Warner Todd Huston's blog

U.S. colleges are demanding. That's right they are sternly demanding. You see, they are all upset that the Japanese government is not promoting study abroad for its citizens and they are demanding that the Japanese government get more of its citizens to pony up the cash for a U.S. college degree and if the people won't do it, why these U.S. colleges demand that the government do it in their stead.

And this demand proves once again just how unAmerican U.S. colleges are.

On February 26, the Japan Times published a story on a junket to the island nation by the hectoring U.S. colleges where these demands were made.

In a bid to stop the dramatic decline in Japanese studying in the United States, representatives of U.S. colleges and universities met Wednesday with education minister Ryu Shionoya to demand that Japan improve efforts to promote study abroad.

These grasping college representatives were upset with the Japanese government. Since 1997, it appears, Japanese students going abroad have dropped 30 percent. It seems that Japan has fallen behind other Pacific Rim nations in students studying in the U.S.

So, U.S. colleges are stomping about Japan with their hands out to the Japanese government.

A group representing 19 U.S. states and private universities asked Shionoya to increase funds for undergraduate scholarships, improve the credit transfer system, introduce September admissions and create a category for those who have studied abroad in Japan's statistical database.

Yes, like the good Europeans they are, these petulant and oh, so entitled college officials imagine that government should "fix" this "problem."

It appears that the "problem" is that in greater numbers Japanese students are finding their own colleges and universities more attractive than U.S. schools. And, instead of trying to understand why that might be and, perhaps, attempting to sell their product in a better way, what are these arrogant "educators" expecting? They are expecting government to fix it for them. They are looking for government programs and handouts.

This is as unAmerican an attitude as it gets. But that is where our useless schools have arrived. They don't care a whit about what they are selling. They expect, they demand and they assume that merely because they exist, they should be given. They see no reason to earn.

It is my fervent wish that Japanese students and the Japanese government gives a cold shoulder to these anti-intellectual, anti-American schools. It is further my hope that they begin to fail and close their doors by the hundreds. For if this is the lesson that our schools are teaching students, foreign and domestic, these "schools" are not serving their purpose.

American universities should not be teaching the European concept of nobleese oblige and the communist idea that government should be the one making these decisions. Government is not the "fix." If American colleges aren't teaching subjects worthy of an engaged student and are not offering things that attract the best and brightest, then these colleges are unworthy of new students. They don't deserve government largess, they deserve elimination.

So, I hope that Bob Soni of the International Student Network, Naomi Baldwin of the University of Central Missouri and all the good little fellow travelers that joined them on their nice little junket find nothing but failure in their quest. Let us hope for the sake of our students and Japan's that these people come home with empty hands.

It is no less than what they deserve.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

California has always been a destructive force in American politics. All too often the worst ideas from the farthest Euro-left spectrum have leaked out of the Golden State to blight the rest of America. Just one of those currently destructive ideas is the absurdly stringent fuel economy standards that California has foolishly enacted. Several western states have pegged their standards to California's and many other states are attempting to do the same. The current effort in Illinois is one of those attempts.

Illinois H.B. 422 (see .pdf of legislation), sponsored by Karen May (D, Highland Park) creates the Illinois Clean Air Act establishing new motor vehicle emission standards based on California's Low Emission Vehicle Program requirements.

Many in the business community in Illinois oppose this legislation for the unduly stringent requirements it would impose on the state, among other reasons. But a compelling one for me is the simple matter of Illinois allowing its laws to be crafted by Californians. What sense does it make for a state in the central part of the country to allow a state thousands of miles away, one that has vastly different environmental conditions, to write laws that will affect its own citizens? This idea alone is so unAmerican that it boggles the mind.

This country was built on the idea of the various states being controlled by its own citizens making laws and rules based on the peculiar needs of their own region. Georgians take care of Georgia, New Yorkers of New York, and Illinoisans do so for Illinois. Yet, here is Illinois proposing that its citizens should be constricted by laws written in California? To allow one's rules and laws to be written by citizens of other states is a wholly unAmerican idea. That reason alone should be enough for Illinoisans to dispense with this bill.

But, that philosophical idea is nothing compared to the technical problems with this bill. The wildly stringent rules from California have been panned by nearly every auto manufacturer in the world, both domestic and foreign. Most of them have testified that the rules California enacted are technically impossible to satisfy with current technology.

And, as far as local needs are concerned, these standards will conflict with the long-time effort to encourage Illinois' ethanol industry making rules already on the books for ethanol production null and void -- and if not voided, then at least in direct conflict. In fact, of the 30 models of flex fuel vehicles available in the nation, California's stringent standards forced auto manufacturers to exclude 11 of them from the California market allowing only 19 to be sold there. If Illinois adopts the California standards, then a large portion of those flex fuel vehicles will also be excluded from the Illinois market severely limiting consumer choice not to mention severely damaging the local ethanol industry that Illinois has spent so much effort to build up. This is one example of why rules written in California are a bad fit for Illinois.

Finally, is this the economic times to institute the sort of regulations that will so hurt car dealers and auto manufacturing

On top of all that, this law is still in the midst of court actions in California, so we aren't even fully sure if the California LEV rules will stand. Yet, Illinois is surging forward to implement a law that has a dubious chance of even being legal? Why the rush? I have only scratched the surface of this debate, of course.

To learn more about the effort to stop this disastrous law from being imposed by unaccountable Californians on the people of Illinois visit :http://www.nocalevinil.com/.

In the old days, Illinois used to be called "the Sucker State" because of the ubiquitous sucker fish that populated its streams and rivers. Now, it appears that Illinoisans are suckers for a wholly different reason.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Paul Harvey is gone. Harvey was a giant in the industry of radio broadcasting but he was a singularly different sort of news reporter. In a day when the goal of every other broadcaster seems to be to dive straight to the lowest common denominator, to celebrate to low born and venal, Harvey's was always to uplift the listener and to celebrate the greatness of America.

With his easily parodied style, his was a distinctive voice. He was from a time when the sound was important, the delivery the thing. And deliver he did. His well used pause and distinctive cadence was so entirely compelling that one simply could not turn away.

But it wasn't only the style and sound that interested Harvey. It was the content.

Harvey's "The Rest of the Story" segments always, always told the story of some man or woman that struggled hard through life until they found that one thing that brought them fame, fortune or adulation. Harvey meant these stories to give us all hope. His guiding principle was that "tomorrow is always better than today."

Paul Harvey, gone at 90. He will be missed and we will wait a long, long time to see his like again... if we ever do.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

The left this week is rushing to destroy Bobby Jindal before he can even get started in national politics, something the vaunted right-wing echo chamber failed to do to Obama. Don't take their bait, and fight back, no matter who you might support for 2012 or 2016. The record shows that Bobby Jindal took action to cut bureaucratic BS during Katrina.- Patrick. 

We all saw the rocky performance that Bobby Jindal gave in his response to the president's not-the-state-of-the-union speech earlier this week. There was a lot of wincing going on during and after his performance. But, let me stress the word "performance," here. It was NOT the basic theme of the speech that was so bad. It was but how he delivered it.

Still, despite his less than show-stopping performance, a lot of second guessing on Jindal started to waft about conservative circles. The "he's not ready yet" stuff was everywhere. So, we need to remind ourselves of just what sort of stuff Governor Jindal is made of. That reminder comes in the form of his reaction and efforts during Hurricane Katrina. If you want a show-stopping performance, there you have one.

With his actions during that natural disaster and his words as a result, we can see his most basic ideals laid bare. And they are ideals we should all applaud. So, as a reminder here are some highlights of his op ed in the Wall Street Journal from September 8, 2005. Jindal began his piece with these words:

Over the past few days, America has been both moved and disturbed by television footage of Hurricane Katrina's aftermath. But for those of us in Louisiana still struggling to cope, the troubling images are of opportunistic politicians playing the blame game while there is so much real work to do.

Rather than point fingers, we should be fixing the situation on the ground. And that will include taking steps to ensure that red tape doesn't stifle the continued security and rebuilding efforts.

There have already been a number of instances in which an overly inhibitive bureaucracy prevented an appropriate response to the disaster. For example, on Wednesday of last week a company called my office. With only three hours before rising waters would make the mission impossible, they were anxious to send a rescue helicopter for their stranded employees. They wanted to know who would give them a go-ahead.

We could not identify the agency with authority. We heard that FEMA was in charge, that the FAA was in charge, and that the military was in charge. I went in person to talk with a FEMA representative and still could not get a straight answer. Finally we told the company to avoid interfering with Coast Guard missions, but to proceed on its own. Sometimes, asking for forgiveness is better than asking for permission.

True as can be. Big Government does not work. Local efforts are far more effective. And if anything speaks to Jindal's basic American ideal it is this line...

My office became so frustrated with the bureaucracy that we often turned to private companies. They responded more quickly and flexibly.

Rugged individualism and local control. Now THAT is something we conservatives should applaud.

In any case, go on over to the WSJ and read Jindal's whole piece. It is instructive to see what the man is made of. And remember, this came before he was the toast of conservatives everywhere, so he didn't have quite as much to prove then as he might now that ambitions might be a tad more extent.

Lastly, I have to express my own disappointment in those that beat the man up so for his reply to Obama. I thought we were the party of ideas? Why are we so chagrined with a less than stellar delivery when the ideas were pretty solid? Are we going to throw Jindal under the bus so soon just because he doesn't perform like Charlton Heston? I sure hope not. We are better than that, aren't we?

And here is a great video of another Louisiana legend, Sheriff Harry Lee, a self-described "yellow dog Democrat," who is a big supporter of Bobby Jindal!

This is Bobby Jindal. Please do not lose sight of this.

(Photo credit: washingtonpost.com)

And the effort to prevent the people's vote by Republican insiders jealous of their unaccountable positions rolls ever onward in Illinois, the most corrupt state in the union.

Earlier in the week I wrote about the regrettable system in Illinois that governs the selection of members of the central committee of the Illinois Republican Party, the group that runs the state party. I reported on the singular fact that the rank and file membership of the GOP cannot elect their leaders and that these committee members, the people that plan every move the party makes, are selected by back room deal making among local committeemen, ward bosses and precinct captains, etc.

The thing that galls me the most about this policy of secret deals and back room arm twisting is that not only does this system cut out any ability of the voters to chose who will lead them, but that in the most corrupt state of the union, the most corrupt party in the union -- that would be the Illinois state Democrat Party -- does allow its voters to chose the party leaders!

So, the thoroughly corrupt Democrats allow their voters to chose who will lead the party, but the Republicans don't! The Republicans stand against free and open elections.

And now the party leaders have done it again. Previously I mentioned that this week SB600, a bill that would revert the system to one of an open election instead of closed selection for party leaders, was to come up for debate in the state house. Well, that day came and went and once again these selected leaders buried the bill and refused to discuss it. Again these party bigwigs have shown their desire to prevent elections.

Now, I suppose one might understand why these particular folks might not want to stand for election by their peers. After all, they don't have the most defendable track record. Let's have a small review of some of the wonderful work they are responsible for, shall we?

The central committee members are responsible for:

• Supporting a corrupt Sec. Of State as candidate for Gov. (George Ryan), one that later ended up in prison
• Allowing a viable Senate candidate to be eliminated over a divorce (Jack Ryan)
• Picking a non-resident that has never had any connection with the state to take up that candidacy (Alan Keyes)
• Then not vigorously supporting Keyes, the very candidate they selected -- some even refusing to support him
• Giving Barack Obama the opening to win a Senate seat and thus the presidency
• Choosing a second gubernatorial candidate associated to all the worst scandals in recent GOP history and allowing four candidates to run for Gov. in the primaries that resulted in this pick
• Losing every single state wide office once held by Republicans to the Democrats

And I want to stress here that we have the Illinois GOP to thank for having a President Obama! It is they that thoroughly botched the election that sent Obama to the Senate.

Great track record guys. No WONDER you want to avoid elections.

And this is not to mention all the close financial ties that these same people have to the Democrats. We don't even HAVE room to get into the intertwined business relationships that many of these people have to high ranking Democrats. The Ill. GOP isn't called "The Combine" over their incestuous connections to Democrat Party officials for nothing.

I spoke to Senator Chris Lauzen (R-Aurora) on the phone the day after SB600 was again put off to a later time. Senator Lauzen graciously offered no blame and indulged in no grumbling. He was resigned that these back room deals would happen but expressed his desire to keep at it.

Now, let me say a few words about the man that leads the Illinois GOP -- and I stress that this is my opinion, none of this came from Senator Lauzen who couldn't have been more business-like and professional in our conversation on this subject.

Andy McKenna is the current leader of the Illinois GOP and he issued a press release to prevent the debate (one that was not sent to Republican groups that do not support McKenna, oddly enough -- he's as much for open information as he is open elections, apparently).

It begins by scolding anyone interested in electing party leaders for wanting to be "like" Democrats and attacking Senator Lauzen as having a "personal agenda." This tactic of personal destruction led by our supposed party leader against a Senator of his own party is disgusting enough, but using the slipshod "logic" that anything we enact would have to be an exact copy of Democrat corruption is merely a childish attempt to defeat a bill that would find HIM eventually dispensed with.

You want a "personal agenda" Mr. Party leader McKenna? How about that "personal agenda" that would support your desire to torpedo an election process that you KNOW would get you voted OUT of your position? This effort to silence the voice of Illinois Republicans in favor of a secret selection process smacks of CYA (cover yer But).

I would also like to point out that Andy McKenna has been jumping in front of every microphone and TV camera he can find to push the idea of a special election for Obama's Senate seat, even though our state process is to have the Gov. make the choice. So, why does McKenna want elections for Senator, but not for his position? Seems sort of odd, doesn't it?

Lastly, it should be remembered that this current system itself was a change. Several decades ago the system was changed to the back room dealer style we now have. And since that change the party has done worse and worse, gotten more unaccountable than ever to the voters, gotten more intertwined with Democrats, gotten more corrupt and lost every single state wide office to boot. For those like McKenna that fear it could get worse... well, I just don't see how it could get worse.

In any case, if we are lucky, the voice of the people will be heard if the debate on this bill is joined next week.

Here is the twisted logic of Mr. Andy McKenna in his press release:

Press Release from the Illinois Republican Party:

Important Reasons Christine Radogno and Senate Republicans Should Oppose The Lauzen Bill

1. The Lauzen Bill will change Republican Party elections to match those currently conducted by the Illinois Democratic Party. Currently, Illinois Republicans, like 45 other states, allow the grassroots of the Party to elect its leaders. Look at the make up of the Illinois Democratic Party, and you will see that it is comprised of Chicago Machine politicians and Party insiders. Illinois Democrats, led by Chairman Mike Madigan, don’t conduct open meetings, elect their leaders in secret and ARE THE SAME LEADERS who endorsed Blagojevich, drove Illinois $9 billion into debt and allowed the appointment of Roland Burris – click here and you will see: http://link.gop.com?42-1758-5145-210256-29945

2. An overwhelming majority of grassroots Republicans already defeated the Lauzen Bill at the 2008 Party Convention in Decatur. Senator Lauzen was motivated by a personal agenda and was afforded every opportunity to make his case. The Illinois Republican Party called for a vote that Senator Lauzen himself failed to attend, and the resolution was crushed:

78% Opposed Lauzen Bill - 22% Supported Lauzen Bill

Grassroots Republicans in all 102 counties across the state were given the choice of how our Party conducts elections and their choice was clear – if Republicans in the Senate choose to support the Lauzen Bill now, they undo the will of the same dedicated volunteers who elected them. It would be a dangerous precedent for our Republican Party if a single elected official like Senator Lauzen can force a legislative solution to change a process he didn’t like – particularly when Lauzen’s solution is copying the Democratic Party of Blagojevich.

3. Only four State Republican Parties conduct elections in a manner similar to the Lauzen Bill. In two of these four states, the cost of Party elections is astronomical. This is certainly not the time for Illinois Republicans, who are already outspent by Democrats, to drain valuable resources for 19 additional campaigns. Furthermore, because Illinois has open primaries and no formal Party registration, Democrats in the City of Chicago could elect Democrats to the Illinois Republican Party State Central Committee.

Why has a Democrat signed on to be the Chief-Sponsor of the Lauzen Bill in the Illinois House of Representatives? Senator Lauzen worked behind the scenes to secure a Democrat sponsor because he knew NO REPUBLICAN IN THE HOUSE would pass this bill. Understand, this action gives Mike Madigan and House Democrats the power to decide how the Republican Party conducts its elections.

4. Illinois Republicans have the greatest opportunity to win elections in a decade. Now is not the time to drain resources or focus from that effort. Republicans already overwhelming defeated the Lauzen Bill at Convention – instead of copying Rod Blagojevich’s Democratic Party, Republicans should be defeating them.

In my opinion, this party has broken down. It has become utter feckless. I don't see that this change presenting the people with the opportunity to vote in their own leaders could make anything any worse. It would be a return to how it was, not any "new" idea. And, lastly, for those that disingenuously say that the legislature should not be getting involved in party politics and saying so to defeat this effort ignores the fact that the legislature already is involved because this bill alters already existing codes, it does not create new ones.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Ben Smith of Politico reports on some interesting union-on-union hatin' this week.

HERE responds: 'Tactics of anti-union bosses'

A official in the the HERE wing of the feuding UNITE HERE union responded just now to mailings from the union's other wing casting its leaders as examples of labor corruption.

"This is an example of Bruce Raynor's take-no-prisoners tactics," the official, Pilar Weiss, told me, referring to UNITE HERE's president. "They are no different from the the mail from the most anti-union employers."

Weiss dismissed a UNITE leader's charge that HERE has a history of corruption -- such questions were "way in our past," she said, and raised questions about spending at UNITE and the Amalgamated Bank, which it controls.

"It's disappointing that people who call themselves labor leaders would resort to the tactics of anti-union bosses," she said.

One footnote on the wider ramifications of the battle: Weiss said a prominent labor operative, Steve Rosenthal, had been running the campaign, and Rosenthal confirmed in an email that he's an advisor to Raynor. Rosenthal is also a close advisor to SEIU President Andy Stern, who backs Raynor's call for splitting the union.

The last bit, the "footnote," is of special interest. Here we see again the heavy handed, take no prisoners version of SEIU President Andy Stern's brand of unionization.

Stern has been dividing and conquering unions for a few years now. His method is to undermine the locals, do away with their leadership, then glide in as the Union savior and take over the collapsing union. This is an effort to destroy as many smaller unions as possible and have them all rolled into the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) organization all under his iron-fisted leadership.

With this sneaky style of enlarging his union, Stern has become one of the most powerful union chiefs in the country. Plainly, he is the man behind the man in this fight Politico's Smith is talking of here.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

The Dontgo movement had a great gathering in downtown Chicago to protest this economy killing Obama generational debt plan.

The Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), the union friendly law currently sitting idle in Congress awaiting a Big Labor financed president to get around to addressing it, has some very interesting supporters. We've been told, of course, that we shouldn't worry about Barack Obama and his followers, that they are just as American as anyone else. That claim of red-blooded Americanness is a bit hard to reconcile, however, where it concerns the EFCA.

While taking a small uptick in numbers the last few years, union membership has been down compared to the heyday of union labor in the US. Unions backed Obama with many millions of dollars during the campaign and have been keenly interested in enacting the EFCA, a bill that will help grow union membership in the country. They expect pay back for supporting Obama and he's pledged to give it to them.

The chief aspect of this bill is the "card check" feature that will tend to eliminate the right of prospective union members from voting for or against the union in the most common process of western democracy; the secret ballot. Future workers will be forced to openly declare their choice of pro or anti union by signing a public card. This public declaration leaves every voter open to any form of intimidation and this is why unions want this bill passed. It will be all the easier to force new members to say "yes" to unionism.

But, it isn't just union thugs that are supporting the unAmerican ideals inherent in this bill. Communists and socialists are too. And by that I mean communists in the United States. (I won't call them "American communists" because it is impossible to be both at the same time)

For instance, the North Texas branch of the International Socialist Organization (ISO) is passing out fliers (see image here) in support of the EFCA.

The disgusting image of the commie Jesus I used above is from their MySpace photos page where one can also see photos from their meetings.

So, this serves as a good illustration of the sort of people that support the EFCA. If the communists are for it, how could any true American join them?

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

We all remember the drubbing that conservatives took during the campaign when they openly worried, and even directly charged, that Barack Obama was a far left radical. Pointing to the racist Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the domestic terrorist William Ayers and wife, and several others of Obama's close friends and associates conservatives sounded a clarion call to alert the country that we were about to get one of the most extremely leftist presidents ever.

Of course, the so-called rational and presumably non-partisan commentators that abound in the center left of the chattering classes scoffed at what they claimed to be the wild demagogues on the "extreme right" who then said Obama was a radical. They have for the last two years excoriated anyone that worries about how far to the left Obama is, saying that Obama is just an average Democrat that seeks to "bring us together."

Oh, but were it true that Obama was a centrist at heart. Unfortunately, with each passing week it seems that Barack Obama is looking far more the radical that conservatives charged that he was during the campaign than he is the centrist hands-across-the-aisle sort that the Democrats claim he is. One need only look at many of his appointments to see just how radical Obama is aiming to turn the U.S. government for proof of this fact.

During the campaign and as he planned his transition, Obama repeatedly turned to people whose views were far to the left of the average American's. For instance, during the campaign and for his transition team, Obama relied on Susan Power for foreign policy advice. Power has for many years advocated that the U.S. give billions to upgrade the armed forces of Hamas and other Palestinian agencies despite the fact that Hamas and the PA have never once renounced the goal of wiping Israel off the face of the Earth.

Similarly, in the field of foreign policy, Obama tapped the services of Robert Malley a man well-known for his close working ties to Hamas and a man that repeatedly met with the terrorist group's leaders. Obama also hired a woman, Sonal Shah, thought connected to a radical Hindu nationalist group in India to advise him.

In the filed of labor, Obama has sought out as his new chief of labor, one Hilda Solis. Solis has been found to have violated ethics rules by lobbying for a union friendly labor bill while she was both a member of Congress AND a member of the very unions that would benefit from the legislation. For the head of the National Labor Relations Board, Obama has picked Wilma Liebman, a woman that has strongly advocated against the rights of individuals and for collective rights; essentially a communist and virulently unAmerican concept.

Recently Obama appointed Harvard's Ashton Carter to become the Pentagon's chief weapons buyer (the undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics). However, Carter has been an outspoken critic of weapons of all stripes for years with his chief experience being in eliminating weapons, not funding and creating them. He has been an opponent of the military industrial establishment, not an ally -- nor even neutral on the matter. Industry experts are worried that his anti-weapons sentiment will make him an enemy to the very job he is supposed to be filling. In a day when we have to fear terrorism as well as one where new technologies and the advancement of weapons systems to keep up with enemies is vitally important, Obama has picked a nominee that is against everything we need to be exploring to keep this country safe. An anti-weapons advocate for our chief weapons buyer is an amazing contradiction... unless one means to eliminate our weapons systems, not to improve them, naturally.

Now comes word that the Obama administration is looking to elevate Charles Freeman to a role in America's intelligence establishment. Freeman once helped radical Islamists from Saudi Arabia to peddle an anti-western/anti-Jewish "text book" to kids in this country. Freeman, president of the Middle East Policy Council, a Saudi-funded think tank, was involved in selling the “Arab World Studies Notebook," a book that for one claimed that Jerusalem is unequivocally an Arab province. The book also claimed that the Koran "synthesizes and perfects earlier revelations."

So for our intelligence establishment, Barack Obama wants to install a man that agrees with, is funded by, and works with the Islamofascist enemies of the west? A man whose sympathies are against us. A man that has already been intimately involved with pushing Islamist ideals. THIS man is to be in one of OUR top intelligence positions?

Then there is Obama's pick as head of the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice, Dawn Johansen. Johansen, for her part, is well known as a feminist radical that has said in the past that she feels pregnancy equals slavery. Johansen was a top lawyer for the National Abortion Rights Action League, or NARAL, a radical abortion advocacy group when she made this crazy claim in a Supreme Court case she was a part of. In many writings and court cases Johansen has also made the case that all restrictions against abortion should be eliminated and government should be made to pay for abortion.

Johansen has also written against any form of the security measures against terrorists that have thus far been put into motion. She is one of those fabulists that imagines that all terrorists could safely be put into the normal U.S. court system to be tried for their actions and has stood against any efforts to preempt terrorist attacks.

She has also advocated that any past applicants to the DOJ that the Bush administration had discriminated against because of the applicant's leftist views should now get special consideration for those same views. In other words, she is hypocritically against past discrimination based on leftist personal political views and now wants the solution to be to discriminate against those that hold right leaning political views.

These Obama picks, each and every one, are radical leftists. They hold views that few Americans hold. They are in no way centrists or moderates and are not representative of the largest number of Americans. And these are the sorts of people with which Barack Obama wants to fill key position in our government.

So, tell me again that Barack is not a radical leftist. No, the truth is, Barack Obama is a radical's radical through and through.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

In the hours after President Obama's not-the-state-of-the-union address, the Networks rounded up the usual suspects to give reply to the speech. CBS, for its part, found the always smiling John McCain asking for his reaction to Obama's starry-eyed rhetoric and long list of promises.

The prosaic, yet perky, Katie Couric asked McCain if Obama "convinced him at all" with the rhetoric? McCain, after saying Obama's was "a very effective speech," seemed, though, to call the president a liar -- though certainly in the nicest way possible.

Still, McCain said, "now I would like to know how we are going to implement it."

"I don't know where Social Security was,” McCain said. “I don't know how you increase all of these programs and still cut spending to a point where you cut the deficit in half.”

McCain then addressed the earmarks issue:

"But when he says there are no earmarks - I just picked up a bill that we are going to take up tomorrow that has 9,247 earmarks in it," a combative McCain continued. "What am I supposed to believe here?"

What are you supposed to believe, indeed, Senator? What are we all supposed to believe?

The Democrats would have us believe that Obama can with one stroke of a pen push the deficit to $1.5 trillion, then slash that same deficit in half in but a few short years. The Democrats would have us believe that suddenly Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare is no factor. The Democrats would also have us believe that there are no earmarks in this bill merely because instead of adding the pork spending as addons, they've written them straight into the thing (as if that makes any difference to the wild overspending).

McCain got as close as he might to calling Barack Obama an outright liar.

Let's hope as the days move forward the drum beat of Obama lies gets louder. The American people need to be confronted with Obama's obfuscation.

(Photo credit: thesun.co.uk)

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!