Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for November, 2012

The Fall of the Right


Once again the Left is promoting the same trap that has devastated the United States and conservatives. I am absolutely stunned that any conservative would fall for it again, but appears the Republicans are on the way down. The Left will have more ammunition to hurl at the Right, continue to march toward bankruptcy, so the Left can claim Marshall law, throw out the Constitution and install a Marxist/Collectivism/Socialist government.

What am I referring too; The deal the Left is proposing again to raise taxes now with the promise to lower spending later on next year.

History: During Reagan’s second term the Left came to him with the same proposal. It went public with the proposal. He went ahead and signed the tax increase, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT HAD THE PROMISE FROM THE LEFT TO REDUCE SPENDING IN THE NEXT CONGRESSIONAL SESSION. REALITY? THE SPENDING CUTS NEVER HAPPENED AND TO THIS DAY THE LEFT USES THAT AS A WEAPON AGAINST THE RIGHT BE SAYING, “Well remember, President Reagan raised taxes.

The DELIBERATE deception was used again with he next Republican President, George H.W. Bush. After his pledge to not raise taxes (“Read my lips, no new taxes“), in a deliberate move to discredit the President and to overcome his immense popularity over the Gulf War success, the Left presented the same proposal; Sign this bill to raise taxes and we will give you a bill in the next Congressional session to cut spending. President H.W. Bush fell for it and it cost him reelection and gave us President Bill Clinton.

Now they are going for it again. Why aren’t the Republicans screaming this over every microphone shoved in their face? Why aren’t they exposing the deliberate, calculated deception of the Left? Why are they being so nice about this? I am disgusted with them all. None of them are truly interested in representing the WORKING people of the United States.

Our recourse? Nothing really other than to continue to speak out and write letters. We do have the mid terms coming up and if the Republicans cave in again, we can kiss the Congress goodbye and then the Left will have unfettered power to rush us into a Constitutional Convention where what we have enjoyed for over 200 years will go away, and that without firing a single shot.

How about you? Will you keep up the fight? Are the freedoms granted by the Constitution worth fighting for? Well?

Make the Democrats own the Obama economy


Economy & Budget

Make the Democrats own the Obama economy

Make the Democrats own the Obama economy

By: Ann Coulter
11/28/2012 06:51 PM

RESIZE: AAA

Print472

One bright spot of Barack Obama’s re-election was knowing that unemployment rates were about to soar for the precise groups that voted for him — young people, unskilled workers and single women with degrees in gender studies. But now the Democrats are sullying my silver lining by forcing Republicans to block an utterly pointless tax-raising scheme in order to blame the coming economic Armageddon on them.

Democrats are proposing to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for everyone … except “the rich.” (Why do only tax cuts come with an expiration date? Why not tax increases? Why not Obamacare? How about New York City’s “temporary” rent control measures intended for veterans returning from World War II?)

Raising taxes only on the top 2 percent of income earners will do nothing to reduce the deficit. There’s not enough money there — even assuming, contrary to all known history, that the top 2 percent won’t find ways to reduce their taxable income or that the imaginary increased government revenue would be applied to deficit reduction, anyway.

Apart from Obamacare, it’s difficult to think of a more effective method of destroying jobs than raising taxes on “the rich.” This isn’t a wealth tax on useless gigolos like John Kerry — it’s an income tax on people who are currently engaged in some profitable enterprise. Their business profits, which could have been used to hire more employees, will instead be used to pay the government.

But Republicans are over a barrel. Unless Republicans and Democrats reach an agreement, the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year. By pushing to extend the tax cuts for everyone except “the rich,” Democrats get to look like champions of middle class tax cuts and Republicans can be portrayed as caring only about the rich.

And when the economy tanks, the Non-Fox Media will blame Republicans.

The economy will tank because, as you will recall, Obama is still president. Government rules, regulations, restrictions, forms and inspections are about to drown the productive sector. Obamacare is descending on job creators like a fly swatter on a gnat. Obama has already managed to produce the only “recovery” that is worse than the preceding recession since the Great Depression. And he says, “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

The coming economic collapse is written in the stars, but if Republicans “obstruct” the Democrats by blocking tax hikes on top income earners, they’re going to take 100 percent of the blame for the Obama economy.

You think not? The Non-Fox Media managed to persuade a majority of voters that the last four years of jobless misery was George W. Bush’s fault, having nothing whatsoever to do with Obama.

The media have also managed to brand Republicans as the party of the rich, even as eight of the 10 richest counties voted for Obama. And that doesn’t include pockets of vast wealth in cities — Nob Hill in San Francisco, the North Shore of Chicago, the Upper East Side of Manhattan and the Back Bay of Boston — whose residents invariably vote like welfare recipients. Seven of the 10 richest senators are Democrats. The very richest is the useless gigolo.

Republicans have a PR problem, not an economic theory problem. That doesn’t mean they should cave on everything, but seeming to fight for “tax cuts for the rich” is a little close to the bone, no matter how tremendously counterproductive such taxes are.

Yes, conservatives can try harder to get the truth out, but as UCLA political science professor Tim Groseclose has shown, media bias already costs Republicans about 8 to 10 points in elections. Try arguing a year from now that Republicans’ refusal to agree to tax hikes on the top 2 percent of income earners — resulting in an expiration of all the Bush tax cuts — had nothing to do with the inevitable economic disaster.

Republicans have got to make Obama own the economy.

They should spend from now until the end of the congressional calendar reading aloud from Thomas Sowell, Richard Epstein, John Lott and Milton Friedman and explaining why Obama’s high tax, massive regulation agenda spells doom for the nation.

Then some Republicans can say: We think this is a bad idea, but Obama won the election and the media are poised to blame us for whatever happens next, so let’s give his plan a whirl and see how the country likes it.

Republicans need to get absolute, 100 percent intellectual clarity on who bears responsibility for the next big recession. It is more important to win back the Senate in two years than it is to save the Democrats from their own idiotic tax plan. Unless Republicans give them an out, Democrats won’t be able to hide from what they’ve done.

Even Democrats might back away from that deal

Racing PAST the End of the Cliff


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Painting Depicts Obama as Crucified Christ


FOX News & Commentary

Painting Depicts Obama as Crucified Christ

Posted in Top Stories | 0 comments

Nov 26, 2012

By Todd Starnes

A painting that features President Obama posed as Jesus Christ crucified on  is on display at a community college art gallery in Boston.

The painting by Michael D’Antuono is part of a larger exhibit called “Artists on the Stump – the Road to the White House 2012.” It’s on display at the Bunker Hill Community College Art Gallery until Dec. 15th.

FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!

The painting is called “Truth” – and shows the president with his arms outstretched. A crown of thorns rests on his head.

It was originally supposed to debut nearly four years ago at New York City’s Union Square. But that event was cancelled due to public outrage.

“I always regretted cancelling my exhibit in New York because I feel my First Amendment rights should override someone’s hurt feelings,” D’Antuono told Fox News. “We should celebrate the fact that we live in a country where we are given the freedom to express ourselves.”

A spokesperson for the art gallery told Fox News there hasn’t been any criticism of the painting.

D’Antuono said the public exhibition “has afforded me the ability to right a wrong.”

He dismissed critics who called the display blasphemous.

“The crucifixion of the president was meant metaphorically,” he told Fox News. “My intent was not to compare him to Jesus.”

D’Antuono blamed the controversy on conservative media “trying to promote the idea that liberals believe the president to literally be our savior.”

In the aftermath of his aborted first attempt – the artist said he received more than 4,000 emails containing messages that were “anything but Christian-like.”

“But I accepted that it is their right to express themselves and hope that they now see it in their hearts to afford me the same right,” he said.

Todd is the author of Dispatches From Bitter America – endorsed by Sarah Palin, Mark Levin and Sean Hannity. Click here to get your copy.

Jamie Foxx: ‘Our Lord and Savior Barack Obama’


ConservativeVideos.com

WWW.CONSERVATIVEVIDEOS.COM

Jamie Foxx: ‘Our Lord and Savior Barack Obama’

Jamie Foxx: ‘Our Lord and Savior Barack Obama’ Jamie Foxx: ‘Our Lord and Savior Barack Obama’

History of United States of America Political Leaders


 

Church Failure Led to Obama Re-Election


by

Church Failure Led to Obama Re-Election

In colonial America, virtually all news was disseminated from the pulpits of churches throughout the colonies.  Besides being a place to worship God, churches were the only real town meeting center and it was the role of the pastor to keep his flock informed.

When it came time to rebel against the British, the announcements were made from the pulpits.  The call to arms was not only considered to be a civic duty but a religious one as well.  Many a pastor also picked up his rifle and went to fight for America’s freedom.

As America grew, the role of the church continued to be that of religion and news.  Pastors felt it was their duty as servants of God to inform their congregations about important events and about the various candidates running for office.  In those days, pastors were free to endorse political parties and candidates and keep their people well informed.

Now that most churches are tax exempt, they feel that they are not allowed to say anything political whatsoever. The bullying effect of the federal government has all but silenced the church’s involvement in political affairs. However, pastors and church leaders can still keep their people informed of political issues, political ideologies, and to encourage them to vote based on their faith in biblical principles.

Three hundred years ago virtually all political news was disseminated from the pulpit. Today, almost no political news comes from the pulpit. In the 2004 presidential election 27% of voters who attend church regularly said that they received information on political parties or candidates from their place of worship. This past November only 13% said they received information on political parties or candidates from their place of worship.

The rise of liberal progressivism virtually mirrors the declining political role of churches and church leaders.  It just may be that the Church’s silence on political issues and candidates is what gave the election of Barack Obama. Had pastors been doing their job, as in days of old, America may have had whole different look to it today.

Rather than blame the GOP loss on Mitt Romney’s campaign, GOP moderatism, modes of campaign advertising, or any other thing that people have been blaming the GOP loss on, I believe it is a direct result of the Church’s failure to inform their people properly. And until the church realizes that it has a civic as well as religious duty we may never get America back. So when you look for someone or something to blame, look at your own church and pastor and ask yourself if they did their job in informing you of which political issues and candidates were closer to biblical principles. If the answer is no, now you know why Barack Obama won a second term.

Michael Moore’s Crazy Letter To Obama


This letter from Michael Moore shows what we’re up against. You can be sure liberals will be relentless in the next four years with requests like this. Here is his “Open Letter to President Obama”:

By Michael Moore

Dear President Obama:

Good luck on your journeys overseas this week, and congratulations on decisively winning your second term as our president! The first time you won four years ago, most of us couldn’t contain our joy and found ourselves literally in tears over your victory.

