Burr wants to combine EPA and Energy. Got a problem with that? Obama does.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

Submitted by robchristensen on 2011-05-13 15:49
newsobserver.com blogs 

The White House is opposing Republican Sen. Richard Burr's effort to merge the Environmental Protection Agency and the Energy Department into one agency.

Burr had initially said the White House had found the idea “intriguing” but the administration has shot that down.

“The administration unequivocally opposes this bill,'' White House spokesman Clark Stevens told Politico, the online political news letter.

The Winston-Salem Republican responded by saying, “I wouldn't expect the president to sign this bill, unless he is serious about fiscal responsibility and debt reduction.”

Burr last week introduced a bill along with 15 GOP co-sponsors that would consolidate the two agencies, saying it would save $3 billion next year alone.

“The amount of money wasted annually on duplicative programs within the federal government is staggering,” Burr said. “This common-sense approach will reduce duplicative and wasteful functions across these two agencies and streamline our approach to a comprehensive, coordinated energy and environmental policy.”

Burr said he plans other cost-saving proposals, such as combining the Department of Labor and the Department of Commerce.

Environmentalists are skeptical, noting that EPA has long been a target of Republican conservatives.
Burr has received $881,095 in contributions from so-called “dirty energy” sources such as oil and coal, and electric and gas holding companies, according to the Institute for Southern Studies.

http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/burr_wants_to_combine_epa_and_energy

Double Talk from Obama, Mike McIntyre and Liberal Pals Could Shut Down Alaska Pipe. Talk Ain't Cheap!

PANTANO FOR CONGRESS 

By Administrator, on May 13, 2011

  

With gas prices hovering around $4.00 a gallon here in Southeastern North Carolina and seemingly rising every day that seems like a nightmare doesn’t it?

Unfortunately, as Russell Gold wrote in his article “Shrinking Oil Supplies Put Alaskan Pipeline At Risk” in the Wall Street Journal this week that may become a harsh reality in the near future.

What’s the problem?  Not enough oil is flowing through the pipeline.  As Gold describes it in his article, the pipeline is “like a garden hose: Open up the spigot only slightly and the water will move slowly; turn the spigot to wide open and the water will move quickly through the hose to the other end.”

The slow flow of oil through the pipeline is a real problem. “That leisurely flow means that oil is above ground longer and more exposed to Alaska’s frigid weather” and “as the rate of the flow and temperature (of the oil) continues to drop, experts say the risks of a clog or corrosion increase.”

Ultimately if this continues it will very likely result in the pipeline being shut down, possibly as early as 2013.

The good news is there is a simple solution -- open more land for drilling in northern Alaska.  Opening more land for drilling would increase the oil being produced which subsequently would increase the amount of oil entering the pipeline on a daily basis which would ensure that oil  flows quickly and safely through the pipeline.

This is a solution backed by most Alaskan officials on the federal, state, and local levels as well as most of the people of Alaska including those that live the areas that would be most highly impacted by the expansion of drilling.  Annual polls show that over 75% of Alaskans support expanding drilling including drilling in ANWR.

The bad news is that the Obama administration and liberals in Congress are continuing to block this solution.  They have hamstrung the oil companies by refusing to issue permits to expand drilling and new exploration along Alaska’s North Shore and ANWR.  And they refuse to budge.

That’s right at the same time that President Obama says he wants to decrease oil imports and increase reliance on domestic energy, the policies shared by Obama and liberal leaders in Congress may force the shutdown of the Trans Alaska pipeline, the pipeline that supplies more than 11% of the oil produced in the United States.

What do you think that will do to oil imports and the price of gasoline in the United States?

This is another great example of Obama and his liberal followers in Washington saying one thing and doing  another.   They read the polls that show Americans are furious about increasing gas prices, that increasing gas prices are causing financial hardship for American families across the country, that Americans overwhelmingly support increasing the domestic supply of energy.

Then Obama and his cronies say they feel your pain, start pushing for increased domestic energy production and even increased oil production.  They even start pointing to numbers that show increased oil production, which oil industry experts attribute to policies approved years ago under previous administrations, as proof that they are acting.

