Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘political left’

Delano Squires Op-ed: The left respects black drug dealers, pimps, and murderers more than black conservatives

DELANO SQUIRES | January 06, 2023


Getty Images

In one week, Cori Bush proved she is more supportive of trans murderers than of black conservatives. The congresswoman from Missouri joined fellow Democrat Emanuel Cleaver in an attempt to stop the execution of Amber McLaughlin – formerly Scott McLaughlin – who was convicted of rape and murder in 2006.

Their efforts failed.

Bush’s tweet lamenting that McLaughlin’s execution – the first involving a transgender inmate – was much different in tone from the one she sent regarding a very different historic event.

Bush called Rep. Byron Donalds, a black Republican from Florida, a “prop” and supporter of “white supremacy” in a recent tweet criticizing his bid to become speaker of the House. Donalds would be the first black person to hold that position – the type of milestone that the left openly celebrates. Leftists certainly have celebrated for Hakeem Jeffries, the black Democrat and noted election denier, who will lead his party in the new session of Congress.

Don’t miss out on content from Dave Rubin free of big tech censorship. Listen to The Rubin Report now.

Byron Donalds is different. He describes himself as a “Trump-supporting, gun-owning, liberty-loving, pro-life, politically incorrect Black man.” His entire political persona is in complete opposition to that of Cori Bush and the members of the Congressional Black Caucus. This fact should be welcome news to black voters. Our political system is all about debating worldviews, priorities, and policy ideas. The black community would benefit from elected officials from opposite sides of the political spectrum debating the merits of charter schools or education savings accounts.

But instead of engaging ideas, Bush went straight to attacks on what she believes black people value most: our racial identity. Bush is just like President Biden and prominent liberals in media and politics who think they are the gatekeepers of racial authenticity. They think anyone who doesn’t follow the left’s script “ain’t black.” But as is often the case in life, the foot soldiers of “Biden blackness” are engaging in projection.

Cori Bush is an abortion absolutist who thinks black babies are better off being killed in the womb than being born to poor black mothers. She also supports Black Lives Matter, the organization that wants to dismantle the nuclear family and believes black children are better off being raised in “villages” full of women where the only “dad” is the government.

Bush is most infamous for her support of the “defund the police” movement. A woman who represents one of the most violent cities in the country thinks that police are the ones making her city dangerous. She is a more zealous advocate for rapists and murderers on death row than for the law-abiding citizens in her district.

There is an important lesson to learn here. People who see themselves as oppressed, marginalized slaves will do anything — even kill themselves and their offspring — if they can be convinced that murder is a form of liberation.

The worst part about Bush’s comments is how normal they have become in our political discourse. The left has directed the vitriol it used to reserve for Justice Clarence Thomas to any black person who is right of center.

Winsome Sears, the lieutenant governor of Virginia, was accused of being a “black mouth” justifying white supremacist ideas by Michael Eric Dyson on MSNBC. Larry Elder was called the “black face of white supremacy” in a Los Angeles Times column during his bid to unseat Gavin Newsom as governor. Condoleezza Rice was called a “foot soldier for white supremacy” by culture critic Touré for her rejection of CRT in American classrooms.

This is the new norm in our political and racial discourse. Black children are told they can be anything they desire – as long as they are not out-of-the-closet conservatives.

Black drug dealers, pimps, and shooters are all treated with more respect than black Republicans. Rappers can degrade black women and glorify violence against black men without any fear of having their BET Awards invitation revoked. But if a black politician or artist says he is glad Roe is dead, he can expect to watch the show at home.

When you reward degeneracy and punish unapproved political thoughts, you shouldn’t be surprised when you get more of the former and less of the latter.

This is why one of the most needed developments in American politics today is to break the notion that fealty to the Democratic Party is a litmus test for maintaining good standing in the black community. All black voters should feel free to support candidates based on policy positions that reflect their values.

This is the sad state of race in America today. Liberals like Robin DiAngelo who tell white people they are the key to black social progress are hailed as heroes. Black politicians like Cori Bush who spend more time championing the rights of “pregnant men” than the benefits of the natural family are treated like bold revolutionaries. But black conservatives like Byron Donalds are treated like race traitors online, by corporate media, and in Hollywood. Their motto for social control is simple, yet effective: “When in doubt, pull the race card out.” The problem is that too many black people see the death and destruction being promoted by the left’s agenda and won’t be silenced.


“Whose Ever Got the Guns Can Win- Let’s Take Over the Buildings!” -WOW! Lisa Fithian, BLM, Radical Leftists Are Working with Federal Workers For Post Election Mass Violence (Video)

Reported By Jim Hoft | Published October 30, 2020 at 7:00am

Lisa Fithian is a radical revolutionary who has been organizing chaos operations and antigovernment demonstrations in the United States for decades. Lisa Fithian was a key organizer of violent demonstrations that caused the shutdown of the 1999 WTO meetings in Seattle, Washington.

Fithian is an anti-capitalist revolutionary.

wto riots seattle

Police use gas to push back World Trade Organization protesters in downtown Seattle on Nov. 30, 1999. The protests delayed the opening of the third WTO conference in Seattle. (Indymedia)

Lisa Fithian later became a top street organizer of the violent Occupy Wall Street movement.


Occupy Oakland goons rioting in 2011.

While you were going to work, paying your bills, taking the kids to their ballgame… Lisa Fithian was training activists. This is an eye-popping video by the EAGFoundation. The video shows anti-capitalist radical Lisa Fithian training Chicago union teachers on how to stage their arrests for the camera in 2011:

Lisa Fithian held training sessions in the St. Louis area during the Ferguson rioting in 2014. And this revolutionary is now plotting violent takeover of Washington DC next week following the presidential election.

Win or lose the communists are going to rip this country apart next week! Be warned. Be prepared!

Earlier today journalist Millie Weaver posted video of leftist groups including Black Lives Matter, being led by Lisa Fithian, and including federal employees plotting their mass chaos in the nation’s capitol next week.

Fithian is heard in the video telling her minions to support their cohorts with guns who are plotting to take over federal buildings.

UPDATE– Filmmaker Jeremy Segal was on America’s Voice with Frank Gaffney on Thursday discussing organizer of the revolution Lisa Fithian.

Commentary: Are We As Stupid As Politicians Think We Are?

It was recently reported that during a closed-door meeting of House Democrats following the Memorial Day weekend, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., expressed concern that “the public still doesn’t understand how the process of impeachment would play out.” This was in the context of House Democrats spitballing offenses that could ostensibly justify proceeding with impeachment against President Donald Trump.

Now, it’s long been the practice of the political class to frame their mission as beyond the understanding of the average voter.

It’s not, of course; this viewpoint has been advanced in order to exalt the role of politicians and to ensure that voters defer to those pols’ whims, as opposed to their own better judgment.

Then, there’s the belief on the part of progressive leaders that people, in general, are too stupid to govern themselves in the fashion our founders intended; thus the rationale for advancing socialism in the first place.

I’ll elaborate on that in a moment.

Finally, there’s the fact that many Americans really don’t understand the machinations of politics and governance.

My parents’ generation and those preceding them were required to know the fundamentals of American governance, as were those in the process of becoming naturalized citizens.

Over the last 60 years or so, progressives in government and the educational system phased out the study of Civics in order to bring about the very conditions that currently exist.

At the same time, politicians have also fostered a level of intellectual indolence on the part of the public, which further reinforces their dependence on the “wisdom” of elected officials.

So, the stupidity leftist politicians cite (usually in private) is really far more ignorance than stupidity.

Even amongst those Americans who deeply respect our Constitution and our system of governance, there are probably very few who appreciate how unique and distinctive these truly are.

Prior to 1776, people were ruled by monarchs and oligarchs. Applying ancient wisdom – some of which was biblical – the founders of this nation sought to create a form of government that might receive the stamp of approval from the Creator.

They knew that flawed human beings would only be able to get so close to this ideal, but that didn’t stop them from trying.

In 1776, the idea of citizens governing themselves was a radical one, but the results of the American experiment became so favored that European nations (from which much of our society and culture sprang) gave over to democratic republican governance in fairly short order.

Even today, few who take the time to really acquaint themselves with the elegance and inspired vision of our founders as represented in our founding documents are not moved to deep emotion.

The process was difficult.

Anyone who has studied the period of America’s founding and the correspondence between our founders finds themselves in awe of the fact that America was founded at all.

America’s subsequent successes and its role as a force for good in the world speak for themselves.

While it is something of an oversimplification, this is how it all came under the gun, as it were: In the beginning of the last century, would-be oligarchs in the emergent political class and their industrialist cronies began to see themselves as effective heirs to the rulers of centuries past.

Part of this was due to a deep conceit, although it also is an unfortunate component of human nature that in looking to the future, we often seek to abandon things of the past, even if they have served us well.

With the advent of socialism, communism and secularized worldviews, it was only natural that an assortment of scoundrels who craved power, though they had nothing whatsoever to contribute to society, insinuated themselves into positions of power.

Encouraging ignorance with regard to the mechanics of governance set the stage for selling citizens this “new” system of socialism as a panacea for the world’s ills. Demonizing capitalism, our system of governance and our founders themselves as retrograde and iniquitous was necessary as part of this process.

The leftist radicals of the 1960s – whose vision is being sloppily if ruthlessly implemented at present – did have a point in their argument that our government had come to serve itself and far too many powerful interests at the expense of the people. Their solution, however, was to become the government and to occupy other positions of power, and this they achieved largely through socialist rhetoric.

In truth, it is socialism in its various incarnations (communism, liberalism, progressivism) that is retrograde, because it relegates self-governance to the dustbin of history whilst handing political power back to the oligarchs. The most dynamic and terrifying efforts we are currently seeing toward bringing this about are obviously coming from the far left wing of the Democrat Party, although closeted progressives among Republican leaders are equally to blame.

While a majority of Americans remain blissfully unaware of what is at stake by design, the fact is that we are at war. Some of the clearest evidence of this involves the criminal cabal that’s attempting to oust a duly-elected president who does understand what’s at stake. Their efforts toward removing him, the incomprehensibly perilous policies they advocate, their duplicity to date and the atrocities of their political forebears necessitate decisive and potent action against them on a scale that is likely to challenge Americans’ sensibilities.

Look to the wretchedness of any nation or region that has implemented socialistic public policy – whether Venezuela, Europe or Scandinavia – and it quickly becomes apparent that there is nothing we ought not consider to entirely and permanently neutralize this scourge.

Article posted with permission from Erik Rush


Erik Rush

Erik Rush is a New York-born columnist, author and speaker who writes sociopolitical commentary, and host of the FULL-CONTACT With Erik Rush LIVE! streaming radio show. He is also the Founder and Chief Editor of the Instigator News Network. In February of 2007, Erik was the first to break the story of Barack Obama’s ties to militant Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright on a national level. His book, “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession,” has been called “the definitive book on race politics in America.”

Leftism as a Secular Religion

“Leftists have contempt for anyone who is guided by the Bible and its God, and substitute the heart and feelings for divine instruction,” writes Dennis Prager. (Photo: ~Userc0373230_9/Getty Images)

One of the most important books of the 20th century—it remains a best-seller 59 years after it was first published—is “Man’s Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankl.

Marx saw man’s primary drive as economic, and Freud saw it as sex. But Frankl believed—correctly, in my opinion—that the greatest drive of man is meaning. One can be poor and chaste and still be happy. But one cannot be bereft of meaning and be happy—no matter how rich or how sexually fulfilled one may be.

The greatest provider of meaning for the vast majority of human beings has been religion. In the West, Christianity (and on a smaller scale, Judaism) provided nearly all people with the Bible, a divine or divinely inspired text to guide their lives; a religious community; answers to life’s fundamental questions; and, above all, meaning: A good God governs the universe; death does not end everything; and human beings were purposefully created.

In addition, Christianity gave Christians a project: Spread the Good News, and bring the world to Christ. And Judaism gave Jews a project: Live by God’s laws of ethics and holiness and be “a light unto the nations.”

All this has disappeared for most Westerners. The Bible is regarded as myth, silly at best, malicious at worst—there is no God, certainly not the morality-giving and judging God of the Bible; there is no afterlife; human beings are a purposeless coincidence with no more intrinsic purpose than anything else in the universe. In short: This is all there is.

So, if the need for meaning is the greatest of all human needs and that which supplied meaning no longer does, what are millions of Westerners supposed to do?

The answer is obvious: Find meaning elsewhere. But where? Church won’t provide it. Nor will marriage and family—increasingly, secular individuals in the West eschew marriage, and even more do not have children. It turns out, to the surprise of many, that marriage and children are religious values, not human instincts.

In the West today, love and marriage (and children) go together like a horse and a carriage for faithful Catholics, Orthodox Jews, religious Mormons, and evangelical Protestants—not for the secular. I know many religious families with more than four children; I do not know one secular family with more than four children (and the odds are you don’t either).

The answer to the great dearth of meaning left by the death of biblical religion in the West is secular religion. The first two great secular substitutes were communism and Nazism. The first provided hundreds of millions of people with meaning; the latter provided most Germans and Austrians with meaning.

In particular, both ideologies provided the intellectual class with meaning. No groups believed in communism and Nazism more than intellectuals. Like everyone else, secular intellectuals need meaning, and when this need was combined with intellectuals’ love of ideas (especially new ideas—”new” is almost erotic in the power of its appeal to secular intellectuals), communism and Nazism became potent ideologies.

With the fall of communism and the awareness of the extent of the communist mass murder (about 100 million noncombatants) and mass enslavement (virtually all individuals in communist countries—except for Communist Party leaders—are essentially enslaved), communism, or at least the word “communism,” fell into disrepute.

So, what were secular intellectuals to do once communism became “the god that failed”?

The answer was to create another left-wing secular religion. And that is what leftism is: a secular meaning-giver to supplant Christianity. Left-wing religious expressions include Marxism, communism, socialism, feminism, and environmentalism.

Leftism’s guiding principles—notwithstanding the principles of those Christians and Jews who claim to be religious yet hold leftist views—are the antitheses of Judaism and Christianity’s guiding principles.

Judaism and Christianity hold that people are not basically good. Leftism holds that people are basically good. Therefore, Judaism and Christianity believe evil comes from human nature, and leftism believes evil comes from capitalism, religion, the nation-state (i.e. nationalism), corporations, the patriarchy, and virtually every other traditional value.

Judaism and Christianity hold that utopia on Earth is impossible—it will only come in God’s good time as a Messianic age or in the afterlife. Leftism holds that utopia is to be created here on Earth—and as soon as possible. That is why leftists find America so contemptible. They do not compare it to other nations but to a utopian ideal—a society with no inequality, no racism, no differences between the sexes (indeed, no sexes), and no greed in which everything important is obtained free.

Judaism and Christianity believe God and the Bible are to instruct us on how to live a good life and how the heart is the last place to look for moral guidance. Leftists have contempt for anyone who is guided by the Bible and its God, and substitute the heart and feelings for divine instruction.

There may be a clash of civilizations between the West and Islam, but the biggest clash of civilizations is between the West and the left.

Commentary By

Portrait of Dennis Prager

Dennis Prager is a columnist for The Daily Signal, nationally syndicated radio host, and creator of PragerU.



Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


The Democrats continue to lose their minds believing that they’re qualified to question Trumps mental fitness.

Trump Mental FitnessPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Thursday November 9, 2017

How We Can Live as God’s People in Troubled Times. The faithful can help the nation, as divided as it is

waving flagAuthored by Wendy Murray | Updated 17 Feb 2017 at 6:58 AM

URL of the original posting site:

Reflecting upon the current state of social discourse, I have come to believe that the greatest battle of our age is not, as one might suppose, the “war on terror,” meaning terrorists. I believe it is an invisible war inside human souls that carries its own element of terror.

This invisible war, as I am coming to see it, can be understood in the writings of Pascal (the Pensées), who describes the character of a person who has who set himself up as his own god: “He [or she] devotes all his attention to hiding his faults both from others and from himself. He conceives a mortal enmity against that truth which reproves him. He would annihilate it, but, unable to destroy it in its essence, he destroys it in so far as possible.”

This captures the essence of what is going off the boil in today’s public discourse generally, and particularly, as it shows itself by “progressives” on the Left and their repulsion of Donald J. Trump’s presidency. The shocking and exceedingly troubling incitement to violence and the raging intolerance is hardly progressive; it is rather quite regressive and, in some instances, barbaric.point-counterpoint

/* */




There is no way to engage such disgorgement on intellectual or even logical grounds. These battles cannot be won on social media, nor arbitrated on late-night talk shows or (especially) cable news programs. In the best of all worlds, the battle might be met by each person, on all sides of the political spectrum, remembering God in a world that has forgotten him or deposed him.amen

The cynic responds: Good luck with that. Nevertheless, those of us who believe in God are not beholden to the cynics. We know God to be good, kind, generous, mysterious and — most vexing of all His attributes, unable to be fooled.

Related: Weaving Prayer into the Daily Grind

We live in a universe of players who live by cravings to be like God. “Each degree of good fortune that raises [them] in the world,” Pascal continues, “removes them farther from the truth, because they are afraid of wounding those whose affection is most useful and whose dislike is most dangerous.” The person or community that assumes the prerogatives of God or thinks to fool God encapsulates the greatest challenge of these times. This is especially true for those trying to navigate these difficult days as people of

God does not wag His finger, contrary to the popular belief of some — and we, as His emissaries, are wrong to wag ours. He is good at exhibiting patience and practicing persistence, organizing His movements in perfect synchrony that open us to act freely and at the same time draw us irresistibly away from self-deception. 

When I ask myself, What is the “truth” of our times that we, as God-bearers, are called to communicate — I come to see that the answer is quite simple: We must, like God, be good at exhibiting patience and practicing persistence. Beyond that, we (meaning humans) are well-served to remember that we are not God and it is best to leave His prerogatives to Him. (This includes determining who is or is not able to be used by God.) It is liberating if one can truly apprehend it.

Related: What Journalism Can Learn from Lady Justice

I draw consolation from the words of Saint Francis of Assisi: “Since you speak of peace, all the more so must you have it in your hearts. Let none be provoked to anger or scandal by you, but rather may they be drawn to peace and good will, to benignity and concord through your gentleness. We have been called to heal wounds, to unite what has fallen apart, and to bring home those who have lost their way.”

Ultimately, the challenge of our time is to impart this truth in a way that appropriately echoes God’s loving, aching heart.


Wendy Murray served as regional correspondent for TIME magazine in Honduras in the early 1990s, and later as associate editor and senior writer at Christianity Today. She is the author of 10 nonfiction books and a novel.

MORONS: The Left Now Fighting For A ‘Maximum Wage’ Law

waving flagWritten by Andrew Allen on January 4, 2017

URL of the original posting site:

If history is any guide there is a very good chance Trumponomics More Evidencewill improve America’s economic conditions. Indeed, after eight years of low growth (Obama’s economy never achieved an annual growth rate better than 1.4%) and wage stagnation, a big chunk of a generation that has never seen a booming economy may experience one for the first time. The next four years may represent a true fundamental transformation on a scale we haven’t seen since the 1980s.

The Left Is Already Playing Offense:

With Obama’s legacy in the national rear view mirror, and a need to save their economic policies from the truth, the left is already playing offense. Democratic commentator Jehmu Greene recently appeared on a Fox News weekend program. Greene warned viewers of the dangers associated with an economy that was doing too well. According to Greene, if our economy performed too well the result might be a significant future economic downturn. Such thinking is reminiscent of Obama’s pledge to remove the peaks and troughs from our economy and instead settle for a persistent fiscal malaise where prosperity once existed.picture2

The left will be hard pressed to offer a convincing rebuttal as the American economy rebounds. So, they will go for what they always go for – divide people and pit them against each other. The left loves to divide Americans along the lines of haves and have nots. The left will insist that the prosperity enjoyed by haves be redistributed among whoever the left believes are the have nots.lib01

Enter from Stage Left, The Maximum Wage:

The maximum wage is an idea the left adores, but doesn’t like to talk about much unless they have a reason. Switzerland provided one such opportunity for liberals to come out of their maximum wage closet. In 2013 the Swiss went to the polls to vote on a ballot initiative called 1:12. The measure would have limited executive pay to twelve times what employees made. The American left loved the idea. CNN pundit John D. Sutter (please, check this guy out) wrote a lengthy Op-Ed in November 2013 extoling the virtues of the maximum wage and begging for it to become an American reality.

lib02Forget for a moment that CNN is owned by Turner Broadcasting and that Turner Broadcasting’s founder, Ted Turner, is one of the richest executives on the planet with an estimated $2.2 billion net worth – far in excess of what Turner Broadcasting’s working stiffs take home. Sutter’s piece is as predictably redistributive economics as it is deliberate in hiding facts. Facts like the truth behind Swiss politicians backing the 1:12 initiative. Sutter mentions Cedric Wermuth as being just one such Swiss politician – nothing to see here, nothing to worry about. That Wermuth was a member of the Socialist International political group was of course never disclosed in Sutter’s Op-Ed.

According to Sutter, “here in America, the land of unequal opportunity” CEO’s earn in a day what an average worker earns in an entire year. The AFL-CIO (with their executives earning tremendous salaries) is Sutter’s source for that information. Comparing the Swiss ratio of executive to worker income with the American ratio, Sutter is sure the Swiss ratio us 148:1. He’s unsure about the American ratio. It’s either 354:1 or it’s 273:1. Either way, “it’s bad” he says. Why is it bad?

“It is fundamentally unfair for the pay gap to be so wide and that it allows a few uber-rich people to wield undo influence over society, economics and politics.” To buttress this aspect of his argument, Sutter defers to Cornell professor Lynn Stout.Leftist Propagandist

Stout said “I’m a big fan of capitalism. I love corporations and I love the business world…but there are structural reasons to think that executive pay and CEO pay are out of whack…what we’ve got is basically an arms race where the CEOs are competing on pay because they want to have higher status than the others.” Sutter cited Stout’s observations as the source of resentment behind the Occupy movement and the 1:12 initiative.Leftist Propagandist

Sutter’s solution would be to cap CEO pay at 100 times the minimum wage. Said Sutter: “It’s ridiculous that the Securities and Exchange Commission attempts to make CEO pay ratios transparent are controversial in the business community. The conversation needs to move forward. Limiting CEO pay to 100 times the minimum wage would still allow top execs to be millionaires – they’d earn a maximum wage of about $1.5 million per year, given the current federal minimum of $7.25 an hour, figured for a 40-hour work week. And here’s the best part: if the fat cats wanted a pay increase, maybe the best way for them to get it would be to throw political weight behind a campaign to boost the minimum wage.”

In an NPR interview conducted in October 2013, Stout provided fodder for Sutter’s conclusion. She said, “you could have a very simple rule that says any compensation in excess of three or four million’s not deductible. You could even tie it to a ratio, something simple to measure like the minimum wage. Any CEO pay that’s more than 100 times the minimum wage is no longer tax deductible. So there are lots of ways to approach this problem.”more-propaganda

So either Sutter’s a plagiarist or the maximum wage, under the terms discussed by Sutter and Stout, is something the left discussed among themselves in 2013. In any event, a quick dissection of Sutter and Stout reveals:

– The idea that too much wealth is a “problem.”lib03
– “Unequal opportunity” is code for “let’s equalize outcomes via restructuring of the economy in the name of “fairness”.
– Use of the word “structural”. Whenever a liberal says “structural” what they really mean is fundamental transformation in the faculty lounge sense. Structural racism, structural problems in our economy, etc. They are all left-wing dog whistles that mean deconstruct who we are, and replace with what the philosocrats in the faculty lounge think we should be.
– Use of the term “arms race”. It’s a rhetorical molotov designed to energize the Occupy types. (Isn’t it convenient Occupy came about when they did so that Sutter could cite them? Were it not for the Journ-o-List and wikileaks one would wonder if there were any collusion between Occupy’s bosses at 39 West 14th Street and 147th West 24th Street in Manhattan, and CNN).
– The underlying theme that somehow, it makes sense to allow executives to earn $1.5 million but not a penny more represents some great moral triumph.

The Swiss voted overwhelmingly against 1:12. Even so, the maximum wage pops up periodically on-line in agenda pieces posing as economic analysis.

Remember Florida Yachts?:

I don’t have $1 million. When you don’t have $1 million, it’s easy to covet the things that millionaires have. Some years back, liberal do-gooders thought it would be a great idea to hike certain taxes affecting the wealthy in Florida. Taxes associated with yacht ownership and operation for example, were raised, because a bunch of liberals thought it a moral triumph to play Robin Hood that way. The result?

Yacht owners either sold their boats, or they moved them elsewhere. (Kind of like how John Kerry used to park his fleet in Rhode Island until people found out about it and he grudgingly had to move them to Massachusetts and pay higher Massachusetts taxes on them). That meant tens of thousands of men and women working in businesses supporting Florida yachting suffered. Boat yards issued pink slips to highly compensated craftsmen. Shops that sold line, anchors, and navigation radars closed their doors. Floridians that once brought home a pay check saw their hourly wage drop to the true minimum wage of $0.00.

As viscerally nice as it might sound to limit what the “fat cats” can earn, the ugly truths are:

– It’s really nobody’s business what anyone else, rich or poor, earns.

– Limit executive salaries to $1.5 million per year and a lot of lower income earners are going to find themselves out of a job.

Indexing this and that to the maximum wage is intellectually bankrupt unless it’s understood that the true minimum wage is in fact, $0.00. That’s what people out of work earn.lib04


Most perplexing in all this (and other topics) is the left’s discovery of morality. At least what they define as morality. The left that couldn’t stand the idea of legislating morality before seems as of late obsessed with the idea of pushing their morality via executive order, court ruling, or legislation – in that order. The left have become Ayatollahs in the pursuit of their version of morality.

If we are to accept that the maximum wage is evidence of moral society, can we find any on this earth that have mandated a maximum wage?

Two Countries Have a Maximum Wage:

They are Cuba (which limits each Cuban’s earning capacity to no more than $20 per month) and Egypt. The Egyptians implemented theirs in July 2014 and suffered a brain drain as banking sector employees moved elsewhere.

When people think of world economic powerhouses, they aren’t thinking about Cuba or Egypt. Nor are they thinking about places where the quality of life is great. Let’s face it. Nobody is fleeing from somewhere to get into Cuba or Egypt. Cubans and Egyptians are begging to leave what their home countries are.AMEN

That the American left wish to place the U.S. in the ranks of Cuba and Egypt in the name of their legacy speaks to their greed.

Conservative Comedian Destroys Illogical Beliefs of Modern Liberals

Posted on December 11, 2014 by Onan Coca

URL of the Original Posting Site:

Conservative Comedian Michael Loftus of the show the Flipside is one very funny man. Watch as he takes a not-so-funny subject and lays bare the bankrupt logic of today’s political left. If you’ve ever had that “aha” moment when talking to a liberal, where you realize that what they are saying makes absolutely NO SENSE… this is for you.


Blog wishes


Terrifying! Obama Regime Unveils Behavior Modification Program to ‘Nudge’ Americans

By:  Marilyn Assenheim //




FOX News reported on Tuesday that the government has created a “Behavioral Insights Team,” which is intended to influence the behavior of Americans. It is being referred to as a “nudge” because the team’s approach has been dubbed “subtle.” One can only assume that such “nudges” are  intended to be the second part of a governmental, one-two punch, the first being ham-fisted executive orders. The first forces compliance; the second is designed to mesmerize one into voluntary acquiescence. The program isn’t in planning stages. It has already been implemented. FOX reports:  “…the White House is already working on such projects with almost a dozen federal departments and agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Agriculture.”

The government release touts the advantages of the program: “Behavioral sciences can be used to help design public policies that work better, cost less, and help people to achieve their goals…the (Behavioral Insights) team would ‘experiment’ with various techniques, with the goal of tweaking behavior so people do everything from saving more for retirement to saving more in energy costs. Anyone interested in working for the White House in a ‘nudge’ squad? The UK has one and it’s been extraordinarily successful.”

The program cites benign examples of its intentions. But White House inspired behavioral modification experimentation won’t stop at cajoling us to save more for our old age.  It is less about helping people achieve their goals than it is to help The Lyin’ King’s regime to achieve its goals. In this, the British government was far more honest. Quoting from the “In 2010, UK Prime Minister David Cameron commissioned the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), which through a process of rapid, iterative experimentation (“Test, Learn, Adapt”), has successfully identified and tested interventions that will further advance priorities of the British government, while saving the government at least £1 billion within the next five years…” Among the U.K.’s concerns were to get tax payers to fork over 30 million pounds of extra tax payments, which they did in three months. They also successfully convinced the public to take advantage of  full-cost, government attic-clearance services. The British government realized a 500% increase in the purchase of  their services and of attic-insulation.  Evidence exists that the Lyin’ King’s power-hungry regime wouldn’t stop there.

Although the White House is painting its usual, self-serving picture, experts warn that there is nothing to stop government’s “we know best” snowball from turning into an avalanche. Michael Thomas, an economist at Utah State University, aired his concerns to FOX News: “Ultimately, nudging … assumes a small group of people in government know better about choices than the individuals making them. And sometimes… government actually promotes the wrong thing.” No kidding.