This time, it was more like breathing a huge sigh of relief. But, like the smooth guy you are, you scored the highest percentage of the vote of any Democrat since Lyndon Johnson, and you racked up the most votes for a Democratic president in the history of the United States (the only one to receive more votes than you was … you, in ’08!). You are the first Democrat to get more than 50% of the vote twice in a row since Franklin D. Roosevelt.

This was truly another historic election and I would like to take a few minutes of your time to respectfully ask that your second term not resemble your first term.

It’s not that you didn’t get anything done. You got A LOT done. But there are some very huge issues that have been left unresolved and, dammit, we need you to get some fight in you. Wall Street and the uber-rich have been conducting a bloody class war for over 30 years and it’s about time they were stopped.

I know it is not in your nature to be aggressive or confrontational. But, please, Barack – DO NOT listen to the pundits who are telling you to make the “grand compromise” or move to the “center” (FYI – you’re already there). Your fellow citizens have spoken and we have rejected the crazed ideology of this Republican Party and we insist that you forcefully proceed in bringing about profound change that will improve the lives of the 99%. We’re done hoping. We want real change. And, if we can’t get it in the second term of a great and good man like you, then really – what’s the use? Why are we even bothering? Yes, we’re that discouraged and disenchanted.

At your first post-election press conference last Wednesday you were on fire. The way you went all “Taxi Driver” on McCain and company (“You talkin’ to me?”) was so brilliant and breathtaking I had to play it back a dozen times just to maintain the contact high. Jesus, that look – for a second I thought laser beams would be shooting out of your eyes! MORE OF THAT!! PLEASE!!

In the weeks after your first election you celebrated by hiring the Goldman Sachs boys and Wall Street darlings to run our economy. Talk about a buzzkill that I never fully recovered from. Please – not this time. This time take a stand for all the rest of us – and if you do, tens of millions of us will not only have your back, we will swoop down on Congress in a force so large they won’t know what hit them (that’s right, McConnell – you’re on the retirement list we’ve put together for 2014).

BUT – first you have to do the job we elected you to do. You have to take your massive 126-electoral vote margin and just go for it.

Here are my suggestions:

1. DRIVE THE RICH RIGHT OFF THEIR FISCAL CLIFF. The “fiscal cliff” is a ruse, an invention by the Right and the rich, to try and keep their huge tax breaks. On December 31, let ALL the tax cuts expire. Then, on January 1, put forth a bill that restores the tax cuts for 98% of the public. I dare the Republicans to vote against that! They can’t and they won’t. As for the spending cuts, the 2011 agreement states that, for every domestic program dollar the Republicans want to cut, a Pentagon dollar must also be cut. See, you are a genius! No way will the Right vote against the masters of war. And if by some chance they do, you can immediately put forth legislation to restore all the programs we, the majority, approve of. And for God’s sake, man – declare Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid untouchable. They’re not bankrupt or anywhere near it. If the rich paid the same percentage of Social Security tax on their entire income – the same exact rate everyone else pays – then there will suddenly be enough money in Social Security to last til at least the year 2080!

2. END ALL THE WARS NOW. Do not continue the war in Afghanistan (a thoroughly losing proposition if ever there was one) for two full more years! Why should one single more person have to die FOR NO REASON? Stop it. You know it’s wrong. Bin Laden’s dead, al Qaeda is decimated and the Afghans have to work out their own problems. Also, end the drone strikes and other covert military activities you are conducting in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Colombia and God knows where else. You think history is going to remember the United States as a great democracy? No, they’re going to think of us as a nation that became addicted to war. They’ll call us warlords. They’ll say that in the 21st century America was so in need of oil that we’d kill anyone to get it. You know that’s where this is going. This has to stop. Now.

3. END THE DRUG WAR. It is not only an abysmal failure, it has returned us to the days of slavery. We have locked up millions of African-Americans and Latinos and now fund a private prison-industrial complex that makes billions for a few lucky rich people. There are other ways to deal with the drugs that do cause harm – ways built around a sense of decency and compassion. We look like a bunch of sadistic racists. Stop it.

4. DECLARE A MORATORIUM ON HOME FORECLOSURES AND EVICTIONS. Millions of people are facing homelessness because of a crooked system enacted by the major banks and Wall Street firms. Put a pause on this and take 12 months to work out a different way (like, restructuring families’ mortgages to reflect the true worth of their homes).

5. GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. You already know this one. The public is sick of it. Now’s the time to act.

6. EXPAND OBAMACARE. Your health care law doesn’t cover everyone. It is a cash cow for the insurance industry. Push for a single-payer system – Medicare for All – and include dentistry and mental health. This is the single biggest thing you could do to reduce the country’s deficit.

7. RESTORE GLASS-STEAGALL. You must put back all the rigid controls on Wall Street that Reagan, Clinton and the Bushes removed – or else we face the possibility of another, much worse, crash. If they break the law, prosecute them the way you currently go after whistleblowers and medical marijuana dispensaries.

8. REDUCE STUDENT LOAN DEBT. No 22-year-old should have to enter the real world already in a virtual debtors’ prison. This is cruel and no other democracy does this like we do. You were right to eliminate the banks as the profit-gouging lenders, but now you have to bring us back to the days when you and I were of college age and a good education cost us little or next to nothing. A few less wars would go a long to way to being able to afford this.

9. FREE BRADLEY MANNING. End the persecution and prosecution of an American hero. Bush and Cheney lied to a nation to convince us to go to war. Manning allegedly hacked the war criminals’ files and then shared them with the American public (and the world) so that we could learn the truth about Iraq and Afghanistan. Our history is full of such people who “break the law” for the greater good of humanity. Army Specialist Bradley Manning deserves a medal, not prison.

10. ASK US TO DO SOMETHING. One thing is clear: none of the above is going to happen if you don’t immediately mobilize the 63,500,000 who voted for you (and the other 40 million who are for you but didn’t vote). You can’t go this alone. You need an army of everyday Americans who will fight alongside you to make this a more just and peaceful nation. In your 2008 campaign, you were a pioneer in using social media to win the election. Over 15 million of us gave you our cell numbers or email addresses so you could send us texts and emails telling us what needed to be done to win the election. Then, as soon as you won, it was as if you hit the delete button. We never heard from you again. (Until this past year when you kept texting us to send you $25. Inspiring.) Whoever your internet and social media people were should have been given their own office in the West Wing – and we should have heard from you. Constantly. Need a bill passed? Text us and we will mobilize! The Republicans are filibustering? We can stop them! They won’t approve your choice for Secretary of State? We’ll see about that! You say you were a community organizer. Please – start acting like one.

The next four years can be one of those presidential terms that changed the course of America. I’m sure you will want to be judged on how you stood up for us, restored the middle class, ended the s***ting on the poor and made us a friend to the rest of the world instead of a threat. You can do this. We can do it with you. All that stands in the way is your understandable desire to sing “Kumbaya” with the Republicans. Don’t waste your breath. Their professed love of America is negated by their profound hatred of you. Don’t waste a minute on them. Fix the sad mess we’re in. Go back and read this month’s election results. We’re with you.

P.S. President Obama – my cell number to text me at is 810-522-8398 and my email is MMFlint@MichaelMoore.com. I await my first assignment!

Obama Held First Meeting After Election With Socialists & Communists


by

Obama Held First Meeting After Election With Socialists & Communists

KOShow20111213-getty-progressive-caucus-restore-american-dream-act-620Will anyone question just why Barack Obama met with Richard Trumka and the Progressive Caucus? Why is it that he met with them first rather than meeting with the congressional delegation? We as a nation should ask these questions because behind closed doors many things can be said that have very dangerous impacts upon our national standings. Why did Obama decide to meet with these particular groups? First we must find out just what does Richard Trumka and the Progressive Caucus have to bring into any discussion with the President of the United States.

Richard Trumka, the head of most unions in the United States, was the man called to the White House to meet with President Obama to find out what he and the Progressive caucus think of the upcoming fiscal program created by an ineffective Congress. This man has close ties to socialistic ideology and it dates back to 1994.

In 1994, Trumka was honored at the annual Eugene Debs Award Banquet in Terre Haute, Indiana; the award was named after the man who founded the Socialist Party of America and ran for U.S. President five times on the Socialist Party ticket.

Here is the first indication that this man has close ties to the Socialist Party which indicates a man that does not have the idea of the United States Constitution in mind. If you wish to dig into the history of the Union, you will find close ties and beginnings with a man named Karl Marx, the founder of Marxism. Karl Marx had the idea that big companies were killing the people, forcing them to work for small wages, and making huge profits on the backs of the workers. It was here where the ideology of Marxism was created and it was here where the unions got their start to make sure that the profits of the companies that the people worked for were, in part, given back to the people for their work. It seemed like a good idea, but the flaws were noted even by Karl Marx himself when he realized that the very idea of everyone getting paid the same did nothing for creating a respectable work environment. However, this still shows up with Richard Trumka and his ideology that is embedded with the Marxist/Socialist ideology.

“In 1995 Trumka was one-third of a troika elected to head the AFL-CIO. His running mates for election were Sweeney, head of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and Linda Chavez-Thompson, who had been Executive Vice President of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Calling themselves the “New Voice,” this threesome pledged to replace the policies of the moderate AFL-CIO leaders who had preceded them. Trumka would go on to serve as the AFL-CIO’s secretary-treasurer from 1995 to September 2009, second in command to its president, John Sweeney.”

As seen here, the “New Voice” has fallen into the realm of the Socialistic ideology and the changes made by the trio of people now guided the Unions in a way that made them become more of a political tool for Socialism then that of one representing the working people. It has to be noted here that now Sweeny is some sort of advisor in the White House, he gave up his position with the SEIU to become a top advisor for Obama. From these beginnings come the change in direction of the Unions that now seem to be part of high taxes and bigger Government. They have melded into a new organization that works hard to elect those that will help the very unions that place the politicians into office. Now here it begins to be shown why the Unions and the “Progressive Caucus” were the First ones to discuss the ever coming Fiscal Cliff everyone now sees on the evening news. Yet if Obama was so dead set upon working with the Congress, why did he see the Union and “Progressive Caucus” First? This is clearly explained below.

Trumka, Sweeney, and Chavez-Thompson represented a turn away from blue-collar industrial unionism and the AFL-CIO’s traditional emphasis on raising wages and improving working conditions. Rather, they focused on recruiting ever-growing numbers of government workers who would benefit from higher taxes and bigger government, and who therefore old reliably support socialism and America’s pro-big government Democratic Party.

Now the reason for seeing the union boss and the “Progressive Caucus” first becomes crystal clear. They are working to set up a socialist Agenda and Congress is contacted just as a picture taking opportunity. Why would any President of the United States open up talks about the fiscal problems of the United States with these extreme left wing people? Could this mean that Obama has found a way to “control” the masses with the unions and the “Progressive Caucus”?

Now that we know that Richard Trumka is closely associated with the “Progressive Caucus” of Congress, let us now look at the ideology behind the “Progressive Caucus”. We will get back to Richard Trumka and his “weekly” visits to the White House. He has had more visits to the White House than most Congressional members!

Ms. Cheryl K. Chumley wrote an article on the “Progressive Caucus” in January of 2007 and what she wrote explains this group as a very extreme left group and that they are closely associated with the Socialist agenda. Ms. Chumley writes in her article Fringe-Left Democrats Wield New Influence

Summary: The Democrats’ capture of Congress gives unprecedented power to the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC)—the organized left wing of the party. Among its expected 70 members in the 110th Congress, at least seven are slated to chair powerful congressional committees and a dozen or more will head subcommittees. In 2005 the Caucus created a fundraising arm, the American Progressive Caucus Policy Foundation (APCPF), whose capacity to inflict long-term damage on American liberty should not be underestimated.

Here she gives a very brief idea of what this group really has as an agenda, and it does Not help the very Constitution of the United States! They are pushing ideas that will destroy our Constitution and the rights many men and women died for protecting through the years. Ms. Chumley goes on to say:

The congresswomen from the 9th and 6th districts of California put it best. “Progressives have forged new and powerful ways to join and influence the debate here in Washington,” said Barbara Lee. Lynn Woolsey observed, “We are in the midst of a progressive awakening in this country and I have never been more confident and optimistic about the future of progressive politics.” Representatives Lee and Woolsey are the co-chairmen of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Lee represents the cities of Berkeley and Oakland, while Woolsey represents Marin and Sonoma counties.”

This group now has some 75 known members that are proud to say they belong to the Socialist Democrat Party of the United States! This should be very disturbing in our nation mainly to the fact that our nation was never formed to accept Socialism; it fought wars to stop Socialism! Now we have members of Congress proudly stating they are members to a group that is dead set to destroy our very Constitution and replace it with the socialist ideology! The “Progressive Caucus” is nothing more than a shadow word for the Socialists that wish to ruin our nation and take it over under the umbrella of Socialism for their own benefit. One must wonder why would a nation based upon freedom and God given rights, which cannot and should not be derived from the government, allow this type of ideology be in the forefront of our political system? Have we failed the founders of the United States? We are a nation of many different people that came here in search of freedom to choose and live with the hope that we can achieve the many things we wish for our family including freedom of choice.

This Progressive Caucus, which should be called the Socialist Caucus, since their ideas fall directly in line with the Socialist form of thinking. It cannot be stated enough that the very word, “progressive” is a word that has been used to ensure that people do not get scared when they hear that rather than hearing the terrible word, socialist! It cannot be stated enough that the “progressive” is a term that is clearly representing the socialists of this nation and they do not harbor the idea that people do have the right to choose what they want. This is shown exclusively by the way the progressives have designed and forced the Obamacare law down the throats of the people, even when over 70 percent of the nation opposed it. The biggest leader in the House of Representatives at the time, Nancy Pelosi was in fact a member of the Socialist Party but got out in order to show she was not a member, but her ideas are still aligned in the socialist ideology.

We must now show just when this Progressive Caucus was developed and just who was the first individual to exclaim they were a member of this Anti-United States group! The individual that began the party that has a defined purpose of moving the United States towards a socialist state is none other than Bernie Sanders. Again, Chumley writes:

“The Congressional Progressive Caucus was founded in 1991 by self-described socialist Bernie Sanders, the mayor of Burlington, Vermont, who in 1990 was elected to the House of Representatives as an Independent. Sanders served eight terms in the House; in 2004 he won 69% of the vote against Democratic and Republican challengers. Last November, just before his election to the U.S. Senate, again as an Independent, the 65-year-old New York transplant was asked by a Washington Post reporter: “Are you now or have you ever been a socialist?”

Replied Sanders, “Yeah. I wouldn’t deny it. Not for one second. I’m a democratic socialist.”

Here it becomes clear that the Progressive Caucus is nothing more than a group of representatives in our Congress pushing their ideology of socialism upon the people of the United States! Many people do not know this nor do they really care. Most do not even know this type of “change” is being pushed, much less that our President himself is more aligned with the socialist group than the freedom loving people. Obama’s background is full of this kind of indoctrination from the well-known Communist, Frank Marshal Davis, who trained him for over 7 years in the ideology of Communism while he was growing up in Hawaii. When Obama went to Occidental College in California, he was an avid member of a group that stood before a huge picture of Karl Marx while trying to figure out just how to destroy the United States so they could “change” it into a more Socialist/Marxist nation! Read the entire article by Ms. Cheryl K Chumley and you will begin to wonder just how did “Freedom” loving United States citizens allow this group to develop and obtain high positions within the floors of power.

Now getting back to Richard Trumka and his background and why it was that Obama had these groups come to the White House first to discuss the upcoming fiscal cliff. One must question why Obama did not see fit to call members of Congress first since they are the ones whom vote on this type of problem? Did he call them last because he wanted to see what the socialists wanted? Did he call them first so he could find out how to set up a plan to go over the fiscal cliff? This was Obama’s idea itself that he wanted to cause the United States to fail and now he has the opportunity to do what he envisioned while he was at Occidental College.

Richard Trumka has so many friends in the defined Socialist ideology that it becomes scary when the names of his associates or friends are known. Discover The Networks is a site where people have dug into the backgrounds of a great number of people and linked them together with Socialists, Communist, Marxists, and other anti-freedom type of groups. They are noted as left wing and most are extreme left wing characters, since most on this site have backgrounds that are the most Anti-United States groups that one could find. Had these groups been around during the McCarthy era, they would have been brought up on charges of Anti-American activities and maybe impeached or kicked from their office. Yet now they almost have free reign over many of the committees that govern our nation.

An example of some of the people that are associated with Richard Trumka are as follows;

“In 1996, Trumka was one of approximately 130
people

who played a role in helping Robert
Borosage

and
Roger
Hickey
found the Campaign for America’s Future. Among the other notables
were: Mary
Frances Berry
,
Julian
Bond
,
Heather
Booth
,
John
Cavanagh
,
Richard Cloward, Jeff
Cohen
,
Ken
Cook
,
Peter
Dreier
,
Barbara
Ehrenreich
,
Betty
Friedan
,
Todd
Gitlin
,
Heidi
Hartmann
,
Tom
Hayden
,
Denis
Hayes
,
Roger
Hickey
,
Patricia
Ireland
,
Jesse
Jackson
,
Joseph
Lowery
,
Steve
Max
,
Gerald McEntee, Harold
Meyerson
,
Frances
Fox Piven
,
Robert
Reich
,
Mark
Ritchie
,
Arlie
Schardt
,
Susan
Shaer
,
Andrew
Stern
, and
John
Sweeney
.”

Some of these names should bring a very cold feeling into your body since they do not like the United States and they wish the United States would fail and rise from the failure as either a Socialist state or a Communist State: Names like Julian Bond, an important name among the people of the NAACP, Richard Cloward, a man that has stated several times that the United States is an evil place and needs to be “changed” to a more socialistic state, and Jesse Jackson, a name affiliated with racism. It should be mentioned here that Jesse Jackson, Jr. is a proud member of the Socialist Democrat Party as are some 75 other congressmen and women. Andrew Stern, the former President of the SEIU union until Obama asked him to join him in the White House, is another named socialist. We can never forget Van Jones who left the White House due to his very strong association and proud proclamation of being a full-fledged Communist. This man was a best friend of Obama.

Now, below is what has happened to allow the Communist Party drive into the unions without any problems. This action shown below has transformed the unions of the United States into a virtual Socialist/Communist factory of their ideology and allowed them to sit with and discuss their socialist and communist ideology with the President of the United States! This by itself should make many true United States citizens become very angry and object to any union since now they have been invaded by the very groups that our nation has fought against since they became powers of the world.

“Trumka, Sweeney and Chavez-Thompson also rescinded a founding AFL-CIO rule that banned Communist Party members and loyalists from leadership positions within the Federation and its unions. Instead, the “New Voice” triumvirate welcomed Communist Party delegates to positions of power in the Federation. And the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) declared itself “in complete accord” with the troika’s new AFL-CIO program. “The radical shift in both leadership and policy is a very positive, even historic change,” wrote CPUSA National Chairman Gus Hall in 1996 about the Trumka/Sweeney/Chavez-Thompson takeover.”

This is but a small part of what Obama has allowed to become policy and action in his administration. Should our nation become a socialist nation? Should our nation allow the socialists to maintain their positions in Congress where laws are made? Should our nation give up our freedomf for the sake of the socialist that wants to “change” our nation? Does the “forward” in Obama’s campaign mean “forward into the Socialist/Communist ideology?” Will Obama allow the United Nations to become the ruler of our nation when it comes to the question of gun ownership? These are but a few of the questions that the people of this nation must ask before this group goes even further. Ask these questions. Go after those who are known members of groups that oppose our Constitution. The article that Ms. Cheryl K. Chumley wrote has the list of socialist Congress members. Look at the list and if your congressman or Congresswoman is on this list, do all you can to get them removed from office in the next election, because as they grow, they become a greater threat to the Constitution and our nation!

Demography is destiny


HumanEvents

Today is: November 15, 2012 | 2:23 PM

Demography is destiny

 

By: Ann Coulter
11/14/2012 06:05 PM

Liberals brag about having won the hearts and minds of America, as if, through logic and argument, they’ve persuaded people to accept their bankrupt European socialist ideas.

Democrats haven’t changed anyone’s mind. They changed the people.

More white people voted for Mitt Romney this year than voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980. Barack Obama lost white voters by 20 points — the widest margin since 1984.

But in 1980, whites were 88 percent of the electorate. In 2012, they were 72 percent of the electorate. Not only that, but the non-white electorate is far more Democratic than it was in 1980.

If the same country that voted in 1980 had voted in 2012, Romney would have won a bigger landslide than Reagan did.

Most Americans don’t realize that, decades ago, the Democrats instituted a long-term plan to gradually turn the United States into a Third World nation. The country would become poorer and less free, but Democrats would have an unbeatable majority!

