SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : How Quickly Can Obama Totally Destroy the US? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: chartseer who wrote (11173)6/22/2014 7:13:57 PM
From: joseffy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16547
 
He is proceeding at a record pace.



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)6/28/2014 11:42:41 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
What Muslims Do

This is a very graphic video and if you have a soft stomach, I urge you not to watch it. Very rough, but it makes the point that the claim that Islam is a religion of peace is pure propaganda. The truth is that it is a religion of peace for those who are Muslims. If you are not, you have two choices: convert or die. That's their position right from the Koran.

If you don't believe that, I can give you a place to buy the most accurate translation of that book from the ancient text's language. It is by a fellow named N.J. Dawood. He is an Iraqi linguist and is considered the foremost authority on the language of the Koran. There are a great many great thoughts in the Koran, not unlike those in the Bible or Torah or any other religious book. But it is the tactics for dealing with non-believers that is at issue.

This video is not of something terribly unusual in Islamic countries; where the religion takes over the government these things happen regularly. “Moderate” Muslims will deny this ever happens. But then they deny the holocaust as well. Go figure. Just remember that Islam is a religion that holds one sixth of the worlds population. And don't forget that they have tried to conquer the world several times in history. More than Germany or Russia. Read some history after you view this shocking video.


THIS IS VERY GRAPHIC. DON'T WATCH IF YOU HAVE A WEAK STOMACH. THESE PEOPLES' ONLY CRIME IS THAT OF BEING A CHRISTIAN.

WHAT MUSLIMS DO

If this video clip, which is for adults only, doesn't drive home what is happening in the 'real world' outside of our borders for the present time, and the risks we face in preserving our 'western' values and way of life then nothing else will.

This short video clip shows how cheap life is to these Islamist fundamentalist peoples. And, what they are doing to anyone who does not embrace the Muslim faith; or their Islamic sect's particular teachings, etc.


THE VICTIMS ARE allegedly CHRISTIANS IN THIS CLIP; THEIR RELIGIOUS FAITH WAS THEIR ONLY CRIME!

asgraphic.org


After you have viewed the video consider this:

A common thread seems to emerge when we look at it in this perspective. This is all factually (and historically) correct - and verifiable.

If you even go back further,
- In 732 AD the Muslim Army which was moving on Paris was defeated and turned back at Tours, France, by Charles Martell.

- In 1571 AD the Muslim Army/Navy was defeated by the Italians and Austrians as they tried to cross the Mediterranean to attack Southern Europe in the Battle of Lapanto.

- In 1683 AD the Turkish Muslim Army, attacking Eastern Europe, was finally defeated in the Battle of Vienna by German and Polish Christian Armies.

This crap has been going on for 1,400 years and half of these damn politicians don't even know it !!! If these battles had not been won, we might be speaking Arabic and Christianity could be non-existent; Judaism certainly would be.

And let us not forget that Hitler was an admirer of Islam and that the Mufti of Jerusalem was Hitler's guest in Berlin and raised Bosnian Muslim SS Divisions: the 13th and 21st Waffen SS Divisions who killed Jews, Russians, Gypsies, and any other "sub-humans."

A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine that America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves. Pause a moment, reflect back. These events are actual events from history. They really happened!!!

Do you remember?

1. In 1968, Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male.
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim males.
3. In 1972 a Pan Am 747 was hijacked and eventually diverted to Cairo where a fuse was lit on final approach, it was blown up shortly after landing by Muslim males
4. In 1973 a Pan Am 707 was destroyed in Rome with 33 people killed, when it was attacked with grenades by Muslim males.
5. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim males.
6. During the 1980s a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim males.
7. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim males.
8. In 1985, the Cruise Ship Achilles Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim males.
9. In 1985, TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim males.
10. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim males.
11. In 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim males.
12. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim males.
13. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim males.
14. In 2002, the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim males.
15. In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded by - you guessed it - a Muslim male.
16. In 2013, Boston Marathon Bombing 4 Innocent people including a child killed, 264 injured by Muslim males.

No, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?

So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. So, ask yourself, "Just how stupid are we???"

Absolutely No Profiling!

They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old, Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males alone, lest they be guilty of profiling. Ask yourself "Just how stupid are we?"

Have the American people completely lost their Minds, or just their Power of Reason???

Let's send this to as many people as we can so that the Gloria Aldreds and other stupid attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, feel ashamed of themselves -- if they have any such sense.

In God We Trust


credit RMP



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)6/29/2014 10:43:26 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
.......bureaucracy run amuk...................this entire agency needs to be disbanded and started over with narrow limited scope and power..........otherwise......leave it entirely to the states...........if states like California wants all business to leave ....so be it.








1. Obama EPA's Rules Are 38 Times Longer Than the Bible

Since President Barack Obama took office in January 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency "has proposed and promulgated numerous regulations" regarding pollution control, a report from the Congressional Research Service observes.

How numerous?

The EPA has issued 2,827 new final regulations, taking up 24,915 pages in the Federal Register, totaling an estimated 24,915,000 words, according to an analysis by CNS News.

The Gutenberg Bible, published in two volumes in 1455, contains 1,282 pages and 646,128 words.

So the new EPA regulations issued by the Obama administration contain about 19 times as many pages and 38 times as many words as the Bible.

The regulations cover greenhouse gases, air quality, emissions, hazardous substances, and other topics.

CNS pointed out that in addition to final rules, the Federal Register publishes proposed rules, notices, interim rules, corrections, and drafts of final rules. The analysis considers only final rules from the EPA, which include the likes of "Revised Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guidelines."

Critics of the EPA "have reacted strongly" to the deluge of new regulations, the Congressional Research Service noted. "Many, both within Congress and outside of it, have accused the agency of reaching beyond the authority given it by Congress and ignoring or underestimating the costs and economic impacts of proposed and promulgated rules."

The CRS report acknowledged that "environmental groups and other supporters of the agency disagree that EPA has overreached.”

"In several cases, environmental advocates would like the regulatory actions to be stronger."

But the report also noted that The Wall Street Journal has charged that the EPA "has turned a regulatory fire hose on U.S. business."

And the U.S. Chamber of Commerce called the EPA's actions "a series of one-sided, politically charged regulations that are intended to take the place of legislation that cannot achieve a consensus in Congress."

credit Watsonyouth



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)10/25/2014 11:49:58 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Ex-CBS reporter’s book reveals how liberal media protects Obama
By Kyle Smith October 25, 2014

nypost.com

Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman. Important people have told her so.

When the longtime CBS reporter asked for details about reinforcements sent to the Benghazi compound during the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack, White House national security spokesman Tommy Vietor replied, “I give up, Sharyl . . . I’ll work with more reasonable folks that follow up, I guess.”

Modal Trigger

Another White House flack, Eric Schultz, didn’t like being pressed for answers about the Fast and Furious scandal in which American agents directed guns into the arms of Mexican drug lords. “Goddammit, Sharyl!” he screamed at her. “The Washington Post is reasonable, the LA Times is reasonable, The New York Times is reasonable. You’re the only one who’s not reasonable!”

Two of her former bosses, CBS Evening News executive producers Jim Murphy and Rick Kaplan, called her a “pit bull.”

That was when Sharyl was being nice.

Now that she’s no longer on the CBS payroll, this pit bull is off the leash and tearing flesh off the behinds of senior media and government officials. In her new memoir/exposé “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington” (Harper), Attkisson unloads on her colleagues in big-time TV news for their cowardice and cheerleading for the Obama administration while unmasking the corruption, misdirection and outright lying of today’s Washington political machine.

‘Not until the stock split’ Calling herself “politically agnostic,” Attkisson, a five-time Emmy winner, says she simply follows the story, and the money, wherever it leads her.

In nearly 20 years at CBS News, she has done many stories attacking Republicans and corporate America, and she points out that TV news, being reluctant to offend its advertisers, has become more and more skittish about, for instance, stories questioning pharmaceutical companies or car manufacturers.

Working on a piece that raised questions about the American Red Cross disaster response, she says a boss told her, “We must do nothing to upset our corporate partners . . . until the stock splits.” (Parent company Viacom and CBS split in 2006).


Often [network executives] dream up stories beforehand and turn the reporters into “casting agents”
Meanwhile, she notes, “CBS This Morning” is airing blatant advertorials such as a three-minute segment pushing TGI Fridays’ all-you-can-eat appetizer promotion or four minutes plugging a Doritos taco shell sold at Taco Bell.

Reporters on the ground aren’t necessarily ideological, Attkisson says, but the major network news decisions get made by a handful of New York execs who read the same papers and think the same thoughts.

Often they dream up stories beforehand and turn the reporters into “casting agents,” told “we need to find someone who will say . . .” that a given policy is good or bad. “We’re asked to create a reality that fits their New York image of what they believe,” she writes.

Reporting on the many green-energy firms such as Solyndra that went belly-up after burning through hundreds of millions in Washington handouts, Attkisson ran into increasing difficulty getting her stories on the air. A colleague told her about the following exchange: “[The stories] are pretty significant,” said a news exec. “Maybe we should be airing some of them on the ‘Evening News?’?” Replied the program’s chief Pat Shevlin, “What’s the matter, don’t you support green energy?”

Says Attkisson: That’s like saying you’re anti-medicine if you point out pharmaceutical company fraud.

A piece she did about how subsidies ended up at a Korean green-energy firm — your tax dollars sent to Korea! — at first had her bosses excited but then was kept off the air and buried on the CBS News Web site. Producer Laura Strickler told her Shevlin “hated the whole thing.”

‘Let’s not pile on’ Attkisson mischievously cites what she calls the “Substitution Game”: She likes to imagine how a story about today’s administration would have been handled if it made Republicans look bad.

In green energy, for instance: “Imagine a parallel scenario in which President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney personally appeared at groundbreakings for, and used billions of tax dollars to support, multiple giant corporate ventures whose investors were sometimes major campaign bundlers, only to have one (or two, or three) go bankrupt . . . when they knew in advance the companies’ credit ratings were junk.”

Attkisson continued her dogged reporting through the launch of ObamaCare: She’s the reporter who brought the public’s attention to the absurdly small number — six — who managed to sign up for it on day one.

“Many in the media,” she writes, “are wrestling with their own souls: They know that ObamaCare is in serious trouble, but they’re conflicted about reporting that. Some worry that the news coverage will hurt a cause that they personally believe in. They’re all too eager to dismiss damaging documentary evidence while embracing, sometimes unquestioningly, the Obama administration’s ever-evolving and unproven explanations.”

One of her bosses had a rule that conservative analysts must always be labeled conservatives, but liberal analysts were simply “analysts.” “And if a conservative analyst’s opinion really rubbed the supervisor the wrong way,” says Attkisson, “she might rewrite the script to label him a ‘right-wing’ analyst.”

In mid-October 2012, with the presidential election coming up, Attkisson says CBS suddenly lost interest in airing her reporting on the Benghazi attacks. “The light switch turns off,” she writes. “Most of my Benghazi stories from that point on would be reported not on television, but on the Web.”

Two expressions that became especially popular with CBS News brass, she says, were “incremental” and “piling on.” These are code for “excuses for stories they really don’t want, even as we observe that developments on stories they like are aired in the tiniest of increments.”

Hey, kids, we found two more Americans who say they like their ObamaCare! Let’s do a lengthy segment.

Friends in high places
Modal TriggerDavid RhodesPhoto: WireImage

When the White House didn’t like her reporting, it would make clear where the real power lay. A flack would send a blistering e-mail to her boss, David Rhodes, CBS News’ president — and Rhodes’s brother Ben, a top national security advisor to President Obama.

The administration, with the full cooperation of the media, has successfully turned “Benghazi” into a word associated with nutters, like “Roswell” or “grassy knoll,” but Attkisson notes that “the truth is that most of the damaging information came from Obama administration insiders. From government documents. From sources who were outraged by their own government’s behavior and what they viewed as a coverup.”

Similarly, though the major media can’t mention the Fast and Furious scandal without a world-weary eyeroll, Attkisson points out that the story led to the resignation of a US attorney and the head of the ATF and led President Obama to invoke for the first time “executive privilege” to stanch the flow of damaging information.


Modal TriggerBarack Obama works on a speech with Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications.Photo: Pete Souza/White House

Attkisson, who received an Emmy and the Edward R. Murrow award for her trailblazing work on the story, says she made top CBS brass “incensed” when she appeared on Laura Ingraham’s radio show and mentioned that Obama administration officials called her up to literally scream at her while she was working the story.

One angry CBS exec called to tell Attkisson that Ingraham is “extremely, extremely far right” and that Attkisson shouldn’t appear on her show anymore. Attkisson was puzzled, noting that CBS reporters aren’t barred from appearing on lefty MSNBC shows.

She was turning up leads tying the Fast and Furious scandal (which involved so many guns that ATF officials initially worried that a firearm used in the Tucson shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords might have been one of them) to an ever-expanding network of cases when she got an e-mail from Katie Couric asking if it was OK for Couric to interview Eric Holder, whom Couric knew socially, about the scandal. Sure, replied Attkisson.

No interview with Holder aired but “after that weekend e-mail exchange, nothing is the same at work,” Attkisson writes. “The Evening News” began killing her stories on Fast and Furious, with one producer telling Attkisson, “You’ve reported everything. There’s really nothing left to say.”

Readers are left to wonder whether Holder told Couric to stand down on the story.

No investigations
Modal TriggerNew “CBS Evening News” host Scott PelleyPhoto: AP

Attkisson left CBS News in frustration earlier this year. In the book she cites the complete loss of interest in investigative stories at “CBS Evening News” under new host Scott Pelley and new executive producer Shevlin.

She notes that the program, which under previous hosts Dan Rather, Katie Couric and Bob Schieffer largely gave her free rein, became so hostile to real reporting that investigative journalist Armen Keteyian and his producer Keith Summa asked for their unit to be taken off the program’s budget (so they could pitch stories to other CBS News programs), then Summa left the network entirely.

When Attkisson had an exclusive, on-camera interview lined up with Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the YouTube filmmaker Hillary Clinton blamed for the Benghazi attacks, CBS News president Rhodes nixed the idea: “That’s kind of old news, isn’t it?” he said.


Attkisson is a born whistleblower, but CBS lost interest in the noise she was making.
Sensing the political waters had become too treacherous, Attkisson did what she thought was an easy sell on a school-lunch fraud story that “CBS This Morning” “enthusiastically accepted,” she says, and was racing to get on air, when suddenly “the light switch went off . . . we couldn’t figure out what they saw as a political angle to this story.”

The story had nothing to do with Michelle Obama, but Attkisson figures that the first lady’s association with school lunches, and/or her friendship with “CBS This Morning” host Gayle King, might have had something to do with execs now telling her the story “wasn’t interesting to their audience, after all.”

A story on waste at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, planned for the CBS Weekend News, was watered down and turned into a “bland non-story” before airing: An exec she doesn’t identify who was Shevlin’s “number two,” she says, “reacted as if the story had disparaged his best friend. As if his best friend were Mr. Federal Government. ‘Well, this is all the states’ fault!’ . . . he sputtered.”

Meanwhile, she says, though no one confronted her directly, a “whisper campaign” began; “If I offered a story on pretty much any legitimate controversy involving government, instead of being considered a good journalistic watchdog, I was anti-Obama.”

Yet it was Attkisson who broke the story that the Bush administration had once run a gun-walking program similar to Fast and Furious, called Wide Receiver. She did dozens of tough-minded stories on Bush’s FDA, the TARP program and contractors such as Halliburton. She once inspired a seven-minute segment on “The Rachel Maddow Show” with her reporting on the suspicious charity of a Republican congressman, Steve Buyer.

Attkisson is a born whistleblower, but CBS lost interest in the noise she was making.

‘They’ll sacrifice you’ Ignoring Attkisson proved damaging to CBS in other ways. When a senior producer she doesn’t identify came to her in 2004 bubbling about documents that supposedly showed then-President George W. Bush shirked his duties during the Vietnam War, she took one look at the documents and said, “They looked like they were typed by my daughter on a computer yesterday.”

Asked to do a followup story on the documents, she flatly refused, citing an ethics clause in her contract. “And if you make me, I’ll have to call my lawyer,” she said. “Nobody ever said another word” to her about reporting on the documents, which turned out to be unverifiable and probably fake.

After Pelley and Shevlin aired a report that wrongly tarnished reports by Attkisson (and Jonathan Karl of ABC News) on how the administration scrubbed its talking points of references to terrorism after Benghazi, and did so without mentioning that the author of some of the talking points, Ben Rhodes, was the brother of the president of CBS News, she says a colleague told her, “[CBS] is selling you down the river. They’ll gladly sacrifice your reputation to save their own. If you don’t stand up for yourself, nobody will.”

After reading the book, you won’t question whether CBS News or Attkisson is more trustworthy.



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)11/22/2014 12:25:18 PM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Shoot1st

  Respond to of 16547
 
Top 10 Lies from Obama's Nullification Speech
..........................................................................
By: Daniel Horowitz
Conservative Review
.


“The one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.”

– Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69



Lie #1: Every President has Taken Executive Action on Immigration: No other president has ever issued an amnesty of anywhere near this scope, created it out of thin air, or built it upon a prior executive action instead of a statute. And in the case of President Eisenhower, his executive action was to deport 80,000 illegal immigrants.

Lie #2: Illegal Immigrant Crossings are Down: Actually, this is the third straight year that border crossings have gone up, not to mention the entirely new wave from Central America.

Lie #3: It does not grant citizenship or the right to stay here permanently: Under the royal edict, the work permits can be renewed every three years, and most likely, they will be renewed at the same 99.5% acceptance rate as DACA applications. And once they get Social Security cards, they are going nowhere. So yes, this is permanent. And yes, they will be able to get green cards, which puts them on an automatic path to citizenship: “we are reducing the time that families are separated while obtaining their green cards. Undocumented immigrants who are immediate relatives of lawful permanent residents or sons or daughters of US citizens can apply to get a waiver if a visa is available.”

Lie #4: Only 5 Million: Make no mistake about it. Obama’s illegal amnesty will not just apply to 5 million individuals. It will apply by default to all 12-20 million illegals in the country as well as the millions more who will now come here to enjoy the permanent cessation of borders and sovereignty. Given the numerous options for people to become eligible for amnesty, ICE and CPB will be restricted from enforcing the law against anyone because each individual has to be afforded the opportunity to present themselves and apply for status. There is no way those who were here for less than 5 years will be deported and there’s no way the new people rushing the border and overstaying their visas will be repatriated.

Lie #5: Deport Felons:
Obama claims he is going to focus on deporting felons. Yet, he has done the opposite. 36,000 convicted criminal aliens were released last year, 80,000 criminal aliens encountered by ICE weren’t even placed into deportation proceedings, 167,000 criminal aliens who were ordered deported are still at large, 341,000 criminal aliens released by ICE without deportation orders are known to be free and at large in the US. Again, this is cessation of deportations for everyone. They are leaving no illegal behind.

Lie #6: Don’t deport families: Obama is playing the family card. It works like this: people are encouraged to come here illegally, Obama grants them amnesty, then their relatives all get to come, even though they would otherwise be ineligible under public charge laws. Yet, at the same time, because the bureaucracy will be flooded with applications of illegals, and those are the applications that will be prioritized, those families who came here legally will have to wait longer to be united. There is no longer an incentive to enter the legal immigration process.

Lie #7: They have to pay taxes to stay:
Aside from the absurd notion that they would turn someone away for not paying taxes, almost every one of these illegal immigrants lacks a high enough income to incur a net positive tax liability. Hence, by paying taxes, he actually means they will collect refundable tax credits!

Lie #8: Background Checks: Just the thought of a criminal background check of people coming from the third world on a lawless program is a joke. But the reality is that Obama has already done this with DACA, and 99.5% of applications were approved, including those of criminals.

more here



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)12/3/2014 12:47:15 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Conservatives Get Snubbed On Committees
.............................................................................
conservativereview.com ^ | 12/1/14 | Gaston Mooney


Squeezing out conservatives on committee assignments is a tried and true strategy of the establishment. Boehner has threatened and successfully kicked conservative “troublemakers” off of committees for standing up for their principles.

In the Senate McConnell even had to recruit Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) for the Senate Finance Committee to jam then Senator DeMint.

Even recently, conservative Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) was pushed out of the chair at House Oversight because he wanted to aggressively go after the Obama administration.

"Given the fact that Senator Sessions has done a superb job serving as the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, why bench your all-star for a walk on?"

It is happening again. Conservative Review was the first conservative media outlet to detail how Senator Enzi was challenging Senator Sessions for the Budget gavel and then laid out how McConnell has the ability to stop or sway the contest.

Seniority plays a large role in Senators’ committee assignments and is traditionally used by the establishment as the reason for withholding key positions from conservatives. However, in the case with Senator Sessions (R-AL) he is the more senior (and more conservative) member.

Senators Enzi and Sessions were both elected in 1997, but because Alabama is a bigger state than Wyoming, Sessions is a notch above Enzi on the seniority ladder. However, for committee assignment purposes tiebreakers on seniority are done by lottery, literally luck of the draw.

Given the fact that Senator Sessions has done a superb job serving as the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, why bench your all-star for a walk on?

"What was Senator Enzi doing on the infamous night of executive amnesty? He was on the Senate floor calling on Congress to pass one of the latest Big Government schemes: an Internet sales tax.”

(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...



To: chartseer who wrote (11173)12/3/2014 12:48:59 PM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 16547
 
Disney, The company of Atheists, considers 'God' is profanity - Why did Disney block God?
............................................................................
foxnews ^ | 12/1/14 | t starnes


Update: After the following column appeared on FoxNews.com, Disney issued the following statement on Tuesday, December 2:

“Disney employs word filtering technology to prevent profanity from appearing on our websites. Unfortunately, because so many people attempt to abuse the system and use the word “God” in conjunction with profanity, in an abundance of caution our system is forced to catch and prevent any use of the word on our websites. The company would have been happy to explain our filtering technology to the inquiring family had they contacted us.”

It turns out you can give thanks for a lot of different folks on the Disney Channel website – but you can’t thank God.

I received a Facebook message on Sunday from Julie Anderson, of Angier, North Carolina, a town located about 30 miles from Raleigh. Julie was writing to tell me about her daughter, Lilly.

Lilly celebrated her 10th birthday on Sunday. After church and a delicious lunch at the Golden Corral, the Andersons headed home – and Lilly made a beeline for the computer.

I do wonder what sort of message the Disney Channel is sending when they tell children that mentioning God in public is bad manners.

Now, Lilly loves the Disney Channel – and as she was browsing the channel’s website she noticed a question. The Disney Channel wanted to know what she was thankful for. So Lilly typed in her answer. “God, my family, my church and my friends,” the 10-year-old wrote.

Lilly pressed the return key and waited for her answer to appear on the website. But her response did not appear. Instead, a message written in red popped up on the screen.

“Please be nice!” the message read.

Lilly tried again and again with no luck – so she told her parents.

“It was Lilly’s idea alone to include God in her post,” Julie told me. “As a matter of fact she was in another room from me and she came and got me when it wouldn’t allow her to post.”

Julie retyped the message and the same red-lettered warning appeared.

“We together figured out that the word God was the problem,” Julie said.

Sure enough, when they removed the word “God” from the post – the Disney Channel approved Lilly’s message. And then – Julie contacted me.

So, I gave it a try, too. I tried posting what I was thankful for on the Disney Channel website.

And just like Lilly and Julie, Disney prevented me from posting any message that included the word “God.”

I reached out to Disney for an explanation. Their people tell me that God was not intentionally blocked from the channel's website however at this point, they aren't quite sure why it happened but they assured me they had a team working on it.

Julie is not very happy, though.

“I’m not at all anti-Disney but to shame a ten-year-old, to tell her to ‘please be nice’ for thanking god and sharing her faith with others is what is upsetting to me as a mother,” she said.

Disney certainly seems to be implying that thanking God is not nice. Well, neither is blocking the Almighty from a website.

Julie said her daughter is a very loving and accepting child who was raised to understand that not everyone believes in God.

“We’ve always told her that inevitably there would come a day when she would be discriminated against for her faith but we never thought Disney would be the source,” she said.

I do wonder what sort of message the Disney Channel is sending when they tell children that mentioning God in public is bad manners.

“I want my daughter, and all children of faith, to know that it is OK to share God and Jesus with their peers,” Julie told me. “I want her to know that she doesn’t have to be silent about her faith. I want her to be strong and soldier on.”

Well said, ma’am. Well said.

It sounds to me like the folks over at the Disney Channel have gone looney tunes.