I find this story hilarious! To think that a black church owns a shop selling KKK stuff.
Of course, a three year court case? When all someone had to do was go to the courthouse (hey, they were already there) and do a simple deed search!
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — After a lengthy legal battle between a black South Carolina church and members of the Ku Klux Klan, a judge has ruled that the church owns a building where KKK robes and T-shirts are sold.
A circuit judge ruled last month that New Beginnings Baptist Church is the rightful owner of the building that houses the Redneck Shop, which operates a so-called Klan museum and sells Klan robes and T-shirts emblazoned with racial slurs. The judge ordered the shop’s proprietor to pay the church’s legal bills of more than $3,300.
Since 1996, the Redneck Shop has operated in an old movie theater in Laurens, a city about 70 miles northwest from Columbia that was named after 18th century slave trader Henry Laurens.
Ownership of the building was transferred in 1997 to the Rev. David Kennedy and his church, New Beginnings, by a Klansman fighting with others inside the hate group, according to court records. That man, according to Kennedy, was feuding with store proprietor John Howard over a woman and “developed a spiritual relationship” with Kennedy’s church, the judge wrote.
But a clause in the deed entitles Howard, formerly KKK grand dragon for the Carolinas, to operate his business in the building until he dies.
Read all HERE.
Okay, we were in Des Moines yesterday. Gas was at $3.09 at all the stations, from QT to Git N Go. Yet in our town here, the Kum & Go has gas at $3.08, which is remarkable because 99% of the time they are always a dime or so higher than Des Moines!
Gas is still $2.99 down in Osceola. At the Pilot Truck Stop at the casino. Plus in town also.
So why is gas so high in Des Moines? Strange!
Obama’s plan to steal the election of 2012
by DrJohn, Flopping Aces
Or, why Eric Holder will remain in office until 2013 at least.
A pair of articles from the Washington Times make clear that the White House has a plan for the 2012 election, and that is to guarantee victory for Obama regardless of the outcome of the vote. A large part of it depends on Eric Holder and his continual bastardization of the law.
The first comes from Robert Knight and his account of why democrats despise voter id laws:
Assistant AG Thomas Perez, the same official who terminated the Black Panther voter intimidation case, ordered South Carolina to stop enforcing its voter photo ID law. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson explained precisely why the law is necessary:
The state Department of Motor Vehicles audited a state Election Commission report that said 239,333 people were registered to vote but had no photo ID. The DMV found that 37,000 were deceased, more than 90,000 had moved to other states, and others had names not matched to IDs. That left only 27,000 people registered without a photo ID but who could vote by signing an affidavit as to their identity.
The second article comes from Jeffrey Kuhner. Against the backdrop of the Carter/Baker report (of which Holder appears to be completely ignorant) Eric Holder plays the race card for South Carolina:
Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. claims Jim Crow is returning. In a recent speech, Mr. Holder said that attempts by states to pass voter identification laws will disenfranchise minorities, rolling back the clock to the evil days of segregation. He said that a growing number of minorities fear that “the same disparities, divisions and problems” now afflict America as they did in 1965 prior to the Voting Rights Act. According to the Obama administration, our democracy is being threatened by racist Republicans. Hence, the Justice Department must prevent laws requiring a photo ID to vote from being enacted.
Holder’s argument has no foothold in reality.
Kuhner points out that Holder’s real problem is that photo ID laws will impair ACORN’s ability to conduct fraud:
Mr. Holder evidently wants to scuttle ID laws because he knows which organization will be hurt most: ACORN. For years, community activist groups, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, have engaged in massive electoral fraud – registering illegal aliens, offering bribes to numerous politically disinterested people in the inner cities as inducements to vote and pushing underage and multiple voting.
Ultimately the job of the Attorney General of the United States is protect the law from abuse but it is painfully clear that Eric Holder was appointed to protect abuse from the law.
Read the article here.
Bumper sticker found HERE.
You Democrats are a short-sighted bunch.
But that goes without saying, I suppose, since your philosophy of Utopianism has failed every time it’s been tried throughout all of human history. But, I digress.
The point is that Democrat Congressional leaders are allowing Barack Obama to absolutely shred Constitutional limits on the Executive Branch — without so much as a whimper — and it is destined to come back and haunt them.
Consider the following hypothetical situation: Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has retired and a seat on the Supreme Court is open.
Late one night, President Santorum declares the Senate in recess. He appoints a new Supreme Court Justice who just happens to beMiguel Estrada, a wonderful originalist judge.
After all, the precedent has been set by Obama. He’s declared that the Senate is in recess, when it clearly is not. But don’t believe me. Check the Senate’s website (which happens to be controlled by Democrats).
Without checks and balances in government, President Obama has established a de facto dictatorship. He’s said as much himself.
…when Congress refuses to act, and as a result, hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them. (Applause.) I’ve got an obligation to act on behalf of the American people. And I’m not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people that we were elected to serve. (Applause.) Not with so much at stake, not at this make-or-break moment for middle-class Americans. We’re not going to let that happen.
In other words, Obama spits on separate-but-equal branches of government. He urinates on the Constitution. And he is quickly, inexorably, transforming this nation into a Banana Republic.
So, liberals: you’re going to pay a serious price for your failure to stand up for American laws, traditions and ethics.
You will live to regret tolerating lawless, anti-American behavior that undermines the foundations of this Republic.
Worse yet, Obama’s behavior — and its approval by Congressional leaders like the deplorable Harry Reid and the despicable Nancy Pelosi — represent a slap in the face of every Marine, Soldier, Sailor and Airman, who take an oath to uphold the Constitution — and then put their lives on the line to follow through with their sworn oath.
The modern Democrat Party is a lawless bunch that must be removed from office in 2012. At every level of government.
The new book on the 44th Administration -
The dramatics that surrounded the passage of health care reform — culminating in Emanuel’s near-resignation — reflect the type of struggles that routinely pitted Emanuel against the first lady during the first two years of the Obama administration. The two jockeyed for influence over the president even before he formally took office.
Kantor, who interviewed for the book 33 White House staffers (many on several occasions) but not the president or the first lady, reports that Michelle Obama had “doubts” about the choice of Emanuel as chief of staff. Emanuel, in turn, had been opposed to bringing Valerie Jarrett, the Obamas’ longtime mentor, into the White House as a senior adviser.
Once the administration began, the frictions only escalated. Emanuel rejected an effort on the part of Michelle Obama’s chief of staff, Jackie Norris, to be part of his 7:30 a.m. staff meeting. The administration did not outfit her with a speechwriter for some time. And the first lady’s office grew so isolated from the rest of the presidential orbit that aides there began, as Kantor writes, “referring to the East Wing as ‘Guam’ — pleasant but powerless.”
“Michelle and Rahm Emanuel had almost no bond; their relationship was distant and awkward from the beginning. She had been skeptical of him when he was selected, and now he returned the favor; he was uneasy about first ladies in general, several aides close to him said, based on clashes with Hillary Clinton in the 1990s that became so severe that she had tried to fire him from her husband’s administration,” writes Kantor. “Now Emanuel was chief of staff, a position that almost never included an easy relationship with the first lady. They were the president’s two spouses, in a sense, one public and official and one private and informal.”
The tug of war between Michelle Obama and Rahm Emanuel for the president’s spiritual or political soul contributed to a White House that was far more disorganized and friction-filled than the public perception holds. Kantor reports that then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was often deployed to push back against the first lady, informing her that she couldn’t take a private vacation on a state visit, spend large amounts on White House redecoration, or buy expensive clothes.
Michelle Obama, who came to politics skeptically but saw her husband as someone capable of lofty achievements, worked hard not to be isolated. She sent emails to Jarrett when she had complaints about news coverage, which Jarrett would forward to others after removing the first lady’s name from them. When she couldn’t wedge certain events or people into her husband’s schedule, she would send her missives to Alyssa Mastromonaco, the president’s director of scheduling. The emails, Kantor writes, “were so stern that Mastromonaco showed them around to colleagues, unsure of how to respond to her boss’s wife’s displeasure.”
Some more on this new book:
Early on Sept. 16, Robert Gibbs was scanning the news when a story stopped him short: according to a new French book, Michelle Obama had told Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, the French first lady, that living in the White House was “hell.” It was a potential disaster — the equivalent of the $400 haircut, Mr. Gibbs feared, coming just weeks before election day and on the heels of a vacation in Spain that had drawn accusations of lavish spending.
Mr. Gibbs asked her aides to find out if she had said anything even close (no, the answer came back), and then fought the story back for hours, having the book translated and convincing the Élysée Palace to issue a denial. By noon the potential crisis had been averted.
But at Mr. Emanuel’s 7:30 a.m. staff meeting the next day, Ms. Jarrett announced that the first lady had concerns about the White House’s response to the book, according to several people present. All eyes turned to Mr. Gibbs, who started to steam.
“Don’t go there, Robert, don’t do it,” Mr. Emanuel warned.
“That’s not right, I’ve been killing myself on this, where’s this coming from?” Mr. Gibbs yelled, adding expletives. He interrogated Ms. Jarrett, whose calm only seemed to frustrate him more. The two went back and forth, Ms. Jarrett unruffled, Mr. Gibbs shaking with rage. Finally, several staff members said, the press secretary cursed the first lady — colleagues stared down at the table, shocked — and stormed out.
Mr. Gibbs later acknowledged the outburst but said he had misdirected his rage. He accused Ms. Jarrett of making up the complaint. After the book incident, he “stopped taking her at all seriously as an adviser to the president,” Mr. Gibbs said, adding, “Her viewpoint in advising the president is that she has to be up and the rest of the White House has to be down.”
And more on this new book on the Obamas….
Popular first lady Michelle Obama has had testy relationships with some top White House advisers, and at times pushed the president to pursue politically difficult causes like healthcare and immigration reform, according to a new book.
“The Obamas” by New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor, paints Mrs. Obama as “an expert motivator and charmer” and “an increasingly canny political player” ahead of the 2012 presidential election, expected to be a tough fight for her husband, President Barack Obama.
Mrs. Obama fought against political tactics espoused by Rahm Emanuel, her husband’s former chief of staff, and Robert Gibbs, the former White House press secretary, the book said, pushing her husband to replace advisers who she felt were “too insular, not strategic enough,” according to excerpts from the book on the newspaper’s website.
“‘She feels as if our rudder isn’t set right,’” the book quotes Barack Obama as telling aides.
The Obamas did not speak to Kantor for the book, which was based on interviews with more than 30 current and former staff members. It will be released on Tuesday.
Iran Begins Internet Crackdown, Preps Countrywide ‘Halal’ Intranet
Obama’s 2012 slogan: “Can’t work with others”
Will the bad guys be bloated hypocrites who got rich off their fearmongering? Again, Fatman Gore, has to do something to make him a bit of money, no matter how dumb!
(KPCC) — Former Presidential candidate Al Gore is known for everything from inventing the Internet to alerting the world to the harsh realities of global warming. Now he’s collaborating with the creatives of PSFK on ”Gaming For Good”, challenging companies to create new games that address the same issues facing his Climate Reality Project – and also being fun to play.
After receiving 60 game proposals from around the world, the entries have been narrowed down to the 10 top finalists, which was then whittled down to four by Gore himself. Among the finalists are Greensquare, “a gaming platform that gives you and your friends a new, greener way to explore local retail store, restaurants and businesses”. Gore was particularly taken with REALiTREE, “a digital representation of our local environment and the role we are playing in sustaining its wellbeing.”
“Games are fun,” Gore told an audience at a “Gaming For Good” event in New York. “I am not saying this as an expert. But looking at the enormous amount of time people are spending playing games, I can see that social games for good represent a fantastic opportunity for encouraging change in political and social spaces.”