But in reality, they have done nothing to increase domestic oil production, to protect the Trans Alaska pipeline, or to lower gasoline prices for American families. Erik Milito of the American Petroleum Institute had this to say when asked about claims that the Obama administration was increasing domestic oil production: "It's completely disingenuous to say that offshore production has increased due to anything this administration has done."

The Obama administration and Obama’s liberal followers in Congress are only trying to placate American families fed up by the high price of gasoline by claiming to be in favor of increasing domestic energy and oil production.

What they are really doing is giving in to the environmental extremists who help fund their campaigns, the Democrat National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and similar organizations. These environmental extremists would be happy if the pipeline was shut down.

That’s right Obama and the liberals in Congress are backing environmental extremists, the same extremists who fought tooth and nail against the pipeline being constructed in the first place back in the 1970s, over the best interests of the American people.

These neglect the fact the pipeline has operated for nearly 40 years with very few incidents, the local support for increased drilling, and the strong evidence that expanded drilling along the north coast of Alaska and in ANWR would have a minimal negative impact on the surrounding environment if done responsibly with proper oversight.

They ignore the widespread support of Alaskans for increased drilling.  They aren’t concerned about the facts, and they aren’t concerned about the effects of $4.00 a gallon gas on American families and on our nation’s economy.  This is the fight they have chosen, and they are committed to winning with the complicit support of Obama and his liberal followers who are beholden to them.

Even our own Congressman Mike McIntyre has fallen into bed with these extremists supporting their agenda over what is best for our district and what is best for our nation as a whole. McIntyre goes around the district talking about being an “independent voice,” about working for you and me, and about fighting for the families of the Southeastern North Carolina.  Mike talks about the need to increase our domestic energy production.  He claims to feel the pain that higher gas prices are inflicting on all of us.

If Congressman McIntyre really wants to do what’s best for us including increased domestic energy production and lower gas prices you would think he would strongly support increasing drilling and energy exploration in Alaska -- keeping the Trans Alaska pipeline flowing, protecting over 11% of the oil produced in the US, and increasing the domestic production of oil by an amount equal to what we import from Iraq!

Don’t you think that would lower gas prices for Americans and protect our national security by lessening our dependence on foreign oil?  I do!  And I know that lower gas prices and a more secure America would be good, no, great for our families here in Southeastern North Carolina.  I would think that a Congressman who claims to be working for the families here would be proud to support policies that would do that
But what does he do when he gets to Washington?

He stands with liberals like Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and the environmental extremists that control them, voting against drilling in ANWR, drilling which very likely would have produced enough oil to keep the Trans Alaska pipeline flowing.  In fact, according to the US Department of Energy, “ANWR could produce greater than a million barrels of oil per day” which is more oil than the US presently imports from Iraq.

Unfortunately this is just another example of Congressman McIntyre claiming to be an “independent voice” who works for what is best for us but instead caving in to extreme special interests and his liberal Washington buddies and doing the exact opposite.

www.pantanoforcongress.com

Top Obama Nominee at Justice Department Blocked by Republicans. That'll Work.

 Verne Strickland Blogmaster

 By Trish Turner  /  Fox News / May 09, 2011

President Obama's nominee to be Attorney General Eric Holder's top deputy at the Justice Department crashed into a Republican roadblock in the U.S. Senate on Monday, garnering just 50 votes, 10 short of the number needed to break a GOP-led filibuster.

Dick Lugar of Indiana was the lone Republican to support the nomination. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., switched his vote at the last minute to 'no' in order to have the vote reconsidered at a later date.

James Cole, a veteran Washington attorney nominated in May, had been serving in the position since late December courtesy of a presidential recess appointment, one that expires at the end of the current session of Congress. And despite the bipartisan support of eight former attorneys general, Republicans remained steadfast in their opposition, though nothing about Monday night's vote changes Cole's temporary job status.