Under Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 immigration act, our immigration policy changed from one that replicated the existing ethnic population to one that strictly favored unskilled immigrants from the Third World. Since 1968, 85 percent of legal immigrants have come from what is euphemistically called “developing countries.”

We can’t admit computer scientists from Spain fleeing their failing socialist nation because we have to make room for a recent Senegalese immigrant’s brother-in-law with no skills but great needs.

Jonas Salk’s parents would be unable to immigrate to America today. But the good news is: Rich liberals and soulless businessmen have no trouble finding cheap busboys, gardeners and nannies! (Whom they underpay, requiring taxpayers to make up the difference.)

If yuppies had to compete with well-educated European immigrants, they might be a little less enlightened on the immigration question. As it is, only unskilled workers, mostly blacks and Latinos, are harmed by our immigration policies.

Because recent immigrants have no skills, they arrive in dire need of government assistance. Their desperation has been an enormous boon to the Democratic Party.Thirty-nine percent of native households receive some form of government assistance. By contrast, 57 percent of immigrant households — legal immigrants — get government assistance. We can’t do anything about the native population, but why on Earth is America taking in immigrants who require taxpayer support?

If you come to America and immediately go on welfare, by definition, you are not a desirable immigrant. Except as a voter for the Democratic Party.

In the last half-century, California’s non-Hispanic white population has been cut in half, from 80 percent to 40 percent. Meanwhile, the Hispanic population has exploded from less than 10 percent to nearly 40 percent — mostly poor Mexicans.

And with that change, California went from being the state that produced anti-tax initiatives, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan to a state that is absolutely untouchable by Republicans (see Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina) and just enacted the highest tax rate in any state.

The same has happened, or is happening, to other states, such as Colorado, New Mexico, Illinois and New York. If Texas ever flips, Republicans will never win another presidential election. The two major political parties will be the Nancy Pelosi Democratic Party and the Chuck Schumer Democratic Party.

Republicans’ low-tax, small-government philosophy will eventually become popular with today’s struggling Hispanics, but not before America is ruined with socialist policies promoted by populist hucksters so strangely beguiling to poor people the world over.

It’s not that poor immigrants think differently about most issues from the rest of us. Try asking a recent immigrant:

– How do you feel about abortion?
It’s taking a life.

– What should we do about criminals?
Lock them up and throw away the key.

– Do you support raising taxes?
No, the government takes too much already.

– How do you feel about overpaid, well-pensioned government workers with no-show jobs?
It ticks me me off.

– Do you support gay marriage?
Absolutely not.

– How are you going to vote?
Democratic.

Most recent immigrants oppose abortion, gay marriage and big government. The problem is that poor, uneducated people — the Democratic base — are easily demagogued into voting tribally.

A white person can vote for a Republican or a Democrat without anyone saying to him, “HOW CAN YOU VOTE AGAINST YOUR RACE?” But that is exactly how poor Hispanics and blacks are pressured into voting Democratic.

Noticeably, the No. 1 issue Obama had in his favor this year was not his policies. It was that a majority of voters agreed with the statement: Obama “cares for people like me.” That’s how Hugo Chavez got elected.

Running Hispanics won’t help Republicans. Ask Gary Franks, Lynn Swann or Michael Steele if being black won them the black vote.

Promoting amnesty won’t help — ask John McCain, who won about the same percentage of the Hispanic vote as Romney did.

Or ask California’s Hispanics, only 4 percent of whom oppose Republican immigration policies. Their main beef with the GOP is that they think Republicans are “the rich.”

The only hope is to run another appealing Republican candidate in four years — when we’re not up against an incumbent president — and return our immigration policy to one that helps America and not just the Welfare Party.

Islamic Child Abuse gets you Probation in Arizona


posted on November 14, 2012  by

Islamic Child Abuse gets you Probation in Arizona

Apparently torturing your offspring is no longer a violent offense in Phoenix, Arizona. Last week an Arizona Superior Court Judge awarded (and I mean awarded) probation to a Muslim family who admitted to kidnapping, beating and trying to kill their nineteen-year-old daughter. Islamists rejoice! “Honor violence” is now officially sanctioned as part of the American culture.

According to Maricopa County Prosecutors, in February 2012, Aiya Altameemi, a nineteen-year-old Muslim female was beaten, tied to her bed, burned with a hot spoon, stabbed in the neck and locked in her room by her family for her unwillingness to accept an arranged marriage to a 38-year-old Muslim man and speaking to a male classmate in public.

As is reported, Miss Altameemi injuries required medical attention and she was taken to a local hospital by her mother for treatment.  The hospital staff became suspicious of the injuries (especially the 1 ½ inch stab wound to Aiya’s neck) and began asking the nineteen-year-old questions about her wounds. During her questioning Aiya explained that her family became angry with her for talking to a boy at school. Apparently in Aiya’s family, it wasn’t appropriate for a young Muslim virgin to be seen talking with a High School boys. Later the victim identified her mother, father and sister (as her attackers) and police were notified and arrests were made.

Last week, during a sentencing hearing Aiya’s father admitted to attempting to kill his daughter by cutting her neck. Mohammed Altameemi, 46, received two years’ probation for disorderly conduct. Altameeni’s wife, Yursah Farhan, 51, was sentenced to two years’ probation for unlawful imprisonment of her daughter and the victim’s sister Tabarack Altameemi , 18, pled guilty to assault and received two years’ probation (she broke a glass over her sister head during the attack).

Some reports suggest that the victim has recanted her story. Heck, if I was Aiya, I might have a little victim’s remorse too if I knew that I had to eventually go home to a family that might slit my throat while I slept. Wouldn’t you? Advocates for the Altameemi Family are now blaming overzealous prosecutors and law enforcement for an innocent domestic situation being blown out of proportion.

Where are Family and Protective Services when you need them? Where are the loud and proud feminist voices of MSNBC? Why aren’t sexual rights advocates and the National Organization for Woman protesting outside this Arizona Courthouse?

I have written a number of articles suggesting that “Sharia law” is creeping into every area of our society. Last week’s ruling by a left wing Democrat, Judge Joseph Kreamer (a 2007 Janet Napolitano appointee) further emphasizes the growing threat of Islamic (Sharia) law and its influence in U.S. Courts. Readers may want to ask themselves how U.S. criminal courts (and liberal media) would have treated this crime if the victim were a homosexual son of a Christian family. Or better yet, what would the charges have been if the victim was the young boy Aiya was seen innocently talking too after school?

This is not Kabul or Tehran; this is the United States of America. First Amendment rights have never provided for the freedom to brutalize another citizen over perceived religious transgressions. Constitutional freedoms definitely don’t provide you with the religious freedom to attempt to murder someone who offends you. Or do they? Personally, I’m wondering if Aiya’s family may have been guilty of a federal hate crime or civil rights violation and walked away with probation. What say you Mr. Holder?

Perhaps we should consider using a new litmus test before we decide to appoint (or for that matter elect) our judiciary. Along with a respect for the unborn, it might be prudent to ask a prospective Judge their views on Islamic law and its relevance to Judeo Christian legal philosophy in American courts; after all we may see more than one Sharia sensitive judge appointed to our Supreme Court in the next four years.

Public education, banking, civil and criminal legal precedent, and U.S. governing agendas are being shaped by agents of Islam every day in America. If you think liberalism is destructive, wait until you find yourself in Aiya’s predicament. Last week in Arizona a frightening message was sent loud and clear by a liberal Superior Court Judge named Joseph Kreamer. Holding a knife to your child’s neck and beating her into submission is no longer attempted murder and felony assault if you follow the teachings of Mohammed and Islam. Heck it’s not even domestic violence.

Here it comes. The anti-gun agenda is beginning.


The Full Article Here: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush’s administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States . The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth?

What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control.

We are being led like a lamb to the slaughter.

The New Barbarians and the “Politics of Stupid”


The New Barbarians and the “Politics of Stupid”

By / 12 November 2012 / 49 Comments

“Typical white people,” according to the president, are afraid of blacks, because we are racists, of course, like his grandmother.  We “cling to guns and Bibles,” because we are “frustrated,” all Bush’s fault you see.  According to the president, his crowd should “get up in our faces,” and vote “revenge” so as to “spread the wealth.”  If you started a business and worked hard to be a success and create jobs, “You didn’t build that,” he says. “Somebody else built that.”

Our people get murdered in Benghazi, and it’s some Islamophobe’s fault.  A jihadist murders soldiers at Ft. Hood, and it’s not terrorism perpetrated by a Palestinian fanatic, rather, it is “workplace violence.”  Hurricane Sandy?  Blame global warming which is the fault of oil companies, and, Bush owned one so it’s his fault.  Oh, and Henry Ford, too, but he didn’t build that…

Obama says we suffer from Romnesia, infected by the murderer who stole from the poor and outsourced to get rich because he don’t care, and he don’t pay no taxes, the new Massa on the plantation, lookin’ to “put y’all in chains,” sayeth Joe the Blow.

Forward! (?)

Thanks to the president’s friends in the Black Panther Party, we get to find out what it’s like “to have a black man rule ya,” for another four years.

Washington, and most Presidents, had the idea their job was to serve the people.  Obama has the idea he has a right to “rule” us.  This is what he calls the “change” that has “come to America.”

You see, it is not about forming a more perfect union, it’s about payback, revenge, conquest, and war.  This is not about a president serving the people.  This is about a president declaring war on half the country, a president encouraging the new barbarians who blindly stumble along playing the politics of stupid, demanding: “Lay on the goodies or we’ll burn the mother***ker down!”  Social ‘justice’  they call it, at Harvard, and Columbia and Occidental.

Obama encourages this behavior; then tells us he is the great unifier.  Is anybody paying attention?  Polish up that Peace Prize baby!

The barbarians are not restricted to one color or creed.  They run the full range, from rich young rulers to misguided white boys, to radicalized Hispanics, and back again to whomever, all with an axe to grind on a spinning stone.  These “special” interests advocate their own narrow agendas to the destruction of the general welfare.  Obama and Co. have simply found a way to organize the community of rodents along Pied Piper Way.

They are kind to both stupidity and irrationality.

By any objective non-partisan measure Obama has been the most accomplished failure in history, especially when it comes to the economy.  Not only has he failed to do anything useful, everything he has done has made matters worse.  By some measures this is worse than the Great Depression.

The party line that tells us the economy is rotten thanks to Reagan/Bush?  A complete lie.

We are bankrupt and our economy is in shambles thanks to the very policies Obama and his allies have instituted for decades: centralized power, government intrusion, confiscatory taxation, stifling regulation, loss of competitiveness, dwindling manufacturing, restricted resource extraction, expensive energy, expensive labor, government spending and waste, entitlements and the unproductive mentality they foster, creeping communism, and the idea that government can and should steal from one citizen and give to another, thereby dominating everyone.

It doesn’t work.  It’s immoral.  It’s counterproductive and divisive. It’s irrational. It is stupid.

And what do the geniuses in this government recommend?  More stupid, as the barbarians applaud, and chant:

“Elect Obama or we’ll assassinate Romney!”

“Cut me a check or I’ll burn the house down!”

One reader was dead on commenting: “They’re addicted.  You cannot reason with an addict.  Addicts are hooked, and they will always demand more, blaming everyone else, never taking any responsibility.” (We need Divine intervention!)

Not only are they addicted to government goodies and the nanny state, they are addicted to demonizing others, playing the blame game, and the race card.  Verbal violence, their recreation, will inevitably turn to physical violence.

And President Pusher Man is happy to stick another needle full of stupid in the barbarians’ arms.  Raise the debt ceiling. Tax the rich. Print some more money for us to spend. Destroy the currency.  We don’t need no stinkin’ budget. To hell with the next  generation.  Michelle is due for another $4M vacation, so shut up.

Meanwhile we all get swallowed in the financial maelstrom, as Ahmadinejad and Putin stand by, pointing and giggling.

Image: Roman soldier submitting a Barbarian; courtesy of National Museum_of Rome; Ludovisi Collection; Photographer: Marie-Lan Nguyen (September 2009);Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Generic license.

Teachers Flock to Northwestern University for ‘Marxist Conference’


Teachers Flock to Northwestern University for ‘Marxist Conference’

This Saturday, the Midwest Marxist Conference was held at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism. The event was teeming with teachers who spoke about the new found bond between the radical socialists and their Teachers Union. The all-day event, which collected money to support Chicago Socialists and featured a communist bookstore, provided students on-campus along with the radical left community to plan the next phase in their activism.

Becca Barnes, a Chicago Teachers Union teacher and organizer with Chicago Socialists, proclaimed at the beginning of the conference that “the struggle here in the United States has entered a new phase. Nowhere have we pointed the way forward more clearly than here in Chicago with the teachers union strike.”

After the opening plenary, breakout sessions addressed more specific topics like the history of the Democratic party, education, and case studies in Russia. In these sessions, speakers continued to celebrate the use of education as a mechanism to insert Marxism into public institutions. In one session, the idea of targeting their message to students, even over “the working class,” was debated.

One teacher, who spoke in an afternoon session, described his tactics to overcome the problem of teachers’ unwillingness to take part in the strike, while Chicago Teachers Union Vice President Jesse Sharkey underscored Barnes’s earlier point when he spoke about the “struggle” of Chicago teachers and the need for additional support from other revolutionary movements. Through a renewed focus on the “strike weapon,” Socialist organizers remarked that they felt their movement had rediscovered its vigor—and the path forward ought to include “mass strikes,” they said.

Eric Ruder of the ISO spoke about the Socialists’ partnership with the Chicago Teachers Union during “The Meaning of Marxism” breakout session:

There are big moments in the sort of chain of historical development that we have to be able to intervene…  And in order to that, you need an organization. That’s really the sort of thing you saw in the Chicago teachers strike. In a situation where there was a huge struggle, our organization threw itself in the middle of that and had a demonstrable impact on it.

Because we’ve been rooted, experienced activists who worked together in a collaborative way to try to build up that influence over the long haul… I think when you get in revolutionary moment where your ability to quickly assess what’s happening and make strategic and tactical shifts on the fly, that is essential.

Working class revolutions have never succeeded without the existence of a revolutionary party that’s capable of making those sorts of decisions and providing that kind of leadership. And that’s what we’re asking you, the members of this group, to join and help in that process. We need you to be able to have enough size and influence to matter, but you need us to be able to be part of a force that could intervene in that sort of chain in historical development.

Other speakers addressed perceived weaknesses in the Socialists’ messaging, including the need to shore up the high pay of union members and racism inherent at the AFL-CIO, which, according to participants, has been an historic problem. Others acknowledged that the general public “seems to fear us” and brainstormed ways to counter these fears.

The event itself, though advertised online as via social media, retained a sense of extreme secrecy. Attendees were told not to record video or audio unless they had express permission from organizers. Rather than traditional discussions in the breakout sessions, we were instructed to “raise your hand in a fist” in order to be first approved and then added by a moderator to a queue to speak. This orthodoxy resulted in extremely disjointed Q&A sessions where no one comment followed another and most questions went unanswered.

After attending the all-day event, which began at 11 a.m., I was singled out as “not in solidarity” by International Socialist Organization (ISO) organizer Dennis Kosuth around 4 p.m, and removed from the premises for “not being a Communist.”

Despite registering for the event, the group of socialists that removed me, including pre-school teacher Kirstin Roberts, social worker Alison McKenna, printer Eric Kerl, Socialist organizer Shaun Harkin, and others. They surrounded me at the edge of a staircase, proceeded to push their way closer to me to force me down the stairs, and hurled insults at me as I attempted to find a way to leave safely. Even after leaving the conference, the group continued to bully me, with one larger man saying under his breath that “you know what would happen at Teamsters meeting” inferring a more violent solution to my presence:

While it may or may not come as a surprise that a radical leftist conference was held on the grounds of an esteemed U.S. university, it is ironic that when a journalist shows up—at this “school of journalism,” no less—and they are summarily booted from just being at the conference. The mere presence of a journalist whom they could not trust to be “in solidarity” with communism was enough to send organizers into a frenzy to remove me immediately.

What were the ISO and Northwestern University so intent on hiding from journalists and the general public? Was it that Haymarket Books, a revolutionary bookstore, was allowed to open up shop on campus and sell revolutionary reading materials? Was it the number of teachers in the house, and t-shirts for sale, supporting the teachers union strike? Or that the ISO was able to charge a fee, fundraise and recruit new members to their revolutionary cause on the Northwestern grounds, using an entire lecture hall and several classrooms?

Perhaps it was all of the above, in addition to the fact that, together with leaders of the Chicago Teachers Union, Occupy Chicago and several other labor unions, these groups discussed how to achieve fundamental societal change. Change that included “historical development,” and the strategies required to overthrow the American system and replace it with a direct dictatorship of the working class over the means of production. Not the best message to send to Northwestern alums and prospective students.

The International Socialists Organizations recruitment program isn’t over after Saturday’s conference at Northwestern University. Next week, the University of Wisconsin Madison will open its doors to the group to indoctrinate another crop of students ripe for the message of revolution.

Don’t blame Romney


Ann Coulter Letter

Don’t blame Romney

Don't blame Romney

By: Ann Coulter
11/7/2012 06:12 PM

We spent billions of dollars and billions of words on an election to switch from President Obama, a Democratic Senate and a Republican House to President Obama, a Democratic Senate and a Republican House.Every election predictor was wrong, except one: Incumbents usually win.Republicans have taken out a sitting president only once in the last century, and that was in 1980 when Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter. Sadly, Reagan’s record remains secure.

The Democrats ran up against the incumbency problem in 2004. The landslide election for Democrats in 2006 suggests that Americans were not thrilled with Republicans around the middle of the last decade. And yet in 2004, President George W. Bush beat John Kerry more handily than Obama edged past Romney this week.

Democratic candidate John Kerry won 8 million more votes than Al Gore did in 2000, and he still couldn’t win. All the Democrats’ money, media, Bush Derangement Syndrome and even a demoralized conservative base couldn’t trump the power of incumbency in 2004.

After supporting Mitt Romney in 2008, some of you may recall, I ran off with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie midway through Obama’s first term for precisely that reason: The near-impossibility of beating an incumbent president. Christie seemed like the kind of once-in-a-lifetime star who could pull a Reagan upset against an incumbent president.

But I was wrong. Romney was the perfect candidate, and he was the president this country needed right now. It’s less disheartening that a president who wrecked American health care, quadrupled gas prices, added $6 trillion to the national debt and gave us an 8 percent unemployment rate can squeak out re-election than that America will never have Romney as our president.

Indeed, Romney is one of the best presidential candidates the Republicans have ever fielded. Blaming the candidate may be fun, but it’s delusional and won’t help us avoid making the same mistakes in the future.

Part of the reason incumbents win is that they aren’t forced to spend half the election year being battered in primaries. Obama started running anti-Romney ads in Ohio before the Republican primaries were even over. Noticeably, Romney’s negatives were sky-high in Ohio, but not in demographically similar states like Pennsylvania.

One of Obama’s first acts in office was to bail out the auto industry to help him in states he’d need in the upper Midwest, such as Michigan and Ohio. He visited Ohio nearly 50 times, while not visiting lots of other states even once. Obama was working Ohio from the moment he became president. Meanwhile, Romney didn’t wrap up the primaries until the end of May.

A little less time beating up our candidate in the primaries so that he could have started campaigning earlier would have helped. In this regard, please remember that no mere House member is ever going to be elected president. Most of them harm their political careers by running. (Where’s Thaddeus McCotter these days? Michele Bachmann is fighting for her political life.

Please stop running. You’re distracting us from settling on an actual nominee.

No one can be blamed for the hurricane that took the news off the election, abruptly halting Romney’s momentum, but Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock can be blamed on two very specific people: Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock.

The last two weeks of the campaign were consumed with discussions of women’s “reproductive rights,” not because of anything Romney did, but because these two idiots decided to come out against abortion in the case of rape and incest.

After all the hard work intelligent pro-lifers have done in changing the public’s mind about a subject the public would rather not think about at all, these purist grandstanders came along and announced insane positions with no practical purpose whatsoever, other than showing off.

While pro-lifers in the trenches have been pushing the abortion positions where 90 percent of the country agrees with us — such as bans on partial birth abortion, and parental and spousal notification laws — Akin and Mourdock decided to leap straight to the other end of the spectrum and argue for abortion positions that less than 1 percent of the nation agrees with.

In order to be pro-life badasses, they gave up two easy-win Republican Senate seats.

No law is ever going to require a woman to bear the child of her rapist. Yes, it’s every bit as much a life as an unborn child that is not the product of rape. But sentient human beings are capable of drawing gradations along a line.

Just because I need iron to live doesn’t mean I have to accept 100,000 milligrams, which will kill me. If we give the guy who passed bad checks a prison furlough, that doesn’t mean we have to give one to Willie Horton. I like a tablespoon of sugar in my coffee, but not a pound.

The overwhelming majority of people — including me — are going to say the law shouldn’t force someone who has been raped to carry the child. On the other hand, abortion should be illegal in most other cases.

Is that so hard for Republicans to say?

Purist conservatives are like idiot hipsters who can’t like a band that’s popular. They believe that a group with any kind of a following can’t be a good band, just as show-off social conservatives consider it a mark of integrity that their candidates — Akin, Mourdock, Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell — take wildly unpopular positions and lose elections.

It was the same thing with purist libertarian Barry Goldwater, who — as you will read in my book, “Mugged: Racial Demagoguery From the Seventies to Obama” — nearly destroyed the Republican Party with his pointless pursuit of libertarian perfection in his vote against the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

I like a band that sells NO albums because it proves they have too much integrity to sell out.
We have a country to save. And just as the laws of elections generally mean the incumbent president wins, they also mean the party out of the White House typically stages a big comeback in midterm elections. BIG. Don’t blow it with purist showoffs next time, Republicans.

One Man’s Amazing Actions to Honor Our Fallen Heroes


One Man’s Amazing Actions to Honor Our Fallen Heroes

True Patriotism: ‘Flag Man’ Goes To Great Lengths to Honor Fallen Soldiers True Patriotism: ‘Flag Man’ Goes To Great Lengths to Honor Fallen Soldiers


SO WHAT NOW? 7 SETS OF QUESTIONS TO ASK AFTER PRESIDENT OBAMA?


 Starting with: “Is the implosion of American more or less likely now?”
By Joel C. Rosenberg

(Washington, D.C., November 7, 2012) — Waking up the day after the 2012 elections, I had many questions on my mind. But none so pressing as this: Is the implosion of America more or less likely now?

I’ll share my thoughts on that in a moment. First things first: Many Americans are stunned by President Obama’s reelection. Most prominent conservative analysts and pundits had definitively predicted Romney would win decisively. Several even predicted a landslide for Romney (most notably Dick Morris and George Will and Michael Barone.) Yet in the end, Mr. Obama won 50.3% of the popular vote and 303 electoral votes, while Mr. Romney won 48.1% of the popular vote and only 206 electoral votes.

Many evangelical Christians and conservative Catholics are stunned and grieving by the fact that the President’s support for abortion on demand, same-sex marriage, massive deficits and national debt, nationalized health care, and large defense cuts have been ratified by the majority of the American people, as has his policies of appeasing the mullahs in Iran, misreading and mishandling the Arab Spring, and creating distance and daylight between the U.S. and Israel. What’s more, same-sex marriages ballot measures were passed in Maryland and Maine; and marijuana-legalization ballot measures were passed in Washington State and Colorado (in defiance of federal laws prohibiting its use).

Why did God say “no” to the prayers of millions of Christians who were asking Him to save the Obama and Biden families spiritually but also remove them from office? It’s going to take time to prayerfully and Scripturally analyze what happened and why. We should be careful not to rush to conclusions. Instead, we need to take time to carefully analyze the facts. The Bible says, “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings to search out a matter.” (Proverbs 25:2) As we process all this, we need to ask a number of probing questions. Among them:

1. Did Mr. Obama win because America is becoming more liberal, more secular, more hostile to Biblical values and those who hold them? That is, are we losing the battle for the soul of America, and should now expect more liberal political leaders to dominate the American scene in the years ahead?

2. Or, did Mr. Romney lose because he was a flawed candidate, who made numerous unforced errors, flip-flopped on numerous policy issues, and campaigned as a conservative when he was in fact a Massachusetts moderate? That is, could a truly principled, experienced, articulate, conservative, orthodox Christian leader be able to persuade a majority of the country to change course?

3. Precisely how did self-professed born-again Christians vote? Did they vote on the basis of personality, or principle? For those who voted for Obama, why?

4. Did many born-again Christians stay home and not vote? If so, what caused them not to turn out for Romney? Was it for personality reasons? Policy reasons?

5. What significance did Mr. Romney’s Mormonism play in the decision of born-again Christians not to vote for him? That is, did many Christians refuse to vote for Romney for religious reasons, and if so, how many?

6. Why were GOP and conservative pundits so wrong, so far off the mark, and what role did wishful thinking rather than sound analysis play in their predictions (especially when the Real Clear Politics average of polls showed Obama pulling ahead of Romney in the last few days)?

7. Considering all the data, is the implosion of America more or less likely today, and will the Church in America wake up and repent and call the nation back to Christ before it’s too late?

We are at a very vulnerable moment. I can’t say that the implosion of America is imminent. But how much longer will God be patient before He decides to judge us for 54 million abortions, a celebration of homosexuality, rampant heterosexual immorality, marital affairs, separations, divorce, the implosion of whole families, rampant pornography, unprecedented murder and violent crime rates, massive deficits, unfathomable debt, and a weak, increasingly apostate Church?

Just as we are living on borrowed credit, so we are living on borrowed time.

A few final thoughts for now…

[To read the full analysis (this has been heavily excerpted) — and/or to read an excerpt from IMPLOSION; or the new e-book, ISRAEL AT WAR; or to find links to the latest news and analysis of events and trends in the U.S., Israel, North Africa, Russia, and the Middle East — please go to: http://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/.]

Aftermath


I am very perplexed with the results of our national election yesterday. I’m having a hard time understanding how a man;

  • With no experience leading anything, running anything, producing anything;
  • Spent his entire youth with a Muslim father and step-father, being indoctrinated in Islam, Marxism, Socialism, Collectivism and “Hate-America” people;
  • Took an economic problem and made it worse
  • Increased our debt faster than any President in history;
  • By-passed Congress over 150 times by issuing Executive Orders, violating our Constitution;
  • Failed to carry out everything he promised, except a Health Care package most of America did not want, completely misrepresented what the Bill has, and what it will cost Americans;
  • Proved his Marxist beliefs by giving his union cronies major control over General Motors;
  • Lied to the American People about “Fast and Furious” and manipulated the Attorney General to keep the Congress from getting answers;
  • Refused to answer any questions about the Benghazi, Libya attack until AFTER the election;
  • Proved repeatedly his refusal to negotiate with anyone, thus reinforcing his “Dictator” persona;
  • Apologized to the World and then deny it
  • Put our military, CIA and FBI Special Service people in harm’s way by telling our enemies who these people are and how they work and what they know;
  • Signed into Law a Hate Speech Bill that prohibits anyone from saying anything negative about homosexuality, transgender and other related life style choices. Now any preacher delivering a message from God’s Word about how God says homosexuality is a sin and those that choose such life styles will NOT be allowed in Heaven will be arrested, thrown in jail and prosecuted under this new Hate Crimes Law;
  • So on, and so on and so on.

I am a student of God’s Word and as I study the Old Testament I can’t help but feel that maybe God is using President  Obama and his minions to punish us for the vast sin America is guilty of, and how unrepentant Americans seem to be.

God created two nations for Himself; Israel and the United States of America. Both have proven to be a disappointment to Him. When I look at history (that has NOT been editorialized and bastardized) I see that America was it’s strongest when America sought God’s face and followed His way. All other times have brought disaster, suffering and loss.

I am very upset with the election outcome. It’s possible that the America the founders established, under God’s mighty hand, will cease to exist over the next four years. When any society has reached the point that a majority of it’s citizens rely on the government for their sustenance, than you have a majority of citizens keeping in office those that will continue to buy their votes with “free stuff”.

I am NOT giving up the fight. I am NOT withdrawing from the Public Square and will continue to exercise my Free Speech rights.

 

Backfire: UN poll watchers dumbfounded that US doesn’t require photo ID to vote


 

 

 

 

Home / Email Videos /

Backfire: UN poll watchers dumbfounded that US doesn’t require photo ID to vote

By / 7 November 2012 /

When the NAACP solicited UN poll watchers to inspect voting sites in the US, they wanted to hear complaints of voter suppression. Instead, UN poll watchers are baffled that the United States doesn’t require a photo ID to vote.
from Foreign Policy:

For the head of Libya’s national election commission, the method by which Americans vote is startling in that it depends so much on trust and the good faith of election officials and voters alike.

“It’s an incredible system,” said Nuri K. Elabbar, who traveled to the United States along with election officials from more than 60 countries to observe today’s presidential elections as part of a program run by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). Your humble Cable guy visited polling places with some of the international officials this morning. Most of them agreed that in their countries, such an open voting system simply would not work.

“It’s very difficult to transfer this system as it is to any other country. This system is built according to trust and this trust needs a lot of procedures and a lot of education for other countries to adopt it,” Elabbar said.

The most often noted difference between American elections among the visitors was that in most U.S. states, voters need no identification. Voters can also vote by mail, sometimes online, and there’s often no way to know if one person has voted several times under different names, unlike in some Arab countries, where voters ink their fingers when casting their ballots.

The international visitors also noted that there’s no police at U.S. polling stations. In foreign countries, police at polling places are viewed as signs of security; in the United States they are sometimes seen as intimidating.

Obama election: ‘It’s time to double-down and fight harder


WND Commentary
America pronounces judgment on itself

 

Published: 17 hours ago

author-image by Joseph FarahEmail | Archive

Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators Syndicate. He is the author or co-author of 13 books, including his latest, “The Tea Party Manifesto,” and his classic, “Taking America Back,” now in its third edition and 14th printing. Farah is the former editor of the legendary Sacramento Union and other major-market dailies.More ↓
For many of us, the unthinkable has happened.

America has decisively turned the corner away from the constitutional principles of limited government and self-government with the re-election of Barack Obama. There may be no way home for us. For those of us who fundamentally reject Obama’s policies, things are going to get very rough for the next four years. We have allowed our fellow Americans to pronounce judgment on the nation.

That’s what Obama represents to me – God’s judgment on a people who have turned away from Him and His ways and from everything for which our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.

The nation is divided like never before – intentionally so. That has been Obama’s game plan from the beginning – to build a constituency of special-interest groups that truly believe their salvation is found in bigger government, more programs, irresponsible spending and unconstitutional policies. This election could very well represent the beginning of the end of the American Dream, American exceptionalism, the American way.

But it’s no time to give up – to throw up our hands in disgust and walk away from politics. Neither is it time to surrender to the radical social agenda Obama has championed to win his victory. It’s time to change tactics. It’s time to double-down and fight harder. It’s time to raise our collective voices of outrage. It’s time to form new alliances. It’s time to form new communities of people who understand just how much Americans have been disenfranchised from our God-given rights and responsibilities.

But, at the end of the day, people generally get the kind of government they deserve. When you turn away from the ways of God Almighty, this is what you should expect, if you are a student of the Bible and history. I’m not going to lie to you. I think things are going to get very tough in America over the next four years. I expect more division, more stratification, maybe even the disintegration of the constitutional republic that was the envy of the world for so long.

It’s time to hunker down. It’s time to prepare for the worst – economically, militarily, socially, culturally. The revolutionaries have won a major political victory. The America haters are running the country for another four years. That is not a pretty prospect.

But it’s not time to retreat. It’s time for those of us who love what America has been for most of its history to gather our wits and begin the long march back. Most of all, it’s time for collective repentance. Only a miracle can save us – and we need to humble ourselves before God and pray hard for one.

Can we find our way home? Is the political system even viable for us anymore? Has our heritage of representative government been permanently robbed from us? Are our cultural institutions – from the press to the schools and universities to the major foundations and even our churches – let us down so badly that there is no hope of restoring the America we once knew and loved?

I don’t know the answers to these questions. But we must not retreat. We must not hide. We must not be intimidated. We must not stop fighting for truth, justice and the American way. Maybe we deserve this punishment for taking our lifestyles for granted. Maybe we deserve this judgment for our own individual and collective sins. Maybe there’s still time to turn things around because we serve a Creator of second and third chances.

One thing is for certain: Our national condition is going to get much worse before it gets better.

Some Final Thoughts Before Tomorrows Big Election


The rhetoric has been fierce this Presidential Election 2012. You’ve read what I have had to say as well as others I have shared with you. You’ve heard the Political ads, read reviews, heard speeches and what other investigation you’ve accomplished. Congratulations. If more Americans where to do that kind of research I believe we would have a vastly better America today. Sadly too many do not do any research, and barely listen to any News outlets to get informed. Based on many “On The Street” interviews, it seems that most young people get their political insight from John Stewart.

Recently a group of people got together and created a political ad that has run here in Southern California. In it the woman makes this statement, “Mr. President, what is it about your first four years that will tell me that the next four years will be any different?” Great question.

Another person took all of President Obama’s speeches from 2008 and compared them with 2012. Same tag lines, same promises, same plan, same emphases. That should answer the lady’s question.

President Obama has made it clear that he was highly influenced by his years in Islam schools, Indonesian society and socialistic family influences. His thought, ideas and perspectives are all from Collectivist/Socialist/Marxist teachings and beliefs. The proof is in the way he has grown the government, created a greater hatred of rich people, and stirred the pot of race hatred and created a class war that rivals anything in history. He has demonstrated his disregard for the Constitution with his Czar appointments, over 150 executive orders bypassing the congress and his utter disdain for the American people where the truth is concerned with such things as “Fast and Furious”, his political hit list and the latest, the Benghazi attack.  Four more years of this will be a disaster of the American Constitution, and the American way of life prior to President Obama’s election.

Please vote. Please vote prayerfully.

ERIC HOLDER…SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IN 2013?


If you are not wide-awake now, you will be when you have finished reading this!!!!! Columnist Andrew McCarthy gives us what probably is the most important question about the upcoming presidential election: appointments to the Supreme Court.

I will enthusiastically support Mitt Romney’s candidacy. For my friends who have hesitation on that score, I’d just ask you to keep these things in mind…

  1. 1.   Justice Scalia is 78.
  2. 2.   Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year
  3. 3.   Justice Breyer will be 76 in August
  4. 4.   Justice Ginsburg is 81. She also has pancreatic cancer
  5. 5.   Justice Stephens has already said he would retire and is just waiting for Obama to be re-elected.

The next president could appoint as many as 5 new Justices over the next 4 years, or over the next 8 years if a new President gets a second term. This election is about much MORE than the ObamaCare Tax. Whomever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one new member of the Supreme Court, in addition to hundreds of other life tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come.” If you do not think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, THINK AGAIN! FOR ANYONE WHO IS THINKING OF NOT VOTING BECAUSE YOUR FAVORITE DIDN’T GET THE NOMINATION, OR WRITING IN A CANDIDATE WHO CAN’T WIN, PLEASE REALIZE THIS BECAUSE IT JUST MIGHT HAPPEN IF BARACK OBAMA, gets re-elected :

ERIC HOLDER, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE? After you have stopped gasping because of this horror, please share this with every rational person you know!

No Judgment! Selective Intolerance and the Atrophy of Virtuous Christian Outrage


By /

1 November 2012 / 44 Comments

In today’s Christian community, it is nearly impossible to provoke outrage. Whether this is a result of the pacifism ensconced in the heart of many of America’s most influential churches, or whether we’ve lost our righteous indignation by overcompensating from what has been perceived as the Puritanical prohibition of our preceding generations, it isn’t clear and ultimately it does not matter. What does should matter is that the Christian community seems to save all of its outrage and scorn for one target: anyone who dares to criticize the Christian community from within.

If you want to spark a bare-knuckle cage match, mention an unbiblical stance taken by a prominent Christian leader in this country. And then duck. All of the outrage and vitriol which should have been directed at those who are undermining the credibility of the Gospel and taking the Lord’s name in vain, will be mortared in your direction. I have seen it happen time and again in a bizarre, cannibalistic charade of self-righteousness and intellectual confusion. Instead of standing for God’s righteousness and speaking against evil, these woebegone milksops stand for evil and speak against God’s righteousness.

This phenomenon manifests itself in a number of ways. It includes apologists for the naked greed and plutocracy of Prosperity Pimps like Creflo Dollar, Eddie Money, Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyers, and others. The tolerance and adoring acceptance shown to cross-over artists like Joel Osteen, who has managed to marry the health-and-wealth gospel with Eastern mysticism.

We see a benevolent indulgence of overt enemies to the cross of Christ when they pay lip-service to their “Christian beliefs”; politicians like Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden practically raise a hand to swear they follow the path of the Lord Jesus while with their other hand they sign bills and orders which finance the wholesale slaughter of innocent fetuses in our country and others.

Most recently, we’ve seen defenders of Jim Daly as he absconds from the mission statement of Focus on the Family to pursue “the Gospel”, as if spreading the Gospel and edifying American families were mutually exclusive activities. Many believers give intellectual approbation and theological cover for “pastors” such as Rob Bell and Jim Wallis, despite the fact that they repudiate basic Scriptural foundations with their words, books, and actions.

One would hope that the righteous anger of the Lord’s disciples would be heaped on these charlatans who use the name and blood of Messiah like a letterman’s jacket because it helps them get into all the right parties. But if this was so, how would this crowd be able to achieve the level of prosperity and renown which they have attained? If Joel Osteen was properly recognized as the snake-oil salesman that he is, he wouldn’t be the pastor of the largest church in America. He wouldn’t be leering at us from the racks of the New York Times Bestseller list at the front of the book store. He would be preaching out of the trunk of an El Camino, getting run out of one town after another once folks got wind of his spineless Buddhist-Christianity.

The sad fact is that most of Christendom would rather bite the tongue and look the other way than confront sin in someone who claims to speak for their Lord. And when a brave soul does stand and speak against the evil masquerading as good, they are pilloried for their efforts. The troubling thing is that much of the fragging comes from within the Christian community. Like one of the Old Testament prophets, these brave souls are verbally stoned and left for dead outside the city gates, all because they dared to question the validity of a ministry or organization which bears the mantle of our Lord.

Is this Biblical? Is this the proper response to those who would speak out against prominent leaders in the church? Paul tells Timothy in his first letter, “Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest may fear.” Paul himself rebukes the entire Galatian church for their errant embrace of legalism. When the big dog himself, Peter, was in error, Paul confronted him with it. First Paul took him aside to try and deal with it privately and when that didn’t work, Paul confronted him in front of the entire assembly. He tells the Romans to “Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good.” We’ve changed this to “Abhor what is critical. Cling to what sounds good. ”

The bottom line is that not only are we permitted to question the motives and actions of the leaders of our churches when they stray into unbiblical territory, we have an obligation to do so. The Bible offers a crystal-clear method of doing so. Christ says to first remove the beam from your own eye, but He doesn’t stop there, does He? Remove our beam . . . so that we can help our brother remove the splinter from his. The Lord is telling us not to be hypocritical, He’s not forbidding criticism. If I love Joel Osteen as myself, how can I NOT warn him about the dangers of adding and subtracting from the Word of God?

Christians need to take a step back and refocus. The Apostle Paul has ceased to be our guide, instead we’ve settled for Ned Flanders. Western society is decaying more quickly as each year passes and we are too busy running popularity contests to be the salt and light which we’re called to be. Let us stop shooting the messenger and re-train our sights on those who use our Lord’s name like a debit card.

The President Obama Cover-up and Denial


 

Court Upholds Law That Could Imprison Pastors For Preaching Biblical Doctrines


In 2009, President Barack Obama signed the Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law.  The law was pushed by every gay rights organization in the country.  They claim that anyone who says anything negative about homosexuality is guilty of bullying them and therefore constitutes a hate crime.

Under the strictest definition of the law, any biblical preaching against sin in general, especially that of homosexuality could be considered hate language and therefore a hate crime.  If convicted of the felony offense, a person could spend as much as 10 years in prison.

In 2010, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act’s constitutionality was challenged in court by the American Family Association of Michigan along with several Michigan pastors, Levon Yuille, Rene Ouellette and James Combs.  The pastors and AFA of Michigan president Gary Glenn actively preached against homosexuality and that it was a sin according to the Bible.  They saw the Hate Crimes Prevention Act as a violation of their constitutional rights for free speech and religion.  Their federal lawsuit was filed against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Later that year Holder filed for a dismissal of the lawsuit on the grounds of standing and ripeness.  Standing and ripeness are legal terms that have to do with their legal ability to file the suit for future circumstances that may or may not ever happen.  A federal district judge granted Holder’s request and dismissed the lawsuit.

The dismissal ruling was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit by Robert Muise, Senior Counsel and Co-Founder of AFLC Co.  Muise argued his case before the court in January of this year.  The Sixth Circuit also dismissed the case claiming that the plaintiffs did not have proper legal standing to challenge the law.

After the disappointing news of the dismissal, Muise commented:

“There is no doubt that this federal criminal statute violates the First Amendment on its face.  Thus, the Act chills the exercise of free speech, specifically the free speech of our clients, who speak out against homosexuality.  This chilling effect is sufficient to confer standing to challenge the Act as a matter of law.”

David Yerushalmi, another Senior Counsel and Co-Founder of AFLC offered this statement:

“Criminalizing religious opposition to homosexuality while elevating those who engage in homosexual acts to a protected class under federal law is a clear violation of the Constitution and a frightening abuse of federal power.”

Not every member of Congress was in favor of the bill as it was passed when the Democrats ruled both the House and Senate.  Iowa Congressman Steve King (R) wrote to AFLC on their efforts to challenge the legality of the Hate Crimes Prevention Act saying:

“I want to commend you for your courage to challenge the constitutionality of the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.  As a Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary, I worked hard to stop this legislation in Committee and on the floor of the House of Representatives. . . .  Like you, I believe this ‘Hate Crimes’ Act is unconstitutional and marks an unprecedented move to regulate and criminalize thoughts.”

This week, the AFLC took steps to have their case heard before the U.S. Supreme Court by filing a writ of certiorari.  They are asking the high court to review the lower courts’ decisions to dismiss the case that challenges the constitutionality of the Hate Crimes law.

If the Supreme Court rejects the request to hear the case, then the Hate Crimes Prevention Act may and will be used against anyone that says or does anything that a homosexual deems offensive or hurts their pride and self-esteem.  Pastors in churches across the country could find themselves facing 10 years in prison for preaching God’s Word.

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act protects perverted sinners from having their feelings hurt, but it does nothing to protect Christians from having someone like a homosexual denigrate their beliefs and feelings.  They will still be allowed to say what they want about Jesus Christ or anyone that follows Him and that won’t be considered hate language.  But tell someone that the Bible says homosexuality is a sin against God and you could go to jail.

This ladies and gentlemen is Obama’s agenda and if he gets re-elected next week, it will only get worse for us Christians.  It will be the first time in our nation’s history that Christians will be openly and legally persecuted.

Of Course! Benghazi Still Matters.


 

Home / 2012 Election /

By / 31 October 2012 / 40 Comments

Benghazi.

It’s all over Fox News, Twitter and Facebook but most of the MSM is quiet about it. This close to an election, with a massive storm that has all but demolished the East Coast, is it still worth mentioning? And, as a mother with two little ones who could one day join the military, I have to ask myself: if anyone of those four men were my child, how would I want this handled?

Regarding Trayvon Martin, President Obama once famously said, “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon. When I think about this boy, I think about my own kids.” And as I look at the pictures of the men who died at the consulate in Benghazi, part of me can’t help but think, “That could have been my husband. That could one day be my son (or my daughter).”

So as a military veteran, as a military wife, and as a mother: yes, Benghazi still matters. It matters because it shows that while Joe Biden — and the rest of this administration — may claim that al Qaeda is dead because Osama Bin Laden is dead, they are naïve (to put it politely) and dead wrong (to put it bluntly). It matters because as more and more reports come out, by all accounts, our president left four Americans to die so he could get a good night’s sleep and campaign the next day.

Because the TV reports show the attack happening at night, it’s easy for most Americans to forget the time conversion and think it was night in DC as well. The attack started at approximately 9:40 PM the night of September 11th, making it approximately 3:40 PM in Washington, DC. The White House was informed of the attack within two hours of the start — or approximately the time President Obama was returning to the White House from Walter Reed and meeting with Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. As of 5:16 PM, however, Libyan officials had already informed the AP that the Libyan consulate had been breached. Either way, the president would have been notified immediately. By 7:41 PM, the stunning news came that at least one American was dead.

During the initial stages of the attack, two former SEALs heard the call for help at their compound a mile from the attack. They were told to stand down — which makes sense. If you have CIA assets who are former SEALs, they’re high value assets. You wouldn’t deploy them unless you absolutely needed to or were sure that they wouldn’t be wasted. Fair enough, except this presupposes a couple of conclusions: first, that the ambassador and his remaining staff, along with any sensitive material, couldn’t be extracted safely, and secondly, that any additional assets would die along with the ambassador. In other words, when the order to stand down came, at some level, the United States government had already written Ambassador Stevens and the staff off for lost. Particularly damning is the news that someone was lasing a target, which means there had to be a gunship on-station that could sync up or that it was a last ditch effort in the hopes that help was on the way and they would see the targets as they were inbound.

So someone had decided that the US ambassador and his staff weren’t worth saving. But why write off an ambassador that quickly? Even with the time-line crunch, even absent rules of engagement and special instructions for pilots operating in the theater, why not treat this as a point defense engagement instead of an urban close air support request? This way, American forces might could quickly have been deployed, terrorists scattered with a few bursts from an AC-130 and American property respected.

And, even if it was the insistence of SECDEF that it be treated as urban CAS, then SPINs and ROEs from the previous Libya engagement could have been utilized, or AFRICOM could have tasked a couple of their pilots and a JAG officer or two to gin some up quick enough to save lives. Even if a few terrorists were maimed/killed/otherwise inconvenienced in the attack and American lives saved, this would have only been good press for President Obama at home. He could tout how strong he was on terrorism, how he made the decision to protect American lives, and how this behavior would not be tolerated — in short, we would see the post-bin Laden football spiking all over again.

Instead, there was confusion. There was a video, there wasn’t a video, it was a terror attack but not really, there was the arrest of a guy who had violated his parole and incidentally posted a video on YouTube for saying mean things about Islam, there was a speech in the Rose Garden, and then there was a campaign trip off to Las Vegas. And in the midst of it all, when the dust settled, there were four dead Americans that didn’t have to die.

It’s worth repeating: Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods didn’t have to die. Someone made the decision that they weren’t worth saving. Someone, for whatever reason, decided that it was more worth it to take a public relations hit for four dead Americans than risk saving them or (and here’s the tin foil hat part) risk having whatever Ambassador Stevens knew come out in public.

Someone broke faith with Americans that, when trouble happened, American forces would be there to protect them. And that’s why Benghazi matters—not just for this election, but for America, because the next time this happens, it could be my husband, your son, or any other American serving in harm’s way. Don’t let these men have died in vain.

President Obama’s Handling of Terrorist Attack on our Benghazi Embassy


 

Obama Executive Order Expands Homeland Security Into State & Local Areas


October 31, 2012 by

obama-executive-orderBarack Obama signed a new Executive Order on October 26 which will expand the role and power of the Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Janet Napolitano. The order establishes a new Security Partnership Council that will have tremendous effects for state and local areas that interact with DHS.

The Executive Order’s purpose is stated as:

The purpose of this order is to maximize the Federal Government’s ability to develop local partnerships in the United States to support homeland security priorities. Partnerships are collaborative working relationships in which the goals, structure, and roles and responsibilities of the relationships are mutually determined. Collaboration enables the Federal Government and its partners to use resources more efficiently, build on one another’s expertise, drive innovation, engage in collective action, broaden investments to achieve shared goals, and improve performance. Partnerships enhance our ability to address homeland security priorities, from responding to natural disasters to preventing terrorism, by utilizing diverse perspectives, skills, tools, and resources.

The National Security Strategy emphasizes the importance of partnerships, underscoring that to keep our Nation safe “we must tap the ingenuity outside government through strategic partnerships with the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, foundations, and community-based organizations. Such partnerships are critical to U.S. success at home and abroad, and we will support them through enhanced opportunities for engagement, coordination, transparency, and information sharing.” This approach recognizes that, given the complexities and range of challenges, we must institutionalize an all-of-Nation effort to address the evolving threats to the United States.

Kenneth Schortgen, Jr. at the Examiner writes,

Since it’s creation in 2001 from the aftermath of 9/11, the Department of Homeland Security has expanded its authority over states, communities, and law enforcement each year. From expanding TSA responsibilities over airport transportation to now include trains, subways, and even highway checkpoints, to new regulations in how border control agents function in immigration conflicts, Homeland Security is one of the fastest growing government agencies in the past decade.

Through creating a new Steering Committee in partnership with how Homeland Security missions, directives, and programs are implemented in state and local levels, the fine line between state sovereignty and the need protect the country from disaster and terror attacks is becoming smaller every day. Over the past few years Homeland Security grants to local law enforcement have led to a militarization of police and public safety, and new drone technology is being used in criminal investigations outside the scope of national security.

In a little more than a decade, the Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with its underlying and partnering Federal agencies, have infiltrated nearly every community in America. This new Executive Order, which expands the scope of the agency and gives it greater power in state and local partnerships, will mean greater loss of freedoms and liberties to both the states and citizens as the Federal government imposes greater authority over what should remain state sovereignty scope and missions.

A new Council and Steering Committee is created in this executive order. According to the EO, the Council membership will be:

(i) Pursuant to the nomination process established in subsection (b)(ii) of this section, the Council shall be composed of Federal officials who are from field offices of the executive departments, agencies, and bureaus (agencies) that are members of the Steering Committee established in subsection (c) of this section, and who have demonstrated an ability to develop, sustain, and institutionalize local partnerships to address policy priorities.

(ii) The nomination process and selection criteria for members of the Council shall be established by the Steering Committee. Based on those criteria, agency heads may select and present to the Steering Committee their nominee or nominees to represent them on the Council. The Steering Committee shall consider all of the nominees and decide by consensus which of the nominees shall participate on the Council. Each member agency on the Steering Committee, with the exception of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, may have at least one representative on the Council.

Then the Steering committee will be chaired by the Chair of the Council and this steering committee will include a representative at the Deputy agency head level, or that representative’s designee from the following agencies:

(i) Department of State;

(ii) Department of the Treasury;

(iii) Department of Defense;

(iv) Department of Justice;

(v) Department of the Interior;

(vi) Department of Agriculture;

(vii) Department of Commerce;

(viii) Department of Labor;

(ix) Department of Health and Human Services;

(x) Department of Housing and Urban Development;

(xi) Department of Transportation;

(xii) Department of Energy;

(xiii) Department of Education;

(xiv) Department of Veterans Affairs;

(xv) Department of Homeland Security;

(xvi) Office of the Director of National Intelligence;

(xvii) Environmental Protection Agency;

(xviii) Small Business Administration; and

(xix) Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Does anyone think this will either give the people more of their freedoms back or actually catch “terrorists?” If you do, then there is some ocean front property beside my house I would like to sell you.

Over and over the federal government, whose main job is to protect, fails to do so, and to cover their obvious failure in this, they continue to promote more government to do what they are currently failing to do. It goes on and on and on and now it’s coming into local and state government. It will be only a matter of time before the federal government becomes the only governing power in this nation, if their power is not reined in via the Constitution.

So again, we so more expansion of the federal government and a bigger power grab, even into the local and state areas of government by the feds.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: