Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for February, 2014

Amnesty Is The Knife That Killed Us


Posted By on Feb 28, 2014

no amnesty sign

“By polluting clear water with slime you will never find good drinking water.” – Aeschylus

Motives are often questioned in politics. In a sense, one cannot question motives, because there is no way to know with certainty what is going on inside the mind of another person. On the other hand, one can—with near certainty—understand motives by studying someone’s past actions. Additionally, motive can be uncovered by studying the nature of man.

The immigration debate has me questioning motives. The reasoning behind amnesty seems obvious to me. For many average American liberals, amnesty is fair. They actually believe that we should grant citizenship to those who have come here outside of the law. However, the elites in Washington know exactly what they want out of amnesty: votes. They want 11 million or so new Democrat voters.

For many countries, the path to citizenship is a difficult one, one that requires skill. These countries want the best and brightest. This makes sense. Allow me to make an analogy. Every year, Ivy League schools across the country wade through thousands of applications in order to decide whom they will allow into their school. They often set very high standards. Many times, not even a high GPA will guarantee a spot. Why do they do this? They do this to make sure that their school remains competitive, and is able to churn out graduates who will excel in their fields of study. If these schools didn’t set high standards, and as a result, admitted nearly anyone who applied, they would no longer remain competitive. Their quality would be greatly diminished. The same applies to citizenship.

The United States seems to be the only modern nation whose immigration policies are scrutinized, and we’re not even close to being the strictest in terms of whom we allow into our country. Why is it that conservatives are constantly being shamed for disagreeing with amnesty? Why is it that conservatives are beaten down for wanting to be competitive? There are a million possible answers, but by understanding past actions, and the nature of human behavior, those possibilities are significantly narrowed.

Democrats, as well as many, many Republicans are smitten with big government. I believe this is because with bigger government comes greater power. Combine a large, matriarchal government with an influx of millions of low-skill workers, and what do you get?

  • You get a recipe for dependency.
  • Low-skill individuals are much more likely to need government assistance, and a portion of those recipients will take advantage of that assistance.
  • Those who take advantage will continue to vote for those who gave them all the free stuff.
  • If this portion of people is large enough, we will forever fall under one Party rule.

We are already facing a crisis in terms of the percentage of Americans on government assistance. Over the last decade, the number of Americans on assistance has skyrocketed. There are those who deny this theory, who naively believe that very few would ever take advantage of the system. To those people, I say: take a look at the numbers.

  • Human nature is greedy.
  • Given this situation, adding millions of new people to the system who will very likely require government assistance,
  • we would be living in a country in which those who are contributing are outnumbered by those who are taking.

Once the contributors are outnumbered by the takers, we will have reached a tipping point at which time a conservative will never again win a national election. The Democrats want to keep a hold on their power, and the best way to do that is to make sure a conservative Republican never even has a chance. The magic weapon? Amnesty. A flood of low-skill workers. The most absurd part about it is that many Republicans will go along with the plan, because they are afraid of not being liked, or they mistakenly believe that the plan will benefit them as well. These Republicans are staggeringly naïve, and are contributing to the destruction of our country.

Could I be incorrect in my assessment of the motives of the Left? No. I know this because I’m not a moron, and I can see patterns, and I recognize the darkness of human nature. We are dying, and amnesty is the weapon that did us in. 2016 is our last chance to turn this ship around.

Resist Amnesty


Today’s “Must See” Political Video

Conservative Videos Banner

February 28, 2014 at 12:06 pm

A Message to African-Americans About Abortion


Click on image to view video

Black abortion

If the Obama IRS did Nothing Illegal, Why would Lois Lerner need Immunity?

Tea Party News Network Banner

February 27, 2014  By

Lerner The IRS scandal has served as a worrisome affirmation of some of the worst suspicions citizens have had of their government. Though it is no longer taught in schools, many of us grew up learning of American exceptionalism- that our system of government, while not perfect, protected citizens from a government that was intolerant of dissent.

Now, we maintain a government that spies on the people, lies to the people and targets political dissent.

The IRS scandal serves as a classic illustration as to how this administration handles scandal. When cornered, the Obama Administration never admits wrongdoing, but quite often, doubles-down.

When confronted with evidence of wrongdoing, the Obama Administration did not apologize and waiver; they offered up the Cincinnati office workers as “rogue agents” and shrugged off the scandal.

Now, this very same IRS that spent years targeting Tea Party and conservative groups is now looking to codify and legitimize this kind of harassment by instituting new rules and regulations within the IRS that would allow them to squelch nonprofits.

IRS official Lois Lerner has been called to testify before Congress, but Lerner has already begun to drag her feet and promise to testify only in exchange for immunity.

Lerner was called to testify last May, but before invoking her Fifth Amendment right to refrain from testifying, Lerner gave a statement denying her guilt. The House Oversight Committee voted 22-17 in favor of acknowledging that Lerner, by reading her statement, had waived her right to Fifth Amendment protections and now, Lerner is scheduled to be called before the Committee on March 5th.

Lerner is promising testimony only in exchange for immunity from prosecution; however, such legal maneuverings leaves one wondering, “What would she need immunity from if, according to President Obama, there isn’t a ‘smidgen’ of corruption in the IRS scandal?”

President Obama has repeatedly shrugged off allegations of corruption, even in the face of empirical evidence to the contrary. Sitting down with Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly earlier this month, Obama claimed that the IRS scandal was a fake scandal, spurred on by sensationalized, rightwing reporting and claimed that there was not even a “smidgen” of corruption to be found.

If that’s the case, Lerner would not need immunity.

The IRS scandal is about so much more than mere harassment of political groups; it signifies a shift from a government that is willing to slightly bend the rules to a government run by people willing to outright break the rules and lie to cover them up.

TPNN’s Greg Campbell contributed to this article.



Todd Cefaratti About Todd CefarattiA graduate of the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), the University of California Irvine (UCI) and (HBS) Harvard Business School Executive Program. Todd Cefaratti holds degrees in economics, marketing and digital marketing. Todd is one of the top internet marketing experts in his field. Todd is also the founder of the nonprofit organization which began in 2009 at the height of the Tea Party movement and today is recognized as one of the top national Tea Party organizations in the movement. The organization is still growing at over a 1000 new patriots every day and going strong with over 600,000 loyal active members. Todd is also the CEO of a major marketing consulting and fundraising organization and the Tea Party News Network. In his spare time, Todd is active with his wife and two daughters in their Christian church and Christian school that both daughters attend.View all Todd Cefarrati’s Posts

– See more at:

ObamaCare Victims Fight Back: We Are Not Liars and Phonies


Doctor to Reid

Watch the latest video at &amp;amp;lt;a href=””&amp;amp;gt;;amp;lt;/a&amp;ampGRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX HOST: Tonight, the Tea Party is celebrating. What are they celebrating? Well, you are going to go to the party a little later.

But right now, the Obamacare horror show goes on.


SEN. HARRY REID, (D-NV), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: There’s plenty of horror stories being told.

UNIDENTIFIED DOCTOR: I’m going to have to be dealing with patients who could get taken off the drug that is now stabilized them and kept them from being disabled.

REID: All of them are untrue.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Our family, our premiums increased from $440 a month to $920 a month.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can’t afford that. I think I’m going to let it go and hope I can stay healthy.

REID: All of them are untrue.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My wife was diagnosed with stage-4 brain and bone cancer. We received this letter of cancellation.

REID: All of them are untrue.

UNIDENTIFIED DOCTOR: I’m going to stop being a doctor when I know I could take care of somebody but I’m not allowed to use the medications that could provide that.

REID: All of them are untrue.


VAN SUSTEREN: Well, our first guest says Senator Harry Reid is wrong, Obamacare is a horror for real. And to her patients and her employees, it is a horror. Ophthalmologist, Dr. Patricia McLaughlin, joins us.

Good evening, Doctor.


VAN SUSTEREN: When you hear Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid say these horror stories are wrong and untrue, what do you think? What do you say to him?

MCLAUGHLIN: I would just certainly hope that he said that in haste and that perhaps the information that was given to him came from a source that wasn’t correct. This is not the case that we are seeing in our practices and with stories patients are telling us.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Well, let’s go specific. Let me go first to your patients. You have patients who have insurance and they go to you. But now you have been knocked off one of the insurance networks. Is that correct?

MCLAUGHLIN: Well, I have been not dismissed but have nothing offered participation status in some of the subsections of one of the insurance companies. And that was insurance that would be covering individuals taking out insurance through the Affordable Care Act or through small business plans outside the Affordable Care Act. It also included them.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, does that mean that these patients that some patients of yours can no longer go to you unless they pay out-of-pocket?

MCLAUGHLIN: That’s correct.

VAN SUSTEREN: Have any of your patients said anything to you? Are they distressed by this or are they happy to sort of move on to look for another doctor?

MCLAUGHLIN: You know, most patients are attached to their doctor. We have had long-standing relationships. We don’t just take care of an illness. We take care of the human spirit as well. So we know things about their spouse, their children, their parents. We have gone through their trials and tribulations. There’s a relationship. Of course, they are distressed. And they don’t enjoy the fact that they don’t have freedom of choice any longer. It’s very, very confusing to them. It’s very distressful. They don’t know where to turn. They still will call us and ask for help. And, of course, we are willing it do that.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Now you have also gotten squeezed because of what’s happened with your own insurance for your employees. What’s happened with them?

MCLAUGHLIN: Well, I had a small business plan and my employees were under my plan as well. So when my plan was cancelled, which was a very complex, very complete plan, but it was cancelled. And the reason given in the letter was that it had to do with not meeting the regulations of the Affordable Care Act. I mean, this completely confused me and came as a complete surprise. Well, you know, I had to then obtain a broker and start looking at other options because the subsequent plan that was offered by the same insurance company turned out to have a network that was so incredibly narrow, so restrictive, where my original plan had a robust network with many, many doctors, including myself on it, and the subsequent plan, didn’t have me or any of my colleagues or any of the doctors that myself, my husband, and my employees used. We didn’t lose just one doctor, we lost a lot of doctors. It was horrendous.

VAN SUSTEREN: Doctor, thank you. Good luck to you.

MCLAUGHLIN: Thank you so much.


Watch the latest video at &amp;amp;lt;a href=””&amp;amp;gt;;amp;lt;/a&amp;amp;gt;Mother

Mother with sickly daughter outraged by Reid’s comments

Senate majority leader claimed ObamaCare ‘horror stories’ are untrue – and this mother fired back on ‘Fox & Friends’

MUST WATCH! Greenpeace founder says Climate Change a combo of ‘extreme political ideology and a religious cult’

Posted on Feb 27, 2014 at 10:51 PM

By The Right Scoop

This guy is my new hero on Climate Change. Patrick Moore, the founder of Greenpeace, says he left the group back in the mid ’80s after being with them for 15 years, when he says the group took a hard turn to the political left and began to adopt positions he could not accept with his scientific background.

When asked by Hannity what’s driving the Climate Change agenda, he said this:

It is a powerful convergence of interests among a very large number of elites, including politicians who want to make it seem as though they are saving the world, environmentalists who want to raise money and get control over very large issues like our entire energy policy, media for sensationalism, universities and professors for grants – you can’t hardly get a science grant these days without saying it has something to do with Climate Change.

It is a kind of nasty combination of extreme political ideology and a religious cult all rolled into one. And it’s take over way too much of our thought process and way too much of our priorities. There are millions of children dying every day from preventable vitamin deficiencies and diseases and we’re spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a problem that may not exist.

That’s probably one of the most thoughtful descriptions of the Climate Change agenda I’ve ever heard. He goes on to talk about why these climate models used to predict Climate Change can’t be trusted and why water vapor is the key to understanding it.

Lastly, when asked by Hannity if he expects to be attacked because he is coming out against Climate Change, he pretty much said yes, but that he’s not worried about it because he knows his stuff. BOOM!

Watch the full interview below:

Climate Change

Racist Lecturer Delivers Anti-Republican Rant at Public University

Union organizer says ‘division, racism, sexism, and classism’ are American values

February 27, 2014 2:01 PM

A guest lecturer at the University of Wisconsin Whitewater, a public school, began class Tuesday with a racist, anti-Republican rant that went on for more than ten minutes.

The guest lecturer, Eyon Biddle, is the political and organizing director for Service Employees International Union Local 150. Biddle was speaking in the freshman general education course “Education 130: Individual and Society,” which allegedly “examines how people influence and are affected by their social worlds from the perspectives of anthropology, psychology, sociology, and women’s studies.”

In a video taken by a student in the class, obtained by Campus Reform, Biddle blames “white rage” for the failure of the Badger State’s 2010 recall attempt against Republican Governor Scott Walker. The union organizer goes on to say that American values are those of “division, racism, sexism, and classism.”

An excerpt of the video is below, and the full video can be found here.


“You’re looking at me like, ‘Dude you’re f*cking absurd, you’re crazy,’” Biddle said near the beginning of his lecture. “But every day you are living in a system that is telling you how to think, what to think, and when to do it.”

The SEIU official declared that blue-collar, white workers would not have voted for Scott Walker in 2010 — a vote that was “against their own interest” — if not for “white rage” and distaste over having to “pay for health care [for] blacks, browns, and gays.” He also said “racism with the first black president” was the cause of support for a governor who is trying to rein in government employee unions’ political power and head off a looming budget meltdown as public employee benefits spiral out of control.

Biddle went on to explain that Walker was not funded by normal Wisconsinites, but rather the “Koch brothers, corporations, [and] rich people” who were “confusing people, scaring people, [and] scaring the elderly about Medicare, Medicaid changes due to the Affordable Care Act.”

All of this was just “nonsense” Biddle informed his young adult audience.

Stating that his opinions “are just fact, the reality of what we live in,” Biddle said that now America focuses on “gay rights, women’s rights, things that polarize people, things that feed into the sense of those deep, like I said, American values of division, racism, sexism, classism.”

Freshman Kyle Brooks, secretary for the college Republicans, who filmed the video, told Campus Reform, “I’m very disappointed. What could have been a productive dialogue turned into a divisive rant smearing the conservative movement.”

— Alec Torres is a William F. Buckley Fellow at the National Review Institute.

Court Rules School Can Ban American Flag Shirts For Safety

Recently I received a mocking comment from a reader ridiculing me for my patriotic stance. He mocked my insistence that repressive Socialism is on the rise in America, and that the Liberal Left are determined to replace our Representative Republic with a European style Socialism/Democracy. This report on a recent decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals gives further proof of the Left’s progress in their efforts toward Socialism.

Jerry Broussard


High school officials acted appropriately when they ordered students wearing American-flag shirts to turn them inside out during a Cinco de Mayo celebration, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday.                  posted on  February 27, 2014 at  8:27pm EST


The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled officials at a Northern California high school were right to place concern of racial violence over freedom of expression rights.

Administrators at Live Oak High School in San Jose said they were concerned American-flag shirts would incite violence from Latino students, prompting the administrators to order several students to turn the shirts inside out or go home during a 2010 Cinco de Mayo holiday celebration.

The school reportedly had a history of racial violence between students during the annual Cinco de Mayo celebration, which commemorates the Battle of Puebla on May 5, 1862, when Mexican troops defeated a French army of Napoleon III. Cinco de Mayo is not Mexican independence day, and is celebrated in the U.S. more than Mexico to honor Mexican heritage.

The vote from the three-judge panel was unanimous, citing past problems as sufficient and justifiable reasons for the administration’s actions. The court’s ruling reflects past decisions that set precedent for schools to limit civil rights in order to maintain safety.

“Our role is not to second-guess the decision to have a Cinco de Mayo celebration or the precautions put in place to avoid violence,” Judge M. Margaret McKeown wrote for the panel.

Attorney William Becker, part of American Freedom Law Center, a politically conservative legal aid foundation who is representing the students, said he plans to ask the appeals court to rehear the case.

“The 9th Circuit upheld the rights of Mexican students celebrating a holiday of another country over U.S. students proudly supporting this country,” Becker said.

“This is the United States of America,” said Kendall Jones, whose son, Daniel Galli, was one of the Live Oak students sent home. “The idea that it’s offensive to wear patriotic clothing … regardless of what day it is, is unconscionable to me.”

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: