Why The Elites Hate Sarah Palin

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

Sarah Palin takes part in the Rolling Thunder motorcycle ride to honor US veterans.

The media is in a frenzy and elite pundits are all atwitter. Why? Because Sarah Palin refuses to let them define her. As Palin puts it, “I don’t owe the media anything.”

The political and media elites on both left and right are rising up in anger at former Governor Sarah Palin. Stories abound, all negative, about this American citizen whose message resonates with ordinary citizens yet doesn’t conform to the current political and media template.

By all rights, Palin should be kowtowing to the media. Doesn’t she know that? Instead, this upstart dares to ignore the unwritten rules governing political behavior. Palin is playing by her own rules and that just isn’t done.

In the elite world of the old media, any contender for public office must give due deference to the unwritten and ever-changing rules of political correctness. The sacred cows of diversity, multiculturalism and social justice cannot be ignored. And the media is the only one allowed to define the issues (thereby winning the debate by default).

But Sarah Palin has her own agenda. And whatever her agenda is, it most certainly doesn’t fit into the template the media and political elites have insisted upon. This is not only unacceptable, it is downright dangerous.

When Palin resigned as Governor of Alaska, the media immediately defined her decision as a failure to fulfill the obligations of her office. That was only explanation the media allowed the American public to consider. Palin, seeing the writing on the wall after months of negative and scurrilous attacks by the media, rightly deduced that her remaining time in office would be spent countering frivolous legal and media attacks instead of governing. So she quit.

Palin understood that while in public office, one is constrained by politics and media. One must play by certain unwritten rules, rules that would have deliberately silenced or distorted her message. She rightly deduced that she was in a lose-lose situation. She exited the political arena. She refused to play the game, knowing the deck was stacked against her. I call her decision courageous and I applaud her.

Conservative columnist and author Ben Shapiro sums it up best:

“Television made Barack Obama. Television it supported bigger and bigger government, from Welfare to health care; pushed abortion-on-demand and the radical gay agenda into the mainstream; it stumped against war and for meaningless buzzwords like diversity and dangerous buzzwords like multiculturalism. Television has done more to change the politics of our nation than simple politics has.”

Sarah Palin realizes this. The media is not on her side. And she rightly refuses to give them the ability to define her. She is more than capable of defining herself, through her own words and actions. She has the courage of her convictions and, thanks to social media, the ability to convey them, unfiltered by a hostile press. No wonder the press hates her.

The media, like myself, has no idea what Sarah Palin’s agenda is. Lacking concrete facts, the media automatically assumes her motives include gaining political power. They have completely overlooked the fact that Palin already has more than enough influence and political power to participate in (and possibly prevail) in our national debate. That this influence is not subject to constraints from either politician or the media is unprecedented. And dangerous.

I believe Palin realizes that real change is almost impossible within the existing political system. It could be argued that right now, Sarah Palin has more ability to influence political outcomes than does the president of the United States. So why should she play by rules that have been set up by those already in power, rules that are designed to keep them in power? Rules that place her at a great dis-advantage.

Palin is like millions of Americans. Americans who are tired of the futile attempts to change the system from within. I believe Palin’s goal is the goal of millions – to bring about positive change. And she has found that one does not have to be an elected official in order to do this. She directly threatens the status quo and the good old boy system. If she continues to prevail, she will prove it is possible to be effective working outside the system. And this can not be allowed.

Palin has rightly decided not to kowtow to the media and political elites. Her tactics and message resonate with a large segment of America. The segment that still believes in the greatness of America and the ability of individuals to accomplish the impossible.

Palin proves it is possible to change the system from without. She proves it is possible for one un-elected American to effect real change. Just think what would happen if others decided to follow her example. No wonder the elites hate her.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.

This article was first published by American Thinker on June 1, 2011


A Letter From Fly-Over Country

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

Disclaimer: With the exception of Sen. Jim DeMint, these views are not endorsed by our local and state officials.

Dear President Obama,

My neighbors here in Murrells Inlet have appointed me their spokesman in order to relay to you the results of our latest kitchen cabinet meeting.

We believe we’ve come up with some great solutions to many of America’s pressing problems. Of course, not a one of us is an expert or has any letters after our names, but we’re hoping you’ll listen anyway. (And we have no problem if you want to take credit for them.)

The economy: Did you know that reducing tax rates actually increases tax revenue to the government? Both JFK and Ronald Reagan found this out when they cut taxes. If you cut taxes instead of increasing them, both the government and the people end up with more money. We know that sounds strange, but Gary Murkowski, our local fire inspector and resident history buff, assures us it’s true. I checked it out, and, by golly, he’s absolutely right!

On energy: Penalizing big oil actually harms people like us in fly-over country. Neal Boortz has pointed out that the majority of stock in big oil is actually owned by mutual funds and IRA’s. (That’s us here in fly-over country) When you penalize them, you’re actually taking money out of our pockets. Frankly, if I lose any more value in my IRA, I might have to take a another job, and that would displace some poor illegal immigrant. Ha ha, just kidding.

Seriously, though, we’re all pretty sure that if you just quit fighting the judge’s order to issue more drilling permits, that would have a very positive effect on both the jobs market and the rising price of gasoline. It would also have the advantage of reducing the amount of money we’re sending to Arab countries.

(PS. Billy Joe is wondering why we’re sending billions of dollars to Brazil so they can drill offshore, but we can’t even drill here in our own back yard.)

Entitlements: We all really appreciate that fact that you and your administration are looking out for us, but there’s no need to bother. Everyone here in Murrells Inlet already has a pretty good safety net in case of emergencies. We’ve got a vibrant community, active churches, local charities and strong families that provide for us during rough times. As far as I know, no-one in this neck of the woods will even take hand-outs from the government. (Except for Betty Sue, our resident liberal, God bless her soul.)

Illegal Immigration: There is a strong case to be made that merely enforcing our existing immigration laws would be an effective solution. Attrition would eventually reduce the number of illegals already here. (When they go home for holidays, etc., we could just stop them from re-entering.) Wouldn’t that be better than endorsing and rewarding people who have broken our laws? In addition, we know of several organizations made up of regular Americans that are willing to help police our borders – at no cost to the government. Granted, they’re not union members, but, hey, no solution is perfect.

Health Care: All of us guys here in fly-over country believe that individual states are in a better position to determine health care policy than is the federal government. (See the Tenth amendment) We’re willing to bet good money that if the federal government just got out of the way, the free market would immediately result in much lower health-care costs. Across the board.

We know these proposed solutions don’t conform to the “progressive” template, but there’s a lot to be said for tried and true solutions that are grounded in history. Here’s hoping you give them careful consideration. After all, just because we’re a lot of white, middle-class guys doesn’t mean our views should be excluded.

Before we sign off, we’d like to give you a big shout-out for killing bin Laden. Like the media keeps saying, (over and over) that was a real gutsy call.

Say hey to Michelle and the kids for us.

PS. Did you get my last letter?

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina.


Is Obama a Serial Liar?

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

Accusing someone of lying is a serious matter. Especially when that someone is the President of the United States. Charges of that nature should be leveled based only on absolute proof of a deliberate statement, intentionally made, whose sole purpose is to deceive. Based on this criteria, President Obama is a liar. Demonstrably so. And a disturbing pattern is emerging that allows for the possibility that our president is a serial liar. Consider:

In just the last month, Obama has made several statements that are just not so. Statements made to the American public that were in direct conflict with known facts.

In April, Obama flatly stated that implementing ObamaCare will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion. A day later, the Congressional Budget Office reported that statement was ‘incorrect,’ pegging the “deficit savings” at $210 billion over 10 years.

In the same April 15 speech, Obama stated that the tax burden on the wealthy is the lowest it has been in 50 years. A simple fact-check proves him wrong. Obama did not correct his false statement and the media didn’t either.

In January of 2009, Obama stated that it was no longer necessary to kill Osama Bin Laden to win the war against al-Qaeda. On May 1, 2011, after the successful raid by Navy Seals that killed bin Laden, Obama told the nation that he made the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden a “top priority,” and had instructed CIA Chief Leon Panetta to make this job number one. Which statement is correct?

Last week, several of my friends asked me if I believed that bin Laden was really dead. The questions weren’t surprising, considering the mass of mis-information and conflicting accounts of bin Laden’s death now emanating from the White House. It appears the question of bin Laden’s demise was only settled after al Qaeda issued a statement confirming it.

What does it say about Obama’s credibility when the pro-Arab al Jazeera media reports are given more credibility than our own president? Maybe that’s why Columbia School of Journalism just awarded al Jazeera a journalism prize.

Giving Obama the benefit of the doubt, I’ll allow for the possibility that Obama underwent a drastic change of heart and altered his position on bin Laden. It happens. But when added to the increasing number of statements Obama continues to make that defy reality, the facts, and common sense, I’m more inclined to believe Obama’s “mis-statements” are a deliberate effort to deceive the American people.

For example: Obama told the American people that NOT spending money is “mortgaging America’s future.” Who knows, it’s possible Obama actually believes this, but anyone with an ounce of common sense knows we can’t spend our way out of bankruptcy.

Another blooper: Obama stated that increased drilling will NOT solve our energy problems. Huh? Again, the media let this statement go unchallenged. (At least Sen. Vitter called him on it.)

Obama would have us believe that the big bad oil companies are to blame for our skyrocketing gas prices, despite the fact that every energy decision made by Obama, from with holding drilling permits to increased regulatory burdens being placed on big oil, has directly resulted in raising the cost of gasoline.

Obama would like us to ignore the fact that his Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, stated in 2008 that he wants to “figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” Since then, gas prices have doubled. Mission accomplished.

Despite the pain at the pump, Obama’s energy dis-information campaign has been quite successful, with a new poll showing that only 9% of Americans believe that Obama is responsible for rising gas prices.

Tailoring the facts to reflect the most favorable interpretation is an accepted prerogative of the bully pulpit. Every president will of course, spin the news to a certain extent. This is not new. But under Obama, there appears to be a deliberate campaign by the White House and many segments of the government to blatantly deceive the American people. Consider our Department of Homeland Security:

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress last week that the Obama administration is trying to come up with a new yardstick to better reflect the improvements it says it has made. The Washington Times correctly noted that, unable to meet it’s border goals, the DHS merely moved the goals.

Arizona Sheriff Larry Deaver pretty much confirmed the Washington Time’s report, testifying before Congress that the U.S. Border Patrol has told its agents to stop arresting illegal aliens crossing the border from Mexico to keep the illegal immigration numbers down. In other words, deceive the American people by peddling perception as reality.

Obama and his administration are masters in getting Americans to think with their hearts instead of their brains. After all, emotions are easier to manipulate than facts. And many truths are easier to ignore than acknowledge. But not acknowledging reality, doesn’t change the reality. And we ignore reality at our own peril, as we are now finding out on a daily basis.

Though not specified in our Constitution, I believe Americans should have the right to enough information to make informed decisions. Instead, we are being fed a steady stream of outright lies and deliberate mis-statements. And when we the people fail to challenge our elected representatives when they lie, we not only enable them, we become complicit. We also forfeit the right to complain when reality hits us in the pocketbook while America continues it’s slide to the level of a third world country.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.

This article was first published in American Thinker on May 9, 2011.


Color Me Happy

By: Nancy Morgan

Color me happy. For the first time in over 10 years, crowds of Americans are waving flags and singing the Star Spangled Banner, celebrating an American victory – the death of bin Laden. Who’d a thunk? Just when I felt progressives had succeeded in turning America into a self-loathing, guilt ridden, multicultural sycophant to world opinion, I see hope that maybe our nation will be able to retain the pride in our accomplishments that has been under assault for so long. How about those Navy Seals?!!

I’m happy because it appears our military and intelligence agencies haven’t yet succumbed to political correctness and bureaucratic meddling. Instead of agonizing about Muslim sensitivities, they decided to take the kill shot and finally meted out justice to the man responsible for the deaths of thousands on 9/11. I’m smiling.

I’m so happy that I don’t even mind Obama taking credit for the operation that resulted in bin Laden’s death. I’m glad that I was wrong in my opinion that Obama would never willingly appear to offend any portion of the Muslim population. Obama’s statement, “Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan,” isn’t even offensive. Finally, he took a stand. Granted, it was a no brainer, but at least he appeared, for a moment, to be presidential. Finally.

I don’t even mind Obama’s patent fabrication when he told the nation late Sunday night that he had made the capture or killing of Osama Bin Laden a “top priority.” We all know of his propensity to revise reality, but at least this latest revision doesn’t harm America. Today, I’ll even give Obama a break.

Today, America is united. A common enemy is a very potent and unifying factor. For the moment, at least, the enemy has been identified and vanquished. All you rich guys out there can rest easy, at least for awhile.

Just in the nick of time, America has received a reprieve from the extreme idiocy and rampant manipulation that has come to characterize our government. Thank you, Navy Seals. Thank you for restoring a portion of my faith in America’s greatness.

I’m happy because, for at least a week, it will be possible to talk about how great America is without risking being called a right-wing nut. For the next week, Americans have carte blanche to point out America’s strengths and revel in, gasp, pride. We can even wave American flags without being sneered at.
I’m happy because when the usual suspects start with their inane questions about the justness of America’s actions, they will rightly be regarded as pantywaists.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes before the national spin machine starts to object to the outbreak of pride that so many Americans are feeling. CNN already started – in their coverage of bin Laden’s death, they referred to him as a victim. And the Washington Post’s Petula Dvorak described the sight of American college kids celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden outside of the White House gates on Sunday night as “almost vulgar.” Yawn.

Good luck to the media in trying to spin this victory. I expect that even the professional victims so beloved by the political and media elites are experiencing the first twinge of patriotism they have ever felt.

Today is a good day. America, at least for the moment, has retained its position as world leader. For awhile, at least, pundits and American apologists will take a back seat to the huge wave of popular sentiment and pride in America that is erupting across the nation.

I’m also happy that Americans have gotten a temporary reprieve from talking about Trump’s hair and who said what to whom. For now, I am experiencing a tingle up my leg when I think about our courageous Navy Seals. Real men finally taking center stage? I’m smiling!

God bless our great country and all our military men and women.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.


You Can’t Say That!

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

It’s now official: The truth shall no longer set you free. In our new era of political correctness, the truth is more liable to get you penalized, demonized or fired. Last week, a female juror in a high-profile American mafia murder trial found this out the hard way.

When asked on a court questionnaire, “Name three people you least admire,” this potential juror answered, “African-Americans, Hispanics and Haitians.” Her answer enraged a federal court judge in New York, who promptly sentenced her to indefinite jury duty, for her “racist” answer. This woman was penalized for being truthful.

Under the guise of being sensitive to “feelings,” political correctness has succeeded in effectively censoring any uncomfortable “truths” that do not comport with liberal orthodoxy.

Censoring inconvenient truths is not a new phenomenon. Starting in 1994, AEI fellow Charles Murray and fellow author Richard Herrnstein came under fire for their best-selling book The Bell Curve, in which they wrote about differences in race and intelligence and discussed implications of that difference.

Murray’s whole body of scholarly work was roundly denounced for daring to point out that the general IQ of African Americans was lower than those of white Americans. Of course, no one objected to the fact that their research also found that the general IQ of Asian Americans was many points higher than white Americans.

Murray and Hernstein found, to their dismay, that their fact-based research challenged the leftist notion of “equality.” Both authors were demonized as racists for daring to point out that differences do indeed exist among differing races. They weren’t supposed to say that, much less prove it scientifically.

Harvard’s former president, Lawrence Summers, also found out that voicing un-politically correct “truths” can exact severe consequences. In a 2005 speech, Summers dared to suggest that, the under-representation of women in science and engineering could be due to a “different availability of aptitude at the high end,” and less to patterns of discrimination and socialization. Feminists took umbrage at the suggestion that the under-representation of females in the scientific community might be due to female preference rather than male oppression.

Summers was forced to resign. And to soothe the hysterical feminists who objected to his politically-incorrect yet fact based opinion, Harvard vested $50 million bucks in Harvard’s feminists studies program. Overlooked, or deliberately ignored, in this delicious fracas was the fact that Summers statement was a valid opinion. But he wasn’t supposed to say it.

Political correctness is an approved form of censorship. Based on emotional appeals at the expense of reason, political correctness mandates that inconvenient truths or facts be swept under the carpet. Or else.

Free speech, guaranteed to all Americans under the first amendment, is on it’s way to becoming moot. The political, media and intellectual elites who control the terms of national debate and the rules of civil society have succeeded in censoring opposing views, limiting debate and demonizing dissent. Perception is on its way to becoming our new reality.

The lady juror who answered truthfully to her court questionnaire is merely the latest example. Though many may express horror at her forthrightness, and are quick to label her a racist, she, like all of us, forms her opinions through an accumulation of her life experiences. She is no different from myself except for the fact that she, through either ignorance or courage, dared to be truthful. She hasn’t yet learned that in today’s America, there are more and more things that are just not allowed to be said.

Her case is important, because for the first time, the unwritten and ever changing rules of political correctness have taken on the force of law. She is being forced to perform indefinite jury duty, supposedly until she starts thinking the right way. Does this sound familiar?

No-one wants to be thought of as stupid or, in liberal parlance, “un-enlightened.” No-one wants to be publicly labeled a homophobe or a racist. Under this threat, more and more Americans are comfortable adopting the assumption that ‘if everyone thinks it is so, then it must be so.’ They are willing to suspend their very own, inexpert but common sense opinions in favor of a widely held perception. A perception based on expert media and political manipulation as opposed to factual conclusions.

Truth, common sense and reality are now routinely suspended. It is OK to publicly revere one’s vagina but acknowledging racial realities is verboten. Dangling a cross in a jar of urine is considered daring – but mentioning God as our savior means you’re a fringe kook.

Daring to suggest that AIDS sufferers share responsibility for their disease means you are mean spirited and lacking compassion. (Advocating the expenditure of other people’s money is the new “compassion.”) And blaming the poor for the life choices they made that contributed to their poverty is considered beyond the pale.

Censoring uncomfortable truths or opinions is the goal of the PC police. Acquiescing to these arbitrary rules enables and validates them. And though it is not politically correct to say, I personally believe that those who are politically correct are weak people. Sheep who are either unable or unwilling to form their own opinions. Intellectually lazy sycophants who have so little confidence in themselves that they are willing to let others define them and determine their actions and opinions. Useful idiots, all. Can I say that?

You Can’t Say That! – Part 1

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.


Welcome To Our Homosexual Day of Silence

By: Nancy Morgan

Friday, April 15, the Homosexual Day of Silence is being promoted in government schools across the country.

Welcome students. Today is the big day. Today is your chance to take a stand against the forces of bigotry and homophobia that unfairly targets our brothers, sisters and others in the gay, lesbian, transgendered, bisexual and gender optional community.

By your very presence here, you signify your complete acceptance and approval of alternative lifestyles, sex on demand and the right of all to engage in whatever sexual practices feel good at the moment. You should be proud. And you may all now officially consider yourself enlightened. And empowered.

I want to thank all of you for not bowing down to the fanatical and intolerant Christians who hate sex. I want to acknowledge your bravery, tolerance and dedication to the concept of gender neutrality and the right of every man, woman and others to choose whichever sexual orientation they prefer.

We all recognize the problems you all encounter in your support of these basic human rights. And one day soon, thanks to you, gay men will not have to face the abject discrimination of being forced to use a men’s room. Pretty soon, I envision a world where all gender challenged people will be judged by the content of their character instead of their sexual orientation.

Until that day comes, however, I urge you to continue to flaunt your sexuality in the faces of those who, incredibly, still object to men swapping spit with other men. Remember, they are repressed. It’s not their fault. They just don’t “get it.”

I’d also like to thank our generous sponsors, your very own teacher’s union. Thanks to them, we have arranged a variety of field trips and several opportunities for activism. Sign up sheets are available and you will all get class credit and a small stipend for your participation.

Sorry Jannella, we’re not taking questions. This is a day of silence. Just listen and don’t comment. Unless of course, you’re a homophobe….

As I was saying, (could you please quiet down there in back), this school is behind you all the way and will be happy to sponsor any “spontaneous” gatherings in support of our LGBT community. Our print shop has designed and printed several posters you can choose from. (What? No, sorry, we’re all out of the Jesus is a Fag signs.)

Because those mean-spirited Republicans just forced Obama to decimate the budget, our teachers’ union has been forced to limit the usual per diem. Of course, if your protest makes it to national TV, we’ll happily reconsider.

Because this is a national day of silence, I’d like to suggest some excellent visual opportunities. I have several tubes of lipstick for any of you guys out there. Having you boys wear lipstick is a great way to banish the remaining stereotypes of manly men. For you gals, we have these cute buttons with pictures of manly women and effeminate men. (Yes, Henry, you can have both lipstick and a button.)

Last but not least, I’d like to announce our Homosexual Pride essay contest. Our generous teacher’s union has offered a grand prize of $500.00 for whomever pens the most articulate and inflammatory essay. The topic is: How Marriage Between a Man and a Woman is Unconstitutional. The winner and runner-up will also be given a pass on math and science for the rest of the semester. (Quiet down!!! This is a day of silence!)

For those of you in the lower grades that haven’t yet learned to write, we’re offering a prize for the best poster. If you need some help, just holler. Just kidding! Ha, ha.

I’d like to thank all of you for your support. I’d also like to stress that your participation in this momentous event is mandatory. We’d appreciate it if you didn’t mention this to your parents. Believe it or not, some parents would object. I know, I know. But take heart in the fact that pretty soon they’ll see the light. NAMBLA has a table right over there that offers lots of good information that should come in handy should you need to educate your parents.

You are all excused from classes for the rest of the day. Now go out there and make your silence heard!

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.


Embarrassed To Be American

By: Nancy Morgan

For the first time in my life, I’m embarrassed to be an American.

Last weekend, as tens of thousands of Japanese were fighting for their lives after an 8.9 earthquake devastated their nation, our President, after giving a generic “We’re with you” statement, remained noticeably absent.

Not really absent – Obama could be found on the golf course Saturday afternoon.

As a Japanese nuclear reactor melted down and threatened a catastrophe of biblical proportions, Obama was otherwise engaged Saturday night, having a rollicking good time at Washington D.C.’s annual Gridiron Dinner. Joking with journalists.

There is something quite shameful about watching our President attending a dress-up dinner, trolling for laughs, as one of America’s allies struggles for life. I’m embarrassed for America, and I send my personal apologies to the Japanese people for the insensitivity of our President.

As the turmoil in Libya continues to escalate, threatening severe geopolitical consequences, it is France (France?) that has filled the global leadership void by proposing a no-fly zone over Libya. What is the President of the free world doing? During his Saturday afternoon radio address to the nation, Obama was busy lecturing Americans about the role of women. And writing an op-ed about the virtues of gun control.

Obama did take the time to give his blessing to a call by the Arab League for a UN no-fly zone over Libya. Obama called it an “important step.” This, as government tanks continued to pound Libyan protesters. I’m embarrassed that, under Obama, America is becoming comfortable following world events instead of shaping them.

Obama has clearly signaled that he is content to leave America’s fate in the hands of the United Nations. He seems to believe that a global consensus should trump American sovereignty. For Obama, this relieves him of the need to make the tough decisions usually required by American presidents. For the rest of the world, Obama’s actions and lack of actions signal weakness. And Obama has never learned the basic lesson that weakness does not appease, it emboldens.

I’m embarrassed that America’s president has chosen to punt on every recent issue of importance – from Libya to Egypt to the economy. As Obama sits firmly on the fence, refusing to make any decision that might impact him unfavorably, 3rd world countries, Islamic fanatics and France scramble to fill the world leadership vacuum. America is AWOL – seemingly more concerned with fat poor people than with events that threaten to permanently undermine US influence around the globe.

The ramifications of U.S. abdication of leadership on the world stage will have severe consequences. These consequences will apply to conservatives and leftists alike as, more and more, America’s autonomy will be held hostage to terrorist nations that supply us oil, and to China, who now holds about 30% of our debt.

Obama’s policy of dissing our allies and kowtowing to our enemies is not leadership. It is folly. A folly that has the implicit endorsement of the American people, who willingly elected Obama as their representative.

I’m embarrassed that America, under Obama, has chosen to bury our head in the sand. I’m mortified that the priorities of our president are so puerile. And I’m shamed that America, under Obama, is acting more like a global lap-dog than as one of the world’s remaining superpowers.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.


Was The Economic Crisis Manufactured?

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

In the summer of 2008, as McCain and Obama were in the midst of their campaigns to capture the presidency, a series of events dramatically changed the focus of the campaign from Iraq to the economy. From that point on, Obama took the lead and eventually won the presidency.

Now, a full two years later, the Pentagon has issued a report on the series of events that led to the 2008 economic crash. Bill Gertz writes in the Washington Times:

Evidence outlined in a Pentagon contractor report suggests that financial subversion carried out by unknown parties, such as terrorists or hostile nations, contributed to the 2008 economic crash by covertly using vulnerabilities in the U.S. financial system.

“There is sufficient justification to question whether outside forces triggered, capitalized upon or magnified the economic difficulties of 2008,” the report says.

Notable for its’ absence is any suggestion that the economic events that arguably catapulted Obama into the White House may have originated in our own political system.

Consider: The economic house of cards started tumbling on June 26, 2008, when Senator Chuck Schumer leaked a memo questioning the solvency of IndyMac bank. This memo precipitated a run on IndyMac which led to its failure. Federal regulators pointedly cited U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., in explaining the bank’s failure. “The immediate cause of the closing was a deposit run that began and continued after the public release of a June 26 letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of New York.”

As I wrote in February of 2009, this event, coupled with the Lehman Brothers collapse in September, marked the beginning of the current economic meltdown and provided the environment that enabled Barack Obama to focus on the economy instead of his position on Iraq – and, not incidentally, resulted in his election as President.

For the last two years, the media has neglected to connect the dots regarding the strange gyrations in our financial markets that started in the summer of 2008. After Schumer caused the run on IndyMac in June, the government moved in:

July 12, 2008: The federal government takes control of the $32 billion IndyMac Bank. *

* Six months later, Jan 2, 2009, a seven-member group of investors agreed to buy the remnants of failed lender IndyMac for $13.9 billion. Other investors included a fund controlled by billionaire George Soros’ Fund Management.

Sept. 6, 2008: Fannie Mae begins its downward spiral, which will end with a crash in November. This crash was avoidable, as the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were identified in June of 2006, when 15 Republicans on the Senate Banking Committee introduced legislation to address the problem. Democrats, led by Barney Frank, killed the reform efforts.

Sept. 15, 2008: Obama and McCain are virtually tied in their race for the presidency. Out of nowhere, in the space of less than 2 hours, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw down of money market accounts in the U.S. to the tune of $550 billion. Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania said that if authorities had not closed the banks, $5.5 trillion would have been withdrawn from US banks, which would have caused the collapse of the US within 24 hours.

This seminal event marked the ascendancy of Obama’s candidacy, and arguably resulted in his election as president.

Fast forward to February of 2009:

The markets reacted to Obama’s proposal to bail-out mortgages and Senator Christopher Dodd’s talk of nationalizing banks by reaching 11-year lows.

Obama continues to stoke the fears of imminent crisis, actually using the word ‘crisis’ a total of 26 times in one speech.

Enter George Soros. The infamous one-worlder, billionaire George Soros adds his voice to the media doomsayers by opining that the world financial system has effectively disintegrated, adding that there is yet no prospect of near-term resolution to the crisis.*

The series of ‘inadvertent errors,’ deliberate obstruction, political shenanigans, behind the scenes manipulation of the money markets and non-stop calls for immediate infusions of taxpayer cash, brought the U.S. to its knees by February 2009. And continues to this day.

The newly issued Pentagon report, along with the media and our elected officials, seem intent on not connecting the dots, considering only foreign enemies as the possible cause of the financial meltdown:

Suspects include financial enemies in Middle Eastern states, Islamic terrorists, hostile members of the Chinese military, or government and organized crime groups in Russia, Venezuela or Iran. Chinese military officials.

This author believes there is enough information to at least consider that this crisis was manufactured for political gain. Right here at home.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.

This article was first published in American Thinker on March 4, 2011.


Obama Takes A Stand on Libya

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

Obama has finally taken a stand on the ongoing carnage in Libya. After nine days of silence, he has finally and forcefully, condemned the “outrageous” crackdown by Libyan security forces on protesters. He also said that a unified international response was forming. Whew.

Translation: America will stand firmly behind the United Nations. We will wait and see what the global consensus and political ramifications are before taking sides against a murderous thug.

The day before Obama firmly came out on the side of world peace via Libya, his press secretary had informed the world that Obama’s 9 day silence on the Libyan inferno was due to “scheduling conflicts.” Now that Obama has made time in his schedule, he has finally made a decision. America is going to let the United Nations handle the problem.

Obama, in his best presidential voice, (complete with reverb) has decided to dispatch Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the United Nations to persuade them to take the lead on the Libyan fiasco. Hillary’s job is to convince other third world dictators that hiring sociopaths to randomly shoot protestors in cold blood is just not the way to go.

No word yet if her diplomatic efforts will bear fruit. Hope, however, is still Obama’s policy. As to whether his hope will affect change, the signs are encouraging. Gadhafi took time off from killing protesters to confirm to the world that Barack is his buddy. “He is of Muslim descent, his policy should be supported, as he now leans towards peace.” There you have it.

Meanwhile, the United Nations also showed its’ desire for world peace by making a small concession. The U.N. Development Program has dropped Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s daughter as a goodwill ambassador.

With the United Nations firmly in charge, Americans will not be able to blame Obama. After all, Obama has been perfectly clear from day one that he favors a “global community” over an upstart and aggressive United States. What right does America have to a premier position in world affairs? Finally, Obama is standing by a position he actually took during his presidential campaign.

America, under Obama, has abdicated its leadership authority in world affairs. Instead of meddling in other countries, Obama has instead focused his power and authority here at home. His wife is conducting a war on obesity while Obama meets quietly with union leaders to figure out how to stop the anti-union protests that threaten his base. His schedule is full as he works tirelessly on behalf of some Americans.

Not to worry. The United States still has influence in the Arab world. Just yesterday, Saudi Arabia adopted one of Obama’s most visible policies for dealing with recalcitrant subjects.

Taking a cue from Obama, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah decided to quell unrest by throwing dollars on the problem. Abdullah announced that he will generously spend $36 billion bucks to increase the pay of civil servants by 15%. The King also announced a reprieve for imprisoned deadbeats and increased aid for students and the unemployed.

See, America still has influence. Now if some of those terrorists would just cut down on their carbs, we might finally be able to achieve the world peace Obama promised us.

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.


I Want To Join A Union

By: Nancy Morgan
Right Bias

Until I saw the thousands of loyal union members expressing solidarity by their courageous protests in Wisconsin, I had no idea of the great perks union membership entailed. Now that I do, I want in.

And not just any union – I want to join either a teacher’s union or the government workers union. Imagine – if I belonged to either of those unions I would never be able to be fired. Not only that, no one could complain about my work, or lack of work. And even if they did, the grievance process is so long that it wouldn’t impact me for several years. My union brothers would stand beside me, no matter what. Even if they found out about that old felony conviction. (That conviction was totally unfair!)

In Arkansas, they’re even paying a teacher to do nothing after they found out she had been convicted of prostitution. It’s called “paid leave.” How cool is that?

If I belonged to either of those unions, I would only have to pay for a fraction of my own health care, and I would even be exempt from Obamacare. Cradle to grave security. Where do I sign up? (Did I mention free Viagra?)

If I belonged to those unions, my pay would be around 40% higher than those saps who work in the private sector. And if someone threatened to lower it, I’d have the President of the United States speak out on my behalf. Totally awesome!

If I belonged to those unions, I would have more power than my stupid boss. I’d be able to take him to task for oppressing the workers (me!) and everyone would automatically believe me and take my side. After all, everyone knows capitalism is evil and bosses profit off my misery. I’d be a victim, not an exploiter. My mom would finally be proud of me.

If I belonged to those unions, I’d be able to take the moral high ground. (Finally!) If you don’t believe me, than you must be one of those idiots that watches Fox News. In case you haven’t heard, Fox News lies. (I saw that on TV so I know its true.)

I want to join one of those unions because then I’d be part of the community of man, a “worker of the world.” I’d instantly be accepted as a valiant warrior fighting for the underdog. I’d have lots of new friends. Sure, I might have to actually work, but that’s OK by me. As long as my rights are respected.

In return for all this, all I have to do is toe the union line. Hey, I don’t have any problem being bussed to other states to picket when required. And the dues they take out of my paycheck will be used to buy politicians who are guaranteed to support the union cause. Small price to pay…

I won’t even mind spending work time on political campaigns in order to elect officials that back unions. Going door to door might even help me lose the weight I gained right before my unemployment benefits ran out.

I want to be part of something important. I’ve been lonely too long. I yearn to fight for a righteous cause, like I did in the 60’s. I want in. And just to let you know how serious I am, I’ll even promise to vote for Obama, even though I think he’s a joke.

Where can I sign up and when do the health perks kick in? I feel a cold coming on. (Just so you know, I don’t need the Viagra.)

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com. She lives in South Carolina.