Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post has written an outstanding article this week characterizing the new levels of frustration being internalized by the leftist elite. The rejection of their 18 month old brand of “hope and change” by moderate mainstream Americans finds them now vilifying any potential voter that dares question or disagree with their political ideology. Mr. Krauthammer describes the new “Let Them Eat Cake” ruling class that has emerged in Washington.  He characterizes the arrogance in their ridicule of those who dare question the validity of their so called “progressive” ideology.  Mr. Krauthammer illustrates the depths to which the liberal left will sink in order to desperately justify – mostly to themselves – their secular progressive ideology, regardless of the opinions of the vast majority of Americans. He speaks about the elitist attitudes that have permeated the Democrat party and the dilemma of moderate Democrats who are now in conflict with the most radical elements of their party and in conflict with more and more of their constituency.  From the article…

Liberalism under siege is an ugly sight indeed. Just yesterday it was all hope and change and returning power to the people. But the people have proved so disappointing. Their recalcitrance has, in only 19 months, turned the predicted 40-year liberal ascendancy (James Carville) into a full retreat. Ah, the people, the little people, the small-town people, the “bitter” people, as Barack Obama in an unguarded moment once memorably called them, clinging “to guns or religion or” — this part is less remembered — “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”

That’s a polite way of saying: clinging to bigotry. And promiscuous charges of bigotry are precisely how our current rulers and their vast media auxiliary react to an obstreperous citizenry that insists on incorrect thinking.

– Resistance to the vast expansion of government power, intrusiveness and debt, as represented by the Tea Party movement? Why, racist resentment toward a black president.

– Disgust and alarm with the federal government’s unwillingness to curb illegal immigration, as crystallized in the Arizona law? Nativism.

– Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

– Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

Now we know why the country has become “ungovernable,” last year’s excuse for the Democrats’ failure of governance: Who can possibly govern a nation of racist, nativist, homophobic Islamophobes?

Note what connects these issues. In every one, liberals have lost the argument in the court of public opinion. Majorities — often lopsided majorities — oppose President Obama’s social-democratic agenda (e.g., the stimulus, Obamacare), support the Arizona law, oppose gay marriage and reject a mosque near Ground Zero.

What’s a liberal to do? Pull out the bigotry charge, the trump that preempts debate and gives no credit to the seriousness and substance of the contrary argument. The most venerable of these trumps is, of course, the race card. When the Tea Party arose, a spontaneous, leaderless and perfectly natural (and traditionally American) reaction to the vast expansion of government intrinsic to the president’s proudly proclaimed transformational agenda, the liberal commentariat cast it as a mob of angry white yahoos disguising their antipathy to a black president by cleverly speaking in economic terms.

Then came Arizona and S.B. 1070. It seems impossible for the left to believe that people of good will could hold that: (a) illegal immigration should be illegal, (b) the federal government should not hold border enforcement hostage to comprehensive reform, i.e., amnesty, (c) every country has the right to determine the composition of its immigrant population.

As for Proposition 8, is it so hard to see why people might believe that a single judge overturning the will of 7 million voters is an affront to democracy? And that seeing merit in retaining the structure of the most ancient and fundamental of all social institutions is something other than an alleged hatred of gays — particularly since the opposite-gender requirement has characterized virtually every society in all the millennia until just a few years ago?

And now the mosque near Ground Zero. The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration’s pretense that we are at war with nothing more than “violent extremists” of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour.

It is a measure of the corruption of liberal thought and the collapse of its self-confidence that, finding itself so widely repudiated, it resorts reflexively to the cheapest race-baiting (in a colorful variety of forms). Indeed, how can one reason with a nation of pitchfork-wielding mobs brimming with “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them” — blacks, Hispanics, gays and Muslims — a nation that is, as Michelle Obama once put it succinctly, “just downright mean”?

The Democrats are going to get beaten badly in November. Not just because the economy is ailing. And not just because Obama over-read his mandate in governing too far left. But because a comeuppance is due the arrogant elites whose undisguised contempt for the great unwashed prevents them from conceding a modicum of serious thought to those who dare oppose them.

The food police…  Coming to a theater near you…

Another lecture from the podium to main stream Americans that we need to CHANGE.  Rather than use his influence to publicly request that the Imam seeking to build this controversial mosque on the hallowed grounds of 9/11 respect the sensitives of millions of New Yorkers and most Americans,  the President has chosen overtly to come out of the closet and advance his Middle Eastern and Islamic “reconciliation” agenda disguised in yet another sermon to the American people.  This time on religious tolerance.  Flash… religious tolerance is not the point.

As a New York Area resident I am outraged at Obama and the left  facilitating this blatantly obvious POKE IN THE EYE action by a purportedly less than moderate Imam.  There is fundamental lack of respect being shown here to the families who have lost loved ones during the 9/11 massacre and indeed to all Americans.  There are other sites in NYC where this mosque can be built. As time moves on Obama is indeed showing his true colors and biased agenda.

This issue is NOT about religious freedom Mr. President, it is about your choices and your decision to instead of using  your position power to at least make an open and public request to the Imam to consider the sensitivities of the people in the community and seek a different location for this controversial mosque, you  once again, in your typical condescending style, “preach platitudes” to the majority of Americans who are opposed to this decision. Worse yet you do it with a clear … let them eat cake attitude.  Your choice to lecture the American people on religious freedom, rather than lecture Muslim leaders against fanning the flames of conflict and mistrust, especially showing a lack of respect, shows once again how inexperienced you are as a leader. Clearly we are all beginning to know now the CHANGE that you have promised America.

The US president, Barack Obama, has defended controversial plans to build a mosque near the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York, saying to oppose them would be un-American.

Prominent Republicans have led protests against the construction of an Islamic cultural centre and mosque two blocks from the site of the former World Trade Centre. The proposed building would not be visible from Ground Zero.

Obama acknowledged that “sensitivities” surrounded the 9/11 site, which he described as “hallowed ground”, but he said Muslims had the same right to practice their religion “as anyone else”.

In a speech at a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan, he said: “As a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country.

“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances.

“This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”

The White House has not previously taken a stand on the mosque. Its press secretary, Robert Gibbs, has described the issue as a local matter.

Republicans including Sarah Palin, the former vice-presidential candidate, and Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House of Representatives, have been vocal opponents of the scheme, describing it as an insult to the memory of those killed by Islamist terrorists in the 2001 attacks. – Guardian

It isn’t a matter of religious tolerance…  it’s a matter of respect. Its not being “in your face” particularly when moderate Muslims don’t want to see radicals add gas to the fire.   Rep. Boehner has it right…

House Republican Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio took issue with Obama’s remarks. “The fact that someone has the right to do something doesn’t necessarily make it the right thing to do,” Boehner said in a statement. “That is the essence of tolerance, peace and understanding. This is not an issue of law, whether religious freedom or local zoning. This is a basic issue of respect for a tragic moment in our history.” — LA Times

You can see the entire speech on the White House Website as part of Obama celebrating Ramadan http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2010/08/13/celebrating-ramadan-white-house

Tired of the BS and Hype?  Ready for a REAL resale rights package actually worth something…

Finally ONE multi-package that contains all of most popular eBook distribution collections which pass through FULL LEGAL MASTER RESELLER RIGHTS.

For our readers who are interested in On Line Marketing, reselling the works of authors who pass through their copyright licenses to bloggers is one of the easiest ways to get started reselling products on the internet.  These authors are all looking for reader exposure and circulation.

Click Here For The Full Story!

For our readers who have digital products to sell, and ebook to promote or any type of product to share with your customers online, here is a great new product that allows easy installation of sales pages onto your wordpress site:

WordPress Squeeze Page Plugin

Click Here!

So the new budget has just been delivered to the country, and for the most part, it’s full of cuts. Although to be honest i’m not entirely sure what we were expecting, given the national recession-based climate. So with a lot of tough decisions still to be made at No.10, everyone’s paying attention to Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg. So with all of this attention on the pair of them, they should start thinking about some designer sunglasses, for two reasons. Firstly, they can get away with avoiding eye contact when those journalists ask difficult questions, and secondly they clearly both want to appear closer to the youth of today. So let’s have the youthful fashion then please!

But what do the two politicians consider to be in-style this season? Let’s begin with our new PM, Mr. David Cameron. I’ve seen him recently in a pair of awesome Ray Ban Aviator sunglasses, and I’ve also seen him on his bike sporting some Oakley Radars. Hmmmm, not actually all that helpful. I was anticipating some poor excuses for style when seeing what Mr. Cameron had, but actually, he’s made a good choice. Ray Ban are a quality make and the retro look achieved by the brand is perfect for this seasons’ trend. Unbelievably, he’s even gone and picked the right sunglasses for biking, choosing one of the best pairs of Oakley sunglasses for the job.

Next up is Nick Clegg, who surely won’t disappoint when it comes to the embarrassing fashion stakes? Ummm yeah, this isn’t going at all how i thought it would. I’ve just come across a picture of Nick sporting some Carrerra sunglasses …. surely they must have been put in via photoshop? Even the colour he’s picked fits in perfectly with the seasons’ trends! Oh I’ve had enough, they’re both clearly not too bad at choosing their eyewear. Where’s the dour Scotsman when you need him?

I have to say i’m actually reasonably impressed with these two; i’m confident they’ll have personal advisors who will have pushed them in the right direction, but none-the-less, it’s not at all bad for a pair of politicians who i thought would be easy targets. Nick, David, I’m impressed!

The UK Government published a piece of legislation on Monday27th April. Although this bill will likely be changed as with any new legislation throughout it’s journey through the Parliamentary proceedings. It does promise however to be one of the most important bills in the current governments history particularly with reference to equality and discrimination issues.

The new legislation is known as the Single Equality Bill

To get an idea of just how important this legislation will be, just take a look at some of the acts that will be replaced by the Single Equality Bill.

1970 Equal Pay Act

Race Relations Act 1976

Sex Discrimination Act 1975

1995 Disability Discrimination Act

Equality Act 2006

These are in fact just a sample of the various legislation that will be superceded by this bill. Although most of the UK governments current legislation on discrimination will still apply. There is no doubt that our equality laws will be greatly changed by the bill, primarily in public sector responsibilities, the scope and implementation of the bill itself.

Public bodies will be forced to ensure that this legislation is implemented, within the public sector. As the biggest single employer within the UK, perhaps it is logical to pave the way for the rest of corporate Britain to follow.

It will perhaps concern many people that such wide ranging responsibilities are placed on the public sector. Even on single requirement – ” Using Public procurement to improve equality”, could have costly and far reaching impact on public finances without some solid guidance and frameworks for the public bodies to follow.

If the public body for instance went down the route of trying to implement improvements in working practices as a prerequirement of contractors, this will have an impact of costs. If the private sectors has to implement costly procedures or processes to work for the public sector the logical conclusion will be for higher costs, likely to be passed onto the Public body.

Another new simple ruling, that secrecy clauses will be banned in employment contracts will have potential problems in many organisations. Although it could be said that these are essential changes to remove inequalities in gender pay for instance.

Whatever the truth, one thing is certain – the complex legal requirements placed on all sectors is bound to confuse. If you would like to know more about this new equality bill

visit our web site for information on training here – equality training

Before you make the switch to a solar power system, there are a few important things to think about. There are many types of roof solar panels available, and some may be more or less appropriate for you depending on your needs.

All roof solar panels are built in such a way that the solar cells inside get maximum sunlight exposure. Solar cells, when hit by sunlight, generate DC electricity. By wiring together the correct number of solar cells, it’s possible to generate any amount of voltage. The solar panels then send the DC electricity to an inverter to be converted to AC, which can then be used by devices in the home. Any excess power can be sent to the power grid. When this happens, the electric meter is reversed, and the power company will provide a credit for the power produced. Roof solar panels don’t produce electricity when the sun isn’t out; there are a couple of ways to deal with this. One way to have power available in the dark is to have batteries, which are charged by the solar panels while they are producing power. If you want more information about batteries, visit Solar Power Battery.

Otherwise, it’s possible to use power from the grid whenever the solar power system isn’t generating enough. Many homeowners prefer the option of using a battery bank, as this can virtually eliminate the need to purchase power from the grid. To learn more about the different types of power inverters, visit Solar Power Inverter.

Since a solar power system is a serious investment, it’s important that every choice is the right one, and choosing the right roof solar panels is one of the most crucial of all. There is a definite difference in performance. In other words, even with the same amount of sunlight exposure, some roof solar panels will generate more power than others. With more efficient solar panels, it’s possible to generate the same amount of power with fewer panels, requiring less space and possibly reducing costs.

Solar panels may also differ in terms of durability. The durability of the enclosure may be a concern. The solar cells behind the enclosures are very fragile and must be protected from the elements. If the enclosure isn’t well made, it won’t be able to guard the cells from all of the hazards it will likely be exposed to. Any sort of damage will reduce the cell’s capacity to generate power. The durability of the solar cells themselves is also important.

Solar cells differ in how they’re made and, as a result, the capabilities they offer. Monocrystalline and polycrystalline are the two main types of solar cells currently available. Of these two, the superior one in terms of quality is the monocrystalline solar cell. Their durability and performance are greater than those of polycrystalline cells. Of course, monocrystalline cells are generally more expensive, but they tend to justify the investment before long. If you want to learn about solar cell efficiency, check out Solar Cell Efficiency.

Global warming has been a talked about topic for several years now . One side of the argument claims that there is not enough to being done to fight the heating of the earth , while the other side claims that global warming does not exist at all . No matter which side you are on , it can at least be agreed upon that there has been a niche forming in developing new ways, thoughts and ideas how to fight  the heating of the earth  . One of the  newest  talked about ways to fight global warming is geoengineering.

From the name itself, geoengineering may sound  like its straight out of a sci-fi movie  , but all it actually refers to is slowing down the increasing temperature of the earth. It is  believed  that if we can slow down the process in which the earth heats up, that plausible disasters that would be caused by global warming would be prevented .

One of the greatest potential disasters that could be caused by global warming  is the melting of the Arctic Permafrost. If the permafrost continues to melt as some have claimed that it has, then every area of the world would be prone to severe flooding and catastrophic consequences.

As of right now, there are two ideas floating around that relates to how we would stop the earth from heating more than it already has:

· The first option would be to block or limit the amount of sunlight that it hitting the earth. This could be done by cloud brightening, which is the process of making more clouds.

· The second option is to remove massive amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Currently , it is thought that cloud blocking would be the better option of the two because there are already methods to create more clouds and due to the fact that it would render quicker results than removing large quantities of carbon dioxide. These are just two niche areas that are being looked at in order to stop or limit global warming.