David Laibson, behavioral economics professor at Harvard University, is working with the government on the program. Laibson’s involvement in the program is right up The Lyin’ King’s alley; his verbal contortions outdo mountain switchbacks. First, Laibson states that “Every intervention would need to be tested to make sure (the program) works well…” Then Laibson added that the way the team will function is still unknown. Finally, Laibson “hopes the government will shy away from involving itself from controversial policies.” Well,  Elvis certainly departed that auditorium ages ago. Laibson ends with a bang: “Let’s say we want people to engage in some healthy behavior like a weight loss program, and then start automatically enrolling overweight people in weight loss programs — even though they could opt out, I’m guessing that would be viewed as offensive …”  Why assume one could “opt out”? Horrifyingly, Laibson believes it would be problematic not because of automatic enrollment but because “a lot of people would say, “…this is judging who I am and who I should be.”

FOX News ends with a cautionary note from Jerry Ellig, an economist with the Mercatus Center: “If you can keep it to a ‘nudge’ maybe it can be beneficial…but nudges can turn into shoves pretty quickly.” Mr. Ellig is dead wrong about a nudge from government being beneficial. A “nudge” from government is never beneficial to anyone except to government. We have almost five years of evidence of that.

Some Thoughts I want to Share With You

The turmoil we are experiencing in America each day has a single common root; Spiritual Darkness. That is the foundation for most of the stresses, crime, social discord and evil found in our society today. God inspired the Apostle Paul to give us an answer when He had Paul write a letter to all the churches he had ministered. Tychicus, a Christian man and helper of Paul’s,  was tasked with inserting the name of each church in the beginning of the letter before he read the letter to them. In our Bibles we find a copy of that letter, the book of Ephesians.

In the sixth chapter Paul is inspired to write, “10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” – (Eph 6:10-12) NIV. The Holy Spirit wants us to know that all the battles we face in this life is spiritual in nature.

Starting at the beginning we learn that the nature to sin was originated with Adam and Eve. Their fall from grace was the result of their disobedience in eating the fruit from the tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil. That knowledge has been passed down to every person ever born on this earth. No exceptions, except Jesus, Who was the result of God’s divine nature impregnating a young virgin girl, Mary.

Jesus also taught us this lesson found in John, chapter three. All too often we preach and teach about the first seventeen verses and neglect the powerful teaching about this issue. “19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”  (John 3:19-21) NIV

“Men love darkness instead of the light…..” That says it all. People of the Extreme Left are made up of those that have chosen DARKNESS for their lifestyle because they were born with the knowledge of God that their life choices are contrary to His will, and therefore, contrary to God Himself. Rather than admit their choices are wrong and all their philosophies are wrong, all their doctrines are wrong and that all they stand for, defend and fight to change, are wrong, wrong, wrong, they curse the light and cling to the darkness. I am sure you know people like that; they will never admit they are wrong.

Those of us who have come to the light have confessed our sins admitting that our life choices are wrong, and we have chosen to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ, making Him the Lord of our lives and yielding to His Holy Spirit to walk in that Light, AS HE IS THE LIGHT (John 1 & 1st John 1). That walk is not withourt it’s challenges, yet He is faithful Who has promised to uphold us with His mighty hand. Darkness hides people for what they are, and the motivations behind all they say and do.

The Apostle Paul wrote the the church in Rome, “18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”  (Rom 1:18-20) NIV

Therefore, all human beings are without excuse before God because we are all born with the knowledge of good and evil. That is why people surround their lives with noise to drown out that still, small voice of God saying, “This is the way and I want you to go. Now walk in it.”

I believe that is the reason the people claiming to be Atheist are so adamant about driving Christianity out of our society. Notice they never attack Catholic’s, Muslims or any other form of religion? Only Christianity is found in their cross-hairs of hatred and strife. Consistent are their efforts to quiet the voice of Christ followers, and our freedom in America to practice our faith and express it openly.

No longer can we say, “I can express my faith in America without fear of reprisal.” Those days are gone because of the efforts of the Socialist Left who want us to stay quiet and stay to ourselves. The persecution of Christ followers is growing in ever rapid pace. The vitriol, hatred, false accusations, misrepresentation of what we say, is becoming more common with each passing day. The day is fast approaching under the Extreme Political Left Wing that being a Christian will be a crime. Already Homeland Security, The State Department and the Department of Defense has labeled Christians as a group pf people to keep a eye on fearing we will cause trouble of some sort, and labeled possible terrorist.


Proverbs 18:2 NIV; “Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions.”

The people the Bible identifies as “Fools” where people who did not know God, or wanted to have anything to do with God. They included the religious of that day, and throughout history, their offspring are following in the same path. We think that only Atheist fall into the “Fool” category, but in reality, anyone who claims they don’t know if their is a God, no God at all, or are simply religious in their thinking and conduct, are denying the living God and the record of His will, the Bible.

These people are free with their opinion about everything, and any opposition is considered hateful and argumentative.  The entire Extreme Left falls into this “Fool” category, and those claiming to be Atheist find comfort, security and acceptance in the Socialist wing of the Extreme Left.

Proverbs 18:12 NIV; “”Before a downfall the heart is haughty, but humility comes before honor.”

Detroit proves this truth of God, and there are many other cities and States (California being one of them) that are about to go the same way.  America is thick with politicians convinced they are above the law, a law unto themselves and will never be brought to answer for their deliberate destruction of our towns, cities, counties and States. Praise God we also find a remnant of politicians that are genuinely humble before God and the status of their governance is good, growing and secure.

Without a genuine Holy Spirit powered revival, we are rushing headlong toward a bloody civil war, race war and demise of all our freedoms and an America that will not look like anything our Godly Forefathers had in mind as God influenced the design and birth of the United States of America. History is obvious that God has formed two countries for His Own; Israel and the United States of America. Our country was form by God for the spreading of the Gospel worldwide. Now, the churches we’ve planted are sending missionaries to us praying Americans will find Jesus and allow the Holy Spirit to turn this country around.

I have been praying for revival since December of 1982. I will not give up. I believe God is not done with America, but our sins cannot go unpunished. Will you join me in praying for Revival?

Detroit is a “Conservative Utopia”???

Posted by


The Ed ShowIt is truly a sad thing to think that some people rely on MSNBC for their “news”.  After hearing some of the ridiculous stuff spewed by a few liberal family members, I am pretty sure they are avid viewers.

MSNBC is a disgrace.

Over the weekend, Ed Schultz, host of “The ED Show” on MSNBC had the following to say:

“Detroit, Michigan used to be, really, a symbol of industrial strength and manufacturing in this country, but thanks to a lot of Republican policies, the city is now filing for bankruptcy…”

Yes, he really did say that.  Don’t believe me?   Watch the first 2 minutes of this for yourself:


Then the moron goes on to say:

“…earlier this year, (Governor) Snyder appointed emergency city manager, Kevyn Orr, who has taken over Detroit’s finances.  This, bottom line here, is an unelected official who began selling off public assets and slashing public services.  Detroit has just 1/3rd of its ambulances in operation.  The average emergency response time for Police in this city is 58 minutes.  And when you have horrible public services, no one wants to live in the city, which means less tax revenue to fix all of the problems and the needs of the public.  It is a very vicious cycle.  It’s the Republican way, and Snyder’s emergency city manager is to blame.”

Let us examine what Stupid, sorry, Ed, is trying to pawn off on his viewers.  Democrats have been in charge of Detroit since 1961, when the City’s last republican mayor lost his reelection campaign.  Since then, the city has had Democrat mayors and Democrat policies.  “Earlier this year” (ie: at most, less than 8 months ago), an emergency city manager was put in place by the Republican Governor of the state, and since he was unable to fix 52 years of Democrat destruction in 8 months, it is the Republican’s fault!

What on God’s green earth is this moron smoking?  How does this idiot have his own television show?  How stupid do you have to be to believe the crap coming out of this man’s mouth?

Obama to College Students: Do Not Celebrate Fourth of July

Obama to College Students: Do Not Celebrate Fourth of July

As the country prepares to celebrate its independence from Great Britain President Obama had a completely different message for a group of Congressional Summer interns in Washington:

Obama Speaks to Congressional Summer Interns

President Obama Speaks to Congressional Summer Interns

“America is a great country. There is no denying this. However, I caution you all as you step forward in your careers. Peer back into history and ask yourselves- Was a revolution truly necessary? Great Britain may not have had it completely right, but they had many things right. Take taxes for example. If your neighbor makes $1 Million a year, but you and your family can barely keep the heat on should he not help your family? God instructs us to help our neighbors. He does not instruct us to look down upon them though the windows of capitalism. Why then on the Fourth of July should you celebrate such a radical break from what is Godly and just? No doubt there are many voices warning you of the harm of big government. They are wrong. Government can provide you with what family and friends cannot. If this is gone what will you have?” 

Many in the crowd seemed uneasy, and desperate for some sort of clarification. Julie Barks, an intern from Louisiana State University, asked President Obama, “Are you saying we should not celebrate the birth of our country?”

President Obama responded, ”I believe we should celebrate where we are going. Celebrate moving forward. Not where we have been.”


Exclusive–Palin: Holes in the Border as Big as the Holes in Their Amnesty Bill



by Sarah Palin

Just like they did with Obamacare, some in Congress intend to “Pelosi” the amnesty bill. They’ll pass it in order to find out what’s in it. And just like the unpopular, unaffordable Obamacare disaster, this pandering, rewarding-the-rule-breakers, still-no-border-security, special-interests-ridden, 24-lb disaster of a bill is not supported by informed Americans.

I am an ardent supporter of legal immigration. I’m proud that our country is so desirable that it has been a melting pot making a diverse people united as the most exceptional nation on earth for over two centuries. But I join every American with an ounce of common sense insisting that any discussion about immigration must center on a secure border. The amnesty bill before the Senate is completely toothless on border security. 

