Cusack’s Next Blockbuster

by: the Common Constitutionalist

So, that paragon of acting excellence, John Cusack, is developing a movie, titled “Rush”, about famous conservative radio talk icon, Rush Limbaugh.

Actor Cusack, who’s blockbuster films include movies like “Sixteen Candles”, in 1984 (only had to go back 28 years for that one) and the more recent action thriller “2012” which he starred in with his buddy, fellow leftist, Woody Harrelson. I too, was impressed with his acting credentials.

Cusack is so liberal, he has actually criticized president Obama of not be liberal enough. Now that’s out there where the busses don’t run.

Production for this gem is set to commence some time next year.

Hollywood director Betty Thomas, who’s set to work on the film, said the
production company is putting the finishing touches on a script that will star the
actor. I see Cusack is lining up the “A-listers” for this project.

Director Thomas has big budget film experience. She’s demonstrated his directing prowess in critically acclaimed movies such as “Private Parts”, starring Howard Stern and everyone’s favorite, “The Brady Bunch Movie”. I guess someone had to direct them. Maybe they drew straws and she lost.

I have no doubt that this film will be heralded by the press and movie critics alike. The organizers at the Cannes Film festival have, no doubt, already engraved an award for Cusack and the New York Times film critics have penned their glowing review of the movie, breathless awaiting its release.

Would anyone be shocked if this film wins some sort of Oscar. It will surely be nominated, if it hasn’t been already.

This film is likely to be a smashing box office success and will surely rake in hundreds of dollars.

If it is the overwhelming success I predict it to be, I wonder if Cusack might do a whole series of films? A few possibilities would be, a third “Kill Bill” movie, “Kill Bill…O’Reilly”, “Sean Hannity…of the Dead”. How about a remake of “Anne of a Thousand Days”, but instead of Richard Burton and Genevieve Bujold, it would star Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter. It would be set in rural California. Ann recruits Beck to go on a rampage, in which they attempt to blow up as many wind and solar farms as is possible in the thousand days. I’d pay money to see that.

But seriously, I’m sure this will be a fair and even-handed portrayal of Limbaugh. The left has always treated conservatives with that type of reverence.

Attribution: MSN

One Shot, One Kill

DARPA Invests in One-Shot Rifle System Capable Under Varying Conditions for Snipers

from:  at The Blaze

DARPA Awards $6 Contract for Development of One Shot Rifle System for Snipers

(Image: Wikimedia)

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the military’s research arm, has awarded a San Diego company a multi-million dollar contract to develop a rifle-mounted system that would allow snipers to better hit targets in one shot, as this single shot could be the only one they get.

In its Advanced Sighting System Project, DARPA states that its goal is to “enable snipers to accurately hit targets with the first round, under crosswind conditions, day or night, at the maximum effective range of the weapon.”

DARPA Awards $6 Contract for Development of One Shot Rifle System for Snipers

(Image: DARPA)

For its next-generation, One Shot XG Phase, DARPA is looking for a “significantly smaller ‘field-ready system’ that can be ‘clipped-on’ directly to the weapon, eliminating the need for a spotter/observer in future sniper operations.”

To accomplish this, DARPA recently awarded Cubic Defense Applications a $6 million contract.

“If military snipers could neutralize enemy targets with a single round, they could potentially save many lives,” Steve Sampson, vice president of Advanced Programs for Cubic Defense Applications, said in the company’s statement. “One Shot XG seeks to allow our snipers to immediately obtain downrange crosswind, direction and range to target to provide ballistic corrections.

Using a crosswind measurement algorithm and electro-optic and laser designs, Cubic and its partners expect to take a different approach to this sniper program.

“Cubic has developed both systems and components, from fiber lasers and quantum well modulators to smart cards. One Shot XG will directly benefit from at least a decade of development geared towards state-of the art field-proven MILES combat training products,” Tony Maryfield, program manager and principal investigator for the One Shot XG product development at Cubic, said in a statement.

Attribution: Businessweek

This Just In…Republicans are Racist

Methodologically Flawed AP Poll: Republicans Are Racist


The Associated Press is claiming, based on the results of a recent poll of theirs, that anti-black sentiments have increased under President Obama so much that it stands to knock him back by five percentage points in the popular vote on Election Day.

The main offenders, those most likely to engage in explicit and implicit prejudice against blacks, are, naturally, Republicans.

The AP found similar results in 2008, a fact which really ought to be cause for them to re-examine their methodology, considering Obama won the popular vote in a landslide that year.

One reason the poll revealed racism is because of the AP’s definition of racism, which is an incorrect definition.

For example, one question it asks is, “Irish, Italians, Jewish [sic], and other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without special favors. Agree or disagree.”

If a respondent answered that he agreed with that statement, he is considered racist. It is considered racist to believe that we should hold all races to the same standard.

Another question the poll asks: “It’s really a matter of some people just not trying hard enough; if Blacks [sic] would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites.” (Here I note that the word “Blacks” was incorrectly capitalized and the word “whites” was correctly not.)

If a respondent answered that he agreed with that statement, he is considered racist. The flaw here is that the same person who would agree with that statement would also agree with the statement even if any mention of a particular race were removed; e.g., “If people would only try harder, they could be well off.” That is a statement with which Democrats generally disagree and Republicans generally agree. Republicans recognize that it is the same exact question no matter what race is specified and no matter whether race is specified at all, and they will answer the same way regardless. The AP worded it in such a way that the expected Republican reply would necessarily come across as racist.

Many of the other questions that were asked used this same “gotcha” methodology, framing the questions so that Democratic replies would necessarily sound more favorable than Republican ones. (“Over the past few years, Blacks have gotten less than they deserve.” Agree or disagree? Republicans disagree, but only because they don’t believe anybody “deserves” anything beyond life, liberty, and the freedom to pursue their happiness, so this question is biased against Republican respondents.)

If there truly is an increase in the negative attitude towards blacks in America, the results

Republicans are all Racist

of a seriously flawed poll cannot be a reliable indicator of that.

But, if it is true, I have my own theory as to why: Barack Obama has engaged in the most racially divisive politics since the days of Woodrow Wilson, pitting blacks against whites. After four years of blacks being made to feel like the victims of whites, would it be surprising if they did hold any resentment towards whites? And after four years of whites being made to feel like their ethnicity is a thing to hide from, would it be surprising if they did hold any resentment towards blacks?

And just as an afterthought, I’ve never met a single conservative Republican who would prefer white Republican Jon Huntsman to black Republican Allen West, or white Republican Joe Scarborough to black Republican Thomas Sowell–for any office.

Soapy Alien Planets

At first glance these incredible images appear to show the mystifying surfaces of distant planets.

But on closer inspection, the photos reveal they are actually soap bubbles.

They were created by photographer Jason Tozer, using dish washing  liquid, a coat hanger bent into a hoop and a plate.

Blowing bubbles: Visual communication magazine Creative Review commissioned photographer Jason Tozer to shoot a series of soap bubbles to test out the capabilities of a Sony D-SLR
Picture perfect: The photos were created 'in-camera', meaning filters and effects were not applied in post-production The photos were created ‘in-camera’,  meaning filters and effects were not applied in post-production
Process: To achieve the planetary like images, Tozer began by blowing through a straw into a plate of soap solution, turning the camera on what formed on the near-side of the dishTo achieve the planetary like images, Tozer began by blowing through a straw into a plate of soap solution, turning the  camera on what formed on the near-side of the dish
Rainbow effect: By blowing through a straw into a plate of the solution, Mr Tozer created the more planet-like images

‘I looked online for bubble recipes and a bit of glycerine is apparently the key,’ said Mr Tozer to Creative  Review who commissioned him to create a series of photos based on the theme of bubbles.

‘Ten parts water, one part dish washing liquid  and a little bit of glycerine. We also used distilled water as well because hard water isn’t so good.’

He explained that his against a black background, his assistant would wave the coat  hanger hoop through the air with the liquid on.

Process: Mr Tozer explained that his against a black background, his assistant would wave the coat hanger hoop through the air with washing-up liquid on
Creative: Mr Tozer then used a lens cap wet with solution to achieve a single bubble shape to photographMr Tozer then used a lens cap wet with  solution to achieve a single bubble shape to photograph
Changing: Mr Tozer found that as more bubbles were made from the solution, the less colour that appeared on the surface Mr Tozer found that as more bubbles were made  from the solution, the less color that appeared on the surface
Stunning: The bubbles take on a dream-like quality as their surfaces all vary

He would then attempt to capture them with  the camera, although moving bubbles are a tricky subject to pin down.

By blowing through a straw into a plate of the solution, Mr Tozer created the more planet-like images.

He took the photo of what was formed on the  near-side of the plate and then used a lens cap wet with solution to achieve a single bubble shape to photograph.

Colour spectrum: Each snap is unique and takes on its own individual shape, colour and photographic presence  Each snap is unique and takes on its own individual shape, color and photographic presence

Ethereal: The colour of the bubbles varied according to the amount of soap, ranging from a burnt orange to blue

Big and small: The surfaces of the bubbles and sizes varied greatly

The beauty of the photos is that they are not digitally altered – they are produced completely in-camera.

Each bubble is unique and takes on its own individual shape, color and photographic presence.

Mr Tozer found that less colors appeared on the surface as  further bubbles were made from the batch of dish washing liquid.

‘The detergent  seems to sink to the bottom of the bubbles, leaving the water behind, so you gradually get different images,’ he explained.

Attribution: Daily Mail

Benghazigate vs Watergate

The Nixon Tapes (Watergate) v. the Obama Tapes (Benghazi)


Many of you are too young to remember the Watergate Hearings. They were on TV  all day, every day. The Democrats wanted to rub our faces in the scandal. After  President Nixon’s resignation, Vice-President Gerald Ford pardoned the former  president. This didn’t sit well with the American people. In the end, we got  Jimmy Carter.

The June 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at  the Watergate office complex in Washington, D.C., was covered up by the Nixon  administration. The scandal eventually led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon on August 9, 1974. The scandal also resulted in the indictment, trial, conviction, and imprisonment of 43 people, including dozens of Nixon’s  top administration officials.

In July 1973, as evidence mounted against the president’s staff about the break-in at the Democratic headquarters, it was revealed that President Nixon had recorded many conversations in his office. Recordings from these tapes implicated the president, revealing he had attempted to cover up the break-in.  Before long, and after a lot of legal stonewalling from the Nixon Administration, the Supreme Court ruled that the president had to hand over the tapes to government investigators; he ultimately complied.

Now it seems that there are Obama tapes of the Benghazi attacks. Will they be released, or will Obama and Co. stonewall through the courts to keep them under wraps arguing Executive Privilege, Separation of Powers, and Checks and Balances  like Nixon did?

Here’s the latest from Fox News:

Sean  Hannity was debating liberal Juan Williams Tuesday on the Benghazi massacre.  Hannity revealed this on the audio tapes of Tyrone Woods begging for air support on 9-11, “My sources tell me they’re pretty damning, Juan. They’re begging for help.”

Tyrone Woods was screaming for air support and Barack Obama did nothing. Then he lied about it.

Hannity later said there are three tapes the Obama administration is holding onto including audio of Tyrone Woods begging for air support.

Will the press in 2012 be as relentless as the press was in 1973 and 1974  when it reported on Watergate, the tapes, and Nixon not making the tapes available?

Will we find portions of the Benghazi tapes erased like the infamous 18½  minute erasure in one of the tapes that some people speculate had recorded  incriminating information?

The media have been protecting President Obama for nearly four years. If a Republican President were in office, the media would be in attack mode. So far,  President Obama is not worried because his media friends have lost their  journalistic fire. Truth no longer matters to them.

Update by the Common Constitutionalist:

Glenn Beck reports the he has extremely credible and well-sourced proof that 2 large media outlets, one being a major network, have emails proving the Obama White House gave orders to “stand down” during the terror attack in Benghazi. An order to “Stand Down” to those who were ready and fully prepared to put down the terror attack and possibly rescue those who were eventually murdered.

So ready were they, that the terrorists were targeted and “painted” with lasers to allow for laser guided munitions to take them out. Yet, evidently, they were ordered to “stand down”.

Beck stated emphatically that these emails must be released to the public so we may learn the truth. These media outlets are holding them and so far have not released the emails.

He went on to state that if they don’t release them, he will publicly expose the outlets and do so before the election.

Saved by Sandy?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

The following article in no way makes light of the tragic situation people find themselves in due to hurricane Sandy. The loss of life and property is horrible. For the loved ones I have in the effected areas, I wish you all the best.

Our beloved president may have been spared the humiliation of being thrown overboard by the liberal progressive commie establishment.

Hurricane Sandy, created of course, by the republican’s secret weather machine, may have inadvertently saved Barack Hussein Obama.

See, liberal ideas or policies can never be to blame for any election loss. I’m certain the liberal powers-that-be were all set to toss King Barack off his throne and under the proverbial bus. It was his fault, not liberal ideas. He just didn’t or couldn’t get the great collective message out. Heck, he only had four years.

No man (or god) will be allowed to shake the foundation of liberalism, not even the “Anointed One”.

But now hurricane Sandy has possibly bailed out Barack.

Alex Guillen of Politico floated the trial balloon this past Monday, of the possibility of postponing the election, despite it never being done before.

Not for any previous natural disaster. Not even for any war including the Civil War, in which, in 1864, President Abraham Lincoln acknowledged that the scheduled elections, “added not a little to the strain” of the ongoing struggle, but postponement was not an option. “We cannot have free government without elections; and if the rebellion could force us to forego or postpone a national election, it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us.” Lincoln further noted that keeping to schedule “demonstrated that a people’s government can sustain a national election, in the midst of a great civil war. Until now it has not been known to the world that this was a possibility.”

That same day (Oct. 29), the White House cheer squad (press corps) asked Obama spokes boy, Jay Carney, “Jay, some of the utilities are saying that the power is going to be out in some areas for up to ten days. That would obviously include Election Day. Is there any contingency planning to alter the Election Day schedule because of this?”

The mainstream will, of course, do whatever it can to secure victory for their man.

On it’s face, this strategy makes no sense. It is completely illogical, but when it comes to the thinking of the left, logic has no place.

What possible gain could be had by postponing an election where only a few states, 2 in particular, were drastically effected? Those two states being New Jersey and New York, which Obama will win anyway.

But this is not the strategy at all. The democrat operatives in Washington no full well that the election will not postponed or changed in any way.

I’m betting, through internal polling and other sources, the liberal elites know Obama will most likely lose this election and may lose big.

Rather than accept the failure of policy, they must somehow create a situation on which to blame the loss.

Much as the liberals did 2000, they must also form a narrative of the election being stolen.

I’m quite sure they don’t favor throwing Obama under the bus, but if it must be done to save liberal ideology, so be it.

It will be much easier to now blame, at least partially, the election loss on the storm.

But the storm only severely effected a few states. How can that be to blame?

Several national polls have just been released showing Obama now winning key battleground states, such as Ohio. Never mind the polls are crap, but they still show Obama ahead.

Obama has suspended his campaign for a few days to actually play president. First time for everything, I know. He’s not really doing anything, but it has that appearance, none the less.

Those on the left, including all the mainstream press, will cry foul, that he, the president had to attend to the business of running the country, while that scum, Mitt Romney doesn’t have to concern himself with such things and can just campaign to his heart’s content, giving Romney the decided advantage. This, among other things, caused Obama to lose.

There will also be the predictable cry of cheating republicans, voters disenfranchised and discrimination due to new voter I.D. laws. The international observers will raise objection to something and lawsuits will follow.

One way or another, Romney will be said to be illegitimate; selected not elected. Sound familiar?

The only way to prevent most of this from occurring is a Romney landslide victory. We will never eradicate all the malfeasance of the left, but a clear and concise victory will quell most of the whining.

And as uncharitable as it may sound (and it is), it would please me greatly to see Obama get tossed in the trash heap of history by those same sycophants who have been fawning over him for years.