Locally Speaking

Horry County Police To Confiscate Bath Salts, Synthetic Marijuana Following State Ban

Horry County police will begin confiscating "bath salts" and synthetic marijuana from local businesses now that the substances are illegal in the state, according to authorities.

The S.C. Board of Health and Environmental Control voted Monday to ban the chemicals known as bath salts and those used to make synthetic marijuana following federal bans on the substances.

Now anyone who possess, manufacture or distribute the substances, known as Schedule I drugs, could be charged with a felony on first offense and face up to five years in prison and/or a fine of up to $5,000, according to state Department of Health and Environmental Control officials.

As a result of the state ban, which went into effect immediately, Horry County businesses that carry the products will have the opportunity to voluntarily surrender them to Horry County police to be destroyed, said Sgt. Robert Kegler, spokesman with the Horry County Police Department.

Anyone found in possession of them or who do not voluntarily surrender the products will be charged accordingly, Kegler said.

Individuals can call the Horry County Police Department at 248-1520 to arrange turning in the products.

There is no criminal penalty if an individual immediately contacts the Horry County Police Department to surrender the products, Kegler said. –The Sun News

<><><>*<><><>

Republican Presidential Debate To Be Held In Myrtle Beach ... But Where?

There is debate over this debate.

FOX News announced Thursday it will host a Republican presidential debate in Myrtle Beach from 9 to 11 p.m. Jan. 16, 2012.

The question is where.

In its press release, FOX News listed the Myrtle Beach Convention Center as the venue.

But that news comes as a surprise to convention center general manager Paul Edwards, who said the convention center was booked a year ago for a different event.

“We cannot do the debate on the 16th, because we have a volleyball tournament,” said Edwards. He said Jan. 16 was not one of the available dates offered to FOX News.

Myrtle Beach Spokesman Mark Kruea seconded Edwards’ comments that the convention center’s exhibition hall had already been booked.

Kruea said in his conversations with the station’s representatives, they expressed interest in Myrtle Beach’s Palace Theatre for the debate.

“I can’t definitely say it’s the Palace Theatre, but I think that’s the direction they were going,” Kruea said. He added the event could theoretically be headquartered at the convention center and held at the Palace.

However, the confusion deepens.

FOX News spokeswoman Carly Shanahan said the details are still being worked out, but the debate will be held at the convention center. She referred further questions to the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce.

Messages left for Chamber President Brad Dean were not returned.

The 2008 presidential debates – both Democratic and Republican – were held in Myrtle Beach, one at The Palace and one at the convention center.

Chad Connelly, head of the S.C. GOP, said there could be another wrinkle in where and when the debate will be held – the “juggling” between Nevada and New Hampshire over their primary dates.

“Until this gets finalized with the early states, you could see some shifting around,” Connelly said.

Some Republicans are calling for presidential candidates to boycott Nevada after its GOP primary was moved up to Jan. 14, thereby threatening New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary status, according to The Associated Press.

Members of the Nevada GOP are voting on the matter this weekend in Las Vegas. Some party members want the date moved to Jan. 17 to make New Hampshire happy, the AP reported.

The S.C. presidential primary is scheduled for Jan. 21.

No matter how the drama in those states plays out, Connelly said FOX News is definitely coming to Myrtle Beach and the debate will happen before the S.C. GOP primary.

“It’s going to be Myrtle Beach. That’s a done deal,” Connelly said. “There’s some drama and we’re working out the details and look to finalize that early next week.”

No matter the venue, Adam Cates is excited the GOP presidential debates are coming back to Myrtle Beach.

The Murrells Inlet resident and chairman of the S.C. Federation of Young Republicans remembers volunteering at the convention center for the 2008 Republican debate, which marked one of his first volunteer efforts in area politics.

“The interest in it was tremendous,” Cates said.

After the debate, Cates said he hit some of the celebrations and got to speak with former candidate Sen. Fred Thompson, as well as current presidential hopeful Gov. Mitt Romney.

Cates said he’s not terribly surprised Myrtle Beach was pegged to host a GOP debate again.

“It’s a good, strong conservative area,” he said. –The Sun News

<><><>*<><><>

Area Police Departments Want Your Pills

Area police officers want your unused prescription pills or unwanted over the counter pills such as those strong headache medicines so they can stay out of the hands of abusers and from polluting the area’s drinking water.

Various departments in Horry and Georgetown counties will participate in an annual community medicine drop-off day this week as part of a federal initiative sponsored by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Deputies with the Georgetown County Sheriff’s office and officers with the Conway Police Department and North Myrtle Beach Police Department will host medicine drop-off day from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Saturday, according to officials with those organizations.

Conway officers will be at Walgreens located at 1601 Church St., accepting unwanted, unused and expired medicines, said Catina Hipp, department spokeswoman.

In Georgetown, residents can take the pills to the Midway Fire Department located at 67 Saint Pauls Place in Pawleys Island, said Carrie Cuthbertson, spokeswoman for the sheriff’s office.

In North Myrtle Beach, residents can drop off their pills at Surfwood Plaza, which is home to Lowes, in North Myrtle Beach, said Pat Dowling, city spokesman.

But if you live in Horry County and have pills you want to get out of your home before then or afterwards, the county’s police department has set up a permanent drop box outside its headquarters inside M.L. Brown Building in Conway.

The box, a white metal container that looks similar to a mailbox, was obtained through a grant sponsored by the National Association of Drug Diversion Investigators. It was installed Sept. 30 and through Sunday officers had collected 27 pounds of drugs that were incinerated.

“We’ve gotten a really good response. The word has gotten out and people are utilizing,” Horry County police Sgt. Robert Kegler said. “There’s a potential of your unused pills, your expired pills that still have potency to them, to get in the wrong hands. Then they’re out on the street, being sold, being used and abused.”

The box is emptied daily and the pills are inventoried as evidence then destroyed. Dropping pills in the box is anonymous since the box is located in the hallway at the entrance to the department’s headquarters.

Any controlled substance medications, over-the-counter medicines and non-controlled medication, vitamins and medication samples can be deposited into the box, Kegler said.

“We take it in and there are no questions asked about it and we destroy it in a safe environment,” Kegler said. “This keeps someone from flushing and keeps it out of our water and from impacting the environment and drinking water.”

Officials ask that resident not put any needles, syringes, mercury or cadmium products, biohazard items, personal care products or chemicals such as hydrogen peroxide in the box.

North Myrtle Beach officials are working to offer a more permanent drop-off location for unused or expired medications, Dowling said.

According to the 2009 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s National Survey on Drug Use and Health, more than 7 million Americans currently abuse prescription drugs, Dowling said. According to the Partnership for a Drug Free America, each day about 2,500 teens use prescription drugs to get high for the first time.

Area officers say they want the medications turned into law enforcement to prevent experimentation or abuse by teens and young adults, who may find the unused prescriptions in a family member’s medicine cabinet.

“The impetus behind the North Myrtle Beach Drug Drop-Off Days has been to provide a safe and secure way for residents and visitors to dispose of their old or unused prescription drugs,” Dowling said. “This helps to prevent young children from accidentally using the drugs, and it prevents some teens and others from purposefully using the drugs to get high.” -The Sun News

Ragbag Headliners

Natural Born Citizen Eligibility Rulings Vanish For The Internet

A New Jersey attorney who brought the first legal challenge to Barack Obama’s occupancy in the Oval Office to the U.S. Supreme Court has published a report revealing that references to a U.S. Supreme Court decision addressing the definition of “natural-born citizen” were scrubbed at one of the key online resources for legal documents.

The Minor v. Happersett case is significant because it is one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen,” a requirement imposed by the U.S. Constitution on only the U.S. president.

That case states:

“The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

In the dispute over Obama’s eligibility, dating back to before his election, it has been argued that the Minor case does not apply. Some have argued that it applies only to voting rights.

But now Leo C. Donofrio, whose original Donofio v. Wells against the New Jersey Secretary of State alleged Obama does not meet the Constitution’s Article 2, Section 1 “natural-born citizen” demand for presidents because of his dual citizenship at birth, has released research suggesting that even as Obama was preparing to be the Democratic candidate for president in 2008, someone was scrubbing court records of that case.