GOP problems with the deputy attorney general are two-fold. Not only is there concern about Cole's tenure as an independent consultant to insurance industry giant AIG prior to the company's near-collapse in 2008 and its subsequent government bailout, but Republicans also voiced strong concern about what they believe to be his soft-on-terrorism stance.

Republican senators repeatedly referred to an op-ed the nominee penned in 2002 in the Legal Times in which Cole referred to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks as "criminal acts of terrorism against a civilian population," and included the attacks in the same vein as "many other devastating crimes" like rape, drug trade, organized crime, and child abuse.

Cole told Judiciary Committee members in his confirmation hearing last year that decisions to try alleged terrorists should be made on a case-by-case basis, not ruling out military commissions for some. The Obama administration has since said it will try the alleged 9/11 terrorists imprisoned at the Guantanamo facility in military commissions.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., defended Cole and said, "There's no justification for a failure to act on this critical national security nomination."

But Republicans balked.

Sen. Charles Grassley, top Republican on the Judiciary Committee and primary opponent of the nomination, read out a laundry list Monday of his concerns about the nominee, including his AIG stint, which the senator called "troubling," and Cole's position on captured terrorists.

The Iowa Republican also expressed an opposition to recess appointments, in general, and cited another concern regarding a DOJ oversight issue unrelated to the nominee as reasons for his blockade of the appointment.

The top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, has also lead the fight against Cole. Chambliss has been fighting to get classified information related to the administration's Guantanamo Bay Detainee Review Task Force.

Still others voiced fear about what they see as a growing trend at DOJ.

"I'm not voting for another nominee, and I'm not going to vote for this one, who spent their time defending terrorists," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., proclaimed, citing "a tilt in the leadership of the department" that the senator said gives him "great concern" that the department is "getting off base."

Leahy warned that the global war on terror could be impacted by the GOP filibuster.  In a statement to reporters after Monday night's vote, Leahy said, "One week ago, a successful operation led to the death of the world's number one terrorist. Experts and the American people believe that we are now facing a heightened terrorism threat in the wake of the raid upon Osama bin Laden's compound. "

Our success in protecting our Nation depends on the ability of the President to rely on his national security team. Jim Cole is a key member of that team, with a well-deserved reputation for toughness, fairness, and integrity. He has demonstrated the leadership skills and clear-eyed focus on the mission that we need against al Qaeda."

Cole previously served in the Justice Department for more than a dozen years before heading into private practice in 1992. He also served on former President Bill Clinton's transition team in 1992.

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/05/09/top-obama-nominee-justice-department-blocked-republicans

CIVITAS EXPOSES OUTRAGEOUS UNION SALARIES PAID BY NCAE.

May 10, 2011

As the average teacher salary declines and the state is adopting large budget cuts to education – one group is thriving in this dire economic situation. It may (or may not) surprise you that group is the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE).  A group whose mission is to defend and advocate for the interests of educators in North Carolina, seems to have its priorities in disarray. The Civitas Institute released a report last week that tracked the average salary and compensation of NCAE employees, and discovered that NCAE salaries for top executives have increased at more than double the rate of the average teacher salary.   After releasing this report the NCAE launched direct protests against Civitas.  Civitas staff and volunteers attended an NCAE rally at the capitol last week to hand out copies of this research to teachers and other attendees. Union representatives were not pleased. They had State Capitol police and Raleigh police tell us to leave the Bicentennial Mall (public property) and stay on the sidewalks. We complied and handed out the flyers as people walked by only to see those people stopped by union employees who ripped the materials out of teachers’ hands or demanded that they discard any information provided by Civitas. Take a moment to watch Civitas video of the rally here. In 2009, the NCAE collected more than $8.8 million in membership dues.  $7.9 million was spent on salary and compensation, which is 72 percent of total expenditures.  With 135 employees, that is significant overhead.  The Executive Director reaped Compensation totaling $229,120, to see other executive compensation click here. Other information included in the report was the NCAE’s political contributions since 2008.  In 2009 the NCAE made over $700,000 in lobbying and political expenditures.   The NCAE also made direct contributions to candidates totaling $172,950, of which 98.6 percent went to Democratic candidates and only 1.3 percent to Republican candidates.  The NCAE along with the NEA also contributed more than $1.8 million to Bev Perdue’s 2008 Governor’s race. It seems in the NCAE’s case, actions speak louder than words.   Civitas in its mission to educate and empower the citizens of North Carolina is working to make this information available to the public.  Please help support our research and allow us to continue to expose union corruption. Click here to make a tax-deductable contribution. The Civitas Institute accepts no government money and is fully funded by the generous support of people like you. Sincerely, P.S. All contributions made to the Civitas Institute are tax-deductible.  If you prefer you can mail your contribution to: Civitas Institute 100 S. Harrington St. Raleigh, NC 27603 or call us at 919.834.2099.  . Civitas Institute <marianne.suarez@nccivitas.org>

FIRST LADY INVITES RAPPER TO 'POETRY READING'. HE CALLS HIMSELF 'COMMON'. HE GOT THAT RIGHT.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

Published: 12:48 PM 05/09/2011

By Neil Munroe

DAILY CALLER 

First Lady Michelle Obama has scheduled a poetry evening for Wednesday, and she’s invited several poets, including a successful Chicago poet and rapper, Lonnie Rashid Lynn, Jr., AKA “Common.”

However, Lynn is quite controversial, in part because his poetry includes threats to shoot police and at least one passage calling for the “burn[ing]” of then-President George W. Bush.

Back in 2003, First Lady Laura Bush held a poetry evening, and she invited several poets t reprise the work of Emily Dickinson, Langston Hughes and Walt Whitman. Although none of those poets had urged violence against a president, Bush canceled the event after left-of-center poets protested and threatened to disrupt the event.
Here’s a sample of Dickinson’s work that could have been presented at Bush’s event:

I’m nobody! Who are you?
I’m nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there’s a pair of us — don’t tell!
They’d banish us, you know.
How dreary to be somebody!
How public, like a frog
To tell your name the livelong day
To an admiring bog!

Here’s a sample of Common’s work, transcribed from a 2007 video with 837,613 viewers on YouTube. Students, please compare and contrast the two poems. You’ll get extra credit for counting the death threats. There is no extra credit for identifying spelling errors. By the way, ‘Uzi’ is slang for a compact machine gun:

A Letter to the Law
Dem boy wanna talk… [indistinguishable]
Whatcha gon do if ya got one gun?
I sing a song for the hero unsung
with faces on the mural of the revolution
No looking back cos’ in back is what’s done
Tell the preacher, god got more than one son
Tell the law, my Uzi weighs a ton
I walk like a warrior,
from them I won’t run
On the streets, they try to beat us like a drum
In Cincinnati, another brother hung
A guinea won’t see the sun
with his family stung
They want us to hold justice
but you handed me none
The same they did to Kobe and Michael Jackson
make them the main attraction
Turn around and attack them
Black gem in the rough
You’re rugged enough
Use your mind and nine-power, get the government touch
Them boys chat-chat on how him pop gun
I got the black strap to make the cops run
They watching me, I’m watching them
Them dick boys got a lock of cock in them
My people on the block got a lot of pok* in them
and when we roll together
we be rocking them to sleep
No time for that, because there’s things to be done
Stay true to what I do so the youth dream come
from project building
Seeing a fiend being hung
With that happening, why they messing with Saddam?
Burn a Bush cos’ for peace he no push no button
Killing over oil and grease
no weapons of destruction
How can we follow a leader when this a corrupt one
The government’s a g-unit and they might buck young black people
Black people In the urban area one
I hold up a peace sign, but I carry a gun.
Peace, ya’ll.”

The First Lady’s office did not return a call from TheDC.
*Commenter notes this may be “Pac,” as in Tupac Shakur


http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/09/burn-a-bush-michelle-obama-invites-rapper-common-to-a-poetry-reading/

HILLARY CLINTON IMAGE REMOVED FROM ICONIC SITUATION ROOM PHOTO BY HASIDIC NEWSPAPER. UPDATE: PAPER APOLOGIZES TO WHITE HOUSE.

First Posted: 05/ 9/11 07:17 AM ET Updated: 05/ 9/11 01:21 PM

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

The original photo is one for the ages -- Obama, Biden, Gates, Hillary Clinton and others -- frozen in awe and rapt attention as they watched stunning live satellite images of Navy Seal Team Six completing their audacious mission -- killing super-terrorist Osama bin Laden in his long-secret lair in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

Nothing could be added to this classic Situation Room candid photograph -- but something was taken from the image -- Hillary Clinton, her hand over her mouth in a gesture of total immersion in the historic event.

Her concern and apprehension seem almost too much for her to bear. Her image, and that of another woman on hand, were removed by the ultra-orthodox Jewish publication Der Tzitung, published in Brooklyn, New York.

This curious and frustrating bit of editing (call it "destruction") has to amount to the ultimate 21st Century censorship of a once-in-a-lifetime candid picture of a watershed moment.

The explanation for the alteration is offered below:

A Brooklyn-based Hasidic newspaper removed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and another woman from the now-iconic photo of the Obama national security team watching the raid that killed Osama bin Laden from the White House Situation Room.

 The original photo, taken as the raid was occurring, famously shows Clinton in the center of the room, with her hand over her mouth. 

 But the newspaper Der Tzitung, described by the Jewish Week as "ultra-Orthodox," has a policy of never printing photos of women in its pages because it thinks they could be sexually suggestive.

Thus, Clinton and counterterrorism director Audrey Tomason, who was seen standing at the back of the room, were removed from the picture.

The blogger Failed Messiah was the first to notice the Photoshopping.

See the Photoshopped version:

See the original:







VS: SO IS A PICTURE REALLY WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS? THE MUTILATED VERSION OF THIS ONE MIGHT BE WORTH A HUNDRED OR SO AT BEST. I NEVER THOUGHT OF HILLARY AS BEING SEXUALLY SUGGESTIVE. BUT SHE DOES SEEM QUITE CUTE AND VULNERABLE HERE. WOULDN'T YOU AGREE? SHE SHOULD GET CAUGHT OFF GUARD MORE OFTEN. MAKES HER APPEAR QUITE HUGGABLE. SHE NEEDS THAT. WE ALL DO.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/09/hillary-clinton-der-tzitung-removed-situation-room_n_859254.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl9|sec1_lnk3|61653

Jewish Paper Sorry for Cutting Hillary Out of White House Photo

Monday, 09 May 2011 08:02 PM

More ways to share...

NEW YORK (AP) — An Orthodox Jewish newspaper on Monday apologized for digitally deleting Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton from a photo of President Barack Obama and his staff monitoring the raid by Navy SEALs that killed Osama bin Laden.

The Brooklyn weekly Di Tzeitung, which says it doesn't publish images of women, printed the doctored photo Friday. It issued a statement saying its photo editor hadn't read the "fine print" accompanying the White House photo that forbade any changes. The newspaper said it has sent its "regrets and apologies" to the White House and the Department of State.

A second woman, Counterterrorism Director Audrey Tomason, also was deleted from the photo, which captured a historic moment in the decade-long U.S. effort to apprehend the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Di Tzeitung said it has a "long standing editorial policy" of not publishing women's images. It explained that its readers "believe that women should be appreciated for who they are and what they do, not for what they look like, and the Jewish laws of modesty are an expression of respect for women, not the opposite."

The weekly said Clinton, a Democrat who represented New York state as a U.S. senator, had won overwhelming majorities in the Orthodox Jewish communities because they "appreciated her unique capabilities, talents and compassion for all."

Di Tzeitung, published in Yiddish, is sold at city newsstands, especially in Brooklyn's Williamsburg and Borough Hall neighborhoods, which have many Orthodox Jewish residents. It acknowledged it "should not have published the altered picture."

An editor at a Manhattan weekly that has covered Jewish issues since the 1890s addressed why the Brooklyn newspaper might have altered the image. The Forward's managing editor, Lil Swanson, said that removing women from photos is "in keeping with" the belief of some ultra-Orthodox Jews that showing images of the female form is "immodest."

In the original photo of the White House Situation Room, Obama and his national security team are gathered around a table, following in real time the operation that culminated in the killing of bin Laden at his Pakistani compound on May 1.

The White House, which issued the photo, had no comment Monday on the removal of the women from it.
___

Di Tzeitung: http://www.ditzeitung.com

WATERY GRAVE, MURKY LAW -- THE DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

 

By LEOR HALEVI  NYT /  May 7, 2011 

AFTER Osama bin Laden’s corpse was slipped into the North Arabian Sea, the White House’s chief counterterrorism adviser declared that the United States had buried him “in strict conformance with Islamic precepts and practices.” According to a senior military official, the body was washed, shrouded and dispatched with a funeral prayer.

Despite its best efforts, the United States government still has much to learn about the intricacies of Muslim funerary law. Its strictures are more nuanced, and perhaps also more flexible, than it imagined.

According to the Koran, the origins of burial stretch back to the dawn of humanity. Cain, full of remorse after killing his brother, was inspired by a ground-scratching raven to hide the naked corpse in the earth. Islamic law insists on this ritual as the ideal one.

But medieval jurists did recognize that travelers and merchants sometimes died at sea. Shafii, the founder of a Sunni school of law, recommended that ships either keep the body on board until they could reach land or sandwich it between two wooden slabs and tow it with a rope.

Other jurists prescribed different actions, depending on the circumstances. If the ship was far from shore and the body began to decompose, then it was permissible to deposit it in the sea, weighted with metal or stone so that it would sink to the bottom. Jurists hoped that sailors, while lowering the deceased, would turn his face toward Mecca.

Releasing the corpse in a floating coffin was also an option, if there was a good chance that it would wash up on the shores of a Muslim country, where the body would receive last rites on land.

In general, however, Shariah permits burial at sea only in extraordinary circumstances. So some interpreters of Islamic law have rushed to denounce what was done with Bin Laden’s body. But the implication that Bin Laden deserved an ordinary Muslim burial doesn’t necessarily comply with that law. Islamic jurists have always made important exceptions to burial rites, depending on how the deceased lived and died.

Largely because of the exigencies of war, those who died on the battlefield were traditionally not entitled to standard rites. In accordance with Shariah, their corpses may be deposited in communal graves. There is no need for prayers, or for washing or shrouding their bodies; immediately upon death martyrs’ bodies are miraculously regenerated, and they receive silken robes in paradise.

Medieval jurists also made exceptions for highway robbers, violent rebels and unrepentant apostates, who were on occasion dismembered and decapitated, their remains left on display. Shafii argued that just rulers ought to treat the bodies of executed rebels respectfully and that they could administer last rites. But many jurists disagreed, arguing that they were undeserving of such honors.

These exceptions matter because Bin Laden’s religious status is a matter of contention among Muslims. On one end of the spectrum are Muslims who consider him an outsider to Islam: if not quite an apostate, a terrorist whose right to an official Muslim prayer is debatable at best. (In 2005 the Islamic Commission of Spain essentially excommunicated Bin Laden, arguing that he should not be treated as a Muslim.) They must find it as perplexing as I do that the United States government granted the man it identified not as a Muslim, but as a “mass murderer of Muslims,” the dubious honor of a quasi-Islamic funeral.

On the other end are Muslims who believe that Bin Laden is now enjoying the blessings of martyrdom. From a theological perspective, it matters little to them how Americans on the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson disposed of the corpse.

Which is all to say that Bin Laden’s burial was doctrinally irrelevant to some Muslims, and confusing to others. Most of the rest feel uneasy. Perhaps the United States could not have avoided that. But a deeper understanding of the history of Islam’s sacred law could have prevented us from seeming so at sea.

Leor Halevi, an associate professor of history at Vanderbilt University, is the author of “Muhammad’s Grave: Death Rites and the Making of Islamic Society.” 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/opinion/08halevi.html?ref=asia

FEDS ORDER BORDER PATROL TO ARREST FEWER ILLEGALS TO MASK SIZE OF PROBLEM.

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

Friends, each day a new and puzzling story (or three or four) crops up revealing the insane situations allowed to develop due to federal leniency regarding "control" of our borders with Mexico. As a result, a full-scale war between dangerous Mexican career criminals and the "law" rages and threatens Southwestern States. Now word has it that our freakishly liberal Attorney General Eric Holder is working tirelessly to shackle U.S. law enforcement struggling to contain the problem. Here is just one story of this scandalous situation:

Friday, 06 May 2011 04:52 PM

By Jim Meyers and Ashley Martella

 / Newsmax

The U.S. Border Patrol has told its agents to stop arresting illegal aliens crossing the border from Mexico to keep the illegal immigration numbers down, Arizona Sheriff Larry Dever tells Newsmax.

He also charges that Attorney General Eric Holder is “holding hands with the ACLU” to protect illegal aliens from prosecution, says illegals are committing “heinous crimes” across America every day, and calls claims that the federal government should be solely responsible for controlling illegal immigration “balderdash.”

Dever is sheriff of Cochise County, which shares an 83-mile border with Mexico, and he says his Border Patrol sector is responsible for half of all illegal aliens caught trying to enter the country and halt the narcotics entering the United States.

Story continues below video.

Cochise County, Ariz., Sheriff Larry Dever discusses his departments battle against the Obama administrations efforts to stop immigration law enforcement. He accuses the Department of Homeland Security of hypocrisy in selective prosecution of crimes.

In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, he was asked about the Obama administration’s bragging that the border is more secure than ever.

“For the secretary of homeland security to say the border is more secure than ever, well, I’ve been there forever and there was a happier time than what it is today. We have a long, long way to go.

“Don’t drink the Kool-Aid and buy into 'this border is secure' nonsense.

“There’s a bad element in the mix of the aliens that are crossing that border and they don’t stay there, they move into communities throughout the country. And every day there are travesties and heinous crimes being committed by those people. If we don’t stop it at the border, it’s just going to continue to grow.”

Dever recently told Congress that in one district in Texas, illegals are allowed to be caught crossing the border 14 times before being charged with a felony, and federal smuggling charges are not considered unless at least six illegal aliens are being smuggled into the country.

“It doesn’t surprise me because we’ve been seeing that every day in Arizona, with artificial thresholds for narcotics, for human smuggling,” he tells Newsmax.

“For that to be issued as a written solid order, it’s outrageous.”

He also explains how he has heard that the Border Patrol has told officers to stop arresting Mexican illegals to keep official illegal immigration figures down.

“That comes from agents on the ground, who have told me, told my deputies, told citizens in the area.

“They have in the past been instructed to scare people back or turn them back south versus arresting them.”

Border Patrol Chief Michael Fisher’s has denied that agents have been told not to arrest Mexican illegals. Dever responds: “I tend to believe there is no written order to that effect. But if your agents on the ground have that perception and that understanding, then you need to go back and change it.

“If they’re lying, shame on them, and shame on me for bringing it up. But frankly, my staff, when they heard this, they said what’s the big deal? We’ve been hearing this forever. And people who live in my county say the same things.

“So something’s going on and it needs to be rectified and fixed so these people are brought to justice.”

Dever tells Newsmax that the Mexican drug cartels are freely operating many miles from the U.S.-Mexican border.

“You can go up to 70 miles north in Pinal County, which isn’t even a border county, and the Bureau of Land Management put up signs on public land warning people not to travel there because of the threat from drug cartels.

“If you travel into the recreational areas in my county, those same signs are up warning people they could encounter drug and human smuggling. I think we ought to point the signs south and tell the folks who are coming here that this is not a safe place for you to come.”

Referring to “roadblocks” Eric Holder has been erecting against Arizona’s attempts to deal with the immigration problem, Dever says: “He’s the guy who sued us, sued the state of Arizona, holding hands with the ACLU. It doesn’t do any good to arrest people if all you’re going to do is kick them back. If they’re not going to be prosecuted and held accountable, where’s the teeth in the enforcement effort?”

