Millennium Falcon Found?

Sceptics expected that a deep-water dive would debunk the slew of extra-terrestrial theories surrounding an unidentified object sitting at the bottom of the Baltic Sea.

But the Swedish expedition team that took the plunge surfaced with more questions than answers and certainly no solution to its origins.

The divers found that the object, which some have likened to the Millennium Falcon because of its unusual round outline, was raised about 10 to 13ft above the seabed and curved in at the sides, giving it a mushroom shape.

They added that the object has ’rounded sides and rugged edges’

‘First we thought this was only stone, but this is something else,’ diver Peter Lindberg said in a press release.

At the center of the object, which has a 60-meter (197 feet) diameter, it has an “egg shaped hole leading into it from the top”.

Surrounding the hole, they found a strange, unexplained rock formation. Adding fuel to the speculative fire, they said that the rocks looked “like small fireplaces” and the “stones were covered in something resembling soot”.

“Since no volcanic activity has ever been reported in the Baltic Sea the find becomes even stranger”, Mr Lindberg continued.

“As laymen we can only speculate how this is made by nature, but this is the strangest thing I have ever experienced as a professional diver.”

The soot also proved cause for concern for Mr Lindberg’s colleague on the Ocean X explorer team, Stefan Hogeborn.

“During my 20-year diving career, including 6,000 dives, I have never seen anything like this. Normally stones don’t burn”, Mr Hogeborn said in the release.

“I can’t explain what we saw, and I went down there to answer questions, but I came up with even more.”

Another find that they saw in person for the first time was the 985-foot trail that they described “as a runway or a downhill path that is flattened at the seabed with the object at the end of it”.

The object was first found in June last year, but because of a lack of funding and bad timing, they have were not able to pull a team together to see for themselves – just the strange, metallic outline, and a similar disk-shaped object about 650 feet away.

As it was before the recent dive, the story behind the object is anyone’s guess.

“We’ve heard lots of different kinds of explanations, from George Lucas’s spaceship – the Millennium Falcon – to ‘it’s some kind of plug to the inner world,’ like it should be hell down there or something”, Mr Lindberg said.

Speaking to Fox News, he said: “We don’t know whether it is a natural phenomenon, or an object. We saw it on sonar when we were searching for a wreck from World War I. This circular object just turned up on the monitor.”

While the Ocean Explorer team is understandably excited about their potentially earth-shattering find, others are slightly more sceptical and are questioning the accuracy of the sonar technology.

In the past, such technology has confused foreign objects with unusual- but natural- rock formations.

Part of the trouble they face, however, is that they have no way of telling what is inside the supposed cylinder- whether it is filled with gold and riches or simply aged sediment particles.

They’re hoping for the former, and history seems to be in their favor.

The Baltic Sea is a treasure trove for shipwreck hunters, as an estimated 100,000 objects are thought to line the cold sea’s floor.

The company have created a submarine that they hope will appeal to tourists and wannabe shipwreck hunters who will pay to take a trip down to the bottom of the Baltic Sea to see for themselves.

Attribution: Mail Online

NBC Caught Again

If your a regular reader you know I’m not a big fan of Mitt Romney. If you’re a new reader; I’m not a big fan of Mitt Romney. I will be voting for him and I will encourage people to do the same.

That being said, I would like to say I am apalled at the latest incident regarding the mainstream media, particulary NBC, but I’m not. It is well known that the mainstream media are in the tank for for Obama.  NBC is the worst offender. They are just dirtbags. I am convinced they will stop at nothing to get Obama reelected. This video evidence is worse than the Zimmerman edited video that got a few people fired.

To continue reading of the latest intentional smear job click on The Blaze link.

A New Party?

by: Stanley Kurtz:

On the evening of January 11, 1996, while Mitt Romney was in the final years of his run as the head of Bain Capital, Barack Obama formally joined the New Party, which was deeply hostile to the mainstream of the Democratic party and even to American capitalism. In 2008, candidate Obama deceived the American public about his potentially damaging tie to this third party. The issue remains as fresh as today’s headlines, as Romney argues that Obama is trying to move the United States toward European-style social democracy, which was precisely the New Party’s goal.

In late October 2008, when I wrote here at National Review Online that Obama had been a member of the New Party, his campaign sharply denied it, calling my claim a “crackpot smear.” Fight the Smears, an official Obama-campaign website, staunchly maintained that “Barack has been a member of only one political party, the Democratic Party.” I rebutted this, but the debate was never taken up by the mainstream press.

Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.

Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.

Knowing that Obama disguised his New Party membership helps make sense of his questionable handling of the 2008 controversy over his ties to ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). During his third debate with John McCain, Obama said that the “only” involvement he’d had with ACORN was to represent the group in a lawsuit seeking to compel Illinois to implement the National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law. The records of Illinois ACORN and its associated union clearly contradict that assertion, as I show in my political biography of the president, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.

Why did Obama deny his ties to ACORN? The group was notorious in 2008 for thug tactics, fraudulent voter registrations, and its role in popularizing risky subprime lending. Admitting that he had helped to fund ACORN’s voter-registration efforts and train some of their organizers would doubtless have been an embarrassment but not likely a crippling blow to his campaign. So why not simply confess the tie and make light of it? The problem for Obama was ACORN’s political arm, the New Party.

The revelation in 2008 that Obama had joined an ACORN-controlled, leftist third party could have been damaging indeed, and coming clean about his broader work with ACORN might easily have exposed these New Party ties. Because the work of ACORN and the New Party often intersected with Obama’s other alliances, honesty about his ties to either could have laid bare the entire network of his leftist political partnerships.

Although Obama is ultimately responsible for deceiving the American people in 2008 about his political background, he got help from his old associates. Each of the two former political allies who helped him to deny his New Party membership during campaign ’08 was in a position to know better.

The Fight the Smears website quoted Carol Harwell, who managed Obama’s 1996 campaign for the Illinois senate: “Barack did not solicit or seek the New Party endorsement for state senator in 1995.” Drawing on her testimony, Fight the Smears conceded that the New Party did support Obama in 1996 but denied that Obama had ever joined, adding that “he was the only candidate on the ballot in his race and never solicited the endorsement.”

We’ve seen that this is false. Obama formally requested New Party endorsement, signed the candidate contract, and joined the party. Is it conceivable that Obama’s own campaign manager could have been unaware of this? The notion is implausible. And the documents make Harwell’s assertion more remarkable still.

The New Party had a front group called Progressive Chicago, whose job was to identify candidates that the New Party and its sympathizers might support. Nearly four years before Obama was endorsed by the New Party, both he and Harwell joined Progressive Chicago and began signing public letters that regularly reported on the group’s meetings. By prominently taking part in Progressive Chicago activities, Obama was effectively soliciting New Party support for his future political career (as was Harwell, on Obama’s behalf). So Harwell’s testimony is doubly false.

When the New Party controversy broke out, just about the only mainstream journalist to cover it was Politico’s Ben Smith, whose evident purpose was to dismiss it out of hand. He contacted Obama’s official spokesman Ben LaBolt, who claimed that his candidate “was never a member” of the New Party. And New Party co-founder and leader Joel Rogers told Smith, “We didn’t really have members.” But a line in the New Party’s official newsletter explicitly identified Obama as a party member. Rogers dismissed that as mere reference to “the fact that the party had endorsed him.”

This is nonsense. I exposed the falsity of Rogers’s absurd claim, and Smith’s credulity in accepting it, in 2008 (here and here). And in Radical-in-Chief I took on Rogers’s continuing attempts to justify it. The recently uncovered New Party records reveal how dramatically far from the truth Rogers’s statement has been all along.

In a memo dated January 29, 1996, Rogers, writing as head of the New Party Interim Executive Council, addressed “standing concerns regarding existing chapter development and activity, the need for visibility as well as new members.” So less than three weeks after Obama joined the New Party, Rogers was fretting about the need for new members. How, then, could Rogers assert in 2008 that his party “didn’t really have members”? Internal documents show that the entire leadership of the New Party, both nationally and in Chicago, was practically obsessed with signing up new members, from its founding moments until it dissolved in the late 1990s.

In 2008, after I called Rogers out on his ridiculous claim that his party had no members, he explained to Ben Smith that “we did have regular supporters whom many called ‘members,’ but it just meant contributing regularly, not getting voting rights or other formal power in NP governance.” This is also flatly contradicted by the newly uncovered records.

At just about the time Obama joined the New Party, the Chicago chapter was embroiled in a bitter internal dispute. A party-membership list is attached to a memo in which the leaders of one faction consider a scheme to disqualify potential voting members from a competing faction, on the grounds that those voters had not renewed their memberships.

 The factional leaders worried that their opponents would legitimately object to this tactic, since a mailing that called for members to renew hadn’t been properly sent out. At any rate, the memo clearly demonstrates that, contrary to Rogers’s explanation, membership in the New Party entailed the right to vote on matters of party governance. In fact, Obama’s own New Party endorsement, being controversial, was thrown open to a members’ vote on the day he joined the party.

Were Harwell and Rogers deliberately lying in order to protect Obama and deceive the public? Readers can decide for themselves. Yet it is clear that Obama, through his official spokesman, Ben LaBolt, and the Fight the Smears website, was bent on deceiving the American public about a matter whose truth he well knew.

The documents reveal that the New Party’s central aim was to move the United States steadily closer to European social democracy, a goal that Mitt Romney has also attributed to Obama. New Party leaders disdained mainstream Democrats, considering them tools of business, and promised instead to create a partnership between elected officials and local community organizations, with the goal of socializing the American economy to an unprecedented degree.

The party’s official “statement of principles,” which candidates seeking endorsement from the Chicago chapter were asked to support, called for a “peaceful revolution” and included redistributive proposals substantially to the left of the Democratic party.

To get a sense of the ideology at play, consider that the meeting at which Obama joined the party opened with the announcement of a forthcoming event featuring the prominent socialist activist Frances Fox Piven. The Chicago New Party sponsored a luncheon with Michael Moore that same year.

I have more to say on the New Party’s ideology and program, Obama’s ties to the party, and the relevance of all this to the president’s campaign for reelection. See the forthcoming issue of National Review.

In the meantime, let us see whether a press that let candidate Obama off the hook in 2008 — and that in 2012 is obsessed with the president’s youthful love letters  — will now refuse to report that President Obama once joined a leftist third party, and that he hid that truth from the American people in order to win the presidency.

Simply Incredible

These are the breathtaking underwater pictures captured by marine life photographer David Doubilet on the wildest parts of the planet.

The vibrant photographs range from cute Australian sea lions peering inquisitively into the lens to a terrifying Great White Shark opening its jaws in South Africa.

Attribution: Mail Online

Joke du Jour

To celebrate their fiftieth wedding anniversary, a couple returned to their honeymoon hotel.

After retiring to bed, the wife said, “Darling, do you remember how you stroked my hair? and so he stroked her hair.”

She reminded him of the way they had cuddled, and so they did.

Then, with a sigh, she whispered, “Won’t you nibble my ear again?”

With that, the husband got out of bed and left the room.

“Where are you going?”, cried the wife.

“To get my teeth”, he said.

2012 Voting Rights Act

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Step one in the great election theft of 2012. Through an illegal dictatorial decree (executive order), the Obama Administration will grant amnesty for young illegal immigrants. They won’t call it that but who cares.

This of course is beyond the scope of the president’s constitutional authority. That is of no concern to him or the revolutionaries that surround and advise him. The plan is to immediately stop any deportation efforts and issue work permits to these young lawbreakers. They will attach some pretend conditions on the illegals to make it sound more reasonable. (eg: must have graduated high school.) In order to comply with the federal program, the illegals will, no doubt,  have to register with Homeland Security. 

During a press conference in 2011, the president clearly explained to the press & public, he did not have the authority to just change or disregard the laws regarding illegal immigrants.

They have evidently found a way to just usurp congress & decree it, just as you would expect a dictator to do. Actually, they haven’t found a way around our pesky laws. The administration just doesn’t care. They do these sorts of things all the time, just daring the congress to stop them. Also, in 2011 they didn’t think they would need this block of non-citizens.

Obama explained his reasoning this way: He sent a proposal to congress and they blocked it. He just can’t wait for their approval, so in true constitutional form, he has decided to make it so without congressional approval. He did assure the American people, this would not be a path to citizenship. Although I don’t believe him, I do believe they don’t care whether these poor folks are citizens or not. That is not what they’re after.

I do agree, however, that he can’t wait. It will, after all, take time for all the illegals to sign up for the program.

The Obamites must leave themselves enough time to implement Step two.

Step Two will be a massive voter registration drive. By shear coincidence, these young illegals just happen to be between the ages of 18 & 30. Just old enough to vote & young enough to still be stupid.

As you recall, all of the young illegals had to sign up for work permits. To do so required them to release to the government, their personal contact information including an address and telephone number.

In a way that doesn’t seem possible, these lists will somehow end up in the hands of the “Center for American Progress”, “MoveOn.Org” and/or some “ACORN” type organization.

These organizations will then fan out across the nation to register the unsuspecting voting block. Strong-arm tactics will NOT be used for the registration drive. Threats of deportation will NOT occur, for those who balk at registering to vote, because the new worker knows it is illegal to do so, . There will be NO incentive proposed for registration, such as free sign up for Obamacare.

As I stated, in 2011, Obama said that he simply didn’t have the authority to do this, he was not a Monarch. So what has changed? Certainly not the whole “Monarch” thing. He has always thought that. What has changed is the need for additional votes.

The administration knows it is in real electoral trouble. This leads me to reveal Step Three.

My theory is that they will cheat as much as they have to, to win the popular vote in November. As you may know, whoever wins the electoral vote, wins the election. If Romney wins the electoral vote but Obama can pull out a popular vote victory, his administration and wacko supporters will file so many lawsuits it would cause the country to shut down, not to mention, tearing it apart by fomenting race riots. There have been many factions in the past wanting to just do away with the whole electoral process & replace it with the popular vote only. Hillary Clinton suggested it several years ago.

I guess we’ll just have to see how much congress let’s Obama get away with. I hate to say it, but most of them don’t have the spine to do the right thing and stand up to this bunch.

But, with enough independent light shone on the administration, it may at least, slow them down and possibly wake up a few more legal voters.

We’re Just Not Acting Right

EPA wants a “Way of Life Act” to control us even more

by: Julie Szydlowski

Despite the extensive regulations placed on Americans through the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts and other directives, zealots at the Environmental Protection Agency say existing rules are not enough to control individual behavior – and controlling individual behavior is what they long to do.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) recently released a video montage of Obama EPA Regional Administrators revealing their hopes of imposing a green “Way Of Life Act” on Americans enforced through the regulatory dictatorship of the EPA.

President Obama-appointed EPA Regional Administrator Al Armendariz is heard saying on the video that the EPA should “crucify” and “make an example” of the oil and coal industries — which is eerily in keeping with Obama’s promise to bankrupt coal companies.

To be precise, Armendariz put his “philosophy of enforcement” of a green way of life regarding oil & coal companies this way: “It was kind of like how the Romans used to conquer little villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they would crucify them. And then you know that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.”

Armendariz went on to say, “I don’t have a Way of Life Act that I can enforce – I’ve got a Clean Air Act, I’ve got a Clean Water Act, a Safe Drinking Water Act that can be used to enforce green ideals.” But having an official Act on how people actually live their lives would be so much more convenient.

Armendariz subsequently resigned under fire for his comments, but he wasn’t alone in his intent to control our way of life. Also appearing on the video is EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck, who tries to justify a “Way of Life Act” because, “I don’t think individual change is going to be enough.”

But it’s not just these two people we need to fear, Sen. Inhofe’s office warns. “The purpose of this video is to get to know President Obama’s ‘green generals’ – the regional administrators – who are going into battle for the Obama-EPA, working hard to force a green ‘way of life act’ in regions across the United States.”

It’s frightening to imagine what type of controls they envision placing on us under such an Act. It’s bad enough that environmentalists are indoctrinating children into a green way of thinking; to the extent of having them monitor their own parents to point out where they’re failing to live “green.” Now agents of the government want to regulate our behavior officially and have another excuse to raise taxes on our use of energy.

The question is, what makes these environmentalists’ values more important than an individual’s right to live as he chooses? At what point will the government, under the guise and legal backing of a green Way of Life Act or other existing Acts, begin to dictate how much water we can use in a given day, or how long we can run our air conditioner? Especially bothersome is that unelected officials are being given extraordinary power to enforce behavior on American citizens, and they have the full support of our President.

Just like New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s attempt to regulate the size of soda cups we drink from, our government has no right telling us how to live our lives in our own private pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Too bad those values are all but forgotten by this leftist government gone wild. Hopefully this Way of Life Act remains nothing more than a pipe-dream.

Anyone Interested in the VMT?

by: Tim Brown & the Common Constitutionalist

It never ceases to amaze me how government can come up with new ways to milk people of their money, but find it impossible to cut their spending.

 Such is a new method that states are trying to come up with by tracking the mileage on your car and taxing it appropriately.

The new technology is already being explored by Minnesota and Oregon. The GPS-like box would be mounted inside a person’s vehicle and they can purchase “miles” ahead of time.

 “As the (national vehicle) fleet becomes more fuel efficient … we’re going to lose a lot of revenue from the gas tax. If it’s not replaced, we’re going to see our transportation infrastructure deteriorate,” says Joshua Schank, president of the Eno Center for Transportation in Washington, D.C.

He expects to see a state vehicle miles-traveled (VMT) tax within the next 5 to 10 years.

“We’re seeing a lot of interest in VMT as one of the potential solutions to transportation funding gaps that states are dealing with,” says Jaime Rall, senior policy specialist at the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Many say the greatest obstacle to a miles-traveled tax has been privacy concerns. When Oregon ran a pilot program six years ago, motorists’ major objection was to in-vehicle boxes used to track miles driven, said James Whitty of the Oregon Department of Transportation. “They didn’t like the government boxes. They didn’t like the GPS mandate,” he says.

Of those 2 words, GPS and mandate, my guess is they objected more to ‘mandate’.

So let’s see if I have this right. In most states, we purchase a vehicle and pay a tax to either the city or town & the state. Then we must register it; another tax. Then we buy gas for it and pay tax on the gas. We then pay a toll to drive on the road; that’s a tax. Now they’re going to tax us on the miles we drive due to diminished revenue because they have forced us into more economical cars with escalated fuel costs and bogus CAFE standards?

 Next, some state or federal bureaucrat will propose a new tax (actually more of a penalty) for non-mass transit users. An additional fee when you register your vehicle. By purchasing a car, it is assumed you will not be using mass transit. The intent of said bureaucrat is to nudge people toward the use of trains and buses.

 If the program has any success, the government will soon discover the revenue shortfall was caused by it’s own action & must then invent another tax or fee to subsidize that shortfall.

 This is what governments do. They constantly cause more problems than they ever solve.