Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for March, 2013

Here is an Argument Not Heard Yet


Will Same Sex Marriage Undermine Obama’s Loyal Muslim Outreach ?

“When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes” Quran 26:165

Not much has been reported on our Commander in Chief’s recent rocky expedition to meet the gods of “Big Oil.” I wonder if same sex marriage was discussed with Islamic leaders during President Obama’s recent trip to the Middle East. Probably not, since any talk of sanctioning homosexuality in Muslims circles might be cause for killing another U.S. Ambassador or fostering another unprovoked attack on America.

If we take the President’s assertions—claiming Guantanamo breeds Islamic aggression—seriously, wait until the world’s Islamic radicals sink their teeth into Big Satan’s coming normalization of deviant sexual behavior and same sex marriages. Wow, this is really going to put a kink in NASA’s efforts to normalize and expand President Barrack Hussein Obama’s U.S. Muslim outreach.

Personally, I have grown weary of the ongoing and relentless discussion distracting America from the long term social consequences of same sex marriage. However, given last night’s Fox News Bill O’Reilly debacle, I just wanted to highlight some easily forgotten realities for America’s compassionate conservatives and their LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) friends and family.

“Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to” Quran 26:165

In case liberals have forgotten, the United States is at war with Islam. Islamists the world over despise America for its willingness to protect and defend morally repugnant behavior like Christianity, Judaism, and yes, LGBT lifestyles. I find it remarkably naive of the LGBT community to believe that Democrats, and their political messiah, Barrack Hussein Obama, are promising to deliver same sex marriage guarantees while attempting to corner the market on Muslim constituents. Hmmm.

The Quran explicitly condemns homosexual behavior. Enlightened American opinions and attitudes, diluted by an addiction for tolerance and fairness, have begun to accept LGBT lifestyles and gay marriage advocacy, but Muslims will always, by tradition, never accept the polishing of the gay image. Remember, there are no social or political ties for homosexuals in an Islamic society. There are no special interest lobbies nor media supported tolerance of gay advocacy, just punishment, torture and summary executions. Just ask Iran’s Ahmadinejad.  Somehow, that soon to be nuclear nation has managed to defy liberal ideological claims that sexual proclivity is not an acquired taste, but a product of birth.

Islam views homosexuality as an enemy. Muslims will never accept sophisticated and multifaceted liberal campaigns to change their core beliefs and views on sexual behavior and marriage. They laugh at American Psychiatric Association declarations removing homosexuality from the list of confirmed mental disorders. No, no, Islam is a stalwart defender of God’s natural law over scientific hypothesis and America’s LGBT communities fight for equal rights will come with a heavy price one day.

Liberalisms perfection of the “moral dodge” has swelled the ranks of Obama’s Democrat Party who have been courting Muslims since the times of Clinton and Gore. As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. However, if I were a homosexual’ the last thing I would want to do is to climb in bed with an Islamist. That would be a very brief and painful dalliance.

President Obama is a man of great ideological conflicts. His masterful use of the “divide and conquer” strategy is well documented. Given his Islamic sympathies and his growing public embrace of the “great religion of Islam,” how will he, and more importantly, how will the Democrats soothe the moral conflict waiting to be revealed once same sex marriage and transgender parenting become the new American constitutional norm. Allah Akbar!

Perhaps Bill O’Reilly and his bubble headed bleach blond should have taken the time to examine the Muslim argument against same sex marriage instead of giving the Bible a good thumping. After all, Fox is in part owned by a Saudi Arab, so I’m sure the crew at fair and balanced television could provide a unique perspective on Islam’s genocidal relationship with homosexuality. Not to mention their support for the coming evaporation of morality in our Islamic tolerant liberal society. What say you Bill?


Are We Moving Towards a Post U.S. World?


PPERKINSARTThe U.S. government has made all the wrong moves.  The temporary economic boon coupled with weak employment numbers should be the first signal to Americans that something is seriously wrong.  Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve is still printing money despite dramatic improvements in the market.  Why?  The answer is simple.  It cannot stop now.  Ben Bernanke’s currency manipulation has improved the appearance of the stock market by weakening the dollar.  Wall Street is making record profits, but the value of American money is slipping into oblivion.

This central planning method is not new.  These were the same tactics tried in Germany’s Weimar Republic from 1919 to 1923.  That horror story ended with the price of a loaf of bread rising from 1 mark to 100 billion marks.  Since we have three more years to try out the most failed system in U.S. history, you might want to trade in your wallet for a wheelbarrow.  Thank you, Mr. President.

While the Federal Reserve, President Obama, and Rachel Maddow remain clueless on what is happening to the U.S. economy, China seems fully aware. The unending episodes of quantitative easing (the practice of printing money that can cause short-term stimulus but weakens the dollar in the long run) combined with massive amounts of debt have destroyed the credibility of the dollar and the world is taking notice.

In an attempt to shield itself from the risks of trading with the U.S. dollar, the Chinese government is now trading in its own currency.  Last week, an unprecedented 30 billion dollar trade deal with Brazil signified the world’s growing insecurity over the dollar.  China and Brazil are members of BRICS (a partnership of nations including Brazil, Russian, India, China and South Africa).  The BRICS nations announced their own development bank this week, another attempt to circumvent western influence from the World Bank.

The U.S. government is weakening the dollar with its policies while completely ignoring these developments and another phenomenon overtaking the markets, the China gold rush.  Even Bernanke seems unconcerned that China is hoping to move to a gold backed currency soon.  He sees the gold standard as an “awful waste of resources.”

This is definitely not the Chinese attitude.  Former General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, Hu Jintao, called the current international currency system a “product of the past.”  China’s game is not all talk and Americans should be concerned.  Chinese foreign currency reserves have shot up 700% since 2004 and currently stand large enough to buy all of the world’s gold bullion…twice.

While gold was down this week, the Chinese and Russian buying frenzy continued.  It is expected that China will reveal by 2014 that they have acquired more than 4000 tons of gold in just the past few years.  This will see China at the same gold-to-GDP ratio as the United States and potentially triple gold prices by 2015.

If the weakening dollar doesn’t concern you, the military situation might.  While the U.S. is neglecting its military advancements, China is quickly catching up.  The old argument was, China has the numbers, but they don’t have the technology to be a dominant force against the U.S.  This is far less true than it was a few decades ago.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently admitted China is modernizing its military at an alarming pace:


“They clearly have the potential to put some of our capabilities at risk. And we have to pay attention to them, we have to respond appropriately with our own programs,” Gates said on a 2011 visit to Beijing.  “My hope is that, through the strategic dialogue that I’m talking about, that maybe the need for some of these capabilities is reduced.”


Essentially, Gates is relying on a strategy of friendship with the Chinese government in hopes that they will continue to let us dominate the western pacific.  This continues a foreign policy methodology of complete ignorance.  The new general secretary, Xi Jinping, has begun to promote a message called, “the China Dream” which advocates Chinese military superiority over the United States.  This does not sound like a message of friendship, it sounds adversarial.

The weakening of the dollar by the Federal Reserve, the whimsical hippie foreign policy of the White House, and the degradation of our culture at the hands of the progressive movement, all add up to one question: Is this a post U.S. world?  Time will tell, but unfortunately we won’t have to wait long to find the answer.

We Pray That You Have the Most Blessed Resurrection Sunday Ever

Easter Sunday 2013

Jill and I Logo

The Marriage Covenant

Gen 2:18-24; 18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.

But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”

24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (NIV)

After creation, the Triune God made a human man after their own image (that image is explained by Jesus in John 4). In order to prove to that man that there was no animal in all of creation suitable for fellowship, and procreation, God made “woman”, the female form of the human man. Thus, the Marriage Covenant was established; One man, one woman, one flesh.

“One flesh” means more than the marriage-bed sexual relationship between the united couple. Its meaning is a joining of two entities formed into one new being. That is why in Genesis 5:1 God called THEM “man”. One united couple commanded to populate the earth. The purpose for this deliberate designed union is explained in Malachi 2:15;

“Has not [the LORD] made them one? In flesh and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly offspring. So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth.” (NIV)

Repeatedly we have witnesses of scripture of God’s condemnation of same sex sexual acts, both in the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament. God is absolutely consistent. Likewise is His judgment on a man and woman having sexual relations outside of marriage is sin. God’s deliberate design was, and remains; one man with one woman in covenant union to raise Godly children for the glory of the Kingdom of God.

When I was in high school there was a saying going around from part of my generation who ultimately became the hippies (who are in legislatures today). That saying was, “don’t shove your morals down my throat”. Those same people are doing just that to the American people with their war on the marriage covenant. The homosexual activist are so desperate to sooth their conscious with their activism to force the “straight” citizens of America to accept their chosen lifestyle as normal, and force the State to give them the same protection of heterosexual marriage. They want to force you and I to change our scriptural position that homosexuality is wrong. They have gone so far as to invade our public schools with materials designed to teach children that their chosen lifestyle is normal and should be explored. Nothing forced upon a people can be a good thing for that society.

No, it is not right to persecute homosexuals for their chosen lifestyle. All “bullying” efforts are wrong as well as any condemnation. I have had the privilege of knowing and working with several different people who practiced the homosexual lifestyle. One of them was one of my closest friends, and I miss him very much. He was a great mentor and I learned volumes from his experience and wisdom. I knew about his lifestyle choices and he knew mine. We never made it an issue, and I never condemned him or made him feel uncomfortable. He passed away several years ago. With all the others I have known and worked with, the issue was never discussed, nor did it affect our relationship. Respect demands acceptance of anyone’s chosen lifestyle that has no negative affect on humanity.

All this uproar over same sex marriage has produced division and discord in our society. Nothing good can really come out of all this, nor will the issue be settled on both sides. Any compromise will not be accepted, nor will it render any respect for anyone. The strife established can only bring about a bad result. Let us discuss several issues that pertain to this argument;

  1. The Federal government has no business even discussing this subject of same sex marriage. The First Amendment to the Constitution restricts them from forcing this definition upon the Church. Each religious institution has the First Amendment right to determine what is acceptable marriage unions. The States have establish laws that recognize, as lawful, marriage unions, including those from other States, or Countries. The Federal Government is not included in any of those decisions.
  2. What good is it for voters to vote on propositions/referendums if groups that don’t like the outcome of the vote and use their co-conspirators (the Federal Courts) to overturn the will of the people, nullifying those votes? Has it not it been the cry of the Left concerning “voter nullification”? Yet they demonstrate their Socialist ideology by using the courts to get their way and ignore the true will of the people.
    1. I have heard many people say, “Why should I vote when the other side will just get their way through the courts”?
    2. b.    Why do we have a Representative Republic if in fact our votes do not count?
    3. c.    Are we already living in a Marxist/Socialist society with the voting is just a sham to make us think our voice still means anything?
    4. Multiple politicians have rushed to the microphones of their media partners proclaiming their support of same sex marriage. Using the insidiousness of emotional blackmail, they pull at the heartstrings of middle-of-the-road ignorant voters hoping to get them to keep them in power. These tactics tell you everything about their true intentions.
    5. The Church (Catholic and Evangelical) is being demeaned and persecuted for taking God at His Word and trying to live out that Word;
      1. Because I do not agree with someone else’s perspective does not make me a hater, nor have I ceased to love people. A Biblical foundation is the ability to love people while hating what they do. For example;

i.    Can you love the alcoholic and hate their alcoholism? Yes.

ii.    Can you love the addict and hate their addiction? Yes.

iii.    Can you love the grumpy while hating their grumpy attitude? Yes.

iv.    Can you love a homosexual while hating their choice of the homosexual lifestyle? YES!

  1. Loving people never means having to agree with all they stand for and believe. Neither does your disagreement make you a homophobe, hater, racist or any other kind of hateful label hung on such people who disagree. A healthy society allows for differing points of view, and does not support anyone forcing others to believe their way.
  2. Christian witnessing has never been by force, as did Mohammad. Any groups of people claiming to be Christian and apply undue force on the populace to believe their way are misrepresentatives of God, and unacceptable by any healthy society.

I have been a student of the Word of God for over 40 years. I do not now, nor have I ever claimed to be some kind of expert. I am still learning. I do know what God’s Word says, and according to 2nd Peter 1, the Word of God is not subject to any private interpretation. In fact, I have learned that the Word of God explains itself and does not need any human to explain. Here are some facts from scripture;

  • God has condemned the practice of homosexuality PERIOD.
    • Lev 18:22; “‘Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” (NIV )
    • Lev 20:13; “‘If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (NIV)
    • Rom 1:18-32; 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.


21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.


24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator-who is forever praised. Amen.


26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.


28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. (NIV)

  • We have two historical accounts of societies that allowed homosexuality to become the norm. The shame was gone, no laws to restrict their practice and society in general let them practice their lifestyle choice openly. Both societies ended up the same; destroyed.

The first is found in Genesis Chapter 19 and the second is detailed in Judges Chapters 19 & 20. In both cities, Sodom and Gibeah, the men of the city attacked the door of the houses because they wanted to have sex with the male visitors that arrived and was going to spend the night under the private roof of the host. In Sodom, the Angels had to pull Lot back in the house and blind the men so they could escape. In Gibeah, the Levite visitor gave them his concubine who gang raped her all night, causing her death. God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah with brimstone and fire. In Gibaeh God caused all of Israel to attack Gibeah because they refused to give up the homosexuals that murdered the woman by gang rape.

This has been the fate of any society that has allowed objectionable conduct to go unchecked, where God has been removed from their lives and the liberal thinking has created an environment that caused the people to say that good (righteousness) was evil, and that evil was good.

The entire subject of marriage does not belong with the Federal Government, and really, it does not belong under any State Government. History tells us about the uproar and objections produced when States decided to get into the marriage business by requiring marriage licenses. The debate was whether or not the State had any business in regulating the sacred bonds of marriage by raising revenue through marriage license. Debating what constitutes marriage and who should be allowed to engage is a subject our founding Fathers never imagined would ever occur. This national debate, and taking up the Supreme Courts time has been the results of the homosexual lobby forcing their chosen lifestyle down the throats of every American. It is not about equality. It is about their determination to force our society to accept their lifestyle as normal and not objectionable. It is a fight for the freedom of Christians, and others, to believe what we know to be acceptable behavior, and to reject what we believe to be abhorrent behavior. Notice that they have not made any attempts to get any of the Islam nations to make the same, forced, acceptance?

Those that scream the most about separation of Church and State are the ones that are determined to remove our free speech, and create laws that they define as hate speech. Such gagging of Christian Americans voices is in itself an abomination, and constitutionally wrong.

California and other States have caved in to provide same sex union contracts that offer most of the same privileges as married couples. That is not good enough for the homosexual lobby. They want to force us (socialism tactics) to accept what we know to be wrong, against God’s perfect will, against His creation and by all historical records, abhorrent to all societies. Furthermore, they hang demeaning labels on anyone who disagree with them and their allies (the entire political Left).

Stop the madness. Leave the sacred institution of marriage alone. You choose to be a homosexual, fine, but stop shoving it down my throat and stop teaching our children that your chooses are normal. I have never condoned prejudice, nor will I. I work hard at loving people and showing respect. In a quality society, such respect should be the norm, and any disagreement accepted.

As a nation we are in desperate need of revival;

  • Spiritual,
  • Constitutional,
  • Common respect for everyone, especially those that disagree with us,
  • and a revival of setting aside our differences so we can focus as a nation on ridding ourselves of our national debt,
  • reducing and eliminating entitlements,
  • and getting Americans back to work.

“Heavenly Father, in the mighty Name of Jesus our Lord and Savior, by the power of Your Holy Spirit, we join in prayer seeking Your Face, admitting we are sinners in need of our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. We repent of our sins, and make the deliberate choice to turn from our wicked ways. We choose to serve You by Your Word and live lives acceptable to You. Please heal our land. Please restore the nation you created for Yourself for the spreading of the Gospel around the world. Thank You for hearing our prayer and healing our land. In Jesus Name, Amen.”

Yes. The Founding Fathers Had Much to Say About Homosexuality, and Thus, Same Sex Marriage


What The Founding Fathers Believed About Homosexuality



I have made no bones about the fact that the ultimate authority on the issue of homosexuality is the Bible and it is crystal clear in condemning it. If others want to cite polls and commentaries and “experts” to attempt to bolster their claim in favor of homosexuality they are welcome to do so. However, what I find a bit disingenuous are those that will talk about rights within the context of the Constitution, which was written by men, not God as though the men who wrote it and backed it would have sided with practicing homosexuals today on the issue of marriage. I can tell you that the issue of marriage would have never been addressed as it is today, simply because the view of homosexuality was addressed first, thus making the point of same-sex “marriage” a ridiculous notion.

First, note that our founding fathers would have been outraged that homosexuals would be out in the open. They knew that such perversion would both undermine and erode the moral foundations of civilization. Under the British common law, the term sodomy was used to identify same-sex relations and was a capital crime. Understand that the founders referenced Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England extensively. He was a British attorney, jurist, law professor, author, and political philosopher.

Blackstone’s commentaries were the premiere legal source used by the Founding Fathers in America. So this should carry some weight with those who claim they know what the Founding Fathers knew and wanted concerning the issue of homosexuality, but I’m guessing they will dismiss it. In Blackstone’s Book the Fourth.: of Public Wrongs in his book titled Of Offences against the Persons of Individuals, Chapter Fifteen, he writes the following on pages 215-216 (emphasis added):

IV. WHAT has been here observed…, which ought to be the more clear in proportion as the crime is the more detestable, may be applied to another offence, of a still deeper malignity; the infamous crime against nature, committed either with man or beast…. But it is an offence of so dark a nature…that the accusation should be clearly made out….

I WILL not act so disagreeable part, to my readers as well as myself, as to dwell any longer upon a subject, the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature. It will be more eligible to imitate in this respect the delicacy of our English law, which treats it, in it’s very indictments, as a crime not fit to be named; peccatum illud horribile, inter chriftianos non nominandum [“that horrible sin not to be named among Christians”—DM]. A taciturnity observed likewise by the edict of Constantius and Constans: ubi fcelus eft id, quod non proficit fcire, jubemus infurgere leges, armari jura gladio ultore, ut exquifitis poenis fubdantur infames, qui funt, vel qui futuri funt, rei [“When that crime is found, which is not profitable to know, we order the law to bring forth, to provide justice by force of arms with an avenging sword, that the infamous men be subjected to the due punishment, those who are found, or those who future will be found, in the deed”—DM]. Which leads me to add a word concerning its punishment.

THIS the voice of nature and of reason, and the express law of God, determine to be capital. Of which we have a signal instance, long before the Jewish dispensation, by the destruction of two cities by fire from heaven: so that this is an universal, not merely a provincial, precept. And our ancient law in some degree imitated this punishment, by commanding such miscreants to be burnt to death; though Fleta
says they should be buried alive: either of which punishments was indifferently used for this crime among the ancient Goths. But now the general punishment of all felonies is the fame, namely, by hanging: and this offence (being in the times of popery only subject to ecclesiastical censures) was made single felony by the statute 25 Hen. VIII. c. 6. and felony without benefit of clergy by statute 5 Eliz. c. 17. And the rule of law herein is, that, if both are arrived at years of discretion, agentes et confentientes pari poena plectantur

Most Americans are completely unaware that the “Father of our country,” George Washington, who would also be considered this country’s first “Commander-in-Chief” approved the dismissal from the service at Valley Forge in 1778 of Lt. Frederick Gotthold Enslin. Why did he do this? According to the orders, which are held at the Library of Congress, Enslin was “attempting to commit sodomy” with another soldier. Under the title of “Head Quarters, V. Forge, Saturday, March 14, 1778” there is the following entry:

At a General Court Martial whereof Colo. Tupper was President (10th March 1778) Lieutt. Enslin of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for attempting to commit sodomy, with John Monhort a soldier; Secondly, For Perjury in swearing to false Accounts, found guilty of the charges exhibited against him, being breaches of 5th. Article 18th. Section of the Articles of War and do sentence him to be dismiss’d the service with Infamy. His Excellency the Commander in Chief approves the sentence and with Abhorrence and Detestation of such Infamous Crimes orders Lieutt. Enslin to be drummed out of Camp tomorrow morning by all the Drummers and Fifers in the Army never to return; The Drummers and Fifers to attend on the Grand Parade at Guard mounting for that Purpose.

What’s even more interesting is that Enslin’s dismissal came less than two weeks after another soldier, Ensign Anthony Maxwell, was acquitted of the charge of “propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin” on Feb. 27, 1778. Penny Star cites the transcription of the court martial dated March 3, 1778: “At a Brigade Court Martial whereof Colo. Burr was President (Feby. 27th. 1778,) Ensign Maxwell of Colo. Malcom’s Regiment tried for propagating a scandalous report prejudicial to the character of Lieutt. Enslin. The Court after maturely deliberating upon the Evidence produced could not find that Ensign Maxwell had published any report prejudicial to the Character of Lieutt. Enslin further than the strict line of his duty required and do therefore acquit him of the Charge.”

Note that our first President viewed “sodomy” or homosexual relations with “Abhorrence and Detestation.” He was not a spineless, wishy washy, panty waisted man like the current occupant of the White House, who claims his views have “evolved.” He was a man that recognized perverse behavior for what it was, perversion. He was not alone either. In all thirteen colonies homosexuality was treated as a criminal offense and eventually that grew to encompass each and every one of the fifty states. By the way, that fell under “equal treatment under the law.”

The law was based upon Leviticus 20:13:

“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death.”

This verse was “adopted into legislation and enforced by the colonies of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut.” Oh the irony that 2012′s GOP Mormon nominee for President Mitt Romney was the one to “legalize” homosexual “marriage” in Massachusetts. Here are just a few of the states and the punishments they executed for sodomy.

That the detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . shall be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that every person being thereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall be hanged by the neck until he or she shall be dead. NEW YORK

That if any man shall lie with mankind as he lieth with womankind, both of them have committed abomination; they both shall be put to death. CONNECTICUT

Sodomy . . . shall be punished by imprisonment at hard labour in the penitentiary during the natural life or lives of the person or persons convicted of th[is] detestable crime. GEORGIA

That if any man shall commit the crime against nature with a man or male child . . . every such offender, being duly convicted thereof in the Supreme Judicial Court, shall be punished by solitary imprisonment for such term not exceeding one year and by confinement afterwards to hard labor for such term not exceeding ten years. MAINE

That if any person or persons shall commit sodomy . . . he or they so offending or committing any of the said crimes within this province, their counsellors, aiders, comforters, and abettors, being convicted thereof as above said, shall suffer as felons. 13 [And] shall forfeit to the Commonwealth all and singular the lands and tenements, goods and chattels, whereof he or she was seized or possessed at the time . . . at the discretion of the court passing the sentence, not exceeding ten years, in the public gaol or house of correction of the county or city in which the offence shall have been committed and be kept at such labor. PENNSYLVANIA

[T]he detestable and abominable vice of buggery [sodomy] . . . be from henceforth adjudged felony . . . and that the offenders being hereof convicted by verdict, confession, or outlawry [unlawful flight to avoid prosecution], shall suffer such pains of death and losses and penalties of their goods. SOUTH CAROLINA

That if any man lieth with mankind as he lieth with a woman, they both shall suffer death. VERMONT

Ah, but some will say, “Thomas Jefferson would have never stood for this. He wanted liberty and equal rights for homosexuals to get married.” Not according to the record he didn’t. In Notes on the State of Virginia by Matthew Carey (1794) Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, “dismemberment” of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. I’m guessing there weren’t too many sodomites wanting that to take place. You might say that is Jefferson’s home state, but not Jefferson’s thoughts on the issue. Not so fast. Jefferson actually authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration (The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew A. Lipscomb, editor (Washington, D. C.: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. I, pp. 226-227, from Jefferson’s “For Proportioning Crimes and Punishments)). The below capture of Jefferson’s legislation is courtesy of The Library of Congress and

jefferson on sodomy

I’ll conclude by stating that the founders understood the role that morality plays in a culture. Washington in his famous “Farewell Address,” which used to be memorized by high school students in America said:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity [happiness]. Let it simply be asked, “Where is the security for property, for reputation for life, if the sense of religious obligations desert … ?”

And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. ‘Tis substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it [free government] can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Now understand this. I don’t believe that all the founders were Christian. Obviously there were Unitarians, at least one Jew, Christians, atheists and deists, and many that belonged to the Masonic Lodge. While morality apart from Jesus Christ results in moralism, there is no doubt that the morals that were taught in the Bible were taken to heart in regards to sodomy. In other words, if we take Washington’s words seriously, then he not only has referenced those of the homosexual community as “abhorrent and detestable,” but he has also said they cannot rightly call themselves patriots. Today, these criminals are out in the open spewing their filth and embraced by the criminals in Washington, instead of facing just punishment.

Coulter: The Left’s Continuing War on Women

Coulter: The Left's Continuing War on Women

By: Ann Coulter
3/27/2013 09:00 PM



The New York Times caused a sensation with its kazillion-word, March 17 article by Michael Luo on the failures of state courts to get guns out of the hands of men in domestic violence situations.

The main purpose of the article was to tweak America’s oldest civil rights organization, the National Rifle Association, for opposing some of the more rash anti-gun proposals being considered by state legislatures, such as allowing courts to take away a person’s firearms on the basis of a temporary restraining order.

It’s a new position for liberals to oppose the rights of the accused. Usually the Times is demanding that even convicted criminals be given voting rights, light sentences, sex-change operations and vegan meals in prison.

Another recent Times article about communities trying to keep sex offenders out of their neighborhoods quoted a liberal saying: “It’s counterproductive to public safety, because when you have nothing to lose, you are much more likely to commit a crime than when you are rebuilding your life.”

But that was about convicted child molesters. This is about guns, so all new rules apply.

As is usually the case when liberals start proposing gun restrictions, they assume only men will be disarmed by laws taking guns from those subjected to temporary restraining orders. But such orders aren’t particularly difficult to get. It doesn’t occur to liberals that an abusive man could also get one against his wife, whether or not his accusations are true.

Rather than helping victims of domestic abuse, this — and other Times’ proposals on guns — only ensures that more women will get killed. A gun in the hand of an abused woman changes the power dynamic far more than keeping a gun out of the hands of her abuser, who generally can murder his wife in any number of ways.

The vast majority of rapists, for example, don’t even bother using a gun because — as renowned criminologist Gary Kleck notes — they typically have a “substantial power advantage over the victim,” making the use of a weapon redundant.

As the Times eventually admits around paragraph 400: “In fairness, it was not always clear that such an order (taking guns from the accused wife abuser) would have prevented the deaths.”

No kidding. In one case the Times cites, Robert Wigg ripped a door off its hinges and heaved it at his wife, Deborah, after having thrown her to the floor by her hair.

Deborah Wigg moved out, got a protective order and filed for divorce. But doors were not an impediment to Robert Wigg. He showed up at her new house and, in short order, broke down the door and murdered her.

He happened to have used a gun, but he might as well have used his fists. Or an illegal gun, had the court taken away his legal guns. Or another door.

As her husband was breaking in, Deborah called her parents and 911. Her neighbors called 911, too. But the police didn’t arrive in time. Even her parents got to the house before the cops did, only to find their daughter murdered.

The protective order didn’t help Deborah Wigg; the police couldn’t help; her neighbors and parents couldn’t help. Only if she’d had a gun and knew how to use it — after carefully disregarding everything Joe Biden has said on the subject — might she have been able to save her own life.

Numerous studies, including one by the National Institute of Justice, show that crime victims who resist a criminal with a gun are less likely to be injured than those who do not resist at all or who resist without a gun. That’s true even when the assailant is armed.

Liberals’ advice to rape and domestic abuse victims is: Lie back and enjoy it. The Times’ advice is: Get a protective order. The NRA’s advice is: Blow the dirtbag’s head off. Or, for the delicate: Resist with a gun, the only effective means to stop an attack.

Apparently a lot of abused women prefer not to lie back and take it. Looking at data from Detroit, Houston and Miami, Margo Wilson and Martin Daly found that the vast majority of wives who killed their husbands were not even indicted, much less convicted, because it was found they were acting in self-defense.

But the Times doesn’t want abused women to have a fighting chance. Instead, it keeps pushing gun control policies that not only won’t stop violent men from murdering their wives, but will disarm their intended victims.

Great Evidence of the Value of Free Market Economics

The Greater Depression

You can’t say we haven’t been warned. Despite the high debt price tag resulting from the government intervention and arbitrary price controls designed to “spur the economy” during the American Great Depression, modern politicians on both sides of the aisle are more than willing to repeat the same mistakes. Interestingly, just as Herbert Hoover is blamed by leftist historians (but I repeat myself) for leading us into the Depression with his so-called free-market policies, so is George W. Bush blamed for his “capitalistic” tendencies. This is nonsense of course, both Hoover and Bush implemented interventionist economic policies that were exactly the antithesis of free-market capitalism. And both were succeeded by men who took their economic strategies (i.e. political compromises) and opened them up to full-throttle. What Hoover and Bush began, FDR and Obama have respectively finished.

In his book, America’s Great Depression, Murray Rothbard sets the record on Hoover in proper perspective:

Hoover’s role as founder of a revolutionary program of government planning to combat depression has been unjustly neglected by historians. Franklin D. Roosevelt, in large part, merely elaborated the policies laid down by his predecessor. To scoff at Hoover’s tragic failure to cure the depression as a typical example of laissez-faire [meaning “allow to act,” or free-enterprise] is drastically to misread the historical record. The Hoover rout must be set down as a failure of government planning and not of the free market.

In similar fashion, George W. Bush receives much of the media scorn for the current recession (read: government subsidized depression) due to his “lack” of enacting interventionist tactics—what one investor refers to as the “unregulated shadow banking system”—which is pure lunacy. Bush’s government spending makes Bill Clinton look like a miser, but it took Obama little more than a year to outspend Bush. As far as the economy is concerned, Clinton was far more Republican than either Bush or Hoover. In other words, both Hoover and Bush should receive a fair share of the blame for their contributions to a weak economy, but it shouldn’t be because of their loyalty to free-market principles—just the opposite in fact.

A 67-year-old warning from an authoritative source should be heard and heeded all across America. After World War II, Hermann Goering, one of Adolf Hitler’s right-hand men, told an American war correspondent:

Your America is doing many things in the economic field which we found out caused us so much trouble. You are trying to control peoples’ wages and prices—peoples’ work. If you do that you must control peoples’ lives. And no country can do that part way. I tried and it failed. Nor can any country do it all the way either. I tried that too and it failed. You are no better planners than we. I should think your economists would read what happened here.

Goering came to understand—too late—that any form of economic intervention by the government is ultimately destined for failure, regardless if it is “part way” or “all the way.” Goering came to realize that controlling people’s work is the same as controlling their lives, and this type of control is illusory and temporary. In the 67 years that have taken place between Goering’s warning and today, the American government is still holding onto this illusion, convinced that it can somehow beat the odds of Goering’s prediction. It can’t and it won’t. Hermann Goering was not warning of what might happen, but of what was already happening in 1946. He could see it because he had lived it and actually helped to implement it. And both Presidents Hoover and Bush would (now) agree.

Lies of the Left Proven Wrong Again

Florida Update: Concealed Carry Permits Up, Violent Crime Down

Written by 

The recent report from ABC News that in Florida, where there are more concealed weapons permits than anywhere else in the country, violent crime has dropped to the lowest point in history, delighted Sean Caranna, executive director of Florida Carry, Inc. “We’re happy to have facts and statistics put into these debates, because every time they do, we win,” he said.

Firearm-related violent crimes in Florida have dropped by one-third in just four years, 2007 to 2011, while concealed carry permits jumped by 90 percent in that period. Further, violent crime of any kind dropped almost as much, 26 percent.

There were naysayers, but their voices are becoming muted as more and more states have adopted “shall-issue” carry laws and have seen their own crime rates drop as well. One of the naysayers was Gary Kleck, a Florida State criminologist who calls himself “as liberal as they get.” He said the link between more permits and less crime might just be a coincidence. He said that nationally, crime has been falling steadily since 1991 and Florida’s numbers might just be part of that trend. He warned against drawing too hasty a conclusion that one statistic caused the other. “The real problem there in drawing conclusions is that you’re guessing why that decline or change in gun violence has occurred,” he stated.