When Arizona passed its tough anti-illegal immigration legislation last year, the ACLU “sued every Arizona sheriff and every Arizona county attorney independently to enjoin us from enforcing the law should it pass constitutional muster,” Dever adds.

“Then the Department of Justice sued the state of Arizona. Here’s what’s absolutely bizarre and hypocritical: The Department of Homeland Security since Sept. 11, 2001, has been on an outreach effort to empower and partner with state and local law enforcement to help defend and protect our homeland.

“When it comes to gun-running, money-laundering, kidnapping, murder, all those border-related crimes that we have, they wrap their arms around us and say let’s go get these guys. When it comes to illegal immigration, they sue us. They say back off, that is our sole responsibility. And I say balderdash.”

Dever encourages Americans to “keep pressure on your congressional representatives” to deal effectively with illegal immigration. “It’s beginning to work. It’s beginning to take hold.”

DETROIT: The end game of liberalism. Motown = Socialism. We told you so!

Verne Strickland Blogmaster

May 06, 2011

Phil Boehmke: AMERICAN THINKER

What do you get when a mighty industrial city is subject to six decades of one party rule and unchecked union greed?  Detroit.

On Election Day 2008, the voters of Detroit turned out in droves to vote for Barack Obama. Special assistance was provided for those who were unable to comprehend the electoral process or read the ballot.  The ensuing landslide unleashed a tidal wave of "Hope and Change" mania among the Democrat denizens of Motown.  Let the good times roll!

Several months later, thousands of Obama loyalists lined up to get their "Obama Cash."  Most of us were astonished by the throngs of Detroiters who proudly displayed their ignorance to the local media.  How could anyone believe that they would receive magical "Obama Cash" from his personal stash?  None of those interviewed had any concept of where the money would actually come from, nor did they care.  How could this be possible?

WWJ Newsradio 950 in Detroit tells us that a new report released by the Detroit Regional Workforce Fund (DRWF) reveals that a mind-boggling 47% of Motown residents (more than 200,000 people) are considered functionally illiterate.  According to the Fund's director Karen Tyler-Ruiz, the day-to-day skills that most of us take for granted present difficulties for nearly half of Detroit's citizens. 

"Not able to fill out basic forms, for getting a job-those types of basic everyday (things).  Reading a prescription; what's on the bottle, how many you should take...just your basic everyday tasks," she said

"I don't really know how they get by, but they do.  Are they getting by well?  Well, that's another question," Tyler-Ruiz said.

According to the report nearly half of those individuals who are considered functionally illiterate have a high school diploma or GED.  The public schools and the teachers union certainly have some explaining to do. 

Take a good look at Detroit and see what socialism looks like when allowed to run to its inevitable conclusion.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/05/detroit_the_end_game_of_libera.html

Article referred by David Boone

Al-Qaida Threatened Nuke Strike if bin Laden Killed. (Nobody believed this would be the end of it!)

We did it, we're glad we did it, and we don't expect you to be good sports about it!

Verne Strickland Blogmaster
May 8, 2011
 
The killing of Osama bin Laden has raised new concerns over an earlier al-Qaida threat to detonate a nuclear weapon in Europe if the terrorist leader was killed or captured.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, told Guantanamo Bay interrogators that al-Qaida would unleash a “nuclear hellstorm,” according to Britain’s Daily Telegraph.

“A senior al-Qaida commander claimed that the terrorist group has hidden a nuclear bomb somewhere in Europe which will be detonated if Osama bin Laden is ever caught or assassinated,” the newspaper reported.

The claim came to light in classified files released by the WikiLeaks website, according to AFP.

The files also disclosed that al-Qaida plotted a 9/11-style attack on London’s Heathrow airport that would crash a hijacked plane into one of the terminals.

There was also a plot to put cyanide into the air-conditioning units of public buildings in the United States.

http://mail.aol.com/33646-311/aol-1/en-us/Lite/MsgRead.aspx?folder=NewMail&uid=1.28854435&seq=10&searchIn=none&searchQuery=&start=0&sort=received