We recently found out that a bunch of kids in New Jersey and yesterday on CNN were told to sing songs praising President Barack Hussein Obama. This particular song caused a lot of outcry, probably because it swiped bits from “Jesus Loves Me” and “Battle Hymn of the Republic” while trying to mold them into little Obamaites.

Well, in the spirit of fairness we should provide a counter-song the kids can sing to cleanse their minds of indoctrination and give them a more accurate assessment of our 44th president:

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He has an ego so darn large we cannot fit it on a barge

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He said he has accomplishments but we have not seen any yet

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He said he was a capitalist but is loved by many communists

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He said he saved the economy, a claim as bogus as Astrology

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Chicago Olympics he tried to sell, but Copenhagen didn’t like the smell

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He said he’d be transparent but his records are hidden behind lots of cement

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He promised he was one of us, but then he threw us under a bus

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He has so many nutty czars they’re as useful as clunker cars

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He promised Hope and Change, but all we got was a falling stock exchange

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

Fidel, Hugo and Muammar praised him much, perhaps like them he’s a bit touched

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

His campaign motto was “Yes We Can!” but now we know that was just spam

Mmm mmm mmm Barack Hussein Obama

He said he was going to save our hide, instead he took us for a ride

By the way, the chant reminds me of a “Star Trek” episode where a bunch of kids are being used by some space divorce lawyer in a feathery muumuu.

ACORN has been involved in a myriad of scandals and it is not unreasonable for any Congressman from either side of the political aisle to question ACORN’s recent actions out of concern over the way they conduct business. Judging from the results of the vote to cut their funding, many Democrats did just that.

The vote passed overwhelmingly, with only 75 House members (all Democrats) voting against the bill. Only the most vehement supporters of the Democrats’ liberal agenda voted to continue ACORN funding, with Congressman Waxman showing his true colors as a member of this fringe.

Waxman portrays himself as a voice of reason and deal maker. The truth is that he’s a left-wing fanatic and an abusive bully who, by siding with ACORN on this vote, revealed that he has no problem with the thug-like tactics and electoral fraud activities of ACORN continuing with the help of  huge amounts of taxpayer money.

As more is revealed about ACORN, I hope moderate, centrist Democrat voters (and there are a few) from Henry Waxman’s district realize that our local Congressman from Los Angeles has totally lost touch with his constituents’ needs and has been seduced and corrupted by extremist views.

Waxman spent years turning over every stone looking for government corruption in the Bush administration and steroid abuse in major league baseball. But when it comes to ACORN’s indefensible activities, the last person to notice or care appears to be Henry Waxman.

Now that White House “Green Jobs Czar” Van Jones has resigned, what’s next?

Inevitably, the American mainstream media – ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, et al – must be held to account for sitting on the sidelines as this major story kept building without them, went viral on YouTube, and then became so large that a key appointee of President Obama was forced to step down.

But with their decision to ignore the Jones story, they may have actually done Mr. Obama far more harm than good: Who vetted this guy? How did he get past the FBI? What did he say, and how did he answer the infamous seven-page questionnaire that all Obama appointees were required to fill out? Inquiring Freedom of Information Act minds want to know.

For most people in this country, the resignation was the first they had heard of Van Jones. For this sin of journalistic omission, there’s institutional media blame. Bias is too tame a word for the utter shamelessness on display: Only Republican scandals – real and imagined – matter.

And it’s not just those the Democratic-Media Complex dub as “mobs” or “tea baggers” that are taking notice. Diminishing audience and evaporating subscribership reflect widespread consumer dissatisfaction. Eventually, the money will run out.

But until then, the growing alternative media of Internet and talk radio and a burgeoning mass of justifiably angry Americans will make every effort to expose the sham that is mainstream journalism.

Obviously, it’s not that the Jones story wasn’t newsworthy. His racist rants, his radical background and his membership in a 9/11 “truther” group made for heavy-rotation YouTube viewing that would have immediately destroyed other mere mortals if the shoe were on the right – or white – foot.

Compounding the problem, the Jones narrative hurts Mr. Obama because it underlines how the mainstream media helped elect the president by glorifying him instead of vetting him.

Just as Mr. Obama was not even cursorily investigated, Van Jones, a fellow “community organizer,” was not given the slightest media attention when named as an unaccountable “czar” selected to oversee billions in taxpayer money for the ambiguous purpose of “green energy.” And that despite having a body of damning evidence that could be found with a single Google search by an ADHD-addled high-school journalism student.

You can read the column in full here.

We now have a Sudan Czar. I thought they had their own Czar, but hey, if it helps improve our image in the Arab world I am all for loaning them a Czar or two. We have a Health Czar despite the fact we have a Surgeon General and to be honest I’m not sure who’s in charge of health. You might think a Czar would outrank a general but a number of third-world countries with tons of Generals are run by colonels.

I addition to having a Czar just for Sudan we have an Afghanistan Czar. Isn’t the President afraid that some countries will feel miffed that he didn’t appoint a Czar just for them? I thought we had a whole State Department with Czars called “ambassadors.” We now have a Mideast Peace Czar and a Mideast Policy Czar. At least the Obama administration has a clear understanding that these two things aren’t related.

We have Herb Allison who is the TARP Czar and Earl Devaney the Stimulus Accountability Czar. Apparently Mr. Allison is not a very accountable guy and needs his own Czar to keep him in the straight and narrow. Do they both answer to the Economic Czar?

We have a Weapons Czar and a Weapons of Mass Destruction Czar; I hope that doesn’t lead to weapons envy.

We have a Border Czar, a Terrorism Czar and an Intelligence Czar. What if a terrorist is crossing the border? Who do we call? Come to think of it, why do we even need a terrorist Czar since Janet Napolitano has told us there are no acts of terrorism only “man-created disasters?”

What this country really needs is a Czar Czar — one uber-Czar to keep all the minor Czars from getting out of line. A person who is feared for their hard line principles. A person with a proven record of successfully eliminating government waste and creating economic success. At the same time the Czar Czar should be someone who can understand and relate to the common man and woman.

Yes, I think Sarah Palin would be an excellent Czar Czar. Hopefully, she will be considered for the job in 2012.

Imagine my astonishment when I discovered that “the wanted” of the show’s first two recent episodes (you can see them here; four more have been produced but are not presently scheduled) were Islamic terrorists.  This is an encouraging new development, considering that Western governments and media have increasingly made taboo any reference to a connection between Islam and acts of terror (of course, the Islamists themselves never got that memo, because they insist on quoting Islamic theology to justify their murder and mayhem). And the left-leaning entertainment industry has virtually ceased pitting heroes against the real-world threat of jihadis, falling back instead on more fashionable stock bogeymen like corporate executives, Marvel Comics supervillains, and, well, corporate executives. 

But now along comes a major network TV show that makes no apology for identifying and targeting Islamic terrorists, and its investigative team even makes unqualified reference to jihad, another taboo word and a concept that Islamist apologists have nearly indoctrinated us into believing has nothing to do with waging holy war against infidels.What’s next, the apocalypse?

Carstens, Ciralsky, Tyler

The aforementioned elite team consists of producer/journalist Adam Ciralsky, former Green Beret Roger Carstens, former Navy SEAL Scott Tyler, and war crimes prosecutor David Crane. In episode one, they zero in on an extremist imam in Oslo called Mullah Krekar, the founder of Ansar al-Islam, a group closely allied with al Qaeda and at the forefront of anti-coalition attacks in Iraq. Krekar is wanted for prosecution in Iraq but is being sheltered by the Norwegian government, which refuses to extradite him to a country that might mistreat or execute him. (Personally, I don’t see the problem with shipping these murdering, openly bigoted supremacists off to any country that might mete out the serious justice they deserve, but that’s why I’m not a politician).

In episode two, the team heads to Hamburg in pursuit of terrorist financier Mamoun Darkazanli, who is credited with funneling money to the 9/11 hijackers – but Germany is waiting for an official indictment from Spain before they hand him over (it’s complicated). 

Liberal critics of the show ridicule the team for “hunting down” suspects who are practically listed in the phone book, but they’re missing the point: it’s outrageous not because these evil men are hidden among us, but precisely because they’re living openly in, and being protected by, countries whose very downfall these Islamists are plotting.  Sadly, “The Wanted” doesn’t provide the satisfying closure of a “Law and Order”; in both episodes, the best the team can manage is to pressure the European governments to quit stalling and finally cooperate on legal action against the suspects.

Mullah Krekar

The show is “really about the rule of law,” Carstens says.“It’s about justice; it’s about human rights; it’s about facing those that are accused – and that’s the key word – facing those that are accused of the most egregious crimes against humanity and effect some sort of effort to get them to at least take responsibility for their actions or clear their name.”

Sounds reasonable, if unexciting.  And yet “The Wanted” seems to drive liberal entertainment bloggers into a frothy outrage.Slate’s critic derided its “frenetic pandering to base instincts” – base instincts such as the uncivilized urge to bring war criminals to justice, I presume.  Lucy Dalglish of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press frets, “Is this supposed to be journalism?”  She and others worry that this show promotes vigilante journalism, the kind that led one cornered suspect to kill himself in the pedophile-hunting “To Catch a Predator” (frankly, if this show does lead to any terrorists killing themselves, then that’s a big plus in my book).  Lydia Khalil, who labels it “dangerous,” and Baltimore Sun critic David Zurawik, who stretched for a hyperbolic denunciation of the show as “McCarthyism,” are apparently concerned that Ciralsky et al are targeting and smearing random innocents: “Who’s deciding who is a terrorist or war criminal?” he frets (for a show that liberals find so easy to sneeringly dismiss, it certainly inspires a lot of fretting).  Well Mr. Zurawik, it’s the State Department and other international agencies who have decided who the terrorists and war criminals are, not a rogue vigilante journalist at NBC, as you imply.

The New York Times too disapproves of “The Wanted” blurring the line between journalism and activism.  Of course, these same critics wouldn’t hesitate to give their imprimatur to the show if the suspects were Bush administration officials/torturers, whom the terrorist hunters could hold accountable for reading all our private e-mails and for callously disregarding the legal rights and cultural sensitivities of foreign Muslim fundamentalists who yearn to hack off infidel heads.  The Obama-era journalists who gleefully declared “Objectivity is passé!” suddenly feign blustery moral indignation, though, when a journalist assists a former SEAL and a Green Beret in the pursuit of the Western world’s real enemies.

If this show brings attention to “an overlooked story,” as NBC producer David Corvo calls it, then I’m all for it.  If more journalists committed themselves to shining a spotlight on, and actively taking down, such vile monsters as Mullah Krekar instead of targeting Joe the Plumber, dutifully transcribing every lie out of the mouth of Bristol Palin’s slimy ex-boyfriend, or giving us breathless updates on who gets Michael Jackson’s children, then maybe they’d earn a little more respect and trust from the public.

But liberal entertainment critics, who serve no useful function in society, are one thing; what about the people “The Wanted” represents?  One unnamed person in the Department of Defense’s special ops community said, “Everyone I’ve talked to said that it was well done, didn’t reveal a lot of our trade secrets – if you will – and left me feeling that somebody’s doing something about a problem we all know exists and, frankly, we can’t do anything about.”

The show’s critics do have legitimate complaints about some of its stylistic glitz, its forced tension (such as a lengthy car chase that fizzles out rather pointlessly), its exposition-heavy dialogue and staged conversations, and its lack of dramatic takedowns. Could “The Wanted” use a little retooling? Certainly. But it already gets its most unique, core elements right: it exposes the bureaucratic apathy of Western governments who coddle some of our most dangerous enemies, and – like “To Catch a Predator” – “The Wanted” raises viewer awareness of the monsters walking free among us.

My grandparents were killed instantly. I lived.  My grandparents were driving an AMC Gremlin. I was driving a Dodge 3500 diesel dually pickup truck.

AMC is now out of business. Dodge Trucks are still selling well. The free market decided that we didn’t need AMC Gremlins.

I still drive a Dodge dually. We factor in safety versus miles per gallon on every automobile purchase that my wife and I make. Devo could not have said it better: “Freedom of Choice…It’s what you want!” Freedom to choose is a basic American right. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are guaranteed to me and 299,999,999 other Americans by the Constitution.

Mr. President, I did not give you nor the Federal Government permission to use my tax dollars to bailout Chrysler or GM. Neither did any of my friends. We did not have a choice in that matter.

We all knew that GM and Chrysler were headed for bankruptcy. So be it. It would be a hit to the American economy. Yep. Let’s take the hit and move on. I believe President Obama, that you knew that GM and Chrysler were headed to bankruptcy as well, but by giving them our money first, you were able to seize control of the American auto industry. In one fell swoop, you became the head of GM and Chrysler. You turned the United Auto Workers Union into GM and Chrysler owners. You nailed the coffin shut on Ford, the one manufacturer who turned down your money (…our money). How is Ford going to negotiate wages with a union that is now also their competitor?

Mr. President, you have created an army of Czars that are answerable only to you.  Our Constitution says that only Congress has the power to create taxes and they are answerable to the people. Not only does our new car Czar not answer to Congress, he won’t even go on Neil Cavuto. Where is the transparency, Mr. President?

But I digress. Your administration has already strong-armed the auto industry into accepting mileage compliances for their new vehicles. Michael Moore is giddy with the fact that the US Government now owns 60% of GM. He wants you to end the auto industry as we know it. According to him, GM should only produce bullet trains, buses and hybrids. If the two of you have your way, Americans will no longer be able to purchase a GMC SUV or a big Dodge truck.

Our family car is a General Motors Hummer H2. I am sure you are familiar with the brand and model; you just sold them to China. China may not want our debt, but they will still take our SUVs.

It is fairly common for us to get cut off and then flipped the finger by eco-saints whenever we drive into the city. Several times we only narrowly avoided a serious freeway accident. Quite often, Mr. President, these cars have bumper stickers with your name on them. These self-righteous “Earth Savers” feel completely justified in their actions as they curse at my children and me because they are only offending and risking the lives of people who are riding in a “planet killer.”  The fact that we heat our house with reclaimed wood, run almost 100% of our ranch on solar power, grow our own fruits and vegetables, and for the three weeks out of the year when our dirt road washes out, the only way in or out of our ranch is in a 4×4 Hummer or it’s equivalent, never enters into their sanctimonious consciousness.

I see this same kind of prejudice in your speeches and your actions Mr. President. I see this same arrogance as you steer our nation away from free enterprise and into the arms of the Central Planning Committee.

Last week, my wife was rear-ended by a driver who never even hit his brakes. His truck slammed into my wife at 50 miles per hour.

I thank God that the Germans put good steel in their vehicles and know a little something about engineering. If my wife had been driving an AMC Gremlin, she would probably be dead now.

Soon my children will be driving and buying cars of their own. Mr. President, will you allow them to have freedom of choice or will you doom them to take their chances in a 21st century AMC Gremlin?