So, now that the shoe is on the other foot.......

Do you remember when President Obama "dissed" our US Supreme Court allowing corporations to make contributions to political campaigns/parties? Didn't Obama talk about how destructive that was going to be, how it would destroy our way of life, you know, all the crap they usually spew like a toilet backing up with "friends"? Well, since that court decision was made, and it is a US Supreme Court decision and they are the law of the land, they are the final word However, Obama did try his best to make the decision illegitimate and, therefore, make the court illegitimate as well. The Democrats have been screaming about how the Republicans have been raising an enormous amount of money and how it's all special interests and corporations will be controlling everything, and "the sky is falling! The sky is falling!" mentality. And to be fair, yes, the Republicans have been very successful at raising money. Well now, we seem to have a change.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees boss Gerald McEntee announced to the NY Times on Teusday that the million member union's latest batch of political ads will take the group's spending on the midterm elections to $91 million, far and away the most spending by any group this cycle (Chris Stirewalt, foxnews.com, 10/27/10). Now, you're probably asking "how do you know they donated to Democrats?" Well, how many unions do you know that have been pro-Republican? Good Lord, a union member was fired recently becuase he was wearing a George H.W. Bush shirt and hat because his son in the Navy is serving on that ship. Apparently, President Obama's people got upset about that as this guy was setting up the stage and the Obama people mentioned something to the union heads, and the guy was fired. Fired! How outrageous is that!? And, that's not all. It was also announced on Tuesday that the Center for Responsive Politics revealed that, if you look at it as a whole, both Democrats and Democrat allied groups have raised and spent FAR more than their republican counterparts--$856 million versus $677 million (Chris Stirewalt, foxnews.com). So, the next time you hear a Lib complain about how much money the Republicans are getting, remind them of the above facts with the sources cited. Indeed they may decry as to how they are being outspent, however as you can clearly see, they're not.

In fact, the Democrats have known that they were likely to get their butts handed to them because they were pushing an agenda that the majority of the American People didn't want. And they did it anyway! Then, President Obama didn't want to discuss it anymore, he wanted to just do it. The efforts of Republicans to slow down and discuss it came with screams of racism and charges of "that's just what they said about ending slavery!" Let's not forget who tried to stop the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1965, Democrats! Including Al Gore's father! Don't believe me though, look it up in Congressional Record!

So, Dems have been trying to get money from CORPORATIONS that were favorable to Dems. This includes Labor Unions as well as they are almost like a corporation, albeit, a Liberal one, so, they're an "ok" corporation. Because they're Liberal. But any other corporation, oh my Lo9rd, you're the Devil! Dems have been getting support from the Pharmaceutical industry, government workers unions, the AFL-CIO and the American Federation of Teachers! Well gee, the labor unions have REALLY benefitted from Obama and his auto bail outs. I argue the labor unions have done enormous damage to the industry, and yet, members still put their faith in the unions! They're the ones hurting you and your employment! What have you been getting for your union dues?! What services?!

So, now that it is clear that Dems are getting more cash, and spending more, I wonder. Where are all the cries of corporations and special interests are corrupting politics and political parties? Hmmm? Man. The sound of the crickets is DEFEANING!

NPR: The time has come....

By now, you have undoubtedly heard the story of how Juan Williams was fired for what he spoke on a network that was not NPR's. NPR says that Juan was not fired for free speech, nor was he fired because he was black. They go further to say he was not fired because he worked for Fox, but, he reports he was repeatedly told he shouldn't identify himself as an NPR News Analyst. I believe that NPR acted in a rather "knee-jerk" fashion here.

Let's start with what he said. He said that he gets nervous when he sees people in Muslim garb when he gets on an airplane. Ok, admittedly, that sounds pretty bad, right? Yes, it does. However, he made it very clear he was expressing his personal opinion. He made this comment on The O'Reily Factor on which he was speaking for the evening as being a Fox News contributor. Juan then goes on to explain that people should not be judged by their appearance, what they wear, their beliefts, that kind of thing. Again however, he was expressing his personal opinion. That was his freedom of speech. Again, he was on Fox News, not NPR at that moment. So, I do not buy the argument that he was not fired because of freedom of speech NPR.

Next, they said this was not an "anti-Fox" thing. Really? So, is that why he was told repeatedly not to identify himself as also being a News Analyst for NPR? And you know what? Why does it matter if he did identify himself that way? You can hide behind your "Code of Ethics" all you want, however, he was not on NPR, he was on Fox. He was giving his opinion. You cannot ignore the fact that he was on Fox when he said this. That, coupled with what Juan says were many warnings, certainly gives the idea that you didn't like him being on Fox and you were concerned about it. If you weren't, you wouldn't be telling him not to identify himself as an NPR News Analyst when he was on Fox, right?

Next, he wasnt' fired because he was black. Ok, I believe that. I actually do. Because he is likely one of the few black persons working for NPR. The last thing they want to do is to be in a position whereby they could be portrayed as being racist. Well unfortunately, you failed. He was black. He was one of the few that worked for NPR. If the roles had been reversed and a Conservative Organization had fired someone who was black, you can bet your bottom dollar that the race card would be played. Big time. So, where exactly is the NAALCP (National Association for the Advancement of Liberal Colored People)?

Well, I checked the NAACP's website. Silence from them on Juan Williams. They are happy to promote their "report" on links between the Tea Party and racism however. I noticed they also neglected to have any information on the New Black Panthers and how there were a couple of members intimidating White voters at a polling place by yelling and holding metal batons. The US Justice Department didn't see this as being important either. But by golly, if it was White people doing that in a black community, you can bet something would have been done. So, it would appear the NAALCP is fine with Juan Williams getting fired. Why? Because he apparently isn't Liberal enough for them. Apparently wasn't Liberal enough for NPR either.

Ok, how about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? Anything from them about this? Well, Sharpton states that "I expressed a genuine feeling that I have if I am in that situation, that is profiling, that is wrong." He goes on to state "though it is something that is naturally done by some we should not be in any way encouraging that." He did say he felt the comment was taken out of context however. He then states "I think the fact that he was arguing against Bill O'Reily against Islamophobia they had the right to fire him, but that reason, I think, is one I would question." He finishes by saying that public figures should watch what they say and that "I've said a lot of things that I shouldn't have said."

Ok, so, he's kind of on the fence here. He acknowledges that he was arguing againt Bill O'Reily about this made up Islamophobia crap, and that gave NPR the right to fire Juan. Really? Why? He was arguing against your made up Islamophobia, so, why should he be fired for that? That doesn't make sense. Yet, you're questioning it. Ok, so, which is it Al? Ya can't have it both ways. Pick one. He did show some humility and said he's said things he shouldn't have. Ok. Thank you. That was honest. I appreciate that, I really do. However, I didn't appreciate the whole "lets jump on The View bandwagon and slam Bill O'Reily. In case you didn't see the show Al, the audience boo-ed both Joy and Whoopi when they threw a fit. They agreed with Bill. Watch it again Al. You might learn something.

No word from Jesse Jackson on this that I could find, other than to say that Jackson was once quoted as saying that when he hears footsteps behind him, he thinks of robbery, and then turns around and is relieved to see someone White. So, is Jackson never going to be on NPR then? I mean, if NPR has to hold to the same standard, Jackson should never be on NPR right? Yeah, I won't hold my breath.

Then, for whatever reason, the CEO decides she's going to trace Juan's comments to his need for psychiatric care. How is that adult?

So, the time has come to get rid of taxpayer funding of NPR. They only receive 1%, but, when you take into account the fundraising at local NPR stations, which are then used to pay for programs broadcast on local NPR stations, it actually accounts for about 3%. Not much, right? Right. So, they can do without it. I encourage you to write your Senators and Representative to pull funding from NPR that is taxpayer funding. I have done so, and, I have e-mailed my local NPR station, NWPR, to let them know I will not be supporting them in the future. I cannot. Juan was a Liberal, but, a very well reasoned one, and, I can respect that. I even agreed with him at times. I would also encourage you to express your feelings with NPR. You will find the links below, however you feel about this, please contact them and express yourself.

http://www.senate.gov/

http://www.house.gov/

http://www.npr.org/