It’s beyond disingenuous for anyone to claim that a vote for this bill is a vote for security. Look no further than the fact that Senator Rubio and amnesty supporters nixed Senator Thune’s amendment that required the feds to finally build part of a needed security fence before moving forward on the status of illegal immigrants who’ve already broken the law to be here. And if shooting down the border fence wasn’t proof enough, they blew another chance by killing Senator Paul’s “Trust But Verify” amendment which required the completion of a fence in five years and required Congress to vote on whether the border is actually secure before furthering any immigration measures. And then they blew it yet again, nixing Senator Cornyn’s “Results” amendment, which also required border enforcement standards. Now the Senate’s pro-amnesty crowd is offering a fig leaf to security via the Corker-Hoeven Amendment, but this is really nothing more than empty promises. It’s amnesty right now and border security… eh, well, someday.  

If this bill was genuinely concerned with border security, it might include practical solutions for those states that live with the problem every single day. Pass-through grants could be given to border states to actually build a fence. The most responsive and responsible level of government is the most local, and since governors accept pass-throughs all the time, this is a workable solution. We could also free up more federal lands along the border to be privatized. The farmers and ranchers would have a clear incentive to keep their private property secure from the flow of illegal immigrants and/or other illegal activities trafficked across the border onto land they’d cultivate. There are plenty of other commonsense solutions, but this bill isn’t about fixing problems; it’s about amnesty at all costs.

When every commonsense, concrete, and verifiable measure to secure the border is stripped away, despite politicians’ promises, what are we supposed to rely on to ensure that our currently unsecured border will be fixed in the future? If D.C. expects us to just sit back and “trust” them despite our permanent political class and Washington bureaucrats proving themselves so very untrustworthy, then I have a bridge to somewhere in Alaska to sell them. Our government is awash in one scandal after another involving blatant lies and violations of our basic liberties, and the leader of the pack ventures out on one road trip after another to avoid accountability. 

Just like they did for Obamacare, the permanent political class is sugaring this bill with one goody after another to entice certain senators to vote for it. Look no further than page 983 of the bill, which contains a special visa exemption for foreign seafood workers in the 49th state despite huge unemployment numbers in the American workforce. This is obviously a hidden favor designed to buy the votes of Alaska Senators Murkowski and Begich.

And just like Obamacare, this amnesty bill fails on every level of economic sanity and sane reform. It offers no solutions. It will barely slow the flow of illegal immigration, which means we can expect millions and millions of new illegal aliens in coming years. Sort of what happened when we passed amnesty in 1986 without securing our borders first. 

According to the CBO, the bill won’t stop illegal immigration, but it will drive down wages for average hardworking Americans. These would be the same blue-collar working class voters of every ethnicity who chose to sit home in 2012 instead of turning out to vote in the swing states we needed to carry in order to stop Barack Obama’s promised “fundamental transformation” of America. I note this just as a helpful reminder to those who believe the hyperventilated new hype claiming that conservatives need to support this bill in order to win future elections. That’s 100% wrong. The crony capitalists in D.C. and their corporatist friends on Wall Street might think this amnesty boondoggle is a great idea, but the average American worker in our middle class who’ll soon see lower wages is the one left out in the cold, along with those hard working immigrants who followed the rules and are working here legally. 

Passing this bill with an unsecured border and within a growing welfare state under Barack Obama is economic insanity. Have people already forgotten that our bankrupt government is running up massive unsustainable deficits every year? We can’t afford to pay the piper now, much less the trillions of dollars more in welfare and entitlements for the millions who are here illegally today that will be granted this bill’s benefits. According to the Heritage Foundation, the bill provides only a temporary delay in granting illegal immigrants eligibility for all U.S. welfare and entitlement programs. We’re looking at an explosion of costs in the very near future. There is no way to pay for the added untold millions of new enrollees in these growing government programs. Pass this, Congress, and Obama will have succeeded in fundamentally transforming America. 

Again, I am supportive of legal immigration and am as sympathetic as the next person to the aspirations of people who come here to work hard and live a better life than the poverty and unfree environments they left behind. So many are drawn here because we are an exceptional nation where freedom provides an equal opportunity for everyone to work hard and make something of themselves. But a key part of American exceptionalism is the rule of law. Border security is fundamental to the rule of law, as is incentivizing those who follow the legal path to citizenship instead of punishing them by promoting lawbreakers. This is non-negotiable. 

It’s time our lawmakers remember that we are a sovereign nation of laws. This bill ignores that, and ignores the will of the people. The continued porous border goes against what politicians assured us was in this mountain-high bill, and in typical D.C. style it flies in the face of what many politicians campaigned on. I heard their campaign promises. You heard them, too.

It’s time for concerned Americans to flood our legislators’ phone lines with the input they need to hear from We the People. Join the mama grizzlies who are rearing up tirelessly to swat away false claims that amnesty is a good thing. Michelle Malkin rightly said the issue is not secure the border first, it’s “secure the border. Period.” Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter have also offered superb warnings on amnesty’s economic impacts to the middle class.

As the Senate moves to pass amnesty, the only bright spot in this travesty is the rallying revolution we can look forward to. For just as opposition to Obamacare became a rallying cry for the 2010 midterm elections, opposition to this fundamentally transforming amnesty bill will galvanize the grassroots in next year’s elections. And 2014 is just around the corner.

Priests Rebuke Nancy Pelosi: Repent or Join a Satanic Church

By /

Screen Shot 2013-06-23 at 4.35.05 PMI wish the craven evangelical ministers would grow some cojones like “The Priests for Life” obviously have and start rebuking politicians who claim union with Christ while proposing and supporting legislation that’s spawned in the abyss.

I don’t know if you’re hip to what the Priests for Life did last week but these gents formally sent Nancy Pelosi a little love letter telling that nutty chick, in essence, to either renounce her backing of abortion, as a Catholic, or join a Satanic Church.

Actually they didn’t say join a Satanic Church. But she would fit right in. Yeah, I said it. Nancy and her ilk, if they don’t repent, should renounce Christianity and just formally hook up with whatever hip sect is following el Diablo because their Weltanschauung sho’ doesn’t flow from the scripture.

Just a cursory bounce through the Decalogue and one will quickly see that Nancy and her nabobs are about as Christ-like as Heidi Klum is fat and nasty.

Check it out:

I. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (Clearly the Progressives have other gods, namely … them.)

II. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven images. (Would having magazines depicting these cats in Messianic poses with Messianic mantras, which they don’t virulently condemn, equate idolatry?)

III. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain. (Look, taking the name of God in vain just doesn’t mean Nancy yelling GD when the Botox needle strikes a nerve in her forehead. It also means invoking His name for insidious and deceptive reasons.)

IV. Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy. (Yeah, right. Progressives are big churchgoers.)

V. Honor thy father and mother. (Note please that it says, father and mother and not father and father or mother and mother.)

VI. Thou shalt not kill. (Uh, would abortion fall into this category? I’m thinking, yes. By the way, why is it a double homicide when a murderer murders a pregnant mom and her unborn kid and not when a doc sucks an unborn baby through a vacuum cleaner fitted with razor blades at the behest of mommy dearest? Also, why do anti-hunters quote this text when they’re blathering about hunting being murder and they’re mute on this text when it comes to abortion? Please, thrill me with your answers. Send all correspondence to

VII. Thou shalt not commit adultery. (Must I comment on this one?)

VIII. Thou shalt not steal. (Uh, “wealth redistribution” anyone? Or Fedzilla printing money into oblivion?)
IX. Thou shalt not bare false witness against your neighbor. (Let’s see: Fast & Furious, Benghazi, IRS v. The Tea Party, NSA Spy Games, Jay Carney, all of their crap-addled campaign speeches. Must I go on?)

X. Thou shalt not covet. (Please. Avarice is all they spawn in their poor duped entitlement culture.)

Yep, ol’ Nance might ought to give the devil a serious look over because the Nine Satanic Statements, from the Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey, seem more apropos given her penchants.

Check them out …

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence! (Show me one liberal crotch rocket that’s into abstinence over indulgence and I’ll show you someone who doesn’t realize they’re a Tim Tebow yet.)

2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams! (I have no idea what that means.)

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit! (Okay, maybe Pelosi shouldn’t join.)

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates! (Whew, okay Pelosi is back in because Progressives only love and legislate for Progressives. Their policies have squat to do with independents, right of center peeps, or sane left of center folks. No, they show love only to the special loons who float their wet dream of being Lord of the Serfs).

5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek! (Didn’t Obama say it’s payback time after 2012’s election? Would the IRS grinding down Tea Party and Conservative non-profit applicants be vengeance? Does any of this ring a bell? Hail, Satan).

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires! ( I have no clue what the heck that means, either; but I’m sure Pelosi does.)

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all! (Cock-doodle-do.)

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification! ( There … you see? The Leftists, in their amorality, shouldn’t even jack with that cosmic killjoy Jehovah! They should pitch their tent on this satanic soil because there is no right or wrong, just pleasure and pain, baby.)

9. And lastly, Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!

Good on The Priests for Life for confronting Pelosi and rank disdain for the Verbum Dei. Who knows? Maybe these public rebukes wake her apostate soul up. If not, as we now know, there is another group that’ll take

Liberals have Corrupted Unions With Absolute Power

JayBy Jay Taylor, Senior Vice President – Liberty Alliance, LLC


When talking to fellow conservatives, one interesting question to ask them is why they are registered Democrat when they have nothing in common with them. The answer inevitably comes back to Labor Unions. The Union Movement was founded to protect workers, and has a great history in its founding with gaining worker protections, fair wages, and benefits. But now the power has gone too far, and instead of being concerned about workers, Unions seem to be more worried about electing liberals to office. The once proud union history has turned into one of bankrupting companies through ridiculous pensions that no one would be able to pay. Pensions should be outlawed and replaced with retirement accounts, but that’s a story for another day.

Some states have Right to Work laws where union membership is voluntary and you can’t be forced to join as a condition of employment. One of the arguments against Right to Work is that workers enjoy the benefits without paying dues. This is not true. The National Labor Relations Act makes it so unions can represent all, but are not required to do so.1 If union membership is all it’s cracked up to be, then why in Right to Work states do they have lower unemployment?2 You would think that pro-choice liberals would like the ability for workers to be able to choose their membership. They can have separate contracts for their members and if their benefits are competitive for the dues paid, wouldn’t members join? There is the true power of the unions as they collect $9 billion in union dues.2 Which in turn seem to be paid out to liberal politicians that frequently don’t have workers best interests at heart.

One of the most outrageous things was Coal Unions supporting Obama.3 There is no defense for anyone wanting to mine coal to support Obama when he has declared war on coal. It doesn’t make any sense if you want to keep your job. The auto bailout was for the unions since their pension had finally gotten to the breaking point and why the American auto industry has trouble competing.4 Hostess went bankrupt because of union greed.5 We’ve seen numerous cities go bankrupt as their unions demanded more and more of the limited city budgets.6 How are these good for jobs?

The strange relationship between liberal democrats and the union movement is tied to their march towards socialism.7 Both want more government with greater rules and control. The only problem is that once the collective has total control, freedom is lost and becomes a moot point. We need a balance where reason is the centerpiece. Unions started out as a good thing, but have traveled down a dark path where greed and power have corrupted them and now they have forgotten who they are.8

I’ve been forced to join two unions in my life. First was at Kroger and later at the hospital union. Both were college jobs, but they taught me a great deal about unions. I attended a Union Steward class to learn more about the Union but found this to be a two day Republican bashing session. When it did come time to learn about filing a grievance it was a 5 minute “here is this form” and where to turn it in. There was nothing about what a legitimate grievance is, or how the union rules work. My experience was that the Union prevented the lazy workers from getting in trouble or fired and got the same amount of money from the part time people in dues to pay for political activities. The only benefit I see from the Union is padding the liberal’s pockets at the expense of workers.

If you are in a union you need to look carefully at where your dues are being spent and who they are supporting in elections. Unions present a pretty picture of how much they say membership can bring you, but is it a short term gain that in the long run will be a bankrupt mess? Do your homework and research out the facts. For those conservatives out there who register as Democrat because of their union, the facts will amaze you. Don’t be used as a sacrificial political pawn for the liberal socialist agenda. Your fellow conservatives are ready for you to come home.    


1 –

2 –

3 –

4 –

5 –

6 –

7 –

8 –

Read more:

UN Small Arms Treaty May Be Signed Under Cover Of Darkness



Instead of taking the opportunity to sign the United Nations Small Arms Treaty on Tuesday, the White House has indicated that Barack Obama will sign it sometime before the end of August. This causes some concern as to what type of event the White House is waiting on to exploit the emotions of Americans to gain support for the measure and put pressure on the Senate to ratify it. Many have suggested that the signature will come under cover of darkness, sometime in August, When Congress will not be in town.

Press Secretary Jay Carney said that Obama aims to sign the treaty “before the end of August.” Tuesday was the earliest he could have signed it.

“We believe it’s in the interest of the United States,” he said. “While we look forward to signing the treaty, there are remaining translation issues that need to be resolved.”

The Hill points out,

The National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes the treaty, and the delay would allow Obama to sign the pact during the August doldrums, with Congress out of town.

That time frame appears to validate the concerns of treaty advocates who had worried the administration would wait until the cover of darkness to sign a treaty opposed by a majority of senators.

Rachel Stohl, a senior associate with the Stimson Center, which supports the treaty, said “I think there’s a lot of political hand-wringing going on. They know people are going to be paying attention to this particular issue on this particular day.”

Secretary of State John Kerry released a statement on Monday in which he said the US “welcomes the opening of the Arms Trade Treaty for signature.” He also said that as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily, Obama would be looking forward to signing it.

So there needs to be conforming official translations and that, completed satisfactorily. Sounds similar to being ready to sign something that you have no idea what it really says. Obamacare, anyone? Seems like that is the case on an international scale where the treaty has already passed overwhelmingly.

Kerry went on to state:

“The Treaty is an important contribution to efforts to stem the illicit trade in conventional weapons, which fuels conflict, empowers violent extremists, and contributes to violations of human rights. The Treaty will require the parties to implement strict controls, of the kind the United States already has in place, on the international transfer of conventional arms to prevent their diversion and misuse and create greater international cooperation against black market arms merchants. The ATT will not undermine the legitimate international trade in conventional weapons, interfere with national sovereignty, or infringe on the rights of American citizens, including our Second Amendment rights.

We commend the Presidents of the two UN negotiating conferences – Roberto Garcia Moritan of Argentina and Peter Woolcott of Australia –for their leadership in bringing this agreement to fruition. We also congratulate all the states that helped achieve an effective, implementable Treaty that will reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes.”

The Secretary of State made no mention of his boss’ current administration providing thousands of weapons to some of the world’s worst criminals to carry out some of the world’s worst crimes which is still ongoing and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens and at least two federal agents.

The Senate has already signed a resolution to not ratify the treaty thanks to the work of men like Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). Also, 130 members of Congress recently sent a letter to both Obama and Kerry opposing the treaty, writing “We strongly encourage your administration to recognize its textual, inherent and procedural flaws, to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms owners, and to defend the sovereignty of the United States, and thus to decide not to sign this treaty.”

The treaty, while be touted by liberals as something that stops guns from falling into the hands of terrorists, is deeply flawed, leaves open the possibility of changes or different interpretations that would only put a stranglehold on the United States. Furthermore, the treaty will have no effect upon governments, such as the Obama administration, that openly and knowingly provide weapons to drug cartels and negotiates support, along with RINOs in the Senate (not mentioning any names here, but at least one’s initials are John McCain (R-AZ)), with enemies of America to arm them.

Ultimately, no matter what we are told by the politicians, it is an attack upon freedom; a freedom we may just have to one day use to stop the growing tyranny.

One other thing to keep in mind. Iran is also one of the countries that the United Nations installed to help police the treaty. Noticeably missing from oversight on the treaty is the United States.

There is not a question of whether Barack Obama will sign the treaty, only when. Timing is key for him and he demonstrated that by putting his support behind the treaty once again within hours of his re-election.

Let’s keep getting the word out that not only should this treaty be opposed, but should be completely removed from the table of consideration so that it cannot be snuck through in a future Congress.

Read more:

But now comes the Obama Administration to tell you that Yes, you just might be imprisoned for something you say online, so you’d better Watch What You Say.

by Ace Of Spades31 May 2013

US Attorney Bill Killian: Posting Something Mean About Muslims on Social Media Might Be a Criminal Action Under Federal Civil Rights Laws

The First Amendment served us well for a time, but now it’s outdated.

Remember reading that England had arrested a guy for anti-Muslim Twitter postings in the aftermath of the Woolrich slaughter? And remember thinking, “Well, this is America, that can’t happen here”?
Oh yes it can. Obama’s Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee wants you to know that if you say something untoward about Muslims, the Federal government may imprison you.

Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian told The News Monday. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.” … Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

The posting he offers as a “for instance” is an egregious one. And yet this country has long protected, absolutely, egregious speech, such as hardcore pornography, for a simple reason: Either you are at liberty to say what you will or you are not. If you are constantly double-thinking every word you might say, for fear of being prosecuted, you are self-censoring, in anticipation of a possible prosecution by the government.

Rather than having a system in which people were constantly worried about imprisonment for speech, our country has evolved a simple bright-line code: Speech of all kinds, with a few exceptions that can be counted on three fingers, is absolutely protected.

Remember, the importance of this bright-line, no-exceptions rule of free speech was preached to us, even when some of us might not have liked it so much, as when hardcore pornography was afforded absolute protection under the First Amendment. In the case of hardcore pornography, it was argued — successfully — that having each artist weigh the possibility of an obscenity prosecution was too much of a burden on his free speech rights, and would have, unavoidably, a chilling effect on speech.

That was the rule then, and that was the rationale.

vampire_obama-275x300But now comes the Obama Administration to tell you that Yes, you just might be imprisoned for something you say online, so you’d better Watch What You Say.

Remember when Ari Fleischer said that, without suggesting any kind of legal penalties? Remember how the media freaked out?

But now comes the US Attorney for the Eastern district of Tennessee explicitly telling you that you may be imprisoned if a political appointee decides your political speech has crossed a line.

Somehow, I don’t think Tim Robbins will be portentously howling us that a “chill wind” is blowing across our rights of free expression this week.

Teacher Faces Disciplinary Action For Telling His Students About Their Constitutional Rights


Robert Heinlein said: “When any government…undertakes to say to its subjects, This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know, the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives.”

Oppression is a daily occurrence. We are oppressed by our public schools; we are oppressed by our “scientists,” and we are oppressed by our federal government. All major industries related to the federal government have cornered the market on oppression of the people. Public schools indoctrinate our children, universities force Socialist and Marxist ideals on their students, and “scientists” don’t allow anyone into their fields who would question the status quo. It is with oppression that power is at its strongest.

According to Town Hall:

“An Illinois Social Studies teacher faces disciplinary action for reminding his students of their Fifth Amendment rights when filling out a school survey on behavior…John Dryden was collecting the surveys before class when he noticed the students’ names were printed on them. He looked to see what was being asked and noticed questions about alcohol and drug use…Dryden told his students that they had a Constitutional right to not incriminate themselves by answering questions on the survey.”

As a result of Mr. Dryden informing his students about their basic Fifth Amendment rights, he is now facing disciplinary charges. Lucky for him, numerous people have risen to his defense.

With all the government scandals bringing fresh memories into our minds of past tyranny, it is an incident like this that makes my skin crawl. Tyranny doesn’t have a grand beginning; it never does. It starts with minor incidents; slowly collecting over time, and culminating in outright oppression. Tyranny takes time to accumulate strength; like a fighter in training. When it’s ready, it will knock us out with a single blow.

