WORLD WAR II MIRACLE IN THE SKY

I accidentally came across this on TruthorFiction.com while searching for something else.  This is quite an account.  It’s a little lengthy, but very well worth reading.

Published in the Fall 2003 edition of the National WWII Memorial Society’s newsletter.

 
Piggyback Hero
by Ralph Kinney Bennett
 

Tomorrow morning they’ll lay the remains of Glenn Rojohn to rest in the Peace Lutheran Cemetery in the little town of Greenock, Pa., just southeast of Pittsburgh. He was 81, and had been in the air conditioning and plumbing business in nearby McKeesport. If you had seen him on the street he would probably have looked to you like so many other graying, bespectacled old World War II veterans whose names appear so often now on obituary pages.

But like so many of them, though he seldom talked about it, he could have told you one hell of a story. He won the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Purple Heart all in one fell swoop in the skies over Germany on December 31, 1944.

Fell swoop indeed.

Capt. Glenn Rojohn, of the 8th Air Force’s 100th Bomb Group, was flying his B-17G Flying Fortress bomber on a raid over Hamburg. His formation had braved heavy flak to drop their bombs, then turned 180 degrees to head out over the North Sea.

They had finally turned northwest, headed back to England, when they were jumped by German fighters at 22,000 feet. The Messerschmitt Me-109s pressed their attack so closely that Capt. Rojohn could see the faces of the German pilots.

He and other pilots fought to remain in formation so they could use each other’s guns to defend the group. Rojohn saw a B-17 ahead of him burst into flames and slide sickeningly toward the earth. He gunned his ship forward to fill in the gap.

 

He felt a huge impact. The big bomber shuddered, felt suddenly very heavy and began losing altitude. Rojohn grasped almost immediately that he had collided with another plane.

A B-17 below him, piloted by Lt. William G. McNab, had slammed the top of its fuselage into the bottom of Rojohn’s. The top turret gun of McNab’s plane was now locked in the
belly of Rojohn’s plane and the ball turret in the belly of Rojohn’s had smashed through the top of McNab’s. The two bombers were almost perfectly aligned – the tail of the lower plane was slightly to the left of Rojohn’s tailpiece. They were stuck together, as a crewman later recalled, “like mating dragon flies.”

Fearing a fire, Rojohn cuts his engines and rang the bailout bell. If his crew had any chance of parachuting, he had to keep the plane under control somehow. 

Once inside the plane’s belly Woodall saw a chilling sight, the ball turret of the other bomber protruding through the top of the fuselage. In that turret, hopelessly trapped, was Staff Sgt. Joseph Russo. Several crewmembers on Rojohn’s plane tried frantically to crank Russo’s turret around so he could escape. But, jammed into the fuselage of the lower
plane, the turret would not budge.

Up in the cockpit, Capt. Rojohn and his co-pilot, 2nd Lt. William G. Leek, Jr., had propped their feet against the instrument panel so they could pull back on their controls with a ll their strength, trying to prevent their plane from going into a spinning dive that would prevent the crew from jumping out.

Capt. Rojohn ordered Lieut. Leek to bail out. Leek knew that without him helping keep the controls back, the plane would drop in a flaming spiral and the centrifugal force would prevent Rojohn from bailing. He refused the order.

 

Meanwhile, German soldiers and civilians on the ground that afternoon looked up in wonder. Some of them thought they were seeing a new Allied secret weapon – a strange eight-engined double bomber. But anti-aircraft gunners on the North Sea coastal island of Wangerooge had seen the collision. A German battery captain wrote in his logbook at 2:47 p.m.: “Two fortresses collided in a formation in the NE. The planes flew hooked together and flew 20 miles south. The two planes were unable to fight anymore. The crash could be awaited so I stopped the firing at these two planes.” 

Two of the six men who parachuted from Rojohn’s plane did not survive the jump. But the other four and, amazingly, four men from the other bomber, including ball turret gunner Woodall, survived. All were taken prisoner. Several of them were interrogated at lengt h by the Germans until they were satisfied that what had crashed was not a new American secret weapon. 

 

Rojohn, typically, didn’t talk much about his Distinguished Flying Cross. Of Leek, he said, “In all fairness to my co-pilot, he’s the reason I’m alive today.”

A great story. I wonder how many more stories like this one are lost each day as members of the Greatest Generation pass on.

 

 

When I read this, I simply could not let this story fade into the past.  I had to pass it on. 

