Sarah Palin: America Speaks Out! It’s time to take back our government and put it on our side. Remember it’s “We the People”!

Sarah Palin: America Speaks Out!

America Speaks Out!
 Yesterday at 10:34am
Here’s a great forum for those who believe it’s time to stand up and be heard! From the tea party movement to the town halls, we’ve seen Americans rise up and make their voices heard. From the bailouts to the wasteful stimulus spending bill to the $2.5 trillion health care take over, Washington stopped listening to us average everyday hardworking Americans… so we’re doing something about that.

Today a new website was launched to change the situation!

Led by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, a new project is now launched called “America Speaking Out” which is aimed at giving us a direct role in putting together a new policy agenda for our country based on the principles of smaller, more accountable government.

Check out the website at http://www.americaspeakingout.com/ and make your voices heard.

It’s time to take back our government and put it on our side. Remember it’s “We the People”!

– Sarah Palin

Invading the U.S.A.

Invading the U.S.A.

Posted By Mike Finch On May 25, 2010 @ 12:30 am In FrontPage | 33 Comments

Pirates prowling the shores, kidnappings and abductions, the murdering of American citizens on our own soil.  A borderland in chaos, full scale anarchy, lawlessness and armed gangs ruling the borderlands.

Such a description certainly fits today with our border with Mexico.  Stories of murder, mayhem, abductions, drugs and trafficking fill the news on a daily basis.  The border area and the cities of Juarez, Tijuana and Nogales are war zones, the violence spreading across the border at a frightening rate.

But the description is not for today alone.  In the aftermath of the War of 1812, with the defeat of the British and New Orleans secure, only Spanish Florida remained out of American hands, the last European colony east of the Mississippi.

But Spain was weak, its once great Global Empire a faded memory as it struggled to hold on to its prize colonies in the Western Hemisphere.  Florida however, like most of Spain’s other colonies in the present day United States, was not considered significant.  Outside of a few military outposts and scattered missions, the disease infested swamps and marshlands were left uninhabited.

By the early 19th century, Florida had become the home of ruffians, outlaws, buccaneers, runaway slaves, and Indian bandits.  The Spanish garrisons in Pensacola were hard pressed to protect their own settlers, much less patrol the anarchy on the border of the U.S.  By 1817, with Americans being attacked and murdered on our side of the border, the crisis had reached a boiling point.  It was one thing to have chaos across a border, but when it spilled over to our side, endangering American lives and property, it became a crisis that had to be dealt with.

Fortunately, America at that time had the strength of General Andrew Jackson, fresh off his victory at the Battle of New Orleans. He was a national hero.  Politicians in Washington, as is often the case, were hesitant and adverse to conflict, even in the case of protecting American lives.  But President James Monroe, sensing that something had to be done, gave orders to U.S. troops to chase raiders across the border.  Jackson took his cue, and within a short period of time, Florida was cleared of trouble. Spain meekly retreated and paved the way for annexation and later statehood for the territory.  Most critical, Americans were safe.

What is the lesson?  There are many and though history never runs a straight line to the present, we can draw from the parallels.  The first and most important lesson of course, is that the protection of American lives and property is paramount over any other consideration.  All options go on the table in the defense of protecting our citizens against harm.  Second, we should not be afraid, averse, or even hesitant to use force, including military force to interdict, across the border if necessary, those committing crimes against American sovereignty.

If the Mexican government cannot control the border, much as the Spanish government could not control Florida in 1817, it is incumbent on the Federal Government of the United States to take whatever steps are necessary to curb the violence.  And let’s call this what it is.  When foreign nationals with weapons cross a border and murder, destroy property and kidnap Americans, that is an invasion.  We have every right to defend ourselves; now the only relevant question is where has America’s pride gone when we don’t care enough for protecting Americans from violence being committed across an international border.  That is singly the Federal Government’s responsibility.

Does this mean we should invade northern Mexico?  Probably not yet, but we do need to militarize the border and prepare for whatever actions become necessary.  As history shows, the precedent is there.