In a backhanded support of Kleck’s warning, Arthur Hayhoe, the executive director of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said “It’s difficult to attach gun control to the reduction of crime, and vice versa. We don’t know what works. We can’t prove that gun control works because we don’t have gun control laws.”

Kleck has authored numerous books and articles over the last 20 years, but none garnered as much national attention as his 1994 National Self-Defense Survey which, based on a survey of 5,000 households, concluded that there were far more incidents where gun owners defended themselves against potentially violent crime than there were actual crimes involving the use of guns. This outraged liberals who thought Kleck would find something that would support their typically anti-gun posture. One such was Marvin Wolfgang, another liberal Florida criminologist who described himself as being “as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among all criminologists in this country.” He said,

I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns — ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people…. What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck … The reason I am troubled is that [he has] provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator … I do not like [his] conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault [his] methodology….

Such a report from Florida must encourage Professor John Lott, who in 2000 authored the groundbreaking book More Guns, Less CrimeLott never intended to become the lightning rod for the anti-gun forces. He began the study initially because he saw that much of what passed for valid statistical analysis in the field was poorly done, and he saw an opportunity to correct and update it. What it did was change his life, and not necessarily for the better. In his recent update to the book, Lott wrote,

Ten years have passed since the second edition of this book. During that time, both the argument and the data have been hotly debated. This debate has often been unpleasant, vociferous, and even disingenuous. To say that my career has suffered as a result is something of an understatement.… And yet … within the scholarly community [my] research has withstood criticism and remains sound. Further, the additional ten years of data provide continued strong support for [my] arguments.…

When Florida passed the first “shall-issue” law requiring authorities to issue concealed weapons permits to qualified citizens upon request in 1987, critics warned that the Sunshine State would soon become the “Gunshine” State, with predictions of differences being settled by gun fights in the streets, and crime soaring. The exact opposite happened. As noted, “homicide rates dropped faster than the national average [and] through 1997, only one permit holder out of over the 350,000 permits issued, was convicted of homicide.”

That was then. This is now. Lott provided an update on right-to-carry laws for the Maryland Law Review last October in which he noted that there are now more than 912,000 permit holders in Florida, many of whom have had their permits for years. Across the country, as some 40 other states have joined Florida in its decision to allow “shall-issue” permits to its citizens, the number of permit holders has reached nearly eight million, and is still climbing. And Lott is getting support for his once-controversial view by recent studies showing similar declines in violent crime. Wrote Lott:

There have been a total of 29 peer reviewed studies by economists and criminologists, 18 supporting the hypothesis that shall-issue laws reduce crime, 10 not finding any significant effect on crime … and [one] paper … finding that right-to-carry laws temporarily increase one type of violent crime: aggravated assault.

He noted that the predicted disasters following passage of such laws never happened. In fact, despite more and more states adopting them, not a single one of those laws has been repealed. As Lott noted,

One simple measure of how well these laws have worked is a political one: despite states adopting right-to-carry laws as long ago as the 1920s, there has never even been a legislative hearing held to rescind these laws.

In that paper, Lott took delight in debunking so-called studies by anti-gun groups that have distorted the data to prove a different, and less favorable, conclusion:

A June 2010 analysis of the gun control groups’ claims examined those groups’ claims for Florida: the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center portray Florida as Ground Zero for problems with concealed handgun permit holders.

They boldly assert that seventeen Florida permit holders have “killed” people with their guns over the past three years [from May 2007 to May 2010] and that this one state by itself accounts for seventeen of the ninety-six “killer” permit holders nationwide.

Yet even though a newspaper reported on the shooting, seven cases were such clear-cut cases of self-defense that no one was even charged with a crime, three cases involved suicide, and two of the other cases, including one involving a police officer, actually didn’t involve permit holders. [Emphases added.]

That means that, following Lott’s rigorous refutation of those inflated statistics, just five out of more than half a million permit holders were involved in a criminal case in that three-year period.

That latest information from Florida just confirms what Lott had discovered years ago: Carrying reduces crime. Wrote Lott: “Armageddon never happened … in state after state when right-to-carry laws have been adopted, the entire debate quickly becomes a non-issue within a year.”

The time is almost here when carrying a concealed firearm is so commonplace that it won’t even be worth commenting on. Florida and Professor John Lott have led the way.


A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American and blogs frequently at, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at

A Respected Perspective

Army Captain: Obama’s DHS Intends to Kill “You and Me!”

By / 26 March 2013 /

Screen Shot 2013-03-26 at 9.22.40 AMOn Thursday, Terry M. Hestilow, a retired Army officer with nearly 30 years of service under his belt, as well as combat experience in both Vietnam and Afghanistan issued a dire warning to all Americans.

The following warning was posted on Hestilow’s Facebook page:

I fully intend to address this in far greater detail within days, but ask yourself, with all the law enforcement available in the United States, who the DHS is preparing to declare war on inside the U.S.?

With the massive purchases of almost 3,000 new armored vehicles (MRAPs) and 1.6 BILLION rounds of ammunition, with associated weapons, who in the U.S. do they intend to kill? Short answer: You and me! Anyone they think is standing in their way to impose a new Marxist government! Anyone who stands for the U.S. Constitution!

We must demand that our representatives (Senators and U.S. Representatives) stand firm and immediately force, by law if necessary, the DHS turn over their arsenal of war making equipment to the Department of Defense. Nothing justifies this massive arms build up of an agency whose jurisdiction is internal within the United States of America! They are preparing to go to war against American citizens!

No Longer a Rumor. Solid Evidence of DHS Moving Their Forces Into Our Cities

Video: Hundreds Of DHS Armored Trucks On The Move?

More footage of military vehicles being delivered surfaces online

Steve Watson

Footage of hundreds of armored trucks, similar to ones reportedly purchased recently by the Department Of Homeland Security has appeared online, raising more questions over their intended use.

The video was uploaded to YouTube last week by a user who stated that it was shot in the middle of the desert between Hackberry and Peach Springs, Arizona.

It shows hundreds of military style trucks loaded on to a train, presumably in the process of being delivered domestically for law enforcement or military purposes.


The video raises significant questions in the wake of reports that the Department of Homeland Security, headed by Janet Napolitano, recently purchased around 2,700 MRAP trucks that many believe are to be deployed to local law enforcement agencies around the country.

It is clear that the DHS does have fleets of armoured vehicles intended for use in the US.

Here is a demonstration video of such a vehicle by ICE agents:

Does the latest video show these same type of trucks in the process of being delivered?

The footage is the latest in a spate of similar videos to surface on the internet in recent months showing huge amounts of military equipment packed onto trains en route within the US.





As we reported today, the DHS’ mass arms build-up continues, with the report that the agency has bought another 360,000 rounds of hollow point ammunition to add to the roughly 2 billion bullets already bought over the past year.

Such stark activity with little to no background detail has prompted several Congressmen to ask the federal government for an explanation. According to some elected representatives, the DHS has refused to answer specific questions on the purchases, stating only that the ammunition is for “training purposes” over the next five years, and has been bulk ordered to save money.

As we have pointed out numerous times however, military experts have noted that hollow point bullets are unsuitable for training, and are much more expensive than full metal jackets.

Efforts by government media mouthpieces to dismiss the story have only caused it to become more viral.

The DHS has also purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, as well as cementing a $2 million dollar relationship with a contractor that recently had to apologize for producing shooting targets of pregnant women, children and elderly gun owners depicted in residential settings.

The DHS has also been busy buying large supplies of body armor, leading to shortages. Last year, the agency put out an urgent order for “riot gear” in anticipation of civil unrest. The agency has also ordered bullet-proof checkpoint booths and hired hundreds of new security guards to protect government buildings over the course of the last 12 months. None of this has been addressed by the mainstream media.


Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones’, and He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham, and a Bachelor Of Arts Degree in Literature and Creative Writing from Nottingham Trent University.

This article was posted: Monday, March 25, 2013 at 1:07 pm

Personhood USA


North Dakota First State to Pass Personhood Amendment

Many people believe that the pro-life movement is just about abortion, but there is so much more to it than that.  If you believe that human life begins at conception, then there are other issues that you need to consider.  In today’s world of high tech medicine and research, you also have issues such as cloning, animal-human hybrids, euthanasia, assisted suicide, stem cell research and eugenics.

This brings the issue down to the legal recognition of human life and when that human life begins.  Some say it begins when you can hear the heart beating, but that can vary from individual to individual.  Others argue that the unborn is a human when it is developed enough to survive on its own outside the womb.  However, that argument falls short since a number of infants are born with life-threatening conditions that can be easily corrected with surgery after being born and others require life-saving procedures into their adult life.

This is where Personhood USA enters the picture.  They believe that human life begins at conception and should be protected from that moment on.  Planned Parenthood considers Personhood USA one of their major adversaries in the abortion fight.  They not only are actively involved in the abortion controversy but in the other issues listed above.

It appears the efforts of Personhood USA have been paying off in North Dakota.  Both houses of the state legislature have passed a personhood amendment that will be placed on the 2014 general ballot. The amendment states that human life begins at conception and that from that moment on is protected under the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution which states:

“Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

To preserved the sanctity of human life between now and the 2014 ballot, both houses of the North Dakota legislature are preparing a bill that would criminalize performing an abortion in their state.  Republican Governor Jack Dalrymple has not indicated if he would sign the bills if passed or not.

Hopefully, Dalrymple will sign the bills when they come across his desk and the Peace Garden State will become a land of peace for unborn humans in the future.  If you live in North Dakota, contact your state legislators and Gov. Dalrymple and urge them to pass the bills to criminalize abortion.  Then urge all of your family and friends to vote in favor of the amendment when they vote in 2014.


More Christian Persecution from the Left

Oregon Teacher Escorted From High School By Police For Opposing Planned Parenthood in Classroom

Portland, Oregon – An Oregon high school teacher was escorted from the building by police this week over what is believed to be related to his continued opposition to Planned Parenthood’s presence in the classroom.

Bill Diss is a math and computer science teacher at Benson High School in Portland, and has taught at the school for 11 years. Diss has also become known in the school for his opposition to Planned Parenthood since 2007, when he first began organizing efforts during after-school hours to stop the furtherance of the abortion provider in the community.

“I certainly fight Planned Parenthood, which I certainly have a right to do,” he told reporters this week following the incident. “And that was all on the outside, until [last] year when they brought Planned Parenthood [into the school].”

According to reports, last year, Planned Parenthood of Columbia Williamette began promoting its Teen Outreach Program (TOP) at Benson High School where Diss is employed as a teacher. In September, two representatives from the organization showed up at Diss’ classroom as they were hoping to speak to students. However, he would not let the representatives enter and asked them to leave.

Planned Parenthood of Columbia Williamette is behind a youth sex campaign called “Take Care Down There,” which includes a website that features a warning that the content is for “mature” viewers before guests are allowed to enter. The site includes such controversial skits as “Hot and Heavy,” “Bring Your Sister,” “Threesome” and “The Down There Song,” as well as other titles that are too graphic for Christian News Network to repeat.

Following Diss’ refusal to allow the representatives into his classroom, the principal and vice principal of the school paid Diss a visit and temporarily removed him from the class. The next day, he was forced to sit in on a Planned Parenthood presentation.

“They were extremely aggressive in obtaining the children’s signatures by promising them all sorts of gifts and cash,” Diss said.

Connect with Christian News

Later, Diss also took issue with TOP permission forms that were being sent home with some students that had his name on them. His attorney contacted Planned Parenthood and the school demanding that they retract statements on the form that appeared as if Diss approved of the program. They threatened a lawsuit, stating that Diss was being harassed for his beliefs about the organization.

Ever since, Diss says that the school has been sending him regular notes that question his teaching skills and methods. He has been required to attend numerous hearings, and was told two weeks ago that his teaching contract would not be renewed.

On Tuesday, administrators notified Diss that he was being placed on administrative leave “pending a recommendation to the superintendent that you be dismissed from your employment with Portland public schools for reasons that have been discussed with you.” He told reporters that he was given a few minutes to gather his belongings before he was escorted out by police and asked not to return.

One student told local television station KGW that at times students mocked Diss, a Roman Catholic, for his pro-life views.

“He doesn’t do it a lot, but students do make fun of him for … being against [abortion] and everything,” explained Ty’sha Harrell, a junior. “When he does talk about it, he does have … really good views and everything, but sometimes he goes too deep into it. He brings religion into it.”

The teacher is on paid leave, and he fears that he will be permanently fired. The school is not revealing much information at this time.

“We do not discuss the nature of personnel issues and actions out of respect for the individual,” representatives wrote in a statement this week after Diss was escorted from school. “But I can tell you that we respect the rights of all employees to their own political, religious, social and other beliefs and affiliations and expect all employees to conduct themselves professionally in their work, most especially with students.”

“[Apparently], it is much more important for the school to have Planned Parenthood at Benson than it is to have a teacher teach computer science and math,” Diss said.

Life Before Birth

Life Before Birth Life Before Birth

God’s Design Challenged Again

‘Marriage Equality’ Spells ‘Marriage Extinction’

wedding rings

Next week the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the most critical cases of our time related to marriage equality. On Tuesday, March 26, attorneys will make the pitch both for and against California’s Proposition 8. This, of course, is the Golden State’s pro-marriage amendment. It maintained the timeless definition of natural marriage as between man and wife.

Then, on Wednesday, March 27, the high court will consider the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed in 1996 with overwhelming bipartisan support and signed into law by then President Bill Clinton. It, likewise, secured the definition of legitimate marriage for purposes of federal law.

 Although both cases certainly address a multitude of legal and political issues, they also involve a number of moral and cultural considerations that, if wrongly decided, will literally shake Western civilization to the core.

The stakes could not be higher. Of central concern is whether the Supreme Court will put its official stamp of approval on that cartoonish contradiction-in-terms labeled “same-sex marriage.” Ultimately, these nine justices will decide recklessly either to deconstruct, radically redefine and render functionally trivial the age-old institution of natural marriage – or leave it alone.

They’d better leave it alone.

Here’s the bottom line: Homosexual activists don’t want the white picket fence. They want to burn down the white picket fence. The endgame is not to achieve so-called “marriage equality,” but, rather, to render marriage reality meaningless.

In a recent column headlined, “The Revolt of Intelligence Against ‘Marriage Equality,” worldview expert Rick Pearcey addressed one prominent “gay” activist’s admission that the destruction of natural marriage signifies the left’s ultimate cultural coup de grâce.

“Masha Gessen, a lesbian and a journalist, spoke frankly about this at a conference in Sydney, Australia,” he wrote. “‘It’s a no-brainer that we should have the right to marry,’ she said. ‘But I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. … ‘Marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity,’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction.’”

Still, if counterfeit “same-sex marriage” becomes the law of the land, then a whole lot more freaky deaky will follow before marriage extinction inevitably occurs.

One of liberals’ favorite Alinskyite defense mechanisms is to ridicule the opposition if confronted with some irrefutable argument against some hallowed left-wing delusion. Such is the tactic employed whenever a thinking person walks into the room and points out this big ol’ gay elephant: Once the government pretends that some vague combination of “love” and “consent” are all that a “marriage” requires, then other “arbitrary” and “discriminatory” parameters beyond a binary male-female prerequisite must also go poof.

That is to say, if the Court magically divines some constitutional right to “same-sex marriage,” then full “marriage equality” necessarily demands that polygamous, incestuous and any other equally aberrant nuptial cocktail be likewise permitted.

It’s a “no-brainer,” right?

To that end, I’m very concerned with the Supreme Court’s recent history of radically redefining that which cannot be redefined. Though examples abound, I’m thinking specifically, as concerns the topic at hand, of the Court’s 2003 holding in Lawrence v. Texas.

In Lawrence, the liberal majority, for the first time in history, radically redefined male-on-male sodomy – hitherto classified “a crime against nature” – as a “constitutional right.”

In his characteristically brilliant dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia voiced my concerns better than I can: “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices,” he wrote. “Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision.”

So, if the high court removes one natural marriage parameter for one special-interest group, then “equal protection under the law” requires that it remove all natural marriage parameters for all special-interest groups.

Liberty Counsel made these very points in a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the Supreme Court: “Ultimately, there is no principled basis for recognizing a legality of same-sex marriage without simultaneously providing a basis for the legality of consensual polygamy or certain adult incestuous relationships,” noted the brief. “In fact, every argument for same-sex marriage is an argument for them as well.”

Another brief filed by 18 state attorneys general voiced similar concerns: “Once the natural limits that inhere in the relationship between a man and a woman can no longer sustain the definition of marriage, the conclusion that follows is that any grouping of adults would have an equal claim to marriage,” they wrote.

The brief further observed the self-evident “no-brainer” that legitimate marriage is “optimal for children and society at large.”

It’s all very simple. If anything is marriage, then everything is marriage. And if everything is marriage, then nothing is marriage at all. “‘Marriage equality’ becomes ‘marriage elasticity,’ with the ultimate goal of ‘marriage extinction.’”

I sincerely hope that the honorable and learned men and women who sit upon the highest bench in the land can recognize that all of these San Francisco-style social-engineering games are a deceptive means to a destructive end.

And it’s not the emotionalist end they’ve dolled-up and dished out. The left’s fierce push for “gay marriage” has nothing to do with “marriage equality” and everything to do with “marriage extinction.”

Or, as Ms. Gessen candidly put it: “[I]t’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.”

I just pray that at least five justices still think it should.

Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction Shipped to Syria, Before Our Invasion, Used By Syrian Government Against It’s Own People

Guess where Syria’s chemical weapons originate


Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely says he has confirmation that Syrian forces have used chemical weapons against rebel forces and civilians, and those weapons are likely stockpiles received from Iraq prior to the U.S.-led invasion 10 years ago.

Vallely has met twice in the region with military commanders for the Free Syrian Army, which he describes as the largest and much more moderate faction among the rebels, which also include elements of al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood. He also gets regular reports from a Canadian medical team. Vallely told WND that team is certain that a chlorine gas weapon was used in recent strikes.

“From what I received from the Canadian medical team who works out of Aleppo is that is was chlorine and that what you saw were the reactions on those videos that were put out within the last week,” Vallely said. “The chlorine, the choking, the skin, depending on the density of the chlorine will cause skin irritation. If it’s mixed with other types of gases too, then it could have an even more enhanced effect on the human body, not only breathing but on the skin.”

Vallely believes the chemical weapons are clearly the work of the Assad regime and that the regime will try to pin the blame on the rebels. He said this is not the first time that the beleaguered government has turned WMD on its own people and that he has evidence of a similar attack last summer.

Continue Reading on

The Slide Continues Toward Sodom and Gomorrah

Polygamy Will be Next (And Much More)

There is nothing in our current legal system or  national moral climate that will stop polygamy from becoming the next liberal cause:

“Redefining marriage to include same-sex couples would jettison the rationale and logic behind prohibitions on polygamous marriages, according to several friend-of-the court briefs urging the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the traditional definition of marriage.

 “‘Ultimately, there is no principled basis for recognizing a legality of same-sex marriage without simultaneously providing a basis for the legality of consensual polygamy or certain adult incestuous relationships,’ reads one of the briefs, filed by the Christian legal group Liberty Counsel. ‘In fact, every argument for same-sex marriage is an argument for them as well.’”

The Netherlands is a microcosm of how the homosexual community hoodwinked this once-Christian nation into accepting a perversion. A former Dutch Member of Parliament “has admitted that polygamous marriage is the ‘next logical step’ following the introduction of same-sex marriages in the Netherlands.”

Serial polygamy is already accepted in America. People get married and divorced numerous times with little regard for marriage as a covenant bond. Hollywood types change wives like some people change shoes. Others don’t get married but live together, have children out of wedlock, and few people bat an eye.

Watch the Home and Garden Channel (HGTV) and note how many times non-married couples are living together and the number of homosexual couples that are featured.

In some respects, America is becoming a third-world nation. The cultural mores that made America great are quickly disappearing. Providentially there is a Christian and conservative counter culture that is quietly replacing the disintegrating secular worldview.

Abortion kills off future generations. Homosexuality is a sterile worldview. The only way homosexuality can flourish is by recruitment. I believe a good case can be made that homosexuality is the result of failed families, and that mostly means failed fathers.

The State has become the father figure to many young people. This is especially true in the Black community. The Welfare State made it financially easy for fathers to abandon their children and for the State to become a substitute parent.

Rulers have ever been tempted to play the role of father to their people. . . . When the provision of paternal security replaces the provision of justice as the function of the state, the state stops providing justice. . . . Those who are concerned about the chaos into which the criminal justice system has fallen should consider what the state’s function has become. Because the state can only be a bad imitation of a father, as a dancing bear act is of a ballerina, the protection of this Leviathan of a father turns out to be a bear hug.[1]

There’s something going on in the black community known as the Down Low.

“Ten years ago, the New York Times reported on a growing underground subculture in the black community known as Down Low, comprised largely of men who secretly engage in homosexual activity while living ‘straight’ lives in public.”

Why is this happening? Because a number of black men are looking for father figures, and they believe they can find it in other men.

The people who have gotten on the “gay train” don’t realize what it’s dragging behind it.

More Steps Toward Socialism/Marxism


Administration Refuses to Explain Why It’s Arming a Domestic Agency for War

Surprise, surprise! The most transparent administration in history feels no need to explain its recent purchases of ammunition, including 1.6 billion rounds by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS.) It’s been estimated that’s enough ammo to carry on a war for over 20 straight years. This bullet-buy is in addition to the DHS purchase of 2,700 light-armored vehicles that will apparently be rolling down a street near you….for your safety, of course.

Infowars is reporting that Congressman Timothy Huelscamp (R-Kansas) said in an interview with one of their reporters:

“They have no answer for that question [regarding the DHS ammo purchase.] They refuse to answer that. I’ve got a list of various questions of agencies about multiple things. Far from being the most transparent administration in the world, they are the most closed and opaque.”

He stressed that he is not the only member of Congress demanding answers. But, no one’s getting any out of the Obama crew.

Huelscamp made reference to Rand Paul’s recent attempts to get answers on the topic of domestic drone strikes, noting that the only way to get this administration to say anything may be to refuse to fund DHS during the appropriations process, until such time as certain questions are answered. That, in fact, is the Congressman’s suggested strategy.

Huelscamp answered questions regarding the NDAA’s “indefinite detention” feature. (He was one of only a handful of Congressman from either party to vote “no” on that bill both times. ) And the bottom line on NDAA is the same as with the bullet-buy above and topics like the President’s “kill list” and domestic drone use against US citizens. That bottom line is this: The administration of Barak Obama obviously rejects the idea that it owes anyone at all any answers.

Who can blame them, really? The media might as well be on their payroll.  Good stooges that they are, you know they will not be asking any hard questions.

Our government is off the rails. “Do not remove the ancient landmarks,” says the Scripture (Prov 22:28), landmarks there having reference to identifying property boundaries. Those who moved the landmarks were stealing land and power that were not theirs by law. Metaphorically, the US Constitution was supposed to function like a set of landmarks, keeping the federal power inside a very narrow strip of allowable activity. Nice idea. The writers of the Anti-Federalist Papers had an inkling of what we’re now seeing. That is, for all practical purposes, the markers are gone, along with the boundaries they were supposed to enforce.

It’s easy to despair when we see all these things. It’s tempting to think there’s nothing left to be done, besides the two options of going quietly into that dark night, or going out in a hail of newly purchased bullets.

Christian citizen, there are still other options: strong, powerful ones.  Today (Friday, 3/22) and tomorrow, Kindle readers can get this article for FREE: Fetters of Iron: Biblical Limits on Civil Government. (Because we have to know right before we can do right.) See also the book, Resistance to Tyrants: Romans 13 and the Christian Duty to Oppose Wicked Rulers (paperback/kindle) for a Biblical defense of the virtue of standing up to government-run-amok, along with suggested strategies.

More Outragious Actions of the Extreme Left


Dem Party official makes students ‘stomp on Jesus’

‘Gee, I wonder if the instructor would dare do this with the name of Muhammed’

Deandre Poole

A Florida college professor causing national outrage for requiring students to write “Jesus” on a piece of paper, then put it on the floor and stomp on it, turns out also to be a top official in the local Democratic Party – the latest in a string of acute leadership embarrassments.

Although one student who refused to participate claims he was punished by being suspended from the class, Florida Atlantic University is defending the controversial assignment.

The dissenting student, Ryan Rotela, told the local CBS TV affiliate WPEC that his instructor, associate professor Deandre Poole, told everyone in the class to write the word “Jesus” on a piece of paper in bold letters, then put it on the floor and stomp on it.

Rotela, a junior from Coral Springs, said some of his classmates complied, but he refused.

“Anytime you stomp on something it shows that you believe that something has no value. So if you were to stomp on the word Jesus, it says that the word has no value,” he told WPEC.

A religious Mormon who attends church every Sunday, Rotela complained to school officials but said they responded by suspending him from the class.

According to Florida Atlantic University, Poole was conducting an exercise from the textbook “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition.”

A synopsis of the lesson plan in question, obtained by Fox News, goes like this:

“Have the students write the name JESUS in big letters on a piece of paper Ask the students to stand up and put the paper on the floor in front of them with the name facing up. Ask the students to think about it for a moment. After a brief period of silence instruct them to step on the paper. Most will hesitate. Ask why they can’t step on the paper. Discuss the importance of symbols in culture.”

Grove City College professor Paul Kengor, author of “The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor,” told Fox he wasn’t surprised by the “lesson.”

“These are the new secular disciples of ‘diversity’ and ‘tolerance’ – empty buzzwords that make liberals and progressives feel good while they often refuse to tolerate and sometimes even assault traditional Christian and conservative beliefs,” Kengor told Fox, saying classes like the one at FAU reflect “the rising confidence and aggression of the new secularists and atheists, especially at our sick and surreal modern universities.”

Kengor added: “Gee, I wonder if the instructor would dare do this with the name of Muhammed.”

It turns out, the “stomp-on-Jesus” professor, Poole, also has a prominent position in local politics. As Bizpacreview reports, Poole is vice-chairman of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party.

Moreover, this isn’t the local party’s first brush with negative publicity.

The former chairman of the county Democratic Party was forced to resign in September after comments he made at the Democratic National Convention last year in Charlotte, N.C.

As WND reported, Mark Siegel reportedly told an interviewer Christians who support Israel want to see Jews “slaughtered.”

Siegel was quoted as saying, “Oh no, the Christians just want us to be there so we can all be slaughtered and converted and bring on the second coming of Jesus Christ.”

And two months earlier, a Democratic Executive Committee member from Palm Beach County also slammed Israel. Evelyn Garcia sent an email accusing the Jewish state of atrocities, writing, “By supporting Israeli occupation with U.S. foreign aid, we are all complicit and guilty of their crimes against humanity.”

“And, I deeply resent U.S. taxpayer funds being used to continue Israeli aggression (yes, confiscating other peoples’ land and building illegal settlements is aggression), not to mention ‘incursions’ that kill PEOPLE, destroy civilian homes and infrastructure all over, mass concentration prison camps, etc,etc,etc,” she added.

Garcia quit her post after a public outcry.

In the meantime, still no word from Florida Atlantic University on whether it will discipline the professor who urged students to stomp on “Jesus” and whether Ryan will have his suspension from class lifted.

FAU did, however, email this press statement: “Faculty and students at academic institutions pursue knowledge and engage in open discourse. While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate.


Things to Come?

Michelle Obama Crowned


All Hail the Queen? First lady Michelle Obama is made to look like a monarch in a new ad for Britain’s Sunday Times Style Magazine.

After naming Obama the Best Dressed Woman in the World, the magazine had this ad made to promote the issue.

She was then “immortalised” on her very own British first class postage stamp design — a space traditionally reserved only for the Queen.

Continue Reading on

Tired of Politics? Tierd of the Fight? Feeling Disappointed and Discouraged?

Shall We Gather Strength?


Screen shot 2013-03-21 at 11.32.46 AM

 Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying on our backs and hugging the elusive phantom of hope, until our enemies have bound us hand and foot?”Patrick Henry

I don’t know about you reader, but I am tired. I am tired of talking about and hearing about politics. I am tired of talking heads on “expert” panels telling me what “most Americans” truly want or believe in. Those same “experts” clearly have no idea what I think or what anybody that I know thinks. I am tired of losing. I am tired of losing elections, my income through taxes, my country through a trampling of the Constitution and my culture to hedonism.

If I am honest, since the election, there are times when I have to force myself to write this column. I wonder if anybody is listening or if anyone cares about what is happening. Even among those loyal Patriot Update readers that do care, even among my fellow conservatives, I sense an overall feeling of burnout and defeatism. I know it is there because I am struggling with it myself. The message I want to share with each of you today, and the message I think Patrick Henry was communicating back in his era was this…get over it!!

Remember, I am talking to the man in the mirror as much as I am talking to anyone. But do any of us really have anything to be “burnt out” about. When we compare the challenges and sacrifices we face to those of the founders, to the men at Valley Forge, or to the men that shivered in the brutal cold of Bastogne, we begin to feel very soft and very silly.

I got the chance to talk to a man the other day whose father flew fifty combat missions as a waist gunner in WWII. His father NEVER talked about the war. When he did try to talk about it, he got so emotional that he couldn’t complete the story. This man told me that one day his father did tell him a story. He had completed the milestone of his fiftieth mission and therefore the war was over for him. He didn’t have to go up again. He could have caught a flight back to the U.S. but he chose to wait for his best friend who was only on his 49th mission. When that friend took off for his own fiftieth the two agreed that they would celebrate upon his return and then fly back home together. His friend’s plane came back to base terribly damaged. When it landed my friend’s father knew in an instant that his buddy was dead. He had to fly home alone.

“You don’t know,” the father later wagged a finger at my friend (his son) and said, “You don’t know what we went through, I can’t describe it in words. You don’t know what we went through so that you could be free and have the quality of life that you have now.”

So what should our generation do? Should we throw up our hands and quit trying to change the government through the legal and peaceful means that were won for us? Should we dig bomb shelters and buy survival food, then turn on American Idol, and tune out of the public discourse as we wait for the whole thing to collapse?

I know many of us are discouraged. I know that the main stream media force us to compete in a heavily rigged game. I know that we have been, and continue to be, blindsided by the ferocity with which our protections against an intrusive state are being bulldozed and our values have suddenly become passé . Still, we barely know what tough times are. We have yet to absorb anything like the blows that our ancestors suffered while never wavering.

If we learned nothing else at CPAC we should have learned this: The heart is there. The fight is there in the people. It becomes incumbent upon every one of us to fan those sparks to a flame. We have to be our own media, Rush, and Beck and Hannity etc. are not enough. We must inform our own neighbors. We must cajole the non-participants in our own communities into full engagement and participation. We have to fight, and then falter, and then get up and fight some more. With or without this or that minority group or special interest group’s vote, there are more than enough people in this country to defeat the progressive agenda. Ninety three million eligible voters did not vote in 2012. We must make it our mission to bring those voters to the polls in 2014 and 2016 as conservatives.

Patrick Henry’s challenge to his countrymen is all the more fitting now. This is no time to let up, no time to give up, and no time to surrender.

Chris Skates has 23 years’ experience in power plant chemistry and environmental issues. He is the author of the novel Going Green: For Some It Has Nothing to Do With the Environment and an Adjunct Scholar of The Cornwall Alliance. You can follow him on Twitter or follow his blog at

Working with the world as it “is” to turn it into the world as “it should be.”

President Obama quotes Alinsky in speech to young Israelis


In his address in Jerusalem today, President Obama channeled Saul Alinsky, citing the radical community organizer’s defining mantra as he urged young Israelis to “create change” to nudge their leadership to act.

Obama told a crowd of college students at Jerusalem’s main convention center that Israel “has the wisdom to see the world as it is, but also the courage to see the world as it should be.”

One of Alinsky’s major themes was working with the world as it “is” to turn it into the world as “it should be.”

In his defining work, “Rules for Radicals,” which he dedicated to “the first rebel,” Lucifer, Alinsky used those words to lay out his main agenda. He asserted radical change must be brought about by working within a system instead of attacking it from the outside.

“It is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be. That means working in the system,” wrote Alinsky.