 

 

 

 

Like so many veterans, Rojohn got back to life unsentimentally after the war, marrying and raising a son and daughter. For many years, though, he tried to link back up with Leek, going through government records to try to track him down. It took him 40 years, but in 1986, he found the number of Leek’s mother, in Washington State.

Yes, her son Bill was visiting from California. Would Rojohn like to speak with him? Two old men on a phone line, trying to pick up some familiar timbre of youth in each other’s voice. One can imagine that first conversation between the two men who had shared that wild ride in the cockpit of a B-17.

A year later, the two were re-united at a reunion of the 100th Bomb Group in Long Beach, Calif. Bill Leek died the following year.

Glenn Rojohn was the last survivor of the remarkable piggyback flight. He was like thousands upon thousands of men — soda jerks and lumberjacks, teachers and dentists, students and lawyers and service station attendants and store clerks and farm boys — who in the prime of their lives went to war in World War II. They sometimes did incredible things, endured awful things, and for the most part most of them pretty much kept it to themselves and just faded back into the fabric of civilian life.

Capt. Glenn Rojohn, AAF, died last Saturday after a long siege of illness. But he apparently faced that fina l battle with the same grim aplomb he displayed that remarkable day over Germany so long ago. Let us be thankful for such men. 

OBAMA WALKS OUT ON PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU

I know this is old news by now, but I have not had the chance to write about this until now. For many of you, this will still be “fresh” news since the mainstream media has said very little about it. Most of you probably don’t know that President Obama walked out on Prime Minister Netanyahu. This happened on March 23, 2010 when the Israeli delegation, which included Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, met with President Obama about proposed housing settlements in East Jerusalem.

The meetings failed to gain a concession from Israel regarding settlements and withdrawal of Israeli forces. So, President Obama walked out on the delegation telling them, “Let me know if anything changes.” This, being translated, is, “Let me know if you see it my way”, or more succinctly, “My way or the highway.” The president then went to dinner and left the Israelis sitting.

This is a major disrespect of a foreign leader that I have not seen in my lifetime, especially of an allied nation. Such behavior on the part of an American president toward an ally is, to put it very mildly, a disgrace to everything this nation has ever stood for, especially when the president has said many times that he will talk to the terrorist leaders such as Iranian President Man-I-Need-A-Job with no preconditions, smiles for the cameras with Chinese President Jintao, and bows to the king of a terrorist nation. That’s effective foreign diplomacy if I ever saw it. Treat those who are our friends like trash and those whose only objective is to destroy the United States like his big buddy and pal.

(Click HERE for the U.K. Times article, click HERE for another account, and for a leftist watered-down version that totally omits Obama’s disrespectful departure from the meeting, click HERE.)

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs’ statement about the highly unusual lack of press coverage and photos of Obama and Netanyahu is still yet another indicator of just how arrogant this administration is. In an apparent response to the press having been excluded, Gibbs said, “I think it comes as a great shock to you and me, but not everything the president does is for the cameras and for the press.” No, just those things that cozy up to enemy nations, that’s all. Transparency at its finest.

To my knowledge, Prime Minister Netanyahu is the only foreign dignitary to have been treated so shabbily by the president. Wonder what would happen if Obama walked out on President Man-I-Need-A-Job with those oh-so-warm parting words, “Let me know if anything changes.”

JUDGE SAY NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER UNCONSTITUTIONAL

You read that right. A judge at the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin ruled last week that the National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. The FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, representing it’s 13,700 members (LAWSUIT TO STOP NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER [Examiner.com]), was filed in 2008. Click HERE for a brief summary of the suit. The suit which has been going through the courts

Judge Barbara Crabb ruled on April 15, 2010 that the National Day of Prayer, established in 1952 but dating back to 1775 (click HERE), is unconstitutional.

Judge Crabbs’ reasoning for the FFRF had standing to bring the suit in the first place was as follows:

“The primary injury plaintiffs allege is the feeling of unwelcomeness and exclusion they experience as nonreligious persons because of what they view as a message from the government that it favors Americans who pray. That injury is intangible.”

That must be just about the most sideways reasoning of any judicial opinion I have ever seen. And I have seen some “doozies” in my time. “Unwelcomeness” from what? “Exclusion” from what? Of course, leftist activist Judge Crabb did not explain these simple questions. It’s because she can’t. Because of “what THEY view”? Sounds like a personal problem to me that less than 14,000 people (there are Facebook pages with more members than that!) should not be wasting my tax dollars on.

Judge Crabb’s further off-the-wall reasoning continues:

“Religious freedom under the First Amendment contains two components, the right to practice one’s religion without undue interference under the free exercise and the right to be free from disfavor or disparagement on account of religion under the establishment clause.”

Let’s take a look at something very subtle here. “. . . the right to practice one’s religion without UNDUE interference . . . ” “UNDUE?” Exactly who defines “UNDUE”? How much interference with the right to practice religion (let’s just go ahead and say it here: practice Christianity; this suit does not refer to the Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Church of Satan, or any one of the other myriad religions in our country)? ANY interference is undue. Apparently, Judge Crabb believes that the practice of Christianity can be interfered with by the government. Judge Crabb needs to read the First Amendment and pay attention to it.

The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF . . . ” I don’t see anything there that permits ANY level of interference, “undue” or otherwise. When the National Day of Prayer was established in 1952, it was not a law establishing any religion. The government did not tell us the only religion we were permitted to practice was _________________ (fill in the blank). It’s a national observance in which those who are not religious can choose to not participate and go on about their daily lives.

The National Day of Prayer is no different than the government establishing Thanksgiving and Christmas as national observances. This is part of the continuing attack on Christianity by a tiny minority of people, in this case, less than 14,000, trying to force their will on the majority of Americans by any stretch of the imagination. Leftist wingnut groups like this avoid the legislative process to advance their agenda like the plague. They carefully pick and choose their cases and file lawsuits to bypass the American people by bypassing Congress and the President.

If this travesty is allowed to stand, I will see to it there will be a day of prayer set aside each year in my community. It’s not too much to ask to contact all the church pastors in this area to organize it and gather at the courthouse to pray. There will be copies of the First Amendment available should anyone from the AMERICAN COMMUNIST LIBERTIES UNION, the FFRF, or any other leftist anti-Constitution groups choose to try to stop me from exercising my freedom.

Oh, by the way, a couple of other points.

There’s a little leftwing propaganda (i. e. lies) floating around calling the National Day of Prayer REAGAN’S PRAYER RITUAL. It was former President HARRY S. TRUMAN who signed it into law April 17, 1952 after a unanimous vote of both houses of Congress. President Truman was a Democrat. Guess that’s why the left prefers to “credit” former President Reagan than admit it was a Democrat who signed it into law.

The FFRF did not count on this: President Obama says he will sign the proclamation to observe the National Day of Prayer despite the lawsuit (NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER DEEMED UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BUT OBAMA WILL RECOGNIZE IT ANYWAY – CBS News.) Wonder what they gonna do ’bout it?

THE FIGHT IS JUST BEGINNING!

I just got this in on the Associated Press wire via Twitter. The Attorney Generals in thirteen states have filed lawsuits against the Federal government on the grounds that the healthcare takeover by the government is unconstitutional. One of the Attorney Generals is a Democrat. Here’s the article:

13 attorneys general sue over health care overhaul

By BRENDAN FARRINGTON (AP) – 1 hour ago

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — Attorneys general from 13 states sued the federal government Tuesday, claiming the landmark health care overhaul bill is unconstitutional just seven minutes after President Barack Obama signed it into law.

The lawsuit was filed in Pensacola after the Democratic president signed the bill the House passed Sunday night.

“The Constitution nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage,” the lawsuit says.

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum is taking the lead and is joined by attorneys general from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Dakota, Idaho, Washington, Colorado and Louisiana. All are Republicans except James “Buddy” Caldwell of Louisiana, who is a Democrat.

Some states are considering separate lawsuits and still others may join the multistate suit.

McCollum, who is running for governor, has pushed the lawsuit for several weeks, asking other GOP attorneys general to join him. He says the federal government cannot constitutionally require individuals to obtain health coverage. He is also arguing the bill will cause “substantial harm and financial burden” to the states.

Some states are also looking at other ways to avoid participating in the overhaul. Virginia and Idaho have passed legislation aimed at blocking the bill’s insurance requirement from taking effect, and the Republican-led Legislature in Florida is trying to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to ask voters to exempt the state from the federal law’s requirements. At least 60 percent of voters would have to approve.

McCollum was working with officials from several state agencies to determine how much the health care overhaul would cost the state. He said earlier this month, “I can’t conceive of any good in this bill and I don’t think any of these agencies can.”

Under the bill, starting in six months, health insurance companies would be required to keep young adults as beneficiaries on their parents’ plans until they turn 26, and companies would no longer be allowed to deny coverage to sick children.

Other changes would not kick in until 2014.

That’s when most Americans will for the first time be required to carry health insurance — either through an employer or government program or by buying it themselves. Those who refuse will face penalties from the IRS.

Tax credits to help pay for premiums also will start flowing to middle-class working families with incomes up to $88,000 a year, and Medicaid will be expanded to cover more low-income people.

No Republicans in the U.S. House or Senate voted for the bill.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

We can’t wait until November to push back. Yes, go to the polls and put out anyone who voted for this. But if you do not live in one of the above states, contact your state Attorney General and encourage him or her to join in the suit. Don’t forget to contact your State legislators and push them to take action too.

The Georgia House of Representatives has introduced a resolution to amend the State Constitution “so as to provide that no law or rule or regulation shall compel any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system and to authorize persons and employers to pay directly for lawful health care services without penalties or fines; to provide for the submission of this amendment for ratification or rejection; and for other purposes.” It’s H.R. 1086 and is only nine votes short of passing the House. For those of you in Georgia, HERE is a link that shows how the Representatives voted. Contact your Representative and tell them you want a “yes” vote to this. If you’re not in Georgia, push your state legislators to amend your state’s constitution. Send them the link to GA H.R. 1086.

It’s way past time for the states to start regaining the rights afforded to them by the Constitution. The TENTH AMENDMENT says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Got that Washington? RESERVED TO THE STATES RESPECTIVELY, OR TO THE PEOPLE. The Obama administration and most of Congress is getting a lesson about the Constitution, that little troublesome piece of paper that is a constant reminder of for whom they really work. They’ll get reminded again on April 15, 2010 at the TAX DAY PROTEST in Washington, D.C., and again in November. All the polls are showing that it’s going to get ugly – for the incumbent Democrats and some RINO’s too.

OBAMACARE UNDER FIRE – FROM OBAMA’S COUSIN!

Here is something I’m sure has drawn the ire of the Obama administration, Reid and Pelosi. This isn’t one of the many doctors throughout the doctors that oppose this attempt at a government takeover of our healthcare system. This is OBAMA’S OWN COUSIN!

Dr. Milton Wolf-Barack Obama’s Cousin Speaks Against Obamacare
March 11, 2010

Well now among all the other problems with passing National Health Care here comes Obama’s second cousin who is a doctor (Milton Wolf) saying things against Obamacare.

“Primum nil nocere.” First, do no harm. This guiding principle is a bedrock of medical care. Sadly, those politicians who would rewrite our health care laws do not live in the same universe as do the doctors and health care professionals who must practice it.

Imagine if, like physicians, politicians were personally held to the incredibly high level of scrutiny that includes civil and financial liability for any unintended consequence of their decisions. Imagine if they were forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on malpractice insurance and still faced the threat of multimillion-dollar lawsuits with every single decision they made. If so, a government takeover of health care would be the furthest thing from their minds.

Obamacare proponents would have us believe that we will add 30 million patients to the system without adding providers, we will see no decline in the quality of care for the millions of Americans currently happy with the system, and -if you act now!- we will save money in the process. But why stop there? Why not promise it will no longer rain on weekends and every day will be a great hair day?

America has the finest health care delivery system in the world. Let’s not forget that and put it at risk in the name of reform. Desperate souls across the globe flock to our shores and cross our borders every day to seek our care. Why? Our system provides cures while the government-run systems from which they flee do not. Compare Europe’s common cancer mortality rates to America’s: breast cancer – 52 percent higher in Germany and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer – a staggering 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway; colon cancer – 40 percent higher in the United Kingdom.

Look closer at the United Kingdom. Britain’s higher cancer mortality rate results in 25,000 more cancer deaths per year compared to a similar population size in the United States. But because the U.S. population is roughly five times larger than the United Kingdom’s, that would translate into 125,000 unnecessary American cancer deaths every year. This is more than all the mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles, cousins and children in Topeka, Kan. And keep in mind, these numbers are for cancer alone. America also has better survival rates for other major killers, such as heart attacks and strokes. Whatever we do, let us not surrender the great gains we have made. First, do no harm. Lives are at stake.

Obamacare: Fixing price at any cost

The justification for Obamacare has been to control costs, but the problem is there is little in Obamacare that will do that. Instead, there are provisions that will ration care and artificially set price. This is a confusion of costs and price.

