<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>Hyscience</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.hyscience.com/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2008-10-12://2</id>
    <updated>2009-11-07T12:22:56Z</updated>
    
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.21-en</generator>

<entry>
    <title>WSJ: Muslim Population in the Military Raises Difficult Issues</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/wsj_muslim_popu.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13564</id>

    <published>2009-11-07T11:46:28Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-07T12:22:56Z</updated>

    <summary>The &quot;difficult issues&quot; Yochi J. Dreazen&apos;s article addresses invites troubling questions. Dreazen writes: [...] The deadly rampage at Fort Hood is forcing Pentagon officials to confront difficult questions about the military&apos;s growing Muslim population. The military has worked hard to recruit more Muslims since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the number of Muslim troops, while still small, has been increasing. There were 3,409 Muslims in the active-duty military as of April 2008, according to Pentagon statistics. Military personnel don&apos;t have to disclose their religions, and many officials believe the actual number of Muslim soldiers may be at least 10,000 higher than the Pentagon statistics. For instance, the military &quot;Officer Record Brief&quot; of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in the...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The "difficult issues" Yochi J. Dreazen's article addresses invites troubling questions. </p>

<p>Dreazen <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125755853525335343.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLETopStories"target=_blank"">writes</a>: <blockquote>[...] The deadly rampage at Fort Hood is forcing Pentagon officials to confront difficult questions about the military's growing Muslim population.</p>

<p>The military has worked hard to recruit more Muslims since the start of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the number of Muslim troops, while still small, has been increasing. There were 3,409 Muslims in the active-duty military as of April 2008, according to Pentagon statistics.</p>

<p>Military personnel don't have to disclose their religions, and many officials believe the actual number of Muslim soldiers may be at least 10,000 higher than the Pentagon statistics. For instance, the military "Officer Record Brief" of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, the suspect in the Fort Hood shootings, said he had "no religious preference" and didn't identify him as a Muslim.</p>

<p>[...]  The push to boost Muslim representation has proven to be a double-edged sword for the military, which desperately needs the Muslim soldiers for their language skills and cultural knowledge, but also worries that a small percentage of those soldiers might harbor extremist ideologies or choose to turn their guns on their fellow soldiers.</blockquote>Why, when we are unquestionably in a war against radical Islam (<em>in spite of Obama's naivite or choosing to ignore it - or his own loyalty to Islam</em>) hasn't the military addressed the "troubling" issue of having Muslims in the military, knowing that Muslims have a propensity - essentially an obligation under Islamic law - to support fellow Muslims and the <a href="http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=81262"target=_blank"">ummah</a> (<em>... they must love and be loyal only to Muslims for the sake of Allaah</em>) before and in place of their country? Why has the military allowed the Muslim population to grow to such a high number?  And as far as "only" a "<a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/09/eight-years-later-tiny-minority-of-extremists-still-aint-tiny-support-for-jihadmartyrdom-bombings-an.html"target=_blank"">tiny number of extremists</a>" being a potential problem, how in the hell do you tell the difference between one of those "extremists" and one that is not?</p>

<p>Related: <a href="http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/10/godfathers-of-ummah.html"target=_blank"">The Godfathers of the Ummah</a> </p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Labor report: Unemployment Edges Toward 10 Percent (Updated - 10.2%)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/labor_report_un.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13563</id>

    <published>2009-11-06T13:36:23Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-07T11:45:25Z</updated>

    <summary>The government releasew its monthly employment report today and the AP reports that the nation&apos;s economy probably lost a net total of 175,000 jobs in October, pushing the unemployment rate to 9.9 percent. Ah, the wonders of Obanomics and Hopenchange. But puhleese, don&apos;t question Dear Leader&apos;s competency. Update: Fox News just reported that unemployment actually jumped to 10.2%. We can all now anxiously wait Team Obambi&apos;s spin on this. Related: Obama in Feb.: Without Stimulus Bill, &apos;Unemployment will approach double digits.&apos; Destroying More Jobs Cannot Wait Until Monday...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The government releasew its monthly employment report today and the <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/06/unemployment-edges-percent-labor-report/?test=latestnews"target=_blank"">AP reports</a> that the nation's economy probably lost a net total of 175,000 jobs in October, pushing the unemployment rate to 9.9 percent.</p>

<p>Ah, the wonders of <a href="http://nocompromisemedia.com/2009/07/14/the-wonders-of-obanomics/"target=_blank"">Obanomics</a> and Hopenchange. But puhleese, don't question <em>Dear Leader's</em> <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obamas-competence-gap/"target=_blank"">competency</a>.</p>

<p>Update: Fox News just reported that unemployment actually jumped to 10.2%. We can all now anxiously wait Team Obambi's spin on this. </p>

<p>Related: <br />
<a href="http://spectator.org/blog/2009/11/06/obama-in-february-without-stim"target=_blank"">Obama in Feb.: Without Stimulus Bill, 'Unemployment will approach double digits.' </a> <br />
<a href="http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2009/11/destroying-more-jobs-cannot-wait-until.html"target=_blank"">Destroying More Jobs Cannot Wait Until Monday</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>WND: Islamic states pushing for &apos;global blasphemy law&apos;</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/wnd_islamic_sta.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13562</id>

    <published>2009-11-06T12:58:24Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-06T13:34:28Z</updated>

    <summary>WTF! WND reports that a resolution pending in the United Nations in one form or another since 1999 is being pushed again by the Islamic nations that originally proposed the plan they called &quot;Defamation of Islam,&quot; which would ban criticism of the beliefs of Muhammad worldwide. The resolution goes against virtually everything the UN supposedly stands for, and if successfully passed, would undermine the religious liberty and personal safety of Christians and members of other faiths.&quot; One could easily believe that, golly gee, there seems to be some kind of an agenda behind this resolution. So why is it that Islam&apos;s &quot;prophet&quot; is off limits to criticism and ridicule, but to the MSM and the rest of the PC crowd, it&apos;s open season all other...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Understanding Islam" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>WTF! </p>

<p>WND <a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114300"target=_blank"">reports</a> that a resolution pending in the United Nations in one form or another since 1999 is being pushed again by the Islamic nations that originally proposed the plan they called "Defamation of Islam," which would ban criticism of the beliefs of Muhammad worldwide. The resolution goes against virtually everything the UN supposedly stands for, and if successfully passed, would undermine the religious liberty and personal safety of Christians and members of other faiths." </p>

<p>One could easily believe that, golly gee,  there seems to be some kind of an <a href="http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/MosheSharon40214%20.htm"target=_blank"">agenda behind this resolution.</a></p>

<p>So why is it that Islam's "prophet" is off limits to criticism and ridicule, but to the MSM and the rest of the PC crowd, it's open season all other faiths. And why does the Left continue to make excuses for the violence of Islam's followers yet continues to attack Christianity!</p>

<p>Related:<br />
<a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/11/disaster-flick-filmmaker-decides-to-destroy-christ-statue-rather-than-mecca-in-new-film-for-fear-of.html"target=_blank"">Disaster flick filmmaker decides to destroy Christ statue rather than Mecca in new film, for fear of drawing death threats</a><br />
<a href="http://www.debbieschlussel.com/5174/hollywood-does-it-again-angels-demons-flick-changes-muslim-villain-to-danish-villain/"target=_blank"">Hollywood Does It Again: "Angels & Demons" Flick Changes Muslim Villain to "Danish" Villain</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Ft. Hood Jihadi Participated in Homeland Security Disaster Preparation</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/ft_hood_jihadi.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13561</id>

    <published>2009-11-06T11:18:49Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-06T13:56:03Z</updated>

    <summary>Do not be persuaded otherwise by the forces of political correctness - make no mistake assuming the contrary, Naqib Nidal Hassan is indeed a jihadi, and he&apos;s not unique. Military jihadists fill &quot;every branch&quot; of our military. As Robert Spencer points out at FrontPageMag today, the effect of ignoring or downplaying the role that Islamic beliefs and assumptions may have played in his murders only ensures that - once again - nothing will be done to prevent the eventual advent of the next Nidal Hasan. It turns out that Nidal Hasan, the Ft. Hood jihadi major who killed 12 people and wounded 31 yesterday, was listed as a participant in the Homeland Security Policy Institute&apos;s presidential transition task force between April 2008 and January 2009...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><em>Do not be persuaded otherwise by the forces of political correctness - make no mistake assuming the contrary, Naqib Nidal Hassan is indeed a jihadi, and he's not unique. <a href="http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=115218"target=_blank"">Military jihadists fill "every branch"</a> of our military. As Robert Spencer <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2009/11/06/jihad-at-fort-hood-by-robert-spencer/"target=_blank"">points out</a> at <em>FrontPageMag</em> today, the effect of ignoring or downplaying the role that Islamic beliefs and assumptions may have played in his murders only ensures that - once again - nothing will be done to prevent the eventual advent of the next Nidal Hasan. </em></p>

<p><strong>It turns out that Nidal Hasan</strong>, the Ft. Hood jihadi major who killed 12 people and wounded 31 yesterday, was listed as <a href="http://gawker.com/5398253/nidal-hasan-ft-hood-shooter-participated-in-homeland-security-disaster-preparation"target=_blank"">a participant</a> in the Homeland Security Policy Institute's presidential transition task force between April 2008 and January 2009 when Barack Obama was inaugurated</p>

<p>Knowing that Muslim officers like Hasan serve in the U.S. military and participate in a presidential transition task force involving our homeland security, are you feeling safe now? Would you feel any safer knowing that Barack Obama appointed two devout Muslims to posts inside Homeland Security and one of them was <a href="http://foro.univision.com/univision/board/message?board.id=barackobama&message.id=74799"target=_blank"">instrumental in taking down the LA Police Department's plan</a> to monitor it's Muslim community? Are you feeling safer knowing that Barack Obama has said that his administration needs more Muslims, and the the issue was encouraged by Muslim U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn (see <a href="http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=2367"target=_blank"">Keith Ellison, CAIR, and Hamas</a>) and the Obama administration got the names from the <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/03/obama-wants-more-muslims-in-his-administration-and-to-work-closely-with-muslim-community-in-us.html"target=_blank"">Congressional Muslim Staffers Association</a>.</p>

<p>And let's recall that Hasan's not the first Muslim "with issues" who has served in the US military. Remember <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan_Akbar_case"target=_blank"">Sgt Asan Akbar</a> and those US soldiers he callously murdered? And let's think about how Hasan's murderous rampage closely resembles one that five Muslim men in New Jersey <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18549005/"target=_blank"">tried to carry out at Fort Dix</a> in New Jersey in 2007, when they plotted to enter the U.S. Army base and murder as many soldiers as they could. And let's not forget the Beltway sniper John Mohammad - another Muslim with "had issues."</p>

<p>In other words, there's sufficient reason to be leery of "peaceful, America-loving," Muslims in America, as well as their true agenda - especially when placed of positions of responsibility or that put them in a position to compromise national security (<em>remember, we are at war with radical Islam - regardless of how team Obambi tries to reframe it</em>). </p>

<p>This brings us to a take-home question <a href="http://atangledweb.squarespace.com/httpatangledwebsquarespace/islamic-jihad-at-the-heart-of-the-us-military.html"target=_blank"">proposed</a> by David Vance over at <em>The Tangled Web</em>:<blockquote>    Is it safe to allow Muslims to serve in our military at a time when we are at war with militant Islam?</blockquote>Related: <br />
<a href="http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/11/allen-west-on-fort-hood-massacre.html"target=_blank"">Allen West on the Fort Hood massacre</a><br />
<a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/10/15/muslim-mafia-exposed/"target=_blank"">Muslim Mafia Exposed</a><br />
<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/house-republicans-ask-inquiry-muslim-group-cair-security-threat/"target=_blank"">House Republicans Ask for Inquiry Into Whether Muslim Group CAIR Is 'Security Threat'</a><br />
<a href="http://muslimmedianetwork.com/mmn/?p=3241"target=_blank"">Congressional Muslim Staffers Association (CMSA) Requesting Resumes for 111th Congress</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Terrorist Attack at Fort Hood? (Updated - shooter not a Baptist)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/attack_at_fort.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13560</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T21:07:15Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-06T03:40:31Z</updated>

    <summary>5:28 PM Update: On MSNBC just now - one shooter identified as 29 or 40 year-old Major whose name is Maliq Nadal Hasan (sp). It&apos;s a sure bet he&apos;s not a Baptist, and it&apos;s looking more like it has an &quot;ideological&quot; basis. We&apos;ll have a better idea when we learn the names of the two soldiers in custody. 5:41 PM update - Ace says a local radio reporter just said the major is a MUSLIM convert. But with an Arabic-sounding name it seems that the major was either born a Muslim or changed his name later when he converted (turns out he is a born Muslim and is still alive and in stable condition). 9:46 PM update: A source tells NPR&apos;s Joseph Shapiro that Hasan...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><em>5:28 PM Update: On MSNBC just now - one shooter identified as 29 or 40 year-old Major whose name is Maliq Nadal Hasan (sp). It's a sure bet he's not a Baptist, and it's looking more like it has an "ideological" basis. We'll have a better idea when we learn the names of the two soldiers in custody. </em></p>

<p><em>5:41 PM update - <a href="http://minx.cc/?post=294442"target=_blank"">Ace</a> says a local radio reporter just said the major is a MUSLIM  convert. But with an Arabic-sounding name it seems that the major was either born a Muslim or changed his name later when he converted (turns out he is a born Muslim and is still <a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/11/the-jihadi-who-attacked-america-malik-nadal-hasan-is-alive.html"target=_blank"">alive and in stable condition</a>).</em></p>

<p>9:46 PM update: A <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120138496"target=_blank"">source tells NPR's Joseph Shapiro</a> that Hasan was put on probation early in his postgraduate work at the Uniformed Service University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. He was disciplined for proselytizing about his Muslim faith with patients and colleagues, according to the source, who worked with him at the time. Also, it it turns out that Hasan had made <a href="http://www.scribd.com/NidalHasan"target=_blank"">at least one web positing</a> expressing <a href="http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/US_Fort_Hood_Shooting_Suspect.html"target=_blank"">admiration for sucide bombers</a>: <blockquote>One of the Web postings that authorities reviewed is a blog that equates suicide bombers with a soldier throwing himself on a grenade to save the lives of his comrades.</p>

<p>"To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause," said the Internet posting. "Scholars have paralled (sic) this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers."</blockquote>Fox News spoke with Col. Terry Lee (ret) who worked with Major Hasan at Ft. Hood. Lee says Hasan was critical of US policy and was critical about Muslims being killed by Americans and that Muslims be defending Muslims (<em>H/t <a href="http://minx.cc/?post=294447"target=_blank"">Ace</a> - who reminds those who say Hasan has some sort of PTSD, he has never deployed to a war zone</em>):<br/><br/></p>

<center>
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8EA1v2r8sHc&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8EA1v2r8sHc&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
</center><br/>

<p>There is one eye-witness report of Hasan <a href="http://galvestondailynews.com/story.lasso?ewcd=18503e97f397c039"target=_blank"">yelling in Arabic during the shooting</a>:</p>

<blockquote>    James Hunt, 27, serving with the 510th Combat Engineers, was with his platoon at the base's Soldier Readiness Center where soldiers who are about to be deployed undergo medical screening. He is scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan in January.

<p>    But because James had broken his foot several weeks ago, he was sent outside and told to get some extra paperwork that would clear him for deployment. James was waiting in the parking lot of the center when the shooting started, his father said.</p>

<p>    "Everybody started running and shouting, and he saw the wounded come out," Tom Hunt said. "He didn't hear the shooting, but he said it was 'a bloody mess.'"</p>

<p>    Hunt said his son told him he loaded up many of the wounded and drove them to the hospital. The wounded relayed what they saw inside when the shooting happened.</p>

<p>    "They were telling him that one guy was shouting something in Arabic while he was shooting," Tom Hunt said. "He couldn't say much more than that."</blockquote><u>Original post</u>: Just heard on Fox that there are as many as 30 wounded, 7 confirmed dead, base and local schools are on lockdown. Not wanting to sound like an alarmist, but with 1 shooter it could be a disgruntled or disturbed soldier, 2 shooters makes it at the least a conspiracy to commit murder, but 3 or more shooters makes it, at least in my mind, a terrorist attack. The only question that remains then is the why and if the attackers are civilian or military - i.e. Islamic extremists or hard-line anti-government militia.</p>

<p>Via NBC: <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33678801/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/"target=_blank"">7 dead, 20 injured in Fort Hood shooting</a>.<blockquote>At least seven people were killed and 20 wounded in a mass shooting Thursday at Fort Hood, Texas, one of the largest military complexes in the world, NBC News and affiliate KCEN reported.</p>

<p>Two suspects were captured and four swat officers were wounded, NBC News and KCEN, based in Waco, Texas, reported. The station had earlier said that one of the shooters had been holed up in a building on the base and had opened fire on SWAT team members. KCEN quoted a source as saying the shooter had a high-powered rifle.</p>

<p>KCEN reported that a policeman was among those shot. The shootings took place in two locations on the base -- at the  Soldiers Readiness Processing Center and Howze Theater, according to a military spokesman. </blockquote>More to come, but we shouldn't be surprised to find out that this is terrorism-related. </p>

<p>Update: Fox is reporting that 12 are now dead and 31 confirmed wounded.</p>

<p>Update: <a href="http://ace.mu.nu/archives/294439.php"target=_blank"">Ace</a> has it that MSNBC is saying that the captured man <strong>is an Army major "with an <u>Arabic sounding name</u>".</strong></p>

<p>Update: Military spokesman confirms that the shooters were U.S, soldiers. </p>

<p>Pure speculation: Could they be "al-Qaeda moles"? At least one commenter on Fox posited the possibility. And just now, an FBI profiler said on MSNBC that he had never heard of multiple PTSD cases getting together for such an attack and says the profile of the attack points more to "political or religious" reasons." </p>

<p>Related: <br />
<a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2009/11/05/cbs-nbc-fail-id-hasan-muslim-abcs-raddatz-relays-i-wish-his-name-was-sm"target=_blank"">CBS & NBC Fail to ID Hasan as Muslim; ABC's Raddatz Relays: 'I Wish His Name was Smith'</a><br />
<a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/chavez/156211"target=_blank"">Obama's Pet-Goat Moment</a><br />
<a href="http://rsmccain.blogspot.com/2009/11/another-belgian-american-goes-berserk.html"target=_blank"">Another Belgium-American goes beserk</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Obama Lied: Pelosi&apos;s Government-Run Health Plan Will Require a Monthly Abortion Premium (Updated)</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/obama_lied_pelo.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13559</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T17:00:04Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-06T03:28:34Z</updated>

    <summary>On line 17, p. 110, section 222 under &quot;Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed&quot; the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority to determine when abortion is allowed under the government-run plan. The Speaker&apos;s plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions. Incredibly, as though it&apos;s some kind of game he&apos;s playing, Barack Obama recently told Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.) in a telephone conversation that when he said in his Sept. 9 speech to a joint session of Congress that &quot;under our plan no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions&quot; he was not talking about the actual bill drafted in the House but about the president&apos;s own health care plan - which has...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>On line 17, p. 110, section 222 under "Abortions for which Public Funding is Allowed" the Health and Human Services Secretary is given the authority <a href="http://republicanleader.house.gov/blog/?p=666"target=_blank"">to determine when abortion is allowed</a> under the government-run plan.  The Speaker's plan also requires that at least one insurance plan offered in the Exchange covers abortions.</p>

<p>Incredibly, as though it's some kind of game he's playing, Barack Obama recently <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/56109"target=_blank"">told Rep. Bart Stupak (D.-Mich.)</a> in a telephone conversation that when he said in his Sept. 9 speech to a joint session of Congress that "under our plan no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions" he was not talking about the actual bill drafted in the House but about the president's own health care plan - <strong>which has never been written</strong>.</p>

<p>In other words, Barack Obama is a liar, and knew he was lying when he said in his Sept 9 speech that no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.</p>

<p>Update: <a href="http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2009/11/05/down-to-the-wire-on-healthcare-abortion-language.aspx"target=_blank"">Down to the Wire on Healthcare Abortion Language</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Laughable claim: $1,000 &quot;saved&quot; or created 50 jobs</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/laughable_claim.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13558</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T15:47:35Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-05T16:21:20Z</updated>

    <summary>50 jobs &quot;saved or created&quot; when $1,047 in stimulus money bought a rider lawn mower from the Toro Company to cut the grass at the Fayetteville National Cemetery in Arkansas? Laughable? How about the $5 billion to weatherize homes having yielded only a little over 5,000 jobs so far? Laughable? How about the Kentucky shoe store that reported it had created nine jobs with an $890 order for work boots? Laughable? And how about a $7,960 contract for a &quot;Basketball System Replacement&quot; in Ohio claiming three jobs? Laughable? Claims like these make The New York Times report that &quot;Reports Show Conflicting Number of Jobs Attributed to Stimulus Money&quot; seem like an understatement, at the very least. As Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who served as director of the...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>50 jobs "saved or created" when $1,047 in stimulus money bought a rider lawn mower from the Toro Company to cut the grass at the Fayetteville National Cemetery in Arkansas? Laughable? </p>

<p>How about the $5 billion to weatherize homes having yielded only a little over 5,000 jobs so far? Laughable?</p>

<p>How about the Kentucky shoe store that reported it had created nine jobs with an $890 order for work boots? Laughable?  </p>

<p>And how about a $7,960 contract for a "Basketball System Replacement" in Ohio claiming three jobs? Laughable? </p>

<p>Claims like these make The New York Times report that "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/us/05stimulus.html?_r=1"target=_blank"">Reports Show Conflicting Number of Jobs Attributed to Stimulus Money</a>" seem like an understatement, at the very least. As Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who served as director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) from 2003 through 2005 is a bit more direct, says "The Obama Administration's claims of fiscal responsibility are both hypocritical .... [a]nd laughable," and that <a href="http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=55498"target=_blank"">doing nothing would have been better</a>.</p>

<p>Yes, Obama's job claims are indeed laughable. As <em>IBD</em> notes <a href="http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=510984"target=_blank"">don't be fooled</a>. No jobs are being generated by the stimulus, but a lot are being lost - along with the wealth of an entire generation.</p>

<p>Related: <a href="http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/10/laughable-defense-of-stimulus.html"target=_blank"">A Laughable Defense of the Stimulus</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Our Motivational speaker and Community organizer - in - Chief</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/our_motivationa.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13557</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T11:57:50Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-05T12:11:59Z</updated>

    <summary>Unfortunately for America, that&apos;s &quot;obviously&quot; what we&apos;ve got in the White House. And as R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr points out in his piece titled &quot;Obama, Obviously,&quot; that&apos;s not the only thing that&apos;s obvious about this president: As I say, it was all so obvious. No president in modern times has come to power with less political experience and less managerial experience. On the other hand, no president has come to power with a clearer record of political extremism. Senator Barack Obama had the most left-wing voting record in the Senate, brief as his record was. Back in Illinois he had a record of associations with extremists that would have sunk any other presidential candidate. Think of his friendship with Bill Ayers, a co-founder of the...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately for America, that's "obviously" what we've got in the White House.  And as R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr points out in his piece titled "Obama, Obviously," that's not the only thing that's <a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2009/11/05/obama-obviously"target=_blank"">obvious about this president</a>: <blockquote>As I say, it was all so obvious. No president in modern times has come to power with less political experience and less managerial experience. On the other hand, no president has come to power with a clearer record of political extremism. Senator Barack Obama had the most left-wing voting record in the Senate, brief as his record was. Back in Illinois he had a record of associations with extremists that would have sunk any other presidential candidate. Think of his friendship with Bill Ayers, a co-founder of the Weather Underground that actually bombed public buildings in the 1960s. Think of Obama's attendance week after week at religious services where the Rev. Jeremiah Wright thundered forth with diatribes lilting with such lines as "God damn America." The radical direction of the Obama presidency was foreordained.</blockquote></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>ABC Reports Iran Caught Sending Record Arms Shipment to Hezbollah</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/abc_reports_ira.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13556</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T11:32:25Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-05T11:53:43Z</updated>

    <summary>We have to give members of the mainstream media credit when and where credit is due because they actually report the true facts of a story. Unlike the New York Times, which completely missed the Iranian connection, ABC was unique among it&apos;s sister network evening newscasts to report that the ship seized by the Israeli navy was loaded with tons of weapons bound for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon and that the origin of those weapons was Iran. And ABC even went so far as to give credibility to the conservative view that Iran should not be trusted in negotiations over its nuclear program. Via NewsBusters:Uniquely among Wednesday&apos;s broadcast network evening newscasts, ABC&apos;s World News with Charles Gibson informed viewers that the Israeli navy earlier in...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>We have to give members of the mainstream media credit when and where credit is due because they actually report the true facts of a story. Unlike the <em>New York Times</em>, which completely <a href="http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2009/11/ny-times-misses-iranian-connection.html"target=_blank"">missed the Iranian connection</a>, ABC was unique among it's sister network evening newscasts to report that the ship seized by the Israeli navy was loaded with tons of weapons bound for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon and that <strong>the origin of those weapons was Iran</strong>. And ABC even went so far as to give credibility to the conservative view that Iran should not be trusted in negotiations over its nuclear program.</p>

<p>Via NewsBusters:<blockquote>Uniquely among Wednesday's broadcast network evening newscasts, ABC's World News with Charles Gibson informed viewers that the Israeli navy earlier in the day intercepted a record quantity of weapons supplied by Iran and destined for Hezbollah, in violation of a United Nations resolution forbidding the arming of the Lebanon-based terrorist group. Host Gibson set up the report: "Israeli navy commandos today seized a ship off the coast of Cyprus. Israel's defense ministry says it was loaded with tons of weapons bound for Hezbollah militants in Lebanon. It is the largest cache of weapons ever interdicted by the Israelis, who say the arms came from one source: Iran."</p>

<p>Correspondent Simon McGregor-Wood opened his report by relaying that the quantity of weapons seized was enough to "keep the Islamic radicals of Hezbollah fighting for a month." And as he concluded the report, he also gave credibility to the conservative view that Iran should not be trusted in negotiations over its nuclear program: "Today's interception won't substantially reduce Hezbollah's military power, but it strengthens Israel's warning to those trying to negotiate with Iran - including the U.S. - it can't be trusted." (<a href="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2009/11/05/abc-iran-caught-sending-record-arms-shipment-hezbollah"target=_blank"">More</a>) </blockquote>As for the details of the evidence that the weapons were of Iranian origin, that has been <a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2010197117_apmlisraelarmsboat.html"target=_blank"">provided by the AP</a>.</p>

<p>So although Charlie completely <a href="http://www.examiner.com/x-16813-Legal-News-Examiner~y2009m9d15-Charles-Gibson-ACORN-and-why-mainstream-media-does-not-cover-the-ACORN-story"target=_blank"">missed (ignored?) the ACORN story</a>, he deserves some credit for getting this one right.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>True costs of the health-care bills: &apos;Prescriptions for Disaster&apos;</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/true_costs_of_t.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13555</id>

    <published>2009-11-05T11:01:31Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-05T11:22:28Z</updated>

    <summary>Americans should not be fooled by those CBO reports on the cost of the House and Senate health-care bills. As Benjamin Sasse and Jeffrey Anderson note in their article at the NY Post today, we need to get past the misleading accounting games. Each bill is routinely &quot;scored&quot; for its 10-year costs from 2010-19. Yet this includes several years when the spending wouldn&apos;t yet have kicked in. According to the Congressional Budget Office, fully 99.9 percent of the Pelosi bill&apos;s costs would hit from 2013 onward. Similarly, 98.3 percent of Reid&apos;s spending would come after 2014:[...] If you start the tally when the bills&apos; spending would actually start (in 2013 for the House bill and 2014 for the Senate bill), then the bills&apos; real 10-year...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Americans should not be fooled by those CBO reports on the cost of the House and Senate health-care bills. As Benjamin Sasse and Jeffrey Anderson note in their <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/prescriptions_for_disaster_lrgi3GBjbGlIZFrM8hHXJO"target=_blank"">article</a> at the NY Post today, we need to get past the misleading accounting games. Each bill is routinely "scored" for its 10-year costs from 2010-19. Yet this includes several years when the spending wouldn't yet have kicked in. According to the Congressional Budget Office, fully 99.9 percent of the Pelosi bill's costs would hit from 2013 onward. Similarly, 98.3 percent of Reid's spending would come after 2014:<blockquote>[...]  If you start the tally when the bills' spending would actually start (in 2013 for the House bill and 2014 for the Senate bill), then the bills' real 10-year costs become clear -- and are remarkably similar.</p>

<p>The CBO reports that, in their true first 10 years, the House bill would cost $1.8 trillion, and the Senate bill would cost $1.7 trillion. Pelosi would raise Americans' taxes by $1.1 trillion over that period, while Reid would hike them by $1 trillion.</p>

<p>And the House bill would siphon about $800 billion from Medicare to spend it elsewhere, while the Senate bill would suck out about $900 billion.</p>

<p>So the financial bottom lines are almost the same.</p>

<p> And if we discount the bills' claims to divert hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare (which is already on the edge of insolvency), the CBO says the House bill would raise our national debt by about $650 billion in its real first decade, while the Senate bill would up it by $740 billion.</p>

<p>So, the bills would either sock older Americans by taking huge sums of money from Medicare -- or hit future generations with huge tax hikes to cover the shortfall.</p>

<p>Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/prescriptions_for_disaster_lrgi3GBjbGlIZFrM8hHXJO#ixzz0VyzK7AQq<br />
</blockquote>Read more <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/prescriptions_for_disaster_lrgi3GBjbGlIZFrM8hHXJO"target=_blank"">here</a>.</p>

<p>Related video: Pelosi's health care bill hurt young doctors and bring rationed care:<br/></p>

<center>
<embed type='application/x-shockwave-flash' src='http://foxnews1.a.mms.mavenapps.net/mms/rt/1/site/foxnews1-foxnews-pub01-live/current/largeplayer011008/fncLargePlayer/client/embedded/embedded.swf' id='mediumFlashEmbedded' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' bgcolor='#000000' allowScriptAccess='always' allowFullScreen='true' quality='high' name='FOX News' play='false' scale='noscale' menu='false' salign='LT' scriptAccess='always' wmode='false' height='275' width='305' flashvars='playerId=011008&playerTemplateId=fncLargePlayer&categoryTitle=undefined&referralObject=11156595' />
</center>

<p>Related article: <a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/how_reform_leads_to_more_uninsured_izkmLRtL7KBbrI4YA6bTpN"target=_blank"">How 'reform' leads to more uninsured</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>&quot;Greenism&quot; a new religion?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/greenism_a_new.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13554</id>

    <published>2009-11-04T19:10:39Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-04T19:32:37Z</updated>

    <summary>It appears that &quot;Greenism&quot; is now officially a religion of believers in man-made climate change, at least in the nutty opinion of a landmark decision in the UK:[...] &quot;a belief in man-made climate change ... is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief&quot; akin to religion. This judgment means a company must not discriminate against someone because of their deeply-held environmental convictions. So no more jokes about the office hippy at the sustainable water-cooler then.As nutty as this sounds, Michael Gilchrist noted back in March 2008 that nowhere today is the human race&apos;s tendency to follow fashion, regardless of facts or social and economic realities, more evident than in the remarkable manner in which the &quot;truth&quot; of man-made global warming is being embraced...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Global Warming" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="International News" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline;"><img alt="gore pray.jpg" src="http://www.hyscience.com/gore%20pray.jpg" width="180" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin: 0 0 20px 20px;" /></span>It appears that "Greenism" is now officially a religion of believers in man-made climate change, at least in the nutty opinion of <a href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/rowenamason/100001719/spectre-of-greenism-in-the-uk-workplace-is-a-backward-step-for-climate-change/"target=_blank"">a landmark decision in the UK</a>:<blockquote>[...] "a belief in man-made climate change ... is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief" akin to religion. This judgment means a company must not discriminate against someone because of their deeply-held environmental convictions. So no more jokes about the office hippy at the sustainable water-cooler then.</blockquote>As nutty as this sounds, Michael Gilchrist noted back in March 2008 that nowhere today is the human race's tendency to follow fashion, regardless of facts or social and economic realities, more evident than in the remarkable manner in which the "truth" of man-made global warming is being embraced with an almost religious fervour by politicians, journalists and (<em>even</em>) some Christian leaders. In his <a href="http://www.ad2000.com.au/articles/2008/mar2008p2_2738.html"target=_blank"">short piece</a> at AD2000 he cautioned that it is one thing to be sensitive to sensible measures to reduce or eliminate local air and water pollution, protect endangered species or to look for alternative forms of energy, but we should be careful to keep these separate from any Green "religion." Clearly, the UK court failed to be able to discern the difference.</p>

<p>So what the hell will the nutty European socialists come up with next?</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>European court of human rights rules against crucifixes in Italian classrooms</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/european_court.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13553</id>

    <published>2009-11-04T18:38:53Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-04T18:54:24Z</updated>

    <summary>The Guardian reports that the European court of human rights has ruled that crucifixes that hang in classrooms &quot;violate religious and educational freedoms&quot;:[...] There was uproar in Italy today over a ruling by the European court of human rights that the crucifixes that hang in most Italian classrooms are a violation of religious and educational freedoms. The seven judges, whose decision could prompt a Europe-wide review of the use of religious symbols on public premises, said state schools had to &quot;observe confessional neutrality&quot;. Except on the far left, the ruling met with condemnation among Italian politicians and was denounced by the Vatican. Silvio Berlusconi&apos;s education minister, Maria Stella Gelmini, said: &quot;No one, not even some ideologically motivated European court, will succeed in rubbing out our...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><em>The Guardian</em> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/03/italy-classroom-crucifixes-human-rights"target=_blank"">reports</a> that the European court of human rights has ruled that crucifixes that hang in classrooms "violate religious and educational freedoms":<blockquote>[...]  There was uproar in Italy today over a ruling by the European court of human rights that the crucifixes that hang in most Italian classrooms are a violation of religious and educational freedoms.</p>

<p>The seven judges, whose decision could prompt a Europe-wide review of the use of religious symbols on public premises, said state schools had to "observe confessional neutrality".</p>

<p>Except on the far left, the ruling met with condemnation among Italian politicians and was denounced by the Vatican. Silvio Berlusconi's education minister, Maria Stella Gelmini, said: "No one, not even some ideologically motivated European court, will succeed in rubbing out our identity."</p>

<p>A Vatican spokesman, Federico Lombardi, said the crucifix was a fundamental sign of the importance of religious values in Italian history and culture, and was a symbol of unity and welcoming for all of humanity, not one of exclusion.</p>

<p>A European court had no right intervening in such a profoundly Italian matter, he said, adding: "It seems as if the court wanted to ignore the role of Christianity in forming Europe's identity, which was and remains essential."</p>

<p>The ruling marked the end of an eight-year battle by a Finnish-born mother, Soile Lautsi. She took her cause to court after failing to get crucifixes removed from the school at which her two children were being taught at a town in north-east Italy.</p>

<p>[...]  <strong>One government minister, Roberto Calderoli, of the Northern League, said yesterday: "The European court has trodden on our rights, our culture, our history, our traditions and our values.</strong>"</blockquote>Read it <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/03/italy-classroom-crucifixes-human-rights"target=_blank"">all ...</a></p>

<p>Having your nation's "rights, culture,  history, traditions and values" trodden upon is the result of Italy forfeiting it's sovereignty to the European union, <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/25/obamas-new-world-order/"target=_blank"">just as will be the case for America</a> when Barack Obama completes his pursuit down a path toward establishing a one-world government.  </p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>11 more disturbing videos found of school children performing praises to Obama</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/11_more_disturb.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13552</id>

    <published>2009-11-04T18:06:34Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-04T19:02:54Z</updated>

    <summary>Big Hollywood has found 11 more disturbing videos of young school children singing and speaking praises to President Obama, and this is in addition to those they&apos;ve posted previously. And as it so aptly notes, what previously seemed like an aberration now appears to be a troubling pattern - more like an &quot;epidemic.&quot; Here&apos;s a sample. Remember, this is just one of the 11:.GOTHAM AVENUE SCHOOL -- 2-7-09 Here&apos;s the likely website for the school. Per the video&apos;s title, these are fifth graders. Video Title: &quot;Ending - Part II of the 5th Grade Performance&quot; Video Note: Special thanks to Mr. Lewis. Partial Transcript: We believe in Barack Obama He loves you and he loves your mama We believe in Barack Obama, yeah With all the...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Abdul</name>
        
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p><em>Big Hollywood</em> has found <a href="http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/11/04/elementary-epidemic-11-uncovered-videos-show-school-children-performing-praises-to-obama/"target=_blank"">11 more disturbing videos</a> of young school children singing and speaking praises to President Obama, and this is in addition to those they've posted previously. And as it so aptly notes, what previously seemed like an aberration now appears to be a troubling pattern - more like an "epidemic." </p>

<p>Here's a sample. Remember, this is just one of the 11:.<blockquote>GOTHAM AVENUE SCHOOL -- 2-7-09</p>

<p>Here's <a href="http://www.elmontschools.org/schools/gotham/"target=_blank"">the likely website</a> for the school. Per the video's title, these are fifth graders.</p>

<p>Video Title: "Ending - Part II of the 5th Grade Performance"</p>

<p>Video Note: Special thanks to Mr. Lewis.</blockquote><center><br />
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DeKR0eU2SrM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DeKR0eU2SrM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br />
</center><blockquote>Partial Transcript:</p>

<p>We believe in Barack Obama<br />
He loves you and he loves your mama<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah<br />
With all the change he's building<br />
Gonna bring hope to the children<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah</p>

<p>Change<br />
That we can believe in<br />
Change<br />
That we can believe in<br />
Change<br />
That we can believe in</p>

<p>We believe in Barack Obama<br />
He loves you and he loves your mama<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah<br />
With all the change he's building<br />
Gonna bring hope to the children<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah</p>

<p>Change<br />
That we can believe in<br />
Change<br />
That we can believe in<br />
Change<br />
That we can believe in</p>

<p>Yeah, haha, haha.<br />
Alright, come on now, here we go;<br />
You know we gotta get Barack and all of his crew<br />
In the White House so they can prove that<br />
In their hearts they know what to do<br />
And that includes Michelle and the kiddies too</p>

<p>[kids chanting]  "There is not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America -- there's the United States of America."<br />
We believe in Barack Obama<br />
He loves you and he loves your mama<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah<br />
With all the change he's building<br />
Gonna bring hope to the children<br />
We believe in Barack Obama, yeah</blockquote>More <a href="http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2009/11/04/elementary-epidemic-11-uncovered-videos-show-school-children-performing-praises-to-obama/"target=_blank"">here...</a></p>

<p>Almost as much as there's the consideration of the "yuck" factor and the creepiness of this "Dear Leader" worship, can you imagine the media outrage if this was going on for a Republican president?</p>

<p>H/t - <a href="http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2009/11/04/more-videos-uncovered-showing-school-kids-being-coached-to-praise-obama/"target=_blank"">Sister Toldjah</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Fox video: Absentee Ballot Surge Raises Red Flags in New Jersey</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/fox_video_absen.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13551</id>

    <published>2009-11-03T21:02:46Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-03T21:08:31Z</updated>

    <summary>As expected, the Democrats appear to be conducting their usual voter fraud operations: John Fund: The state has received a flood of 180,000 absentee ballot requests. On some 3,000 forms the signature doesn&apos;t match the one on file with county clerks. Yet citing concerns that voters would be disenfranchised, Democratic Party lawyer Paul Josephson wrote New Jersey&apos;s secretary of state asking her &quot;to instruct County Clerks not to deny applications on the basis of signature comparison alone.&quot; Mr. Josephson maintained that county clerks &quot;may be overworked and are likely not trained in handwriting analysis&quot; and insisted that voters with suspect applications should be allowed to cast provisional ballots. Those ballots, of course, would then provide a pool of votes that would be subject to litigation...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>As expected, the Democrats appear to be conducting their usual voter fraud operations: <blockquote>John Fund: The state has received a flood of 180,000 absentee ballot requests. On some 3,000 forms the signature doesn't match the one on file with county clerks. Yet citing concerns that voters would be disenfranchised, Democratic Party lawyer Paul Josephson wrote New Jersey's secretary of state asking her "to instruct County Clerks not to deny applications on the basis of signature comparison alone." Mr. Josephson maintained that county clerks "may be overworked and are likely not trained in handwriting analysis" and insisted that voters with suspect applications should be allowed to cast provisional ballots. Those ballots, of course, would then provide a pool of votes that would be subject to litigation in any recount, with the occupant of New Jersey's highest office determined by Florida 2000-style scrutiny of ballot applications.</blockquote><a href="http://www.breitbart.tv/absentee-ballot-surge-raises-red-flags-in-new-jersey/"target=_blank"">Video at Breitbart</a></p>

<p>Related:  <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/03/too-bad-to-check-nj-dems-sending-gangbangers-on-gotv-efforts/"target=_blank"">Too bad to check: NJ Dems sending gangbangers on GOTV efforts?</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Video: Dont Copy Europes Mistakes: Less Government Is the Right Way to Fix Healthcare</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2009/11/video_dont_copy.php" />
    <id>tag:www.hyscience.com,2009://2.13550</id>

    <published>2009-11-03T18:05:41Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-03T18:19:42Z</updated>

    <summary>Via Ed Morrissey, The Center for Freedom and Prosperity offers this video as part of its continuing series on the high cost and damaging distortions that come with heavy government interventions. In the video, Eline van den Broek explains that government interference is driving up health care costs in America and warns that European style health &quot;reform&quot; will make the situation even worse. Based on what has happened in Europe, she explains that universal health coverage is not the same as universal health care, that insurance mandates mean more government control, and that price controls simply do not work: &quot;American policymakers should not look to European health-care solutions for answers, or attempt to duplicate them. If government is the main cause of the current problems...</summary>
    <author>
        <name></name>
        <uri>http://www.hyscience.com</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Political News and commentaries" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.hyscience.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Via <a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/03/video-the-real-lessons-of-europes-nanny-state-health-care-system/"target=_blank"">Ed Morrissey</a>, The Center for Freedom and Prosperity offers this video as part of its continuing series on the high cost and damaging distortions that come with heavy government interventions.  In the video, Eline van den Broek explains that government interference is driving up health care costs in America and warns that European style health "reform" will make the situation even worse. Based on what has happened in Europe, she explains that universal health coverage is not the same as universal health care, that insurance mandates mean more government control, and that price controls simply do not work: <blockquote>"American policymakers should not look to European health-care solutions for answers, or attempt to duplicate them. If government is the main cause of the current problems of health care, why would you think that more government is the solution?"</blockquote><center><br />
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RZum_o-GAEI&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RZum_o-GAEI&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br />
</center><br/></p>

<p>More information at <a href="http://www.freedomandprosperity.org/">The Center for Freedom and Prosperity</a>.<br />
</center></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>