Amazing Race Disgraceful, Degrading Broadcast From Vietnam

Christmas gift from Amanda and Scott to Dad 2008I am a Marine Vietnam veteran. I lost close friends there. I live with the wounds, nightmares and anxiety of my experience there. If I had it to do all over again, I would still volunteer and serve with pride. I have been spit on, called a “baby killer”, experienced all the disdain many people have of that war. We were not receive home with celebrations, but with curses and hate.

Many people have commented how Vietnam veterans don’t talk about the war. Getting information from us is difficult. Here is my perspective of why; I have never found anyone who could understand what we faced, or grasp what it was to live 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in absolute paranoia. Vietnam was the first war America ever fought in where your enemy did not wear uniforms. The enemy could be anyone; man, woman or child. Yes, we were attacked by women and children.

The Chinese were expert at psychological warfare and we were their direct target. Their use of everyday items to use for bobby-traps was beyond anyone’s imagination. We often thought that the Chinese were more interested in wounding us than killing us because of the demoralizing effect it had. Add to that the lack of support of the American people and the stories we read about the riots and demonstrations, the mental effect was debilitating.

I won’t go any further than that. The purpose of this writing has to do with the disgraceful broadcast of Amazing Race from Vietnam last Sunday evening. To have the contestants learn, and perform. a communist song celebrating the shooting down of the B-52 that was on displayed demonstrated their hatred of us veterans and their disregard for what we still suffer today. They shamed themselves, America and every veteran that served in any war.

Such hatred has no excuse. Yet, other than FOX, have you heard anyone else talking about it? Shame on the media and their lack of empathy for us.

My wife and I have been long time watchers of the CBS evening line-up of shows. They have lost me. I can live without them.

Are We Ignoring the Glaring Evidence of Our Nation’s Demise?

Evidence that America is Committing National Suicide


“If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.” — Abraham Lincoln[1]

This is the first time I’ve seen Lincoln’s reference to national suicide. I’m more familiar with James Burnham’s book Suicide of the West that was published in 1964. The Cold War with Communism was in high gear in the 1960s. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a front-page nail biter.

Burnham’s book issued a stark warning to America that went beyond failed ideology of Communism as W.J. Rayment points out:

“Burnham’s thesis . . . was the growth of liberalism and its complete blindness to death, cruelty and injustice perpetrated by leftist regimes.

“In 1964, as today, it is very easy to see how a thinking person might see the intellectual drift to the left as a move toward societal suicide. For liberalism is a cry for the supremacy of general good intentions over the practical application of common sense. Burnham said that liberals are often driven by ‘profound non-rational, often anti-rational sentiments and impulses.’ Ideas like the welfare state and leniency on criminals to facilitate rehabilitation may have sounded good coming out of the mouth of a liberal, but they were disastrous in practice.

“Burnham’s book . . . was in effect a warning that leftward drift would ultimately destroy all affluence and freedom in the world.”

Lincoln indirectly blamed slavery for lawlessness in the United States. While we’ve abolished chattel slavery, we’ve substituted it with a new type of slavery. There are no longer chains, overseers with whips, and restrictive plantations.

In most cases the outward indicators that people are slaves are hidden, and that’s the way our government wants it. Most of the debilitating effects of the new State slavery can be seen in cities like Detroit and certain parts of Memphis, Atlanta, and Philadelphia. These cities committed suicide a long time ago, and their elected officials led them to the ledge.

Today’s political slavery is more insidious because the people enslaved don’t know they’re slaves. It’s not the so-called welfare queens and those who live in Section 8 housing who are the only ones enslaved. Young people who go to college on government grants and loans are also slaves to the State. That’s why we shouldn’t be surprised when they they vote for their slave masters because they’ve been really good to them.

The same can be said of the more than 90 percent of parents who send their children to government schools to be indoctrinated by the State. A majority invariably vote for the perpetuation and growth of government at the expense of others.

They, too, are slaves. Dependency is slavery.

No amount of fact-spreading and resultant consequences of their choices to put their faith in government will deter them ultimately from turning to government for security when a crisis comes. H. L. Mencken said it well:

“The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.”

What Lincoln and Burnham did not see was a downgrading of personal morality of the worst kind and its legitimization by the State. A softening of morals results in the softening of the mind and the ability to think straight.

The use of the phrase national suicide is more than a metaphor. Liberalism kills, whether it’s with economic issues (slavery to the state) or social issues (homosexual marriage, abortion, divorce, single parents, out of wedlock births). “Who will follow the Jews, the gypsies, the handicapped and the aborted unborn who have died by the millions already?”[2].

The United States of America Needs a Revival of Conservatism

Without True Conservatism, The Obama’s Of The World Will Prevail

Recently, Republican Party Chairman, Reince Priebus, announced plans to spend $10 million dollars reaching out to minority groups in a bid to attract a different group of American voters. The Republicans also plan to begin to embrace immigration reform and to soften the party’s stance on gay-marriage. A recent study commissioned by Republicans concluded that the party’s electoral success hinged on becoming more “inclusive and welcoming” of “non-traditional voters.” In other words, the Republicans are caving, and moderate and liberal influences are about to take over what is left of the opposition party, and conservatism is about to be bloodied.

Apparently, the Republican Party no longer wishes to pretend to represent “old white male” conservative voters. The people that work hard, pay their taxes, and raise their families to love God, respect morality and observe the law. Somehow, Republicans have come to view winning as more important than fighting the good fight. Somehow, Republicans have come to believe that Log Cabin Republicans and children of illegal aliens will provide for the Republican Party of tomorrow and I resent their foolishness. It will only cause the future defeat of their party and the further destruction of America.

Soon to be invited to the Republican ranks, the minority homosexual community or the “Log Cabin Republicans,” was a group founded in 1977 to defeat California legislation (see Briggs Initiative) banning homosexuals from teaching in public schools. Since its birth as a homosexual advocacy group, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) has only endorsed one Republican candidate for President, John McCain. All prior Republican Presidential candidates failed to secure this groups support because all Republican candidates subscribed to the traditional definition of marriage and paid little attention to the false cause of gay rights.

Many wrong thinking Republicans believe this group shares a conservative ideology. Aside from what some consider a fiscally conservative, small government, low taxes, free markets, strong defense slant, nothing could be further from the truth. Log Cabin Republicans support liberal causes including “Corporate Diversity”; ”Family Fairness”; and “Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?” It is also worth noting that LCR was instrumental in defeating “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (see Log Cabin Republicans v. United States) and refused to participate in the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). I wonder why.

I lost my faith in any established political party a long time ago. They are all, owned by “big money” influences of one philosophy or another. The Republican and Democrat Party have both done their fair share of damage to the U.S. Constitution and fiscal strength of our nation. Now it appears both parties wish to destroy what is remaining of traditional American values by setting up the old “big tent.”

I have some news for Republicans. I only vote for conservatives. Your national party has not been worth a damn since Reagan left office. You are losing the political fight because few of you possess the courage to tell the truth and stand for traditional American values. You may move to the center to accommodate your newfound homosexual constituency and the entitlement cultured Hispanics like your competition President Obama, but in the end, you will lose the core of your party, conservatives.

Without tradition, there is nothing conservative. The basis for Conservatism is tradition. Voting Republican does not make anyone a conservative any more than owning a gun makes one a constitutionalist. If conservatism fails to win the culture war reshaping our government and political parties, we will all become a nation of indentured servants and slaves to the coming tidal wave of immoral tolerance washing over our Republic.

Rarely do Americans consider the long-term costs of “feel good” ideas like tolerance and social justice. Instead of acknowledging their failures and working to correct the damage they have caused the Republican Party is about to undertake a “rebranding” by unfolding its “Big Tent” strategy again. A vision that includes gay marriage, dual citizens, and the entitlement addicted. Big money influences have laid down the law and Republican lackeys are bowing to their demands.

Political favors will not solve America problems. Respect for honored traditions by honorable men and women will. If the Republican Party turns its backs on conservatism, they might as well hand the government over to the Democrats. Based upon the last 13 years there does not seem to be much of a difference, just one failure after another.

Damn these Cowards!

Department of Homeland Security Refuses to Answer Congress Questions Regarding Ammunition Purchases

Congressmen Demand DHS Explain 1.6 Billion Bullets Purchase

dhs ammoCongressman Leonard Lance (R-NJ) has come out and demanded that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano explain why the Department of Homeland Security has been engaging in huge amounts of purchases of ammunition over the past year. Rep. Lance has called on Congress to get involved in ascertaining DHS’ stockpiling of ammunition which is enough to wage a 20 year plus war, which has most certainly caused a shortage in the public market.

“I think Congress should ask the Department about both of those issues and I would like a full explanation as to why that has been done and I have every confidence that the oversight committee ….should ask those questions,” said Lance.

“Congress has a responsibility to ask Secretary Napolitano as to exactly why these purchases have occurred,” added the New Jersey congressman.

Lance said the he was “concerned” and that he wanted to make sure that Americans continued to live in a country that was based upon freedom and individual rights. He also hoped that DHS would step forward and answer the question candidly.

Congressman Lance is not the only representative in Washington asking ‘Big Sis’ why she is purchasing large amounts of ammunition. We Are Change’s Luke Rudkowski interviewed Congressman Timothy Huelscamp (R-KS) at the 2013 CPAC on his decision to vote against the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and also asked they also discussed Obama’s Disposition Matrix and the large ammunition purchases made by the DHS.

When asked why DHS needs the type of armament that they do against the American people, the Kansas congressman said, “The have no answer for the question. They refuse to answer that. I’ve got a list of questions of various agencies about multiple things. Far from being the most transparent administration in the world, they are the most closed natured, opaque and they refuse to let us know what’s going on there. So I don’t have answers for that. Multiple members of Congress are asking those questions.”

“When it comes down to it, during the budget process, during the appropriations process, are we willing to hold DHS’ feet to the fire?” he asked. “We’re going to find out if we get an answer. I say we don’t fund them till we get an answer.”

The conversation pointed out the complaints about sequestration and added in addition to the billions of round purchased there are also $50 million new uniforms on order from the DHS.

Recently Forbes called for a “National Conversation” in light of DHS’ ammo spending spree. Ralph Benko writes, “It is utterly inconceivable that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is planning a coup d’etat against President Obama, and the Congress, to install herself as Supreme Ruler of the United States of America. There, however, are real signs that the Department bureaucrats are running amok. About 20 years ago this columnist worked, for two years, in the U.S. Department of Energy’s general counsel’s office in its procurement and finance division. And is wise to the ways. The answer to “why would DHS need such a vehicle?” almost certainly is this: it’s a cool toy and these (reportedly) million dollar toys are being recycled, without much of a impact on the DHS budget. So… why not?”

“Why, indeed,” he continues, “should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland? Because it’s wrong in every way. President Obama has an opportunity, now, to live up to some of his rhetoric by helping the federal government set a noble example in a matter very close to his heart (and that of his Progressive base), one not inimical to the Bill of Rights: gun control. The federal government can (for a nice change) begin practicing what it preaches by controlling itself.”

“Remember the Sequester?” Benko asks. “The president is claiming its budget cuts will inconvenience travelers by squeezing essential services provided by the (opulently armed and stylishly uniformed) DHS. Quality ammunition is not cheap. (Of course, news reports that DHS is about to spend $50 million on new uniforms suggests a certain cavalier attitude toward government frugality.) Spending money this way is beyond absurd well into perverse.”

As you recall, former Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin was criticized for posting on her Facebook page, “We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.” In the wake of that, last week the Democratic Governors Association (DGA), a lobbying organization which represents governors affiliated with the Democratic Party, started an ad campaign calling on Americans to sign a petition demanding Sarah Palin be denounced for “extremist” rhetoric.

DHS solicited in February for 240,000 rounds of ammunition and recently DHS put in a solicitation for 7,000 “personal defense weapons” that shoot 5.56 NATO ammunition that have “fire select” capability along with high capacity 30 round magazines. Remember these are for “homeland” use, not foreign.

Back in December DHS solicited for 250 million rounds of .40 caliber ammunition. In September, DHS solicited for nearly 200 million rounds of sniper ammunition. In August 750 million rounds of high power ammunition were also solicited and in March DHS solicited 450 million rounds of hollow point bullets.

Additional government agencies have also solicited for large amounts of ammunition. While it is expected that law enforcement at the Federal level would purchase ammunition, it is the large purchases in a short amount of time from an Marxist regime and a Federal department charged with “homeland security” to be purchasing this much and many of the rounds are hollow points.

DHS, via a February Associate Press article claimed that they were merely purchasing in bulk to save money and that these purchases were merely for training purposes, something I was also told last year by one reader who claims to have been in law enforcement. However, a former Marine, Richard Mason, told reporters at WHPTV, that he has his doubts.

The House just got through passing a Continuing Resolution which fully funds the implementation of Obamacare. I’m thinking it might be time against for Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) to bring on another filibuster to make the American people aware of the lack of transparency on the Obama administration’s part in acquiring these billions of rounds to be used in the service of homeland security. I’ll stand with Rand again. Will you?

See two accompanied videos:


Successful Defense of First Amendment Rights

Student’s First Amendment Rights Violated by School Says U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

The Pocono Mountain School District believes elementary school students should have their First Amendment rights greatly limited.

In December 2010, a fifth grade girl at Barrett Elementary Center in Cresco, Pennsylvania went to school carrying flyers for a Christmas party at her church.  Although other students have passed out flyers and invitations to other out-of-school events like scouting and various clubs, school officials stopped the girl from handing out her flyers because it contained elements of religious faith.  The Pocono Mountain School District stood behind the school’s decision, claiming they have a policy that forbids anything being handed out that mentions religious faith in any fashion.

In March of 2011, Alliance Defending Freedom filed a lawsuit against Pocono Mountain School District on behalf of the student, claiming that her First Amendment rights of free speech had been violated.  The school district not only cited their policies but argued before the court that elementary students are young enough to have their First Amendment rights greatly limited.

A lower court heard the case and ruled that the school had indeed violated the student’s First Amendment rights.  The school district appealed the case to the Third US Circuit Court of Appeals who just issued a ruling that backs up the lower court’s decision that the school district did in fact violate the student’s First Amendment rights.  The Appeal Court also ruled that the two policies the school used as their defense were unconstitutional when applied in this form of student expression.  In their decision, the court wrote:

“It is difficult to identify a constitutional justification for cabining the First Amendment protections … to older students.  The fact that [the student] was only in the fifth-grade and the invitation originated from her church does not mandate a different approach.”

David Cortman, Senior Legal Counsel for ADF who filed the original lawsuit on behalf of the student, commented about the latest ruling:

“In this day and age, when our younger students are subject to so much that comes from both the school district and outside sources, it’s certainly important that they’re able to speak about their own faith and not be subject to censorship for it.”

“In this case, the school district tried to argue that for some reason the Constitution doesn’t apply to younger students, but the court rejected that theory – and that’s certainly good for all students.”

This is not the first time that a school district trampled on a student’s First Amendment rights only to have the courts rule in favor of the student.  The Candy Cane Case from Plano, Texas, was fairly similar to this one and ended with a similar court ruling in favor of the student.

If you find that your child’s school is bullying them about their Christian faith, church or the like, check into it and if need be contact someone like Alliance Defending Freedom.  Schools must be stopped and taught that they are not as powerful and privileged as they think they are.  If you don’t take action, the school will continue to bully other kids and violate their First Amendment rights, so you owe it not only to your child, but all of the others as well.

Is the Door Open for the Rise of the Antichrist?

I am a student of the Bible and have been for forty years. Europe”s present financial disaster is described in Revelations as the platform for the Antichrist to come into power. Jesus reveals that the Antichrist will propose a solution to the economic chaos that will be accepted by the world’s powers and establish peace. That will be his inroad to world wide tyranny.

Please read the following blog post with that in mind. Is Jesus return eminent?


This is what Socialism looks like if…

Posted by on Mar 18, 2013

Socialism… you happen to be a productive member of society.

Yesterday we wrote about Fun and Games in the Mediterranean, how the government of Cyprus was getting set to “tax” bank accounts from 6% to 10% to get the IMF to bail out their two largest banks.  The banks shut off all electronic transfers, today is a bank holiday and the government has extended it through Wednesday.  The Cypriot (interesting the last four letters of that little nation) Parliament has not yet codified the “tax” but it’s on the way.

Let’s take a quick look back at the two most interesting quotes from Europe’s political class from yesterday.

European officials said it would not set a precedent.


officials were quick to say Cyprus was a unique case.

Today, we’re learning more about this “grand bargain.”

First of all, it appears that the highest tax rate will be 15%.  It will have three tiers, 6% on small accounts, 10% on account of rich people and 15% on the wealthy.  I’m sure it’s all about fairness.

Now you may think a 15% tax on your bank account is outrageous, but the Cypriots are lucky the Germans didn’t get their way.  ZeroHedge reports that they wanted a flat tax of 40%.

Second, let’s talk about yesterday’s highlights.  No precedent, Cyprus was a unique case.

The Germans, who are throwing up their hands and screaming “Not our idea!!” are pointing every finger they can find and everybody who’s handy.

BERLIN (Reuters) – Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble deflected blame on Monday for a European bailout deal for Cyprus that foresees hitting small savers in the Mediterranean island’s banks, saying this solution had not been a German idea and that he was open to it being changed.

They’re obviously lying through clenched teeth.

Not only are the Germans – who provide all the European money for bailouts in the EuroZone – lying about Cyprus, they’ve got their eyes on Italy.

Joerg Kraemer, chief economist of the German Commerzbank, has called for private savings accounts in Italy to be similarly plundered. “A tax rate of 15 percent on financial assets would probably be enough to push the Italian government debt to below the critical level of 100 percent of gross domestic product …”

I find it interesting that the IMF, the European Union and the financial media are calling this raid on private bank accounts a “tax.”  Kind of like the way the Obama administration, the Congress and the US major media are now referring to the ObamaCare penalties as a “tax.”  In fact, neither are taxes.

Again, from ZeroHedge

 Let’s be quite clear; the European Union has confiscated the private property of the citizens in Cyprus without debate, legislation or Parliamentary agreement …

A bank account is not a bond or a stock or any sort of investment. This seems to be lost on many people. A bank account is the private property of a citizen or a corporation and does not belong to the government or at least that was the supposition up until now in Europe.

Europe is on the edge.  For all the talk of “austerity” in Greece, Spain and Italy, those governments haven’t faced the reality that they have to make fundamental changes in their government.  There were riots in Greece and Italy over cuts that were the rough equivalent of the sequester here in the US.  In other words, no real cuts.

Greece, Italy and Spain will all require additional bailouts from the EU and IMF.  France will be the next country to fall off the fiscal cliff.  Look for more “taxes” imposed by the unelected financial wizards and then you will see real rioting.

Note that big concern with Italy is that their debt to GDP ratio is over 100%.  That is a financial red line from which there is little hope of recovery.  Note also that President Obama and his Democrats have driven the US debt to GDP to 107% and the US major media hasn’t said a word.

Pay attention to Europe, the same situation is coming our way and there will be nobody around who can bail out the US.


Joe The Plumber’s Promise to His New Born Daughter

My Promise To My Daughter

Posted by on Mar 18, 2013

dad&SamI do not know what my Daughter will grow up to be, but I do know that I will raise her to be  a God Fearing/Loving Christian woman. I will raise her in The Word. I have taken on the responsibility of raising a daughter and she will see and feel that she is my priority. I will work hard to provide for her, but I will not let the world intrude on our family time. I will not make the mistake of being her friend, I will be her Dad… because that is what she will need.

Public Declaration:

I will Love her
I will teach her
I will show her GOD’s love
I will support her
I will encourage her
I will Love her
I will be patient
I will be understanding
I will comfort her
I will be there for her
I will teach her family
I will teach her commitment
I will discipline her when needed
I will teach her responsibility
I will teach her to think for herself
I will teach her Love of Country
I will Love her
I will play dress up
I will teach her to shoot
I will teach her to fish
I will hug her
I will praise her
I will braid her hair
I will be silly
I will be there for her
I will Love her
And… I’m sure along the way you will teach me

These are my promises to you Samantha Jo, I love you and am very thankful that GOD has blessed us with you and that I get to be your Dad.

Another “Brain-Child” of the Liberal Left

Elizabeth Warren: Hike Minimum Wage to $22 an Hour

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) wondered out loud why the nation’s minimum wage isn’t at $22 an hour, during a Senate Committee hearing on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions last week.
“If we started in 1960, and we said that, as productivity goes up — that is, as workers are producing more — then the minimum wage is going to go up the same. And, if that were the case, the minimum wage today would be about $22 an hour. So, my question, Mr. Dube, is what happened to the other $14.75?”
President Obama called for an increase in the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9 in his State of the Union address.

Silencing and Denying the Military Vote

US Military Voting: Silencing and Denying the Military Vote


By: Gen Jerry Curry (Ret.)

Many of our military personnel stationed overseas do not successfully vote in presidential elections; or when they do vote their ballots don’t count. It is criminal that the President and the Pentagon can arrange for our troops to die in the service of their country, but can’t arrange for those same troops to vote.

The Department of Defense could have ballots printed and flown to our troops at all our bases all over the world, have them filled out by the troops, sort the ballots out, fly them back to the U.S., and then have them deposited at voting drop off sites with plenty of time to spare. If legislation is needed to make this procedure legal and lawful, then let the President so inform the Congress and it will be done.

“So, why aren’t soldiers voting? In many cases they simply can’t, and they have their commander in chief, President Obama, to blame,” asserts American Majority Action CEO Ned Ryan writing in the Washington Times. Since most military service men and women are by nature conservative, they tend to vote Republican. The President and the Secretary of Defense are Democrats and they may not be as keen as they could be to see that our troops exercise the right to vote.

But Obama and the Secretary of Defense are only a small part of the problem. The Generals and Admirals running the Pentagon could easily arrange for every overseas military soldier, sailor and airman on active duty worldwide to vote. Of course this assumes that exercising the soldier’s right to vote is a high priority within the Pentagon bureaucracy. If there isn’t a high level of interest, a simple nod of the head by the Secretary could fix the problem.

Currently the Obama Administration counters our troops failure to vote by pointing out that fiscal problems, including the Sequestration and a shortage of funds, makes it impossible to properly implement the military voting program as well as the President would like. The problem is really not just a shortage of funds; it is also a shortage of will power and little concern for our troops being able to exercise their constitutional right to vote. We know that many in the Obama Administration may not be too eager to encourage military troops to vote. So, some of the bureaucrats in the Pentagon will not protest overly much if somehow the overseas voting program doesn’t catch fire and if the troops are “accidentally” shut out of exercising their constitutional voting rights.

Civilian National Security Force Is A Reality and Being Armed and Supplied

Dear Mainstream Media, Don’t You Want to Know Why Obama Needs 1.6 Billion Bullets?

18 March 2013 /


Dear Mainstream Media,

Back in 2008, candidate Barack Obama went off his teleprompter and added a couple of sentences to the text of a speech about expanding the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps. Over rolling applause, the soon-to-be president of the United States said: “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

At the time, Joseph Farah of wrote a column calling on you to help shine a light on what this shocking statement really meant. In a permanent state of vapors over Obama’s candidacy, you were of no use when it came to extracting anything but press releases from Team Obama.

Nearly five years later, it hardly matters that candidate Obama’s promise to double the Peace Corps and the rest has come to naught. But the president’s unscripted determination to empower a civilian national security force is a different story. As far as you’re concerned, though, it’s also a non-story.

This complacency or complicity has to stop. During the last 10 months, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, including millions of hollow-point bullets. The department also has purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, and it has overseen the retrofitting of more than 2,000 light tanks, which, of course, were originally designed to resist the mines and ambushes of the battlefield. Why does DHS need such offensive and defensive firepower?

Remember, DHS stands for Department of Homeland Security, and “homeland,” just to be extremely clear, means the USA. Obama must be asked against which domestic enemy he is arming nonmilitary forces. It sounds incredible, to be sure, but are we watching administration battle plans take shape against American citizens on the streets of Your Town, USA?

That’s where you in the mainstream media come in. This story has been burning up the “alternative press” of our Internet age — Drudge Report,, — for months, even years. As noted by Natural News, another “alternative” source, it’s only this week that the story is finally showing up in the mainstream media. Leapfrogging off a very thin Associated Press story of Feb. 15, contributor Ralph Benko made quite a splash (664,581 views) this week with a more substantive piece acknowledging these same menacing stockpiles and calling for a “national conversation.”

We the People seem ready for such a conversation — just think of all those story views. (By contrast, the next most popular story garnered 87,384 views.) You, the media, need to make sure the administration doesn’t get away with stonewalling.

Read More:

URGENT! MUST READ AND ACT! This Makes the 2014 Mid Term Elections All The More Important


Obama’s Advisers: Disarm America Through Taxation


“The power to tax involves the power to destroy,” Chief Justice John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819.

Here’s what Obama’s advisors are telling him about the way to confiscate guns: Tax them.

They are advising him to tax guns, ammunition, magazines, and licenses and then attach draconian remedies for failure to register and pay the taxes. Set the taxes low the first year, then increase them gradually to the point where a person owning an AR 15, three magazines and a box of ammo would owe $5,000 a year in taxes.

If a gun owner doesn’t pay, the small print at the end of the tax law would subject him to jail and confiscation of everything he owns.

Why use this approach? Because people ignore gradual change and taxes can be imposed as a gradual change. It’s only when two things happen simultaneously that revolution occurs. First, the ideals underlying the society must be undermined. That has already happened. And second, there must be a spark that ignites revolt. Since traditions and ideals of the country have already been compromised, it would be unwise to create any sparks.

Taxes ignite no sparks. Getting a tax bill is a non-event. The hapless taxpayer grinds his teeth and gets out his checkbook. He’s in a bad mood for a month. There is nothing to rally around. No one has been killed or invaded, at least at the point where the tax has been imposed.

Under this taxing approach you increase taxes to the point no one can pay them, then send a tax bill to the gun owners you know about (in Pennsylvania, that’s pretty much everyone who owns a gun), and you wait for someone not to pay. When a preferred target doesn’t pay, you send the storm troopers to his house, find his guns, and arrest him. You take the offender’s guns and his house and put him in jail for twenty years. Then you publicize the arrest and declare a period of amnesty for other weekend rebels and watch the guns flow in.

At that point, the country will have been effectively disarmed.

After the taxes are imposed and offending gun owners are picked off one at a time, wives will implore their husbands not to risk the family home, all their savings and the husband’s own freedom. And they will point to the examples of imprisoned and bankrupted gun owners that have already been held up to public view.

Norman Thomas described America’s descent into socialism very much in the way I have described America’s descent into gun confiscation:

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without every knowing how it happened.”*

That’s the smart way to do it, Barack. Get us a little farther down the road to socialism, then quietly tax guns, and finally, take them all.

*Source cited quote from “The Liberal Mind,” pg, 27 by Lyle H. Rossiter

Are You Smarter Than A Sixth Grader?

Dianne Feinstein: Assault Weapons Like Child Pornography

feinstein gunThe Senate Judiciary Committee passed Feinstein’s gun-grabbing bill that bans over 150 different types of guns, but it didn’t pass without a fight from Republicans. Ted Cruz grilled Feinstein on the Constitutionality of her gun ban, reminding her that the same “right of the people” applies equally to the 2nd Amendment as it does to the 1st and 4th Amendments.

He asked her if she thought it within the purview of the federal government to ban certain books because it didn’t like them (in violation of the 1st) or claim that certain citizens are not protected against unlawful searches and seizures (in violation of the 4th). After all, he contended, this is what she and her Democrat team are doing with the 2nd Amendment and semi-automatic weapons. They’ve simply deemed those firearms “assault” weapons and have arbitrarily decided that they are scarier than other guns for the time being, and because of that, they can be legally banned.

But she didn’t want a lecture on the Constitution:

”I’m not a sixth grader. Senator, I’ve been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons. I’ve been up — I’m not a lawyer, but after 20 years I’ve been up close and personal to the Constitution. I have great respect for it. This doesn’t mean that weapons of war — and the Heller decision clearly points out three exceptions, two of which are pertinent here. And so I — you know, it’s fine you want to lecture me on the Constitution. I appreciate it. Just know I’ve been here for a long time. I’ve passed on a number of bills. I’ve studied the Constitution myself. I am reasonably well educated, and I thank you for the lecture.”

She strongly objected to Senator Cruz’s use of the term “prohibited.” She said that nothing’s being prohibited, because there are 2,271 exemptions. She said:

“Isn’t that enough for the people in the United States? Do they need a bazooka? Do they need other high-powered weapons that military people use to kill in close combat? I don’t think so.”

After she didn’t answer Cruz’s question, he asked it again, to which Feinstein reluctantly responded, “No.” The government does not have the authority to ban certain books, because that would be a violation of the 1st Amendment.

But then she backpedaled when other Democratic members of the committee chimed in and reminded her of child pornography. She then changed her answer and said that child porn books can be legally banned because they are not protected under the 1st Amendment. So, banning weapons (with “exceptions”) is OK, because they’re not protected under the 2nd Amendment, just like child porn. Therefore, it’s not a violation of the 2nd Amendment.

When are they going to say that with regard to handguns and shotguns and knives? Who decides which weapons are not protected by the Bill of Rights? Apparently Dianne Feinstein. And we should trust her to make these arbitrary decisions because she’s “not a sixth grader.” She’s a “reasonably well-educated” person. And yet she still doesn’t get it that banning semi-automatic guns won’t do anything to curb violent crime, but will most likely increase it.


New Pope: Same-Sex Marriage ‘A Machination of the Father of Lies’

By Breitbart News 13 Mar 2013

New Pope Francis I is an ardent opponent of same-sex marriage, in coincidence with traditional Catholic belief. In 2010, he wrote, “Let’s not be naïve, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

The media remains aghast at the fact that Francis I is a Catholic. They should get used to it.

Hurray for the Courage of the Secret Service to Speak Out

Secret Service Agent Blasts Obama

indexA former agent blasted President Obama for blaming the Secret Service for the decision to shut down White House tours, calling it “an act of political cowardice” on Your World with Neil Cavuto this afternoon. Dan Bongino explained that the agency’s job is to provide security for the White House; it does not determine who comes in. “To say that this was the Secret Service, and that they somehow injected themselves into a political decision — well, do they get to tell [the president] to stop taking vacations and to stop going golfing as well?” Bongino said. “This doesn’t even pass the smell test.”

The administration’s explanation for who decided to stop the tours in response to sequester cuts has been murky over the last few days. Obama told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in an interview this week that the Secret Service was responsible, but press secretary Jay Carney had earlier told reporters that the White House made the call. Carney later attempted to clarify that the Secret Service decided to withdraw personnel, which ultimately prompted the White House to cancel tours altogether.

See video at


A Great Message of Hope

Tyrants, You Are Warned!

“The Bible is no mere book, but a Living Creature, with a power that conquers all that oppose it.”

– Napoleon Bonaparte

On a daily basis, America’s biblical and constitutional foundation is under hostile attack by atheist and homosexual groups that are being used as a political battering ram in an attempt to usher in communism.

For example, an atheist group filed a brief on Feb. 15 fighting the federal government’s motion in support of a permanent shrine to Jesus in the Flathead National Forest. Outrageous!

(I find that these groups operate on the defense rather than the offense, falling into the very holes they themselves have dug (Psalm 7:15).)

Another example: Outgoing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has defied the Defense of Marriage Act and unilaterally issued a directive stating that the U.S. military will now extend certain benefits to unmarried domestic partners that were formerly reserved for married couples—but will only do so if the domestic partners certify in writing to the Department of Defense that they are of the same sex. Absurd!

The question is, who has been responsible for encouraging the onslaught of attacks against America’s Christian heritage and constitutional republic? You need not look any further than Obama and his vile minions for the answer.

Scripture comes to my aid: “The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted” (Psalm 12:8).

Barack Hussein Obama has been labeled the “Architect of a New America” by Time magazine, and Newsweek featured him as the “First Gay President.” Obama is also known as America’s most biblically hostile president. He has placed himself above We the People time and time again, as if to say we derive our rights from Obama instead of God.

Obama has personally attacked biblical values, the bedrock of our republic, over 50 times since he took office.

Day by day, Obama’s tyrannical measures are beginning to take shape. And what should America expect from one who is at war with God?

It is clear to see the narcissism of this president, but just as obvious is the hypocrisy and lack of duty from the professed church and the modern government (leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod, Mark 8:15). After all, leaders will only do what the people let them get away with.

Theologian John Calvin said, “And ye, O peoples, to whom God gave the liberty 
to choose your own magistrates, 
see to it that 
ye do not forfeit this favor 
by electing to the positions of highest honor, 
rascals and enemies of God.”

Study the Past

At the entrance of the National Archives in Washington, D.C., you will see a monument stating, “Study the Past.”

Why study the past? Our forefathers suggested this so we might learn from history, so it does not repeat itself.

History has shown time and time again that when a nation departs from God, there will be a tyrant in the midst attempting to move into His position. Then follows devastation and massive loss of life. This is what God warned would happen to nations that refuse keep His commandments (Leviticus 26:21).

God commands us to go back to the old paths “where is the good way” (Jeremiah 6:16), not to dare His justice by taking on the new paths.

Here are ten lessons men have learned from history:












Indeed, America is emulating those who have not learned from history. If you do not learn from the lessons history has to teach, then history will repeat itself.

History also teaches a lesson to tyrants who are at war with God and attempt to usurp His law (Isaiah 14:13-15). What man forgets, God will not.

What did Bonaparte say? Those who oppose God and His Word will be conquered – and that is exactly what history teaches us.

Let me show you the little-known history of those who dared to crucify Christ, kill His apostles and behead John the Baptist. Let me also show you what happened to tyrant Mussolini, French Queen Marie Antoinette, godless Voltaire and the vain Senate of Rome: Go to


Discrimination Against White People???????

Congressional Black Caucus Urges Barack Obama to Discriminate Against Whites

by Published by https://www.political

Embrace Diversity PeopleCongressional Black Caucus to President Barack Obama – “The people you have chosen to appoint in this new term have hardly been reflective of this country’s diversity.”

So said Marcia L. Fudge, oblivious to the irony that such a statement would be coming from her; she’s the chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, a group the diversity of whose members ranges from light-skinned black to dark-skinned black. That is the extent of the level of diversity within the CBC.

Even the Congressional Hispanic Caucus has more diversity. Visit the CHC’s Wikipedia page and click on each of the pages for the 21 current members (all of whom are Democrats, by the way, as only a Democrat would be so segregationist). You will find that at least half of them look white. The only thing Hispanic about them is that their names sound like Taco Bell meals. (I can say that because I’m part Cuban.)

And if you look at the Congressional White Caucus, you’ll find–oh, wait, never mind  I forgot that a Congressional White Caucus doesn’t exist. For one, white people don’t have such privilege, and two, white people–or at least the Republican ones–don’t wish to segregate themselves off from other races.

Marcia Fudge, who does engage in such segregation, feels offended that President Obama hasn’t nominated anyone to any cabinet positions who can “speak to the unique needs of African Americans.” She wrote a letter to Obama to express her racist desire for Obama to start discriminating against whites.

A White House spokesman responded to the letter from the Congressional Black Caucus by saying, in part, “The President is deeply committed to diversity in his cabinet and ensuring his Administration reflects the breadth of our country.”

Because the rep said President Barack Obama is committed to diversity, we can deduce that “ensuring his Administration reflects the breadth of our country” means ensuring every racial group is featured in proportion to its demographics in the country.

If this were really President Obama’s goal–and of course it should not be, and I don’t believe it is–every group of 100 people in his administration would consist of 72 whites, 13 blacks, 5 Asians, and one lone Elizabeth Warren (Native American).

Decisions as to who will be advising the leader of the country should not involve such trivialities as the melanin level in someone’s skin. The only considerations should be competence, wisdom, knowledge, and the desire to uphold the Constitution.

More Evidence of the Socialist Mentality of the California Government

California Gun Confiscation Program to be “National Model”

gun california confiscationCalifornia’s Attorney General Kamala Harris wrote a letter to Joe Biden recommending that California serve as a national model for gun confiscation. “What do we do about the guns that are already in the hands of persons who, by law, are considered too dangerous to possess them?” she wrote. In total, about 20,000 Californians and 200,000 citizens nationwide own guns “illegally.”

Probably no other state tracks firearm sales as closely as California. They’re constantly cross-referencing their gun registry with criminal and mental health records. About 15 to 20 previously “legal” gun owners get added to the criminal or mental health records daily, all of sudden making them criminals for owning a firearm.

If someone was recently admitted to a mental hospital, that revokes that person’s 2nd Amendment rights. If someone had a restraining order placed against him, (whether justified or not) that revokes that person’s 2nd Amendment rights.

California’s Department of Justice has been going around door-to-door and actively participating in gun confiscation. Last year, they seized over 2,000. They also confiscated 117,000 rounds of ammo and 11,000 high-capacity magazines.

John Marsh, one of California DOJ’s supervising agents for the gun confiscation program, lamented that he got called the Antichrist by a resident who was outraged that he was taking people’s guns away. He assured Bloomberg News that they weren’t “contacting anybody who can legally own a gun.”

Yeah, but they’ll be saying that long after they’ve taken everybody’s guns away. They’ll claim that not one “lawful” gun owner had his guns confiscated. It just so happened that all gun owners in some way revoked their own 2nd Amendment rights, making their possession of firearms illegal, warranting gun confiscation.

This is how they’ll take everyone’s guns away supposedly without violating people’s 2nd Amendment rights. They’ll continue to champion the 2nd Amendment while they persist in keeping guns out of the “wrong hands.” They’ll just eventually consider every single non-government civilian as the “wrong hands.”

Lynette Phillips, one Californian whose guns were seized by the California DOJ, recently stayed involuntarily at a mental hospital for 2 days. That was enough for her to show up on their list of “illegal” gun owners and have her and her husband’s 3 guns taken away. She said that the mental health professional blew a situation out of proportion, and she was forced to stay in a mental health facility. That’s entirely plausible. But was she able to state her case to the police before they stole her weapons? Of course not. Once you show up on the list, that’s it.

We already know who Homeland Security deems to be domestic terrorists. Mental health professionals aren’t going to be any different, because they don’t want to “take any chances” of a gun winding up in the hands of someone who might have a politically incorrect opinion. After all, they’ll be held accountable for not turning someone in who ends up committing a crime. So, that’s their incentive for wanting to be overly cautious.

This is why conservatives should not at all be in favor of sanctimonious politicians trying to keep guns out of the “wrong hands” via background checks and mental health records. You and I are the wrong hands.

Part of the solution is for states to enforce penalties for murder, rape and other violent crimes. Murderers and rapists especially should be executed, regardless of whether or not they were “insane” at the time of the crime. And it doesn’t matter what weapon, if any, they used to threaten or kill their victim. The focus should not be on the tools used to commit the crime, but rather the criminal act itself.

The other half of the solution is to encourage all households to own and carry firearms for their protection. Cities and small towns around the country are starting to do this, but it needs to be much more widespread. Gun proliferation among law-abiding citizens is far more effective than a police state in combating crime.

We can’t and shouldn’t depend on the police or mental health professionals for crime prevention. Yes, guns will end up in the hands of criminals, regardless of the laws. But I’d much rather have good people and bad people own guns than just the bad people. Besides, we outnumber the bad guys by far. But that won’t be true for long if California becomes the national model for gun confiscation.

Great Questions. Any Good Answers Yet?


1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It’s Time For A National Conversation

Soldiers from the 41st Infantry Regiment, 1st ...Armored Personnel Carriers in Baghdad. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, so far to little notice.  It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition.  As reported elsewhere, some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month.  Therefore 1.6 billion rounds would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years.  In America.

Add to this perplexing outré purchase of ammo, DHS now is showing off its acquisition of heavily armored personnel carriers, repatriated from the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation.  As observed by “paramilblogger” Ken Jorgustin last September:

[T]he Department of Homeland Security is apparently taking delivery (apparently through the  Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico VA, via the manufacturer – Navistar Defense LLC) of an undetermined number of the recently retrofitted 2,717 ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ MaxxPro MRAP vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.”

These MRAP’s ARE BEING SEEN ON U.S. STREETS all across America by verified observers with photos, videos, and descriptions.”

Regardless of the exact number of MRAP’s being delivered to DHS (and evidently some to POLICE via DHS, as has been observed), why would they need such over-the-top vehicles on U.S. streets to withstand IEDs, mine blasts, and 50 caliber hits to bullet-proof glass? In a war zone… yes, definitely. Let’s protect our men and women. On the streets of America… ?”…

“They all have gun ports… Gun Ports? In the theater of war, yes. On the streets of America…?

Seriously, why would DHS need such a vehicle on our streets?”

Why indeed?  It is utterly inconceivable that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is planning a coup d’etat against President Obama, and the Congress, to install herself as Supreme Ruler of the United States of America.  There, however, are real signs that the Department bureaucrats are running amok.  About 20 years ago this columnist worked, for two years, in the U.S. Department of Energy’s general counsel’s office in its procurement and finance division.  And is wise to the ways.   The answer to “why would DHS need such a vehicle?” almost certainly is this:  it’s a cool toy and these (reportedly) million dollar toys are being recycled, without much of a impact on the DHS budget.  So… why not?

Why, indeed, should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland?  Because it’s wrong in every way.  President Obama has an opportunity, now, to live up to some of his rhetoric by helping the federal government set a noble example in a matter very close to his heart (and that of his Progressive base), one not inimical to the Bill of Rights: gun control.  The federal government can (for a nice change) begin practicing what it preaches by controlling itself.

Remember the Sequester?  The president is claiming its budget cuts will inconvenience travelers by squeezing essential services provided by the (opulently armed and stylishly uniformed) DHS.  Quality ammunition is not cheap.  (Of course, news reports that DHS is about to spend $50 million on new uniforms suggests a certain cavalier attitude toward government frugality.)

Spending money this way is beyond absurd well into perverse.  According to the AP story a DHS spokesperson justifies this acquisition to “help the government get a low price for a big purchase.” Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center:  “The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.”

At 15 million rounds (which, in itself, is pretty extraordinary and sounds more like fun target-shooting-at-taxpayer-expense than a sensible training exercise) … that’s a stockpile that would last DHS over a century.  To claim that it’s to “get a low price” for a ridiculously wasteful amount is an argument that could only fool a career civil servant.

Meanwhile, Senator Diane Feinstein, with the support of President Obama, is attempting to ban 100 capacity magazine clips.  Doing a little apples-to-oranges comparison, here, 1.6 billion rounds is … 16 million times more objectionable.

Mr. Obama has a long history of disdain toward gun ownership.  According to Prof. John Lott, in Debacle, a book he co-authored with iconic conservative strategist Grover Norquist,

“When I was first introduced to Obama (when both worked at the University of Chicago Law School, where Lott was famous for his analysis of firearms possession), he said, ‘Oh, you’re the gun guy.’

I responded: ‘Yes, I guess so.’

’I don’t believe that people should own guns,’ Obama replied.

I then replied that it might be fun to have lunch and talk about that statement some time.

He simply grimaced and turned away. …

Unlike other liberal academics who usually enjoyed discussing opposing ideas, Obama showed disdain.”

Mr. Obama?  Where’s the disdain now?  Cancelling, or at minimum, drastically scaling back — by 90% or even 99%, the DHS order for ammo, and its receipt and deployment of armored personnel carriers, would be a “fourfer.”

  • The federal government would set an example of restraint in the matter of weaponry.
  • It would reduce the deficit without squeezing essential services.
  • It would do both in a way that was palatable to liberals and conservatives, slightly depolarizing America.
  • It would somewhat defuse, by the government making itself less armed-to-the-teeth, the anxiety of those who mistrust the benevolence of the federales.

If Obama doesn’t show any leadership on this matter it’s an opportunity for Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, to summon Secretary Napolitano over for a little national conversation. Madame Secretary?  Buying 1.6 billion rounds of ammo and deploying armored personnel carriers runs contrary, in every way, to what “homeland security” really means.  Discuss.

Pastor Standing Up Against the Politically Correct

Church Celebrates 2nd Amendment, Kids Make Pop-Tart Guns During Sunday School

By / 13 March 2013 /

DSC_0687bThis past Sunday, a Chicago area church sponsored a Second Amendment Sunday filled with “assault” pop-tarts, “combat” cupcakes and a sheet-cake that featured a chocolate semi-automatic Glock handgun with a quote from Jesus that read “Blessed are the peacemakers.”  John Kirkwood, Pastor of Grace-Gospel Fellowship in Bensenville Illinois said the idea came to him after reading a column by Doug Giles entitled “Christian Parents Should Have Their Kids Play With Toy Guns.”

“Giles has a way of exposing the absurdity of the left,” said Kirkwood, “his article was in response to some Pastor from St. Louis and his ‘toy gun’ buyback program.   That and the news about 7 year olds getting suspended for threatening pop-tarts and menacing cupcakes led me to stand up for true American values and the Biblical wisdom that underlies them.”  The Pastor, referring to two recent cases in which a pop-tart shaped like a handgun and cupcakes topped by plastic soldiers brought on what many felt was over-the-top school discipline, decided to respond in kind.

“We had an ‘assault’ pop-tart challenge in our Jr. Church where each child who wanted to participate chewed a pop-tart into the shape of a gun and the top four would win prizes; in this case a toy gun,” said Kirkwood, “the guns were named for celebrities.”

“Second runner up received a double barrel shot-gun that we nicknamed ‘The Biden,’ and when we presented it we made sure to say what ‘not’ to do with it in a real situation.  The prize for runner up was a Navy Seal sniper rifle that we named ‘The Chris Kyle’ in honor of the American Sniper.  We felt that it was appropriate,” added Kirkwood, “given the insulting way that this administration ignored the death of this American hero, yet had the crust to send a delegation to the memorial service for Hugo Chavez.”

What was the top award?   Kirkwood smiled and noted, “You know, I stood in the toy aisle for a good half an hour to choose just the right one and it turned out to be the biggest Nerf gun that I could find, and the kicker – the box was marked ‘semi-auto’ and ‘high capacity,’ so we named that one ‘the Feinstein.’”

The church had signs, sold t-shirts and even had a chili cook off to honor the day but it wasn’t all about mocking political correctness.  “I instructed my teachers to plan their lessons around the Biblical understanding of the value of life, the directives to protect that life and the right to bear arms in doing so.  We deconstructed the myth of the pacifist Jesus and connected the dots between the second amendment and the Bible,” Kirkwood remarked.

David Steiger, the church coordinator of Bible Boot Camp, added, “At Grace Gospel Fellowship we take words seriously, especially those of God and the founders.  That’s why this past Sunday ‘we the people’ sought to honor ‘in God we trust’ by examining God ordained rights in the light of the Declaration, the Bill of Rights and most importantly the revealed Word of God. We celebrated 2nd Amendment Sunday as an assembly because we know … if Christians don’t do it, if Christians WON’T push back, the single most important experiment in the history of the world will come to an ungodly end.”

What was the general response to this rather unique worship service? “Well one couple did walk out, though I was told it was for another engagement, but overall the response was tremendous and we plan on doing it every year … and next year the prizes will be even better.  Our Bible Boot Camp class (High School age) will be challenged to come up with a 5 minute speech on the right to bear arms and the winner will walk away with a Ruger 10/22,” said Kirkwood, “who knows, maybe by then we’ll have sponsors.”

As for the odds on this becoming a national phenomenon among fellow pastors, Kirkwood smirked, “you’re kidding me right?  The reason this country is in this condition is not because sinners act like sinners, it’s because Christians don’t act at all.  And pastors?  They’re notorious cowards … anything that will come between a filled pew and a filled collection plate … the hirelings scamper away.  Having said that, I have been contacted by three other pastors each from a different state who want to know more and asked me to send them material.”  The pastor went on to say, “There will always be a remnant … I hope to see a new Black Robe regiment rise up and man the wall.”



Another senator warns of gun confiscation

Says criminals will acquire firearms regardless of law

author-image by Taylor Rose Email | Archive

Taylor Rose is a Washington, D.C., staff reporter for WND.
WASHINGTON – A ban on assault weapons will lead to “gun confiscation,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, today warned the Senate Judiciary Committee reviewing S. 150, the proposed “Assault Weapons Ban.”

In his opening statement, Grassley said

that despite banning “assault weapons,” mass shootings will continue and “criminals will continue

Anonymous Gun Buy Back Program In San Francisco

to circumvent” the law.

He predicted that after these current measures prove ineffective, “then we will continue to debate whether gun registration is needed and it will lead to gun confiscation.”

The senator reminded the committee that criminals do not comply with existing background check laws, and this type of legislation would punish lawful gun owners, rather than prevent crime.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., however, said the plan to ban a certain type of weapon “demeans the argument,” and the bill has nothing to do with confiscation.

Schumer said “all we are doing is extending the success of the Brady law,” claiming the 1993 act that instituted federal background checks “by almost universal agreement, has been extremely successful without any infringement upon lawful ownership.”

Majority Democrats on the committee then advanced S. 150 to the floor of the Senate, with all Republicans opposing the move.

Though Schumer said he supports the Second Amendment and is opposed to gun confiscation, in 2007 he voted against the Vitter Amendment to SA 2774, which would have protected American citizens from gun confiscation in the event of a national emergency.

Additionally, by resisting the Vitter Amendment, Schumer stood against a measure barring the United Nations from registering personal firearms in the U.S.

The specter of gun confiscation over the American people has increased. WND reported Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., in a Senate hearing last week asked Attorney General Eric Holder if an AR-15 might be a better defensive weapon at times than a shotgun.

Vice President Joe Biden several times has suggested in his advocacy of President Obama’s gun restrictions that people who need to defend themselves should buy a shotgun.

To Holder, Graham, said, “Let me give an example,” Graham began. “That you have a lawless environment where you have a natural disaster or some catastrophic event, and those things, unfortunately, do happen. And law and order breaks down because the police can’t travel, there’s no communication. And there are armed gangs roaming around neighborhoods.

“Can you envision a situation where if your home happens to be in the cross-hairs of this group that a better self-defense weapon may be a semiautomatic AR-15 versus a double-barrel shotgun?” Graham asked.

Holder dismissed the question, calling it a scenario from a “hypothetical” world.

Graham said facing such a threat, he would prefer an AR-15, and he disagreed with Holder’s suggestion that the scenario is removed from reality.

“Well, I’m afraid that world does exist. I think it existed in New Orleans, to some extent up in Long Island, it could exist tomorrow if there’s a cyber attack against the country and the power grid goes down and the dams are released and chemical plants are discharges,” he said.

Holder said, “I don’t think New Orleans would have been better served. … ”

Graham interjected: “What I’m saying is if my family was in the cross-hairs of gangs that were roaming around New Orleans or any other location, that the deterrent effect of an AR-15 to protect my family is better than a double-barrel shotgun, but the vice president and I have a disagreement on that.”

Concerned about surveillance drones, tanks in the streets and gun confiscation? Find out “HOW AMERICA IS BECOMING A POLICE STATE” in this shocking WND special report.

WND reported last month on the events in New Orleans following Katrina’s assault.

There, thousands of weapons – legally obtained and owned – were grabbed from citizens after New Orleans Police Superintendent P. Edwin Compass III announced: “Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons.”

To make sure the message was loud and clear, the city’s Deputy Police Chief Warren Riley told ABC News: “No one will be able to be armed. We are going to take all the weapons.”

Then they did exactly that.

One man at a post-Katrina meeting assembled in conjunction with the National Rifle Association said: “The bottom line is this. Once they did it, they set a precedent. And what we’ve got to be sure [of] is that the precedent stops here.”

In a series of videos, the NRA documented the weapons grab by police in New Orleans with videos that show them physically taking weapons from individuals, including one woman who was stunned when officers threw her against her kitchen wall because she had a small handgun for self-defense.

The not-to-be-forgotten images, Part 1:

Part 2: To See Video Copy and Paste This embed// <![CDATA[
// ]]>

The police actions – many of the victims describe the gun confiscation as out-and-out theft – left New Orleans’ residents, who had been prepared to stand their ground and defend themselves from thugs and looters running amok, completely defenseless.

Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center, told WND such plans “start smacking of a non-The United States of America” and more of “some Third World country.”

The government, he said, appears to want ever more control over people’s lives, which “is crippling the ability of people to defend themselves … in situations like a Hurricane Katrina where the police were nowhere around and people were taking up arms to protect their property.”

He noted that since the U.S. Supreme Court has determined police do not have a constitutional obligation to protect people from crime, self-reliance often can be the key to survival.

Gun confiscation schemes, then, mean “we’re going to have a citizenry that is helpless in the face of lawless people.” And that, said Thompson, is unconstitutional.

Herb Titus, a nationally known constitutional attorney and law professor, told WND government’s claim always is that such draconian powers will only be used “in an emergency situation.”

But there are so many “emergencies,” he said, that “all of our rights are in jeopardy.”

“It’s typical of the government to do this, typical of this age. You see the government believes it can make the decision for you better than you can make it for yourself. There’s a lot of this from the Obama administration,” he said.

The result?

Government “as our master, rather than servant,” he said.


Numbers Never Lie, But Theu Can Be Manipulated

by Published by

Chris Matthews: Obama Deserves Credit For “This Amazing Economy”


Urkel Obama economyEvery time Obama speaks, Chris Matthews “gets a thrill up his leg.” So we can only imagine what Matthews is experiencing now that Obama has created such an “amazing economy.”

When government officials say the economy is bad, liberals blame Bush. When government officials say the economy is good, liberals give Obama the credit. But this is Obama’s 2nd term. They’ve got to skew the data to make it look as good as possible and then give Obama all the credit. That’s what Chris Matthews is doing:

“[W]hen is President Obama going to get some credit—and this is like Rodney Dangerfield—when’s he going to get some credit for this amazing economy that’s coming back? It definitely is coming back, maybe not like gangbusters, but the unemployment rate really dropped again today, and there really are a quarter-million new jobs out there. It really is amazing… It seems to me when I look at the stock market breaking all records, when I look at 236,000 new jobs and I keep thinking when are the Republicans going to do what Rodney Dangerfield asked for all those years, ‘show a little respect.’ And what does this all mean? Don’t they secretly say ‘damn it, things are getting better!’ I mean what are they saying when they read this stuff?”

Well, one thing that we’re saying is that that the Bureau of Labor Statistics doesn’t include everyone who is unemployed. Howard Portnoy over at Hot Air made this observation:

“While 236,000 Americans found jobs in February, 296,000 stopped looking. Once an unemployed person has run through 99 weeks of unemployment compensation, moreover, he no longer exists in the eyes of the Labor Department’s statisticians, and is thus no longer counted as unemployed.”

A record 89.3 million Americans are no longer counted as unemployed. That includes people who have retired, but it also includes people who have simply given up looking for work. Millions of people are in this category. When millions have given up looking for employment because not many businesses are hiring anymore, that indicates that the economy is not doing well at all, and that in reality, the unemployment rate is higher.

Matthews asks when Obama is going to get the credit. I give Obama much deserved credit for this failing economy. And I understand it’s not just Obama. It’s his entire team, including the media and even many on the Republican team.

Centralized economic planning doesn’t work. Well, it works to centralize power over the economy in the hands of a dictator, but it doesn’t work to make the economy thrive. The government can’t ever be a catalyst for economic growth, because all it does is interfere in the economy by taxing and regulating businesses out of existence and granting monopolies to the big corporations which write laws benefiting themselves. Of course, that’s what liberals like Matthews call “leveling the playing field.”

I have no trouble at all giving Obama credit for this economy. But we don’t have an amazing economy unless you live in the White House or work for MSNBC. As for Americans, many are struggling to make ends meet, many are underemployed and many more have given up looking for work. Those things are natural consequences under socialism. When’s Chris Matthews going to give Obama credit for those things?

Must See Video

Get ready for a future superstar. She is only FIVE YEARS OLD.

Five Year Old<iframe src=”; width=”320″ height=”240″ frameborder=”0″>


More Sybolism Over Substance

John Brennan Sworn In On Constitution Without Bill Of Rights, Not Bible

8539033959_ec46e87578Newly confirmed Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan took his oath in a swearing ceremony that was highly unusual. Brennan was not sworn in on a Bible. He was sworn in by Vice President Joe Biden on a “first draft” of the Constitution, which does not contain the Bill of Rights.

The first draft included notations from George Washington. While this might sound historic and patriotic. It is anything but that.

So what is a “first draft” of the Constitution? According to Empty Wheel:

That means, when Brennan vowed to protect and defend the Constitution, he was swearing on one that did not include the First, Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments — or any of the other Amendments now included in our Constitution. The Bill of Rights did not become part of our Constitution until 1791, 4 years after the Constitution that Brennan took his oath on.

I really don’t mean to be an a*****e about this. But these vows always carry a great deal of symbolism. And whether he meant to invoke this symbolism or not, the moment at which Brennan took over the CIA happened to exclude (in symbolic form, though presumably not legally) the key limits on governmental power that protect American citizens.

Here’s how the White House pushed the symbolism of this ceremony:

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office – behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America’s top spy – the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

“There’s one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters gathered for their daily briefing. “Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington’s personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.”

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

“Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,” Earnest said.

The Bible has been used historically in the oath that one takes. The oath calls the God of the Bible to witness against the person taking the oath. This nonsense of swearing in on the Constitution, even the one that we hold to now as was done by Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), or the Koran is utterly un-American and has not been done historically. The symbolism is clear: according to Brennan and the Obama administration, they will not swear to uphold American citizen’s rights or State’s rights, for that matter, in so cavalierly performing this mockery of an oath.

If you think this is unimportant, perhaps you weren’t paying attention when Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) was filibustering. I suggest you educate yourself a bit on that here.

Brennan has also been outed as a Muslim, which gives many cause for concern, seeing the growing calls for Shariah law, the State Department’s attempts to recruit jihadists, the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of U.S. government, as well as a Muslim sympathizer in the White House.

Three Must See Videos – Especially the One of the Father Speaking to His “About-to-be” Son-in-Law

Kimmel Exposes Sequester Ignorance: ‘Only Voted Obama Because He’s Black’

Kimmel Exposes Sequester Ignorance: ‘Only Voted for Obama Because He’s Black’ Kimmel Exposes Sequester Ignorance: ‘Only Voted for Obama Because He’s Black’

Most Touching Speech Made by Bride’s Father to the Groom Most Touching Speech Made by Bride’s Father to the Groom Christian Teen’s Anti-Gay Poetry Video Goes Viral Christian Teen’s Anti-Gay Poetry Video Goes Viral

Unimpeachable Evidence of the Tyranny of the Obama Adminstration

Anticipated Internment/Resettlement (Re-education) camps … Government documentation and operational parameters.

Don’t be mislead into thinking these will be … or are being … built to house ‘foreigners’ IE.; How many foreigners do you believe hold a valid US Social Security Number?

Dumb Gun

Today I swung my front door open and placed my Remington 870 shotgun on the front porch. I gave it 6 shells, and noticing that it had no legs, I decided to place it in a wheelchair to help it get around.

Then I left it alone and went about my business. While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy across the street mowed my lawn, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign in front of my house.

After about 2 hours, I checked on the gun and it was still sitting there in the wheelchair, right where I left it. It had not rolled itself outside and it had not killed anyone even in spite of the many opportunities that had been presented to it, and strangely enough, it had not even loaded itself.

Well you can imagine how surprised I was with all the media hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people.

So either the media is wrong, and it is the misuse of guns by people or I’m in possession of the laziest gun in the world.

So now I’m off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat.

Infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama Adminstration


Why couldn’t we find qualified men who were ‘born in America’
to help make decisions for our country?


Arif Alikhan – Assistant Secretary for Policy Development for the

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

 Mohammed Elibiary – Homeland Security Adviser

 Rashad Hussain – Special Envoy to the (OIC) Organization of the Islamic Conference

 Salam al-Marayati – Obama Adviser – founder Muslim Public Affairs Council

and its current executive director

 Imam Mohamed Magid – Obama’s Sharia Czar – Islamic Society of North

AmericaIslamic Society of North America

 Eboo Patel – Advisory Council on Faith-Based Neighborhood Partnerships

A Fresh View Needing Attention

Mixing Politics and Religion

Posted by on Mar 8, 2013 Published by https://www.

REVRAYWhy would anyone want to start a discussion about politics? I mean, seriously, when you go to a party and you see that hand waving, fanatically loud, opinionated person who’s captured a couple of innocents in a corner…well, you just don’t go there, right?

What about the family picnic and weird uncle Ray is doing his best Billy Graham impression, telling everyone about the need for Jesus, and “just as I am”, so you try to hide, right again? For the majority, we really don’t want to mix politics and religion into everyday conversation for just those reasons.

But what happens when politics becomes religion? Guys like Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin may never have started out thinking of themselves as Savior, but we know what eventually happened.

Italian author and historian Emilio Gentile in an interview by David Hulme said, “…some secular entity in politics, like “the Fatherland,” “the Race,” “the Revolution,” “the Proletariat,” becomes absolute and requires obedience from people who believe that such an entity is the giver of the meaning of life, for which you should be willing to sacrifice your life. In any nation you sacrifice your life in war to save the country. In this way, the country (“or it’s leader” mine) becomes a secular god.”

Let me cut to the chase and say I love America, I was born, raised, and will die here. I love Jesus, even more, I pastor a small church, my children know right and wrong from the bible, and someday I’ll be carried to heaven in the arms of my loving Savior.

But when it comes to matters of faith, I PRAY…matters of conscience, I VOTE

For example, let’s say:

  • Death of the innocents…

I pray and believe God would not have me support the needless taking of life

I vote for a strong military (best deterrent to war) and against government funded abortions

  • Social justice and human rights…

I pray and believe Jesus sees all people the same, all are one in His eyes,

I vote for representatives with high moral values and against government intervention (dependance) to “level the playing field” based on race, creed, sexual preference, etc.

  • Economics…

I pray and believe God owns it all, (we give because we receive) and 10% is a good place to start

I vote for fiscal responsibility (when the out-go exceeds the in-come, then the up-keep will be your downfall ) and against stealing people’s money by selectively (vs. proportionately) raising their taxes

So, maybe if we all do a little more praying before voting, we won’t find we’ve elected a new savior instead of a servant. In which case, we would lose the right to vote anyway, be left with only a discussion of politics, a whole lot more only praying, and no more need to mix politics and religion ever again. What fun would that be?

Did You Hear About the American City that Requires It’s Citizens to be Armed?

Another City Requires Its Residents To Own Firearms

nelson ordinanceWe’ve written before about Kennesaw, Georgia, the town that since 1982 has had an ordinance that requires gun ownership among its residents. Part (a) of the ordinance read:

 “In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.”

  Part (b) listed those who were exempt from the statute that included those who were physically or mentally disabled such that they were incapable of safely using a firearm; those who “conscientiously opposed” the ownership of guns; and those who were felons.

Now there’s another city actually not far from Kennesaw that’s doing the same thing. Nelson, Georgia sits on the borderline between Pickens and Cherokee Counties, and for this reason, police response time is low. Nelson has one police car that patrols the city during the day for 8 hours, but for the remaining 16 hours, they have no one. This is why the city is requiring its residents to own firearms, and their ordinance is modeled after Kennesaw’s.

If you asked someone like Piers Morgan, he’d say that these kinds of ordinances are all about money. They’re all about padding the pockets of the evil gun lobby. Now, I’m all about following the money, but you have to know when it applies. Money is in every transaction, and just because there is a money connection, doesn’t mean that it must be bad.

If a city encouraged its residents to start growing their own food as a way to lessen the blow associated with an economic meltdown, would they just be padding the pockets of the “garden lobby?” It would no doubt be good for those companies selling seeds and gardening supplies, but it would also be good for those starting a garden.

You follow the money with things like Obamacare. It’s a federal mandate that will eventually apply to every single American. It’s a mandate that will increase the cost of healthcare and drastically lower the quality all at the expense of the American taxpayers. It harms the American people and benefits large corporations. Those are the instances where you “follow the money” to find out why we have such stupid laws.

A city ordinance requiring its residents to own a gun does not harm them in any way. It benefits them. And yes, it benefits gun manufacturers. This is a win-win situation, and therefore the money connection isn’t relevant.

One Nelson, Georgia resident was complaining that this ordinance is over the line. He said, “This is big government at its worst. Government mandating what a free individual can and will have in his home.” Oh please. I can think of far worse mandates from a government. Like mandating that everyone get rid of his guns.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: