Tuesday, September 29, 2009


It is now abundantly clear that the image of Barack Obama sold to the American electorate was tightly edited, air-brushed, and exaggerated. He has worn a series of masks -- eloquent orator, brilliant scholar, centrist, and literary sensation. All of these masks are coming off as he copes with a job for which image will not suffice. For instance, hiding behind the eloquent orator mask is a guy who says "uhh" a lot when he is winging it,

and who makes lots of factual and grammatical mistakes. JUST HOW SMRT IS HE


Friday, September 25, 2009


AP Photo/Evan VucciAs appalled and outraged as I was to learn recently that a sitting U.S. president illegally ordered a private company to stop pointing out facts about his policies (facts confirmed by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office), such blatant assaults on dissent are nothing new for this president.

Of the many, many examples I have copiously documented of Obama giving liberty-minded citizens reasons to keep comparing him to Hitler, here are the top 10:

10. The fact that he enlisted law enforcement officials to "target" anyone who ran campaign ads against him that he didn't like.

9. The fact that he blacklists any news media outlet that actually bothers to question him.

8. The fact that he threatened the broadcasting license of a Pennsylvania station just for considering airing an ad on his extreme anti-gun record.

7. The fact that he has repeatedly branded dissenters as right-wing terrorists.

6. The fact that his administration was caught planting fake "experts" at health care town halls.

5. The fact that he keeps illegal enemies lists.

4. The fact that his administration repeatedly sent its hired union rent-a-mobs to shout down and intimidate dissent.

3. The fact that he tried to prosecute Bush attorneys for daring to write legal opinions that Democrats disagreed with.

2. The fact that he corrupted and politicized the Census Bureau for partisan gain.

1. His support for Card Check and the "Fairness" Doctrine.

Obama's Constitution-trampling war on dissent is why so many Americans are increasingly rejecting his scams for power and control (ObamaCare, Cap-and-Trade, etc.) as the sleazy partisan ploys they are. These actions are the signature of a Third World dictator, not an American president.

Sunday, September 20, 2009





Do we need to tell you that a legitimate president of the United States can not during term of office collaterally hold any other government position under the constitution of a foreign sovereign state?

Do you need to be told--without recognizing for yourself--the president of the United States and U.S. commander in chief cannot be at the same time president of the United Nations Security Council?

SOETORO-OBAMA and his treasonous partners are subjecting Americans and the United States Constitution to death by a thousand cuts.

We must stop the knife sharpening and carving here and now as SOETORO and his ilk are very close to inflicting the terminal, fatal wound.

SOETORO-OBAMA the whore, SOEHO shall we call him, is scheduled to assume the title and duties of the principal officer of a principal "organ" of the United Nations in days.

Would that our United States Constitution be operative!

SOEHO would not hold the White House in occupation this moment, nor would he be in a position to surrender United States sovereignty to an ever emerging and ever strengthening modern day world government boasting as it promises to subject Americans to international sovereignty, international governance, and international jurisdiction.


This devil of a man is a foreign agent who has infiltrated U.S. constitutional government with the very specific purpose of quietly, insistently, insidiously injuring the Constitution unto death giving way to the new international order.

Has it occurred to anyone that SOEHO'S appearance before the United Nations will set an international precedent that the United States chief executive can be a citizen of any country, let's say for example Britain, or Indonesia?

WE SAY AGAIN!: SOEHO's swearing in as president of the U.N. Security Council sets an international precedent that the United States chief executive and commander in chief can be a citizen of any county, leading a nation reduced to state status under the U.N. secretary general and U.N. constitution (charter).

You must comprehend, as it stands, we citizens of the United States must know SOEHO is a foreigner. No one can claim ignorance. Our silence as an American people--manifested in our impotence to oust SOEHO as a foreign born domestic enemy--is our agreement before the international community that the United States Constitution is formally decommissioned.

It is in this context that SOEHO is being allowed to swear allegiance to a foreign sovereign advancing SOEHO's commitment to bring Americans ever so carefully under the international constitution known as the United Nations Charter.

In discussions with Marine Sergeant Harrington, Tim pointed out that SOEHO's accepting a foreign government position under the United Nations flag perfectly demonstrates an act of TREASON legally defined as:"...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour.

It must be offered as well a person can commit TREASON against the U.S. as either a U.S. citizen or as a foreigner otherwise owing allegiance to the United States of America.

SOEHO took an oath to the Constitution back in January 2009 as Tim and I both recall. Then there's SOEHO's former state and federal performances as a senator worthy of remembrance.

SOEHO's swearing an allegiance under the U.N. flag is yet another step in the process manifesting the treasonous purposes obsessing SOEHO and his criminal partners.

SOEHO and his band of treasoners are dedicated to replacing U.S. government as based upon the U.S. Constitutional with an international government subservient under and obedient to the United Nations Charter.



SOEHO is a FOREIGN BORN DOMESTIC ENEMY and FOREIGN AGENT, who's infiltrated U.S. government at it's highest position and is subject to and must suffer the same fate as any other TRESONER-INFILTRATOR. SOEHO is a common variety street punk hooligan, a thug, a self-possessed career criminal!



Tuesday, September 15, 2009


At a time when our president and other politicians tend to apologize for our country`s prior actions,here`s a refresher on how some of our former patriots handled negative comments about our country.

These are good

JFK'S Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, was in France in the early 60's when DeGaule decided to pull out of NATO. DeGaule said he wanted all US military out of France as soon as possible.

Rusk responded "does that include those who are buried here?

DeGaule did not respond.

You could have heard a pin drop

When in England , at a fairly large conference, Colin Powell was asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury if our plans for Iraq were just an example of empire building by George Bush..

He answered by saying, 'Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return.'

You could have heard a pin drop.
There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them?'

A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly:

'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people;
they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities;
they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day;
they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day;
and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck.

We have eleven such ships; how many does France have?'

You could have heard a pin drop.
A U.S. Navy Admiral was attending a naval conference that included Admirals from the U.S. , English, Canadian, Australian and French Navies. At a cocktail reception, he found himself standing with a large group of Officers that included personnel from most of those countries.

Everyone was chatting away in English as they sipped their drinks but a French admiral suddenly complained that, whereas Europeans learn many languages, Americans learn only English.

He then asked, 'Why is it that we always have to speak English in these conferences rather than speaking French?'

Without hesitating, the American Admiral replied, 'Maybe it's because the Brit's, Canadians, Aussie's and Americans arranged it so you wouldn't have to speak German.'

You could have heard a pin drop.

Robert Whiting, an elderly gentleman of 83, arrived in Paris by plane. At French Customs, he took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry on.

"You have been to France before, monsieur?" the customs officer asked sarcastically.

Mr. Whiting admitted that he had been to France previously.

"Then you should know enough to have your passport ready."

The American said, 'The last time I was here, I didn't have to show it."

"Impossible. Americans always have to show your passports on arrival in France !"

The American senior gave the Frenchman a long hard look.

Then he quietly explained, ''Well, when I came ashore at Omaha Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn't find a single Frenchmen to show a passport to."

You could have heard a pin drop.


If you are proud to be an American, pass this on! If not, delete it.

I am proud to be of this land, AMERICA

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Islam Is Fire to Burn You

By Amil Imani

Islam is Fire

The Islamic fire, fueled by immense oil income, is raging in certain regions of the world, smoldering in others, and is ready to ignite in yet other parts of the world. It is imperative for the free people of the world to abandon all illusions about Islam and put out its fire, once and for all. Multiculturalism, live and-let live, is a delusion of kind-hearted naïve people. Islam, as fractured as it is, is a non-compromising mono-culture; a cruel culture of a primitive people handed down by Muhammad some 1400 years ago.

It is true that most religions are intended to attenuate human fears. They are based on natural fears, many of which are irrational...but natural nonetheless. For example, many pagan religious practices were focused on the seasonal cycles related to the harvest. Why? Because if the harvest was poor, their entire civilization could perish, or be weakened to the point where a neighboring tribe would kill them off. While they misunderstood the scientific basis for weather, they created natural (yet irrational) religious beliefs about weather and harvest. In this sense, religions were psychologically useful and inevitable in addressing natural conditions.

But some religions establish for themselves fears of things which do not exist...which the religion itself invented in order to create and perpetuate fear, and then artificially addressed it in order to establish a political regime. The political nature of Islam transcends personal spiritualism and becomes a cult of oppression. This is fraud. This is evil. This is Islam.

Islam essentially invents the idea that Christians, Jews, and pagans are abominations and offensive to Allah, and that their very existence represents an attack upon the self-defined Islamic right to reign over the world. Allah thus enlists Muslim believers to eradicate by force those who offend him and by disbelieving, prevent his rule. True Muslim believers therefore become the enforcers, hit men and mercenaries for their god, in order to establish a global Caliphate for their parasitic clergy. Their targets are artificially constructed adversaries. Believers are instructed to fear the “great Satan.” and are told that if they do not live up to Allah’s calls to Jihad, they are themselves offensive to Allah and to their families. It’s a “you’re either for me or against me” strategy.

Contrast this with say, Christian fears. Christians too fear offending God, because they believe that God will judge their lives when their bodies die. So their fears are reduced by atoning in personal alignment with the teachings of the Bible.

So, as a political religion, Islam creates artificial fear of alien groups, and then eliminates the fear through war and coercion. Islam pleases Allah with brutality and Jihad. Islam seeks to instill a political regime to enforce its provisions. When such a political doctrine declares that “resistance is futile”, it is referring to corporeal enforcement by people.

Personal religions acknowledge natural fears, and then use light, wisdom, and the capacity for human nobility to eliminate them through a positive, spiritual exercise. Other religions encourage voluntary, personal spiritual alignment. The only “coercion” in a religion based on personal spiritualism is the conveyance of the natural idea of a soul and judgment. If you believe in these things, you change and atone, perhaps out of fear. If you do not, you accuse the evangelizer of being fraudulent...but a fraud is a demonstrable deception not an opinion, and the one who disbelieves in a personal religion cannot prove his point of view, so fraud is not in play as a driver of personal spiritualism. When a personal religion declares that “resistance is futile”, it is referring to spiritual enforcement by God.

This is the difference between day and night, between good and evil. Islam believes in the rule of Islam, Caliphate to the Sunnis and Imamate to the Shi’as. Hence, to Muslims, all other forms of government represent the handiwork of the Satan and the infidels. Therefore, one and all non-Islamic systems of government must be purified by the Islamic fire.

Islam is and has always been political, in the form of Imamate, Caliphate or by proxy where Islam, through religious divines, controlled the state. Saudi Arabia, for instance, does not even have a constitution. The Quran is the constitution. The country has a king. Yet, the king is the supreme enforcer of the laws dictated by Islam.

Islam is so radical that even the term “radical” does not adequately depict its true character. The founder of Islam, Muhammad, behaved in extreme ways whenever he could. Early on, in Mecca, among his tribe of Quraish, he was ridiculed as a crazed Poet. Ordinary residents of Mecca scorned him in their habitual way of treating the mentally deranged. What did Muhammad do? He personified meekness itself. He put up with extreme indignities, did not fight back and suffered abuses.

Time was on Muhammad’s side. Before long, he attracted followers, some of whom were men of power and influence, such as Umar, Uthman and Abu Bakr. Then the pendulum swung. The long-suffering meek became the tyrannical avenger. He ordered all the idols in the idolatry of Mecca destroyed, except the one called Allah. Yet, he selected the same name for a non-corporeal deity who commissioned him as his messenger. Then Allah’s messenger, Muhammad, set out to systematically exterminate people he perceived as his tormentors and enemies—Jews of Medina, among others.

The Quran is full of black and white, right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable verses. Men who didn’t convert to Islam were labeled infidels and slaughtered; their women and children were taken along with all their belongings as booty. It was either Islam’s way or the highway. This radicalism is very much in action today.

In another Islamic country, Iran, where the mullahs rule, the constitution is squarely based on the Quran. Many laws are strictly drawn from the Sharia. The mosque is the state and no other competing political ideology is permitted. But marrying religion with government is stoking fire with explosives. In free democracies, governments are accountable to the people and serve at the people’s pleasure. In Islamic theocracy, governments are accountable only to Allah and the people must serve at the pleasure of the government. And one can see the result of Islamic total or partial rule in fifty-four or so countries which rank among the highest nations of the world on every index of misery.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Iran threw off its oppressive theocratic rule and established a government “of the people”, with room for all beliefs? Iran could be a powerful nation and a peaceful one, an example for the rest of the developing world of how to thrive without Islamic politics. However, the road to freedom is perilous. Nothing as worthwhile as freedom can be purchased easily. But the cause is worth it.

While I desire freedom in Iran, I am a committed anti-Islamist and anti-communist in general. I believe communism as an expression of materialist naturalist philosophy is atheistic, representing a desire by man to dominate both nature and man. To me, it is Satan’s “denial” play...that there is no God. But Satan and his minions work in multiple theaters simultaneously. Islam is Satan’s chief “deception” play. Rather than deny God exists, it asserts that God does in fact exist, but that God does not desire men worship out of love or free will, but through rote, fear, and guilt, and through the sins of pride, envy, and chauvinism.

It is a mentality of enslavement that drives Islam...“submission” in which man subdues other men in order to establish a kingdom of oppression and hatred on earth. Atheism, materialism and Islam appear as contradictions with respect to each other, but when you peel away the veneer of their pretense, you see that their aims are the same. Fascism is fascism.

We live in a society which worships “experts” and specialists. However, our distorted society of “experts” has continually failed us. Almost nothing they have told us has turned out to be true. Thus, I am a revisionist in that I believe much of what we believe is true is utterly false. I also believe in good and evil, a notion sadly obsolete in our nihilistic time. I don’t think Satan is any more a metaphor than is God.

Islam is theocracy, the rule of the clerics. The authoritarianism runs from the top to the bottom in a strict hierarchy with Allah at the top, to his Prophet, to the Caliphs or the Imams, to the lesser men of cloth along the chain of command. No one is allowed to contest or dispute the word and actions of the authorities. Islam and democracy, therefore, are inherently irreconcilable. In some Islamic circles Muslims speak of Islamic Democracy—an oxymoron.

Jihadists are the army of Allah. The use of violence as an instrument of policy has been and continues to be central to Islam. Muslims war under the firmly-believed and widely-cherished set of ideas that are rabidly militaristic. No matter which side is killed, Islam is the victor, “You kill them, you go to paradise; you get killed, you go to paradise,” are two examples of exhortation to jihadism and war.

To cut to the chase, we need to eliminate some disinformation and myths about the “war on terror”:

1) We are not fighting terrorism. We are engaging in an ideological battle between freedom, conservatism, democracy, individual rights, capitalism, “Christian” ethics and Islamofascism, communism-socialism, theocracy, and tyranny. There are also internationalist, dictatorial, globalist forces that seek to use the conflict to create an international government and a unification of all religions by the destruction of nationalism, patriotism, individual rights and sectarianism.

2) It is not “fanatical”, “radical”, or “extreme” Islam that we are fighting, but normal, orthodox, canonical, typical, accepted, traditional Islam, straight from the mouth of the Muhammad. Islam is violent in direct proportion to its mission and scripture. The so-called fanatics are only upholding the truth of their principles. There are those who do not openly engage in terrorism or warfare, but are in support of it, or are working in other ways to spread Islam by force or fraud.

3) Islam is evil, by any accepted definition of that word, and must be seen as such by all rational non-Islamists. There is no such thing as “peace” in Islam except the peace that comes after a successful war against infidels.

4) Islam can work by brute force and by the lengths to which the believers will go to perpetuate it. Its theology and practices make it inherently evil and dangerous to all of mankind. It has already spread and infected the world like a cancer. How do you nuke it out of existence? You can’t...in fact, they will nuke us first, and I guarantee it. When this happens, all hell will break loose, and most freedoms will be up in smoke. Ask yourself how the Palestinian problem can ever get resolved. There are only two ways; either they are gone for good or converted from Islam. Otherwise, the war will never end. The Israeli-Palestinian war is not about the land, it never has been. It is about the eradication of the Jews; right to the last one of them because Muhammad had prescribed it and is eternal.

We must begin to declare Islam evil, not from a sectarian perspective, but from a universal, humanist one. Every encroachment of Islam as a religion must be rejected, harassed and discouraged by all people everywhere. Any leftist attempts to give aid and comfort to this religion of hate must be denounced and frustrated at every turn. Otherwise, get used to your radioactive suit and your fallout shelter, a standard of living—and a level of freedom of 1/10th what of you have today.

Warning to free men and women: remain a spectator at your own peril. It is imperative that you Take a Stand at denouncing the fraud of Islam and do all you can to prevent the Islamic fire from devouring our civilized democratic system.

Friday, September 11, 2009


Fiat (FIAT, borrowed, not Flat) Money: How Else You Gonna Kill 600,000 Americans?

Mises Daily by Robert P. Murphy Posted on 9/11/2009 12:00:00 AM

A few years ago on these pages, I harshly criticized an article urging New Yorkers to "eat local," and went so far as to dub the young lady's column, "The worst economics article ever." I am here to report that her record has been smashed. Floyd Norris's recent New York Times article on the greenback is hands down the worst economics article I have ever read. Not only is it jam-packed full of false history, but it uses the falsehoods to justify monstrous crimes, both in the past and present.

Read full article with graphs at:


The reader with a strong stomach will have to click the above link to appreciate the full enormity of Norris's accomplishment, but for those with limited attention spans I'll detail some of its biggest problems below.

Thursday, September 10, 2009


The IRI file number at Hague court was issued. Complaints against the IRI will be kept under this number: OTP-CR-777/09 .


Secular News reports: On August 18th a press conference featuring hundreds of personalities and thousands of individuals who were known to have withstood brutal torture, took place in front of the International Criminal Courts in The Hague (ICC).

Farshad Hosseini, Mina Ahadi, Shiva Mahboubi, Fareed Arman, Akram Beeronvand, Saeed Partow and Fereshteh Moradi participated in the press conference and discussed at length, the most recent as well as thirty years of crimes committed by the Islamic regime; those crimes include torture, rape, execution of minors and children, assassination of regime opposition members inside and outside Iran.

Demonstrators who turned up at 2 p.m. braving the rainy weather, carried placards of images of those who lost their lives; they gathered to represent all the deceased, those who were tortured and raped by the regimes criminal officials, as well as the families of the victims and whose loved ones blood was spilled for the freedom of Iran, and finally the millions of Iranians whose wish is to prosecute the heads of the Islamic regime. A manifesto was also read by Hosseini, Ahadi, Moradi, Partow and Arman in Farsi, English and Dutch.

During the demonstration Mina Ahadi and Farshad Hosseini who represented the International Committee Against Stoning and International Committee Against Execution met and held discussions and deliberated with officials from the ICC prosecution unit. Other than the presentation of a detailed report of the crimes committed by the Islamic Republic during the last thirty years, a request for an investigation of said crimes as crimes against humanity, by the ICC was also made. A separate report based on the recent crimes which consisted of a list of one hundred names of those who are known to have been killed during the recent months as well as the illegal and secret burials in mass graves was also presented to said ICC officials. The issue of the tortures performed on detainees in prisons, rapes of political prisoners were mentioned as well. Ms. Ahadi and Mr. Hosseini also reitereated the nature and severity of the crimes perpetrated by the Islamic regime against humanity and explained that any delay or compromise in this matter, where a concrete and effective international action plan for halting this course of genocide, whatever the reason, will lead to the continuation of these crimes. Every day the ICC delays the investigation of these crimes, will be another day will be an extension for the criminals perpetrating said crimes. Today international organizations who head up the ICC’s role is to stand as a buffer and is duty-bound to prosecute criminals and as such they must act swiftly in taking action against those responsible for such atrocities. The request to prosecute the heads of that Islamic regime is the request of millions of Iranian and hundreds of thousands of plaintiffs, in either a personal, political or public form.

The officials from the prosecution unit of the ICC responded with diligence and readiness in accepting the reports presented to them; therefore based on the presented information a file for the investigation of the leaders of the Islamic regime was opened and the case number will be provided on August 31st which will then be distributed. The officials from the prosecution unit also explained the legal methodology of the complaint process and in response stated that the accelerated steps taken against the Islamic regime was as a result of the large and continued complaints against the government of Iran and as such immediate action will be taken to examine the evidence. The officials from the prosecution unit also added that additionally they are currently addressing four cases of crimes against humanity in countries such as Uganda, The Congo, Sudan and Central Africa.

The International Committee Against Execution continues its activities to inform public opinion on the topic of the executions and the general crimes committed by the Islamic Republic. For more information or assisting us regarding this case, please contact us.

Mina Ahadi


0049 177 569 24 13

Farshad Hoseini



The International Committee Against Execution

29 August 2009

Monday, September 7, 2009


By Jonah Goldberg

ABC News reports that Barack Obama has returned to Washington, only to step off the plane and "into his next domestic crisis." He "planned to leave the details of health care reform to Congress, but today the White House says he'll play a much stronger role." The Associated Press says Obama is "backing away" from his "'it's-all-on-the-table' approach" and is "prepared to get louder and more involved in the details of a health care overhaul." "This weekend," NBC Nightly News explained in its lead story, "the president signaled an aggressive stance to put his personal stamp on the sweeping legislation."

There's only one problem. These stories were all reported nearly three months ago upon Obama's return from his largely failed European mission. And yet, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that Obama's planned address to a joint session of Congress next week "will insert the president into the heated debate in a way he has avoided all summer." The Washington Post informed readers that the "White House is scrambling to take control of the health-care debate after watching from the sidelines." A "senior aide" to Obama says the president will be "much more prescriptive."

Why the White House press corps didn't just change the date on their old copy and run it again is beyond me. And I'll leave it to others to ponder the media's seemingly infinite capacity to give Obama as many do-overs as he might need.

Why the Obama administration is determined to do the time warp again is easier to decipher. Obama's advisors think the answer to every problem is more cowbell, if by "cowbell" you mean "Obama." It's like Obama guru David Axelrod is the Christopher Walken character from the "Saturday Night Live" skit about Blue Oyster Cult (if you don't know the reference, Google "cowbell").

Every time someone comes up with an alternative to throwing Obama on TV, Axelrod says, "No, no, no. Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription ... is more Obama!"

But is that really what the doctor ordered?

Obama's address next week will be his third prime-time appeal in three months and the fifth in his 7-month-old presidency. The networks are chagrined about this, not least because the ratings half-life of these events is severe. (Fox's broadcast network beat out the other networks by running "So You Think You Can Dance" instead of his last prime-time press conference.) More relevant, they haven't done Obama much good.

His July 22 press conference was billed as perhaps Obama's last chance to save health care reform. It tanked (partly because Obama's attack on the Cambridge police dominated the press). Afterward, public support for ObamaCare dropped significantly. A Pew poll taken that week found that more people opposed the proposals being considered by Congress than supported them, and that Obama's overall approval had dropped 7 points from the previous month. Other polls showed similar declines.

Now, more than a month later, things look even worse. The obvious solution? Even more cowbell.

But what is lacking is not cowbell, it's substance the American people can support. Obama will reportedly be "more specific," but he won't commit himself to any particular piece of legislation. This suggests that the White House still thinks it has a communication problem, and if only it dispels the cloud of "lies" belched up by the opposition, there will be nothing but blue skies ahead.

Funny how the people who run the most sophisticated communication operation in the history of the presidency keep concluding that their difficulties stem from their inability to get their message out and never from what their message actually is.

And so, rather than change the substance of the message, they're grabbing an even bigger megaphone: an address to a joint session of Congress. Three out of the last four presidents gave just one address to a joint session of Congress, and all but one of them reserved such occasions for major international events, like a war or, in Ronald Reagan's case, a breakthrough with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Only Bill Clinton used such a venue for a domestic priority: health care reform.

That didn't work out so well either.

Just seven months into Obama's presidency, the White House is turning up the speakers on the cowbell as loud as they will go. And, heck, if you love cowbell, it's going to be a real treat. But in all the ways that matter, it may just end up being more noise.