First, whether or not it is within the powers of the school to bring the hammer down with disciplinary action, it is entirely absurd. Dryden did absolutely nothing wrong when he merely informed his students of their Fifth Amendment right to decline self-incrimination if they had anything they didn’t want made public.

Second, I’m not sure whether it is within the bounds of the school’s power to ask these types of questions in the first place. Without anonymous surveys being offered, any information provided in ink would be directly linked to the student who filled out the survey. This behavior is unseemly at best and dangerously invasive at worst.

With Dryden facing disciplinary action, I can only shiver at the thought of what else public schools could do with the power they believe they have. Tyranny starts in small places.

Gestapo Alert! DHS Sends Armed Guards and Helicopters To Monitor Tea Party Protests at IRS

Armed DHS guards at IRS protest
<“Armed DHS guards at IRS protest”;Credits: Jim Hoft
 Jason Howerton reported that it remains unclear why “federal officials felt the Tea Party presence required more than the attention of local law enforcement.”

Jim Hoft of the Gateway Pundit said that armed DHS guards greeted Tea Party activists in St. Louis.

“Around 300 protesters turned out anyway,” he wrote.

According to an account posted by Hoft, DHS used a helicopter against Tea Party protesters in Los Angeles and told the group they were not allowed on federal property.

“Many of our 300 tea party folks were approached immediately by Homeland Security and told they coIRS protest St. Louis County -- May 21, 2013uld not be on federal property. My lawyer told me as long as I didn’t block passage we were OK. Many Homeland Security trucks and a helicopter above us scared many patriots so most of group went to public side walk to rally,” an unnamed Tea Party activist told Hoft.

A report at BizPac Review said the DHS also made an appearance at a Tea Party protest in Florida.

“Under the watchful eye of Homeland Security — yes, they were present — protestors carried signs that read ‘We Do Not Consent to Tyranny,’ ‘Abolish the IRS’ and ‘Don’t Target me Bro!,’ making it clear they do not condone the use of the IRS as a political weapon,” Tom Tillison wrote.

A protest in Fort Wayne, Ind., actually had more police than Tea Party. Howerton said that a lone woman “was reportedly accompanied by three visible security guards in the IRS parking lot, which included a Homeland Security officer.”

“The DHS appears to have finally found a use for all those bullets it’s been buying,” Paul Joseph Watson wrote at Prison Planet, echoing a sentiment at Fire Andrea Mitchell.

“Amazing how Obama can send out his stormtroopers for peaceful IRS protests by the tea party, yet couldn’t bother with the ‘bumps in the road’ in Benghazi,” Fire Andrea Mitchell said.

According to reports, the Tea Party protests concluded without incident.

Video of the protest in St. Louis can be seen here.

PERJURY. Why Can’t We Just Say it Out Loud. Attorney General Holder Committed PERJURY.

Why is it so hard to say? Anyone of us caught lying to Congress, while under oath, would be charged with perjury. Attorney General Holder committed perjury while answering questions about his involvement with the DOJ‘s illegal act of invading the privacy of reporters, and the further slanderous invasion of privacy of FOX’s Rosen and his parents. They also committed perjury when they went to a Federal judge to get his signature for a search warrant accusing Rosen of being a co-conspirator.

That brings up a question I have been asking regarding President Obama instructing Attorney General Holder to investigate himself. Here is the question;

Have any of you ever heard of a time when an executive of a major corporation has been caught lying to the Board of Directors and then instructed by the Chairman of the Board to investigate themselves and return with a report? Anyone? Hello? Anyone out there ever heard of such a ridiculous situation?

Now even the liberals are joining the demand for Holders being fired. For me, he needs to be prosecuted for his repeated perjury before Congress.

Please see the following article from FOX NEWS;

House Republicans challenge Holder testimony on reporter surveillance

Published May 29, 2013

Top Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee openly challenged Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday over his testimony two weeks ago in which he claimed to be unaware of any “potential prosecution” of the press, despite knowing about an investigation that targeted a Fox News reporter.

Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-Wis., voiced “great concern” in a letter to Holder. They asked a litany of questions about the department’s dealings with the press, and pointedly alleged that the Fox News case “contradicts” his testimony at a May 15 hearing.

“It is imperative that the committee, the Congress, and the American people be provided a full and accurate account of your involvement,” they wrote.

The letter comes a day after the committee confirmed it was looking into Holder’s testimony. Appearing before the House Judiciary Committee on May 15, Holder insisted that “the potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material” is not something he was involved in or knew about.

But days later, it emerged that the Justice Department obtained access to the emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen — after filing an affidavit that accused him of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator” in the leak of sensitive material regarding North Korea. Rosen was never charged, and never prosecuted. But he was effectively accused of violating the federal Espionage Act. 

“The media reports and statements issued by the Department regarding the search warrants for Mr. Rosen’s emails appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony before the Committee,” Goodlatte and Sensenbrenner wrote in the letter Wednesday. They did not accuse Holder of committing perjury, but noted he was “under oath.”

Among other questions, they asked Holder how he could claim to have never heard of the potential prosecution of the press. And they asked him to clarify whether he “personally approved” the search warrant request. Sensenbrenner, in an interview on Fox News, threatened to subpoena Holder to come before the committee if necessary.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, though, said on Wednesday that it appears Holder testified truthfully. He said President Obama “absolutely” has confidence in him.

The top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, said he thinks Holder “was forthright and did not mislead the Committee.”

“Certainly, there are policy disagreements as to how the First Amendment should apply to these series of leak investigations being conducted by the Justice Department, and that is and should be an area for the committee to consider.  However, there is no need to turn a policy disagreement into allegations of misconduct,” he said.

Holder could argue that, in fact, Rosen was never prosecuted — and so his testimony was not misleading.

A federal law enforcement official said last week that the department had to establish probable cause in the affidavit in order to obtain the search warrant, per the terms of the Privacy Protection Act.

“Saying that there is probable cause to believe that someone has committed a crime and actually charging the person with that crime are two very different things,” the official said.

Meanwhile, one of the country’s most prominent liberal legal scholars called Wednesday for Holder to be “fired,” joining the growing list of left-leaning pundits slamming his department’s pursuit of journalists’ phone and email records.

Jonathan Turley, an attorney and law professor at George Washington University, hammered Holder in a USA Today column Wednesday. He charged that Holder has “supervised a comprehensive erosion of privacy rights, press freedom and due process,” aided by Democrats who looked the other way.

But in the wake of the reporter records scandal, Democrats are starting to join with Republicans in questioning whether Holder continues to be the right man to lead the Department of Justice in President Obama’s second term.

Turley, in his column, referenced a recent call by the Republican National Committee chairman for Holder’s resignation. “Unlike the head of the RNC, I am neither a Republican nor conservative, and I believe Holder should be fired,” Turley wrote.

While Democrats largely defended Holder when his department came under fire for the botched anti-gunrunning sting Operation Fast and Furious, they’ve been less forgiving over the move this year to seize two months of phone records from Associated Press offices. That bombshell was compounded by the revelation that the department seized phone and email records for Fox News offices. The scandal grew as the department acknowledged Friday that Holder was involved in the court document that accused Rosen of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator,” as part of the department’s successful argument for obtaining a search warrant for Rosen’s emails. 

According to a report in The Daily Beast, aides say Holder has started to feel regret for the investigations. Under Obama’s direction, he is starting a review of DOJ policies and meeting with representatives from the media. 

A Justice Department official said Wednesday that Holder will hold meetings with several Washington bureau chiefs of national news organizations over the next two days.

“These meetings will begin a series of discussions that will continue to take place over the coming weeks. During these sessions, the Attorney General will engage with a diverse and representative group of news media organizations, including print, wires, radio, television, online media and news and trade associations,” the official said.

Turley, in his column, scoffed at this course of action, since Holder was involved in the surveillance — at least the surveillance involving Fox News — in the first place. “Such an inquiry offers no reason to trust its conclusions,” Turley wrote.

He described Holder as a trusted Obama “sin eater,” swallowing the worst criticisms to shield the president.

“Indeed, these sins should be fatal for any attorney general,” Turley wrote.

Read more:

George Washington Bore A Cross – Obama Thinks He Wears A Crown



“Criminals mock society’s laws. Your compassion is a weakness that your enemies do not and will not share…”

– Bradlee Dean

As the White House has been slammed with scandals such as Benghazi, Extortion 17, the AP phone tapping scandal, targeting FOX News, and the IRS targeting conservative groups, Obama appeared before the nation at a press conference. In the middle of answering a question about the IRS scandal, it began to rain. Obama had the “audacity” to call up two marines to hold an umbrella for himself and the Turkish Prime Minister, stating, “Why don’t we get a couple of Marines [to hold umbrellas.] They’re gonna look good next to us.”

What a stark contrast to our first president, General George Washington!

It was said that Washington was hailed as “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen.”

During the Revolutionary War, George Washington didn’t send someone else to go in his stead… and he certainly would not have asked anyone to hold an umbrella for him. He took responsibility and went himself to lead the call for independence on the behalf of the country and the people he loved. During this time, he had little-to-no money to fight the war, but he fought on with what he had and beat back the tyrant King George.

George Washington was also known as the man who could not die in battle, as he was shot at several times with bullet holes in his jacket, yet he survived unscathed. He told his family, “By the all-powerful dispensations of providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability or expectation.”

Like King David, God protected Washington from his enemies.

In the past half-century, as we have seen the corrupt in government slowly usurp their authority and declare war on the American people, the “protection” of the president has risen to ridiculous measures.

A Congressional Research Service report investigated how much taxpayers spend whenever the president leaves the White House by plane. The report found that it costs $179,750 to fly Air Force One for just one hour! That expense is only for fuel, maintenance, and sundries; it does not include all of the staff and security personnel that accompany every move the president makes.

