14 Year Old Girl Danced at the All Star Topless Strip Club in Detroit, Arrests Made

A Detroit strop club was busted as a 14 year old girl was allegedly dancing at the topless bar. I guess 14 is the new 21 for dirt bags like Andrew Hutson, the manager of the topless bar.  The All Star 8 Mile strip club advertised that ‘a steady stream of hot, Victoria’s Secret looking dancers,’ but limits admission to people 21 or older.  Too bad the dirt bags there felt it ok to hire 14 year olds.

Andrew Hudson, arrested, crimes against children

The manager of a Detroit strip club was charged after authorities learned a 14-year-old girl was employed as a topless dancer, making several hundred dollars a night, authorities said Friday.

The 31-year-old manager of the All Star topless bar was arraigned Friday on a charge of child sexually abusive activity.

Read more

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer Signs Law that Makes it Illegal for Illegal Immigrants to be in USA

What part “ILLEGAL” does Barack Husein Obama not understand about “ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS”.

It is the federal government responsibility to protect it’s citizens, the borders and the United States of America. The federal government has failed miserably. Amnesty is not the answer.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the immigration bill into state law that would actually make it illegal for illegal aliens to be in the US of A, what a novel concept. The law will actually make it a state crime to be in the country illegally. The full text of the bill can be read HERE.

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

It will require migrants to produce papers verifying their status when asked to do so by a police officer.  Arizona has become one of the busiest border states for human and drug smuggling in the United States.

Arizona’s immigration law is now considered the toughest in the nation.

“Respect for the rule of law means respect for every law,” said Brewer, a Republican. “People across America are watching Arizona”.

“We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act,” Brewer added. “But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation.”

Brewer’s decision came just hours after President Obama called the proposal “misguided.” At a naturalization ceremony for new U.S. citizens today, Obama pressed Congress to revamp federal immigration policy or face the possibility of “irresponsibility by others.”

Misguided Mr President? Misguided and radical LEFT might be defined as a President who is sworn to defend the United States, who in stead when a State decided to defend its border from individuals committing crimes against America instead stated as “misguided” and may violate a person’s civil rights. Illegal immigrants have civil rights? So much for them being here illegally.

AZ Governor Brewer ignored criticism from President Obama and went forward and signed the bill into law. Rather peculiar that Obama felt the need to criticize an issue that his Administration has made promises on and has avoided since becoming President. What part about illegal does President Obama not get? Isn’t Obama supposed to uphold the laws of the land?

The legislation, sent to the Republican governor by the GOP-led Legislature, makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It also requires local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants; allows lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws; and makes it illegal to hire illegal immigrants for day labor or knowingly transport them.

The law sends “a clear message that Arizona is unfriendly to undocumented aliens,” said Peter Spiro, a Temple University law professor and author of the book “Beyond Citizenship: American Identity After Globalization.”

Obama makes his push toward illegal immigrant Amnesty

The American voter now has another issue to vote on in 2010 and 2012 when Barack Obama runs for re-election.  Obama says that the American people demand and deserve a solution. Yes the do; however, just as with health care reform, WE THE PEOPLE want nothing to do with your leftist Amnesty garbage.

This President could care less about passing anything with regards to immigration reform that the people deserve. We say this already play out with Obamacare. Just the other day the admission was finally made that Obamacare would raise health care costs, not lower them as promised.

Obama talks about laws that people want and deserve.  70% of the Arizona voters support the tough immigration bill that was passed and signed into law by Gov. Jan Brewer. Only 23% opposed it. What people are you referring to Barack Obama? Who is misguided Barack?

The Arizona legislature has now passed the toughest measure against illegal immigration in the country, authorizing local police to stop and check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds that 70% of likely voters in Arizona approve of the legislation, while just 23% oppose it.

Media Finally Admits that Obamacare Will Increase Health Care Costs, So Much for Obama’s Health Care Principles

America, read the following and ask yourself how that Obama “Hopey, Changey” thing is working out for you.

What a shock, Obamacare will increase health care costs after all. Too bad this was not admitted by CMS prior to the vote on Obamacare when Democrats and Obama were allowed to spin that it would do just the opposite. So much for bending the cost curve.

Remember President Barack Hussein Obama’s three tenants of health care? Obama’s three principles of health care reform were 1) the rising cost of health care must be brought down, 2) Americans must have the freedom to keep whatever doctor and health care plan they have or to choose a new doctor and health care plan if they want it and 3) all Americans must have quality affordable health care.

Any comprehensive health care plan that is sent to Obama’s desk must have these three principles. Oh, and it was supposed to be a transparent process where all views are welcome too. We all know how that worked out as Pelosi House passed Obamacare in partisan vote.

Republicans warned you that health care costs would not go down, in fact they would rise. Republicans warned that no one could guarantee that you could keep your own doctor and health care and they also warned that quality would go down as well

Guess what America … Republicans were right and Obama lied. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services concludes the provisions in Obamacare will increase the nation’s health care tab over the next 10 years instead of bringing the costs down as Obama promised.

The Obama administration on Friday defended the new health insurance law after a report from its own Medicare services agency showed the provisions will increase the nation’s health care tab over the next 10 years instead of bringing costs down.

The sobering assessment by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services concludes what Republicans had warned about during heated debate — that the double-counting of Medicare spending — as both savings and as a means to shore up the debt-ridden government fund for seniors’ health care — means the cost is unrealistic.

The analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years, or $311 billion, up from the $222 billion previous estimated.

Of course, Remember when Obama said this doozy that premiums would go down and premiums through the work place would fall 3000%.  These are the lies that this President spewed to the people. We are supposed to believe that Obama did not know that his plan would raise the cost. Sure he didn’t.

Obama’s ridiculous 3000% lowering of premiums comment

The news got even worse for the Obamacare plan that Democrats rammed down the throats of Americans knowing very well that the claims they were making were complete fabrications. What happened to Obama promise and pledge that Obamacare would lower costs and individuals would have the freedom to keep their own coverage?

But House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Friday the report shows that not only will the national health care costs increase, it will force more than 7 million seniors off their current Medicare coverage.

“According to his own administration’s analysis, the health care law the president signed one month ago today would violate his pledge to ‘bend the cost curve’ and force millions of seniors off their current Medicare coverage. This is in addition to what we already know about how this new law is squeezing employers with job-killing tax hikes and leaving middle-class families to brace for higher premiums,” he said.

Among the findings, the actuary concluded are as follows:

• About 14 million people would lose their employer coverage by 2019 as smaller employers terminate coverage and workers who currently have employer coverage become enrolled in Medicaid;
• The estimated reductions in the growth rate of health spending “may not be fully achievable” because “Medicare productivity adjustments could become unsustainable even within the next 10 years, and over time the reductions in the scope of employer-sponsored health insurance could also become an issue”;
• New fees and taxes on medical device makers will “generally be passed through to health consumers in the form of higher drug and devices prices and higher premiums”;
• By 2011 and 2012 the initial $5 billion in federal funding for the creation of a national high-risk pool “would be exhausted, resulting in substantial premium increases to sustain the program; we anticipate that such increases would limit further participation”

Is it any wonder why nearly a month after Obama was signed this health care reform bill into law that so many Americans are opposed to it more than ever and want Obamacare repealed. This will continue to plague Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections and thereafter.

Democrat lies will come home to roost in November.

60% of Americans Support a Government Recognized National Day of Prayer

Recently Wisconsin District Court Judge Barbara Brandriff Crabb ruled that the National Day of Prayer was unconstitutional. The National Day of Prayer was declared by Congress in 1952; however, it’s origins date back to 1775 and the Continental Congress.

However, in a recent Rasmussen poll, 60% of Americans are in favor of a government recognized Day of Prayer while only 28% are opposed. Note it is a government recognized, not government making a law respecting an establishment of religion. This is where the anti-religion crowd and this liberal judge get it wrong. A National Day of Prayer has nothing to do with the “Establishment clause” of The First Amendment.  I guess we can presume that the atheist group who brought the initial suit is part of the minority 28%.

But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 60% of Americans favor having the federal government recognize a National Day of Prayer. Just 28% are opposed. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure.

Rev. C. Welton Gaddy, a Baptist minister from Louisiana and president of the Interfaith Alliance, which includes representatives of many religious faiths, praised the judge’s decision, saying, “Maintaining clear boundaries between religion and government only serves to strengthen both.”

Forty-seven percent (47%) of Americans agree with Geddy’s statement, while 31% disagree. Twenty-one percent (21%) are not sure.

But at the same time, adults by a nearly two-to-one margin – 61% to 31% – favor prayer in public schools.

This will be reversed by the courts.

Daily Commentary – Friday, April 23rd, 2010 – Got Credit Problems?

April 23rd, 2010

* If so, you’re not alone. Lindsay Lohan has racked up a bill that would put just about anyone to shame.

Daily Commentary – Friday, April 23rd, 2010 – Got Credit Problems? [1:23m]: | Download

As Markets Crashed, the SEC Surfed Porn

Your hard earned tax dollars and government at work …

It is comical an absurd for government to even consider pointing the finger at private business when it comes to scandal, waste, fraud and abuse. The US Government is far an away the kings when it comes to fraud and abuse of the tax payers money.  Obama might want to point his finger at government first, before the watch guards are given more power. Who knew that SEC government financial “oversight” was a porn site? By the way who is going to monitor the monitors?

Who knew the SEC actually meant SEX.

That is correct, as the markets crashed in 2008, top SEC officials watched porn on their government issued computers. At least was paying the fiddle when Rome burned, what say you SEC? No wonder the SEC could not police Wall Street, they were to busy surfing porn. Madoff Ponzi scheme be damned, the SEC was too busy checking out how their favorite porn site”made-off”.

Republicans are stepping up their criticism of the Securities and Exchange Commission following reports that senior agency staffers spent hours surfing pornographic websites on government-issued computers while they were supposed to be policing the nation’s financial system.

California Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said it was “disturbing that high-ranking officials within the SEC were spending more time looking at porn than taking action to help stave off the events that put our nation’s economy on the brink of collapse.”

He said in a statement Thursday that SEC officials “were preoccupied with other distractions” when they should have been overseeing the growing problems in the financial system.

As President Obama tries to gain more regulatory power for the SEC to safeguard the American people Another Black Conservative states,  the very agencies that should have been minding the store in the first place were busy searching for porn.

Once again, your hard earned tax dollars at work and Obama wants to give these folks even more power.

• An accountant was blocked more than 16,000 times in a month from visiting websites classified as “Sex” or “Pornography.” Yet he still managed to amass a collection of “very graphic” material on his hard drive by using Google images to bypass the SEC’s internal filter, according to an earlier report from the inspector general. The accountant refused to testify in his defense, and received a 14-day suspension.
• Seventeen of the employees were “at a senior level,” earning salaries of up to $222,418.
• A senior attorney at the SEC’s Washington headquarters spent up to eight hours a day looking at and downloading pornography. When he ran out of hard drive space, he burned the files to CDs or DVDs, which he kept in boxes around his office. He agreed to resign, an earlier watchdog report said.
• (Its wasn’t just the men) An SEC accountant attempted to access porn websites 1,800 times in a two-week period and had 600 pornographic images on her computer hard drive.

Is it any wonder why used cars salesman know rate above government officials?

More Hope & Change … Only 35% of Americans Approve of Obama’s Handling of Israel & the Palestinians

Here is more Hope and Change that we have come to expect from the Obama Administration.

Only 35% of American voters approve of the job that Obama has done in handling the Jewish/Palestinian conflict.  However, 2/3 of Jewish voters disapprove of Obama’s handling of the situation. Even more significant, 2/3 of the voters stated that Obama should be a stronger supporter if Israel.

Only a third of Americans approve of the way President Obama’s handling the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, according to a new national poll.

A Quinnipiac University survey released Thursday morning indicates that 35 percent of the public gives the president a thumbs up on how he’s dealing with the situation between Israel and the Palestinians, with 44 percent saying they disapprove, and just over one in five unsure.

This stands in contrast with how Americans feel about Obama’s overall handling of foreign policy, with 48 percent approving and 42 percent saying they disapprove.

According to the poll, two-thirds of Jewish voters disapprove of how the president’s handling Israeli-Palestinian relations, with 28 percent saying they approve. Jewish voters were big backers of Obama in the 2008 presidential election, with exit polls indicating that nearly eight of ten backed the Democratic candidate.

Two-thirds of people questioned in the survey say that the president should be a strong supporter of Israel but, by a 42 percent to 34 percent margin, voters say Obama’s not a strong supporter of Israel.

Remembering back, only 4% of Jews in Israel though Barack Hussein Obama was pro-Israel.

As the Gateway Pundit states, maybe more would approve of Barack Hussein Obama’s stance on Jews if he had not threatened to blow Israeli jets out of the sky.

Go figure of all Senators to blast Obama for his handling of Israel comes from Democrat Chuck Schumer. As Hot Air states, what a novel concept that the Palestinians are the problem partner … in the quest for peace. Schumer went on to say that Obama’s stance on Israel was “counter-productive”.

But Schumer dramatically sharpened his tone on the politically conservative Jewish Nachum Segal Show today, calling the White House stance to date “counter-productive” and describing his own threat to “blast” the Administration had the State Department not backed down from its “terrible” tough talk toward Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Schumer, a hawkish ally of Israel since his days as a Brooklyn Congressman, described “a battle going on inside the administration” over Middle East policy.

“This has to stop,” he said of the administration’s policy of publicly pressuring Israel to end construction in Jerusalem.

In the 2008 Presidential elections Barack Obama gained 77% of the Jewish vote, it would appear that number will not be attained in 2012.

Daily Commentary – Thursday, April 22nd, 2010 – Loss of a Family Member

April 22nd, 2010

* Dana lost his sister to cancer last week. Our thoughts and prayers are with the family she left behind.

Daily Commentary – Thursday, April 22nd, 2010 – Loss of a Family Member [2:01m]: | Download

Lance Baxter, Voice in GEICO Ads Fired for Insults Made To Tea Party

Lance Baxter, aka “D.C. Douglas,” who is the voice of the  man who informs you how much Geico can save you on car insurance has been fired for insensitive and inflammatory remarks made toward the mentally retarded to Freedomworks.

When will people ever learn, when one is the voice or face of a brand, companies do not want controversy? Just ask Tiger Woods.

Today, Douglas reports he’s been dropped from Geico’s campaign. His dramatic news release is here; he claims to have been motivated by “the recent gay and racial slurs slung by Tea Party members at Congressman Barney Frank and Representative John Lewis during the Health Care Reform Weekend,” and says he’s “open to any attorneys taking on this case pro bono.”

The harassing message can be heard below …

“I just need to know what the percentages of people who are mentally retarded are”

Here are the comments made by the former voice of GEICO.

“I just need to know what the percentages of people who are mentally retarded are,” Baxter says in a voice-mail recording posted on the site, “who work for the organization… and also what your plans are for when one of your members actually kills somebody.”

On a person note, what is up with liberals and their incessant mockery of the mentally challenged? First we had President Obama making fun of those in the Special Olympics and using them as the brunt of his joke. Then  there is Obama’s White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel using the term “fu#k—ing retarded” as a negative connotation. Hell the House Democrats even had the “R” word in the Obamacare bill … and now this.

What is up with the LEFT thinking that it is completely okay with making fun of and using a term like retarded in such a negative light? What’s the matter, is making rude comments and making fun of Southerners and those who live in trailer parks become old?

As No Sheeples Here states, all one has to do is visit his web site to see Baxter’s true colors and they don’t appear to be green.

Another Black Conservative nails the case as usual. There is no law suit here, this is a perfect case of Freedom of Speech. Idiots have the opportunity and freedom to say what they will, they then have to deal with the consequences.A company has the right to fire an individual if they do not want them as the voice of their brand. BTW, Freedom of Speech means the government cannot silence you, not a privately owned company.

Of course Douglas is playing the victim card. Sorry buddy, but that doesn’t work. This is an open and shut case of the First Amendment in motion.  Here is how it works. The First Amendment allows you to say pretty much what you want. However, the First Amendment does not guarantee that what you say will be well received. Douglas exercised his First Amendment rights by leaving the nasty-gram. Tea Partiers did not appreciate his message and exercised their First Amendment rights by contacting Geico.

Funny, I thought the exact same thing when I first heard this story; however, the folks at NRO, did the same …he should not be unemployed long, the leftist at Progressive Insurance is sure to hire this moonbat.

From the tone and lunacy of the former voice of Geico’s words, “what the percentages of people who are mentally retarded are”, … it appears that once again disparaging the mentally retarded is so easy even a moonbat cave man can do it.

As an aside, thankfully it was not the voice of the lizard that went bye bye.

Bias, Three Bisexual Men Sue the NAGAAA for Discrimination during the Gay Softball World Series

Well alrighty then …  File this one under “You’ve come a long way baby”. After years of claiming discrimination and bias, it would appear that Gays have some biases of their own.

Three bisexual men are suing the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance for discrimination for actions taken during the Gay Softball World Series held in the Seattle, WA two years ago.

I guess the question becomes when is a man gay enough to be considered gay?

The three Bay Area men say the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance in essence deemed them not gay enough to participate in the series.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Seattle accuses the alliance of violating Washington state laws barring discrimination. The alliance organizes the annual Gay Softball World Series.

Beth Allen, the alliance’s attorney, said the lawsuit is unwarranted and that the three plaintiffs “were not discriminated against in any unlawful manner.”

From Hot Air, the quote from the lawsuit, “This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.” So then why do gays find it so offensive when other say, :It’s Adam & Eve not Adam & Steve”? It is rather comical to see the pot calling the kettle bi-sexual. Comical indeed.

Wouldn’t the policy of don’t ask, don’t tell have worked perfectly in this case? Could you imagine if there was the Heterosexual Softball World Series or the White  Softball World Series where only two gay people or two black people were allowed to play in the organizations rules? Can you imagine the hue and cry that would ensue and the claims of bias and discrimination from gay and black organizations.

The three plaintiffs — Steven Apilado, LaRon Charles and Jon Russ — played on a team called D2 that qualified for the 2008 Gay Softball World Series, which is organized by the alliance.

The alliance’s rules say that each World Series team can have no more than two heterosexual players. According to the lawsuit, a competing team accused D2 of violating that rule.

Each of the three plaintiffs was called into a conference room in front of more than 25 people, and was asked “personal and intrusive questions” about his sexual attractions and desires, purportedly to determine if the player was heterosexual or gay, the lawsuit alleges. The alliance has no category or definition for bisexual or transgender people in its rules, the plaintiff’s attorney said.

By the way, where is the ACLU?

So the three men were tossed because they were not deemed gay enough. This coming from the folks who have made claims of bias and state that others act in a judgmental fashion toward them. Oh the hypocrisy.