Tiger Woods' Injuries Reportedly Caused by Wife, Not Car Crash

Tiger Woods was in an early morning car crash on Saturday where reportedly his wife tried to rescue him from the car by bashing a window out with a golf club.

Reports now are that she had assaulted him after a heated argument over suspicions he was cheating on her.

QUESTION:  Is this really any of our business?  Married couples already have a difficult road ahead because of cultural and societal assaults on the nuclear family.  Let’s just leave them alone, folks.

Good Riddance, Saddam; Gary Sinese Tours Baghdad Palace

Last summer, actor Gary Sinese, best known for his role as Lt. Dan in Forrest Gump, made his 4th trip to Iraq to visit the troops and build morale.  While he was there, he toured one of Saddam’s palace, which was also a place of torture and murder.

No one can argue that Iraq or the Middle East was better off with Saddam in power, and the “Saddam was a bad guy, but” excuses reflect pretty poorly on those who try to use it.

Terrorists Gaining Upper Hand Against Troops Due to Obama's "Fundamental Change" of America

In his presidential acceptance speech on November 4, 2008, Barack Obama promised to bring fundamental change the United States of America.  It didn’t take long for him to make good on that promise. 

From massive government takeovers of private industries, incurring more federal debt than all other Presidents of the United States combined, appointing dozens of unconfirmed White House “czars” to cabinet positions made up of self-professed communists and radicals, to putting national security on the back burner and forcing healthcare reform down our unwilling throats, Barack Obama is indeed fundamentally changing our country.

The U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who has a background in defending enemies of the United States, decided recently that four of the 9/11 masterminds held at Guantanamo Bay Detention Center in Cuba would be given the same Constitutional rights and legal privileges as an American citizen with a criminal trial in New York City rather than trial by a military tribunal as an enemy combatant.  This paves the way for our enemies to exploit our newfound preference for defending the rights of our enemies over the rights of our citizens.

So it is no surprise, as infuriating as it is, that when three Navy Seals captured Iraq’s most wanted terrorist, Ahmed Hashim Abed, in September, they were accused by the detainee of giving Abed a fat lip, and are being brought up on abuse charges.

Ahmed Hashim Abed is the terrorist allegedly responsible for the 2004 Fallujah murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004.  The Americans’ bodies were torched and hung from a bridge.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called a captain’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Neal Puckett, an attorney representing McCabe, told Fox News the SEALs are being charged for allegedly giving the detainee a “punch in the gut.”

“I don’t know how they’re going to bring this detainee to the United States and give us our constitutional right to confrontation in the courtroom,” Puckett said. “But again, we have terrorists getting their constitutional rights in New York City, but I suspect that they’re going to deny these SEALs their right to confrontation in a military courtroom in Virginia.”

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. “I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health.”

The lawyer suspects the detainees’ injury was self-inflicted.  If it isn’t, it could be hard to prove that the soldiers intentionally roughed up the terrorist.  But the SEALS are on the defensive.  As are all our troops.  Because of Obama’s weak stance on national defense and love for everything anti-Bush, terrorists who murder Americans are now given the benefit of the doubt while our own troops are the suspects.

Why not just zip-tie U.S. troops and turn Gitmo into a place where the soldiers are incarcerated and the detainees gaurd the cells?  That’s essentially what’s happening.

New Haven Promotes Firefighters 5 Months After Obama Supreme Court Appointee's Case Overturned

Five months after the Supreme Court overturned a reverse discrimination case against white Connecticut firefighters denied promotion because of their race, the City of New Haven, Connecticut will promote 14 of the firefighters.  It was Obama’s Supreme Court appointee Sonya Sotomayor who, as an appeals court judge, ruled against the white firefighters in favor of unqualified minority firefighters to receive promotion based on their race. 

It was an embarrassing moment for Obama and Judge Sotomayor as this case came before her as Obama’s Supreme Court judge because her previous decision was overturned by her peers.  The Court’s decision served as a rebuke to Sotomayor’s previous ruling.

Now even more embarrassing for Obama’s Supreme Court judge, the firefighters were promoted by the local fire department, a promotion she fought as an appeals court judge. 

Legislating from the bench?

The City of New Haven, Conn., says it will promote 14 firefighters who were plaintiffs in a high-profile lawsuit over racial preferences.

City officials told WTNH-TV, New Haven, Tuesday night the promotions for the firefighters in the Ricci vs. DeStefano case would be finalized as early as possible.

The Boston Globe said Wednesday the immediate promotions were ordered by a federal judge the previous day.

Ricci vs. DeStefano accused the city of reverse discrimination and became a thorny issue in the confirmation of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor. Sotomayor ruled as an appellate judge that the city was within its right to throw out the 2004 promotion test after no African-American firefighters scored high enough to win promotions to captain.

The Supreme Court this summer reversed the decision and sent the case back to U.S. District Court, which Tuesday issued a new ruling that the civil rights of the 14 plaintiffs had been violated and ordered their promotion.

Update on Friday, November 27, 2009 at 07:48AM by Amy Proctor

Why Didn’t CNN Mention Obama Pick Sotomayor in This Story?

 

 

After all, Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, is the reason this is a story in the first place.  The Supreme Court hears cases everyday and this story is news because as an appeals court judge, she voted against white firefighters who were discriminated against and not promoted because of their race in a reverse discrimination case. 

 

 

Obama Shatters Spending Record for First-Year Presidents

Happy Thanksgiving, America

The federal government spent $3.5 trillion during President Obama’s first year in office. This far exceeds the spending for any other first-year president. 

That price tag came with a $1.4 trillion deficit, nearly $1 trillion more than last year. The overall budget was about a half-trillion more than Bush’s for 2008, his final full fiscal year in office. 

That’s a big increase. But compared with other presidents’ first years in office, Obama is running circles around them. 

D-Congressman Obey Suggests War Tax to Turn Public Opinion Against Afghanistan

Democrat David Obey is trying a new tactic to lose the war in Afghanistan: suggesting a war surtax. 

He suggested the same thing with the war in Iraq, but Democrat Charlie Rangle’s motion to bring back the draft was a bit more memorable, although just as unsuccessful.  Thankfully, the American people are too smart to get sucker punched by more bad liberal ideas that bring the United States defeat and hyper-partisanship. 

(transcript)

OBEY:  ..what we’re suggesting is that, if we’re going to pay for health care, we also ought to pay for whatever we’re doing in Afghanistan if we decide to go ahead.

And what we’re suggesting is a war surtax, a graduated tax, so that we don’t devour with that war cost every other priority that we have in the economy. That surtax would start at 1 percent for anybody with taxable income. It would rise to 2 percent if you have the income of, say, a member of Congress, and then, once you hit $250,000, $300,000, it would rise some more, until the full cost of the war would be covered, so we don’t pass the cost of that war on to our kids.

Look, the president has a miserable set of choices. He didn’t start this war. He didn’t screw up our ability to win it in the first place, like the previous administration did. And now we’re stuck with the reality that we — being mired in Afghanistan. In my judgment, we don’t have a viable partner on the ground in an Afghan government that is worth anything in the fight.

No matter how good a strategy is, if you don’t have the tools to implement it on the ground, the strategy isn’t worth very much. And right now, it’s very hard to convince me that we have a reliable partner on the ground in either the Pakistani government or the Afghan government.

Two years ago, the economy had not yet collapsed. Two years ago, we didn’t have a runaway deficit, which we have now, thanks to the collapse of that economy.

We saw the progressive movement in this country back before the ’20s wiped out by World War I. We saw Harry Truman’s Fair Deal wiped out by Korea. 

We saw Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society wiped out by Vietnam. I don’t want to see the restructuring and reforming of our own economy wiped out because we get stuck in a 10-year war, a war that isn’t paid for.

What? 

Just a couple points:

1)  Americans already have a graduated tax system. What the —— are you politicians doing with our money that you need to tax us again?  And again?  And again?

2) The Constitution supports the funding of our national defense and our military, not for healthcare.

3)  President Bush didn’t start this war either, you doofus.

4)  Guess what else happened two years ago that led to the demise of the economy?  DEMOCRATS TOOK THE MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE.  Do the math!

5)  You were wrong about the surge in Iraq, too.

6)  Nationalized healthcare isn’t a “war of necessity”, but our commander in chief said Afghanistan is.  Why should we pay over a trillion dollars for something no one wants and neglect what we need?

6)  President Obama said no one earning less than $250,000 would see pay one extra red cent in taxes and that 95% of all working families would see a tax cut.

Help your president keep his promise, Mr. Obey.

Gloria Steinem: "Only 1 in 8 Women Get Breast Cancer, But 1 in 3 Need an Abortion"

Or, women need abortion coverage more than breast cancer screening.

Feminist icon of the 1970’s and abortion-Nazi Gloria Steinem on CNN’s Anderson Cooper talking about the recent recommendations by a government panel to discourage women from learning self-breast exams and getting mammograms before age 50:

(transcript)

STEINEM: … But what worries me is that I fear that, in some ways, the coverage of this, which is good, has so outweighed another huge health issue. I mean, one in eight women gets breast cancer. One in three women needs an abortion at some time in her life. 

That is a huge — a huge, huge, health issue. I mean, for years, I have been wearing a bracelet here with the name of Rosie Jimenez, who was the first person who died because they’re — of the Hyde amendment.

So, where is that coverage? And that’s a deal-breaker.

Has Gloria Steinem forgotten  the link between abortion and breast cancer?  Maybe she wants women to get both. 

PREVIOUSLY:

Chinese, Turkish Researchers Find Significant Link Between Breast Cancer and Abortion

Despite Denials, White House Behind New Mammogram/Breast Exam Guidelines

Remember last week when the  U.S. Preventive Services Task Force came out with ridiculous recommendations suggesting women stop being encouraged to perform self-breast exams and that women under 50 shouldn’t get mammograms? 

Then remember that the Obama administration and his Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius distanced themselves from the panel insisting it was an independent agency that has nothing to do with setting any kind of policy?

Well, now remind yourself how often the Obama administration lies to the America people.  Via this CNN report, correspondent Randi Kaye exposes the fact that not only the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force more than just an “independent panel”, but that they are considered the “gold standard” for determing preventative care in the U.S. 

And the panel was assembled under Sebelius’ department of Health and Human Services.

And it gets better: their recommendations are in the Senate version of the healthcare bill. 

(transcript)

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT:  On Monday last week, a so-called independent panel, the U.S. Preventive Task Force, came out with new recommendations for mammograms, suggesting women start routine mammograms at age 50, not 40, as is the standard now.

Now, one of the arguments is mammograms do more harm than good, cause more false positives and more unnecessary surgery for breast cancer. That sent women across the country reeling, wondering if they should or shouldn’t be getting a mammogram and at what age?

So, two days later, Wednesday last week, the White House jumped to clear up some of the confusion and worry and to distance itself from the recommendations of that task force.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Wednesday — quote — “The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside, independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations. They do not set federal policy, and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government.”

So, “Keeping Them Honest,” we read the Senate bill tonight. And, sure enough, that so-called outside and independent panel has its hands right in that bill. In fact, the Senate bill relies on that task force’s recommendation to outline what preventive benefits Americans should have access to.

That’s right. The same task force whose influence the White House is playing down is actually weighing in on whether or not your mammogram should be covered. Take a look right there in section 2712. It’s titled “Coverage of Preventive Health Services.”

It reads — quote — “A group health plan and a health insurance issuer shall provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost- sharing requirements for services that have in effect a priority rating of A or B in the current recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.”

Well,that task force says mammograms between ages 40 and 50 is a level C, not a priority level, not covered. And here’s something else. On the Health and Human Services Web site, the U.S. Preventive Services Task is described as the — quote — “gold standard” for clinic preventive service.

And insurance companies look to that panel for guidance on which preventive care practices they should actually cover. But now you suddenly have the administration distancing itself from this task force, which was assembled by Kathleen Sebelius’ own department, and saying, in effect: Hang on. Don’t pay any attention to those people. We’re not going to listen to their recommendations.

PREVIOUSLY: U.S. Government Suggests Rationing Preventative Care for Breast Cancer

9/11 Terrorist Defense Attorney: "I'm Proud and Honored" to Defend Them

Scott Fenstermaker, defense attorney for the four 9/11 architects to be tried in New York City, said yesterday that his clients would give “their assessment of American foreign policy” on the witness stand during their civil trial and that “their assessment is negative.” 

Tonight on Fox News’ O’Reilly Factor, Scott Fenstermaker went further, asserting that it wouldn’t be al-Qaeda propaganda spewed in the courtroom, but rather “U.S. government propaganda”.

Fenstermaker went on to reiterate that it wasn’t 3,000 people who were killed on 9/11… it was “less than that”, and wouldn’t concede that those “less than” 3,000 Americans were murdered; that would be the jury’s job.  He concluded by saying he is honored that people upset by the defense of these terrorists hate him because, he believes, that means they hate the rule of law.

O’REILLY: In the courtroom, we are going to hear al-Qaeda propaganda, correct?

FERNSTERMAKER:  I wouldn’t say that’s the case.  I would say you’re going to hear a lot of propaganda, but I wouldn’t necessarily say you’re going to hear…

O’REILLY: Well if they’re al-Qaeda, what kind of propaganda… are we going to hear Roman Catholic propaganda?

FERNSTERMAKER: You’re going to hear a lot of United States government propaganda.

The way these men have been treated is contrary to the values of the United States and I’m hear to protect the protections that they have.

Take away the visual and Fernstermaker could be any number of Obama associations; Jeremiah Wright, Rahm Emanuel, Eric Holder, Bill Ayers, or any number of his Marxist czar and cabinet appointments.

PREVIOUSLY:

Obama Admin Gives 9/11 Terrorists Constitutional Rights in NYC Civilian Trials

Graham to Holder: ‘If We Capture bin Laden, Do We Read Him His Rights and Give Him a Lawyer?’

Defense Attorney: 9/11 Terrorists Will GiveTheir "Assessment of American Foreign Policy" on the Witness Stand

Obama Admin is Slashing Enforcement of U.S. Immigration Laws

From Investors.Com:

 For illegal immigrants, the good times are back. Workplace raids have been halved, and easily fudged paperwork audits are up. Make no mistake, this is a politically driven precursor to amnesty.

Justice Department data show criminal arrests of illegals down 60% in fiscal 2009 to a mere 443 from 1,103 a year ago. Administrative arrests have fallen 68% — to 1,644 from 5,184 — while indictments are down 58% and convictions 63%.

The sharp decline in numbers in a single year is stronger than incremental demographics or economics. It signals a policy shift.

President Obama said he would change focus from nabbing illegals to punishing employers. The latter is done through I-9 paperwork audits, which are up 317% on the year. This gives the appearance of enforcement, but it also sets the stage for amnesty and a new crop of Democratic voters.

It’s “a pander to (immigrants) to win Democratic votes,” a House staffer told us. Not only are La Raza types pushing it, so is Big Labor.

Result: the gutting of one of our best tools for discouraging illegal immigration. The new approach will only encourage more.

It also coincides with increasing openness from Democrats about amnesty. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., plans to introduce legislation as early as December to provide a “path” to green cards for 12 million illegal immigrants.

Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano told the Center for American Progress recently that reform was in the air: “I know a major shift when I see one, and what I have seen makes reform far more attainable this time around.”

Here’s an insight into the pro-illegal immigration agenda coming from this administration via the New York Times:

The new border policy is one of many ways the hard-charging Ms. Napolitano has begun to refocus the objectives of her sprawling agency. Though the Homeland Security Department was established after the Sept. 11 attacks, Ms. Napolitano rarely uses the word terrorism, and she has said she does not intend to practice the “politics of fear.”

She has said her agency will devote as much attention to preparing for natural disasters as for “man-caused disasters,” her euphemistic term for terrorism. She made public her disapproval of an immigration raid of a mechanics shop in Washington State, freed the immigrants who had been detained, and gave them work permits. Her actions sent a signal that future enforcement would focus on employers who rely on illegal immigrants, rather than on the workers.