As one example, consider the implications of Obamacare’s financial penalty aimed at your doctor if he seeks the expert care he has determined you need. If your doctor is in the top 10 percent of primary care physicians who refer patients to specialists most frequently – no matter how valid the reasons – he will face a 5 percent penalty on all their Medicare reimbursements for the entire year. This scheme is specifically designed to deny you the chance to see a specialist. Each year, the insidious nature of that arbitrary 10 percent rule will make things even worse as 100 percent of doctors try to stay off that list. Many doctors will try to avoid the sickest patients, and others will simply refuse to accept Medicare. Already, 42 percent of doctors have chosen that route, and it will get worse. Your mother’s shiny government-issued Medicare health card is meaningless without doctors who will accept it.

Obamacare will further diminish access to health care by lowering reimbursements for medical care without regard to the costs of that care. Price controls have failed spectacularly wherever they’ve been tried. They have turned neighborhoods into slums and have caused supply chains to dry up when producers can no longer profit from providing their goods. Remember the Carter-era gas lines? Medical care is not immune from this economic reality. We cannot hope that our best and brightest will pursue a career in medicine, setting aside years of their lives – for me, 13 years of school and training – to enter a field that might not even pay for the student loans it took to get there.

Giving power back to people

I believe there is a better way. The problems in the American health care system are not caused by a shortage of government intrusion. They will not be solved by more government intrusion. In fact, our current problems were precisely, though unintentionally, created by government.

World War II-era wage-control measures – a form of price controls – ushered in a perverted system in which we turn to our employers for insurance and the government penalizes us if we choose to purchase insurance for ourselves. You are not given the opportunity to be a wise consumer of health care and compare prices as well as quality in any meaningful way. Worse still, your insurance company is not answerable to you because you are not its customer. It is answerable to your employer, whose interests differ from your own.

Insurance companies have been vilified for following the perverse rules that government has created for them. But it gets worse. The government, always knowing best, deploys insurance commissioners across the land to dictate what the insurance companies must provide, whether you want it or not, and each time, your premiums increase. Obamacare will make all of this worse, not better.

One of America’s founding principles is our trust in the people and their economic freedom to rule their own lives. We should decouple health insurance from employers and empower patients to be consumers once again. Allow them to determine the insurance plan that best meets their families’ needs and which company will provide it. This will unleash a wave of competition that will drive costs down in a way that price controls never have. Eliminate the artificial state boundary rules that protect insurance companies from true competition and watch as voters demand that their state insurance commissioners get the heck out of the way. Innovative companies will drive down costs similar to how Geico and Progressive have worked for automobile insurance. And it won’t cost taxpayers a trillion dollars in the process.

This free-market approach has worked for everything from high-definition TVs to breakfast cereals, but will it work for medicine? It already is. Take Lasik eye surgery, for example. Because patients are allowed to be informed consumers and can shop anywhere, doctors work hard for their business. Services, availability and expertise have all increased, and costs have decreased. Should consumers demand it, insurance companies – now answerable to you rather than your employer – would cover it.

Between Barack and a hard place

I have personally trained and practiced in both the government-run and free-market segments of American medicine. The difference is vast. Patients see this for themselves, and this may be why, according to a recent CNN poll, they oppose Obamacare nearly 3 to 1. I am with them. It is difficult for me to speak publicly against the president on his central issue, but too much is at stake.

I wish my cousin Barack the greatest of success in office. But I feel duty-bound to rise in opposition to Obamacare. I must take a stand for my patients, my profession and, ultimately, my country. The problems caused by government will not be solved by growing government. Now that this new era of big-government takeovers has spread to our health care system, it’s not just our freedoms or our wallets that are at stake. It’s our lives.

Dr. Milton R. Wolf is a radiologist in Kansas. He is Barack Obama’s second cousin once removed. President Obama’s great-great grandfather, Thomas Creekmore McCurry, is Dr. Wolf’s great-grandfather. Dr. Wolf’s mother, Anna Margaret McCurry, was five years older than Mr. Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham. The two were childhood friends until the Dunhams moved from Kansas to Seattle in 1955.

Washington Times.com

CAREFUL – WHAT’S IN YOUR COFFEE?

There’s a movement underway that reportedly started on Facebook. It is an obvious attempt at countering the Tea Party Movement although they are trying to attach themselves to the Tea Party Movement. They call themselves the COFFEE PARTY. When I noticed several people on my Facebook friends list who are conservatives listed as “liking” their Facebook page, I felt compelled to warn fellow conservatives about this very deceptive group.

The left has found out that direct opposition to the Tea Party Movement along with the very “tolerant” name-calling that includes some pornographic references has not worked. The Tea Party Movement has continued to grow rapidly as the majority of Americans are fed up with big government and the Washington system. The Tea Party Movement has transcended political ideologies, party affiliations, and all walks of life. The Republicans thought they saw a huge political opportunity and tried to attach themselves to it. The Tea Party, or rather, fellow citizens more or less told them, “Uh, no, some of y’all need to go too.”

In order to see through the Coffee Party movement, let’s start with the founder, Annabel Park. First, Ms. Park actively campaigned for Barack Obama in 2008. She was one of the founders of the YouTube channel UNITED FOR OBAMA. That alone seems to be incongruous with the statement Ms. Park made to the New York Times, “We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party . . .” Since Obama was the most radically left of all the Senators, including Ted Kennedy, just the fact she is an ardent Obama supporter would in and of itself indicate she opposes the Tea Party.

Next, let’s look at their website and see for what they stand. When the INFO tab is clicked, the first thing that is noticed is that many of the articles’ referenced are from MEDIA MATTERS, a radically left political website. The Coffee Party supports government takeover of the nation’s healthcare system, legalization of illegal immigrants already in the U.S., sides with the handful of scientists who espouse climate change (some of whom have been discredited for suspected tampering with climate data to “prove” global warming), believes the Democrats and the Obama administration have not been fiscally irresponsible, supports Obama’s policies on terrorism, and attacks Sarah Palin.

“We’re not the opposite of the Tea Party,” Ms. Park told the New York times. “We’re a different model of civic participation, but in the end we may want some of the same things.”

“We need to roll up our sleeves, put our heads together and work it out.”

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Sounds like she wants to bring liberals and conservatives together to bring about positive change in Washington, doesn’t it? Well, if you’re still not convinced, check out some of Ms. Park’s Twitter tweets:

Doesn’t sound like the coffee wants to join with the tea to me.

Don’t be fooled by this. It’s simply another attempt by the radical left to regain their political stature. They know they are in big trouble and this November will be just the beginning. Voters do not seem to have the short memories of days past.

FORGOT HE WAS BLACK???

Here is another shining example of the ludicrous left trying to impress the public. This is Chris Matthews on MSNBC, which very little of the American viewing public watches anyway (TV BY THE NUMBERS and BROADCASTING CABLE), with one serious case of foot-in-mouth disease.

This should enrage black people everywhere. Saying that he forgot he was black insinuates very strongly that the president performed as well as a white president. How else can this be interpreted? What difference does it make if President Obama were white, black, or whatever? It has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Not only did Matthews make a huge blunder here, but, instead of letting it go and hoping it would slip under the radar, he goes on and on along racial lines bringing more attention to it.

Let’s play a game for a few minutes called, “Can You Imagine?” The object is to imagine someone other than a liberal/progressive/whatever they are calling themselves this week said this. Here we go.

Can you imagine what would happen if I said to any black person, “You did a great job . . . for a while I forgot you were black!” Yeah, we know, and the subsequent explosion would be more than justified. Arrogant? Very. Surprising to hear it from the left? No. Before they level any accusations of being racist at conservatives, just maybe they need to look at some of their own revered icons.

Can you imagine what would happen if . . . Sean Hannity of Fox News had said this? You guessed it . . . a liberal media explosion. There would be no justifications accepted by the left, only accusations of their favorite, “racism”, then “hate-mongering”, “hate speech” by the “radical right wingnuts”. With the upcoming November mid-term elections with all the polls showing incumbent Democrats being in big trouble, such a remark would of course be tied to the Republican party, no matter how far they had to stretch their imagination to do it.

Can you imagine what would happen if . . . Rush Limbaugh had said this? See Sean Hannity above. Bullhorn sales would go through the roof.

Can you imagine what would happen if . . . Sarah Palin had said this? See Rush Limbaugh above again. The left is doing it’s best to destroy her now because they are very afraid she will be a presidential candidate in 2012, so the media blitz would be incredible. There would be more name-calling than any of us could imagine . . . twenty-four hours a day for the next three months. The left already made a big deal of out Ms. Palin writing notes on her hand with even White House spokesman Robert Gibbs putting in his less than two cents worth (click HERE for the New York Daily News article). The firestorm from this one would be enormous.

Very good! You get an A+ for getting them all right!

It’s nothing more than the same old double standard. No one in the media has brought this up, and no one has called Matthews out for his insensitive and unacceptable comment, not even Obama supporters. But then, there are not that many Obama supporters left, so scratch that last one.

AND SPEAKING OF THE “CORNHUSKER KICKBACK” . . .

You guessed it, the leftists in Washington aren’t about to give up on taking over your health care, even though 58% of likely voters now oppose it, and 61% say start all over (according to Rasmussen). The numbers of opposition just keep going up. Do you think they’re in such a big hurry to push this through because they know their days are numbered with mid-term elections coming up?

Here is a LEGISLATIVE ALERT from Tim Wildmon, President of the AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION with the latest.

It’s back – ObamaCare 2.0, worse than the first Call your senators and your representative today to insist that they vote “No” on socialized medicine.

CALL NOW Enter Your Zip Code President Obama, determined to press for the government takeover of our entire health care system, is reviving a tweaked version of the Senate health care “reform”bill. If possible, it’s even worse than the one Sen. Harry Reid cobbled together in secret and then sprung on the country just before Christmas.The president will hold a highly-publicized just-for-show “summit” Thursday in an effort to breathe life into his version of this monstrosity. As our good friend Gary Bauer of the Campaign for Working Families and American Values points out, here are just some of the problems with the bill: The president is threatening to use what’s called the “reconciliation process,” a gimmick that will enable him to enact socialized medicine with just 51 votes in the Senate. A Rasmussen poll found that 58% of likely voters oppose both the Senate and House health care bills, and 61% want Congress to tear up both bills and start over. The American people have already made it clear they do not want a government takeover of health care. The president says his proposal will cost about $1 trillion, but the Congressional Budget Office says the language is too vague even to come up with an official cost estimate. Under his plan, senior citizens living off investment income will get hit with a new tax on so-called “unearned” income. (It’s hardly “unearned” – you worked all your life to build those investments.) It extends the “Cornhusker kickback” to every state in the Union, essentially offering a bribe to every senator. It includes the unconstitutional mandate that every American buy insurance or pay a fine. (This means you will get taxed for not doing something!) It imposes price controls on the health insurance industry. Every time in history price controls have been used, they have resulted in shortages and rationing. It not only makes taxpayer funding of abortion a right, it provides for the direct funding of abortions through Community Health Centers and would lead to mandates that would require every private insurance plan to cover elective abortions. But as Gary says, “we stopped socialized medicine before…and I believe we can stop them again.” Take Action Enter your ZIP CODE (above in the Call Now box) and click “GO” to get the direct telephone numbers for your senators and your representative, along with suggested talking points for your call. Please politely but firmly urge him (or her) to vote “No” on socialized medicine. It’s critical for you to call your senators and your representative today in advance of the Thursday health care summit. (MY NOTE: It’s still not too late to contact your Senators and Representative. Click on the “LEGISLATIVE ALERT” hyperlink above to use the “Call Now” box.) Forward this important alert to your friends and family. Sincerely, Tim Wildmon, President American Family Association

THE LATEST NUMBERS

It’s been awhile since I’ve posted any poll numbers, so here’s a few. This is from RASMUSSEN.

 

First, here are the polls from upcoming Congressional mid-term elections:

 

In Wisconsin, former Republican Governor Tommy Thompson is ahead in the polls over incumbent Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, 47% to 43%. And Thompson has not even entered the race!

In Iowa, Republican SENATOR CHARLES GRASSLEY leads former Iowa House member Bob Krause 56% to 30%, 59% to 31% over former U. S. Attorney Roxanne Conlon, and 61% to 25% over State Senator Tom Fiegen.

 

In Nevada, Chairwoman of the Nevada Republican Party Sue Lowden leads incumbent Senator Harry Reid by a margin of 50% to 40%. Former UNLV basketball player Danny Tarkanian leads Reid 50% to 43%.

 

In additional to the national races, Rasmussen polls show Democratic incumbent governors and Democratic state legislators are also running behind Republican challengers.

 

If I’m going to bore your with statistics, you know I HAVE to include the President’s approval ratings. As of January 29, 2010, 25% of voters nationally strongly approve of the job Obama is doing as President. On the other hand, 42% of voters strongly disapprove. This gives President Obama an approval index of -17% which Rasmussen calculates by subtracting the percentage of those who strongly disapprove from the percentage of those who strongly approve. This is down two percentage points from just a couple of days ago.

 

So, I think the Democrats might just possibly be in a little trouble, as in a serious meltdown. Massachusetts was the warning shot. To the Democrats, it sounded like an atom bomb.

Liberal Democrats, hear that rumble? See the dust cloud on the horizon? That’s us, the angry American voters, coming to a voting booth near you, November 2010.

 

 

AN OBVIOUS CASE OF RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION

The article below came from ONE NEWS NOW and tells about how a court ordered a ten-year-old girl to go to public school rather than continue to be home-schooled.

New Hampshire Court orders Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school

Pete Chagnon – OneNewsNow – 8/26/2009 4:45:00 PM
Updated 8/27/2009 3:00 PM (Central)

A Christian homeschool girl in New Hampshire has been ordered into government-run public school for having “sincerely held” religious beliefs – and the Alliance Defense Fund is troubled by the ruling.

The case involves divorced couple Martin Kurowski and Brenda Voydatch and their 10-year-old daughter, Amanda. The couple split in 1999 when they were living in Massachusetts, and the proceedings moved to New Hampshire after Voydatch relocated to that state with her daughter in 2002.

Although Voydatch has primary custody over Amanda, both parents agreed to a parenting plan that included joint decision-making responsibility. A court-appointed guardian served as a mediator.

A source of contention between the parents has been the mother’ court.
The situation was then analyzed by the court-appointed guardian, who made a recommendation to the court. During the evaluation process it was determined that Amanda was excelling in her schooling and used curriculum that was approved by her school district. The curriculum used in her home schooling was created by certified teachers, and Amanda routinely took standardized tests.

Furthermore, Amanda attended her local public school to take art, Spanish, and P.E. classes. Her public school instructors also commented on the fact that Amanda was well-rounded in her social skills. But a sticking point arose concerning Voydatch’s Christian faith.

The court order stated: “According to the guardian ad litem’s further report and testimony, the counselor found Amanda to lack some youthful characteristics. She appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith.” (It’s called backbone, something government, especially politicians, hate in the citizenry.) The guardian noted that during a counseling session, Amanda tried to witness to the counselor and appeared “visibly upset” when the counselor purposefully did not pay attention.

The guardian also noted that Amanda’s relationship with her father suffered because she did not think he loved her as much as he said he did due to the fact that he refused to “adopt her religious beliefs.”

According to the court order, the guardian concluded that Amanda’s “interests, and particularly her intellectual and emotional development, would be best served by exposure to a public school setting in which she would be challenged to solve problems presented by a group learning situation and…Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior.“ NOTE: “Different points of view” translates to “points of view approved by the government”. Needing exposure to a “group learning situation” is completely invalidated by the fact that she attended public school for three classes. The problem is that she’s a Christian.

Story continues below ——————————————————————————–
What is the most important fundamental right or freedom being denied
by forcing this student to attend a government-run, public school?
Vote in our poll
——————————————————————————–Furthermore the court order states that despite Amanda’s mother insisting that her daughter’s religious beliefs were her own, “it would be remarkable if a ten-year-old child who spends her school time with her mother and the vast majority of all her other time with her mother would seriously consider adopting any other religious point of view.” NOTE: I certainly won’t “consider adopting any other religous point of view.” Neither do the Islamics. Their religion teaches them to kill anyone who leaves Islam or is not Islamic. But I guess that’s OK. Although the court noted that it “is extremely reluctant to impose on parents a decision about a child’s education,” it ruled that Amanda must attend public school.

Alliance Defense Fund-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons has filed a motion to reconsider. He says this ruling is dangerous to home schoolers because it will set a precedent for other cases.

“Every time you have a court order that uses a wrong standard or misapplies constitutional law, everyone’s rights are eventually at stake,” the attorney explains. “Because what happens with precedent is it gets expanded — it gets cited in other cases.”

Simmons believes this case goes beyond the initial divorce and custody battle with this ruling because the standard used in the decision contained in the court order is troubling. He contends that the child’s religion should not have played a role in the decision, and that the court should have focused solely on the academic merits of Amanda’s education which proved to be excellent.

I agree with Mr. Simmons. This whole thing went far beyond the merits of the case. The girls religious beliefs should never have entered into it. The academic merits should have been the only thing considered, and since she was excelling beyond full-time public school students, there should not have been a problem. Mr. Simmons is correct in that when such a mishandled ruling is made, the case is used as a precedent and its scope always gets expanded. So, is a parent’s option to home-school their child in danger? Yes, it most certainly is. If Mr. Simmons is unsuccessful in his appeal, it will be one more freedom we will have lost.

Other than discriminating against her for her religiious beliefs, I think it’s another case of a home schooled child putting the heavily funded government school system with degreed professionals to shame.

What’s coming is home-schooling your child will be illegal at some point. The government does not want a child to be educated without government influence. The government and pro-public education special interest groups have been very successful in spreading many myths and outright lies about home-schooled children to the point that people look at you strangely many times if you say anything about it. Home-schooled children are looked upon as social and psychological misfits, because after all, the government knows better how to take care of your child than you do.