Saturday, January 31, 2009

Steele Up ... And Rebuild For Conservative Principles

Former Maryland Lt. Gov. and newly elected Chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC) Michael Steele has stated that marriage is a covenant between one man, one woman and God. Image Credit: Chris Gardner/AP

Steele Up ... And Rebuild For Conservative Principles

Conservative thinking voters need to rebuild the Republican Party. If one wants to vote and have that voice heard ... it's the only option.

The Democrat Political will never side on the issue of personal freedom over the right of Government to dictate the nature of the arena and manner your life is lived.

A third political party will never reach the critical mass to win elections even though many of the specific issues third parties are formed upon have merit.

We, at MAXINE, think it is time to consider making the "Grand Old Party" mechanism work and rebuild the party to make it new and useful based upon the core first values the Republican Party are most noted for.

WE, conservative thinking voters, can all do this behind the leadership of the first African-American chairman of the Republican Party (RNC) - Michael Steele.

This excerpted and edited from the new website ... Rebuild The Party -

Rebuild The Party
Join The New Media Coalition - A 10-point action plan to strengthen and modernize the Republican Party

As Republicans, we face a choice.

Either we can spend the next several months -- or years -- trying to figure out what just happened, excusing our defeat away as a temporary blip or the result of a poor environment, and waiting for Barack Obama to trip up. Or we can refuse to take this defeat lying down, and start building the future of our party now.

2008 made one thing clear: if allowed to go unchecked, the Democrats' structural advantages, including their use of the Internet, their more than 2-to-1 advantage with young voters, their discovery of a better grassroots model -- will be as big a threat to the future of the GOP as the toxic political environment we have faced the last few years.

The time is now to set in motion the changes needed to rebuild our party from the grassroots up, modernize the way we run campaigns, and attract different, energetic, and younger candidates at all levels.

We must be conservative in philosophy -- but bold in our approach. We don't need a slight tweak here or there. We need transformation. We can't keep fighting a 21st century war with 20th century weapons.
Obama's victory could be a blessing in disguise for conservatives. Why? Because Obama's winning strategy was built on the back of an inherently conservative idea: that we the people, acting together outside of government, can accomplish great things. Or, in the words of the overused slogan, "Yes We Can."

The irony here is that Obama as President would act in ways that contradict the bottom-up culture that fueled his campaign. In the campaign, it was "Yes We Can." In the White House, it will be "Yes, Government Can." Obama's top-down government control of the health care and the economy will give conservatives an opening to once again recapture the mantle of distributed citizen activism.

Obama campaigned against the establishment, and now he is the establishment.

Consider these contrasts. Like the Internet, free markets are distributed and allow good ideas to rise from the bottom up. The bureaucracies that Obama prefers are inherently top-down and stifling.
And yet Democrats have been allowed to get away with the notion that their success online is fueled by a "bottom-up" culture while Republicans are "top-down." Ironic -- given that Democrats want top-down government control of your life, while Republicans believe in dynamic markets and a strong civil society.

Some people believe our problems are mostly strategic and tactical. Others believe they are policy driven. It strikes us that there is a unifying solution to both, and that is to empower the individual, trust the people.

Just as Republicans must trust individuals and families with their own money, we must trust the volunteers who walk into our headquarters and train them to take responsibility for entire neighborhoods. We must trust the online grassroots who want to take action on our behalf, and who need a decentralized, peer-to-peer volunteer community supported by our campaigns to really be successful. That will require giving up some control -- more control than our traditional institutions are used to giving up -- in exchange for an exponentially larger and more effective volunteer/donor/activist ecosystem.

Obama tapped the Internet successfully because he made it about "you" and "us" not "me" and "I." You were invited in. You were a key part of his campaign/movement. Your help was truly appreciated. Republican candidates need to grow more comfortable talking in these terms and focus less on being inaccessible objects of hero worship (the "me/I" strategy).

Because of the Internet, "us" becomes a force more powerful than any in politics. The ability to donate or volunteer instantaneously online gives the millions of "us" more leverage than even the most connected group of insiders. Only "us" will be powerful enough to fund the first $1 billion Presidential candidate. By embracing the Politics of Us, the Republican Party can rediscover its roots as the party of individual liberty and build a truly modern political army.
Reference Here>>

Stand up, unite, make your conservative political voice heard, for at this moment ... according to the latest Rasmussen Report ... your voice is NOT heard.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Digital Signal Hostage Crisis Averted – Not Over

Nightline, or ABC News Nightline is a late-night hard and soft news program broadcast by ABC in the United States. The program had its beginnings on November 8, 1979, just 4 days after the Iran hostage crisis started. ABC News president Roone Arledge felt the best way to compete against NBC's The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson was to update Americans on the latest news from Iran. Caption Credit: Wikipedia Image Credit:

Digital Signal Hostage Crisis Averted – Not Over

The House of Representatives, yesterday, did not muster enough votes to place the launch to the conversion of television broadcasting from analog signal to digital signal in a delay.

The proposal on the House floor was designed to delay (hold hostage) the conversion date by four months (from Feb. 17, 2009 to June 17, 2009).

Delaying the transition would cost public broadcasters $22 million, the PBS system chief, Paula Kerger, estimated on Monday.

The National Association of Broadcasters had not taken a position on extending the deadline. The TV stations don't want to suddenly alienate and lose viewers, but they've also sunk money into preparing for the Feb. 17 transition.

Americans have had about one year to prepare for this digital signal conversion. With this vote, our broadcast standards conversion will not be held hostage here in Carter’s Second Term.

We have averted a Converter Box/Digital Signal conversion hostage crisis, but hope still looms - proponents of the delay are hopeful that the House can take up the issue again next week (on behalf of President Barack Obama) and take a vote for a conversion delay a second time with a simple majority decision.

Consumers can apply for a coupon at or call 1-888-DTV2009. Many converter boxes have sold out, according to the NTIA’s official list. However, I know digital converter boxes are still in stock. I was at the Target store in Huntington Beach over the weekend and they had plenty. Caption & Image Credit:

This excerpted and edited from the San Francisco Chronicle -

House vote keeps digital TV deadline, for now
Ryan Kim, Chronicle Staff Writer - Thursday, January 29, 2009

Despite a unanimous vote by the U.S. Senate to delay the Feb. 17 deadline to transition to digital television, the changeover will proceed as planned after a vote Wednesday by the House of Representatives.

The House voted 258-168 in favor of a four-month delay, but the measure fell 26 votes short of the necessary two-thirds margin for passage. The Senate voted Monday to delay the transition to June 12, fearing that an estimated 6.5 million TV households would be unprepared for the shift from analog TV.
The two-thirds vote was required because the bill was fast-tracked on the House's suspension calendar.

Viewers who use sets with antenna to pull in the old analog signal will need to buy a TV with a digital tuner, purchase a converter box or upgrade to a pay TV service.
President Obama urged a delay earlier this month. Republicans were largely opposed to the delay, saying it would further confuse consumers and would cost broadcasters millions to keep broadcasting in analog. They also worried about public safety agencies who were set to take over parts of the spectrum freed up by moving to more efficient digital airwaves.

"The bill is a solution looking for a problem," said Joe Barton of Texas before the vote. He is the top Republican on the House Commerce Committee.

Congress allocated more spectrum to broadcasters in 1996 so they could create digital broadcast channels. In 2005, legislators chose the deadline of Feb. 17 to free up spectrum for emergency services and advanced wireless communications. The transition also allows broadcasters to create multiple digital channels, including high-definition feeds.
Reference Here>>

With this delay/hostage crisis situation being placed on ice, at least temporally, don’t look for a revival of the once popular ABC NEWS program, Nightline, soon.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Day Two Of Obama's Digital Signal Hostage Crisis

This whole television transition is one big bloated boondoggle. These stores and the converter box makers scored with this one. For one, the coupons are good only with stand-alone devices that will convert the signals and not for multi-purpose devices like VCRs, televisions, etc. that build in a converter. Two, television broadcasters don’t need to pay a penny for their broadcast licenses. Three, the converters are expected to cost $75 or more. Four, the converter boxes don’t even include a V-chip (this was a missed opportunity to get a V-chip in every home). There is more to complain about, but I’ll spare myself the time and effort. Caption & Image Credit: Reports From My Nanocosm

Day Two Of Obama's Digital Signal Hostage Crisis

We are in the middle of a Converter Box/Digital Signal conversion hostage crisis!

Yes, that is right, the NEW Carter Administration (the Obama 44th Presidency) has it’s first hostage situation and it was created by a request from the office of the President Barack Obama.

The reason given for the delay approved for by the Senate in all digital broadcast conversion was that the FCC ran out of money to fund its $40.00 converter coupon give-away program which would allow those people who receive their television signal through the general broadcast method (without Cable or Satellite Dish) to receive and decode the new digital signal.

What may be more to the truth, Barack Obama wants to make sure all citizens under his control will be able to see the news he and his administration creates as they meddle with our capitalistic based economy in a really big socialistic way.

I don’t generally shop in Wal*Mart (ruthless and toothless); however the converter box cost $10 after the coupon ($50 retail price). That beat the $65 charged by Radio Shack for a no brand item. The nice thing I found out about this box is that it includes a V-Chip intended to let parents filter out inappropriate content from their youngsters. It is likely that most people who rely on the government coupons to purchase a converter box will not have televisions built since 2000 when the V-Chip was mandated. The program is still a boondoggle, just not as big as I had previously made it out to be. Caption & Image Credit: Reports From My Nanocosm

This excerpted and edited from the Sacramento Bee -

Senate approves four-month delay in digital TV conversion

Sacramento Bee via Associated Press - Published: Monday, Jan. 26, 2009

The Senate today approved a four-month delay in digital TV conversion.
The latest estimate is that more than 6.5 million households are not prepared for the switch.

The National Association of Broadcasters had not taken a position on extending the deadline. The TV stations don't want to suddenly alienate and lose viewers, but they've also sunk money into preparing for the Feb. 17 transition.

Delaying the transition would cost public broadcasters $22 million, the PBS system chief estimated on Monday. The stations will face increased power charges to maintain over-the-air broadcast signals, said Paula Kerger, president and CEO of the Public Broadcasting System.
Reference Here>>

Nightline, or ABC News Nightline is a late-night hard and soft news program broadcast by ABC in the United States. The program had its beginnings on November 8, 1979, just 4 days after the Iran hostage crisis started. ABC News president Roone Arledge felt the best way to compete against NBC's The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson was to update Americans on the latest news from Iran. Caption Credit: Wikipedia Image Credit:

Americans have had about one year to prepare for this digital signal conversion so now our broadcast standards, well, are being held hostage on only the sixth day (yesterday) here in Carter’s Second Term.

We are in the middle of a Converter Box/Digital Signal conversion hostage crisis!

Can a new edition of Nightline evening news program be around the corner?

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

GLObama Historyia Turns To Buzz Kill

President Barack Obama, his wife Michelle, and his daughters Sasha (L) and Malia wave after Obama is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States on the West Front of the Capitol as his wife Michelle looks on January 20, 2009 in Washington. Obama becomes the first African-American to be elected to the office of President in the history of the United States. (view BBC video image slideshow - click photo) Caption Credit: UPI - Image Credit: UPI Photo/Mark Wilson/Pool

GLObama Historyia Turns To Buzz Kill

The media coverage of the inauguration of our first elected African-American man as President of the United States, as they presented it, was all about the GLOW … did you feel it?

It brink-ed upon a form of hysteria about the history - Historyia - that was being made with the tradition of a smooth transition of power we have come to assume here in the United States.

Days before this day it was roundly touted the attendance would be estimated in millions and swell upwards to as much as six million people. Yesterday, news readers toned it down a bit by stating a figure of over a million to as much as four million … then later, that the attendance could be as much as two million. This morning, soon after President Barack Obama gave his inauguration speech the report stated the he gave his speech in front of “Hundreds Of Thousands” of well-wishers lining the mall in Washington DC.

Reality has a way of sneaking up on media hype and BUZZ … and killing it.

Take for example his inauguration speech – We, at MAXINE, wish we had a line by line veto on some of what he said … and were able to curtail the poem … and update the invocation prayer delivered by 87 year old Rev. Lowery - he didn’t have to continue to call out and marginalize the majority of voters (the white race) that helped Barack Obama arrive to take the oath of office. After all, wasn’t a black man just sworn in as the leader of the most powerful and free nation on Earth?

Barack Obama delivers Inaugural Day speech to hundreds of thousands massed on the mall in Washington D.C. (Speech video - click photo). Image Credit: BBC

President Barack Obama’s inauguration speech – The Good (not vetoed)

My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.
In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted — for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk takers, the doers, the makers of things — some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.
We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished.
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.
And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.
But those values upon which our success depends — hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism — these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths.

President Barack Obama’s inauguration speech – The Buzz Kill (vetoed)

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land — a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.
The state of the economy calls for [Governmental] action, bold and swift, and we will act — not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.
To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.
What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility — a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
Reference Here>>

Hold on to your wallets for it is the taxpayer that will foot the bill and pay the price of this new era of responsibility.

The ultimate buzz kill came from Reverend Lowery when he decided to rise up an old sixties tome that had little relevance to the importance of the day and an insult to most of the people who brought this day about.

After Obama's inspirational speech, the Rev. Joseph Lowery, a civil rights icon and a pastor known to speak his mind to power, opened his benediction with the first words of the Negro National Anthem, Lift Every Voice and Sing (YouTube video - click photo). Image Credit: Ron Edmonds/AP

Text excerpted from the benediction delivered by Rev. Joseph Lowery –

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day:

when black will not be asked to get in back,

… when brown can stick around,

... when yellow will be mellow,

... when the red man can get ahead, man;

and when white will embrace what is right.
Reference Here>>

Today, a black man was just asked to “get in back” … of a one-of-a-kind, custom built, attack proof Presidential Cadillac limousine by a majority of voters that happened to be white and driven to live with his family for at least the next four years … in the residence of the First Family, The White House.

All hail to President Barack Obama. He is our President and may he be blessed with the special wisdom to lead ALL of the people of this special and great nation of ours.

And finally, the stock markets closed with a major downturn in its vote of confidence for the new and decidedly lopsided tax and spend power structure that came to pass this Inauguration Day.

The blue-chip Dow Jones industrial average yesterday fell 4 percent, a dive of 332.13 points to 7,949.09, the biggest Inauguration Day drop in the Dow's 112-year history.

The broader Standard & Poor's 500 dropped 5.28 percent, closing at 805.22 Tuesday.

The tech-heavy Nasdaq plunged 5.78 percent, or 88.47 points, to close at 1,440.86.

This is a grand beginning to a Carter’s Second Term … let the ramped up government meddling begin and kiss good-bye free market Capitalism as a social system based on individual rights. Inflation and recession will live together again, as it did when Jimmy Carter was President, during the term of this 44th presidency.

Wednesday, January 07, 2009

One-Party Rule Does Away With Transparency

Maybe it's just because she is the first female speaker of the house...who knows -- but Nancy Pelosi's wardrobe has been getting a ton of attention of late with most of the discussion revolving around her signature strand of South Sea Cultured Pearls, which are estimated to cost around 80k!! Caption and Image Credit:

One-Party Rule Does Away With Transparency

Be afraid, be very afraid – Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat Party Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, fearing nothing in terms of expense to political capital or a push back from a Democrat Political Party controlled Executive Branch when Barack Obama take office on January 20, 2009, will seek to dispense with a few of those pesky openness and legislative transparency rules that govern the law making procedures that currently guide the way our elected representatives in the House of Representatives do their business.

What this means is that many of the processes that were once open to scrutiny from the public (you and me … voters), rebuttal from factions with a different viewpoint, and those just plain caring for more democracy and debate rather than less will have less influence upon how things get done in our government.

In the most simple of terms, Nancy Pelosi plans to reduce the freedoms of a majority of Americans making the processes in the 111th session of the House of Representatives one where the Nation of citizens serves the acts of the House of Representatives as opposed to the concept that the House of Representatives serves for the acts of the Nation of citizens.

America the free will turn a corner where this is no longer a nation by the people, for the people …

In Article I of the U.S. Constitution, "all legislative powers" were "vested in a the House of Representatives of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." The House of Representatives has the responsibility to debate and create the laws under which our country operates. Image Credit:

This excerpted and edited from U.S. Constitution Online –

Constitutional Topic: The Preamble
This Topic Page concerns The Preamble. The first paragraph of the Constitution provides the context for the Constitution - the "why" of the document.

The Constitution was written by several committees over the summer of 1787, but the committee most responsible for the final form we know today is the "Committee of Stile and Arrangement". This Committee was tasked with getting all of the articles and clauses agreed to by the Convention and putting them into a logical order. On September 10, 1787, the Committee of Style set to work, and two days later, it presented the Convention with its final draft. The members were Alexander Hamilton, William Johnson, Rufus King, James Madison, and Gouverneur Morris. The actual text of the Preamble and of much of the rest of this final draft is usually attributed to Gouverneur Morris.

The newly minted document began with a grand flourish - the Preamble, the Constitution's r'aison d'etre. It holds in its words the hopes and dreams of the delegates to the convention, a justification for what they had done. Its words are familiar to us today, but because of time and context, the words are not always easy to follow. The remainder of this Topic Page will examine each sentence in the Preamble and explain it for today's audience.

We the People of the United States

The Framers were an elite group - among the best and brightest America had to offer at the time. But they knew that they were trying to forge a nation made up not of an elite, but of the common man. Without the approval of the common man, they feared revolution. This first part of the Preamble speaks to the common man. It puts into writing, as clear as day, the notion that the people were creating this Constitution. It was not handed down by a god or by a king - it was created by the people.

[not elite leaders who seek less openness in the way the transact their daily business]

in Order to form a more perfect Union

The Framers were dissatisfied with the United States under the Articles of Confederation, but they felt that what they had was the best they could have, up to now. They were striving for something better. The Articles of Confederation had been a grand experiment that had worked well up to a point, but now, less than ten years into that experiment, cracks were showing. The new United States, under this new Constitution, would be more perfect. Not perfect, but more perfect.

establish Justice

Injustice, unfairness of laws and in trade, was of great concern to the people of 1787. People looked forward to a nation with a level playing field, where courts were established with uniformity and where trade within and outside the borders of the country would be fair and unmolested. Today, we enjoy a system of justice that is one of the fairest in the world. It has not always been so - only through great struggle can we now say that every citizen has the opportunity for a fair trial and for equal treatment, and even today there still exists discrimination. But we still strive for the justice that the Framers wrote about.

[Pelosi’s move seeks to make this process less transparent, less fair, and strives for less justice in the process of the House of Representatives]

insure domestic Tranquility

One of the events that caused the Convention to be held was the revolt of Massachusetts farmers knows as Shays' Rebellion. The taking up of arms by war veterans revolting against the state government was a shock to the system. The keeping of the peace was on everyone's mind, and the maintenance of tranquility at home was a prime concern. The framers hoped that the new powers given the federal government would prevent any such rebellions in the future.

provide for the common defence

The new nation was fearful of attack from all sides - and no one state was really capable of fending off an attack from land or sea by itself. With a wary eye on Britain and Spain, and ever-watchful for Indian attack, no one of the United States could go it alone. They needed each other to survive in the harsh world of international politics of the 18th century.

promote the general Welfare

This, and the next part of the Preamble, are the culmination of everything that came before it - the whole point of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general welfare - to allow every state and every citizen of those states to benefit from what the government could provide. The framers looked forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of that.

[by the PEOPLE, for the PEOPLE - not billions of collected tax money by the government, for the government to expand its holdings in industry, investment in junk mortgages, and land - as in houses]

and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

Hand in hand with the general welfare, the framers looked forward to the blessings of liberty - something they had all fought hard for just a decade before. They were very concerned that they were creating a nation that would resemble something of a paradise for liberty, as opposed to the tyranny of a monarchy, where citizens could look forward to being free as opposed to looking out for the interests of a king. And more than for themselves, they wanted to be sure that the future generations of Americans would enjoy the same.

[The House of Representatives seeks to become more tyrannical and less open]

do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

The final clause of the Preamble is almost anti-climatic, but it is important for a few reasons - it finishes the "We, the people" thought, saying what we the people are actually doing; it gives us a name for this document, and it restates the name of the nation adopting the Constitution. That the Constitution is "ordained" reminds us of the higher power involved here - not just of a single person or of a king, but of the people themselves. That is it "established" reminds us that it replaces that which came before - the United States under the Articles (a point lost on us today, but quite relevant at the time).

Reference Here>>

The Preamble according to the new, 111th House of Representatives:

We, the House of Representatives, in order to promote ourselves over the scrutiny of the common man, dispense with these rules of openness in procedure and debate so that we can grasp even more power (with less shared power and input), as we seek to establish a ruling class without the insight and rancor from the masses. We do ordain and establish these changes in our rules for the Democrat Political Party to the detriment of all other points of view and justice for the common man ruled by this governmental body.

Thank you Democrat Political Party and it’s Majority Leader, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.

Kiss liberty and the pursuit of happiness here, during this time of one-party rule / Carter's Second Term, GOODBYE!

Tuesday, January 06, 2009

Build A Digital Antenna/Converter Box For $8.00

Consumers with analog televisions who tune in using antennas will need a digital converter box, left, once television stations stop broadcasting in analog Feb. 17. Image Credit: Bebeto Matthews -- Associated Press

Build A Digital Antenna/Converter Box For $8.00

The federal government's TV converter box program runs out of funding!

Is anyone surprised? We, at MAXINE, believe; give the government something to manage and they will manage to mess it up. Hey, why don't we have the government fix our economy that had been sent into a tailspin through the promotion of JUNK MORTGAGES backed by organizations create by .... the government? - oops!

Maybe the government can free up some of the 750 billion dollars that was supposed to be used to buy back JUNK MORTGAGES so that people in our society don't miss the new gameshow program, Million Dollar Password.

This excerpted and edited from the Washington Post –

TV Converter Program Runs Out of Funding
By Kim Hart, Washington Post Staff Writer - Tuesday, January 6, 2009

The government's billion-dollar program to help people prepare for the transition to digital television has run out of money, potentially leaving millions of viewers without coupons to buy converter boxes they need to keep their analog TV sets working after the switch.

As of this past Sunday, consumers who request a $40 coupon to help offset the cost of a converter box are being placed on a waiting list. They may not receive the coupons before Feb. 17, when full-power television stations will shut off traditional analog broadcasts and transmit only digital signals.

Members of Congress are now scrambling to find ways to allocate more money to the program.

Reference Here>>

Check out the video ... the one that teaches someone on how to build an analog to digital antenna for about $8.00, build an antenna, then watch Million Dollar Password!

Saturday, January 03, 2009

Hamas Leadership Dispenses Terror That Cuts Two Ways

In a public relations campaign launched in the Palestinian Authority, the Hamas terror organization is claiming victory over Israel's withdrawal and promises to terrorize Haifa and Tel Aviv until Israel is defeated and Palestine restored to the Arabs. They are taking credit for the Israeli withdrawal, saying that Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip defeated by the "resistance," not as the result of "useless negotiations." Caption and Image Credit: Hyscience

Hamas Leadership Dispenses Terror That Cuts Two Ways

The biggest tell on a government and its attitude toward its people in a crisis situation is how it responds to the protection and care of the citizenry.

Hamas has finally poked the beehive of Israel to where the government of Israel had to respond with a damaging force where the Hamas leadership knew that Israel would not tolerate having rocket bombs being shot into their national boundaries any longer.

After Israel dropped bombs on the launching points from where the Hamas initiated rocket bomb activity had been traced, collateral damage in sued and injuries to the citizens who lived under Hamas rule needed a response. The appropriate response would be to allow a quick first medical response in order to allow the injured but living to remain living.

This excerpted and edited from Pajamas Media –

Revealing Silence at the Gaza-Egypt Border

Why does Hamas victimize its own people? And why doesn't the media call them on it?
January 2, 2009 - by Richard Landes

At about 1:10 on Sunday, December 28, 2008, the BBC anchor Peter Dobbie found out, along with his audience, that there were 40 Egyptian ambulances ready to evacuate wounded, and lorries full of medical goods sent by Qatar to restock Gazan hospitals, waiting at the border crossing in Egypt. (According to another source there were also 50 Egyptian doctors ready to go into the Strip to help.) Since Dobbie and his audience had heard the repeated complaint from the people in Gaza that the hospitals were overwhelmed by the injured and desperately lacking in supplies, one would have expected the border to be full of purposeful activity. Instead, nothing was happening. The Gazan side lay silent.

A real journalist, someone with a smell for revealing anomalies, would have immediately recognized this as an important story to follow up on. After all, Dobbie had not hesitated to interrupt and challenge Israeli spokesmen on precisely the issues at stake: the disproportion between Israeli-caused fatalities and Israeli-suffered fatalities, the inevitable suffering of innocent civilians when such a bombing campaign takes place in so densely populated an area. “The math doesn’t work,” said Dobbie, implying what commentators emphasized elsewhere — the “disproportionate use of force” the Israelis were employing.

So here was a perfect issue with which to challenge Hamas spokesmen: If they were so distraught at the loss of life of their own people, why didn’t they take care of them? What on earth would possess Hamas not to avail themselves of what they pleadingly told the world they so desperately needed? As the honest and courageous Egyptian blogger Sandmonkey put it, “My head hurts.”

Alas, the BBC did nothing of the sort. The next six hours saw nothing but canned footage repeating Palestinian complaints, voiced not only by Hamas spokesmen and BBC reporters, but UN officials like Chris Gunning and human rights advocates, and, of course, others in the Western MSM.
Too bad. Had the BBC behaved like real journalists instead of parroting Palestinian narratives, they might have taken the “golden” (read excremental) thread that leads out of the labyrinth and straight to the “real story.”

That story, of course, is the dreadful Palestinian strategy, taken to new heights by Hamas in the early 21st century — play the victim card at any cost. In this case, create a genuine humanitarian crisis.
Hamas initially offered two reasons for not allowing the wounded out: 1) the roads were too dangerous to venture out on, and 2) they were composing a list of the wounded.
Then Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum, speaking to Khaled Abu Toameh, denied the Egyptian allegation that Hamas was to blame, “claiming that many of the wounded rejected an Egyptian offer to receive medical treatment in Cairo in protest against Cairo’s ‘support’ for the IDF operation.
On the contrary, as Ma’an News Agency reported, Hamas would allow no passage of wounded until the border was completely open.
And of the 600 wounded (according to Palestinian sources) all of them, suffering in a ludicrously crowded and understaffed hospital, refused to go to Egypt?

Although the reasons are hollow, they do tell us about Hamas priorities, and the overwhelming message of this refusal is that helping their own civilians survive ranks very low on their scale, well below revenge and public relations concerns. Indeed, as with Israel, so with Egypt: they hold their people hostage to maximalist demands.

Some say Hamas doesn’t care about their people. The evidence suggests far worse. They actively seek the victimization of their own people. Indeed, the enormous resources they have expended on the constant, if largely ineffective, barrage of rockets on Israeli civilians is actually quite staggering. Not only have they lavished much of their meager resources to this vicious and gratuitous activity, but, as a result of those attacks, guaranteed that their borders would be closed and their people would continue to suffer — hostages to their hatred. Thus, the phony excuses offered for the border snafu disguise something far more sinister: Hamas wants the crisis; they want civilians dying dramatically in wretched hospitals.

On the face of it, it seems absurd that a government would actively victimize its own people. What advantage in making an already miserable people suffer even more?

There are two major explanations here. First, Hamas, like many other Palestinian groups, is addicted to violence against Israel. Anything they can do, no matter how small, to make Israelis suffer, they will do, whatever the cost.
But the second explanation is far more disturbing, because it involves the media. Hamas only gains a real advantage to having Palestinians suffer if they, who do so much to inflict that suffering, can blame it on Israel.

It would be absurd for Hamas to stand in front of the world and say, “Look at how much we make our own people suffer; join us in hating Israel.” So the game is intensely hypocritical. It depends on getting public opinion, both in the Arab-Muslim world and in the West, to accept a scapegoating narrative — the Palestinian Guernica — that deflects responsibility.

And the pathetic thing is that it works.
Reference Here>>

The truly odd thing to all of this is that this scapegoating narrative of suffering has a parallel application.

This strategy of deflecting responsibility is also being used by our current Executive and Congressional leadership to diffuse the problems in our economy in the causes and attempts to right the wrongs caused by our leadership.

Further, they have a willing partner in the forces of the MSM to NOT report the story outside of the narrative template that Hamas is using in its campaign of terror in the Middle-East.

To reconstruct the questions asked at the beginning of this article:

Why does our Executive and Cogressional Leadership victimize its own people through social engineering agendas (using taxpayer money in programs that continue to fail)? And why doesn't the media call them on it?