Sotomayor and La Raza – “A Must Read”

Sotomayor is a member of La Raza and her comments about “Wise Latinas” being superior to white men appeared in the La Raza Law Journal. The National Council of La Raza bills itself as “the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States” who works through “its network of nearly 300 affiliated community-based organizations.”

Among these affiliates are several chapters of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán) who La Raza helps fund. Aztlán is what radical “Mechistas”—as they refer to themselves on La Raza’s website—call the American Southwest, which they claim still belongs to Mexico. Their slogan is "Por La Raza todo, Fuera de La Raza nada" meaning “For the Race everything, outside the Race nothing.” One chapter says on La Raza’s site that their mission is “empowerment of our gente and the liberation of Aztlán.”

La Raza receives tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to set up charter schools like the Aztlán Academy of Tucson where they fly the Mexican Flag, but not the American Flag and teach students “Aztec Math.”

In 1994, La Raza gave their “Chicano of the Year” Award to Jose Angel Guitierrez who once said, “We have got to eliminate the Gringo, and what I mean by that is that if the worse comes to the worst, we have got to kill him" and that “our devil has pale skin and blue eyes.”

Of special importance when considering a Supreme Court nominee is La Raza’s position on a variety of policy and legal issues. They support driver’s licenses, in state tuition and amnesty for illegal aliens. They say that virtually all enforcement of our immigration laws on the state level is unconstitutional. They filed amicus briefs in favor of racial preferences and in favor of benefits for illegal aliens. They led the legal attack against Hazelton, PA for their official English and anti-illegal alien measures.

While questioning her connections to radical left wing groups is off limits, attacking conservatives for belonging to mainstream organizations like the Federalist Society is fair game for the Democrats.

The Democrats support of Sotomayor and La Raza shows us what Obama’s “post racial” America really looks like. Designated minority victim groups are free to promote their anti-white racist agenda, while any whites who fight back are playing “racial politics.”

Hussein Obama’s Poll Numbers

Obama's poll numbers these days.

He's bleeding on every front. The latest Pew survey shows that only 38 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the economy. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, fewer than half of respondents (48 percent) say Obama can be trusted to keep his word. Gallup has his approval rating at a new low of 52 percent, and Rasmussen has it below 50 percent for the first time.

On almost every domestic issue, polls show that support for Obama and his agenda is plummeting, and that the Democratic Party's advantages over Republicans on the economy, taxes, the deficit and health care have been erased or severely reduced.

All presidents go through rough patches, and Obama's no exception. Odds are his poll numbers will get better -- and worse -- in the years to come. All of this is typical.

But this misses a crucial point: Obama isn't supposed to be a typical politician. He was supposed to be The One. He was supposed to change Washington. Transcend race. Fix souls. Bake 12-minute brownies in seven minutes.

Oprah promised Obama would help us "evolve to a higher plane." Deepak Chopra said Obama's presidency represented "a quantum leap in American consciousness." Last month, Newsweek editor Evan Thomas proclaimed that Obama stood "above the country, above -- above the world, he's sort of God."

His messianic hopey-changiness has been exposed for what it was, and what it could only be: a rich cocktail of pie-eyed idealism, campaign sloganeering and profound arrogance.

Indeed, the one unifying theme of his presidency so far has been Obama's relentless campaigning for a job he already has. That makes sense because that's really all Obama knows how to do. He's had no significant experience crafting major legislation. He has next to no experience governing at all.

But he's great at giving speeches, holding town halls and chitchatting with reporters. So that's largely what he does as president. The problem is that campaigning is different than governing. The former requires convincing promises about what you will do; the latter requires convincing arguments for what you are doing. He's good at the former, not so good at the latter. Or as columnist Michael Barone puts it, he's good at aura, bad at argument.

Now, just as critics predicted, Obama needs on-the-job training to become a president, because he's a god no more.

