Islam: A System of Living Masquerading as a Religion

As former teachers and citizen journalists, one of our goals has always been to inform those who follow our blog on issues they would normally not pursue further in an in depth study.  Fortunately many of  our daily readers and friends do take Islam and it's threat to America seriously and are very knowledgeable.  Others are not.  Why is the destruction of our Western civilization a priority goal to followers of Islam?  Two Sisters From The Right are extremely fortunate to have received the manuscript which we will present to our readers in three parts.  It is an in depth study of Islam written by Robert H. Olsen, with a foreword from our good friend and contributor to Two Sisters, Retired USAF Brigadier General James L. Cash.  It is an edifying fascinating read, and we are honored to bring it to our readers. Parts II and III will be presented on consecutive days.
Two Sisters

Foreword

I am often asked what I consider to be the greatest threat facing this nation in the next decade. Of all the problems we hear about every night from various news media, the greatest in my opinion is without doubt or hesitation, the rapid advancement of Islam. It is not the economy (we will eventually elect officials with mental ability to fix it). It is not terrorism (we will eventually say enough is enough and elect a President with a mentality capable of fixing that also). It is the misunderstanding of the average American about backward sixth century Islam itself, it's actual goal of domination, and how rapidly it is silently gaining a foothold in this country. As it grows at a rate far outpacing that of the existing population, a democracy hell-bent on political-correctness with far-left leanings is a fertile environment of this kind of threat from within. The intent is to install Sharia Law, which can, over time, insidiously change the form of government of even the United States of America. It is already well on its way in Europe, and if we don't wake up and stop listening to the political correct call from progressives, the sound of morning-call-to-prayer will be heard loud and clear over loud speaker systems all over America. I am devastated by the thought, even though President Obama has said it would be the sweetest music ever heard by his ears. These people will block vote, and with their increasing numbers, gain control of our government. At that point, recognition of the problem will be too late.

Please take time to read every word of the attached article by my friend, Bob Olsen. It is a wake up call, written at an understandable level, and important to Americans of all ages. We must elect representatives who will act to insure Islamization of America never happens. This is the most direct threat to our Constitution that our country has ever faced. It is here, and it is now. ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION, IT IS A WAY OF LIFE, and is in total opposition to our CONSTITUTION!!!

Bob has given me permission to make distribution on this article. Please pass it on, reprint it, and get the word to as many as possible. Educating the public will bring an end to this lunacy, and now is the time.

Jim Cash
B/G,USAF, Ret.

Islam

A system of Living

Masquerading as a Religion

by  Robert H. Olsen

Part I

I’m usually quite a tolerant person. I forgive and forget easily most of the time. I’ve been in the U.S. Army; I’m an avid church attendee and pay my taxes on time and in full. I’m a flag waver and have shed many tears over my country and flag. I support our troops no matter where they are or what they are doing. I love our Constitution and the laws by which we live. I’ve traveled and lived abroad and know the comfort of carrying a U.S. Passport. I’ve talked to people who would die just to see their family live within the USA. Yes, this country is great and it is my country and I’m extremely proud of it. I feel proud that I can stand up and say that I don’t like our President. I have that right, as do those who believe I’m wrong. But there has been a movement over the past years to bring my “wonderful country” to its knees. The movement is called Islam. I, personally, have decided to draw a line in the sand, so to speak. Basically, I’m not going to stand for all the political correctness that I feel is ruining our country. The actions by some who support Islamic beliefs and Sharia (Islamic Law) within the confines of the United States have gone over my line.

I want to believe that there are many followers of Islam who are honest and good people and that those who cause me anger are those radicals of the Islamic system who have crossed my line. I’m however, having a hard time believing the actions or for that matter the inactions taken by the followers of Islam; but on second thought maybe I can. After studying this “system of living” masquerading as a religion, it becomes apparent that I cannot believe anything, said or promised by anyone who believes in and follows Islam’s teachings. It is stated clearly in their holy book (the Qur'an) that lying to further Allah’s word is fully acceptable within Islam. This by itself is alarming and is called Taqiyya. According to Sharia (Islamic Law), deception, misleading or lying is not only permitted in certain situations but may be deemed obligatory in others.

However, what scares me most is when I hear a Christian friend say, “their god (meaning the god of Islam) is the same as our God” (the God of Christianity). Nothing could be further from the truth. Many Christians believe that the Islam god is Satan. Each time I hear a TV program or radio program refer to the differences between Islam and Christian beliefs, they tip toe around this fact. Well, I’m tired of it and I’m tired of all the problems that Islam is bringing into my country. I’m tired of Islam trying to get Sharia introduced into the USA; which would be the end of our Constitution. I’m really tired of everyone tip toeing around the thought that Islam should be outlawed in the United States of America.

The USA has welcomed people from every corner of the earth. We have the best, most forgiving and caring people in the world. We love this country and for the most part we don’t want the type of change that Islam is demanding. We don’t want the high birth rate of the Muslims to eventually affect our educational system, our government, our standard of living, or, most importantly, our laws. Sharia should be made illegal everywhere in the USA and it is time someone said it. Our laws state clearly that we have religious freedom as one of our rights and this right is for those that have no religion as well. It protects both believers and non-believers alike; but this Islam and Sharia are something else. They go beyond, way beyond, the beliefs and understanding of the authors of our Constitution and laws. We didn’t see this coming and now that it is on our doorstep and we wake up and see it for what it is, we need to take a stand. This Islam is a system of living that is designed to eradicate all non-believers. It is not a religion and thus should not be protected under our constitutional law protecting freedom of religion!

Islam means “Submission to the will of Allah”. It actually derives from the Arabic word or letters SLM, which means, ”to resign to or surrender to or submit oneself”. From that you can add a couple of letters and have Islam which is “the ACT of Submission or resignation of oneself” and finally from that you can change the letters around somewhat and get Muslim which is “one who has submitted”.

If you study Islamic Law which is called Sharia, it basically says believe or die and it says exactly that many times throughout the Qur'an. However, there is option we can choose to continue to live under Sharia and that is to pay a tax to Islam and that way we would be tolerated by Islam and not murdered. This is supported by the writings within the Qur'an and called jizya (Tribute or tax).

Lately, I’ve been studying our education system within our California Schools. Did you know that our California Public Schools supply textbooks to our 7th graders that instruct our children in and about Islam? Many parents of 7th grade students in our California Public Schools have been outraged to discover that Islam is being taught to their children. Students are not allowed to wear crosses, Christian “T” shirts or speak the name of Jesus but instead are subjected to an intensive course on Islam. In some cases, the students are required to memorize verses from the Qur'an, learn the five pillars of the Islamic faith, study the important figures of Islam’s history, wear traditional Muslim clothing, take a Muslim name and stage their own Jihad. All this is done close to the beginning of the school year so that it will be sure to be covered. In addition, the students are required to kneel in Muslim fashion paying homage to Allah. They are instructed to pray “in the name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful,” and to chant “Praise be to Allah, Lord of Creation”, and taken on a field trip to a mosque. None of this is academia: it is propaganda and a clear attempt to engrave Islam as being a peaceful and loving religion (which it is clearly not), in the minds of our young children. The reason for this propaganda is that it is the best way to get to us through our children.

Omar M. Ahmed, Chairman of the board of CAIR, Council on American-Islamic Relations, said, “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur'an should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.” He goes on to promote an even stronger presence in our classrooms.




Tomorrow:  Part II:   The Q'uran



Drill, Drill, Drill

Two Sisters From The Right's best read today comes from "The Patriot Post" (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/ )" a publication to which we subscribe and highly recommend to our conservative readers.  To read more about author Lawrence Kudlow, see the end of the article.

 
Full-Throttle Drill, Drill, Drill

By Lawrence Kudlow 




Offshore drilling

If you buy into the energy speech President Obama delivered on Wednesday, it sure sounds like we're headed for drill, drill, drill. It would be a total reversal of policy. I guess $100-plus oil and near $4 gas at the pump -- along with a consumer economic-political revolt -- will do that to you.
After bashing oil and gas companies for a couple of years and instituting a virtual drilling moratorium, President Obama now says yes to offshore oil and makes a big pitch for natural gas. There may even be incentives for faster leasing and smaller royalty payments to the government.

Is it credible? Well, when you get to the fine print, it may not be.

In the fact sheet that accompanied the speech, there's a lot of talk about "responsible development" for natural gas fracking chemicals, state regulators, tapping experts, the environmental community, and protecting public health and the environment. In other words, the standards for new drilling could be so high that there won't be that much new drilling.

The president doesn't discuss the role of the EPA, which is going after coal, natural gas and oil. And while he says he'll speed up new leases and permits, he then blames oil companies for not using their old leases. That's an old saw of an argument that neglects to mention dry holes.

I believe natural gas is the answer to our energy problems over the long run. It's really cheap. And we have boodles and boodles of it. While the president says we're going to reduce oil imports by one-third in 2025 -- something that sounds suspiciously like a backdoor cap that will damage job creation and growth -- the U.S. is expected to be a natural-gas exporter in the next few years. That's how much of it we have.

So it seems to me that the trick is to figure out efficient ways to pump that natural gas into cars. Or to liquefy it and then get it into cars. Or to use the steam from the gas and get it into cars. Some mass-transit systems on the West Coast are already doing this.

And here's another rub: Heavy federal subsidies for solar and wind, which come to roughly $24 per megawatt hour, still won't be able to compete with cheap natural gas. Solar and wind are already less than 1 percent of total electricity. If the market can produce it, fine. But there's no evidence of that.

And then there's the ethanol disaster.

We've already learned that ethanol has a heavy carbon footprint -- even Al Gore acknowledges this. But we've also painfully learned that farmers are planting corn for ethanol instead of for food consumption. They are foregoing wheat for the corn, and all this is helping drive food prices through the roof worldwide.

You can add Ben Bernanke's dollar depreciation to that food inflation. And if we had King Dollar, once again convertible to gold as Lew Lehrman has proposed, then oil prices might be closer to $25 a barrel instead of $100. During the Bretton Woods period, when the dollar was linked to gold, oil was about $2.50. And today, market forces are actually reducing oil use as a share of gross domestic product. With higher oil prices and the onset of natural gas and other alternatives, oil per unit of economic output is down about 50 percent. That's good.

All this is why I favor market forces and a drill, drill, drill policy. The U.S. has 112 billion barrels of oil, both on- and offshore. As much as 2 trillion barrels are locked up in shale rock. Even excluding shale, discovered oil resources could fuel 60 million cars for about 60 years. These are all Interior Department statistics.

And by the way, market forces create significant incentives for oil, gas, coal, and nuclear producers to be as safe and environmentally sound as human engineering can make possible. They don't want BP-level calamities. Nor do they want repeats of the Japanese disaster.

But here's what America wants: Less government and fewer regulatory barriers in order to unleash the great American energy industry. If we do this, not only will we get the power to fuel the economy, but millions of new high-paying jobs will be created.

Does President Obama get this?


COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM



Lawrence Kudlow is CEO of Kudlow & Co., LLC, an economic and investment research firm in New York City.  Mr. Kudlow is a nationally syndicated columnist and also has a blog site at www.kudlow.com. He is a contributing editor of National Review magazine, as well as a columnist and economics editor for National Review Online. He is the author of American Abundance: The New Economic and Moral Prosperity, published by Forbes in January 1998.

Mr. Kudlow is consistently ranked one of the nation's premier and most accurate economic forecasters according to The Wall Street Journal's semiannual forecasting survey.  He is a Distinguished Scholar of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia.

It's Not The "Hail Mary" - It's Those Watching Its Arc

What Matters Above All is Not the Hail Mary Pass but the Faces in the Stands Watching its Arc

by Rich Carroll

Football fans can apply this analogy to Republican Presidential hopeful Donald Trump. He has thrown the long ball, and our eyes are not focused so much on the velocity or distance as we are seeing the “wave” he is garnering from the stands. “The Donald” has shown his ray of testosterone by questioning the eligibility of one Barack Hussein Obama, and the collective “we” are loving it! Trump, like tens of millions of American voters, wants to see Obama's birth certificate, a simple request actually that is being met by outrage from the left. Their answer is to sing louder to drown-out the cry's from the right. What lefties aren't prepared for; “the Donald” isn't going away on this subject. He isn't the type of guy to be deterred by childish name calling. He wants the truth, and his “arc” is a thing of beauty creating in it's wake the wind of doubt. Yesterday morning Trump handed Newsmax his birth certificate. “There it is, I have nothing to hide.” Mr. Trump threw-down the gauntlet of this is not a big deal to me why should it be a big deal to Obama?

Donald Trump, the billionaire real estate broker from New York has the courage of his convictions to awaken the deadened conscience of the American conservative voter who has, for over two years, sat on the sidelines with a silent inner gnawing that “something ain't right about this President.” Donald Trump has activated our euphoric central stream with his daily assault on Barack Hussein Obama's eligibility and the collective Conservative “base” is watching his arc. Right or wrong, we deserve an honest answer and not some hocus pocus phoney birth certificate from the only President in U.S. History that has spent millions hiding his past.

“The Trumpster” is our ray of Republican testosterone setting an example for the rest of the milquetoast “elected officials” who have made a career of sitting on the sidelines and never throwing the long ball, and the more noise he gets from “progressives” on his persistent push, the harder he pushes. Donald has his cleats firmly in the ground on this one. The rest of you “candidates” pay attention and learn a lesson in grit and fortitude.

Former Dallas Cowboy quarterback Don Meredith was famous for telling his receivers in the huddle “Okay boys, I'm gonna haul-off-and-throw-one you just get under it.” A 65 year old American business magnate, socialite, author, television personality, Chairman and CEO of the Trump Organization and founder of Trump Entertainment Resorts has taken a page from “Dandy Don” and thrown a bomb. You will know the success of his arc by the thickness of the sweat on the Manchurian Hoax's brow, and the yammering complaints from his droolers as this arc finishes it's flight.

Thank you Donald Trump for awakening the sleeping crowd. Remain steadfast in your endeavor to uncover the biggest hoax in United States History. You have a cheering crowd behind you, and a growing “fan” base. 

Copyright © 2011 - Rich Carroll

Rich Carroll is the  author of "Orphaned Heroes" and "Terrorists' Crossing."  His commentaries appear in various publications.

Ramirez Editorial Cartoon

Michael Ramirez

© 2011 Investor's Business Daily, Inc

No Clear And Present Danger

In the two years, and two months since Barack Obama was inaugurated as president, we have not willingly sat down to hear him speak.  We prefer to read the transcripts of his speeches after the fact.  Reading his lies doesn't seem to affect our hypertension as much as watching Obama read from his well placed teleprompters, while attempting to appear sincere when addressing the American people.  Normally when Obama speaks, we turn off the television, or switch channels.  Tonight we listened intently to most of his speech.  Our plan was to  listen objectively, take notes, and reserve judgement until the speech had ended, but it was not to be.  Obama's innate arrogance is one of the many character deficiencies that the man is incapable of controlling, and we are incapable of tolerating.  When he reached the point in his speech where he began to seemingly gloat in self congratulation,  and began to compare the actions in Libya to the war in Iraq, he totally lost us...click, the screen went black.  It'd be back to reading the text again for us.


Obama began his "update to the American people" by recognizing the United States military.  We appreciated his acknowledgement of them and are  sure that most Americans did as well.  In the next very carefully crafted paragraph he appealed to the American sense of pride for being the nation that has traditionally taken a leading role in righting the wrongs of the world.   Continuing in that vein he said, "But when our interests and values are at stake, we have a responsibility to act. That's what happened in Libya over the course of these last six weeks."


Our values? Yes. Our interests? No. We have no interests in Libya other that to see Moammar Gaddafi's gone!  Obama went on to talk about  Libya's geographical location between Tunisia and Egypt and the danger of those countries being flooded by refugees from Libya.  We did not disagree.  The world doesn't need anymore  displaced refugees.  Just as Ronald Reagan did, we too believe that Moammar Gaddafi is a "madman", and should not be allowed to turn his military might on his own people. We also couldn't argue with using Gaddafi's ill gotten millions to help the Libyans rebuild -- better Gaddafi's money than the American taxpayer's.


We listened to the pacifist candidate turned warrior president, talk about issuing orders for Libya, the continuing war in Afghanistan and ending the combat in Iraq.  In his own, inimitable self serving way, Barack Hussein Obama, who opposed war and the use of  military force,  uttered these words:  "I've made it clear that I will never hesitate to use our military swiftly, decisively, and unilaterally when necessary to defend our people, our homeland, our allies and our core interests."


What we discern in those words is the 2012 presidential candidate hard at work.  Did he make it clear to his Left Liberal base, or is he launching an appeal for a new support group.


Just this past week ,  Secretary of Defense Gates, in an interview with ABC Senior Correspondent Jake Tapper said about Libya,  "No, no.  It was not -- it was not a vital national interest to the United States"  However, in Gates' opinion, what was of interest was, " The  engagement of the Arabs, the engagement of the Europeans,"  "The general humanitarian  question that was at stake,” he said. 


We did not  finish watching Obama speak, but  have read the complete unedited text of his speech.  It was obviously written to appeal to the American public's natural sense of patriotism.   It is probably the most American-president-like speech he's ever read, with the exception that an American president wouldn't authorize the use of force against another country without first asking for Congress' authorization -- as George W. Bush did.


When Hillary Clinton was a senator in 2007, contemplating a bid for the presidency, she took a tough stand with President Bush, and on the floor of the Senate she stated:  “If the administration believes that any -- any -- use of force against Iran is necessary, the President must come to Congress to seek that authority"   Appearing in  the same interview with ABC's Tapper she had obviously undergone a change of mind about the president needing Congress' authority.  


When Tapper  asked her, in regards to Libya  "Why not go to Congress?" Clinton replied, “Well, we would welcome congressional support, but I don't think that this kind of internationally authorized intervention where we are one of a number of countries participating to enforce a humanitarian mission is the kind of unilateral action that either I or President Obama was speaking of several years ago.”  She continued, “I think that this had a limited time frame, a very clearly defined mission which we are in the process of fulfilling.”   Clinton was of course referring to candidate Obama's assertion, also in 2007, that “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,”  which we all know well, is exactly what now president Obama did ten days ago.


In his speech Obama assured the American people, " This transfer from the United States to NATO will take place on Wednesday," and the United States will act in a supporting role.  Really?  And what nation will invest as much man power, equipment, ordnance, airplanes, and naval vessels, as the United States?    This exchange leads us to believe that Liberal Democrats are truly guilty of believing their own propaganda.  They DO believe that those of us on the right are rubes incapable of seeing through their charade.


The fact is that Obama didn't answer the most searing questions for us.  Who are these rebels whom we are helping?  What about the reports that some of the rebel leaders are really members of al Qaeda?   Again we ask, why did Obama wait so long?  It seems to us that the rebels were asking for help BEFORE the UN resolution, the Libyan people were being slaughtered, BEFORE the UN resolution. Libya's geographical location remains the same BEFORE and AFTER the UN resolution and the administration did not feel any humanitarian urges then?   Libya has in the past, but not now, presented a danger to American interests.  If the need to intervene was "humanitarian" why did we let the massacre and retreat of the rebel forces continue until it was almost too late?  Why was it necessary to have the Arab League's involvement?   This was an obvious case of humanitarianism mixed with politics.  There might be other factors not yet ascertained.


As the president spoke, there were atrocities being committed in other oil rich Muslim countries.  In Syria, since the uprising began, 62 persons have been killed by the Syrian government.  What about Bahrain?  Are we not going to issue our support for those who seek freedom  and democracy?   Is this adminitration involved in selective "regime change"?  Isn't that the goal in Libya?  Having all that oil, and a government friendly to the U.S. -- quite a coup.


After all the criticism that the previous administration endured at the hands of Liberals, it is extremely ironic to see, particularly this anti-war, anti-military administration supporting and defending the bombing and killling, without Congressional authorization, of a country that did not directly attack us.  What say the Liberals now to our involvement in an OIL rich country which did not present a clear and present danger to America or American interests? 


Obama had plenty of time to consult with Congress before the recess but he chose not to do so.   Instead he waited for the Arab League's involvement in a UN resolution to act.   The president cannot be allowed to continue  deploying and engaging our military in actions such as the one in Libya, authorized only by a resolution in the United Nations Security Council.  By the same token, the United Nations cannot be allowed to have control of the United States military at any time.  


In 1973, Congress passed   The War Powers Resolution (P.L. 93-148) over the veto of President Nixon on November 7,  to provide procedures for Congress and the President to participate in decisions to send U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities. Section 4(a)(1) requires the President to report to Congress any introduction of U.S. forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities. When such a report is submitted, or is required to be submitted, section 5(b) requires that the use of forces must be terminated within 60 to 90 days unless Congress authorizes such use or extends the time period. Section 3 requires that the "President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing" U.S. Armed Forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities. "


Barack Hussein Obama seems to have a way with ignoring our laws as well as our Constitution.  Now that he has committed our military and our tax dollars to a third front in a Muslim country, Obama has to make sure that Gaddafi IS defeated and ousted.   As other Middle Eastern despots and tyrants continue to suppress their people and deny them the liberty they seek is Obama going to send them the message that the "coalition" will not tolerate the slaughter of the oppressed people?  That hardly seems likely in light of Secretary Clinton's statement this past weekend that  Bashar Assad of Syria is a reformer, unlike Gaddafi. 


This administration is a mass of inconsistencies and disimulation.  Do they consider us to be idiots because we place more value on those principles which they so cavalierly eschew?   Where are all the peace seeking anti war protesters now that their revered leader has shown his other side?   Does their messiah have feel of clay?  Barack Hussein Obaba is simply a man, a politician who wants to be re-elected to the highest office in this land.  Every decision he makes, every word he utters, will be done with one purpose in mind, re-election. 


After watching and reading Obama's speech on Libya we still have unaswered questions.  We are particularly bothered by the whole Arab League connection.  We are repulsed by the Left's insincerity and hypocrisy.  We won't erase the years that we, those of us who supported the previous administration, were called vile name by the elitist, arrogant Left which included Barack Obama.  We have not received satisfactory answers, and resent being played for fools.  It is our hope that American voters can see through Obama's new personna, and ask themselves, was this speech really an update on Libya, or  the launching of re-elect Obama 2012?

Two Sisters

Are You A Victim of PTSD?

By Rich Carroll

Do you wake-up each morning wondering what the repellent hoax in our Oval Office has done overnight to destroy the United States? Your symptoms might include:

• The gnawing feeling that another lesbian or communist has been appointed to our Supreme Court.
• An anxiousness about our next 5 star general being an Islamic Imam or transvestite or, that our armed forces have been placed under the command of the United Nations.
• You have figured-out that Obama is using our manpower, military and money to advance the cause of a 1 nation of Islam by deposing small kingdoms for the Muslim Brotherhood right under our noses and you don't know what to do.

You may be suffering PRESIDENT TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER!

Other symptoms may include:

• A gut feeling that today this foreign anti-white, anti-American President will find another way to degrade our country financially by giving more U.S. Tax dollars to Muslim terrorist groups or his homeland of Kenya.
• You nervously anticipate this President delivering another speech to yet another country describing America as a hateful, racist, colonist nation that is responsible for global poverty.
• Concern that Barack Hussein Obama will appoint additional anti-Christian Muslims or radical communists to high government positions.
• You are anticipating the announcement that radical anti-American terrorist bomber Bill Ayers has been made Director of the U.S. Department of Education.
• .Learn that our Department of Justice is spending more hard-earned tax dollars to defend Muslims, Black Panther thugs and terrorists, or those same tax dollars to prosecute military heroes.
• .You are anxiously writing the main stream media sources in your town asking why they won't discuss Obama spending $770 million dollars to refurbish mosques around the world.
• .How much money will this White House usurper spend today on lavish parties or vacations?
• What are Obama's friends, Van Jones, Louis Farrakhan, George Soros, Jeremiah Wright, Hugo Chavez (to name but a few) doing today to prosecute the demise of the United States?
• How much more can Obama decrease the effectiveness of our “war against terror” today?
• If 623 Muslims with ties to terrorist groups were caught on our southern border last year, how many actually found their way into the United States?
• Why will Obama defend the borders of Korea and Afghanistan against illegal invasion, but sue the state of Arizona for defending it's borders?
• You were struck while you tried to sleep with the clear epiphany that the mosque at ground zero WILL be built (when the small amount of outcry dies-down) and that Sharia Law WILL be allowed in your country within five years thanks to Obama and his Muslim Department of Justice.
• You are angry that Homeland Security is guided by two radical Muslims and angrier that you are called a “racist” for even being concerned.
• You fully anticipate a radical Muslim Imam will be appointed as the official “chaplain” of the Senate and Congress.
• You are bitter and distrustful and angry that this President spends billions of dollars importing Muslims into the United States at a time when our unemployment is already nearing 20 per cent and the liberal media outlets will not mention this item.

These are only a few of the President Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms but the number grows by each day. Unfortunately no drug will help because when you awaken from your drugged or drunken stupor, you still face the fact this American hating Kenyan occupies our White House. The best medicine is your vote. To not vote is to surrender to people like this.


Become PTSD free. Do all you can to insure this hoax is a one-termer; and remind your friends, daily. Your health and the health of your country depend on you. Great nations fail because they turn their backs on what made them great. This current administration is trying to erase our greatness. Stop them!




© Rich Carroll - 2011

Don't Break The New Lightbulbs!

If there is one thing all conservatives can agree on is the fact that we just don't like Big Government. As it is, we feel that government intrudes in our lives entirely too much.  Although some Americans seem perfectly content we are not in the least bit fond of the Nanny State.  One  prime example of government intervention is the the Federal Energy Independence Security Act of 2007. (Democrats in both Houses)   This law, due to take effect in 2012, calls for the elimination of what the government considers to be inefficient light bulbs. They include our standard 40W to 100W incandescent light bulbs. By the year 2012, they will no longer be sold.  I other words, the government is now telling us how to light our homes.

The extinction of the incandescent will require homeowners to switch to other energy-efficient light sources for their fixtures, such as LEDS, compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) or certain types of halogens. Consumers will be forced to use compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFLs), certain exempted incandescent bulbs, energy-saving incandescent/halogen bulbs, or new bulbs currently still in development by major lighting companies.  1CEpro  Energy studies have shown that dimming can save an average 10 percent of lighting energy consumption in the home,  while vacancy sensors can save an average 20 percent.  Homeowners choosing CFLs who want dimming must use special dimmable compact fluorescent bulbs labeled as compatible with dimmers.  Consumers unsatisfied with compact fluorescent dimming can use energy-saving
incandescent/halogen bulbs with dimming controls.  2CEpro

As 2012 approaches, there is a growing anti-green backlash against CFLs due to mercury levels and the disposal costs. Consumer awareness that CFLs include traces of toxic mercury is growing. 3CEPro   Ironically, when we think of "green" we think of the state of California.  While researching facts for this blog we found the best information through the California Energy Commission.  California has an energy crisis and former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger authorised a complete study on the problem.  Lately the concern about the mercury found in the new bulbs has many people extremely concerned.

Recently Journalist Fred Barnes, while discussing this law on a television panel, said he would begin to hoard incandescent bulbs because the disposal of broken bulbs is too complicated and too costly.There is one story making the rounds of the Internet about a woman who had to spend $700 cleaning her carpet after breaking one bulb. Having small grandchildren who visit our homes frequently, we too are rather concerned about the release of mercury within the confines of our home. 

Also while researching these new products that we will be required by law to use, we found that there are a number of lawsuits against the makers of the CFLs and several industrious  law firms are prepared to file lawsuits on behalf of the injured. We did find a very helpful page that detailed exactly what precautions one must use if one of the new law required bulbs should break.  We hope you find it helpful as well.

We believe that we should have the right to use the bulbs of our own choosing and not be requires by federal law to change over to a product that can be harmful. We thought that the Environmental Protection Agency was formed to help the citizens and our natural resources.  Providing Americans with an Internet page with instructions on how to minimize exposure to Mercury doesn't quite seem like they have properly done their job.
Two Sisters

What to Do If You Break a Fluorescent Light Bulb
By Isaiah David, eHow Contributor


Fluorescent light bulbs save energy and last longer than incandescent lights, making them a good way to help protect the environment and lower your electricity bills. Unfortunately, fluorescent lights contain a small amount of mercury. Mercury stays in your body for a long time, and can cause health problems if too much accumulates. Although breaking a single fluorescent bulb isn't going to hurt you, it's always a good idea to minimize mercury exposure.

Clear the Air
Open up one or more windows to air out the room. Leave the room, close the door and tell anyone else in your house to stay out of the room for 15 minutes. When the bulb shatters, it can send mercury vapor and dust contaminated by the metal up into the air. Airing out the room before you clean will minimize your exposure to these airborne pollutants. If you have a central heating or cooling system turned on, turn it off, since it can spread mercury dust.


Prepare to Clean
Find something to contain the pieces from the light bulb. A metal tin or glass jar with a lid will work well, since both can be sealed. If you can't find either, use a plastic bag. Keep in mind, however, that the glass shards can easily puncture a plastic bag. You will also need stiff paper or cardboard, tape, a wet cloth or paper towel, and if you broke the bulb on carpet, a vacuum cleaner.


Basic Cleanup
Use the cardboard or stiff paper to scoop up the big pieces of glass and as much of the powder as you can. If you broke the bulb on the carpet, pick the pieces up with your hands instead, taking care not to cut yourself. Put the pieces and the paper into your container.


Remove the Dust
Put a piece of tape on the floor, sticky-side down, on top of the spill. Pull it up and throw it away in a container. Repeat until you've cleaned up all of the dust. If you are cleaning up the carpet, work the tape down into the fibers to get up all of the little pieces of glass and dust. The dust is from the phosphor coating on the inside of the bulb. Although it is not mercury, it can contain traces of mercury, so clean it up thoroughly.


Final Steps
If you broke the bulb on the floor, use a wet paper towel or moist, disposable cloth to clean up any remaining traces of dust from the bulb. Throw it away in your container. If you broke the bulb on the rug, vacuum the area. Immediately empty out the vacuum bag when you are done. Otherwise, the vacuum cleaner can potentially spread dust contaminated with mercury back into the air.

A Political Reality Show

We are thrilled to feature one of our favorite authors in tonight's post.  Burt Prelutzky's biting political satire can be read in his books which include two of our favorites, "Conservatives Are from Mars, Liberals Are from San Francisco: 101 Reasons I'm Happy I Left the Left" and " Liberals: America's Termites (It's A Shame That Liberals, Unlike Hamsters, Don't Eat Their Young)"   More about Burt Prelutsky, here.  Readers can access the Patriot Post on the web.
Two Sisters

By Burt Prelutsky

I am constantly writing myself notes, jotting down the things I hear oozing out of the mouths of politicians. But occasionally when it comes time to use the quotes in an article, I find myself wondering if our elected officials actually spoke those words or if I had been hallucinating.


I mean, when some of the Tea Party Republicans were trying to introduce the notion of fiscal responsibility to Capital Hill by defunding the NEA, did Harry Reid actually take the floor to defend a cowboy poetry festival that annually draws dozens of tourists to Nevada? For one thing, if the Democrats are going to fight over such things, don't they realize that they sound exactly like those dippy women who divorce guys like Donald Trump and, in the battle over alimony, insist that they really need $20,000-a-month for their dog trainer and another 25 grand for daily pedicures?


For another thing, I hope I never again have to hear the words "cowboy" and "poetry" uttered in the same sentence.


Speaking of dumb things, did I actually hear Martin Sheen compare Charlie Sheen's situation to that of a cancer victim? If so, Charlie's not the only one in the family who needs to have his head examined.


On the other hand, as I listened to Charlie's endless rants about how special he is, being, as he is, a warlock, I found myself thinking that he was only saying out loud the exact same things that all those left-wing Hollywood crackpots believe about themselves. When you see and hear folks like Alec Baldwin, Barbra Streisand, Danny Glover, Sean Penn and George Clooney, scolding the rest of us, describing us as rubes, fascists and racists, don't you suspect they're wondering, "Why am I even wasting my time with these puny little creatures who all wish they could be me, me with my millions of dollars, my battalion of servants and sycophants, and my veins filled with tiger blood"?


Like most sane people, I was delighted to see the two oafs named Schiller dumped by National Public Radio. I would have been even happier if I didn't immediately have to see Juan Williams on Fox, once again chastising the left-wing elitists at NPR. Why is it that nobody dares challenge Mr. Williams by pointing out that it was the exact same place, pouring out the same sort of left-wing drivel, when he was working there quite contentedly for over 10 years? And after all that time, he didn't suddenly come to his senses and quit; he was fired. So, for all of his self-righteous bluster, the only thing that's changed are the folks who sign his checks.


For sheer chutzpah, it's hard to beat Sen. John Ensign, who claimed his decision not to seek re-election in 2012 has nothing to do with his adulterous affair with a staff worker, but, rather, his concern with how a campaign would affect his family. How odd that he never wondered how his affair would affect them.


By the way, with the frequency that politicians are caught having affairs with members of their staff, are we to assume that these days typing and filing skills are strictly optional, while taking dictation is essential?


Proving that even a guy who looks like Central Casting's idea of a president can be as dumb as a rock, allow me to present for your inspection Mitt Romney. As we look forward to a campaign in 2012, in which ObamaCare figures to be a major issue, this schnook defends RomneyCare! His defense is that it was created to deal with Massachusetts' needs. Who's managing his campaign -- Moe, Curly or David Axelrod?


If he were as smart as he is rich and good-looking, Romney would have said, "I regret to admit it, but my health care plan proved to be an unmitigated disaster. But I, unlike Barack Obama, learned from my mistake."


I believe that most Americans will accept that governors, senators and even presidents, make mistakes. In fact, they've come to expect it. But what they resent are politicians who are too stubborn or too simpleminded to acknowledge theirs and who, instead, double down.


But doing his best to take the heat off Romney's gaffe, we had Newt Gingrich blaming his tawdry affairs on his patriotism. I must say that, as excuses for adultery go, this one had the virtue of originality. But only in the sense that a kid explaining to his teacher that the reason he wasn't turning in his report was because a Martian had eaten it.


I never thought I'd say it, but I just might toss my hat in the ring and run in 2012. If things continue the way they have been, I just might be the last Republican standing. What's more, I am over the age of 35, I was born in Chicago and I'd be happy to show anyone who's interested my long form birth certificate.



"The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/ )"

Copyright © 2011 The Patriot Post.



Obama: The Picture Of Clarity

What a refreshing surprise!  This gem of an article was found in the Chicago Tribune, President Obama's state.  It is a beautifully written account of a very serious matter, with just a hint of dry wit.  Not surprisingly the comments to Mr. Kass' article are not too favorable by the Chicago crowds.   Mr. Kass captured our attention with the title and we decided to share the find with our readers whom we're sure will be more understanding of his opinion.
Two Sisters

While Obama searches for clarity, we're plunged into another war

President Barack Obama unmasked himself Tuesday.



by  John Kass

Chicago Tribune

March 23, 2011

He was in El Salvador, standing with Salvadoran President Mauricio Funes, when reporters asked him about his war in Libya.

It is indeed his war. He started it. He gave the order to launch the missiles over the weekend. And now the man who ran for president as an anti-war candidate owns his very own war.

But there has been confusion over which member of his coalition will command the war. Will Obama ask a foreign general to direct American troops? Will President Nicolas Sarkozy of France take the coalition lead?

On Tuesday, Obama was asked about these command issues. It wasn't a trick. It should have been expected. He stood there, and he opened his mouth.

"I would expect that over the next several days you will have clarity and a meeting of the minds of all those who are participating in the process," Obama said.

We'll have clarity in a few days?

Clarity in a few days, Mr. President?

You don't wait to find clarity a few days after you begin a war. You'd better have complete clarity before you ever give the order to fire in the first place.

Days after ordering the launch of cruise missiles at around $1 million a pop isn't the time to find clarity, Mr. President.

Days after you bomb a country — even one run by a murderous psychopath like Moammar Gadhafi — isn't the time to begin searching for clarity.

The president must find clarity before beginning such an enterprise. To do otherwise is to risk not only American lives and his own presidency and political fortunes, but to risk America's future security and its place among nations.

There wasn't much drama in that quote in El Salvador, so I wonder whether Mr. Obama's Search for Clarity will remain in the news cycle or will drop mercifully from public notice.

Given the free pass he's had on this Libya business, I doubt whether it will become a slogan.

But he did say it — in front of TV cameras. And it would be laughably ridiculous, except that lives are at stake.

I suspect that every world leader saw it, and their generals saw it, from China to Russia and beyond, and they all took his measure and saw what was in him.

His enemies, the Republicans, say that if you take away his teleprompter, he's quite vulnerable. He's misspoken many times, but so has every president.

If this were merely a matter of rhetoric or misspeaking, I wouldn't mention it.

But that passive discussion about clarity, coming from the mouth of the president, underscores another problem that's been noticed by Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate.

He hasn't been clear on the war at all.

Before he ordered the strikes against Gadhafi, he'd argued that the Libyan dictator had to go, that driving him from power was the important thing.

Then that argument changed, and Obama and his advisers said we had to save the people of Libya from a bloody civil war. So it became a humanitarian mission.   Sort of.

Naturally, members of Congress are shrieking, since he attacked without asking their permission. Liberal U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the Ohio Democrat, brought up a quote from the past:  "The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."

And who said it? Barack Obama, to The Boston Globe in 2007.

Early polls show that only 50 percent of the American people are in support of Obama's attack on Libya. Historically, such numbers are much higher at the outset of a war. So expect the numbers to get worse.

Sen. Mark Kirk, the Illinois Republican and U.S. naval intelligence officer, was speaking at the City Club of Chicago the other day, and I caught up to him there.

"The president needs to clearly define the war aims and who is in command," said Kirk, who supports the war in Libya.

"My hope is that when he returns to the United States, he needs to speak to the nation because he's just taken the country to war," Kirk said. "And a presidential address from the Oval Office is necessary to outline the mission, how he expects to achieve it and who is in charge."

When the president returns to the U.S. on Wednesday, and if his teleprompter is working, he'll put on a blue suit and a red tie and a white shirt and look quite presidential.

He'll speak forcefully. He'll speak reasonably. He will appear to the world like a leader.

And he won't look anything like the back bencher in the Illinois Legislature who never confronted power and spent his entire career accommodating the bosses so he could climb the political ladder. He won't look anything like that fellow who voted "present" time after time after time.


Instead, he'll look the picture of clarity.


jskass@tribune.com  

Copyright © 2011, Chicago Tribune

Be A Force For Good

The Two Sisters From The Right do not operate under any illusion that we will become famous or wealthy by writing this blog.  Ours, as you know, is a not for profit publication.  We do not advertise, we do not request donations.  Our purpose is strictly to provide a forum of expression  for ourselves,  and our readers.  Often through many of the articles presented here, our readers can become informed on issues and topics of current interest.  In some cases it is an outlet for our personal friends and colleagues to release their own frustrations, worries, and their angst regarding our current political situation. 

We know what it is to live during politically turbulent times.  Even at the height of the counterculture movement in the 1960s when our world was rocked by a variety of  cultural revolutions, we still felt safe in America.   Those who did take part in the various movements had different axes to grind.  The turmoil of those years was triggered by a number of factors; racial relations,  women's rights, and a sexual revolution which altered our mores from then on.   The hippie movement came to the forefront and it spawned a youth subculture which encouraged fighting against the establishment,  sexual promiscuity, widespread use of hallucinogenic drugs,  defiance of civic and parental authority, and of course, the protest of the Vietnam War. 


For those of us who chose not to indulge, it was a spectacle that we observed for an extended period of time.  Many of you lived through it,  most of you were not even born  during those years.  The counterculture movement peaked during the years 1965 (my Sophomore year in college) through 1972 (the birth of my second child).  In spite of domestic terrorists such a Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn of the Weathermen or Weather Underground, and the Black Panthers formed by Bobby Seale and Huey P. Newton all of whom were leftist, socialists, we didn't really fear for our country's freedom. We knew our system of law and justice would prevail.

As the demonstrations and protests took place from East coast to West coast, in the southern United States, the Civil Rights movement had gained momentum.  It was successful in obtaining rights for blacks that had long been denied. The Civil Rights movement owes a great deal of its success to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s theory of non violent protest, and also to the many non black Americans  who joined them and often died in their support.  Today, those tumultuous times are but a vague memory.  Some called it America's growing pains.  We survived, not unscathed, but with our sovereignty intact.

We mention those years above because we lived through those times. It wasn't always easy growing up in a post Atomic Age world, or in a nation gripped by the tension of the Cold War. We know what it is like to live in a country undergoing a counter cultural revolution which brought about many cultural and sociological changes which forever touched our lives. This could be why we did not buy into the hope and change shtick. We have lived through change.

The tension that was felt during all those years had a different feel, a different tone, than the tension that we feel today. Many who voted for Barack Hussein Obama bought into the Hope and Change scenario. Little did they realize that being President of the United States of America is no simple task, and Barack Hussein Obama, was not up to the task of leading this nation. Behind his "hope and change" scheme there was a darker more sinister motive: the defeat of a republic whose success is dependent on a free market capitalist system, and to replace it with socialism instead.

In her introduction to her book, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, Ayn Rand wrote -- "No politico-economic system in history has ever proved its value so eloquently or has benefited mankind so greatly as capitalism—and none has ever been attacked so savagely, viciously, and blindly. The flood of misinformation, misrepresentation, distortion, and outright falsehood about capitalism is such that the young people of today have no idea . . . of its actual nature." American capitalism has never been in such peril.

Yesterday in this blog, BornintheUSA99 asked of our readers, "Had enough?"  He asked how long We The People would tolerate this corrupt, inept, government which has brought our republic to the verge of destruction.  We've seen how the labor unions took charge of the Wisconsin teachers' protest and changed its entire character.  As a result, the teachers lost.  They might not be aware of it yet, but they're losers, one and all. The union interference prolonged the situation, and gave them false hope.  First responders who were not going to lose collective bargaining rights, lost them. All of them were used to suit the purpose of the union bosses.  They were used for media attention, and the purpose it served was to propel unions like SEIU straight into the leftist media's lens.  I was perfect timing for the unions to begin hatching their plan.

The Blaze, a publication read by many conservatives, today revealed an audio recording of a conversation in which former SEIU leader Steven Lerner is heard talking about radical plans and strategies to destroy the American economy by causing disruption and spreading fear, instability and uncertainty throughout the country.  The Wisconsin protesters fell right into their hands.  


In an article published in The American Thinker, Chris Banescu writes, "What the Bolsheviks and communists did to their own people with violence, indiscriminate murder, starvation, torture, and concentration camps, union leaders in America want to accomplish via plans to destroy our financial system, undermine the stock market, disrupt capitalism, redistribute the wealth, and destabilize the country." To learn more about it click on The Blaze, or the paragraph above.


Never, in our many years, have we felt so threatened or so vulnerable.  After the attacks of September 11, 2001, our nation finally took notice of the threat that radical Islamists present to our country.  Since then we've seen countless examples of their relentless pursuit of our citizens' Islamization.  Their blatant attempt to interject Sharia Law into our justice system is proving to be successful.  This is an issue of great interest to those who value their Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.  Author Richard Carroll has written about it very eloquently in this blog, as well. 


Now we are facing a war on a third Muslim front. The totally clueless Obama, without consulting Congress, has committed the American military to a war in Libya.  Regardless of his assurances that we will be out of there in no time, does he really believe that he can withdraw our people as simply as he entered into this alliance?  Will he really turn control of the U.S. military over to a foreign power?  Each of those missiles fired costs $600,000 and yesterday we lost a multi-million dollar F15 when it went down over Libya. 


The man who criticized George W. Bush for starting a "dumb war" in Iraq has now placed the United States in a supporting role, in a war we simply can not  win under the present circumstances.  How "smart" is that? 


Had enough?  What are we going to do about it?  "Speak Up America, I Can't Hear You!"  We want to hear what YOU think.  We're going to try a little experiment and we can only get results if our readers participate.  At the end of this article there is a comments section.  It is designed by Blogspot, sometimes it is not easy to use.  The easiest way to use it is to write under the title  Anonymous.  Although we  do care who all our readers are, we really want to hear YOUR opinion your ideas.  You can also email us at SisterOne46@yahoo.com  No names will be used to contact you or will be revealed.  We invite your comments.  Are we going to sit back and allow this completely incompetent administration, allied with the union madmen to cripple our economy for their own personal gain.  Are you willing to be used and exploited by union thugs? 


Obamacare was rammed down our collective throats a year ago.  Then Speaker Pelosi told us we needed to vote it in first, and then read it.  Well, we're reading, and we don't like what we see -- neither do doctors and health care professionals.  How much longer are we going to allow this administration to trample the Constitution and ignore the rule of law?  By the time the economic ax truly falls we might not be here, but our children and grandchildren will and securing their future is the passion which drives us.  We're in a struggle for survival against evil forces.


Heed the words of John Adams: " Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy, such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man's life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable cruelty of one or a very few." (1763)


Wake up, America.  Speak up America!  Be a force for good, before it is too late!