“New evidence conclusively establishes that 25 U.S. Supreme Court opinions were sabotaged then republished at Justia.com during the runup to the ’08 election,” he reported –Vision To America

Cigarettes Versus Marijuana: Why One Is Legal And The Other Not

Imagine this. You are driving from Montana or Oregon. You arrive in Illinois. You are stopped by the police for a traffic violation.  A search of your vehicle reveals your stash of marijuana. You whip out your prescription for the weed or the Medical Marijuana I.D. card issued by your state.

The handcuffs go on, you go to jail. You now have to find a local lawyer to sort out the mess. You must take your chances before a judge, and depending on the county, a hot shot prosecutor who will make your life more miserable.

Sixteen states have legalized something called medical marijuana, a substance that does not legally exist. 

Marijuana is a Schedule 1 controlled substance under federal law and is illegal to cultivate, prescribe, dispense, sell, possess, or use. The FDA does not recognize “medical” marijuana, otherwise it would be cultivated, processed, and sold solely through the pharmaceutical industry.

It would be known as pharmaceutical marijuana. Its trade would be strictly regulated.

There is no such thing as medical marijuana. It is a fraud, a canard, and a con. It is part of the conditioning narrative, also known as soft or pity propaganda, to eventually legalize pot. The efforts to legalize cannabis have been ongoing since the 1960s. The proponents of legalization latched on to the so called medical benefits argument and pushed those hard.

Instead of recreational use, they pity pushed medicinal use to get it legalized.

In states where it is legal there have been abuses of the law. That was the whole intent. As of two months ago, the federal government is cracking down.

If so called medical marijuana is legalized in all fifty states then full legalization will follow. This is the goal. At least that is what the advocates hope and think will happen.

Think about this. Supposedly cigarettes are not only a health hazard but a deadly hazard.  They are allegedly a major cause of catastrophic diseases and death. If the medical community and the government agree whole heartedly that cigarettes are such a deadly health hazard why are they legal?  

Why doesn’t the government just ban cigarettes? Why is our government allowing an extremely hazardous product to remain on the market? Our government bans all types of hazardous products. Why not cigarettes?  

Why is marijuana banned and cigarettes legal? There are two reasons. They are the same two reasons why marijuana will never be legalized. Money and horticulture.  

Approximately 20% of the population smokes, just over 40 million adults. That is tens of millions of dollars a day in local, state, and federal taxes.  

The government has a captured cash cow in cigarette smokers. People cannot just grow tobacco and manufacture their own cigarettes. Tobacco is a land, labor, and time intensive crop. After it is harvested it must be cured, aged, and dried in a specific manner. 

It would take a good sized plot of land, a lot of work, and about a year and a half for you to produce a few cartons of cigarettes. You need more than one plot of land as tobacco depletes soil and the crop must be rotated, or you must invest in expensive fertilizer and nutrient mixes. You cannot easily or economically grow tobacco to make cigarettes for personal consumption.

Marijuana, on the other hand, can be cultivated anyplace. You can grow enough in pots to continually supply you and your friends. If you have enough space you can turn it into a cash crop. All you need are seeds or plantings, and in a short time you can fly higher than a kite. Anyone, anyplace can grow marijuana. And they do.  

The government cannot control, regulate, or easily tax pot. This is why marijuana will never be legalized. There is no way to make it a commercially viable and profitable product and no way to effectively tax it.

Legalizing marijuana would continue the same multi-billion dollar underground economy the illegal product does. Something the government, and our society, is loathe to do.  Instead of narcotics agents, governments- local, state, and federal- would have to hire revenue agents. There is no way they could hire enough.

Aside from the pro and con moral, legal, constitutional, medical and social arguments, it is all about the money. It always is. There is no way for any commercial enterprise to make vast profits if anyone can grow their own cannabis. There is no way governments can tap into the money stream.

Even if the government decided to create pharmaceutical marijuana, regulate it through the FDA, restrict its sales through the pharmaceutical industry and its dispensation through doctors and pharmacists, there is no way to stop people from growing their own, using it and selling it.

Why go to Walgreens or CVS when you can just produce your own?

To all you tokers, smokers, 420ers, and stoners out there: Give it up. There is no way marijuana will be legalized anytime soon. So, just fire up a chubby, and keep dreaming your dreams of a high society.

Until the man comes crashing through the door.

By Peter Bella –The Washington Times

Note: Peter Bella is a retired Chicago Police Officer, freelance writer, freelance photographer, and consultant.  He is a passionate cook and eater.  He likes to be the sharp stick that pokes, annoys, and provokes.  His opinions are his and his alone.

Nine Words Women Use

(1) Fine: This is the word women use to end an argument when they are right and you need to shut up.

(2) Five Minutes: If she is getting dressed, this means a half an hour. Five minutes is only five minutes if you have just been given five more minutes to watch the game before helping around the house.

(3) Nothing: This is the calm before the storm. This means something, and you should be on your toes. Arguments that begin with nothing usually end in fine.

(4) Go Ahead: This is a dare, not permission. Don't Do It!

(5) Loud Sigh: This is actually a word, but is a non-verbal statement often misunderstood by men. A loud sigh means she thinks you are an idiot and wonders why she is wasting her time standing here and arguing with you about nothing. (Refer back to # 3 for the meaning of nothing.)

(6) That's Okay: This is one of the most dangerous statements a women can make to a man. That's okay means she wants to think long and hard before deciding how and when you will pay for your mistake.

(7) Thanks: A woman is thanking you, do not question, or faint. Just say you're welcome. (I want to add in a clause here - This is true, unless she says 'Thanks a lot' - that is PURE sarcasm and she is not thanking you at all. DO NOT say 'you're welcome' . That will bring on a 'whatever').

(8) Whatever: Is a woman's way of saying F--- YOU!

(9) Don't worry about it, I got it: Another dangerous statement, meaning this is something that a woman has told a man to do several times, but is now doing it herself. This will later result in a man asking 'What's wrong?' For the woman's response refer to # 3.

* Send this to the men you know, to warn them about arguments they can avoid if they remember the terminology.

* Send this to all the women you know to give them a good laugh, 'cause they know it's true!!!

Author Unknown

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: America Is Still Great

We are fast becoming a nation where convenience and ease surpass ingenuity, creativity and even stubborn “Yankee pride.” And I’ve got news for you: There isn’t a thing wrong with pride when it is funneled into creative channels.

America did not rise to the top by taking orders or being led around by the nose. We got there by breaking the Old World molds of complacency and rejecting the status quo. Being pushed around and accepting leadership from a few who couldn’t find their way out of a paper bag is hardly a matrix for success or longevity.

Our Founders clawed their way across forests and deserts, forged roads of steel and concrete, built industries out of nothing and never admitted defeat - regardless of the size and verbosity of their foe.

So what happened? When did we surrender our God-given mandate to lesser entities? When did we find it easier to follow than to lead, and why have we taken a back seat to mediocrity instead of being front-row-and-center upon the world stage?

We are still Americans, and we are made of the right stuff. Taking orders from weak individuals merely because of title, connections or indoctrination is not what made people like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony or Franklin Delano Roosevelt great. Those people led by example, not dictate alone. Occasionally, we forget that being an American is not all cakes and ale, but rather requires mutual sacrifice, unity of cause and even the spilling of our blood when necessary. Thank God, however, that our forebears placed the good of the many far above the lust of the few.