America can and should not stand by and allow a lawless borderland to continue.  The drug cartels have taken control of the border and murdered thousands of Mexicans and now that violence has come north.  Call it what you want, but it is a war.  And if Mexico won’t or can’t fight this war, we will.  If we can send hundreds of thousands of American troops to protect the life and liberty of Iraqis, Afghans, Vietnamese, Koreans, Bosnians, and millions of others, then we can surely do the same for our own American citizens.

It is time to heed the call of Andrew Jackson. “The conduct of this banditti is such as will not be tolerated by our government, and if not put down by Spanish authority will compel us in self-defense to destroy them.”  Such were the words given by Jackson to the Spanish Governor at Pensacola.  Such words should have been spoken by our President instead of the cowardly and treacherous apology that he gave President Calderon last week in Washington and his arrogant elitist blather about shopping for ice cream cones.  Has he forgotten the oath that he took just a year and a half ago?

A message needs to be sent to Washington and to Mexico City.  American lives deserved to be protected from foreign invasion.  It is the one duty of the Federal Government above all others.  It is time this warning is heeded.

The Last Best Hope–We can see November from our house !!!!!!!!!

The Last Best Hope

Posted By Dennis Prager On May 26, 2010 @ 12:01 am In FrontPage | 3 Comments

One of the many beliefs — i.e., non-empirically based doctrines — of the post-Christian West has been that moral progress is the human norm, especially so with the demise of religion. In a secular world, the self-described enlightened thinking goes, superstition is replaced by reason, and reason leads to the moral good.

Of course, it turned out that the post-Christian West produced considerably more evil than the Christian world had. No mass cruelty in the name of Christianity approximated the vastness of the cruelty unleashed by secular doctrines and regimes in the post-Christian world. The argument against religion that more people have been killed in the name of religion than by any other doctrine is false propaganda on behalf of secularism and Leftism.

The amount of evil done by Christians — against, for example, “heretics” and Jews — in both the Western and Eastern branches of Christianity — was extensive, as was the failure of most European Christians to see Nazism for the evil that it was. The good news is that Christian evils have been acknowledged and addressed by most Christian leaders and thinkers.

But there were never any Christian Auschwitzes — i.e., systematic genocides of every man, woman and child of a particular race or religion. Nor were there Christian Gulags — the shipping of millions of innocents to conditions so horrific that prolonged suffering leading to death was the almost -inevitable end.

The anti-religious Left offers two responses to these facts: The first is that modern technology made the Nazi and Communist murders of scores of millions possible; had the church been technologically able to do so, it would have made its own Auschwitz and Gulag. The second is that Nazism and Communism were religions and not secular doctrines.

The response to the first is that technology was not necessary for the Communist murders of over a hundred million innocent people in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia and elsewhere. In Cambodia, millions were murdered with hammers, in Rwanda with machetes.

The response to the second is that Communism and Nazism were secular movements and to deny that is to tell a gargantuan lie. Even if one argues that Nazism and Communism were religions, they were nevertheless secular religions. That too many Christians morally failed when confronted with Nazism is true, but irrelevant to the fact that Nazism was in no way a Christian movement.

And now the post-Christian world is getting worse.

The moral news about the world in which we live is almost unremittingly negative.

Russia

Russia is devoid of a moral values system. Whatever moral role the Russian Orthodox Church played was largely extinguished during the seven decades of Communist suppression of religion. Today, pockets of religious morality notwithstanding, Russia is essentially a nihilistic state. Under the leadership of a former KGB director, Russia now plays a destructive role in world affairs. Russia today is characterized by major arms shipments to Syria, protecting Iran while it becomes a nuclear power, forcing its will on Ukraine and other neighboring states, and the violent suppression of domestic critics who shed any light on the organized crime syndicate that rules the geographically largest nation in the world.

Turkey

The Ataturk Revolution is being undone. Turkey, the country long regarded as the bridge between the West and Islam, is rapidly moving away from the West and to an increasingly anti-Western Islam.

Iran

Iran is ruled by the heirs of Nazism, if that word still means anything after being cheapened by the Left for decades, most recently by the Left’s comparison of Arizona to a Nazi state. The rulers of Iran boast of their desire to initiate a second Holocaust against the Jews, all the while denying that the first Holocaust took place. And the country’s treatment of Iranians who seek elementary human freedoms and of Iranian women is among the worst on earth.

Congo

According to all reports, nearly 6 million people have been killed in the Congo in the last decade. The great secular liberal hope in “humanity” and “world opinion” has once again been shown to be the false hope it is. World opinion and “humanity” have rarely done anything to help the truly persecuted.

But there is more to the Congolese genocide — the absence of reporting about it in the world’s media and its being a non-issue at the United Nations. If an Israeli soldier kills a rock-throwing Palestinian, or even worse, makes plans to build 1,600 apartments in east Jerusalem, the U.N., world opinion and the world media cover it as if it were the primary evil on earth. But the Congolese deaths are barely worth a mention.

Mexico

Mexico is fighting for its life against narcotics gangs that compete with Islamists in their sadism. Mexico could become the largest narco-state in the world. To be a good person in Mexico today, i.e., to oppose the drug lords in any way, is to put oneself in danger of being slowly tortured to death.

Europe

Europe long ago gave up fighting for or believing in anything other than living a life with as much economic security, as many days off and as young a retirement age as possible. World War I killed off European idealism. And whatever remained was destroyed by World War II. What I have written about the Germans is true for nearly all of Europe: Instead of learning to fight evil, Europe has learned that fighting is evil.

Other consequences of European secularism and the demise of non-materialistic ideals include a low birthrate (children cost money and limit the number of fine restaurants in which one can afford to dine), and appeasement of evil. Thus most European nations are slowly disappearing and nearly every European country has compromised Western liberties in order to appease radical Muslims.

Radical Islam

Polls taken in the Muslim world regularly report that about 10 percent of the world’s Muslims say they support radical Islam — meaning Islamic totalitarianism as practiced by the Taliban and terror as practiced by Al-Qaida. That means at least one hundred million people. Add to that the unspecified number of Muslims who support the Nazi-level and Nazi-like anti-Semitism promulgated in much of the Middle East and you have an enormous body of people committed to the death of the West.

China

As in Russia, traditional Chinese virtues were largely destroyed by Communism, and China, too, is essentially a nihilistic state whose government spends its vast sums of foreign currency in buying influence in some of the cruelest places on earth (Zimbabwe, for example) and protecting the genocide-advocating regime of Iran.

The United Nations

The net result of the United Nations is an increase in evil on earth. Whatever good is performed by some of its institutions, like the World Health Organization or UNICEF, that good is outweighed by the amount of evil the U.N. either abets or allows. It has supervised genocide in Rwanda, done nothing to stop genocide elsewhere (e.g., Congo and Sudan), gives a respectable forum to tyrannies, and is preoccupied with vilifying one of its relatively few humane states, Israel. Its contributing to human suffering is exemplified by Libya being elected to its Human Rights Commission and Iran’s election to its Commission on the Status of Women.

The United States

The United States was described by President Abraham Lincoln as The Last Best Hope of Earth. Most Americans agreed then. However, with the ascent of the Left in America — in our educational institutions, news and entertainment media, and arts world — fewer and fewer Americans believe this. On the contrary, the Leftist view of America, which pervades American life, is of a country deeply morally compromised by endemic racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, militarism, imperialism and a rapacious capitalism, leading to immoral levels of economic inequality.

As in Europe, these views are leading America to avoid offending its enemies. The American attorney general recently refused to answer a congressman’s repeated question about whether he believes that radical Islam might have been one factor motivating recent Muslim terrorists in America.

With America more interested in being like Europe and being liked rather than in fighting its enemies, more and more countries are identifying with America’s enemies than with America. Last week’s three-way hug among the leaders of Brazil, Turkey and Iran was a clear example of such.

Meanwhile, America is rapidly accumulating unpayable debts that will render it not very different from Greece. Indeed, California, once the grease of the American economy, has become the Greece of the American economy.

As the Left’s power increases, America’s power recedes — and the world further deteriorates. Under Democratic Party rule, the Last Best Hope of Earth has decided that the United Nations and Western Europe deserve that title, not the United States.

Those of us working to remove Democrats from power regard this November’s election as not only a referendum on the direction of America, but of the world itself.

Dennis Prager hosts a nationally syndicated radio talk show and is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is the author of four books, most recently “Happiness Is a Serious Problem” (HarperCollins). His website is http://www.dennisprager.com.

Moral Monopoly No More

Moral Monopoly No More

Posted By Rev. Canon J. Gary L’Hommedieu On May 26, 2010 @ 12:05 am In FrontPage | 7 Comments

What explains the deliberate misreading of the new Arizona immigration law by pundits, politicians, and even private citizens? The law expressly forbids racial profiling, and yet a vast constituency of Americans interpret the law as an open assault on race–or, perhaps, on the racial status quo.

The answer has to do with the massive transfer of moral capital that occurred in the wake of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. According to civil rights activist and scholar Shelby Steele, that landmark legislation marked a revolution of consciousness in the American white majority in acknowledging its complicity not only in the formative years of slavery but in subsequent era of segregation. America’s acknowledgement of this huge wrong resulted in a “vacuum of moral authority.”

According to Steele, from that moment on “the legitimacy of American institutions [became] contingent on proving a negative: that they are not racist” (White Guilt, by Shelby Steel, p. 27, emphasis added). Soon this contingency extended beyond black-white relations in the United States to include all non-white populations throughout the world as well as the environment and even the rule of law. It was impossible for those traditionally associated with power in America–the white majority–to invoke any sacred text or principle, whether Holy Writ or the U. S Constitution. Why? Because they lacked the moral authority to do so.

This explains why Americans are more afraid of being called racist than they are of defending their own borders. It’s almost like they are in fear for their mortal souls. It explains why American airport security has turned into a ritual exercise of proving “we are not racists” by showcasing obvious non-threats rather than going out of our way to keep would-be terrorists from entering the United States.

It also explains why many are desperately intent upon keeping the memory of America’s racial past on center stage, until almost everything is about race. For today’s political opportunist, every issue derives either directly or indirectly from America’s original sin of racism. Those who identify on one side of an issue have the power to stigmatize those on the other simply by calling them a name. That kind of spiritual potency translates into moral capital which, in turn, justifies political power.

Moral authority is what gives weight to one set of public opinions and not another. It explains why politicians can get away with dubious logic and even outright falsehood as long as they are “on the right side” of a sensitive (usually racially charged) issue. It explains the mysterious power of political correctness, which everyone laughs about but few have the courage to confront.

Moral authority is what legitimizes the exercise of power in society. Some have it and some don’t. Those who have it have rights. Those who don’t can be pushed around. This is why people can simply walk across American borders and join a protest movement once they get here. It explains why anyone who objects is “racist.” Rational discourse about “issues” is usually a matter of political window dressing. Arguments are won these days based on who holds the cards in relation to America’s racial past.

Hence the intuitive reaction to the Arizona legislation. In a very concrete way, the new legislation reshuffles the American political deck. It does so by reinstating the rule of law as a matter of principle and in defiance of the demand that public discourse be properly vetted by some certified authority brokered in during the era of political correctness.

Arizona has threatened the status quo by refusing to acknowledge the old currency of political correctness. That means the handwriting is on the wall. Now it is only a matter of time before that currency loses all value.

If Arizona gets away with asserting the rule of law–the same law that is on the books at the Federal level and in most states–then the basis for exercising power will have changed hands in the United States. A transformation of consciousness will have taken place. This is why the President and his minions are waging a special campaign against the Arizona legislature without reading the text of the legislation and without consulting with the Governor.

A people that is willing to stand up for itself, even at considerable cost, acquires moral weight in defining the meaning of right and wrong. As Dr. Steele points out, that was the moral achievement of the civil rights movement in the 50s and early 60s.

White House Wants Us to trust them We Aint in Kansas any more look behind the curtain

White House Wants Us to trust them

May 25th, 2010

By Peter Baker, NYT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny9nfrrucNg&feature=player_embedded

Sestak bribery is an impeachable offense

For three months, the White House has refused to say whether it offered a job to Representative Joe Sestak to get him to drop his challenge to Senator Arlen Specter in a Pennsylvania Democratic primary, as Mr. Sestak has asserted.

But the White House wants everyone who suspects that something untoward, or even illegal, might have happened to rest easy: though it still will not reveal what happened, the White House is reassuring skeptics that it has examined its own actions and decided it did nothing wrong. Whatever it was that it did.

“Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak,” Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said Sunday on “Face the Nation” on CBS. “And nothing inappropriate happened.”

“Improper or not, did you offer him a job in the administration?” asked the host, Bob Schieffer.

“I’m not going to get further into what the conversations were,” Mr. Gibbs replied. “People that have looked into them assure me that they weren’t inappropriate in any way.”

Read More:

OBAMA REDISTRIBUTION VICTORY: PRIVATE PAY PLUMMETS, GOVT HANDOUTS SOAR

OBAMA REDISTRIBUTION VICTORY: PRIVATE PAY PLUMMETS, GOVT HANDOUTS SOAR

May 25th, 2010

By Dennis Cauchon,USA Today

  Obama’s economy is fulfilling his big government agenda

Paychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year, a USA TODAY analysis of government data finds.
At the same time, government-provided benefits — from Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs — rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010.

Those records reflect a long-term trend accelerated by the recession and the federal stimulus program to counteract the downturn. The result is a major shift in the source of personal income from private wages to government programs.

The trend is not sustainable, says University of Michigan economist Donald Grimes. Reason: The federal government depends on private wages to generate income taxes to pay for its ever-more-expensive programs. Government-generated income is taxed at lower rates or not at all, he says. “This is really important,” Grimes says.

The recession has erased 8 million private jobs. Even before the downturn, private wages were eroding because of the substitution of health and pension benefits for taxable salaries.

The Bureau of Economic Analysis reports that individuals received income from all sources — wages, investments, food stamps, etc. — at a $12.2 trillion annual rate in the first quarter.

Read More:

Obama to Skip Memorial Day at Arlington Cemetery

Obama to Skip Memorial Day at Arlington Cemetery

May 26th, 2010

Newsmax

 Obama says forget tradition I am going to Chicago

In a highly unusual move, President Barack Obama is going to skip the traditional Memorial Day event at Arlington National Cemetery to return home to Chicago for the long holiday weekend.

Obama sees it as addressing one of the great broken promises of his administration: his early pledge to return home to Chicago every six weeks or so, according to The Washington Post.

On Monday, Obama will make remarks at the Abraham Lincoln National Cemetery and miss the usual tradition of presidents speaking at Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day.

Instead, Vice President Biden and his wife will appear in Obama’s place, laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, as well as holding a breakfast for Gold Star families — families whose loved ones died in military service — at the White House earlier that day.

Read More: also covered at the Washington Post

Fawning press now gets cold shoulder from Obama

Fawning press now gets cold shoulder from Obama

May 26th, 2010

By Bryon York, Washington Examiner

 Obama is pushing the press around

Will Barack Obama go an entire year without holding a formal news conference? He’s getting close: The president’s last full-scale session with the press was on July 22, 2009, which was 307 days ago.

When Obama last held a big news conference, there had not yet been terrorist attacks at Fort Hood, Detroit, and Times Square. Scott Brown was an unknown Massachusetts state senator. There was no national health care bill, much less national health care law. Tiger Woods appeared to be a model family man.

A lot can happen in 307 days, which is far longer than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton ever went between news conferences.

In its defense, the White House says Obama answers a lot of questions from reporters, just not in the traditional news-conference setting. In fact, the president does a lot of one-on-one interviews, frequently with sympathetic reporters. But even in terms of brief question-and-answer sessions with the White House press corps, he has still done fewer than Bush or Clinton.

More troubling is that Obama makes no secret of his disdain for the press. Just look at the scene in the Oval Office May 18, when Obama invited a few journalists to watch him sign a new bill — it just happened to be the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act.

“Speaking of press freedom, could you answer a couple of questions on BP?” CBS’s Chip Reid asked Obama after the signing.

“You’re certainly free to ask them, Chip,” Obama said.

Read More:

Obama’s border Kabuki: Don’t believe the hype; Update: Meddling Mexico dictates how U.S. should use its National Guard

Michelle Malkin 

Lead Story

Obama’s border Kabuki: Don’t believe the hype; Update: Meddling Mexico dictates how U.S. should use its National Guard

By Michelle Malkin  •  May 25, 2010 03:34 PM

Scroll for updates…


Photoshop credit: Applecross Media and Big Fur Hat

The most glaring sign that President Obama’s announcement of border funding and National Guard troops is one big, phony charade? He apparently didn’t even bother to let the governor of besieged Arizona, Gov. Jan Brewer, know about it. Via Yahoo News:

The Obama administration plans to announce Tuesday that it will send as many as 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to improve border security, an Arizona congresswoman said.

Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords also said in a statement released Tuesday that President Barack Obama will request $500 million in funding for border security.

Part of Giffords’ district borders Mexico.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s spokesman said the governor hadn’t been told of the move prior to her office being contacted by The Associated Press and had no immediate comment.

I called out the Bush administration and Republicans countless times when they used border security as a campaign ploy and performed Get Tough Theater only to flake out on systemic immigration enforcement reform — and then drop the shamnesty shoe.

This is no different. Both political parties in Washington reek on the issue.

The only thing worse than open-borders Obama exploiting our illegal immigration woes is open-borders Johnny-come-lately John McCain continuing to do the same.

Until politicians with proven integrity and commitment to securing this country against invasion step into the leadership vacuum, Arizona’s DIY policy on border security is the only trustworthy one:

Do It Yourself.

***

Update: GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions responds:

U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued the following statement today regarding reports that President Obama plans to request funding for 1,200 National Guard troops to be sent to the U.S.–Mexico border:

“The only thing that matters is whether the president—the Chief Executive and the top law enforcement officer of the country—is personally committed to ending illegality at the border. Announcing and taking specific steps can be helpful, but only if it’s part of a determined and consistent effort to fix the problem. The president’s decision to send up to 1,200 troops to the border, while helpful, will not fix the problem. Indeed, it is less than a third of the troops ordered to the border by President Bush.

“Just days ago, members of President Obama’s administration gave Mexican President Felipe Calderón a standing ovation as Calderón proceeded to slander the state of Arizona for its efforts to protect its citizens. President Obama’s chief immigration officer, John Morton, announced that he might not enforce immigration crimes reported by Arizona officials. And, both the Attorney General and the Homeland Security Secretary have attacked the Arizona law, though they later admitted to having never actually read it.

“It is critical that President Obama make border security a true priority and send a clear signal that his administration is dedicated to consistently enforcing the rule of law. Sending National Guard troops to the border can be an important step in the right direction, but it should be followed with a commitment to vigorous worksite enforcement, full cooperation with state and local law enforcement officials, strong support for completion of the border fence, and all other necessary border measures. If these policies are resolutely done, the massive current illegality will be dramatically improved.”

Update: Mexico tells us how to police our border:

Regarding the Administration’s decision to send 1,200 National Guard servicemen to the US Southern border, the Government of Mexico trusts that this decision will help to channel additional US resources to enhance efforts to prevent the illegal flows of weapons and bulk cash into Mexico, which provide organized crime with its firepower and its ability to corrupt.

Additionally, the Government of Mexico expects that National Guard personnel will strengthen US operations in the fight against transnational organized crime that operates on both sides of our common border and that it will not, in accordance to its legal obligations, conduct activities directly linked to the enforcement of immigration laws.

Two more nails in liberalism’s coffin

Two more nails in liberalism’s coffin

Gene Schwimmer

Is Atlas about to shrug? Don’t know, but judging by a couple of news items today, it sure looks like the old boy’s knees are starting to wobble.

First, USA Today reports that in the first quarter, “[p]aychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year.” As University of Michigan economist Donald Grimes points out, “The trend is not sustainable” because “[t]he federal government depends on private wages to generate income taxes to pay for its ever-more-expensive programs.”

Whoa! I mean, who knew? Clearly, Barack Obama doesn’t, nor do much or all of his economic “team.” There is no I in team, as the saying goes, but surely at least one member of Obama’s “team” can count the number of Is in idiot. Or is that asking too much of an economic “team” that apparently believes that money grows on trees.

But there is good news, too – evidence that the public, increasingly, is getting it. In today’s Rasmussen Poll, Obama’s approval rating stands at 42% , a new low for him.