CNN - Another Reason Why I Won’t Watch It

Rick Sanchez, a CNN anchor, provoked a tempest in a Twitter this week when he said he'd be a rich guy if he "sold out as hispanic and worked at fox news." The commentary on the episode mostly centered on whether working at Fox News Channel constituted "selling out," with left-wing bloggers defending Sanchez and conservatives weighing in on Fox's behalf. But the real outrage in Sanchez's statement isn't what he implied about Fox News; it's the whole idea that an individual is capable of "selling out" others who happen to share his race or ethnicity.

We ought to relegate terms like Uncle Tom, sell-out, and traitor-to-your-race (or sex) to the same category we do racial and sexual epithets. They reflect the same root prejudices. Anytime we assume that we know something fundamental about how a person behaves or thinks based on race, ethnicity, or sex, we're exhibiting our own biases. People aren't good or bad, hard-working or irresponsible, smart or dull, liberal or conservative based on the amount of melanin in their skin or the number of X-chromosomes in their DNA.

The sooner we start judging people as individuals, not as members of groups, the sooner we'll put prejudice and bias of all sorts behind us once and for all. So the next time Rick Sanchez starts casting ethnic aspersions based on politics, let's recognize his prejudice for what it is.

Obama and the Big Health Care Lie

The president's pitch for his radical makeover of American medicine is built on a big lie of "you get to keep what you have." Incredibly the MSM stands aside and lets him make this outrageous claim again and again, even though it has the effect of defrauding every single voter who hears it unchallenged. I asked Howard Kurtz about the comatose state of the MSM, and his defense of the Beltway press gaggle was necessarily tepid. It had to be. The press corps is along for the ride and refuses to ask even the most obvious questions about the president's whopper.

Which means voters will have to do the asking, at every "townhall" and district meeting with a Congressman or a senator.

Obama and Health Care

"Here's a guarantee that I've made: If you have insurance that you like, then you will be able to keep that insurance. If you've got a doctor that you like, you will be able to keep your doctor."

This is an exact quote from President Obama's AARP meeting on Tuesday. The transcript is here. But a transcript shouldn't be necessary. The president has made the same detailed and absolute assurance on a half dozen occasions in the past few weeks. Only once was he pressed on it, by ABC's increasingly head-and-shoulders-above-the-rest-of-the-White-House-correspondents Jake Tapper, and the president deflected the question and quickly moved on.

The president has to flee from questions about these twin assurances that he routinely gives because they are not true. Have never been true. Cannot be made true.

And it isn't known yet what basic services the government plan will cover. Rationing systems such as those of Canada, Great Britain and Sweden deny many forms of treatment to elderly patients that private American insurance covers.

Hussein Obama – Hope and Change

Six months into the Obama administration, it should now be clear to all Americans: Hope and Change came to the White House wrapped in brass knuckles.

Ask the Congressional Budget Office. Last week, President Obama spilled the beans on the "Today Show" that he had met with CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf -- just as the number crunchers were casting ruinous doubt on White House cost-saving claims. Yes, question the timing.

The CBO is supposed to be a neutral scorekeeper -- not a water boy for the White House. But when the meeting failed to stop the CBO from issuing more analysis undercutting the health care savings claims, Obama's budget director Peter Orszag played the heavy.

Orszag warned the CBO in a public letter that it risked feeding the perception that it was "exaggerating costs and underestimating savings." Message: Leave the number fudging to the boss. Capiche?

The CBO and the Blue Dogs got off easy compared to inspectors general targeted by Team Obama goons. Former AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin was slimed as mentally incompetent ("confused" and "disoriented") after blowing the whistle on several cases of community service tax fraud, including the case of Obama crony Kevin Johnson. Johnson is the NBA star turned Sacramento mayor who ran a federally funded nonprofit group employing AmeriCorps volunteers, who were exploited to perform campaign work for Johnson and to provide personal services (car washes, errands) to Johnson and his staff.

At the Environmental Protection Agency, top Obama officials muzzled veteran researcher Alan Carlin, who dared to question the conventional wisdom on global warming. The economist with a physics degree was trashed as a non-scientist know-nothing.

Liberals (Hillary Clinton) – Global Warming

Minister Ramesh (India) has expressed doubt before that global warming is the grave problem that trendy liberal Democrats insist it is. Late last week, he even expressed doubt that Himalayan glaciers have been damaged by climate change, despite environmentalists' insistence that the glaciers are melting.

Frankly, Minister Ramesh sounded very much like what Al Gore calls a global warming denier. Yet the Indian is in good company. There are a growing number of scientists and political leaders who doubt the significance of carbon in the atmosphere. In fact, they doubt the existence of global warming, period -- and with good reason. Contrary to the environmentalists' computer projections, there has been no global warming since 1998. Instead, we now have global cooling. Actually, the past two years' worth of global cooling has eliminated the past 30 years of global warming.

Possibly, Ramesh has read the latest scientific debunking of the global warming position supplied by an important book, "Heaven and Earth," by Ian Plimer, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide. In an interview with London's Spectator, the professor summed the book's findings thus: "The hypothesis that human activity can create global warming is extraordinary because it is contrary to validated knowledge from solar physics, astronomy, history, archaeology and geology." Being a geologist, professor Plimer has had to study climate conditions going back to the origins of the planet, more than 4 billion years ago. He chides the global warming hysterics for only studying the past 150 years. Other skeptics whom I have noted in this column are the scientist Bjorn Lomborg and former British Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary of State for Energy Nigel Lawson.

Nonetheless, hysterics rattle on, locked into the view established by their guru, Secretary Clinton's friend Gore.

Well, the Indians are not alarmed, nor are the Chinese and the Brazilians. Professor Plimer explains: "When I try explaining 'global warming' to people in Iran or Turkey they have no idea what I'm talking about." The prof claims that alarmists -- such as Gore and Clinton and, for that matter, President Barack Obama -- are a self-centered minority out of touch with human needs and with atmospheric conditions. "Eco-guilt is a first-world luxury," he told The Spectator. "It's the new religion for urban populations which have lost their faith in Christianity."

Hussein Obama – On War

First of all, we are not at war. Let me recall for you that four months ago, as Commander-in-Chief, I instructed the Pentagon via memorandum no longer to use such phrases as the long war or the global war on terror. I redefined what we are doing in Afghanistan as an "overseas contingency operation."

So if we're not seeking victory in the Afghan contingency operation, what are we doing there?

I still have my team working on that. I expect to have some answers soon. Let's save that one for next time.

Liberal / Socialist – Minimum Wage

The minimum wage has just gone up 11 percent - to $7.25 an hour. An endless parade of studies shows that when the cost of labor rises, companies become more cautious in hiring and unemployment increases. Unemployment currently stands at 9.5 percent - a 26-year high. Given its upward pressure on unemployment, is this the proper time to raise the minimum wage?

Meaning no disrespect, sir, is it then wrong to conclude you think it's better for some to be unemployed at $7.25 an hour than to be employed at $5 or $6.50?

Obama – Rationing Health Care

Take Obama’s comments to Jane Sturm during his ABC News endorsed health care town hall meeting. Sturm asked if under Obama’s plan her mother, now 105 years old, would be eligible for a pacemaker when she was 99 years old. Sturm mentioned that a specialist recommended against installing the pacemaker due to her mother’s age. Sturm did find a doctor to add the pacemaker and Medicare paid for the procedure. Sturm’s mother was shown in a video clip to be vibrant and full of life today, more than five years after the surgery.

Yet, Obama’s response to Sturm was chilling. Referencing his socialized health care plan, Obama said, “You know, maybe this isn’t going to help [the pacemaker]. Maybe, you’re better off not having the surgery, but taking a pain killer.”