Radio, Recalls, Writing and Rape Allegations Result in Busy Week

In addition to sharing news about my recent appearance on “Coast to Coast AM” with George Noory, I shared several interesting items this week that you won’t find anywhere except at my sites, including

Click image above to read about my appearance on "Coast to Coast AM."

Click image above to read about my appearance on “Coast to Coast AM.”

Is Toyota Guilty or Victim of Justice Department Shakedown?  — That’s the question I asked Wednesday before offering evidence that points to my conclusion that the Obama Administration has been waging a kind of shakedown of the Japanese automaker that would make Jesse Jackson proud.

REPORT: DoD to Overhaul Personnel Screening Process — After reading what the Washington Post reported Tuesday evening, I shared how readers can gain a better understanding of the issues involved simply by reading my latest nonfiction book, THE CLAPPER MEMO.

SHOCK: ‘If You Like Your Military, You Can Keep Your Military’ — On Tuesday, I revealed how the Obama Administration is dismantling the nation’s military in much the same way it has the healthcare system.


Click image above to read about alternative to the polygraph.

Cops Nationwide Embrace Alternative to Polygraph — Also on Tuesday, I shared details about a technology polygraph loyalists love to hate that’s at the center of the decades-old “turf war” described in my latest nonfiction book, THE CLAPPER MEMO.  Surprising to some, the technology — which, by the way, DoD has prohibited its people from using — is being used by cops in big city and smalltown law enforcement agencies across the nation.

Michael Behenna Goes Home — One week ago today, I was ecstatic to share news about the release from prison of a wrongly-convicted Soldier from Oklahoma whose case I’ve written about so often during the past five years.

DIA Return Address on EnvelopeBe sure keep your eyes open for updates about the Defense Intelligence Agency‘s continuing efforts to stonewall a Freedom of Information Act request related to findings I share inside THE CLAPPER MEMO.  Their stonewalling, by the way, recently passed the 600-days mark.

Though I haven’t written anything about it yet, I received official trial information yesterday about a Marine Corps officer who beat bogus sexual assault charges and is preparing to fight back.  This case, I’m afraid, constitutes one of the worst cases I’ve seen a military officer face — as bad as the case chronicled in my first nonfiction book, Three Days In August — as a combatant in the “War On Men in the Military.”  Stay tuned!

Finally, I’m ever so close to finishing the first final draft of my first fiction novel, and I think you’ll really like it.  Stay tuned!

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Is Toyota Guilty or Victim of Justice Department Shakedown?

It’s all over the news today:  Attorney General Eric Holder announced Wednesday the U.S. government has reached a $1.2 billion settlement with Toyota that ends a four-year criminal investigation into the automaker’s response to safety issues.  But is the Japanese automaker really guilty of wrongdoing?

Click image above to read more articles about the Toyota recalls.

Click image above to read more articles about the Toyota recalls.

I ask that question after today’s headlines prompted me to take a trip back into the Bob McCarty Writes archives.  There, I found several articles worth sharing again.

In a Feb. 5, 2010, piece, Obama Administration Sending Wrong Signals, I opened by stating that no one could blame Toyota Motor Company officials for feeling as if they’ve been on the “hot seat” for an inordinately-long period of time.  Then I listed four noteworthy incidents to back up my opinion:

• On Sept. 29, the company issued a recall related to floor mats interfering with accelerator pedals of seven Toyota models;

• On Jan. 21, the company issued another recall, this time related to issues with the accelerator pedals of eight Toyota and Lexus models;

• On Feb. 4, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood offered inaccurate off-the-cuff advice to drivers of Toyota vehicles; and

Today, Toyota President Akio Toyoda issued an apology on behalf of his company amidst news the company is reportedly considering a recall of its Toyota Prius model over issues related to its braking system.

I went on to cite an AFP article, Is US bullying Toyota on recall?, before asking and answering the question, “Why would the Obama Administration want to bully Toyota?”

I explained that two primary reasons existed for Obama’s actions:

• President Obama wants to hurt sales at Toyota and increase sales at General Motors and Chrysler, the companies in which the federal government has an ownership stake; and

President Obama wants to help the United Auto Workers employees who work at GM and Chrysler plants, many of which have shuttered in recent years.

UAW "Ready for the Next Course" by My Personal LitmusAlso on Feb. 5, 2010, I asked the question, Is Toyota Paying Price for Not Supporting Obama?, before highlighting Federal Election Commission records that revealed only two of the 151 executives whose biographies appeared on the Toyota web site at the time made contributions to Obama’s presidential campaign between Jan. 1, 2007, and Feb. 4, 2010.

Three days later, I pointed out how federal government officials had failed to issue a recall for the GM-produced Chevy Cobalt despite the fact it had received more complaints per vehicle than Toyota.  Going a step farther, I used one paragraph to ask and answer an important question:

So why hasn’t the federal government issued a recall on the Cobalt? Probably because Chevrolet is owned by General Motors (a.k.a. “Government Motors”), a taxpayer-owned company that stands to benefit greatly from having its foreign-owned competitors struggle with the public relations nightmares related to product recalls.

On Feb. 15, 2010, I offered a few thoughts as to why Japanese automakers should expect more recalls — namely, because executives at Honda, Nissan and Suzuki had, like their colleagues at Toyota, failed to contribute much to Obama’s campaign coffers.

On May 5, 2010, I shared news about Toyota passing the three-million recall remedies mark.

Nine months would pass before I shared news I thought might signal the end of the federal government’s harassment of the Japanese automaker.  But I was wrong.

Despite the fact that NASA engineers found no electronic flaws in Toyota vehicles, Toyota will, according to Attorney General Holder, have to pay a $1.2 billion financial penalty under a “deferred prosecution agreement.

Translation:  “Pay up or we continue our shakedown.”

Oh, what a feeling, Toyota!

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Conservatives, Honest Liberals Opposed FCC Newsrooms ‘Study’

By Paul R. Hollrah, Guest Writer

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai

In a Feb. 10 op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, who occupies one of the Republican seats on the commission, broke the news that the Obama Administration was planning to place inquisitors in the newsrooms of television and radio stations across the nation.

Titled the “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the FCC program proposed to send researchers into TV and radio newsrooms to interview reporters, editors, and station managers about how they decide which stories to cover… or not cover.

As Pai described it, the stated purpose of the CIN was to “ferret out information from television and radio broadcasters about ‘the process by which stories are selected,’ and how often stations cover ‘critical information needs,’ along with ‘perceived station bias’ and ‘perceived responsiveness to underserved populations.’” As a guideline for their research, the FCC planners selected eight major categories for their investigators to delve into:

1) Emergencies and risks – immediate and long term;

2) Health and welfare – local health information and group specific health information;

3) Education – the quality of local schools and choices available to parents;

4) Transportation – available alternatives, costs, and schedules;

5) Economic opportunities – job information, job training, and small business assistance;

6) The environment – air and water quality and access to recreation;

7) Civic information – the availability of civic institutions and opportunities to associate with others; and

8) Political – information about candidates at all relevant levels of local governance, and relevant public policy initiatives affecting communities and neighborhoods.

In addition, the FCC identified two broad areas of critical information needs associated with each of these categories: 1) Those fundamental to individuals in everyday life; and 2) Those that affect larger groups and communities.

But this is all pretty boring stuff.  If the FCC was interested in conducting a study on which topics and which stories were most likely to put TV viewers and radio listeners to sleep, it’s pretty clear they were really onto something.  There have always been much more interesting stories to report.

Although everyone but the fascist thugs of the Obama Administration and the brain-dead rank-and-file of the Democratic Party were immediately horrified at what the FCC proposed, for the first time in history conservatives and the lawyers of the American Civil Liberties Union threw their arms around each other.  The thought of someone marching into the newsrooms of television and radio stations and demanding to know how they conducted their business was roundly denounced by conservatives and honest liberals alike.

Jay Sekulow, of the American Center for Law and Justice, a conservative public interest law firm, cautioned:  “The federal government has no place attempting to control the media, using the unconstitutional actions of repressive regimes to squelch free speech.”

Without doubt, Sekulow had the Obama administration in mind when he cautioned us against “repressive regimes?”

Commentary magazine equated the proposed FCC study to the dangers of, say, a federal shield law.  The principal danger of a shield law is that, in order to legislate protections for a specific group… i.e. the “press”… it is first necessary to define that group.  Therefore, the government would be placed in the position of deciding who is a journalist and who is not.  As Commentary suggests, “The government could easily play favorites and have yet another accreditation – not unlike an FCC license – to hold over the heads of the press.”  Given the Obama Administration’s unprecedented use of the IRS to thwart its political opponents, is there any doubt that a shield law in their hands would be a very dangerous thing?

Commentary concluded that it is such rules that the FCC’s CIN calls to mind.  It opens the door to increased government scrutiny of the press, with an implicit threat to a broadcaster’s license.  It does so under the guise of “public service,” “quality control,” “fairness,” and other terms that usually hint the government is up to no good.  Left unchallenged, the CIN would support the premise that “news judgment is the FCC’s business.”

The FCC quickly issued a statement saying that Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler was in agreement that “survey questions in the study directed toward media outlet managers, news directors, and reporters overstepped the bounds of what is required.”  An FCC spokesman added that “any suggestion that the FCC intends to regulate the speech of news media or plans to put monitors in America’s newsrooms is false.”

However, what is most noticeable about all of the moral indignation directed at the FCC’s CIN program, whether from the left or from the right, is that it is all premised on the notion that we actually have a free press in the United States when, in fact, we do not.  Few conservatives, the most “underserved population” of all, would deny that because of many decades of leftish propagandizing by the mainstream media, any opportunity to get inside the newsrooms at the major networks to expose them for the charlatans they are would be far too tempting to ignore.

For example, in 2004, CBS newsman Dan Rather created a national stir when he charged that George W. Bush had been AWOL during a part of his service in the Texas Air National Guard.  Unfortunately for Rather, the documents used to support his charge turned out to be forgeries.  The documents, which Rather claimed were memos from one of Bush’s senior officers, contained superscript characters which were not available on typewriters at the time.  In truth, the documents that Rather hoped would ruin Bush’s reelection chances were created on a modern computer using Microsoft Word software, and artificially aged to make them appear authentic.

Nevertheless, the networks and major print media devoted hundreds of hours of airtime and countless lines of newsprint to the bogus story.  It would have been interesting to learn how the networks decided to spend that much time and effort on the phony Bush AWOL story.

Conversely, just three years later, when it became evident that Sen. Barack Obama would be a viable Democratic candidate for the presidency, legal scholars complained that, because Obama failed to meet the basic requirements to be a “natural born Citizen,”  as required by Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, he would be ineligible to serve.  And although there was ample evidence to support the charge, the mainstream media all but ignored the story.

And when the Maricopa County, Ariz., Cold Case Posse, under the direction of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, provided irrefutable proof that the long form birth certificate uploaded to the White House website on April 27, 2011, was a poorly crafted forgery, that his draft registration card was a forged document, and that his Social Security number was stolen and would not pass a simple Social Security Administration E-verify test, the left-leaning newsmen of ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and NBC looked the other way.  They simply ignored the story.

It would be interesting to have editors, producers, and reporters at our major networks explain why a few days absence by George W. Bush from his Air National Guard duty station should be a major national news story, while the constitutional ineligibility and the forged documentation of the country’s first black president deserved nothing more than to be swept under the rug.

These are not isolated incidents; they happen every day of the week, on every conceivable kind of issue, foreign and domestic.  The only constant is the fact that the reporting is almost always slanted in favor of liberal/socialist orthodoxy and against traditional conservative views.

Given that so much of the Obama Administration invites favorable comparison to Hitler’s Third Reich, it was only to be expected that the FCC’s CIN study would quickly attract comparisons.  Marilyn Assenheim, writing at Minutemen News, suggests that, “What (Obama) is establishing is a redo of historical absolutism.  The German National Socialist government could not have aspired to better.”

Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, reminds us that “Arbitrary power is ugly and vicious, regardless of what pious rhetoric goes with it.  Freedom is not free.  You have to fight for it or lose it.”  Further, he asks, “But is our generation up to fighting for it?”

Humorist Frank J. Fleming has said“I think Obama is learning.  By the end of his presidency he’ll have gone from less than useless to achieving parity with uselessness…  In America, we love rooting for the underdogs, so maybe a gigantic decline in our nation is just what we need to believe in ourselves again.”

Perhaps a close brush with fascist dictatorship will be enough to wake us all up to the realities of the terrible dangers Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi represent.

Paul R. Hollrah is a two-time member of the Electoral College and a contributing editor for the National Writers Syndicate and the New Media JournalHis blog is found at OrderOfEphors.comHe resides in the lakes region of northeast Oklahoma.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Obama Administration Whitewashing Government Inaction Regarding Oil and Natural Gas Leases

In advance of President Barack Obama’s energy speech at Georgetown University, a top oil and natural gas industry leader called on the Obama Administration to abandon its policies “to defer, delay and deny access to domestic resources of oil and natural gas.”

In a statement to reporters during a media conference call this morning, American Petroleum Institute Upstream Director Erik Milito refuted a report by the Interior Department that U.S. oil and natural gas companies are sitting on oil leases granted by the government, refusing to turn them into producing leases.

“The report completely whitewashes the fact that in many cases, the reason these leases have no exploration plans is that BOEMRE is sitting on those plans,” Milito said. “This is like leasing an apartment from the government for $20 million dollars and the government refuses to give you the keys to the apartment – then the government proceeds to complain because you are not occupying the premises.”

Below, because I was unable to participate in the conference call today, I share an excerpt from the full text of Milito’s statement as prepared for delivery by API:

The disturbing reality is that 2011 could go down as the first year since 1957 that there has not been at least one offshore lease sale. Not one.

I’m certain that Americans find it difficult to reconcile that – and the fact that 85 percent of our offshore resources are off-limits to development – despite increased uncertainty in world oil markets and rising worldwide demand for crude oil.
President Obama has a speech on energy scheduled for later today.

We hope he will tell Americans that the administration will abandon their policies to defer, delay and deny access to domestic resources of oil and natural gas:  Resources that could help create U.S. jobs, grow the U.S. economy and provide royalties, rents, and revenues to the U.S. Treasury.

However, reports suggest that the President wants to provide “incentives” to develop the leases the industry currently has, but may or may not, actually have oil and natural gas on them.

The reports are that these incentives include shortening lease terms and increasing royalty rates through a graduated system.

These are not incentives.

They are, in fact, disincentives.

These are actions that will discourage investment here in the US and shift that investment to other parts of the world – to places like Brazil.

We hope the president will abandon energy politics in favor of energy policies that will provide Americans what they want and deserve: more energy, economic growth and more jobs.

We have a million American jobs that we can create if our industry is allowed to produce the oil and natural gas in knows how to produce.

And we have 9.2 million jobs to protect – the jobs across the country supported by our industry.

We urge the president to join the oil and natural gas industry in helping us create and protect those jobs.

It is not too late to get America’s energy policy back on track.

If you oppose the Obama Administration’s actions that are literally killing the nation’s oil and natural gas industries, costing American jobs and making us more dependent on foreign sources of energy, CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE NATION’S CAPITOL, let them know how you feel, and make sure they know you’ll be watching their votes.

UPDATE 3/30/11 at 5:30 p.m. Central: Cross-posted at Andrew Breitbart’s

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

‘Gas Strike’ Fueled by Emotion and Ignorance (Update)

This morning, I came across a Facebook event, titled “GAS STRIKE,” that nearly a half-million people have signed up to “attend” today.  Sadly, their effort — which involves boycotting gas stations for one day — is a misguided effort driven more by emotion and ignorance than common sense.

Oil companies produce the oil and make it available on the marketplace, but the price is set by the markets in much the same way as farmers accept the going rate for commodities such as corn and soybeans.

Americans who want “change” in the form of lower gas prices at the pump should stop venting their outrage against oil companies and the small business owners who operate gas stations and convenience stores across the nation.  After all, it didn’t work when tried June 19.  Instead, they should demand President Barack Obama and his underlings — a group that includes Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Energy Secretary Dr. David Chu and everyone in the EPA — end their war of regulation and red tape that is preventing U.S. oil and natural gas companies from tapping domestic sources of energy.

No one but the Obama Administration is responsible for gasoline prices reaching $4 per gallon and higher. If Obama wants to improve the everyday lives of Americans via lower fuel prices, he needs to conduct business in a way that allows more drilling onshore and offshore so that we can actually reduce our dependence on foreign oil and keep 9.2 million Americans gainfully employed and contributing to the economy.

To learn more about how gas prices are set, read The Facts about Rising Gas Prices, an Energy Tomorrow blog post published yesterday.

If you need help paying for gasoline until the Obama Administration ends its war against “Big Oil,” buy a “Will work for fuel” t-shirt.

UPDATE 3/10/11 at 12:28 p.m. Central: Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) makes my point in a just-released video (below).  He even mentions Obama’s statement about skyrocketing electricity prices, a topic I covered in this Nov. 3, 2008, post.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

Chrysler Pushing ‘Foreign Policy’ Ad Campaign While Ex-Dealers Sue Government for Millions

Chrysler will soon begin an advertising/marketing push to cast the automaker’s dealers as “embassies,” according to an Automotive News report*.  The push will coincide with the new brand tagline, “Imported From Detroit,” introduced in a Super Bowl XLV commercial featuring the rapper, Eminem.  One would think, however, that Chrysler might want to focus on “domestic relations” before delving into this kind of “foreign policy.”

Why?  Because, as Associated Press reported today, 64 ex-Chrysler dealers who lost their dealerships in 2009 have filed suit against the government and are seeking damages of $130 million or more.  Of course, the former dealers are suing the government — instead of Chrysler by name — since the automaker is partially government-owned after being bailed out of the financial salvage yard by the Obama Administration.  And they have every right to be angry.

In a post May 20, 2009, I shared several videos — including the one above — in which Chrysler dealers talked about their feelings after being told their dealerships would close.

In a post May 23, 2009, a Texas Chrysler dealer wrote a powerful letter to warn fellow Americans about the future of small business in the United States if the closure of his dealership and others was allowed to stand.

In a post May 27, 2009, I shared research aimed at determining whether or not Chrysler dealers received their “pink slips” (i.e., showed up on the closure list) based on politics.

Finally, in a post on June 9, 2009, I shared no-longer-available video of Chrysler and General Motors (a.k.a., “Government Motors”) representatives testifying before a U.S. Senate committee on the subject of “DealerGate.” I addition, I provided a link to a very-informative Doug Ross post, Dealergate: Some minorities more equal than others.

Though the final chapter of this saga cannot be written until either a settlement or a judgment is reached in the lawsuit, one thing is certain:  If the “Imported From Detroit” campaign works as well as current U.S. foreign policy, we should expert Cairo-style protests outside the Chrysler Building.

*Note: No link provided, since Automotive News is a subscription-required site.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!

President Obama Continues Anti-Israel Push

A red-letter link atop the Drudge Report takes readers to a disturbing Foreign Policy magazine article published Wednesday:  In sharp reversal, U.S. agrees to rebuke Israel in Security Council.  The article, in turn, stands as only the most-recent reminder of many about President Barack Obama’s anti-Israel sentiment.

The State of Israel coin above reflects President Obama’s vision for the future of the Jewish State (i.e., it’s blank).  It went into circulation on the day he was inaugurated as part of “Barack Obama’s Seven Mystery States Coin Collection,” an alternative for coin collectors not interested in the U.S. Mint’s 50 State Quarters® Program.

Since his inauguration, President Obama hasn’t disappointed those who share his vision for Israel.

One month after “44″ took office, U.S. State Department officials participated in the United Nations World Conference Against Racism, an event which had a decidedly anti-Israel tone.

Two months after he took office, NEWSWEEK threw in its support of President Obama’s vision by erasing Israel from a world map they published.

In an American Thinker opinion piece three months after “O” was sworn in, Cliff Thier expressed grave concern about the future of Israel and worries that President Obama will use U.S. Air Force assets to prevent Israeli forces from taking out Iran’s nuclear weapons capability.  No doubt, that concern remains intact today.

Four months after the inauguration, Israel National News reported that the United States was working with both Egypt and Russia to rid Israel of its nuclear weapons, as part of a comprehensive plan to neutralize Iran’s nuclear power.

Of course, I could list dozens — if not hundreds — more examples of the Obama Administration’s anti-Israel stance.  Instead, I’ll simply fast forward to the Foreign Policy piece mentioned in the first paragraph above.  In it, writer Colum Lynch shares this disturbing news:

The U.S. informed Arab governments Tuesday that it will support a U.N. Security Council statement reaffirming that the 15-nation body “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity,” a move aimed at avoiding the prospect of having to veto a stronger Palestinian resolution calling the settlements illegal.

That, my friends, is akin to U.S. abandonment of the Jewish State at a time during which tensions are high in the Middle East.  This stance must change.  2012 can’t come soon enough.

FYI: If you enjoy this blog and want to keep reading stories like the one above, show your support by using the “Support Bob” tool at right. Thanks in advance for your support!