#1 – Video Push-Back On Obama’s War On Women – via SBA-List.org

#2 – Father Auctions Son For Suicide Mission – via TheGatewayPundit.com

#3 – Communism Vs. Capitalism In Pictures – via AceofSpadesHQ

#4 – Your Car, Tracked By The Feds…For Your Safety – via AllAmerican Blogger.com

#5 – Turkey’s Middle East Policy – via YidWithLid

#6 – Growth, By The Charts – via Doug Ross

Don’t forget, Tony is on The Kudlow Report today at 7pm EST. Be watching!

According to FreedomWorks and blogger Jim Hoft, Moveon.org is reporting that the DNC has pulled funding for the recall election, which puts Walker 9 points ahead against Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett. Barret lost to Walker in 2010. Hoft writes:

Worse yet for Democrats, MoveOn.org reported in a mass email that the DNC has withdrawn financial support from the race. Via the Democratic Underground the MoveOn.org email reads:

BREAKING NEWS FROM WISCONSIN: The Democratic National Committee isn’t investing in the massive get out the vote effort in Wisconsin to recall Scott Walker.Wisconsin is ground zero for Democrats this summer—and there are only three weeks before Election Day—which is why this breaking news just doesn’t make sense.

The news couldn’t be more fascinating. If the DNC is out of the race, they have, in essence, “pulled an Obama” and thrown the activists and unions in Wisconsin under the bus. Getting out financially is a sign of defeat. In politics, money means importance. The more money involved in a race, the more the importance of the race.

However, Wisconsin is important regardless of the money. The DNC pullout means they see the writing on the wall. An important rule about money – don’t throw good money after bad. (Just ask Rep. Ron Paul.) The DNC may have looked at the poll numbers, the grass roots efforts from the Racine Tea Party and others, and the weakness of their own case and decided to pack it in.

The writing is on the wall, but the work still has to be done – in Wisconsin and for Election 2012. Democrats getting out means they have conceded defeat. The Unions wasted their money. The activists exhausted themselves for nothings – and they now know it. The Left’s favorite radical (No, not Obama.) Saul Alinsky, in his book Rules For Radicals, wrote:

(Rule #10 -) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition

The DNC is not keeping up the pressure. They took their money and left, leaving their supporters in the lurch. One wonders if that will have blowback in November.

If you are in Wisconsin, join us for the Racine Tea Party on June 2nd.

According to the Daily Mail, the Socialist-In-Chief has three “holiday” homes on the water, with an estimated value of £1million:

The 57-year-old who ‘dislikes the rich’ and wants to revolutionise his country with high taxes and an onslaught against bankers is in fact hugely wealthy himself…

As well as the spacious Paris apartment he shares with his lover Valerie Trierweiler, Hollande owns a palatial villa in Mougins, the prestigious hill-top Cannes suburb where the artist Pablo Picasso used to live…

It is valued by the Official Journal at €800,000 (£642,000), and is just a short drive from Hollande’s two flats in the Cannes. They are each priced at €230,000 (£185,000) and €140,000 (£112,000).

Much of Hollande’s campaign success was making sure that former President Nicholas Sarkozy was the “Bling Bling” president. Was this information hidden from the French people, or are the French press simply as inept at vetting their candidates as the US press?

Hollande’s opposition to austerity measures is going to be the focus of his meetings with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Hollande, like his comrades in the Golden Dawn party in Greece, do not believe in financial restraints. A Hollande spokesman said that the ‘politics of austerity’ was failing to improve the continent’s financial crisis.

Hollande’s answer to austerity is a 75% tax on incomes over €1 million while simultaneously attempting to eliminate jobs in a major industry in Paris. After that fails, maybe he can sell a house or two to get that economy going. Or, maybe three.
.

DESPERATE NEWSWEEK EMBARRASSES PRESIDENT, LIES TO AMERICA

Newsweek has provided a magazine cover that leaves one speechless. Not because of its amazing photography, nor for its deep intellectual insight. But rather because, in its attempt to praise President Obama for his coming out in favor of gay marriage, Newsweek has managed potentially to insult the President, to create campaign fodder that will haunt him until Election Day, and to deceive Americans into thinking the President has done something extraordinary.

Last week, under serious stress from high-level donors and Vice President Biden’s own “misstep” on Meet The Press, Obama came out in an interview with ABC’s Robin Roberts in favor of gay marriage:

…at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for
me personally it is important for me to go ahead
and affirm that I think same sex couples should be
able to get married.

The mainstream media and other doting sycophants exploded in fawning delight. They declared Obama brave. Roberts, discussing the interview with contraception-lover George Stephanopolous, said she was getting “chills” just thinking about it. On MSNBC’s Martin Bashir program, leftist pundit Krystal Ball referred to the announcement as “historic.”

Yet, as Bruce Carroll of GayPatriot.net noted on Daily Caller, what’s so historic about something that former Vice President Dick Cheney did back in 2009, which caused New York Magazine to call him a “Gay-Marriage Pioneer?” (Come to think of it, what’s so brave about being backed in to a position by your Vice President? A position that you were going to announce just before the Democratic National Convention? Also, what is so historic about a man vocalizing an opinion he held in 1996, only to put it–and gays–in the closet so he could become a Senator and then President, pulling those same gays out of the closet when it became politically expedient?) As Carroll noted:

After the initial glow, however, those of us who look at life more critically and through the prism of reality like, for example, the law and the U.S. Constitution, found Obama’s announcement to be anything but historic. All he did was state his personal perspective on a social matter. Did he say he was going to ask Congress to repeal the “Defense of Marriage Act” signed by President Clinton? Nope. Did he urge all 50 governors to move toward same-sex marriage recognition in their state? Nope. Did he say he would back efforts for a gay marriage plank in the DNC platform at the Democratic Convention. Nope.

Once again, Obama is all bluster, no bite. (I would have said, “All bark, no bite.” but I didn’t want to make the man hungry.) The cover is a two-fer, as it was designed not only to “praise” the President and lie to passers by, but also to take on the competition. AfterTIME magazine came out with its now-infamous breast feeding cover, Newsweek editor Tina Brown declared, “Let the games begin!” But this isn’t a game. This isn’t even rational. Is Newsweek calling Obama gay? Exactly what about supporting gay marriage makes one gay? Wouldn’t he still, by definition, have to have a sexual proclivity towards men? At the very least, wouldn’t Obama, like Carroll argues, have to do something more than make an awkward, calculated pronouncement? Newsweek is perfectly willing to label elected officials as needed in order to sell magazines. What covers are next in the Brown arsenal? The First Jewish President–next to a picture of Louis Farrakkhan, with a blue and white halo surrounding the yarmulke on his head?

The article within Newsweek is written by Andrew Sullivan who, for years, has been parading around as a conservative, in the same way David Frum parades around as a conservative…and Meghan McCain…and Sen. Lindsay Graham. From excerpts taken from the Daily Mail, Sullivan writes:

‘When you step back a little and assess the record of Obama on gay rights, you see, in fact, that this was not an aberration. It was an inevitable culmination of three years of work,’ Mr Sullivan said in a statement about the article. ‘He had to discover his black identity and then reconcile it with his white family, just as gays discover their homosexual identity and then have to reconcile it with their heterosexual family,’ he wrote, describing the similarities between Mr Obama and the gay community.

True, Obama repealed ”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” True, he instructed the Justice Department not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. However, the only “inevitable culmination” over the past three years is that President Obama is a cold, calculating politician who will do anything necessary to help his re-elect, including pretending to give a damn about gay America.

Sullivan’s commentary is engaging a therapy session with America about his own coming out. I can only imagine doing so is difficult for many, but it’s not the basis for calling the President gay. A fantastic cover will sell magazines. But Newsweek hasn’t sold magazines here, they’ve taken labeling to a whole new level. Here’s a more accurate cover: Newsweek lied. Obama isn’t brave. Gay America got nothing except more lip service.

And there are 175 days until Election Day.

Lugar, the 80 year-old, six-term Senator, conceded to Mourdock early into the vote counting. Mourdock took 61% of the vote to Lugar’s 39%. In his concession, Lugar stated his hopes that Mourdock will win in November. However, a statement released by his campaign had a stinging rebuke of both Mourdock, and, by extension, the Tea Party: (emphasis mine)

I want to see a Republican elected President, and I want to see a Republican majority in the Congress. I hope my opponent wins in November to help give my friend Mitch McConnell a majority.

If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.

This is not conducive to problem solving and governance.

Those groups whose “prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party?” Lugar, of course, means the Tea Party. One wonders whether Lugar came up with these words on his own, or just crib them from Sens. Harry Reid (D-NV) or Chuck Schumer (D-NY)?

This is why Sen. Lugar is the now “lame duck” Sen. Lugar, and why the Tea Party is so very effective. When Lugar speaks of straying from “orthodoxy as they see it,” is he referring to the Constitution? The Constitution is not orthodoxy, it is the values of a nation. It is the blueprint that allows free people to live free, and provides for the people the opportunity to safeguard those freedoms.

Is he referring to fiscal responsibility? In Lugar’s statement, he stated: (emphasis mine)

Ultimately, the re-election of an incumbent to Congress usually comes down to whether voters agree with the positions the incumbent has taken. I knew that I had cast recent votes that would be unpopular with some Republicans and that would be targeted by outside groups.

These included my votes for the TARP program, for government support of the auto industry, for the START Treaty, and for the confirmations of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan.

It was apparent that these positions would be attacked in a Republican primary. But I believe that they were the right votes for the country, and I stand by them without regrets…

Those groups that would “target” Lugar for his votes? Just one – The Tea Party, and rightfully so! While others can argue the votes for Justices Sotomayor and Kagan (let’s see what happens with Obamacare, but no one can argue we knew far too little about Justice Kagan,) and for the START Treaty (an absolutely unnecessary agreement that hurts the United States with unwarranted formality, if not the full text of the treaty,) the Tea Party stands opposed to TARP, and to government spending. For the Tea Party, these are the votes that destroy a country. You Can Not Spend Your Way Into Prosperity!

For Lugar to admonish those who would be upset with these votes (which he stoically stands by) is elitist lunacy. The Tea Party has proven that its “orthodoxy” is nothing more than an adherence to the Constitution. The Tea Party will “target” those who engage in rampant misuse of the American People’s hard earned money. The Tea Party, regardless of the words of Reid or Schumer or Rep. Pelosi or MSNBC, has made a commitment to themselves, to America and to its future which is unshakable. The Tea Party is alive and well.

Congratulations to Richard Mourdock. Congratulations to the Tea Party. Bring on November! There are 181 days until the election.

#1 – Leftists Expand “Value” Of Abortion – via PubliusForum.com

#2 – U.S. Gives Back Taliban Prisoners While Having Citizens Still In Custody – via CommentaryMagazine.com

#3 – Did White House Lie About Terror Plot? – via SooperMexican.com

#4 – The President…Gay Marriage…Ummm…Evolving…Something…Ummm – via WeaselZippers.us

#5 – The Government Must Save You From Food – via Yahoo.com

#6 – Romney Should Act More Like McCain, Says Left – via AceofSpadesHQ

Did you miss the Tony Katz Show yesterday? The podcast is here!

On The Tony Katz Show, Tony asked his producer, Holly Bacon, to search the job site Monster.com for jobs in her area requiring a degree in sociology. Schultz has a Masters degree in sociology, and, according to his conversation with Hannity, is living off student loans while he pursues his Ph.D.

Living in Atlanta, Bacon found some job offerings in her area, but with no salary range attached. When Katz suggested that she look in New York (after all, why should he have to relocate for a career!) Bacon came across this posting from MarketResearchRecruiter.com:

The job clearly states that it requires a bachelor’s degree in Sociology. It also calls for experience in research and data collection. Schultz mentioned to Hannity that he had experience in data analysis, and according to his resume on LinkedIn it is possible that he’s qualified.

When Hannity suggested he get a job being a cook, a dishwasher, or a contrtactor, Harrison asked if Hannity is suggesting that he do something “more menial?” The day after the program, Hannity invited Schultz on to his radio program to continue the conversation. Schultz, however, continued with his elitist mindset, telling Hannity that he would only accept a job that paid over $80,000 per year.

This job, found in six minutes on Monster.com, fits the bill:

When questioned by Hannity about finding a job, Schultz said:

Hey. I’m online all day. I’m sending my res (resume) out.

Not quite sure what Schultz is doing online all day, but we found a job – while doing a radio show! – in six minutes. We’ll wait to hear if Schultz even applies for it, or is “applying” for a job beneath him?

According to French journalist Nabila Ramdani, Hollander will “strike fear” in to the “hearts of the rich”:

The 57-year-old Socialist has openly admitted that he “does not like the rich” and declared that “my real enemy is the world of finance”. This means taxing the wealthy by up to 75 per cent, curtailing the activities of Paris as a centre for financial dealing, and ploughing millions into creating more civil service jobs.

This means more than just taxing the wealthy, this means a full on, frontal assault on Capitalism. Certainly, outgoing French President Nicholas Sarkozy was no friend to open markets, but Hollande’s talk is far more ugly, and is reminiscent of the Occupy movement who feel Capitalism is the root of all evil.

Recently, on Sean Hannity’s FOX program “Hannity,” Occupy spokesperson/organizer/anarchist Harrison Schultz stated: (emphasis mine)

Anarchy isn’t easy….The problem here is capitalism. That’s what needs to change. That’s what failing all these people…I’m looking at far far more radical alternatives than political alternatives.

People can have multiple views on what “far, far more radical alternatives” can be. However, Hollande has specific views on those who have attained financial success. Exactly how will Hollande “curtail” financial activities in Paris? What, exactly, will be those civil service jobs that will cost millions of Euros? What will their pensions and benefits be? How will they get paid for in the long term? Already, wealthy French citizens are looking for ways to get out of the country.

When referring to something (in this case, the “world of finance,” which is, to say, Capitalism) as the “enemy,” one can easily assume that your response in how to deal with it will be, like the Occupy movement, a “radical alternative.”

Ramdani also added:

Add an explicit threat to renegotiate the euro pact to replace austerity with “growth-creating” spending, and you have one of the most vehemently left-wing programmes in recent history.

Does “growth-creating spending” equate to stimulus, as has been tried to nil success in the United States? Perhaps: (emphasis mine)

Shortly after his victory…Hollande announced he will make his proposals for a “pact of responsibility, growth and governance”…“Austerity can no longer be the only option,” added the Socialist president-elect.

Stimulating growth through old-style Keynesianism is,however, out of the question: “The means cannot be extra public spending, since we want to rein it in, nor can they be tax relief, which is forbidden,” Hollande told Slate.fr.

All along his presidential campaign he has championed four proposals at European level: increasing the capital of the European Investment Bank (EIB), a financial transaction tax (FTT), remobilising structural funds toward growth and creating eurobonds or project bonds….Bridge-building will be necessary as the new French president is unlikely to settle for non-binding growth measures as was the case at the March European Council. (German Chancellor Angela) Merkel has already invited Hollande to Berlin to hold talks, touted to take place within a week at the earliest. Previously, the chancellor had publicly declared her support for Sarkozy.

Its certainly good to hear that Keynesianism is “out of the question,” but the financial transaction tax in question is definitively Keynesian. It was economist John Maynard Keynes who suggested the tax as a way keeping speculators in check. In 1971, it was again brought forward by American Economist James Tobin, and is often referred to as the Tobin Tax.

President Obama has been echoing the themes put forth by Hollande. The Buffett Rule would add a 30% tax on income over $1 million. His latest budget, based on the idea of “growth,” would add $3.5 trillion to the deficit through 2022. And Obama’s financial reform – The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act – in their own words, provides “assistance” by, “…imposing tough new capital and leverage requirements that make it undesirable to get too big…” and, “…Strengthens oversight and empowers regulators to aggressively pursue financial fraud, conflicts of interest and manipulation of the system that benefits special interests at the expense of American families and businesses.”

Said another way, it “curtails” the world of finance. There are 183 days until Election Day in the United States.

On the eve of the election, the Financial Times posted an article that shows what every non-Socialist in the world has been saying – if we can’t make a living, we won’t stay:

The “soak the rich” rhetoric that has punctuated the presidential campaign has prompted a sharp rise in the numbers weighing a move across the Channel, according to London-based wealth managers, lawyers and property agents specialising in French clients.

Investment firms have seen a rise in those clients looking to find ways to protect their wealth. The uptick on inquiries is over 40%. In addition to Hollande’s call to engage the Obama-topian fantasy:

Hollande promised to hire more staff to boost France’s state education system and to reduce the retirement age from 62 to 60 for people who have completed a minimum 41 years of work.

It seems that France would rather engage their blinders, and go the way of Greece, rather than deal with the economic realities of, well, reality.

The UK changed its tax structure, levying a 50% tax on high income earners. The result? Approximately £500 million less in revenue for the government…in one month:

The Treasury received £10.35 billion in income tax payments from those paying by self-assessment last month, a drop of £509 million compared with January 2011. Most other taxes produced higher revenues over the same period.

In the United States, we are 184 days to Election Day.