd, FCC Diversity Officer (Czar), and Where He Stands On Issues by Desiree Paquette
Last Friday news broke which suggested a new agenda for the Federal Communications Commission, the government entitiy which issues licenses to broadcasters and broadcasting companies throughout the US. Under the Obama Administration, there is a new position at the FCC called the Diversity Officer. The Diversity Officer has the ability to put into place new regulations. Our new Diversity Czar has an agenda all his own, formulated over several years. This agenda entails creating a new license fee for private broadcast compaines, EQUAL TO THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET OF THAT COMPANY, then redistributing those fees to public broadcast stations to hire, in effect, minority talent and minority owned broadcast entities. There is not one entity who could survive paying their entire annual budget as a new tax, thus as the vast majority of privately owned broadcast entities promote and give voice to middle America, this overwhelming majority of the public would be left with NO VOICE and certainly NO DISSENTING VOICE for the policies and programs put forth by the minority far left segment of the population.
Let’s take a closer look at our new “Diversity Czar”, shall we?
Mark Lloyd has a very distinctive pedigree which cerrtainly fits the bill for a Diversity Czar. His history shows him to have started in broadcasting at NBC and CNN, then moving on to degrees from U of M and Georgetown University. According to his bio posted online at http://www.netcaucus.org/biography/mark-lloyd.shtml
Mark Lloyd is a senior fellow at the George Soros funded Center for American Progress focusing on communications policy issues, including universal service, advanced telecommunications deployment, media concentration and diversity. From the fall of 2002 until the summer of 2004, Mr. Lloyd was a Martin Luther King, Jr. visiting scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he taught communications policy and wrote and conducted research on the relationship between communications policy and strong democratic communities. He also served as the executive director of the Civil Rights Forum on Communications Policy, a non-profit, non-partisan project he co-founded in 1997 to bring civil rights principles and advocacy to the communications policy debate.
Let’s take a closer look at his past positions. According to Civil Rights.org The Civil Rights Forum on Communications Policy, it deals with.. The rules that govern the National Information Infrastructure concern and impact us all. Communications policy will determine whether all citizens will be able to participate effectively in the political process, have access to the public airwaves, share in the fruits of publicly-funded research, or maintain their privacy. Communications policy is a civil rights issue. The Civil Rights Forum works to bring civil rights organizations and community groups into the current debate over the future of our media environment. The Forum is a project of the Tides Center, a national non-profit organization which manages hundreds of projects that promote change toward a healthy society — one which is founded on principles of social justice, broadly shared economic opportunity and a robust democratic process. The twin goals of the Forum are to introduce civil rights principles and advocacy to the implementation of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and to reframe the discussion over the role of media in our society around the needs of communities and the rights of citizens.
An article posted at zimbio.com at http://www.zimbio.com/The+Searched/articles/H7FW6nnt-NU/Mark+Lloyd+New+Chief+Diversity+FCC+Draws+Fire shows the newly appointed assoiciate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission, is having a rough time of it during his first days on the job. Lloyd has come under fire from some right-wing media sites, after two an article Lloyd authored in 2007 urging liberals to file complaints against conservative talk radio stations came to light.
In “Forget the Fairness Doctrine,” Lloyd writes that conservative radio stations have abonded the bottom line as their primary motivator, and are purely ideological organs. He argues, however, that ressurecting the Fairness Doctrine, which forced radio and television stations to give equal time to opposing viewpoints, is not the answer. He does, however, suggest the private radio broadcasters, due to the fact that they use public airwaves, should be required to donate and support public radio.
In 2009 Center for American Progress’s Progressive Media project emerged as a major communications war room on behalf of Obama’s domestic and foreign policy agenda and CAP became a strong advocate for escalation in Afghanistan. Progressive Media is run through the Center for American Project Action Fund, the more political 5014 arm of CAP. It coordindates closely with the Common Purpose Project, an effort to create message discipline among the pro-Obama organizations, with a direct tie to the White House. The Center for American Progress — which has emerged as perhaps Washington’s most influential idea factory in the age of Obama — is launching a major new war room, to be staffed by nearly a dozen people, that will focus on driving the White House’s message and agenda, I’m told. … The new war room – which is called Progressive Media – represents a serious ratcheting up of efforts to present a united liberal front in the coming policy wars. The goal of the war room will be to do hard-hitting research that boils down complex policy questions into usable talking points and narratives that play well in the media and build public support for the White House’s policy goals. … The war room – a joint project of CAP Action Fund and Media Matters Action Network — will be headed by well-known liberal operative Tara McGuinness, who worked on John Kerry’s presidential campaign and was a major player in the anti-war movement during the Bush years.” Jennifer Palmieri is the project’s communications director.
Mark Lloyd has served on the boards of directors of dozens of national and local organizations, including the Independent Television Service, OMB Watch, the Center for Democracy and Technology, and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund. He has also served as a consultant to the Clinton White House, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Open Society Institute and the Smithsonian Institution. The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) is a 501(3) “non-profit public policy organization dedicated to promoting the democratic potential of today’s open, decentralized global Internet,” according to its website. CDT’s stated mission is “to conceptualize, develop, and implement public policies to preserve and enhance free expression, privacy, open access, and other democratic values in the new and increasingly integrated communications medium.” In 1994, Jonah Seiger “helped found and served as Communications Director for the Center for Democracy and Technology. “CDT pursues its mission through research and public policy development in a consensus-building process based on convening and operating broad-based working groups composed of public interest and commercial representatives of divergent views to explore solutions to critical policy issues. In addition, CDT promotes its own policy positions in the United States and globally through public policy advocacy, online grassroots organizing with the Internet user community and public education campaigns, and litigation, as well as through the development of technology standards and online information resources.”
At an article from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/10/pub-fccs-new-hire-previously-targeted-gop-radio-stations/ comes the following: The FCC’s new chief diversity officer laid out a battle plan two years ago for liberal activists to target conservative talk radio stations, and critics say they are concerned that he now will want to bring back the “Fairness Doctrine.” Mark Lloyd, who was named the associate general counsel and chief diversity officer at the Federal Communications Commission last month, is under attack for authoring a June 2007 report entitled “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio” and a subsequent essay, “Forget the Fairness Doctrine”. “What he lays out is a battle plan to use the FCC to threaten stations’ licenses with whom they do not agree with politically, and now he’s at the FCC waiting to take their calls,” Motley told FOXNews.com. “This is not about serving the local interest, it’s about political opposition.” In February, a report in the American Spectator said aides to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., met with FCC staff to discuss ways to re-enact Fairness Doctrine policies and to apply them to the Internet as well. Both the FCC and Waxman’s office denied the report.
Bought and paid for “Community” organizations such as ACORN, far left wing organizations such as Apollo Alliance, Tides Center and Center for American Progress, and corruption in the form of SEIU, are quickly taking the place of the Constitution of The United States of America. Please take a few moments to watch this video, in which Glenn Beck explains the interconnectivity and undue influence these groups are having on the Obama Administration. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7Yc858QdXo&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftherealbarackobama%2Ewordpress%2Ecom%2F2009%2F07%2F29%2Fthe%2Dapollo%2Dalliance%2F&feature=player_embedded#t=29 The above video also details how the Apollo Alliance developed what became the Stimulus Bill.
Our government is turning into a Chicago style scam. Please, look for yourself and become aware. They would have you believe it’s Democrat vs Republican. IT IS NOT! It’s much different than that. Most democrats would not endorse the coruption that is gripping our government. Neither would Independents, Libertarians, Republicans.
Free speech is turning into free speech only if it agrees with the Administration’s view point. The majority of the population is being dismissed. Opportunities for citizens to speak out are being filled instead with paid operatives (see help wanted ads in column from 08/14/2009), SEIU and ACORN members, while the authentic public is locked out and left standing in the street.
There is no substitute for knowledge. Your country is being taken away from you on a daily basis. It is important that you realize what is going on. If you condone it, do nothing. If you DON’T, please do what you are able to do. Pass along informative emails, attend a local tea party. If you can afford to do so, JOIN US 09/12 for the march on Washington. details at http://912dc.org/
Single Payer from A Canadian Citizen’s View (video) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_Rf42zNl9U
CITIZENS SURROUND ACORN BUS (thank you for standing up America) http://www.semiautorifles.com/forums/f10/people-surround-acorn-bus-1277.htmlRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )