The Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel reported on the recent neo-Nazi rally which occurred in West Allis on Saturday, September 3rd.  Given that this small, reprehensible group has already received way too much publicity, thus only helping add fuel to the fire, the reporting itself is yet another classic example of bias in the media.  Supposedly 30 supremacists turned out - organized by a neo-Nazi group from Detroit, along with 100 police officers and 2,000 counter protesters (although these numbers seem high when compared to radio reports on the event, which stated there were just a few hundred counter protesters and a dozen neo-Nazis.).

The article "5 Arrested at neo-Nazi rally"  (9/4/2011) by Meg Kissinger and Tom Kertscher of the Journal/Sentinel staff, clearly demonstrates how the reporters will try to slant a story.   Of course most people find groups like the neo-Nazis to be very offensive and disturbing.  Kissinger and Kertscher wrote that during the rally, five people were arrested and taken into custody by police.  Two people were taken away for weapons violations and three were arrested for disorderly conduct.   Yet, the reporters did their readers a disservice by refusing to report who was arrested.  It is easy to surmise that it was NOT the neo-Nazis who broke the law on weapons violations and disorderly conduct.  If any of the neo-Nazis had been taken into custody, this would have made the headlines. So,  why try to cover this up?  If the counter protesters broke the law - this should have been mentioned in the article.  It all goes along with the who, what, why, where, when, and how guidelines that good journalists are supposed to abide by. 

Yet, Ms. Kissinger and Mr. Kertscher failed to do their jobs.   Was this just bad reporting?  Probably not.  Was this an intentional attempt to protect to the counter protesters from bad publicity?  Sure seems that way.  Simply because the reporters wanted  the neo-Nazis to be despised (and rightfully so), they decided to leave out necessary information from their report.   Obvious bias such as this has no place in a news story.   Because the reporters wanted to portray the neo-Nazis as the bad guys and the counter protesters as the good guys, they were willing to overlook the fact that some of the counter protesters couldn't abide by the law.  Picking and choosing what to include in an article based on one's own feelings and agenda is wrong.  Period. 

...until November, 2012!!!

It has been ten years since the horrific terrorist attacks and murders of thousands of innocent people at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania. 

Most of us probably remember what we were doing on that day.  In our household, we had a television on and watched after a plane had hit one tower of the World Trade Center.  As we observed this,  we saw another plane slowly approach - and head straight for the second tower.  Complete shock followed.  Everywhere we went throughout the day, people were talking softly and appeared surprised.  We seemed completely lost - unable to grasp what had occurred.  Nothing like this had EVER happened to our country.

Fast forward ten years.

Since no major terrorist attack has occurred on American soil since that dark day, we as a nation must give credit where credit is due.  When 9/11 happened, America really was ripe for the pickings.  Little was done during the Clinton years to address the terrorist threat even though there had been  several terrorist attacks during Clinton's tenure.   The Clinton Administration treated terrorism as a criminal act.  During this time, there were also major roadblocks in place that prevented federal, state and local agencies from working together regarding intelligence and information-sharing about terrorists and the potential threats they posed.  In summary, the nation didn't treat terrorism seriously.   Osama Bin Laden took advantage of this.

Since 9/11, President Bush and Vice-President Cheney made it their number one priority to protect Americans from another attack in the United States.  They succeeded.   Bush went even further - taking the fight to the terrorists.  Who can forget his memorable words, standing among the smoldering remains of the WTC with one of the heroic firefighters, saying loud and clear: 

,

Credit must also be giving to President Obama for not dismantling many of the tools the Bush Administration put in place to continue to keep America safe.  The wars on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan proceeded - we have not given up the fight.    Once Obama got into office, it was apparent that he had a lot to learn, and Obama did actually listen to those fighting the war on terror.  Obama's dangerous promise to close Gitmo didn't become a reality.  Obama's attempts to try captured terrorists in New York City was short-lived.   The Patriot Act is still in place.  The troops are still fighting the good fight.  Osama Bin Laden was killed during Obama's watch - a huge coup for the American soldiers who risked their lives to accomplish such a feat and a benefit for us all to be rid of such an evil monster.   

But we must never forget, nor grow complacent.

God bless the many people who sacrificed their lives to save others and worked tirelessly in the days after the attacks and beyond.  God bless those who lost family, friends and co-workers on that fateful day as well as thousands who lost their lives.  God bless the agencies who now work together to keep America safe.  God bless the men and women in the military, risking their lives every day with many paying the ultimate price in order to ensure that we - American citizens - remain safe at home.  God bless President Bush who made it his number one priority - in spite of eventual sagging poll numbers and open disrespect from Democrats and the media - to keep our country safe. 

In closing, what a great feeling to repeat the screams of the crowd surrounding President Bush shortly after 9/11/01:

USA!  USA!  USA!

Remember just a few short years ago when President Bush was connected to the Enron scandal by six degrees of separation and a lot of really hard trying by the press?    Enron, the giant energy company, had "cooked the books" to make it seem that they were doing much better than they actually were.  In fact, the company was failing.    And in the end, it's losses reverberated throughout Wall Street and on the national scene.  Somehow, the media managed to twist and spin and tie President Bush in to the collapse and shady dealings of the Enron corporation.  All of this because Enron had been one of Bush's biggest supporters - donating a bit over $700,000.00 over an eight year period.  So Enron was bad - and Bush was bad because he was associated - very loosely - with Enron. 

Now along comes Solyndra. Supposedly a cutting-edge green energy company - loved by the left, of course.   President Obama actually went and visited this company.  Obama and  VP Joe Biden spoke in glowing terms of this maker of solar panels.  Biden even said Solyndra would allow America "to compete and lead like we did in the 20th century."  Obama gushed that Solyndra "was a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism."  So Obama and Biden saw no problem in giving Solyndra a $500 million dollar federal grant - based on the fact they were a "green" company.  What happened?  Well, the American taxpayer lost $500 million dollars.  The company went bust.  Filed for Chapter 11.  Closed its doors.  Seems that Solyndra had never even turned a profit since 2005.  

(Remember when Obama came to Wisconsin and made an effort to visit another "green" company in Menomonee Falls?  ZBB Corporation welcomed the president with open arms.  Yet, here we have another energy company that does little more than lose money.    Is there a pattern here?)

Could Solyndra be Obama's Enron - or even much worse?  President Bush never gave taxpayer dollars to Enron.  He didn't have a whole lot to do with the company itself.  Yet, the press loved the idea that this evil big corporation - making money off the "little people" - took advantage of their status and robbed people blind over the long run.  So Bush was somehow to blame.  The mainstream media made it appear as though Enron CEO and Chairman,  Kenneth Lay,  was Bush's long lost brother.  

What President Obama and Vice-President Biden did has to honestly be viewed as much worse.  These two championed Solyndra.  They had no problem giving the hard-earned money of the American taxpayer to a rocky corporation.  They both possibly even knew it was doomed to fail.  Solyndra had a terrible track record.  The company had known issues with securing a permanent CEO of the firm.  The company hadn't made a profit in years!   Once the huge losses of $500 million - from the American taxpayer -  came to light, all the White House can do is say "oops?"

Hard-working Americans ought to be outraged.  However, it gets worse.  Right now, Obama and the Democrats are considering giving more "stimulus" funds to 15 other "green" companies.  It's a recipe for disaster.  Hopefully the Republicans in Washington D.C. will block this nonsense and protect our taxpayer dollars.  In these difficult economic times, made even worse by a president who refuses to do the right things to get America businesses back on track, we do not need to be giving more "stimulus" funds  to worthless companies that will only lose money in the long run. 

What is quite clear from all of this is that America will not begin to prosper until Obama is gone.  He is solely responsible for the dire economic times we find ourselves in right now.  He is standing in the way of job creations.  He is standing in the way of economic recovery.  The private sector is afraid of him and big government regulations.  They will continue to play it safe until he is out of office.  Then the hiring can begin.  Companies can grow.  The over-regulations of government can be reduced. 

Need more evidence that the commander-in-chief doesn't have a clue?  Obama's own words from last year regarding Solyndra:

“The true engine of economic growth will always be companies like Solyndra.”

The sooner Obama is out of office, the better off the American people will be.

During the past few weeks, the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel has kept up a steady stream of stories on one individual:  Cindy Archer.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/130477953.html  ("Woman interviewed for state job days after it was given to Archer"  - 9/24/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/130054303.html  ("County Supervisors remember Archer as dedicated to Walker" - 9/17/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/130056193.html  ("Archer profited when job shifted from civil service to appointment" - 9/17/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/128511208.html  ("Archer hopes for state job later"  - 8/26/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/130486628.html ( "Spokesperson for Walker granted immunity in John Doe probe"  9/24/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/130236158.html   ("Sources say Van Hollen's office declined to help with John Doe" - 9/20/11)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/129890163.html  ("Former Walker aide Archer says she has done nothing wrong"  - 9/15/11)

and so on...

What's missing is a real "smoking gun."  Cindy Archer, Governor Walker's former deputy administration secretary and former chief aide for Walker when he was the Milwaukee County Executive - has become a real target - for the left and media.  Why?

All the stories on Archer and her supposed misdeeds are puzzling.  What exactly did Archer do?  What is she accused of?  More importantly, why the John Doe investigation, on the federal level?  Supposedly the word has floated around that while Archer was the chief aide for County Executive Walker, she may have done "pro-Walker" work on the county dime.  Does this mean the woman needs to be elevated to "most wanted" status for some reason?

Hmmmm.   Looks kind of suspicious.  What is the real story behind this witch hunt?

Let's examine some facts.  Wisconsin - which had been a blue state - has gone red.  Conservatives and Republicans are in charge in Madison.  The state known for electing Democrats - and Democratic presidents - no longer is a reliable bet. The Obama Administration actually helped unionista's and the left with the protests in Madison during  the past few months of turmoil when Walker was working on major solutions addressing the state budget crisis.  As most in Wisconsin know, collective bargaining - and the stranglehold it put on state finances -  was one of the topics Governor Walker and the Republicans focused on.  Obama didn't want the unions to lose any power, since they are a big source of income for the left.  Obama's help, as with the protests in general,  fell flat.

The recall efforts by the unions and Dems, with lots of assistance from "outside sources" (i.e. The White House)  didn't get the desired results.

Joanne Kloppenburg - a big unionista favorite and darling of the left (with no judicial experience and numerous failed attempts to become a judge in the past) - lost the recent heated Wisconsin Supreme Court election to Justice David Prosser.  This was supposed to be an opportunity for the Dems and libs to put another individual on the bench who would manipulate the laws to fit an anti-Walker agenda.  Thankfully, the voters knew better and re-elected Prosser.   Another epic fail for the left and Obama.

Enter the evil twins - Wisconsin State Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justice Ann Walsh Bradley - who concocted a scheme to discredit Prosser.   Choke-gate turned the entire court into a circus for a while and failed miserably to achieve the desired results of getting Prosser kicked off the bench.   When the truth came out, this silly episode became a "nothing to see, move along" moment.  Walsh Bradley ended up only embarrassing herself.

Victory after victory after victory has followed conservative and Republican politicians.  Legislation that many Wisconsinites had wanted for years finally became realities because the Democrats could no longer block such laws from happening.  Two such crowning achievements are Voter ID and Concealed Carry.  The state budget is finally in the black - after years of careless spending, raiding one fund to pay for another, and continually playing a shell game with taxpayer dollars (thanks, Governor Doyle!).  All of this has happened because Scott Walker was elected governor. 

The left is besides itself and is fighting a very desperate battle to remain relevant.  In order to do so, they need to manufacture such bogus "gotcha" moments to discredit Governor Walker.  Governor Walker MUST be brought down.  So, the left - with the help of the media and possibly some help from out of state by a president with a slim chance of being re-elected - are going after Walker allies.  The end result being:  Walker will be guilty by association.  The Democrats can then set their sights on returning to power in the state.  

Cindy Archer is only the beginning. 

As the November 2012 election looms near, the nastiness and spin will ramp up.  Think the bad behavior, intimidation, vandalism, threats, pushing and shoving, yelling, beer spilling,  bongo-beating, sing-a-long idiocy from the anti-Walker crowds in Madison was a fluke?    Given the win-at-all-costs methods we have seen from many on the left over the years, I doubt anyone would expect anything less.