Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘deceit’

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: New Democratic Spin Cycle: Launders Money, Gets Out The Toughest Sleaze!

Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

The Democrats have two very different profiles. One is their public face of absolute moral purity. They’re just better people than Republicans. That’s what you’re buying when you walk into the Democratic store: pure virtue. They’ve got nothing else on the shelves. No beef jerky, no wiper fluid, no Gatorade. 

The other profile is reality: In the backroom, where the employees eat lunch, the Democrats and their fat-cat donors are committing unspeakably sleazy and immoral acts. Everyone on the left knows this. That’s why, the moment Harvey Weinstein was exposed as a sexual predator, his reflexive response was not to apologize. Accused of the kind of rapes you’d usually need a gang to commit, he put up a virtue shield by attacking the National Rifle Association.

As we recently discovered, first with Weinstein and then with the Hillary campaign paying for the Russian dossier, the left has an all-new trick that exponentially multiplies the Democrats’ sleaze factor. It used to be that Democrats like Bill Clinton would deploy FOBs — Friends of Bill — like James Carville and Sidney Blumenthal to smear his victims. Now, they run their Watergate-style “ratf—ing” through law firms.

Ronan Farrow writes in this week’s New Yorker that Weinstein deployed a raft of spies to befriend and deceive his accusers in order to collect information that could be used against them. A spy with the Israeli private investigations firm Black Cube used a fake name and fake foundation to meet actress Rose McGowan. Then, pretending to be a deeply sympathetic women’s rights advocate, the agent secretly tape-recorded the actress, hoping to get incriminating evidence against her. At a minimum, this is unspeakably repellent and possibly illegal.

And who hired the spies? Not Weinstein! The law firm of David Boies, prominent Democratic attorney.

Using a law firm as a cut-out between the client — an alleged sexual predator — and the people stealthily recording his accusers has one very useful purpose: It places the spy agency’s work behind the protection of attorney-client privilege.

Boies pretends to be steeped in the ethics of his profession, flying to California to argue against the “hate” of Proposition 8 and rushing to Florida after the 2000 election to defend Al Gore’s rightful claim to the presidency.

But now we find out he’s been harassing and intimidating a rape victim on behalf of his client (the rapist) with private eyes who lie about their identity and motives, wasting hours of the victim’s time with false promises of support for her cause — a cause she has taken up precisely because of her alleged rape by the lawyer’s client. Whether or not this violates any bar association ethical canons, it’s certainly despicable.

Two weeks ago, we found out that the law firm cut-out maneuver was the exact same technique used by Hillary’s campaign to obtain damaging information on Donald Trump from the Kremlin — the infamous Russian dossier. The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee shelled out $12 million seeking incriminating information on Trump from Russian government officials.

Just like Weinstein, the Democrats funneled money for a nefarious purpose through a law firm. To wit: The Democrats paid a law firm (Perkins Coie), which paid a private investigations firm (Fusion GPS), which in turn paid a spy (Christopher Steele), and Steele paid Russian government officials for dirt on Trump.

When the media found out that Donald Trump Jr. had taken a meeting with a friend of a friend, because she claimed to have incriminating information from Russia on Hillary, the word “treason” filled the airwaves.

Hillary’s vice presidential nominee, Sen. Tim Kaine (D- Va.), called Don Jr.’s pointless meeting “potentially treason.”

MSNBC’s favorite former Bush official, lunatic Richard Painter, said anyone who “wanted to help the Russians (disrupt our election process) engaged in treasonous conduct.” Al Sharpton said that the willingness to accept “information to discredit your potential opponent in an American election from Russia — from what is supposed to be an enemy state” — raised the prospect of treason.

If that’streason,” then what is it when the Democrats reach out to the Russians and pass them money for dirt on Hillary’s opponent in a presidential election? Wasn’t that dossier an attempt to discredit her opponent and disrupt the election?

Remember: Don Jr. didn’t seek a meeting with any Russians to get compromising information on Hillary, nor did he receive any. The Russian woman was using the pretense of having dirt on Hillary as a ruse to get a meeting, so that she could lobby Don Jr. on the Magnitsky Act.

Unlike Don Jr., the Democrats didn’t wait to be asked! They paid $12 million, funneled through a law firm, seeking information on Trump from Russian government officials.

But we’re not allowed to mention it because the Clinton campaign and DNC used Weinstein’s money laundering technique.

The attorney-client privilege is intended to ensure that people are completely truthful with their attorneys. It is not supposed to be a shelter for any sordid, and possibly illegal, behavior by liberals. 

DEAR CNN: Did YOU Forget Hillary Called A Gold Star Mom A LIAR?

waving flagPublished on August 1, 2016

URL of the original posting site:

Ok. I understand now: When a CLINTON does it, it’s perfectly fine.

Trump vs. Khan. The media is abuzz about how (insert nasty adjective here) Donald Trump is for taking issue with the Khan family’s challenge of his character.

The usual talking heads cried foul. How dare anyone answer back to someone after they’ve been presented with a folded flag.

Can anyone tell us where these same talking heads were when Hillary called Gold Star parents liars? Why the double-standard?

Right. Wikileaks showed us why they didn’t? The DNC signs off on their stories before they go to print. Here’s a recap of what they neglected to share:


lying so longWhen a Gold Star mother stands in public and says “I blame Hillary Clinton personally for the death of my son,” that’s a strong statement.

How did she respond? Hillary is on record in an interview with Chris Wallace. “I don’t hold any ill feeling for someone who in that moment may not fully recall everything that was or wasn’t said.”

Who in that moment may not fully recall?? Really?

Matt Vespa quipped: Oh, so Smith is not only wrong — her grief may have induced some amnesia? Vespa also linked to this handy flashback:


Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies fight Picture1 true battle In God We Trust freedom combo 2 Pro-Life News Report

waving flagWednesday, February 17, 2016

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit

Heartbreaking Ultrasound Shows Dying Twin Baby Holding His Sister’s Hand
Kansas family Ian and Brittani McIntire were heartbroken when doctors told them that one of their unborn twins probably will die before he is born. Baby Mason McIntire has a hole in his heart and an abnormal brain.

Clinton Demands GOP OK Obama SCOTUS Nominee: “He’s President Whether They Like It Or Not”
At a Democratic party fundraiser in Colorado, pro-abortion presidential candidate Hillary Clinton demanded that Republicans approve whichever nominee President Barack Obama makes to replace pro-life Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. She said republicans should stop threatening not to vote on a nominee because Obama is the president, “whether they like it or not.”

Click to Read at

Ted Cruz Video: As President I Will Do Everything Possible to End Abortion
Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz is one of the pro-life candidates seeking the GOP nod to take on pro-abortion Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders. Cruz has a long pro-life track record in office and it’s one he says in a new video he will continue as president.

Click to Read at

Donald Trump Responds to Ted Cruz Abortion Ad: “I Am Pro-Life, Cruz is Totally Lying About Me”
 Donald Trump has issued a short response to pro-life Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz. Trump says Cruz’s recent television ad saying Trump “can’t be trusted” on abortion issues is off base. Trump says he is pro-life and has been for a long time.

Click to Read at

Joy Behar: “Racist” Senate Won’t Confirm Scalia Replacement Because of Obama’s “Color”
 President Barack Obama has less than a year left as commander in chief, but that isn’t keeping talk show hosts from making his race an issue – even now. On Tuesday, Whoopi Goldberg slammed her co-host Joy Behar while The View ladies discussed conspiracy theories surrounding Justice Antonin Scalia’s recent death.

Click to Read at

Liberal Media Pushes Pro-Abortion Former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor as Consensus Nominee
 With a massive fight brewing over a Supreme Court nomination between pro-abortion President Barack Obama and pro-life Republicans int he Senate, the liberal media is attempting to push a consensus nominee — but one pro-life advocates will find objectionable. Media outlets are suggesting pro-abortion former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Click to Read at

Abortion Activist Has “No Regrets” Aborting Her Baby: I Don’t Give “Much Thought” to It
 Many women report intense guilt years after experiencing an abortion, but administrative law judge Amy Oppenheimer writes in the Huffington Post of being grateful. Oppenheimer became pregnant at 21 years old in 1973, the same year the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion.

Click to Read at

One of the Biggest Abortion Clinics in Louisiana May Have Closed Its Doors for Good
At we reported on all sorts of stories that affect the pro-life community, but few provide us with the kind of elation we get when we can report that an abortion business has closed its doors — even if only temporarily. Not only do women and unborn children benefit, but fathers, families and the community do as well.

Click to Read at

West Virginia Senate Bans Dismemberment Abortions Tearing Babies Limb From Limb

This University Was Caught Using Eyeballs of Babies Aborted at 24 Weeks in Research

How to Kill Your Baby? Web Site Offers “20 Tips for Your First Abortion”

Doctor Told Woman Her Baby Died and Gave Her an Abortion Pill, Later Her Baby is Found Healthy

Abortion Activists Have Made Women With Zika Virus Scared to Give Birth to a Disabled Baby

Why Do Unborn Children Matter? Just Because They Are

Chinese Hospital May Have Killed Tens of Thousands to To Sell Their Organs for Profit

Michigan Abortionist With Violent Criminal History and Addiction Arrested Again

Ohio Senate Candidate Ted Strickland Will Only Vote for a Pro-Abortion SCOTUS Nominee

Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.

Comments or questions? Email us at
Copyright 2003-2015 All rights reserved.

I AM A PERSON with Poem In God We Trust freedom combo 2


Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

waving flagResults Are In

BREAKING REPORT=> SMOKING GUN! US Was Running Weapons Thru Benghazi to Syria

waving flagPosted by Jim Hoft on Monday, May 18, 2015

FOX News confirmed today that the US ran guns from Benghazi to Syria before the attack on the US consulate on September 11, 2012. The US Ambassador to Libya and three others were killed in the terrorist attack. The Obama administration were running weapons to Syria.
benghazi guns syria

FOX News reported Monday that the US was sending guns to Banias and Borj Islam, Syria before the Benghazi terrorist attack.

US Intelligence agencies were fully aware that weapons were moving from the terrorist stronghold in Libya to Syria before the attack that killed four Americans…

September 16, 2012 DIA Memo copied to the National Security Council, CIA, and others concluded the Benghazi terrorist attack was planned at least ten or more days in advance…

The memo also tied the attack to 9-11… No discussion of a demonstration or anti-Mohammad video.

US officials were aware that weapons were being shipped to Syria by the Port of Benghazi.

The US was in fact running guns from Benghazi to Syria when the annex and consulate were attacked.Party of Deciet and lies

Senator Rand Paul questioned Hillary Clinton about this gun running program back in January 2013 during her testimony on the Benghazi terrorist attack. Hillary Clinton said she did not know about the program while testifying under oath.
Here is the transcript:

Sen. Rand Paul: My question is, is the US involved in any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?

Hillary Clinton: To Turkey? I’ll have to take that question for the record. That’s, nobody’s ever raised that with me.

Sen. Rand Paul: It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that they may have weapons. And what I’d like to know is, that annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries? ANy countries, Turkey included?

Hillary Clinton: Well, Senator you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. And, I will see what information was available.

Sen. Rand Paul: You’re saying you don’t know?

Hillary Clinton:I do not know.I don’t have any information on that.Clinton Democrat Party

Rand Paul accused the Obama administration in January 2013 of running guns to Syrian rebels.
Rand Paul was right.






Many Clinton charity donors also got State Department awards under Hillary

waving flagBy Sarah Westwood | April 23, 2015 

Enemy-Email-NRD-600Twenty-two of the 37 corporations nominated for a prestigious State Department award — and six of the eight ultimate winners — while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State were also donors to the Clinton family foundation. The published donor records of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation don’t give exact dates or amounts of its contributors, but it is possible to create a general timeline for when many of the corporations donated and when they were either nominated or selected for the award.

  • Silicon Valley giant Cisco was the biggest foundation contributor nominated in 2009, giving the Clinton charity between $1 million and $5 million. The company then won the award in 2010 when eight of the 12 finalists and two of the three winners had donated to the foundation.
  • The other Clinton contributor to win that year, candy-maker Mars, Inc., had given between $25,000 and $50,000. Coca-Cola was the most generous foundation donor to be honored as a finalist in 2010, giving a $5-10 million donation.
  • TOM’s Shoes, a 2009 winner for its work in Argentina, donated between $100,000 and $250,000.
  • The other 2009 winner, Trilogy International Partners, gave between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Overall, seven of the 10 finalists in 2009 were foundation donors.
  • Seven of the 12 finalists for the award in 2011 gave to the charity. One of the winners, Procter & Gamble, had contributed $1-5 million. The other 2011 winner, Sahlman Seafoods, does not appear to have been a donor.
  • Tiger Machinery, a 2011 finalist, is the Russian dealer of Caterpillar, Inc. tractors and other heavy equipment. Caterpillar gave between $1,000 and $5,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
  • Intel, another Silicon Valley giant, was nominated for an award each year of Clinton’s time in office, winning the award in 2012. The technology company donated between $250,000 and $500,000.
  • Five of the eight finalists and one of the two winners were foundation donors in 2012. A finalist that year, Esso Angola, is an international subsidiary of Exxon-Mobil, a prolific contributor to the Clinton Foundation. Exxon-Mobil gave between $1 million and $5 million.Party of Deciet and lies

Each of the companies listed appear to have made at least a portion of their donations before 2013. However, the Clinton Foundation’s vague listings prevent a more thorough review.

Kerry Humphrey, spokesman for the department’s Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, said “senior representatives” from multiple federal agencies selected winners from among those nominated by U.S. embassies for “corporate excellence” abroad, including “demonstrating respect for human rights” and “promoting respect for the environment.”

The early days of Clinton’s second presidential campaign have been overshadowed by widespread criticism from across the political spectrum of foreign donations to the former chief U.S. diplomat’s family foundation, as well of her use of a private email and server to conduct government business while Secretary of State. She then unilaterally destroyed an estimated 30,000 emails she claimed were personal.

A forthcoming book by Peter Schweizer called Clinton Cash purports to show “a pattern of financial transactions involving the Clintons that occurred contemporaneous with favorable U.S. policy decisions benefiting those providing the funds.”In Review OARLogo Picture6

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

 Empathy For Sale

URL of the Original Posting Site:




Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

1990’s Calling

URL of the Original Posting Site:


4 BBerry-Grandma-NRD-6002 Clintons-Again-NRD-600 delete Hillary Clinton Obama's Third Term Society Picture6

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

A River Runs Through It

URL of the Original Posting Site:


muslim-obama Islamapologist Obama Muslim collection Party of Deciet and lies Dupe and Chains Picture6

AP Fact-Check: Hillary’s Email Excuses Don’t Hold Water


 by Breitbart News 10 Mar 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site:

CLINTON: “Others had done it.”

THE FACTS: Although email practices varied among her predecessors, Clinton is the only secretary of state known to have conducted all official unclassified government business on a private email address. Years earlier, when emailing was not the ubiquitous practice it is now among high officials, Colin Powell used both a government and a private account. It’s a striking departure from the norm for top officials to rely exclusively on private email for official business.

CLINTON: “I fully complied with every rule I was governed by.”

THE FACTS: At the very least, Clinton appears to have violated what the White House has called “very specific guidance” that officials should use government email to conduct business.

Clinton provided no details about whether she had initially consulted with the department or other government officials before using the private email system. She did not answer several questions about whether she sought any clearances before she began relying exclusively on private emails for government business.

Federal officials are allowed to communicate on private email and are generally allowed to conduct government business in those exchanges, but that ability is constrained, both by federal regulations and by their supervisors.

Federal law during Clinton’s tenure called for the archiving of such private email records when used for government work, but did not set out clear rules or punishments for violations until rules were tightened in November. In 2011, when Clinton was secretary, a cable from her office sent to all employees advised them to avoid conducting any official business on their private email accounts because of targeting by unspecified “online adversaries.”

CLINTON: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.”

THE FACTS: The assertion fits with the facts as known but skirts the issue of exchanging information in a private account that, while falling below the level of classified, is still sensitive.

The State Department and other national security agencies have specified rules for the handling of such sensitive material, which could affect national security, diplomatic and privacy concerns, and may include material such as personnel, medical and law enforcement data. In reviewing the 30,000 emails she turned over to the State Department, officials are looking for any security lapses concerning sensitive but unclassified material that may have been disclosed.

CLINTON: “It had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.”

THE FACTS: While Clinton’s server was physically guarded by the Secret Service, she provided no evidence it hadn’t been compromised by hackers or foreign adversaries. She also didn’t detail who administered the email system, if it received appropriate software security updates, or if it was monitored routinely for unauthorized access.

Clinton also didn’t answer whether the homebrew computer system on her property had the same level of safeguards provided at professional data facilities, such as regulated temperatures, offsite backups, generators in case of power outages and fire-suppression systems. It was unclear what, if any, encryption software Clinton’s server may have used to communicate with U.S. government email accounts.

Recent high-profile breaches, including at Sony Pictures Entertainment, have raised scrutiny on how well corporations and private individuals protect their computer networks from attack.

CLINTON: “When I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two. Looking back, it would’ve been better if I’d simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn’t seem like an issue.”

THE FACTS: If multiple devices were an inconvenience in the past, they may be something of an obsession now. Clinton told an event in California’s Silicon Valley last month that she has an iPad, a mini-iPad, an iPhone and a BlackBerry. “I’m like two steps short of a hoarder,” she said. She suggested she started out in Washington with a BlackBerry but her devices grew in number.

Smartphones were capable of multiple emails when she became secretary; it’s not clear whether the particular phone she used then was permitted to do so under State Department rules.


Will Obama leave office in 2017?


Joseph Farah is a highly opinionated patriot. I have New WhatDidYouSay Logoenjoyed many of his articles. With that in mind, please take care as you read the following knowing it is the opinion of Joseph Farah, and not While I have heard a vast number of people discuss this, along with multiple scenarios of how it could happen, and the facts surrounding what Imperial President Obama has done in office, including his developing his own civilian Army by transforming Homeland Security into his own machine.

Still, what you are about to read is heavy speculation. Take it for what Joseph Farah intended; to make you think and ask questions.

Jerry Broussard of


Posted By Joseph Farah On 03/05/2015

Article reblogged from WND:

URL of the Original Posting Site:


Obama as King George

Question: Why are Americans so certain there will be a presidential kingobamafingerconstitution-300x204election in 2016 and that Barack Obama will leave office in January 2017?

Answer: Because it’s the law and because it’s American tradition.

However, we currently have a man in the White House who respects neither the law nor the American tradition of Imperial President Obamapeaceful changes of power. With regard to his contempt of the law, here are just a few examples:

  • He abused his executive authority for the purpose of effectively changing immigration law, even after admitting repeatedly that he had no constitutional authority to do so. He even broke administrative law in the process, according to a federal judge who reviewed the action and ruled it was illegal. Obama’s response? He dug in his heels and doubled down in his determination to carry out his illegal plan, threatening any government employees who refused to execute his order with retribution.
  • He conducted military intervention in Libya without congressional approval.Little-Dude-3-620x492
  • In Operation Fast and Furious, the Obama administration ordered gun store owners to illegally sell thousands of firearms to Mexican drug dealers, resulting in the deaths of many including Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
  • He gave $535 million in taxpayer dollars to campaign contributors and lobbyists, claiming it was for a revolutionary “green energy” startup called Solyndra that would create 4,000 new jobs. The company quickly went bankrupt, after selling its product for less than the cost of production. By publicly overstating the company’s financial condition, Obama broke the same law that resulted in Martha Stewart, a private citizen, going to prison.
  • By appointing dozens of “czars” without seeking Senate confirmation, Obama violated the Constitution according ObamaDictator-300x204to Democrats Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.V., and Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.
  • He signed Obamacare into law despite the fact that it was a revenue bill and did not initiate in the House of Representatives as per the Constitution.

As for his disrespect for American tradition, recall that as a candidate for the presidency he called for “the fundamental transformation of America.”

While downplaying and ignoring foreign threats to national security, Obama Imperial President tear down this walland his administration have both hyped the domestic threat of “right-wing extremists,” even participating in a raid of a lawful Texas political meeting in which all parties were detained and fingerprinted.….

So with all of this history – and much more, in fact – why do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?

I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why. And judging from the number of questions I’m getting along these lines from the public, I’d say there’s great concern out there across the fruited plain.Obama and Jefferson

Maybe we assume he will respectfully leave office after two terms because he has publicly said he would. In 2013, Obama said he and his family might remain in Washington after leaving office.

But that begs the question of whether Obama is truthful.

Remember what he said about his immigration order before issuing it: “This is something I’ve struggled with throughout my presidency. The problem is that I’m the president of the United States; I’m not the emperor of the If his mouth is open he must be lyingUnited States. My job is to execute laws that are passed. And Congress right now has not changed what I consider to be a broken immigration system. And what that means is that we have certain obligations to enforce the laws that are in place even if we think that in many cases the results may be tragic. … [W]e’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can.”

Remember what he said about Obamacare before it was implemented: “No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people. If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”culture of deciet

Remember what he said about ISIS? Now what does he say? “I didn’t call the Islamic State a ‘JV’ team.”

Again, do I think Obama will leave office in January 2017? Yes I do.

But, with a track record like this – and, actually much worse – should we simply take it for granted?

Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Run US Run

URL of the Original Posting Site:

Islamapologist Obama Muslim collection

culture of deciet

Freedom with Prayer

Wait Until You See the Anti-American, Hate-Filled ‘New Pledge’ this Professor Made his Students Recite

December 8, 2014 By

Dr. Charles Angeletti, a tenured professor at Metropolitan State University in Denver, claims to love America. But, if what he had his students do is displaying love for our great republic, then I’d be a little nervous to see how he demonstrates hatred or loathing.
 Propaganda Alert BS Alert
A professor at the university since 1967, Dr. Angeletti has had his students recite this America bashing pledge for the past 20 years. But, for some reason, it is just coming to light thanks to freshman Meteorology major Steven Farr. This ‘new pledge’ reads as follows:

“I pledge allegiance to and wrap myself in the flag of the United States Against Anything Un-American and to the Republicans for which it stands, two nations, under Jesus, rich against poor, with curtailed liberty and justice for all except blacks, homosexuals, women who want abortions, Communists, welfare queens, treehuggers, feminazis, illegal immigrants, children of illegal immigrants, and you if you don’t watch your step.”Liberalism a mental disorder

Farr, outraged, shared a copy of the handout of this ‘new pledge’ with Campus Reform  . In an interview with them, Farr said, “This was an attempt to propagandize an entire classroom of young adults.” He also conveyed that no alternative political prospective beyond far left progressivism espoused by Angeletti who is an admitted atheist and socialist.

Campus Reform  reached out to the professor to give him a chance to explain himself. During the interview, he doubled down on this ‘new pledge.’ He retorted, “We’re very racist, we’re very repressive, we’re very Christian oriented, we don’t tolerate other kinds of thinking in this country. I could go on and on—and do in my classes for hours about things that we need to do to make this a better country.”

Liberalism a mental disorder
Blog wishes

New Studies on Voter ID Laws DESTROY This Major Claim By Liberals

Posted by Michael CantrellNovember 28, 2014

URL of the Original Posting Site:

Voter ID

With President Obama’s recent immigration executive order–the one that gives 5 million lawbreakers a “get out of jail free card” to stay in America–it’s more important than ever for states to pass voter ID laws requiring folks to provide proof of identity at the polls.

This should seem like common sense given the fact that it’s likely many of those immigrants who will be allowed to stay will feel indebted to the Democratic Party, and if allowed, will gladly cast a vote in favor of bogus radical progressives bent on the destruction of America.

Unfortunately, liberals are working overtime to try dissuading Americans from being in favor of any kind of measure that would protect the integrity of the voting system, using their favorite go-to weapon to shame people into not supporting voter ID laws: racism.Mar 3 09

Kooky liberals claim that these type of laws “suppress minority voters,” therefore it’s racist to pass and enforce them. Never mind the fact that you need an ID to drive, buy beer, get a gun, and the list goes on.

Well, according to the New York Times, several freshly conducted studies say liberals spewing out this garbage are full of crap.

As the Brennan Center puts it in the second sentence of their article: “Yes, it is likely rare for an election to be close enough for voter ID laws to swing the outcome.”

The Brennan Center instead disputes my contention that studies tend to “overstate the number of voters who truly lack identification.”

My position on the matter, setting aside whether the laws are a cynical attempt to disenfranchise Democratic voters, is based on these facts: Many studies do not use robust matching techniques when comparing state voter registration and licensing databases (and robust matching, even when used, isn’t perfect); and many studies fail to match voter registration files with alternative forms of identification, like United States passports or military identification.

The studies with the most sensational and widely publicized findings have generally failed to do these things. The most famous of these was a study finding that 758,000 of Pennsylvania’s registered voters lacked identification. It caused liberals to wonder whether voter ID laws could steal elections. The result was publicized by the Brennan Center, but more rigorous studies have since cut that figure nearly in half.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies


I hate to break it to you, Mr. Liberal, but voter ID laws aren’t any more racist than requiring an ID to buy a beer.Liberalism a mental disorder

With the state of our country currently going down the crapper–due to a president who claims to be a constitutional scholar, yet for some reason can’t seem to grasp the concept of a separation of powers–it’s more critical than ever to protect the integrity of the voting system.ignorance

Voting is the most powerful weapon the average citizen possess to fight out of control government. If this is corrupted, then the great American experiment we’ve all been privileged to be a part of is over.

This study should help open some eyes about the fairness and effectiveness of voter ID laws to help prevent voter fraud and inspire other states around the nation to adopt them as quickly as possible.




My Two Cents on Imperial President Obama’s Speech Tonight


By Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.orgNew WhatDidYouSay Logo

Everything spoken tonight was anticipated, telling us that Imperial President Obama has become more predictable than anyone has recognized. Here are my reactions to what I heard;

  1. The underlying message of this Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Hating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat is that every immigrant that came to this country legally, through all the normal channels, are the dumbest people on the planet. All this amnesty talk, no matter how they try to spin it, is a thumb in the eye of every legal immigrant living in America today.
  2. The second underlying message to every legal immigrant, that all their hard work to become naturalized citizens was a waste of time and meaningless. Learning our language (English), learning our history, learning our Constitution and adapting to our culture, was demeaned by Imperial President Obama.
  3. No matter how Imperial President Obama spins his unlawful actions, the fact remains that he has taken the Obama tearing up the constitutionposition as a tyrannical dictator, instead of a Constitutional upholding President.
  4. All his talk about how the Republican House has been uncooperative, has been written abundantly by much smarter people than me. It is important to remember that definition of cooperation for the Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Hating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat’s is, “Agree with everything we say, everything we mean, and say it the exact way we want it said. Anything less is hateful, racist and you are the party of “NO”.”
  5. I will not apologize for repeating the following; The one and only thing the Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Only ReasonHating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat’s care about illegal aliens is that they know they are more likely to vote Democrat.
  6. Imperial President Obama’s retching story of the illegal alien was one of the greatest insults to every legal immigrant, and all the rest of us that were born and raised in America. Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Hating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat’s do not want any of their puppets to have to take personal responsibilities for their illegal decisions, invasion into our country, stealing jobs that make real American’s jobless, take benefits that do not belong to them and sending as much of what they earn back to their home country thus stimulating that countries economy, instead of spending it here to stimulate ours.
  7. Then there is the tax issue. Any economy that puts out more than they take in is destined for collapse, which is the plan for the Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Hating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat’s following the teaching of Saul Alinsky and Cloward-Piven. The very idea Cloward Pevin with explanationthat the Leftist/Marxist/Socialist/America-Hating/Extreme-Liberal/Democrat’s are going to collect a penny of tax from these cheaters, is beyond laughable, it’s absolutely insulting.
  8. Imperial President Obama’s mocking the Republican Congress is more spin that increases the insult. When counted, his own cohort, Harry Reid, has made the two of them the real “Party of NO”.

I could go on, but I don’t want to risk insulting you with what you heard for yourself. Unfortunately, 30+% of the people who heard the speech are the people who are already drunk the Kool-Aid. After all, Liberalism is a Mental Disorder. The rest of America? Considering the percentage of Americans who don’t bother to vote, the percentage of low-information voters, and the those people claiming to be Christians who refuse to be “Salt and Light” by voting, leaves you and me, and the other political junkies that give a rip about this Country, and want to see us revive our country as designed by the founders.Liberalism a mental disorder

Thank you for reading.





Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Obamacare Brainiacs

URL of Original Posting Site:


Complete Message

culture of deciet



Guess What? Obama Social Media Posters are Trolls


Posted by Michael BeckerMichael Becker on— November 18, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site:

Surprise, surprise!  Barack Obama social media – his Twitter feed and Facebook page – are driven by just a handful of trolls.  What looks like hundreds of thousands of supporters is really just a couple of hundred people and their sock puppets.

We’ve got President Troll supported loudly by troll supporters.  What a shock.’+document.title.toString()+’&d=’+((document.getElementsByName(‘ );</script>”>troll

If you’re a regular commenter on political sites you’ll see that the Obamaphiles tend to follow a very distinct pattern of cutting and pasting the same comments over and over, and those comments often show up under multiple posters.  It turns out that the Obama supporters are engaging in sock puppetry, creating fake user IDs to make it appear that there is more support for an idea than there really is.

Americans began heading anew this weekend to President Obama’s official Obamacare Facebook page to gather information on the new round of health care enrollment, share their experiences shopping for insurance on the federal exchange and voice their opinions on the president’s signature domestic achievement.

However, what some would view as a robust marketplace of ideas is actually controlled by just a few, an analysis of the Web page shows.

Sixty percent of the site’s 226,838 comments generated from September 2012 to early last month can be attributed to fewer than 100 unique profiles, according to an analysis completed by The Washington Times with assistance from an outside data analytics team.

Personally, we think is simply a duplication of the 2012 election results.  A handful of supporters showing up lots of times.  Zombie voting, if you will.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

The ObamaCare website is a clone of the President’s OFA Twitter feed.  He appears to have about 43 million followers.  Researchers at Barracuda, a computer security company in Campbell, California, found that about half of those “followers” were fake.  In the name of accountability and transparency Organizing for Action declined to comment on Barracuda’s findings.

You really should read the whole article, the Washington Times has done an outstanding job of investigative journalism.  The bottom line, the President’s overwhelming social media presence is every bit as phony as everything else about this President.  He’s grubered* the American people now for about eight years and we’ve still got twenty six months to go.

We really think that history won’t be kind to President Present.  He’ll likely be nothing more than a footnote, the first – and perhaps last – black president.  He’ll be ignored by historians, who are largely liberals, because his record is so deceitful that they won’t be able to cover it up so they’ll just ignore it.culture of deciet

Kind of like in ancient Egypt when Pharaoh cast someone out of court and had all mention of them chipped from the histories or when Stalin had people photoshopped out of official pictures.

A fitting end for an empty suit pretending to sit in an empty chair.  Clint Eastwood was right on the money.

About the Author: Michael Becker

Michael BeckerMichael Becker is a long time activist and a businessman. He’s been involved in the pro-life movement since 1976 and has been counseling addicts and ministering to prison inmates since 1980. Becker is a Curmudgeon. He has decades of experience as an operations executive in turnaround situations and in mortgage banking. He blogs regularly at The Right Curmudgeon, The Minority Report, Wizbang, Unified Patriots and Joe for America. He lives in Phoenix and is almost always armed.




Gruber Admits Obamacare’s Long-Term Objective Is to End Employer-Provided Health Insurance

Transcript from the Rush Limbaugh Show, November 18, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site:

RUSH: I’m gonna take you back four years to March 5, 2010. This is me talking about health insurance reform and the plan to eliminate employer-based insurance.


RUSH ARCHIVE: Once a significant number of businesses have offloaded their health care benefits and the government is now providing that insurance, how do you stop that? “Okay, we’re going to repeal this now.” The Democrats are going to be out there saying, “See? We told you. Republicans don’t want you to have health care! Republicans want to take your health care away. Just like you senior citizens, the Republicans want to take your Social Security away from you.”

The cost of doing business in the United States today, as you know, is very high. There’s no economic growth. People are being laid off. People are not being hired. The growth is occurring in the public sector. In fact, for the first time, public sector employee average salaries are $7,000 a year higher than in the private sector. Sixty-seven thousand versus 60 is the average. Not the mean, the average. And this is a trend that has been ongoing for quite a while.

So any business… You go out and talk to them. The whole health care situation bugs ’em. They have to provide it. Employees expect it. They have to provide it to get quality people. But they hate it. The costs keep going up. The employees are never satisfied with all of what they’re getting, even though the employees are paying no tax on it. It’s a free benefit.

Companies now have to have entire departments just to deal with that aspect of running their business, which has nothing to do with running the business. If you think a company will not choose an 8% off-the-top option payment to the government rather than 14 to 15% that is costing them to provide benefits for their employees, you got another thing coming, with as much pressure and stress on these people as there is to stay open. All of this is by design…


RUSH:  This was my attempting to explain — and it’s tough take a minute-and-45 bite. Half of that’s irrelevant to what I was talking about.  The point was that the government was gonna offer businesses an opportunity to get out of providing health insurance for employees with a small, one-time, 8% off-the-top payment to the government, and that 8% payment to the government was in lieu of providing health insurance.

//“>rush video 01

2011 Hewitt Health Care Lecture from Mike Dean on Vimeo.

The government would take over then and provide it for people who’d lose their policies at work. And the point I was making there was that if you’re a business and somebody comes along and says, “Hey, what you’re now spending 15% on, I’m only gonna charge you 8%, and you get to offload the whole problem of health insurance for your employees,” you’ll take it.  Now, remember, this is four years ago.

The long-term objective here for Obamacare is to eliminate employer-provided or employer-based insurance, and to also eliminate, way down the road, the private sector free enterprise insurance industry.  The objective long term is to see to it that there’s only one place to go for health insurance and for medical treatment.  That’s gonna be everything run by the US government.

That’s the long-term objective, and it’s not just Obama’s. It’s every authoritarian-type, Big Government statist who’s ever dreamed of running a country with an iron fist. The health care system is the thing that you try to get control of first because it’s so important to people and something they can’t deal without, and they’ll do anything to get it, and you’ll own them.

You’ll make them totally dependent, and they literally will do anything to not be frozen out of medical treatment and health insurance.  So the long-term objective here is to take advantage of the fact the employers really, really increasingly don’t like having to mess with all this.  The government’s giving them an option to get out of it.  They’ll still pay the government something, but maybe half of what it’s costing them to insure their employees.

Okay, that sets up the old Obama video or audio, and a new Gruber discover.


RUSH: So we played for you the sound bite back in March of 2010 describing for you how the Regime was going to take advantage of big business and small business really not liking having to deal with providing health insurance.  Do you remember the old CEO of General Motors, Rick Wagoner?  He got the gig. He loved cars. He wanted to run a car company. He finally got there and he found out that his job as CEO was health care administration.  The biggest expense, the thing that required the vast majority of his time, was dealing with the health care benefits for all of the employees.

And a lot of small businesses, you talk to ’em, you own them, you run them, you work for them, businesses medium size, they all resent how much it’s gotten to cost, they resent the time it takes, everything about it.  And if somebody comes along like Obama and offers them a way out of it, you know they’re gonna take it. If they can get away with paying a fine for dropping it that’s only half of what their cost is, and this was what the plan was, one of many plans in Obamacare to get as many choices for average people and their health insurance taken away from ’em.

The employer benefit, I mean, it’s part of a job now.  Everybody expects to have health coverage.  Everybody expects to have health insurance.  It’s just considered every bit as part of the job as salary is.  And if you can take that away, you can panic people.  If you can take that away from ’em, you can legally allow their employers to off-load that, they’ll do it in a second.  And then if you’re the government, and you’re oriented towards statism and authoritarianism, then you set yourself up, the government, as the first place and the easiest place people can go to replace the health insurance plan they had at work.  And then you own ’em.

Well, here’s Obama.  Let’s go back to March 2007.  This is a Service Employees International Union health care forum.  Obama is a presidential candidate and senator at the time, and here is some of what he said.

rush vid 02

OBAMA:  “My commitment is to make sure that we’ve got universal health care for all Americans by the end of my first term as president.  I would hope that we’d set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort, but I don’t think we’re gonna be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately.  There’s gonna be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.”Complete Message

RUSH:  “I don’t think we are going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately.”  He’s telling his union buddies it’s gonna take time, be patient with me.  “I hope to have universal coverage by the end of my first term.”  He didn’t.  But even if we do, it’s gonna take a long time, maybe 15 or 20 years, ’cause people aren’t gonna like this.  He knows he’s telling his union buddies behind-closed-doors comments here. (imitating Obama) “Look, we’re working together on this.  We’re not gonna eliminate employer coverage immediately.”  What that means is we’re gonna institute universal government provided coverage.

He knows that people aren’t gonna go for it.  He couldn’t go out and get elected on this.  This is what everybody’s talking about.  He could not run for office and say, as part of his plan with Obamacare to eliminate your health insurance at work, “We want to eliminate that, and we want to be the ones that provide you your health insurance.”  Sayonara.  He doesn’t get elected.  He doesn’t get elected president.  He doesn’t get to do Obamacare.

So he has to lie about it, and they rely on the stupidity of the American people to believe the lie. They rely on the stupidity of the American people to believe that they’re all compassionate about this.  They rely on the stupidity, the gullibility of the American people to accept that all they care about is people and they have the best intentions. When in fact what they’re trying to do is turn this whole thing upside down so that they get total control over us. Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

It isn’t about health care.  Health care is the mechanism to get there and to expand government in such a way that it can’t be undone by future presidents, future Congresses, or what have you.  So here is Obama being truthful, and this is seven years ago, folks, being truthful with some very loyal donors and supporters, the SEIU.  He’s winking and he’s nodding. (imitating Obama) “Look, I know we want to get rid of employer coverage, but we can’t do it immediately.  Ten, 15, maybe 20 years.”

Listen to this again.  We played this all during the campaign in 2008 hoping it would make an impression, hoping it would be heard, hoping it would awaken people out of the stupor in which they were looking at Obama, as some messianic figure, blank canvas, make of him whatever they wanted to make of him.  There was no good on the horizon even back then, but people didn’t want to see it.  Play sound bite number two again.

OBAMA:  “My commitment is to make sure that we’ve got universal health care for all Americans by the end of my first term as president.  I would hope that we’d set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort, but I don’t think we’re gonna be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately.  There’s gonna be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.”Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

RUSH:  Okay.  So here we are reminding everybody what Obama said seven years ago.  Tomorrow, in the Drive-By Media, the story will be our reaction to learning that Obama wanted to eliminate private sector insurance in 15 or 20 years.  Well, employer-provided, which is pretty much the same thing.  I mean, the employer goes to private sector insurance companies to get plans, get the coverage, get the policies.  I mean, the two go hand in hand here.

If you eliminate the employer-provided, where are you gonna go to become a member of a group to get your so-called group discount?  You gotta join some government exchange.  So now let’s go forward four years.  We’re back to 2011, four years forward from Obama in 2007.  This is March the 9th at the Pioneer Institute’s 2011 Hewitt Lecture, the budgetary impact of federal health care reform.  And here is the first of two sound bites we have from Gruber.

GRUBER:  “The Cadillac tax. Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy to employer provided health insurance. It’s a terrible policy. It turns out politically it’s really hard to get rid of. And the only way we could take it on was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it’s really a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.” 

RUSH:  Yeah, and of course the only thing noteworthy here to the Drive-By Media is what my reaction to this is gonna be.  Nothing to see here other than my reaction to it.  But what do we have?  We have, once again, the primary architect of Obamacare admitting they had to lie and mischaracterize a tax that was gonna be levied on you but they couldn’t tell you that or it would never see the light of day.

The Cadillac tax. Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy to employer provided health insurance.”  What is that?  The employer-provided tax — the subsidy is that nobody pays a tax on that.  I mentioned, I think it was either yesterday or Friday, the government considers all money to be owned by it, and anything you have is what government graciously determines to allow you to have after they have decided what of your activity they’re going to tax.  And anything that they claim is untaxed, they think you’re getting a subsidy.

You haven’t earned anything.  You’re getting a subsidy.  So if you have health insurance at work, as a benefit, and nobody’s paying tax on that, then the government, Gruber’s group, looks at that as though you are being subsidized by the government.  The government gets its cut first.  The government gets its take first no matter what, and then whatever you’re left with is yours.

But in the case of employer-provided health insurance, there’s no tax applied.  It’s a free benefit.  There’s no imputed income. You don’t have to report the value of it on your tax return.  And these guys are coming along and saying we can’t do this anymore. We’re gonna have to start collecting tax on these benefits.  And what Gruber is saying here, politically this is gonna be hard to do. People have gotten these free health care benefits for years, we can’t just start taking this, so what do we do?  Well, we mislabel it.  We call it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people, when we all know it’s really a tax on people who hold those plans.

So yet another instance and another, perhaps for Gruber, this is the most direct and maybe the clearest way he has admitted this fraud.  I mean, this is an in-your-face tantamount admission of the con game that was run.  And it’s still being run.

Here’s the next bite.  Here is the second phase of Gruber’s plan.

GRUBER:  “And the second one was to start it late. It started in 2018. But by starting it late we’re able to tie the cap for the Cadillac Tax to the CPI, not to medical inflation.  What that means is a tax which starts by only taxing about the top 8% of health insurance plans essentially amounts, over the next 20 years, to basically getting rid of the exclusion from employer-provided health insurance.  This was the only political way we were ever gonna take on what is one of the worst public policies in America, and every economist should celebrate this.  We took it on and got rid of it in the most expeditious way we possibly could have politically.”

RUSH:  What he’s talking about here is the fact that you get your health benefits free, that you don’t pay any tax on it, and we’ve got to change that. He found a way to do it now by fooling you into thinking you’re not gonna be paying the tax on it.  Economists need to be celebrating this worldwide because this is a big deal. We’re trying to figure this out, how to get rid of “the exclusion for employer-provided health insurance” and ultimately eliminate it.

So here it is, folks.

This is all the stuff that’s going on behind the scenes, all the lying, all the conning going on, in order to get some modicum of public support.  Actually, it never has had majority public support.  Some of this was necessary to get Democrat votes.  But it has been a deception from the moment of its conception.  The whole thing is an intricately woven web of deceit that very little truth can be found inside.

And they celebrate how they were able to run this con and fool you and also celebrate what their long-term objective is, which is to eliminate one of the great options that you believe you’ve had all your life, and that is to get health coverage, health insurance via your job.  I mean, all of this is despicable as could be. It’s deceitful. And I don’t know how people in Washington — as they learn this or perhaps have it confirmed ’cause they knew it already — can just sit by as though it’s no big deal.


RUSH:  Notice how excited Gruber sounds in these bites.  Notice how happy he is.  He’s excited at the cleverness that he (and he obviously thinks he alone) has come up with and used in fooling the American people.  You can hear it in his voice.  You can hear how excited he is.  He can barely contain it! He’s speaking so fast, you can barely understand everything he’s saying as he’s talking to his economist buddies about how he’s put the screws to everybody.

(impression) “Oh, yeah, we raised taxes on ’em but we told ’em we are taxing the insurance companies — and they fell for it! (guffawing) Yes, siree bob! We had to do that, otherwise there couldn’t have been a way to get the done! (laughing) Is this not great?  Every economist ought to be celebrating the way we lied to the American people!  It was so brilliant!  I am soooo good.  Oh, my God, does Obama know how lucky he is to have me?” 

And then we go to Brisbane and Obama said (impression), “Who?  Gruber?  I never heard of the guy.  Is he some low-rent advisor?  You know, people say what they want to say, but none of that’s true. I just found out about this. I’m mad, and I’m gonna get to the bottom of it.”  It’s an amazing con.  




Victor Valley Daily Press Op-ed


New WhatDidYouSay Logo





Is this plan necessary?

Unless you’re an academic specializing in French history, you’ve probably never heard of Jean Baptiste Colbert, a politician who served as the Minister of Finances of France from 1665 to 1683.  But you may have heard his most famous public utterance, or at least some version of it.

It goes like this: “The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least possible amount of hissing.”

But it applies to more than taxation.  It’s what the entire field of public relations and marketing is built upon, and it’s what scams of one sort or another are all about.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Latest example is the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, which has received precious little public attention, and about which a public meeting in Victorville was held a couple of weeks back.  Some 350 people showed up to listen to Chris Beale, the DRECP acting executive director, make a case for the plan’s current draft.

Quiet the hissing Tyranney Alert

What Mr. Beale was up to, of course, was to figure out how to open up 22.6 million acres of California land to renewable energy projects while causing the least amount of hissing from the people who live in the desert.

We’re on the side of the hissers, primarily because the whole idea of more renewable energy projects in the High Desert — or anywhere else in the 22.6 million acres of California land being considered, including 12 million acres in San Bernardino County — is unnecessary.

cause of deathSuch projects have been viewed as a panacea for America’s energy needs.  But consider that the whole idea of establishing DRECP began in 2008, long before fracking technology revealed that America’s natural gas supply, the cheapest and least polluting of carbon-based energy sources, is virtually limitless.  Latest proven reserves (from 2012) are 323 trillion cubic feet. In 2013, the country used 23 million cubic feet.  Divide 23 million into 323 trillion and you get … a virtually limitless supply.  And the price is falling as reserves mount.

Consider also that the plan was conceived just when Barack Obama, the most ardent global warming believer ever to occupy the Oval Office, took power.

The DRECP gang wants to make way for renewable energy projects, not because they’re needed, but because environmental activists have sold the notion that without them the Earth is going to burn to a cinder before its time due to rising carbon dioxide levels IF WE DON’T DO SOMETHING TO STOP IT!

Subsidizing waste 

It’s nonsense, of course, but if we don’t stop the effort to stop the nonsense, we’ll be devoting billions and billions and billions of tax dollars to subsidizing an industry that’s not needed.  There’s another “public hearing” by fomenters of the DRECP today, in Joshua Tree. We expect that to also attract plenty of desert residents (other DRECP draft plan hearings prior to Victorville’s, held in down-the-hill communities whose residents don’t feel threatened by DRECP plans, were attended by almost nobody).energy-2014-AEA-600
Now if, say, the government was proposing that 100 wind turbine generators be erected along the Southern California coast a couple miles offshore from Santa Monica, and a public hearing were held in the area to consider a “draft plan,” how many people (OK, protesters) do you suppose would attend?  It would be standing room only at The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

The Mojave Desert doesn’t need this latest effort to turn it into a dumping ground for taxpayer subsidized wind turbines and solar generating projects covering thousands of acres of land with solar mirrors and 500-foot towers with spinning blades, all out of sight and mind of the Left Coast’s environmental nut cases, but all too visible and intrusive to the people who love the desert and want to keep it as pristine as possible.

We think it’s time to turn up the volume on hissing.

Steve Williams

The meeting is Wednesday Nov. 19, 2014
5:30pm – 8:00pm
Joshua Tree Community Center
6171 Sunburst Ave.
Joshua Tree, CA

John Smith

Mojave Communities Conservation Collaborative  (web page)
2saveourskyline (Facebook page)







Democrats Lie – They’re Too Arrogant Not To

By  / November 17, 2014

URL of Original Posting Site:

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

It seems that Susan Ferrechio of the Washington Examiner has found a few choice quotes from Democrats, namely Bella Pelosi (I vant to suck your wallet) as the title of her article on Saturday would suggest: “Dems: Gruber wrote computer code, not Obamacare.”

Is that right. Well, he sure does have a lot to say and sure seems to have plenty of detailed strategic information for some guy tucked away somewhere pecking at a keyboard. That, or a very active imagination. Maybe he’s the inadvertent Edward Snowden of Obamacare, or maybe he’s a typical egotistical arrogant liberal who, like Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al think they can say anything and not be held to account, even when they’re caught on audio or video. “Are you going to believe me, or your lying eyes?”culture of deciet

Nonetheless, Susan writes that House Democrats contend that Jonathan Gruber was merely a computer code expert who was factually wrong in the assertions he made, regarding Obamacare.

By now most of us have heard that he was merely a computer “modeler, who wrote 15,000 lines of computer code.” And for this, writes Ferrechio, he “banked more than $1 million from the federal government and states by helping design and implement the Affordable Care Act.” Where do I sign up for that gig?

Susan reports that although Pelosi insists that he played no role in writing Obamacare, Gruber evidently visited the White House eight times. Now why in the world would anyone in the White House invite a mere computer programmer to meet with them just wants let alone eight times? Answer: they wouldn’t.

liar PelosiSo Pelosi claims he had no role yet on her own website she said “The White House sometimes consulted Gruber on healthcare issues.” Huh – asking a computer programmer about healthcare? That’s like asking the guy who does my dry cleaning how to rebuild my cars engine. It makes no sense. Yet remember, it doesn’t have to. There are no contradictions in the world of a liberal Democrat.

Want an example? Ferrechio has one. We’ve all seen the videos where Gruber is caught saying “the ‘stupidity of the American voter’ and a ‘lack of transparency’ were the key to getting the public to accept the 2010 law.” She then cites Pelosi on her own website saying “First of all, there was no lack of transparency in the drafting and passing of the Affordable Care Act. In fact, the Affordable Care Act had more openness and transparency in its consideration than any law in many years.”com 01

I’m not sure that this type of arrogance can be taught. It may be something that Pelosi was born with. It may be inherited. Perhaps we should look into her family tree. Is she a descendant of Charles Ponzi, or maybe Raoul Wallenberg? No, that couldn’t be. Wallenberg was a good liar who saved a lot of Jews in Hungary during World War II.

Anyway – back to this “no lack of transparency” claim of Pelosi’s. Does the phrase, you have to pass it to find out what’s in it ring a bell? This woman really is beyond the pale. That or she’s suffering the early stages of dementia.Nana needs to go to a home

In fact, she may have more contradictory statements over the past five years then Obama. Ferrechio writes that “Pelosi made a reference to Gruber’s modeling during a 2009 press conference, but when asked about him last week she initially said she didn’t know him.”

Pelosi disputes Gruber’s claim that the authors of the law deliberately avoided describing the individual mandate as a tax, saying “the authors of the ACA have always ignores that individuals would have to report it on their tax returns as in addition to income tax liability.”

Okay, I’ll give her a pass on that one. First it was a tax that it wasn’t a tax then it was a tax, 02

All in all, Ferrechio does an excellent job condensing some of Pelosi’s more outrageous lies regarding Obamacare and Gruber. It’s a difficult thing to do so in a short one page article. It seems that not a day goes by when Pelosi is lying about something.

But hey, that’s what Democrat politicians do. They lie and do so with impunity. And they’re so arrogant that they don’t even care if and when they get caught.obama-liar4-266x189

It’s the nature of the modern Democrat Party.

If his mouth is open he must be lying



Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon



Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


2014 Election Pandemic



Article collective closing

Border Patrol Agent Slams Feds: ‘We All Know Who We’ve Captured… You Can’t Keep This Kind Of Information A Secret’


SHTF PlanOctober 10, 2014


Imperial Islamic President ObamaRepresentative Duncan Hunter (R-CA) recently claimed that a high-level Department of Homeland Security official informed him of the capture of at least ten Islamic State terrorists on the Texas-Mexico border. A DHS spokesperson speaking with the New Republic unequivocally denied the Congressman’s claims:

“The suggestion that individuals who have ties to ISIL have been apprehended at the Southwest border is categorically false, and not supported by any credible intelligence or the facts on the ground,” said DHS spokesperson Marsha CatronB.S. Meter.

DHS continues to have no credible intelligence to suggest terrorist organizations are actively plotting to cross the southwest border.

But even the Islamic State has said they want to launch attacks directly on American soil and in recent weeks IS public relations arms on social media have urged followers to identify U.S. soldiers, track down their addresses and kill them and their families. Some reports of DHS chatter even suggest that America’s worst fears of a biological attack could be realized if IS militants infect themselves with Ebola or another deadly virus and deliver it to America in live hosts via the southern border.

And while Homeland Security has brushed off such threats and warnings as not obama-liar4-266x189credible, the border patrol agents being faced with thousands of undocumented immigrants attempting to cross into the United States daily have a completely different story to tell.

According to one agent who has chosen to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal, not only are they seeing scores of disease-ridden individuals being brought into the country, there is a real and present danger that members of terror organizations have already crossed into the United States.

Homeland Security and Obama Administration officials may categorically deny the claims, but this agent insists terrorist organizations are operating in Mexico and he says that he is aware of at least four Islamic State insurgents that have already been detained by the government:

A border patrol agent told the Examiner Wednesday evening that he knew of at least four ISIS insurgents that have been captured this past week.

“There could be more,” he said. “All I know is we (the border patrol agents) know what we see and do, even if the Feds don’t want to acknowledge it.”

“We have stepped up our searches on vehicles, under, over and all-around because we believe they may be trying to bring in explosive bombs and devices,” the agent said. 

“Why would we be so cautious if the possibility was not there?”

“We all know who we have captured,” he continued. “As much as they want it quiet, you can’t keep this kind of information a secret very long. We have families here.”culture of deciet

The report comes on the heels of another whistleblower speaking out recently about the seriousness of the threat. In an interview for the documentary Back To The Border, insider Zach Taylor suggests that what’s happening in the south is a controlled event being facilitated by top-level officials.

The problem as I see it… and as apparently CDC, Health and Human Services, and Department of Homeland Security… are trying to make this a controlled situation.

They’re anticipating a large national crisis.

When you see that FEMA is preparing for 200 million deaths in the United States that tells you something.

When you see that the government is controlling the supply of ammunition and that basic medical supplies are in short supply in southern Arizona, something’s wrong.

They are anticipating something drastic.

(Full Video Interview Here)

The official position of the Homeland Security apparatus is that our southern border has never been as protected from external threats as it is today.

That, of course, is laughable, given the fact that literally thousands of migrants from unknown origins are crossing into the United States every single day including those carrying diseases, drug cartel gang members, and Other-Than-Mexican security threats.

It is only a matter of time before some of them sneak in carrying a deadly virus, a dirty bomb or other weapon of mass destruction.

And when that happens we’ll most certainly hear the oft repeated narrative of, “no one could have seen this coming or prepared for it.”

Article collective closing

Obamacare Sends Iowa Health Insurance Premiums Skyrocketing


9 Oct 2014

Thousands of Iowans are now facing double-digit health insurance premium hikes due to Obamacare.

On Wednesday, the Des Moines Register reported that the state’s insurance commissioner has approved Des Moines-based Wellmark to hike its rates between 11.9% and 14.5%.

The premium spike will affect 19,000 Iowans.

“That increase is for individual policyholders who have Affordable Care Act-compliant plans,” reports the Register.

CoOportunity, one of the main companies offering health insurance on the Obamacare exchange, will increase its rates 19%. 19

Nationally, Obamacare remains deeply unpopular. The latest Associated Press poll finds that just 30% of the country supports Obamacare.

President Barack Obama promised at least 19 times that Obamacare would lower health insurance premiums by $2,500 per family.

Repreal Obamacare








Article collective closing

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


No Worries


E JV 2 600 LA

Dupe and Chains

Article collective closing


MORE LETHAL THAN ISLAM: Barack Obama’s Cowardice and Lies


Written by Pete Parker on September 22, 2014

Obama delivers statement on Ukraine from the White House

Image; confiscation_program_of_Australia/35877/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Barack Obama’s incessant lies and cowardice make him more lethal than the world’s most barbaric ideology–Islam.

That’s correct: More lethal than Islam.

From Obama’s steadfast public denial (lie) that Islam has nothing to do with ISIS–to his whiny and cowardly, ad nauseam political decrees that he will not put “boots on the ground” in Iraq–he is making America (on the world stage) look like a nation without balls courage.

Though ISIS is following in the exact footsteps of its Prophet Mohammed (rape, beheadings and sundry other atrocities)–our president is busy holding press conferences to lecture his subjects on Islam’s “boundless peace and tolerance.”

As I have mentioned in my previous articles–Mohammed was a serial decapitator and rapist. His penchant for violence and mayhem was second to none. And for that reason–historians have recognized him as one of the most bloodthirsty figures of the 7th century.

Imperial Islamic President ObamaYet, Obama’s continuous lies that Islam has nothing to do with ISIS only serves to further embolden the enemy simply because it views said lies as a sign of profound weakness. That’s correct: A sign of profound weakness.

Why? Because only a weak and cowardly leader resorts to lies in a time of crises. After all, ISIS knows it represents Islam. And why is that? Because its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, holds a PhD in Islamic Studies.

Moreover–Obama’s stated decision not to put boots on the ground is purely political. By making this decree–he demonstrates to his rabid, left-wing base that he is the anti-Bush.

But, by engaging in this brand of political expediency (after telling the world that ISIS possess a direct threat to America)–he is letting our enemy know that he doesn’t have the will, nor the spine to confront it on the battlefield.

(Just a side note: Most military and foreign policy experts–including Allen West and John Bolton–have publicly stated that “boots on the ground” is the only way to defeat ISIS.)

In the final analysis–Barack Obama’s lies and cowardice might very well usher in America’s demise. And thus, my friends–the end of Western Civilization.

And that makes him more lethal than Islam.

















Article collective closing

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


The Impostors



Article collective closing

Obama Claims ISIS Is Not Islamic



Posted on September 11, 2014 by

“I believe that political correctness can be a form of linguistic fascism, and it sends shivers down the spine of my generation who went to war against fascism.” – P.D. James

Political correctness is like the toxoplasma gondii parasite; it infects its host and dangerously alters its behavior. In the case of political correctness, a rational—and more importantly, realistic—worldview is changed for the benefit of another’s feelings. Political correctness tells us that the truth is too offensive, or cruel to speak, and that we must be sensitive. But sometimes sensitivity blinds us to the reality of our cultural experience, which directly or indirectly endangers us.

In his speech yesterday regarding the radical Islamic terrorist organization ISIS, president Obama said many things, but one thing in particular left me stunned.

“Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic…No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.”

According to the president, ISIS is not Islamic. Doesn’t that sound so warm, culturally sensitive, and nuanced? What an urbane, and prudent man, Obama is. His rationale? The fact that ISIS condones murder, but also the fact that many of ISIS’ victims have been fellow Muslims. You read that correctly. Because ISIS kills Muslims, they cannot possibly be truly Islamic. Let’s talk about that.

  • ISISis made up of Sunni Muslims, and many of the Muslims they are killing are Shiite. To the Sunnis, Shiite Muslims are infidels, and aretherefore a target. According to Alissa J. Rubin of The New York Times:
    • ISIS believes that the Shiites are apostates and must die in order to forge a pure form of Islam…In a chilling video that appeared to have been made more than a year ago in the Anbar Province of Iraq, ISIS fighters stopped three truck drivers in the desert and asked them whether they were Sunnis or Shiites. All three claimed to be Sunni. Then the questions got harder. They were asked how they performed each of the prayers: morning, midday and evening. The truck drivers disagreed on their methods, and all were shot.”
    • Regardless of what you believe about Islam in general, the fact that Muslims are murdering other Muslims does not preclude those doing the killing from being Muslim. And Obama is a moron for saying so and thinking the public will believe him.
  • Next, let’s talk about the whole “no religion condones the killing of innocents” thing. Obama is either deliberately spreading misinformation, or he is bafflingly stupid. The Quran is filled with passages which command the execution of infidels (otherwise known as non-Muslims).
    • Quran 5:33 “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.”
    • Quran 8:12 “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”

Imperial Islamic President ObamaThose are just two of dozens, and dozens of versus in the Quran advocating the killing of infidels. There are peaceful Muslims in the world, certainly, but there are those who take the Quran quite literally, and they are the ones fighting this war. Radical Muslims are no less Muslim because they practice violence. In fact, one could argue that they are more devout, because they follow more closely to the Quran.

Additionally, Obama shows his foolishness when he describes the victims of ISIS as “innocents.” To ISIS, non-Sunni Muslims are not innocents, they are infidels, and enemies of Allah. The radicals in ISIS are not killing innocents; they are killing their enemies, whom they believe to be apostates, and evil doers.

Since the beginning of his presidency, when he gave his we’re-all-in-this-together speech in Cairo, Barack Obama has been terrified of labeling radical Islamic terrorism. As his presidency has progressed (I hesitate to use that word), he has evolved, entering into even more treacherous territory. Remember when Obama “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” during his speech to the UN? Now, with his latest denial of the linkage between Islam, and terror, he has taken political correctness to a frightening level.

The longer Obama denies that radical Islam is the root of modern terrorism, the more power we give to radical Islam. Not only is it a disservice to those who have fought, and died to say that the terror we face isn’t based in radical Islam, it’s a denial that leads us away from fighting the root of the problem. If we don’t recognize the intent of the radical Islamists, which is to wipe us out, and create a modern caliphate, we won’t be able to defeat them. Instead, we will try to negotiate our way out of the problem. But you cannot negotiate with someone who has no intent to cooperate.

Obama’s denial that ISIS is inherently Islamic is not only completely untrue, but If his mouth is open he must be lyinghazardous to our safety as a nation. Given the absolute stupidity of Obama’s statement, it’s safe to say that he is either stunningly incompetent, or just a flat out liar. Either way, he is doing the United States quite a bit of harm.











Article collective closing

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon

Article collective closing

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: