Grizzly Groundswell Blogtalk Radio This Coming Monday Night

Dana Hanley and Gary Fouse on this week's Grizzly Groundswell Blog Network Show- 060208, 7:30-9pm CST

This week we have a jam packed show with special guests Dana Hanley and Gary Fouse!

Dana Hanley, our Grizzly Groundswell Governor of Nebraska is one of the premier home school bloggers out there with her blog: Principled Discovery. Now she is expanding her blog into online radio on www.blogtalkradio.com as a member of the Grizzly Groundswell Radio Network, assuring home schoolers and her voice are heard! Dana and her family have committed themselves to getting the home school message out there and we here at the Grizzly Groundswell are so fortunate to have her voice here on the Grizzly Groundswell! Tune in to see what her plans are and get to know this great Grizzly Groundswell Author and Radio show host is up too today!

Gary Fouse, our Grizzly Groundswell Mayor of Lake Forest, California, is on the cutting edge with his blog Fousesquawk . Gary is also working with me to get extend his blog into a www.blogtalkradio.com radio show on the Grizzly Groundswell Radio network. Gary will fill us in on his exciting writing, standing up and stepping into action in the happenings in the University of Cal Irvine.

This is a Jam packed show and I will try to give an opportunity for callers as well. Feel free to join us in our chat room and of course here at the www.grizzlygroundswell.com and www.grizzlygroundswellradio.com

The show can be listened to on www.blogtalkradio.com and www.blogtalkradio.com/grizzlygroundswell

Join us 7:30 PM until 9 PM CST Monday Night.

~Teddy Bear

(Teddy Bear is Chad Everson, editor of Grizzly Groundswell Blog.)

What is Wrong With the Republican Party

"Why am I not retiring in Washington? Because I don't want to have to listen to a bunch of people telling me how they are saving the world. I've already saved the world."

-An associate of mine who was in the process of retiring from the Dept of Agriculture, told to me in the 1980s while I was working at the US Consulate in Milan, Italy.


Back around 1990-1, when George H W Bush was president, I had recently moved from Pittsburgh to the Washington DC area (Northern Virginia) when I was transferred to DEA's Office of Training in Quantico. (Fortunately for me, I didn't have to drive into DC to work, but had a leisurely drive to Quantico through back roads. I was also able to avoid our HQs office with all of its bureaucracy-which I will refer to later). At any rate, one day, I got a letter in the mail from some bunch identifying themselves as "The Republican Inner Circle". I wasn't sure why I got the letter since I have never been registered with any political party though I traditionally vote Republican. The said letter just another way of asking for money, albeit in an interesting way.

I don't remember the exact details, but it went something like this: If I contributed a certain minimum amount of money, I would get some certificate or patch or some memorabilia identifying me a member of the Republican Inner Circle. A larger contribution would enable me to "be briefed" on policy by some "important administration official" (probably a DEA Hqs type, I thought to myself). An even larger contribution would enable me to have lunch with a higher administration official, whereupon, I could exchange views with this unnamed person. As I recall, the maximum gift would mean I could attend a "high-level Republican strategy session", whatever that meant.

Mercifully, the contribution categories came to an end (in the multi-thousands of dollars). I figured sarcastically that if I gave, say, a million bucks, I would be able to push the red button and launch World War 3.

Suffice to say, this left a bitter taste in my mouth. I sent no money, and I sent no reply. The result was that I was even more convinced that Washington was inhabited by people had had lost all contact with normal society and that I had made the right decision by remaining independent-no matter whom I voted for.

This stretch of living in the DC area lasted 8 1/2 years. It wasn't my first period of living there, at least temporarily. I had spent 6 months in the DC area while attending the State Department Language School (Foreign Service Institute) in Rosslyn, Va in 1974. (Don't get me going on the State Department.)

This rather convoluted introduction about Washington DC is meant to explain one of the main things that has gone wrong with the Republican Party today-namely, that they have fallen victim to Potomac Fever, in effect, have become corrupted by the Washington mentality.

It is hard to explain the Washington mentality to anyone who has not spent a lot of time there. It not only affects politicians and their staffs; it also affects government workers who are eventually transferred to Washington by their agencies. In the case of DEA, it is policy that once an agent rises from street agent to supervisor, a HQS tour of duty of 2-3 years is a necessary career step. At that point, an agent literally changes worlds and outlook (sometimes referred to as a frontal lobotomy). He or she goes from being a cop to being just another suit working in the bureaucracy-carrying out the wishes and policies of the top levels of the agency, which in turn is under the supervision of the Attorney General.

In the case of politicians, many of whom have now spent decades in Washington, they are completely removed from the every-day world as they wield power in the process. But we should remember that the Republicans are supposed to be the party of smaller government, less government intrusion into people's lives and lower taxes, right?

Well, not exactly.

Something has gone wrong with the Republican Party in recent years. At the risk of making an oversimplification, they came to Washington and became part of the system. Many have arrived in Washington thinking they were going to change Washington. Not going to happen. Washington has changed them.

For Democrats, this is not a real problem since they stand for bigger government anyway. They are basically doing what their liberal constituents want them to do; make more laws, more regulations, create new programs and raise taxes.

But the Republicans-especially those who came to power in 1994- were supposed to stand for something different. They came up with the Contract with America, thanks to Newt Gingrich. They took control of Congress. George W Bush has been president for more than 7 years years, and what has happened? Did government become smaller? No. Did spending decrease? No. It is higher than ever. Have Republicans fought earmarks and pork barrel spending? No. Remember the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska? Introduced by a Republican. Many in California will recall the recent Transportation Bill that gave tons of money to Kern County so that a beltway could be built around Bakersfield. Kern County actually got more dollars-not per capita-more dollars than LA County, even though Kern has a tiny fraction of the population of LA County. How did this happen? Thanks to a Republican congressman from Kern County.

So, let's be frank: with some exceptions, Republicans in Congress have completely betrayed their constituents back home. They have fallen in love with the Washington culture, have joined the system, and the only thing that matters is getting re-elected and maintaining their power. As a result, they have paid the price. They lost Congress in 2006, and they will probably suffer more losses in 2008.

They deserve it.

We have also seen more than our share of Republican scandals in recent years. Mark Foley was forced to resign when it became known he was chasing under-age pages around the Capitol. Larry Craig was arrested for soliciting an undercover vice cop for sex in a Minneapolis bathroom. David Vitter got caught up in the DC prostitution ring. Ted Stevens recently had his Alaska home served with an FBI search warrant. The latter three names I mentioned are still in Congress, refusing to resign.

Meanwhile, with certain exceptions, Republicans in Congress have joined their Democratic counterparts in refusing to do anything meaningful to stop illegal immigration. Only an outraged populace, that bombarded them with calls, emails, letters and faxes last year, kept them from passing an amnesty bill.

And finally, what do we have for a Republican presidential candidate this year? Why, it's John McCain, who has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into supporting border enforcement, who organized the "Gang of 14" that made a deal with Democrats when they were blocking judicial nominees, and who gave us McCain-Feingold "campaign reform". To be sure, McCain has many admirable qualities, and he figures to do the right thing in the War on Terror, judges and spending. But he has antagonized many conservatives with other actions as well as his apparent disdain for those who point it out.

So what should Republicans do to right the ship?

1 They must stand for conservative principles-even if outnumbered by the Democrats-even if they must go down to defeat on votes. At least, we will know who stands for what.

2 They must weed out the bad apples who have discredited them (Vitters, Craig, Stevens et al.)

3 Republican candidates for office should bluntly tell their supporters not to expect pork from them once they get to Washington.

4 Newly-elected Republicans should refuse to suck up to the senior leaders who expect them to go along with a corrupt system. If they don't get plum committees or they wind up with an office next to the men's room, tough. If their party doesn't support them for re-election tough. At least the public will know.

Finally, cases of out and out political corruption involving bribery need to be vigorously investigated by the Justice Department and offenders punished in draconian fashion by the courts.

I know what you are saying: How naive. Well, yes, it is naive. I don't really expect these things to happen. But it has to start with the voters, who need to let Washington know that they are fed up with a corrupt system of government. Maybe then, the Republican Party can return to its core constituency.

In the meantime, I sure ain't joining.

Let's Play "Name That Copycat"

Match the speaker with the words.

a Father Michael Pfleger
b Pat Boone
c Michael Bolton

1 "Tutti Frutti-Oh Rutti"
2 "When a man loves a woman"
3 "She wasn't the only one crying. There was a lot of white people crying too."

Answers:

a- 3
b- 1
c- 2

Scott McClellan' s Book

So now comes the latest tell-all book from a Washington insider who seeks to cash in on his White House experience. Former White House Press Secretary, Scott McClellan has now come out with his book, "What Happened", which trashes his former boss, President Bush, as well as Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Reactions to the book, as would be predicted, are varied according to what side of the fence you sit. Democrats and liberals are playing up the book for all it's worth. Just today, McClellan appeared with Meredith Vieira on the "Today Show" and took up an entire show with none other than that noted Bush admirer, Keith Olbermann (MSNBC). Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL)wants to bring McClellan before Congress to testify. On the other side of the fence, White House officials are expressing dismay at the "Scott we thought we knew". Bob Dole has released a letter he sent to McClellan calling him a miserable creature who is cashing in on his White House service. Others point out that McClellan refers to meetings he did not attend. Still others are saying that there is nothing knew in the book; Bush did not handle Katrina well? He tried to sell Iraq to the public? What else is new? Why didn't he speak out if he saw things that he thought were wrong? (He served as press secretary from 2003-2006).

For me, sitting here in Orange County, California, I don't know what is true or not true. I will not read the book (nor do I read political autobios that I would agree with-too self-serving).

Yet, I have the same questions and doubts that others have expressed. Here is another in a long line of political animals who have come to Washington, tasted power in the shadow of a president, and cashed in with a book deal after they have left government service. Is it unseemly? You bet it is. Does it speak ill of the caliber of men and women who are running Washington? Absolutely.

Of course, McClellan is already telling the world his true motivation for writing the book-he wants to "change the culture in Washington".

Of course he does. In the words of so many who have preceded him:

"THAT'S WHY I WROTE THIS BOOK, LARRY." (The Larry King on Life Support appearance should be any day now.)

Scott McClellan may be totally honest in his book for all I know. But for now, I tend to think that Bob Dole has it right.

Oh No! Another Obama Minister- Meet Father Michael Pfleger

Father Michael Pfleger (R) with Louis Farrakhan



Tapes are now surfacing on YouTube of a sermon given at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago (Barack Obama's Church) by activist Roman Catholic priest, Michael Pfleger. The sermon was given on May 25, 2008. Pfleger is a controversial priest who is associated with the St Sabina Catholic Church in Chicago, a largely black congregation. (Pfleger is white.) In his sermon, Pfleger copies the oratorical style of his friend, Jeremiah Wright, alternating between using a soft, low voice then rising to a screaming crescendo. (It has to be the most ridiculous performance since Pat Boone sang "Tutti Frutti".)

Pfleger is known as a renegade priest. He has been involved in various social movements in Chicago including work with drug users and prostitutes. However, he is not afraid to venture into political matters, making controversial statements and drawing the ire of his Bishop in the process.

In May of 2007, Pfleger appeared at a Rainbow Push protest outside Chuck's Gun Shop, which had been identified as the source of many guns used in Chicago gang shootings. During his talk, Pfleger said (referring to the shop owner), "We're going to find you and snuff you out like a rat. Like a rat, you can hide. But like a rat, we're going to catch you and pull you out."

These are the words of a Roman Catholic priest. A Roman Catholic priest who is an associate of Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan and Barack Obama. (Up until a couple of weeks ago, Pfleger was listed on Obama's web site as a "spiritual endorser". It is also being reported that Obama obtained a $100,000 dollar earmark for Pfleger's church.

In this week's sermon, Pfleger spoke on the on-going election. Shouting to the rafters, he scolded white people who don't hold themselves responsible for slavery.

"I must now address the one who says, 'don't hold me responsible for what my ancestors did. But you have enjoyed the benefits of what your ancestors did! Unless you are ready to give up the benefits -throw away your 401 fund. Throw away your trust fund! Throw away all the money that been put away in the company you walked into 'cause your daddy and your granddaddy and your great grandaddy... Unless you are willing to give up the benefits, then you must be responsible for what was done in your generation! 'Cause you are the beneficiary of this insurance policy!"

Then Father Pfleger continues his "sermon" about Hillary Clinton:

"When Hillary was crying and people said that was put on, I really don't believe it was put on. I really believe that she just always thought, 'this is mine. I'm Bill's wife. I'm white, and this is mine. I just gotta get up and step into the plate'

"Then out of nowhere, I'm Barack Obama!"

"Ah, damn! Where did you come from? I'm white! I'm entitled! There's a black man stealing my show!", as he pulls out a hanky and mocks Clinton's crying.

"She wasn't the only one crying. There was a whole lot of white people crying!"

All this as the congregation went wild.

Today, Obama expressed his disagreement and disappointment with Pfleger's remarks. (sound familiar?) In addition, Pfleger has now apologized for his comments about Hillary Clinton. Also, he took pains to point out that his comments were not in accordance with the views of Obama.

The problem is this is hardly the first time Pfleger has made outrageous comments unworthy of a religious figure. Of course, the Bishop in Chicago (Cardinal Francis George) is also deserving of criticism because he is obviously afraid to get rid of this guy.

So now add the name Michael Pfleger to the Obama "honor roll" of questionable associates (Wright, Ayers, Rezko et al).

Let's Play "Name That Uncle"

Red Army victory parade in Red Square 1945. Could Barack Obama's uncle be in that picture? (I don't think so.)


Yesterday, Barack Obama told a crowd of curious on-lookers that his uncle helped liberate Auschwitz.

Fact: Barack Obama never had an uncle. (His mother was an only child.)

Fact: The American Army did not liberate Auschwitz. The Red Army did.

Today, the Obama campaign has issued a clarification that Obama had a great uncle who helped liberate a work camp at Ohrdruf, which was a satellite camp of Buchenwald in the German state of Thuringia. (Auschwitz was in Poland.)

* Normally, I don't do two consecutive "Let's play...", but this was too good to resist.

Let's Play "Name That Pal"

Top: Tony Rezko, Accused Chicago racketeer
Bottom left: Professor Bill Ayers, former Weather Underground bomber
Bottom right: Pastor Jeremiah ("G..D.. America") Wright


The above three persons are all pals of whom?

a John Dillinger
b Al Capone
c Trent Lott
d Ann Coulter
e Barack Obama

Answer: (Is this really necessary?)- e

(This should be the $100 question on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?")

Another Example of Anti-Semitism From the Muslim Student Union at UC-Irvine

Above: Der Stuermer, 1944 issue
Below: MSU portrayal of Ariel Sharon at UCI, May, 2008
(courtesy of Red County blog)



The week before last, UC-Irvine's Muslim Student Union (MSU) hosted one of their quarterly anti-Israel weeks featuring a parade of speakers, some of whom are not only anti-Israel, but anti-America and anti-Jew as well. Of course, the MSU fervently denies they are anti-Jewish-only anti-Zionist. In fact, during their "festivities" at UCI, on at least one occasion, they marched around chanting, "Judaism yes! Zionism no!".

As part of their visual display, the MSU erected a mock wall representing the wall Israel has erected to keep out suicide bombers. The wall contained various photographs, drawings, quotations etc. The one that caught my attention was a caricature of Ariel Sharon drawn in the old style of Julius Streicher's Der Stuermer, an infamous newspaper of the Nazi era that was devoted to propagating hatred of Jews among the German people.

Julius Streicher was the Gauleiter (district leader) of Nuremberg during the Nazi era, as well as the editor of Der Stuermer. Streicher was such a repulsive character that even his fellow Nazis viewed him with disgust (Hitler excluded). To Streicher, the Jews were sexual predators, sacrificing Aryan children for their blood rituals and lusting after and defiling Aryan women.

For illustrations, Der Stuermer's artist was a fellow named Philip Ruprecht, who used the moniker "Fips" in his drawings. Ruprecht's semi-pornographic drawings portrayed Jewish men as fat, bald, and ugly with large hooked noses and thick lips.

After the war, Streicher was put on trial as one of the main Nazi war criminals for his incitement of hatred of Jews that contributed to the eventual Final Solution. Already in forced retirement by the time the war started, Crimes Against Humanity was the only charge he could be convicted of. For this, he was hanged.

Unfortunately, Der Stuermer's style of portraying Jews has survived, mostly in the Middle East, where such caricatures persist. It seems they have also survived among some segments of the American Muslim population-specifically, the Muslim Student organizations in various colleges around the country-at least the one at UCI.

Of course, Ariel Sharon is a hated figure among Muslims and Palestinians as a warrior on behalf of his country. That hardly justifies portraying him in a way that dredges up negative stereotypes of Jews in general, which is exactly what the MSU at UCI did.

Yet, there has been not a word of protest among the professors and leaders of UCI for this type of display (except for me-I included it in a letter to the campus newspaper, New University). To the university, however, this is apparently just another example of their sacred cow-Free Speech. Not only did they allow it to stand for a week, but to my knowledge, no one else who draws a paycheck from the university has said a word about it publicly.

I also called attention to this display in my letter to the director of the Orange County Human Relations Commission, a certain empty suit by the name of Rusty Kennedy. In his nasty reply to me, he attacked me for criticizing UCI's leaders for their negligence, but never said a word about the display.

So the hypocrisy and hatred of the MSU stands naked for all to see. I would invite the reader to compare the above pictures and draw his or her own conclusions. Also be aware that since the MSU receives funding from the university taken from student tuition fees, your tax dollars are being used to pay for this kind of display.

A New Feature- European Blogs

Recently, I have started adding selected European blogs that are speaking out against Islamic extremism and creeping Shariah in that continent. I am now organizing them into a new section entitled: "Our Real European Allies". I will be adding more in the days, weeks, and months ahead. I would encourage you to check out these blogs to see what is going on in Europe-it is really disturbing. I would also encourage you to interact with these blogs, as I do to let them know what is happening here in the US and that there are like-minded folks on this side of the pond.

* Note: I have been advised by the editor of Islam in Europe that they focus on European Muslim issues only, so I would advise you read this blog only. It is quite informative.

The Imposters

"Hi! We're a couple of future presidents. Anyone going to Denver?"

After Sleeping On It.....

Last night, I posted a Memorial Day tribute that was feisty and angry in referring to certain segments who engage in criticism of the military. Maybe it was a reflection of my mood-or that extra glass of wine for dinner I sneak in when my wife is not home, I dunno. I actually woke up in the middle of the night with enough second thoughts to go to the computer and put it back in the draft status. By then, I had already received a retort from my biggest co-respondant asking me if having problems with Abu Ghraib, Guantanemo and waterboarding means denigrating the whole military. Point well taken.

This morning, in looking at that fourth paragraph, I feel a clarification is in order. My friend is correct. Objecting to Abu Ghraib is not denigrating our whole military. In fact, it was the military who investigated the incident and punished those responsible. It was not something that was standard practice, and I don't approve of it either. I just feel it pales in comparison to the torture and beheadings that befall those who are captured by our enemy. As for Guantanemo, that was a political decision to establish that prison camp-one that I agree with. As for waterboarding, as I understand it, it was a practice-now suspended-that was carried out by our intelligence folks as opposed to the military. Reasonable people can disagree on whether it should be done.

As for my references to folks like those who run San Francisco and Berkeley, the most I can do in the way of a retraction is perhaps to say "to heck with you" instead of "to Hell with you".

At any rate, a memorial Day tribute should have focused on honoring our troops-and perhaps leaving it at that.

Memorial Day

This weekend, we celebrate Memorial Day-a tribute to those who have served in our military and especially to those who have given the ultimate sacrifice. Were it not for the American military forces, no one in the world would be living in freedom today.

No one.

Today, our armed forces are engaged in battle against Islamic terrorists-murderous fanatics who would enslave the world in their insane vision of religion. Our military personnel today are the very best of American society, and we should all be so grateful to them. Unfortunately, there are Americans who have never put on the uniform of the military who protest against them-including some of our political leaders. There are people in other countries who owe their very freedom to the American Armed Forces who protest against them.

To those, both in the US and around the world who denigrate our troops, I say to Hell with you. To those who complain about things like Abu Ghraib, Guantanemo and waterboarding- I say to Hell with you. You are not worthy of the sacrifices made by the American military and their families. You are not fit to shine their boots.

This weekend should be a time of gratitude, quiet reflection and celebration of our American heroes. Sadly, some will not be celebrating because they are against everything our military stands for. I am talking, for example, of the city leadership of places like San Francisco and Berkeley, cities that do not welcome Navy battleships or military recruiters. To them, I say to Hell with you.

There are those in Congress who have compared our soldiers to Nazis, Soviet Gulags, Genghis Khan, terrorists, and so on. To them, I say to Hell with you.

I am sorry that anger has entered into my own personal tribute to our military on their day. But the simple fact remains that there are too many in the US-and the world who are not worthy of the sacrifices made by our heroes.