H. RICK TAVARES
Campo, Calif.

The Washington Times

Smartphone Pictures Pose Privacy Risks

Proposed Budget Cuts By The New Republican House Of Representatives

Below are some programs which the "new" Republican U.S. House of Representatives has proposed to cut from the federal budget:

Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy = $445 million annual savings

Save America's Treasures Program = $25 million annual savings

International Fund for Ireland = $17 million annual savings

Legal Services Corporation = $420 million annual savings

National Endowment for the Arts = $167.5 million annual savings

National Endowment for the Humanities = $167.5 million annual savings

Hope VI Program = $250 million annual savings

Amtrak Subsidies = $1.565 billion annual savings

Eliminate: 68 duplicative "education programs" --- [H.R. 2274 to eliminate the "duplicate programs" was authored/introduced in Congress by Howard McKeon, R-California] = $1.3 billion annual savings

U.S. Trade Development Agency = $55 million annual savings

Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy = $20 million annual savings

50% Cut: funding for congressional printing and binding = $47 million annual savings

John C. Stennis Center Subsidy = $430,000 annual savings

Community Development Fund = $4.5 billion annual savings

Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid = $24 million annual savings

50% Cut: Federal Travel Budget = $7.5 billion annual savings

20% Cut: Federal Vehicle Budget = $600 million annual savings

Essential Air Service = $150 million annual savings

Technology Innovation Program = $70 million annual savings

Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program = $125 million annual savings

Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization = $530 million annual savings

Beach Replenishment = $95 million annual savings

New Starts Transit = $2 billion annual savings

Exchange Programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts = $9 million annual savings

Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants = $2.5 billion annual savings

Title X Family Planning = $318 million annual savings

Appalachian Regional Commission = $76 million annual savings

Economic Development Administration = $293 million annual savings

Programs under the National and Community Services Act = $1.15 billion annual savings]

Applied Research at Department of Energy = $1.27 billion annual savings

Freedom CAR and Fuel Partnership = $200 million annual savings

Energy Star Program = $52 million annual savings

Economic Assistance to Egypt = $250 million annually

U.S. Agency for International Development = $1.39 billion annual savings

General Assistance to District of Columbia = $210 million annual savings

Subsidy for Washington DC Metropolitan Area Transit Authority = $150 million annual savings

Presidential Campaign Fund = $775 million savings over 10 years

No funding for federal office space acquisition = $864 million annual savings

End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services

Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act = More than $1 billion savings annually

IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget = $1.8 billion savings over ten years

Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees = $1.2 billion savings over ten years

Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of = $15 billion total savings

Eliminate: death gratuity for Members of Congress = Lord help us

Eliminate: Mohair Subsidies = $1 million annual savings

Eliminate: taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change = $12.5 million annual savings

Eliminate: Market Access Program = $200 million annual savings

USDA Sugar Program = $14 million annual savings

Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) = $93 million annual savings

Eliminate: the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program = $56.2 million annual savings

Eliminate: the Fund for Obamacare "administrative costs" = $900 million savings

Ready to Learn TV Program = $27 million savings

HUD Ph.D. Program = ?

Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act = ?

TOTAL SAVINGS = at least $2.5 TRILLION approx.!

The BIG questions are:

1) WHAT [the HELL] are all these 54 items doing in the U.S. budget in the first place?

2) HOW and WHY [the HELL] did they get on the federal budget to begin with?
Additionally. . .

Require collection of UNPAID taxes by federal employees which amounts to $1 billion in UNCOLLECTED tax revenue!

3) WHY have federal employees been allowed to NOT pay these taxes?

4) WHO allowed federal employees to NOT pay these taxes?

Source Unknown

Quote of the day:

"Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that
would require every citizen to prove that he is insured, but
not require one to prove that he is a legal citizen or resident."

 
-- Ben Stein --

This Weeks Sound Off

Bill Introduced to Strip Citizenship Of Americans Supporting Terror Abroad

A new bill introduced by Connecticut independent Sen. Joe Lieberman and several other members of Congress would strip the citizenship of Americans deemed by the government to be involved in terrorism.

Lieberman introduced the “Enemy Expatriation Act” Wednesday with Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown, Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Charlie Dent and Pennsylvania Democratic Rep. Jason Altmire. The legislation would update federal law to revoke the citizenship of Americans involved in terrorism.

Currently, there are seven categories under federal law for which U.S. citizens can lose their citizenship. Existing expatriation law includes such acts as renouncing one’s citizenship or serving in the armed services of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S.

The new legislation would expand the list to include “providing material support or resources to a Foreign Terrorist Organization, as designated by the secretary of state, or actively engaging in hostilities against the United States or its allies.” -Vision To America

I support this bill 100%!

Being an American citizen is a privilege which shouldn’t be taken lightly or for granted. Any citizen who betrays America and supports an enemy bent on destroying our country should loose their rights, as well as their citizenship, jailed and the key thrown away.

Locally Speaking

ACLU Sues South Carolina In Attempt To Strike Down Immigration Enforcement Law

On October 12, 2011, the ACLU, representing a slew of groups and individuals, filed a lawsuit against the State of South Carolina seeking to enjoin South Carolina Senate Bill 20 ("SB 20").  Like lawsuits brought by the ACLU in Arizona, Utah, Georgia, Alabama and Indiana, this lawsuit seeks to prevent the State from enforcing its immigration law.

SB 20 is based on Arizona's SB 1070 and Alabama's HB 56 and contains similar provisions.  These provisions include:

> a ban on sanctuary policies,
> a state criminal provision for failing to comply with federal alien registration laws,
> a state harboring and transporting criminal provision based off of a similar federal harboring and transporting statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a),
> a requirement that state and local officers verify an individual's immigration status during a lawful stop for a criminal offense if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully present, and
> a requirement that jailers verify the immigration status of inmates with the federal government.

SB 20 also requires public and private employers to use E-Verify and penalizes employers who knowingly hire unauthorized aliens by suspending their business licenses.

The claims brought by the ACLU are similar to the ones brought against the other states.  The ACLU alleges that that federal law preempts SB 20 and that SB 20 violates the Fourth Amendment's protections against unreasonable search and seizure.  The ALCU also alleges that SB 20 violates the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses.  The ACLU has not challenged South Carolina's authority to require employers to use E-Verify and its ability to suspend the business licenses of employers that knowingly employ unauthorized aliens, likely in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting.

In response to the lawsuit, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson expressed confidence in the law. "We have a strong opinion this law is constitutional and we're prepared to defend it to the U.S. Supreme Court if we have to." (UPI, Oct. 13, 2011) Governor Nikki Haley likewise showed confidence in the law and questioned the motives of the plaintiffs in the case.  A spokesman for Haley stated, "As the daughter of immigrants who came to this country legally, Gov. Haley understands that no American value is more sacred than the rule of law. That's what this is about.  Nothing more, nothing less. And if the ACLU was really about what they claim to be, they'd stay out of our business and let us enforce our laws." (ABC News 4, Oct. 16, 2011)

At this point, neither party has filed briefs nor has the Court issued an order indicating when briefs are due.  However, SB 20 is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2012, it is likely that the ACLU will request a temporary injunction. –Fair

Ragbag Headliners

Our Future: Empty Pockets, Except For Our Phones

Here's a Googley vision for the future:

"We definitely hope one day you can walk out of the house with your phone in your hand -- and nothing else," said Marc Freed-Finnegan, the company's product manager for Google Wallet. It aims to digitize everything in your pockets in coming years by collapsing all that paper, plastic and metal into one device: the smartphone.

The idea of using the mobile phone as a credit card, driver's license, transit pass, digital coupon collector, house key, hotel key, corporate ID and more probably sounds pretty sci-fi-futurey. But it's almost practical when you consider the history of the smartphone.

Since the Apple iPhone debuted in 2007 (it's considered by most tech analysts to be the first true smartphone, running apps and functioning as a pocket computer), technologists have been cramming ever more functionality into these Swiss Army Knife-like gadgets.

Our phones have replaced many other once-common tools, from GPS devices (remember those?) to handheld gaming consoles, point-and-shoot cameras, calendars, notebooks, newspapers and portable music players.

Now they're conquering new territory, most notably the wallet.

From there, who knows? Analysts expect phones to get so smart that they could delay your alarm clock if an airline delays your morning flight. Apple's new "humble personal assistant," named Siri, is a step in that direction. And technologists are working on phone prototypes that could be built into clothing, could project their screens on your skin or, in the way-off future, would have flexible and stretchable screens.

"Mobile phones are definitely becoming a center of all of our lives, I think," Freed-Finnegan said. "When you're carrying around this small computer, you can do all kinds of things with it."

The phone-as-wallet trend started in South Korea and Japan about five years ago, and it's been talked about in the U.S. for some time. But it only became a reality September 19, when the Google Wallet app went public for Nexus S smartphones on Sprint's network. That's a relatively small subset of people (Google wouldn't say how many), but the company says it's just an early implementation of what's to come.

Here's how it works at checkout:

Instead of pulling out a credit card to pay for your purchase, you get out your phone. Then you tap it on an NFC reader (these are becoming more common in stores and are usually labeled "PayPass" along with a little radio-wave icon) to log the payment. You have to enter a PIN for security.

Google Wallet currently works only with Citi MasterCard. Google also has a prepaid card of its own that you can load up with money from a bank or credit card account.

Some reviewers say the service is clunky.

"Other forms of payment are easier and quicker," said Jeff Blyskal, a senior editor at Consumer Reports, who tested Google Wallet in San Francisco.

"I don't think the Google wallet or any of these digital wallets are going to replace your leather wallet," he said. "I just don't think it will happen."

The phone-wallet technology is promising and probably will be a significant part of the mobile future, but it has to get easier to use, said Will Stofega, director of mobile device technology and trends at IDC, an analyst firm.

"I think the phone as wallet is a good place to start, and one of the things that has to happen is it has to be easy ... and it has to be accepted all over," he said.

Google says Google Wallet will continue to develop. The company hopes that, at some point, this smartphone app will carry loyalty cards and digital coupons so someone could just tap their phone and, all at once, also get discounts from a grocery store loyalty program or spend a Groupon deal they had in the queue.

In the longer term, the company and others hope to jam the rest of the contents of your pockets -- identification cards, transit passes, keys and the like -- into your phone, too. The details are far from worked out, but a phone with an NFC chip could be used to unlock doors and to identify a person. (Here's one reason Google Wallet isn't all that popular yet; only a handful of smartphones in the U.S. have such a chip in them, including the Google Nexus S and two BlackBerry models, which don't work with Google Wallet.)

For a hotel key, a clerk could transfer a key permission to the guest's phone upon check-in. Then the phone would communicate with a door lock in the same way it would with a cashier: by passing identifying information back and forth and unlocking the door.

Lots of hardware and industry standards might need to be changed to make something like that happen. And there will probably be security issues as well.

Even more complicated would be the phone-based drivers' license, since state governments would need to approve that. Google said there would obviously also have to be some form of authentication technology employed so the digital license couldn't be faked. That's a long way out, Freed-Finnegan said.

But the company thinks the digital wallet is a smart place to begin.

"We're really just getting started," he said. –CNN Tech

Hiding The Sausage

How a Well-Funded Right-Wing Organization is Grinding Out State Laws

The Center for Media and Democracy is re-posting this article from Billy Manes at the Orlando Weekly as part of our efforts to expose the American Legislative Exchange Council. (http://alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed) The original can be found here. (http://orlandoweekly.com/news/hiding-the-sausage-1.1203271)

When Jeff Wright walked into the lobby of the New Orleans Marriott on Aug. 3, he wasn't sure what to expect. As the director of public policy advocacy for the Florida Education Association -- a prominent teachers' union that had been bearing the brunt of legislative attacks from Florida Republicans throughout the 2011 legislative session -- he wasn't there for your standard Mardi Gras-themed party. The American Legislative Exchange Council, a national nonprofit organization made up of elected officials and private interests who gather regularly to try to directly influence the substance of public policy, was holding its annual four-day meeting there, so any "partying" would probably be a little more conservative, and -- going by a recent glut of press coverage pointing out ALEC's clearinghouse mentality of privately linking big corporations with the state legislators willing to pursue their bottom-line agendas in the form of "model legislation" -- slightly more nefarious. Nevertheless, he wanted to see it for himself.

"I just registered straight up, fully disclosed who I represented, the whole thing," he says, pointing out that he paid some $900 in registration fees. "I was surprised I got to go. I got pretty nervous going through several of the sessions, because they don't always give both sides of the equation, needless to say."

He wore a name tag disclosing his FEA affiliation, took some sideways glances from legislators, corporate suits and ALEC staffers, and got on with the business of having his eyes opened to the multimillion dollar machine that's been effectively -- and legally -- chipping away at liberal causes in state legislatures across the country.

"At one point they told me I couldn't come into one session," he says. "I said, 'Wait, no, I paid $900 to be a participant. My badge says participant. If I'm not going to be allowed in, then I'd like my money back.'"

Wright was allowed in, but he was one of the lucky ones. At least three journalists from independent media blogs were strong-armed by security guards instructed by ALEC to get them out. One state representative, Wisconsin Democrat Marc Pocan, reported some glares despite the fact that he, too, had paid his own way (a $50 annual fee for legislators).

"We had other people there representing the progressive side and those who were there that were from media groups -- they weren't permitted in," Wright says. "They were bodily removed."

ALEC is, by nature, a cynical construct. The multimillion dollar think tank insists it's not a lobbying group, yet it readily utilizes the financial influence of its huge affiliate corporations to assist in the actual writing of law, and it helps with the election to public office those who will introduce its "model legislations" in state governments. It calls itself bipartisan, but in 2010, only three of its 23 legislative board leaders were Democrats. ALEC claims to be little more than a fair-minded gathering place of ideas, but the bulk of the science and ideals behind its think tanks are purchased directly by corporate special interests. And it operates, like many of its billionaire CEO members, in the dark rooms of closed meetings.

The best way to understand the shiny glass wall surrounding the shadowy ALEC premise is to look at the sort of word-for-word copycat legislation -- essentially written by ALEC and sponsored by its legislator members -- cropping up at the state level. During this year's session of the Florida legislature, for instance, the passage of two proposed constitutional ballot initiatives (one to repeal healthcare reform, the other to cap government spending), a law challenging teacher tenure, new state election restrictions and the near passage of a racial profiling law mimicking Arizona's SB 1070, among others, bore ALEC's stamp. Among the organization's more than 2,000 legislative members are local powerhouse names, like Florida House Speaker Dean Cannon, gun-loving State Rep. Jason Brodeur, R-Sanford, and avid pro-life State Rep. Scott Plakon, R-Longwood. Among those in receipt of campaign cash from ALEC-affiliated corporations are U.S. Congressman Daniel Webster, R-Orlando and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. -- both of whom spent time in the Florida legislature before taking the national stage. It is a pervasive conservative machine.

"[ALEC has] been waiting in the wings for Republicans to take over the state legislatures and governorships, and [has] pre-packaged, off-the-rack public policies with a conservative bent, ready for introduction," University of Florida political science professor Daniel Smith told the Tampa Tribune in May. "You see these cookie-cutter policies popping up across the country."

And while the silent influence of corporations on politics at every level has become an accepted norm -- see the lucrative careers of lobbyists, the impenetrable rubric of campaign finance laws and the recent Supreme Court decision to grant personhood to corporations -- ALEC's uniquely brazen efforts to connect legislators to corporate-conceived policies (with campaign donations presumably to follow) comes off as exceptionally well choreographed and frighteningly unstoppable.

For Wright, who was sitting in on an education "task force" meeting at the New Orleans Marriott, that meant coming face to face with the obvious: The Republicans are winning.

"They were just saying, 'Look, it lined up perfectly for us. We ended up with a Republican house, a Republican senate and a Republican governor. Go for the jugular,'" he recalls. "That's what the lady said: 'Attack while you can.'"

ALEC's roots stretch back to 1973, according to the group's website. The organization was formed based on a perceived need for "a nonpartisan membership association for conservative state lawmakers who shared a common belief in limited government, free markets, federalism and individual liberty." Future Ohio Gov. John Kasich was there at the group's initial meetings, as was controversial North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms. But the group's most cited founder, Paul Weyrich -- the man who first launched the phrase "moral majority" and co-founded the Heritage Foundation -- largely set the tone for the group's early social agenda. Namely, as an informal think tank created to disenfranchise those who were not like them.

"Now many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo goo' syndrome. Good government," he notoriously told an audience of 15,000 preachers in Dallas in 1980 (the speech is on YouTube). "They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

The documented history from there is murky and secretive at best, but ALEC didn't remain a vehicle for political moralism for long. Increasingly the group came to align itself with large corporations and interest groups whose combined financial resources would be of better service to more economically conservative policies. Big Tobacco, Big Pharma and Big Oil were soon at the boardroom table, clamoring for decreased regulation in states because state governments are more easily purchased than the national government. Cue: increased privatization, decreased regulation, protection against asbestos lawsuits and stricter prison sentences. Through its business-coddling measures, ALEC's presence has grown in all 50 states, with nearly 2,000 legislative members and 300 corporate or special-interest groups convening three times a year (with one major annual conference) to hammer out next year's conservative agenda.

Today, ALEC operates like a well-oiled political machine. In 2009 alone, 115 of the 826 bills produced by ALEC passed in state legislatures and were signed into law. At its policy core, ALEC has nine task forces -- Civil Justice; Commerce, Insurance and Economic Development; Education; Energy, Environment and Agriculture; Health and Human Services; International Relations; Public Safety and Elections; Tax and Fiscal Policy; and Telecommunications and Information Technology -- each headed by two separate leaders: one from the public sector (an elected state leader) and one from the private sector. So, on the task force involving the modeling of insurance legislation, you have Emory Wilkerson, a representative of State Farm Insurance, holding a commanding (if outwardly equal) vote with Colorado Republican State Rep. Glenn Vaad over what will move through the committee and what will not. If the corporation does not sign off, a measure has virtually no means of becoming model legislation to be taken by ALEC member legislators to their state governments.

That came as a surprise to Wright. "I thought they were the usual conferences where [the corporations] are all there to wine and dine and all that," he says. "I had no idea that the structure of ALEC gives them full participation at the table. They sit at the table in the debate on the issues and then get to vote."

And their vote is louder. According to Wright, at an Education Task Force meeting at the New Orleans conference, five out of six items up for consideration this year came from the private sector, one of which went so far as to require that every high school student study free enterprise for a full semester. That initiative was sponsored by Roberta Philips of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Interestingly, one of the other initiatives brought forth by the private sector -- a "Comprehensive Legislative Package Opposing Common Core State Standards Initiative," penned by the Goldwater Institute and the American Principles Project -- was tabled on the advice of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Bush who, on his Foundation for Excellence in Education letterhead, tried to stem the flood of concerns that a federal standard for education was tantamount to giving in to big government.

"There is concern that this initiative will result in Washington dictating what standards, assessments and curriculum states may use," Bush wrote in the letter, a copy of which was obtained by the Weekly. "But these voluntarily adopted standards define what students need to know without defining how teachers should teach or students should learn."

Beyond that minor conflict, Wright says, ALEC's intent to weaken the traditional fabric of public schools and teachers' unions was apparent: "It was absolutely made abundantly clear that the corporations want digital, virtual, charter and choice. That's where they get the money."

Money may be the goal of ALEC's corporate affiliates, but it's also become the group's key public relations problem. The disparity between the public sector's stake in ALEC's finances and the private sector's stake became the root of a rolling drumbeat against the organization this year. Liberal group the Center for Media and Democracy, which is responsible for the widely reported alecexposed.org website documenting the atrocities of ALEC, points out that of ALEC's $6.3 million in 2009 revenues (according to the group's tax documents), only $82,981 -- or 1 percent -- came from its nominal $50-a-head legislative dues. (Conversely, ALEC spends $600,000 a year to recruit and retain legislators). Corporations, meanwhile, paid dues of up to $25,000 a year, with additional fees charged to serve on task forces. Koch Industries -- the energy conglomerate headed up by billionaire corporate bogeymen, Charles and David Koch -- funded the group more than $200,000 in 2009. ALEC's Washington, D.C., office employs just 28 people.

The fiscal picture gets even more suspect when you consider the outlying influence of ALEC's corporate network on campaign finance. Banner ALEC companies like AT&T, ExxonMobil, Coca-Cola and Walmart have poured more than $370 million into state races over the past decade, with more than $10 million of that coming into Florida. And yet ALEC maintains that it is an informational tool and not a lobbying group.

"ALEC allows a place for everyone at the table to come and debate and discuss," ALEC's senior director of policy, Michael Bowman, told NPR in October. "You have legislators who will ask questions much more freely at our meetings because they are not under the eyes of the press, the eyes of the voters. They're just trying to learn a policy and understand it."

Just as the New Orleans convention was kicking off, the St. Petersburg Times seemed to challenge that assertion when it reported that ALEC maintains a $1 million "scholarship fund" to be used in bringing legislators to the convention table, a blatant example of pay for play. Florida law has forbidden elected officials from taking such gifts since 2006, but a former Florida House attorney issued a legal opinion that said that since ALEC "has significant funds that were collected prior to the effective date" of the law, the dozens of Republican legislators from Florida in attendance were acting above board in utilizing some of the funds for food and travel. Florida State Rep. Jimmy Patronis, R-Panama City, who is the state's ALEC leader allowed legislators to have their pricey meals paid for along with up to $500 for travel, according to the Times. "I felt that this was an honest way to allow the dollars to be used," he told the paper.

Rep. Plakon didn't make the convention, though his name is listed among the ALEC membership. "I had never heard of them until six or seven months ago," he says. But Plakon is often heralded as one of the critical components behind ALEC's stated mission to sabotage so-called "Obamacare," state by state. He calls the connection between his "Health Care Freedom Act," a constitutional amendment initiative to appear on next year's ballot, "nuanced," adding that he and his Republican brethren "have a responsibility as a legislature to be true to our own states, our own constituencies. ... We are not robots of some out-state interests."

However, one of Plakon's closest house allies (and Tallahassee roommates), future House Speaker Chris Dorworth, doesn't have the comfort of that kind of arm's length separation from the ALEC machine. Liberal magazine In These Times pulled public records earlier this year that implicated Dorworth -- and potentially Plakon -- in conspiring with ALEC to pass anti-union legislation in the state. (Current House Speaker Dean Cannon initially denied any ALEC association). Dorworth's bill, HB 1021, sought to prohibit the automatic payroll deduction of union dues from the paychecks of public employees. Within the 87 pages of public records obtained by In These Times was a packet titled "Paycheck Protection" containing several different drafts of nearly identical legislation; the difference was that this packet includes at the foot of the page the words "Copyright, ALEC." Dorworth's legislative aide Carolyn Johnson says that the whole thing was a misunderstanding. The ALEC draft was just one of many that was sent to Dorworth's office for review.

"We never once worked with ALEC at all," she says. "Nobody from ALEC has ever reached out to us." She also reveals that Dorworth was in fact in New Orleans at the time of this year's ALEC convention, but he did not attend any ALEC events.

The bill in question never made it out of committee on the Senate side due to immense public pressure.

Plakon likewise swears that he did not get the text of his similar anti-union bill from ALEC, and suspects that the "Paycheck Protection" ALEC boilerplate uncovered by In These Times was probably just one of many influencing factors in Dorworth's decision to file his legislation.

"I get stacks of stuff," Plakon says, somewhat dismissively. "They're just one source of ideas for bill slots."

On the surface, Plakon's assertion that ALEC is just one of many special interests constantly available to assist legislators in crafting their bills may ring true. After all, the moneyed parading of influence by lobbyists in Tallahassee is nearly as expected as the lawmakers themselves as each legislative session begins. It's all in the game.

"Really, it's not that much different than the way things have already worked for a while," says Brad Ashwell, Florida Public Interest Research Group's democracy and consumer advocate. "It's the same thing as it always was, only now they have more top-down planning, more corporate structure around."

But it's ALEC's relative lack of transparency -- or, in the case of the New Orleans conference, abject secrecy -- that bends its credibility as a force in government. If nobody knows exactly what path the money is taking, it's unlikely that it's headed in the direction of the public interest.

"As a voter, it bothers me to think that if I'm talking to my lawmaker, or sending him a letter -- or maybe I've been organized with 100 people in my community -- that they're going to overlook that in favor of some corporate vehicle for corporations to get what they want," Ashwell says.

In July, Common Cause -- which describes itself as "a nonpartisan, grass-roots organization dedicated to restoring the core values of American democracy" -- cried foul on ALEC to the Internal Revenue Service. ALEC is registered with the IRS as a 501(c)3 educational nonprofit, and according to IRS rules, such organizations can lobby, but only if lobbying activity does not amount to a "substantial" part of their activity. In a letter to the IRS, Common Cause asked that the agency "review the organization's operations to determine whether its tax-exempt status should be revoked due to excess lobbying or, alternatively, because ALEC appears to operate primarily to further private business interests and not to advance a charitable purpose."

ALEC bit back, issuing a statement in which ALEC National Chairman Noble Ellington, R-La., alleged that Common Cause "has distorted the facts, concealed critical details and apparently attempted to mislead the news media and public." Among the "distortions" Ellington alleges is that Common Cause failed to reveal in its report that, though 22 companies may have contributed to state political campaigns, Common Cause failed to distinguish individual contributions of company employees from those of the corporations themselves.

"Contrary to the claims of Common Cause, ALEC does not lobby; takes no role in partisan campaign activities; and has no involvement in campaign contributions made by an individual, company or political action com- mittee," Ellington writes.

Brannon Jordan, the communications director for the Florida Democratic Party, says that ALEC has "rammed through a radical social agenda that has hurt Florida," but doesn't elaborate on whether that kind of radicalism can be used by Democrats to turn the tables on Republicans by painting them as corporate shills.

In fact, among local elected Democrats, frustration in the face of ALEC seems like a desperate act of futility. There are no real laws forbidding legislators from drinking at the trough of ALEC, or any individual corporation. Diluted campaign finance laws allowing unlimited "soft money" effectively assure that representatives can be bought and sold.

"ALEC has gone out of its way to throw people out of the room that don't agree with them, to do things behind closed doors with and under the influence of the most far-right corporate backers," says State Rep. Scott Randolph, D-Orlando. "The public should definitely be aware of the fact that this legislation being pushed by so many in the state legislature is coming from this type of organization."

He calls ALEC's scheme "intellectually dishonest," adding, "They know that if they can get a Republican president and Republican senate again, then they'll kick everything back to the states. It's the classic 10-year approach."

Meaning that while nobody is paying attention to state government -- especially in a state that elected a governor neck-deep in Medicare fraud -- the stage is being set for a corporation-owned future, parcel by parcel. "What they've learned is the more cynical they can make the public, the more likely they are to get away with it," Randolph says.

"The Supreme Court made that ruling that money is speech," adds State Rep. Darren Soto, D-Orlando. "And it really has settled the question right now as to whether that's corruption or not."

If it isn't corruption, it is fishy. Former Marion County Republican lawmaker Nancy Argenziano -- who is currently running for the U.S. House of Representatives as an independent after recently becoming an outspoken opponent of her former political party -- was once an ALEC member. In the late '90s, she even attended an ALEC conference.

"I went to ALEC because I was really naïve at the time," she recalls. "I thought this was really someplace you go to learn and get information."

Specifically, Argenziano was pushing through three pharmaceutical bills, one of which involved supporting Warfarin, a generic blood-thinning alternative to Pfizer's name-brand Coumadin. She braved the standard good-ol'-boy fare and rubbed shoulders with surprisingly few legislators, she says, as it was mostly staff members in attendance. When she entered the committee on healthcare, she was in for a surprise.

"I walk into the room and it's Pfizer, it's freaking Pfizer, that only had one side of the story and it was so biased that I knew then that it was just a mechanism for these guys," she says. "Now, as you know, now this is years later. They have gotten to the point where they write the legislation that is repeated from state to state."

For Argenziano, it was a wake-up call. She says she found a much fairer alternative in the National Conference of State Legislatures, an actual nonpartisan group that charges no dues and accepts no donations from for-profit corporations. "There I found balance."

ALEC, she says, is dangerous.

"They own the government. I knew that they owned a certain amount, that there were certain contributions and certain leaders they owned, but I didn't realize to what degree," she says. "Now I'm frightened because they really own a great deal of our government from state to state. I'm not anti-corporation, but I am anti them taking over the government."

By Billy Manes-The Center For Media and Democracy’s

The Great Palestinian Lie

Hypnotist At The Senior Centre

It was entertainment night at the Senior Citizens' Centre.

Claude, the hypnotist, started by saying: "I'm here to put you into a trance, and I intend to hypnotize each and every member of the audience."

The excitement was almost electric as Claude withdrew a beautiful antique pocket watch from his coat. "I want each of you to keep your eye on this antique watch. It's a very special watch. It's been in my family for six generations."

He began to swing the watch gently back and forth while quietly chanting, "Watch the watch, watch the watch, watch the watch. . ."

Indeed, the crowd became mesmerized as the watch swayed back and forth, light gleaming off its polished surface. Hundreds of pairs of eyes followed the swaying watch, until, suddenly, for some unknown reason, it slipped from the hypnotist's fingers and fell to the floor, and broke into a hundred pieces.

"SHIT!" said Claude, the hypnotist.

It took three days to clean up the Senior Citizens' Centre. Claude was never invited back to entertain. 

Author Unknown

“Gay” Soldier was Not Booed for Being a Soldier

Stephen Hill is a self-admitted homosexual. How do we know? When he stood up to ask a question at the Republican debate held in Orlando, Florida, September 22, he opened his remarks with this statement:

In 2010 when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was because I’m a gay soldier.

 There were no boos from the audience when he made this declaration. Not a single one. The sporadic booing was in reference to the question he asked about a repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” if Rick Santorum becomes president.

One pro-homosexualist wrote that the booing was a “shocking demonstration of disrespect for one of our soldiers, lustily booing him.” To repeat, they weren’t booing because he was a soldier. Several articles remarked that there were some boos but “silence from the rest of the crowd.” This means the “rest of the crowd” did not boo.

Even President Obama got into the act. Speaking at a pro-homosexual fund raiser, the president said:

“We don’t believe in the kind of smallness that says it’s okay for a stage full of political leaders – one of whom could end up being the President of the United States – being silent when an American soldier is booed. We don’t believe in that. We don’t believe in them being silent since. You want to be commander-in-chief? You can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States, even when it’s not politically convenient.”

He didn’t say anything when Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. called Tea Partiers “sons of bitches,” or when his own vice president described them as “terrorists,” or when a member of his own party said that they would love to see black people lynched. There are no liberal votes in these denunciations.

A soldier is not exempt from criticism when he engages in behavior that is immoral because he is a soldier. What if a soldier stood up and said that he was an “adulterer soldier” or a “bigamist soldier” or a “fornicating soldier” or an “alcoholic soldier” or a “pedophile soldier”? Mr. Hill defined himself in sexual terms. He’s a soldier who has sex with other men. I guarantee that if Mr. Hill had said the following, the reaction from the media would have been different:

In 2010 when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was. I’m a soldier who has sex with other men.

We could take Mr. Hill’s admission and play fill-in-the-blank: “In 2010 when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was. I’m a soldier who __________________.”

There may be lots of people who engage in all types of rude and crude sexual behavior, but I doubt that they would stand up before a watching world and admit their self-identifying proclivities, many of which they might claim are genetic.

I suspect that there are millions of soldiers who have lied about what they do or who they think they are. Do we have to know these things? Do laws have to be passed to codify what a person chooses to do sexually and then force compliance on the 98 percent of the culture?

Herman Cain has said that he should have stepped in and denounced the booing. Santorum said the same thing. I’m getting tired of Republicans apologizing every time liberals make an issue of a person’s self-professed sexual activity. Why is it that when some person stands up and tells the world what type of sex he or she is involved in that I have to accept it and treat it with respect? A person who defines himself in terms of sexuality is not well adjusted.

Reports are that more Americans are more accepting of “gay rights.” That’s because they never hear anything about what being gay is all about. No one has a problem with two men loving one another. It’s the sex thing that they object to, and this rarely comes up in discussions of “gay rights.”

Some years ago I was teaching a class at a local high school. Discussions of contemporary issues were always on the table in my classes. I tried to integrate what I was teaching with what was going on in the world. Invariably, one day the discussion came around to homosexuality. A number of the students saw nothing wrong with it. Here was my one sentence response: “Please tell me how one man sticking his penis in the rectum of another man is considered normal sexual behavior?” That was the end of the discussion of that topic. –Godfather Politics

Dem. Congressman Apologizes For America To Muslims

On Saturday morning, Illinois Democrat Congressman Mike Quigely made a surprise appearance at the American Islamic College Conference in Chicago. The unaccredited college is the first of its kind in the United States.

Quigley gave remarks to the primarily Muslim audience. He rambled on about the typical racism and discrimination that the liberal left is so convinced America is rampantly infected with. As you can see in the video below, he proceeded in his congressional capacity to apologize on behalf of the country for discrimination against muslims’ faith.

^^^*^^^

Congressman Quigley Apologizes for America

for Muslim Discrimination in Chicago

Financial Warfare: Why Our Enemies Would WANT To Buy Our Debt

For the better part of the last eight years I have been telling everyone that would listen that the biggest national security threat we face is not from a nation that supports terrorism, but from our national debt. If you are one of the thousands of people who have seen our live seminars you have witnessed first hand how I spend a lot of time on this subject and what we call “financial warfare” and how it threatens the sovereignty of this nation.

In the live Government Gone Wild seminars I use the example of the Suez Canal Crises of 1956 where allies of the United States (Great Britain and France) were in a battle with Egypt over control of the canal. At that time the U.S. owned a great portion of Great Britain’s debt and we were able to put financial pressure on them by threatening to dump their debt and sell sterling on the open market and thus destroy their currency as to cause a shortage of reserves needed to pay for imports. Great Britain and France backed down and some historians have said that it is at this point in time where the great British Empire ceased to exist.

This past week I had the opportunity to see the HBO movie “Too Big To Fail” which is a film based on the book about the banking crises written by Andrew Ross Sorkin who is a columnist for the New York Times. There is a part in the movie that most glazed over…but shook me to my core and,if true, really captures the magnitude of our debt problem.

In this particular scene Hank Paulson (played by William Hurt) is sitting down having dinner with who appears to be the Chinese Minister of  Finance. He is then told by this Chinese official that the Russians had contacted them and asked them to coordinate the dumping of hundreds of billions worth bonds on the market. This modern day version of financial warfare would have, according to Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke in the movie, brought down the entire economy of the United States!

Thank God the Chinese said “no thank you”.

The sad state of affairs is that our nation is now open to this type of financial attack because our reckless spenders in D.C. wont stop spending. Congress has put us in the unenviable position where our enemies abroad would want to buy our debt because it offers them a greater chance of bringing down this nation. Our record deficits represents an opportunity for the enemies of liberty to have incredible leverage over us: the chance to be our banker!

China has this leverage over us now but they choose not to dump the debt because currently we are their best customers. We may not be as fortunate in the future. –Government Gone Wild

This Weeks Sound Off

Herman Cain Does 180 on Islam, Would Appoint Muslims To Cabinet

After coming out strongly against Islam and appointing Muslims to his cabinet, Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cain reversed course completely. [View Cain’s Statement Here]

One Out of Two Herman Cains Would Appoint Muslims to His Cabinet, Judgeships

Herman Cain wants to correct the record: He would consider a Muslim for his cabinet or as a federal judge if he’s elected president.

Cain’s clarification comes two months after he initially said he wouldn’t have any Muslim appointees, stoking controversy and criticism from a leading Muslim advocacy group.

“That statement is not what I said. It has been misconstrued,” Cain told Glenn Beck on his radio show Tuesday. –Vision To America

Now that I’ve read this statement about Cain’s willingness to appoint a Muslim to his cabinet, I wouldn’t think twice about NOT voting for the bastard.

Infusing Muslim’s, in particular Islam into our political system is simply out of the question, for by doing so it would give Islam legitimacy that we cannot afford as American's. Why? Because Islam’s main goal is to destroy our way of life. By giving Islam an open door through which they could destroy us is not politically correct.

Herman Cain, go back to your pizza factory! I’m just saying!

Ragbag Headliners

Tobacco Companies Knew Of Radiation In Cigarettes, Covered It Up

Tobacco companies knew that cigarettes contained a radioactive substance called polonium-210, but hid that knowledge from the public for over four decades, a new study of historical documents revealed.

Scientists from the University of California, Los Angeles, reviewed 27 previously unanalyzed documents and found that tobacco companies knew about the radioactive content of cigarettes as early as 1959. The companies studied the polonium throughout the 1960s, knew that it caused "cancerous growths" in the lungs of smokers, and even calculated how much radiation a regular smoker would ingest over 20 years. Then, they kept that data secret.

Hrayr Karagueuzian, the study's lead author, said the companies' level of deception surprised him.

"They not only knew of the presence of polonium, but also of its potential to cause cancer," he said.

Karagueuzian and his team replicated the calculations that tobacco company scientists described in these documents and found that the levels of radiation in cigarettes would account for up to 138 deaths for every 1,000 smokers over a period of 25 years.

The study published online in the journal Nicotine and Tobacco Research.

Cheryl Healton, is the CEO of the American Legacy Foundation, the organization created from the 1998 legal settlement against tobacco companies. She said the knowledge that cigarettes contain radiation is disturbing today, but would have been even more unsettling to Americans in the midst of the Cold War-mindset of the 1950s and 1960s.

"This was when we were crawling under our desks during school radiation drills and thinking about building bomb shelters in our backyards," Healton said. "You probably could not imagine a more ideal time where you would have maximized the impact of that information. Unquestionably, this fact would have reduced smoking if it had been publicized."

She added that most Americans are probably still unaware that cigarettes contain radiation.

Polonium-210 is a radioactive material that emits hazardous particles called alpha particles. There are low levels of it in the soil and the atmosphere, but the fertilizer used to grow tobacco plants contributes to the levels of polonium found in cigarettes.

Dr. John Spangler, a professor of family medicine at the Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in North Carolina, said when smokers inhale, the radioactive particles damage the tissue on the surface of the lungs, creating "hot spots" of damage. When combined with other cancer-causing chemicals in tobacco, Spangler said the damage from radiation is potent.

"The two together greatly increase your risk of lung cancer," Spangler said. "So tobacco smoke is even more dangerous than you thought before."

David Sutton, a spokesman for Philip Morris USA, the largest U.S. tobacco manufacturer, said the public health community has known about polonium in tobacco for decades.

"Polonium 210 is a naturally occurring element found in the air, soil, and water and therefore can be found in plants, including tobacco," Sutton said.

All tobacco products on the market today still contain the polonium. In 1980, scientists discovered that a process called "acid washing" removes up to 99 percent of polonium-210 from tobacco. The documents reviewed by UCLA scientists reveal that tobacco companies knew of this technique, but declined to use it to remove the radioactive material from their products. –ABC News

<><><>*<><><>

Supreme Court Rejects Cases on Obama Eligibility, Gun Rights

The U.S. Supreme Court kicked off a new term, which is expected to include a lot of time devoted to studying appeals to Obamacare, by clearing its docket of several other appeal, including one challenging President Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president and another on gun rights.

Early word from the court today as it began its new term included the following:

Obama eligibility: The high court refused without comment to hear a challenge brought by conservative activist Alan Keyes and other members of the American Independent Party. They contend Obama wasn't eligible to be president because he was not born in the United States and thus not a citizen. Other U.S. courts, as well as the Supreme Court, have tossed similar suits.

Keyes wanted the certification of Obama's victory halted in California until there was documented proof by a state official that he was eligible to be president. The Supreme Court of California threw out the lawsuit.

The case is Keyes v. Bowen, 10-1351.

Gun rights: The high court refused to consider whether an individual's right to own guns includes carrying a firearm outside the home, staying out of one of the nation's most divisive social, political and legal issues.

The justices let stand a ruling from Maryland's highest court that upheld a state law prohibiting the carrying of a handgun without a permit outside of one's home.

The court turned down the opportunity to define the reach of its landmark 2008 ruling that the constitutional right to keep and bear arms applies to individuals and allows them to use guns for lawful purposes such as self-defense in the home.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that gun rights apply not only to federal laws but also to state and city statutes. The court's rulings in the gun cases have been closely divided, by 5-4 votes and split along conservative and liberal lines.

Gun rights have long been a contentious issue. The United States has the world's highest civilian gun ownership rate, with some 90 million Americans owning an estimated 200 million guns.

At issue in the new case from Maryland is whether that right extends to carrying a gun outside the home. The Supreme Court without comment rejected an appeal by Charles Williams, who was convicted of unlawful gun possession.

Williams bought his handgun legally from a licensed dealer in August 2007, but never applied for a permit.

A police officer from Prince George's County on Oct. 1, 2007, saw Williams standing behind a bus stop, pulling items out of a book bag near the woods.

When asked what he had hidden in the bushes, Williams replied, "My gun." The officer then retrieved the handgun, a black Glock with 15 rounds in the magazine.

Williams, who had been transporting the gun from his girlfriend's house to his residence, was convicted of violating a state law prohibiting the wearing, carrying or transporting of a firearm in public without a permit.

He was sentenced to three years in prison, with all but one year suspended, and to three years of probation.

Stephen Halbrook, an attorney for Williams, said in the appeal that the Supreme Court so far has ruled only on the right to keep a handgun in the home but argued the right also exists outside the home.

Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler opposed the appeal. He defended the state law and said it protects an individual's right to have a handgun in the home and carry one on the street with a permit.

The Supreme Court case is Charles Williams v. Maryland, No. 10-1207.

Ballot case: The Supreme Court will not get involved in a Massachusetts dispute over whether election officials were within their rights to block the name of the Libertarian Party's national presidential candidate from the state ballot in 2008.

The court refused to hear an appeal from Bob Barr and the state Libertarian Party.

The party initially put a local presidential contender on its nomination papers.

State officials said the party could not then substitute the name of national Libertarian candidate Barr. A judge intervened and Barr received less than 1 percent of the vote.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has said the state's ballot laws are nondiscriminatory and that Barr had enough time to collect the needed 10,000 signatures.

The case is Barr v. Galvin, 10-1456.

Text messages: The Supreme Court let stand a ruling that the police can search text messages from an arrested criminal suspect's cell phone without obtaining a warrant.

The justices refused to review the California Supreme Court ruling that upheld the search on the grounds that defendants lose their privacy rights for any items they are carrying when taken into custody.

The Supreme Court rejected without comment an appeal by Gregory Diaz, who was convicted on drug charges. His attorneys said Supreme Court intervention was needed to resolve differing lower court rulings on how to apply precedent to warrantless searches of cell phone data.

In 2007, Diaz was arrested, searched, and taken to a police station after driving a car in which his passenger sold six pills of the drug ecstasy during an undercover operation. A small amount of marijuana also was found in his pocket.

The Ventura County Sheriff's Department seized his cellphone and placed it with other evidence. Diaz initially denied any knowledge of the drug transaction.

During a break in the interrogation, an officer looked at the text message folder and discovered a coded message that appeared to refer to the ecstasy sales. That was about 90 minutes after Diaz had been arrested.

The officer showed the text message to Diaz, who then admitted that he had taken part in the deal. He later pleaded guilty to transportation of a controlled substance and was sentenced to three years of probation.

Diaz appealed, challenging the search as unreasonable and for violating his constitutional rights. A California appeals court and the state Supreme Court both upheld the search as valid under a lawful arrest.

The Supreme Court already has on its docket a case about privacy rights, the police and modern technology. On Nov. 8, it will hear arguments on whether the police need a warrant to use a global positioning system device to track a suspect's movements.

The Supreme Court case is Diaz v. California, No. 10-1231.

Ten Commandments in courtroom: The high court turned away another appeal from an Ohio judge who wanted to display a poster containing the Ten Commandments in his courtroom.

The court on Monday refused to hear the argument from Richland County Common Pleas Judge James DeWeese.

The judge hung the poster in his courtroom in Mansfield, north of Columbus, in 2006 after the U.S. Supreme Court let stand lower-court rulings that another Ten Commandments poster he hung in 2000 violated separation between church and state.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation sued and the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the display endorsed religious views and was unconstitutional.

The ACLU also sued in the case of the first poster.

The case is DeWeese v. ACLU of Ohio, 10-1512.

KFC taxes in Iowa: The court won't stop Iowa from forcing KFC Corp. to pay nearly $250,000 in corporate income taxes, even though it had no restaurants or employees in the state.

The high court today refused to hear an appeal from the fried-chicken giant, which a decision by that state's Supreme Court overturned.

All KFC restaurants in Iowa are independent franchises, whose owners pay KFC for the use of its logo and systems. But the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance assessed the company more than $248,000 in unpaid corporate income taxes, including interest and penalties, in 2001. The taxes were for 1997 to 1999.

KFC says it doesn't owe Iowa taxes because it doesn't have property in the state. But Iowa judges have not agreed with that argument. –News Max

<><><>*<><><>

NBC: Occupy Wall Street Like an 'Arab Spring,' is 'Drawing Historical Comparisons'

Friday’s NBC Nightly News once again promoted the left-wing/anti-capitalist protests which Brian Williams non-ideologically described as “a protest against economic and social inequality” that “has now spawned organized marches in 45 states.”

Reporter Chris Jansing featured a man whose “frustration brought him to lower Manhattan” and he pronounced: “I think it's our Arab Spring.” Jansing next trumpeted how “‘Occupy Wall Street’ is drawing historical comparisons,” a quest for historic impact the networks never sought for the Tea Party. Her expert, Georgetown University history professor Michael Kazin, whom she failed to note is co-editor of the far-left quarterly, Dissent.

Kazin asserted: “The first stage of any movement is a lot of people showing how unhappy they are at the situation -- the Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement. If it lasts long enough and is organized well, it could become a mass movement.”

After reporting how “Occupy Wall Street” had raised $50,000, Jansing helpfully advised: “Experts say leaders will need to emerge with a plan to use that cash and harness all that energy before rage can turn to revolution.”

ABC decided to advance the cause of the protesters, putting people in front of ABC’s own “Tell Wall Street” sign to spout off, a favor they never extended to Tea Party allies.

Diane Sawyer announced on World News: “The open protests against Wall Street and the big banks have been spreading, from lower Manhattan to more than 50 cities tonight. But people keep asking, exactly what do these protesters want? ABC's Cecilia Vega has been on the scene.”

Kazin asserted: “The first stage of any movement is a lot of people showing how unhappy they are at the situation -- the Civil Rights Movement, the anti-war movement. If it lasts long enough and is organized well, it could become a mass movement.”

After reporting how “Occupy Wall Street” had raised $50,000, Jansing helpfully advised: “Experts say leaders will need to emerge with a plan to use that cash and harness all that energy before rage can turn to revolution.”

ABC decided to advance the cause of the protesters, putting people in front of ABC’s own “Tell Wall Street” sign to spout off, a favor they never extended to Tea Party allies.

Diane Sawyer announced on World News: “The open protests against Wall Street and the big banks have been spreading, from lower Manhattan to more than 50 cities tonight. But people keep asking, exactly what do these protesters want? ABC's Cecilia Vega has been on the scene.”

Vega explained: “We set out across the country to ask people exactly what they want to tell Wall Street.” She cued up a man: “What burns you about Wall Street?” He answered: “They making all this money and ain't nobody else making no money.”

Vega relayed: “From Chicago to Dallas to Los Angeles to Miami, people want to know, where is the accountability?” She ran three clips, including this from another man: “Up in Wall Street, they all crooks. They money hungry, they don't care about nothing but loading their pocket up and they don’t care about the American people.” -Ready More At Media Research Center