Commentary

If Tim Tebow were a Muslim

I originally posted this on October 26, 2011.  It’ received a lot of attention from Muslim activists…

On my radio program we got into a discussion regarding Denver Bronco quarterback, Tim Tebow. Specifically we were talking about his come-from-behind effort on Sunday, during the last four minutes of the fourth quarter, to tie, and then beat in overtime, the Miami Dolphins, 18-15.

It was Tebow’s first start in the NFL,  and the first three quarters were pretty rough.  Going into the final quarter, with the Broncos in danger of being shut out for the first time since 1992, Tebow was 3-for-8 for 24 yards.  He had been sacked four times.

But then in those last four minutes, with the Dolphins up by 15, Tebow made it happen. He connected on his passes, and even ran into the end zone for the first comeback touchdown. He was awesome.

Yet, even after the dramatic overtime victory, commentators on virtually every outlet were ripping him for an el-sucko performance prior to the last portion of the game.  And they refused to let go of it.

One of the more gracious commentaries came from the New York Daily News: “In his first game since being named the Bronco’s quarterback, Tebow was horrendous for three quarters, spectacular for one.  He didn’t play well.  He just won.”

Hey, idiots in the media: the only thing that matters in sports is the score when the clock runs out.  Seems to me that Tebow faced adversity head on, and smacked it down.  Sounds like a good day at the office to me.

So, why does the media refuse to give Tim Tebow a break?

It’s because he’s a Christian–and an outspoken one at that.  My gosh, during the 2010 Superbowl he was in a pro-life commercial for Focus on the Family–the media hated it, because they hate Focus on the Family founder, James Dobson (“He’s a homophobe,” they say).

Put a mic in Tebow’s face and you’ll get an “I give thanks to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” everytime.

And the media hates that too.

But how about if Tebow were a Muslim?  How would the media have reacted to his victory on Sunday?

With over the top praise and adoration.  I can hear it now: “The Sultan of Sling,  Timmy Tebow, with a courageous come from behind win!”

In the post game interview they would ask “the Mighty Muslim” how his faith helped him overcome a tough situation.  He would give glory to Allah.  Cameras would be following him to his prayer mat on Monday, showing how  Islam was a part of his training regimen.

If Tebow were a Muslim the media would glorify him, because they want to make you believe that Islam is the religion of peace, as opposed to the religion that drove eleven men into blowing up 3,000 Americans into pieces.

Even if he someday wins the Superbowl, the media will always have an ax to grind with Tim Tebow, which is why many of us (even those of us who are not Bronco fans) wish him success.

 

An Inspirational Quote

My upcoming book, Eco-Tyranny: How the Left’s green Agenda Will Dismantle America, (April 2012, WND Books) will be the most comprehensive expose’ ever written about the environmental movement; a movement which is really a ploy to unleash socialism upon the United States.

Eco-Tyranny is filled with jaw-dropping facts revealing the origins of the movement, the deceptive lies being spread by its leaders, and the depths to which the eco-tyrannists have been able to effectively worm their way into all levels of government, our schools, and even our religious institutions.  As I prove in the book, if we do not stop the radicals pushing this agenda–particularly those in the Obama administration who are ramming this plan through via executive order and back room policy decisions–by 2050 we will be living likes drones in an Orwellian world, formerly known as the United States of America.

Here’s a quote that has served as inspiration in writing the book:

“No people will tamely surrender their liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved. On the contrary, when people are universally ignorant, and debauched in their manners, they will sink under their own weight without the aid of foreign invaders.” -Samuel Adams

April 2012 can not come quick enough.

 

Obama the Poor Investor

On March 3, 2007 USA Today ran a piece on then-Senator Obama regarding two stocks in his portfolio.  Obama was running for President and his critics were stating that the Senator may have been involved in insider trading, cronyism, using his position for personal gain, etc. Basically the media ran this story for a day, and then kissed it goodbye.  Could you imagine the outrage if these same set of circumstances involved a Republican running for President?

Here’s the original story, by Nedra Pickler:

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Wednesday he was not aware he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors and said he had done nothing to aid their business with the government.

The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications. Obama set up a trust that gave his broker authority to trade stocks on his behalf without his input, according to 16 pages of documents he released Wednesday.

“At no point did I know what stocks were held, and at no point did I direct how those stocks were invested,” Obama told reporters at the end of a news conference called to trumpet an unrelated immigration bill.

“What I wanted to make sure is that I didn’t want to invest in companies that potentially would create conflicts with my work here,” said Obama, who has campaigned on the need for stronger congressional ethics rules. “Obviously, the thing didn’t work the way I wanted it to.”

Obama purchased $5,000 in shares for AVI, which was developing a drug to treat avian flu. Two weeks after buying the stock, as the disease was spreading in Asia, Obama pushed for more federal funding to fight the disease, but he said he did not discuss the matter with any company officials.

Obama also had more than $50,000 in shares of Skyterra, a company that had just received federal permission to create a nationwide wireless network that combined satellite and land-based communications systems.

Among the company’s top investors were donors who raised more than $150,000 for Obama’s political committees, the New York Times reported Wednesday. The stock holdings were first examined Monday by the financial Web site, Thestreet.com.

The reports found no evidence that any of his actions ended up benefiting either company during the roughly eight months he owned the stocks. Obama lost about $15,000 on Skyterra and earned a profit of about $2,000 on AVI. Skyterra stocks continued to drop after Obama divested.

Obama said he wanted to invest in stocks after signing a $1.9 million deal for his second book, “The Audacity of Hope.” He said after buying a home and putting money in the bank and mutual funds, he asked a friend and political donor, investor George Haywood, to recommend a broker so he could invest a portion more aggressively.

“I thought about going to (billionaire investor) Warren Buffett, and I decided it would be embarrassing that I only had $100,000 to invest,” Obama said.

Haywood, a major backer of both AVI and Skyterra, recommended a broker at UBS who also bought stock for Obama in those companies.

Obama said at some point in fall 2005 he got a stockholder letter from AVI or Skyterra, but he couldn’t remember which company. But on Dec. 15, 2005, he liquidated the “Freedom Trust,” as it was titled in the May 15 agreement establishing it, and put his money in mutual funds and money market accounts that wouldn’t raise such questions.

“It’s at that point that I became concerned that I might not be able to insulate myself from knowledge of my holdings, that this trust instrument might not be working the way I wanted it to,” Obama said.

UBS spokeswoman Karina Byrne said the company would not make Obama’s broker available for interviews because they do not discuss client investments.

Obama said he didn’t invest in a qualified blind trust because it wouldn’t enable him to limit which companies he invested in, such as those in the tobacco industry and other areas that he did not want to support.

Obama attorney Robert F. Bauer added that the senator felt the blind trust left him in an “inadequate ethical position” because it would mean he couldn’t respond to media inquires, for example, if questions arose about his investments. But Obama also would have to report the stock holdings each year under Senate rules because they weren’t part of a qualified blind trust.

“At this point, I’m only invested in mutual funds or cash or money market accounts. That’s my instruction to my accountant,” Obama said. “We are not going to own individual stocks precisely because it raises questions like this.”

Senate ethics rules do not prohibit lawmakers from owning stocks in companies that do business with the federal government.

Obama with coincidental investment connections.  Obama who was an upside down borrower on his condo. Obama who just got a little “boneheaded” advice from  convicted felon Tony Rezko when he bought his mansion in Chicago.  And now this same man thinks he can pull the correct levers and push the proper buttons to get this country back on sound economic footing?

Perhaps it’s time we have a businessman run this country for a change?

Government is the Problem

In his 1981 inaugural address to the nation, President Ronald Reagan said, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problems, government is the problem.”  The words of Reagan have been confirmed.  Government regulations, corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, estates taxes, uncertainty regarding future tax policy, 40 precent overspending by the federal government, and a $15 trillion nation debt are now strangling us.  Adding to the misery is the ridiculous Congressional Deficit Reduction Super Committee: they came up with no plan, just as most of us forecast.

Meanwhile, Obama’s stimulus architect, Christina Romer, contends the problem is that the Federal Reserve has not been aggressive enough in their own stimulus efforts, and numerous commentators, led by Paul Krugman of the New York Times, say we need more unvarnished stimulus spending.  Again, what these leftist apparatchiks are demanding is more government.  They are basically saying, “This didn’t work before, so let’s just try more of it.”  There are reasons these foolish interventions haven’t worked.  The more government sucks out of the economy, the less there is left for private sector production.  The more uncertainty government produces, the less businesses are willing to hire, invest, and take risks.

It’s like dealing with an incompetent auto mechanic.  You just paid the guy $2,000 to fix your engine.  As soon as you drive off the lot you realize the problem has not been fixed, in fact it seems worse.  You do a quick U-turn, jump out  of the car and confront the mechanic.  He tells you, “For another  $2,000 I think we can get it fixed.”

Only a fool would go for that deal, which is what the Left is playing us for.

Our government is not stabilizing the economy, it’s creating instability.  We need less of it and not more.  Reagan was right: government is the problem.

More Taxpayer $ Wasted on Green Fantasies

We’re learning that President Obama’s ridiculous “green jobs” plan suffered another punch to the solar plexus this week.  The nonprofit National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) in Golden, Colorado, announced plans to lay off roughly 10 percent of its staff.

The lab receives taxpayer cash to handle U.S. Department of Energy research and development programs–things that should be done by private enterprise.

According to the Denver Post, the lab plans to eliminate between 100 and 150 of its 1,350 jobs. The Obama administration injected $200 million in “Stimulus” cash into the NREL in 2009.  In 2010 the NREL’s budget was $536.5 million.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu visited Golden in May 2009 to promote the NREL as a beneficiary of those funds.  As we learned with Solyndra, a visit by Chu is a sure sign of future failure.

At the time of Chu’s announcment, the Associated Press reported that the “stimulus” fund grants included $68 million to build a demonstration model of an energy-efficient office building; $19.2 million for solar, geothermal and fuel cell equipment; $10 million for testing and evaluation of wind technology; and $45 million to research and test drive-train systems for wind turbines.

NREL spokesman Bob Noun blames Congress for the organization’s failures. The Denver Post reports that he believes the gridlocked U.S. Congress forced the NREL to find $8 million in new budgetary savings.

“We don’t see any budget scenario where the lab doesn’t face budget cuts,” Noun said. “We just want to be proactive in managing the budget so we continue our core mission.”

Amy Oliver of Colorado’s conservative Independence Institute said one way to look at these potential “green jobs” shortcomings is that the NREL is exaggerating its claims. Oliver told The Daily Caller that the government-funded lab has seen a surge in government funding in recent years.

“Their funding for 2008 was $328 million,” Oliver said in a phone interview. “In 2010 it was $536.5 million. They’ve had a 64 percent increase in their funding during the Obama administration.”

Question.  Was the government involved in the development of coal, natural gas or petroleum as a source of energy?  Was it involved in the creation of the combustion engine?  No.  These were game-changers that altered the course of human history and the government had nothing to do with any of it.

The Feds need to quit wasting our good money on fantasies,  pipe dreams and chimeras.  If solar, wind, and bio are so great, let the free-market develop, market and sell them to the public.