Making the clear distinction between then and now, George Washington bears the cross, while this president wears the crown.

Anyone who travels to Washington, D.C., will know what I am talking about. When the president’s motorcade goes through town, every road is blocked off by armed officers, and any building the president enters is searched over with a fine-toothed comb.

The Secret Service was originally created in 1865 to suppress counterfeit currency. It had nothing to do with the president’s safety until 1907, when Congress passed the Sundry Civil Expenses Act, which now meant that two men would be in full-time charge of the president’s safety. The Secret Service now has 3,200 employees, and whenever the president leaves the White House, the Secret Service calls on other federal, state, and local agencies to heighten security measures.

Until Harry Truman’s presidency, former presidents were dropped off at their homes and were provided no special pension, security, or other benefits. They would become an average American citizen, just like those they served.

When president, Truman would take daily walks around Washington, D.C., with a bodyguard or two in tow. American citizens could walk right up and shake his hand.

What has happened since then? When presidents work for the people, they feel safe enough to walk up and be friendly with their constituents. However, when they work for special interests and are being treated as crowned kings (which they are not), they suddenly feel that they need to be protected from their constituents. Is the writing on the wall? Yes, indeed it is.

Look at the parallel between Washington and the current administrations:

  • In 1789 the federal government under President Washington had 350 federal civilian employees; today they number in the millions!
  • In 1832 the total federal budget was $11 million; in 2011 it was over $4 trillion!
  • Since 1900 the total number of government laws and regulations the average citizen is required to obey has increased an estimated 3,000 percent.

James Madison stated that “… every word of (the Constitution) decides a question between power and liberty.” As the government increases control, this leads to a corresponding decrease of individual liberty and responsibility.

The real problem is when all this power becomes centralized and is left unchecked by the public, then comes the rationale that “they have the badge, they must be right.” Thomas Jefferson, who went through the era of the Revolutionary War, warned,

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”

It has been said that laws are most numerous when the commonwealth is most corrupt. This video illustrates present-day criminals with badges. You may be shocked at who they are.




The Stink Starts at the Head. More Christian Persecution with White House Connections

IRS: Are You Now, or Have You Ever Been a Christian?

Posted on May 19, 2013 by

But the IRS’s actions crossed a line from merely corrupt into sinister when it grilled an Iowa pro-life group about its religious views. During a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on Friday, Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., asked outgoing IRS commissioner Steven Miller about it.

“Their question,” Schock said, “specifically asked from the IRS to the Coalition for Life of Iowa: ‘Please detail the content of the members of your organization’s prayers.’ Would that be an inappropriate question to a 501 c3 applicant? The content of one’s prayers?’

Miller tried to avoid answering the question, claiming to have no knowledge of the case, but finally said it would “surprise me” if such a question was asked.

The Thomas More Society presented the Ways and Means Committee with evidence in three cases involving its clients being harassed by the IRS. The information indicates that at least two other pro-life organizations were targeted and that the actions extended beyond the IRS’s Cincinnati office, which has been at the center of many of the past week’s revelations, and began before 2010, the date that has come up frequently in other cases of IRS harassment.

According to TMS, in 2011, the El Monte, California, office of the IRS began harassing Christian Voices for Life of Fort Bend County, Texas. In a statement, TMS wrote: “In a series of questions penned by Exempt Organization Specialist Tyrone Thomas from the California office, the IRS asked a series of unwarranted questions ordering Christian Voices for Life without any foundation, to explain its content, message, and prayers as if they were engaging in highly offensive or criminal behavior.”

The Coalition for Life found itself under IRS scrutiny when it applied for nonprofit status in October 2008, during the closing months of the Bush Administration. Nearly a year of interrogation included an illegal demand from the IRS’s Cincinnati office that coalition board members sign a pledge not to picket Planned Parenthood. Other demands of the group included information about the “content of the group’s prayer meetings, educational seminars, and signs their members hold outside Planned Parenthood.”

Daniel and Angela Michael of Small Victories, a pro-life organization, were singled out by an IRS agent in Chicago who called them every two to three weeks with demands for a year.

During the testimony and numerous stories that have come out this week, it was also revealed that the IRS has been targeting conservative Jewish groups for similar treatment, especially pressuring them about support for Israel, while groups perceived as supporting liberal causes and the Administration have sailed through the IRS review process.

The Thomas More Society also represents clients who are suing the Department of Health and Human Services over the Obama Administration’s demand that religious groups provide health insurance to employees that funds contraception and abortions in violation of religious conscience.

Almost since Day One of the Obama Administration, the Department of Homeland Security has issued reports warning of the dangers posed by conservative groups and military veterans, conflating Christians and Orthodox Jews with Left-wing-inspired groups such as the KKK and neo-Nazis.

More recently, the Air Force and Pentagon have moved toward a policy of cracking down on Christians who evangelize by sharing their faith with other enlisted personnel. The planned policy change has raised alarm among conservative groups because it seems to be driven by the zealously anti-Christian Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

Taken altogether, and viewed against President Obama’s self-professed preference for Muslims, the Administration’s targeting of Christians and Jews is chilling. Still the Administration pretends as if nothing unusual has gone on.

These are the roots of tyranny, which we are watching grow deeper before our very eyes.

Read more:

The Obama administration is doing a far better job making the case for conservatism

Obama is Making Conservative Principles Look Tasty


By / 16 May 2013 / 31 Comments

Screen Shot 2013-05-16 at 9.36.16 AMIt must get confusing in the IT department at the Associated Press: Are you talking about the hackers who hacked our Twitter account or the Justice Department hackers who hacked our phones? Monday, the Associated Press reported that the Justice Department had secretly obtained two months of records of phone conversations by its reporters. Meanwhile, the Washington Post revealed that the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of conservative groups was more widespread than first reported. Someone at the IRS also leaked information about conservative groups to ProPublica. The Environmental Protection Agency may also have made it easier for environmental groups to file Freedom of Information Act requests than conservative organizations.

The Obama administration is doing a far better job making the case for conservatism than Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, or John Boehner ever did. Showing is always better than telling, and when the government overreaches in so many ways it gives support to the conservative argument about the inherently rapacious nature of government.

First let’s get our terms straight. Conservatives are not the same as Republicans. The former believe in a philosophy which stays roughly fixed and the latter belong to a party that occasionally embraces the philosophy but deviates when necessary to win elections, pass legislation, and follow the selfish aims of those who are in office and want to remain there. Conservatives argue against the expansion of government, whereas Republicans sometimes enlarge it to please their constituents or themselves. Republicans also sometimes botch foreign policy operations and spin themselves silly in their aftermath, which is why the Benghazi revelations are left out of this grand unification theory.

Though some of these scandals will allow Republicans to score points in the daily tally of who is ahead and who is behind, there is a larger benefit to conservatives that goes beyond the fall in the president’s approval ratings or the boost Republican Senate candidates may get in 2014. Those outcomes rely on further adjudication of these issues. It may turn out that President Obama had nothing to do with any of them. It could simply be rogues in various agencies. Or, maybe President Obama orchestrated the whole kaleidoscope of wrongdoing on the White House whiteboard. You don’t have to embrace either of those theories to see that it’s much easier to agree with the conservative notion that government is a mess. We have enough evidence of that already.

Read more:

Read more:
Get more Clash on, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.


How Many Scandals Does it Take?


American Gestapo?

Cleta Mitchell to Newsmax: IRS Scandal Reaches to White House

Tuesday, 14 May 2013 01:08 PM

By Melanie Batley and Kathleen Walter


IRS-Target-590-LICleta Mitchell, one of Washington’s most respected elections attorneys, told Newsmax she has tangible proof that high-ranking IRS officials in Washington were fully aware of the agency’s campaign to target conservative groups for heightened scrutiny, despite their denials.

And she thinks the president knew about the practice, too. If proven, she said, it could be an impeachable offense.

Mitchell, in an interview with Newsmax TV on Tuesday, said she was told by a Cincinnati IRS agent that applications by two of her conservative clients were being processed by — and would ultimately be approved or denied in — Washington.

She said she also is aware of nearly 100 other conservative groups that were being targeted by Washington.

“There were nearly 100 groups across the country that got the very egregious set of letters from the IRS that were almost identical and they came from offices all over the country so I know of at least 85 to 90, maybe more, organizations,” said Mitchell, who represents six groups which say they have been targeted, including the King Street Patriots and True the Vote.

“If they had the name ‘tea party’ or they had the word ‘patriots’ or if their mission was smaller government or study the Constitution, believe it or not, that would cause the IRS to say, ‘Oh, we better investigate these groups.'”

View video;

She added she had two clients whose group’s purpose was to lobby against Obamacare, both of which received extra IRS scrutiny. And of the clients who have gone public with their claims, they received “incredible scrutiny, voluminous requests for information, documents, almost like having been audited before they even are an exempt organization.”

In the case of one such client, she and her family subsequently became targets for audits to their personal and business tax returns, and were even visited by three different government agencies. She also knows of other groups who had surprise visits from the FBI after they applied for IRS status.

Mitchell said she doesn’t believe the president or the White House was uninvolved in the IRS activities, as the administration has claimed.

“I’ve thought for some time that this is politically motivated and that’s the reason it was happening. And, as I said, I’ve been doing this for more than 20 years and I’ve never seen anything like this until 2009, 2010. And the only thing that changed was we had a different administration,” she said.

“We know the White House used the Department of Health and Human Services to try to silence critics about Obamacare. So if we know they used HHS, why wouldn’t they also use the IRS or other federal agencies to try to silence political critics?”

Mitchell credits Congress for investigating the matter but says they have had limited effectiveness because she believes the IRS has lied even to lawmakers during hearings last year.

“They’ve been very helpful but the fact is, the IRS has lied and covered up, even to the members of Congress,” she said. “The problem is they’ve had hearings — the IRS commissioner basically lied to Congress last year when he appeared before Congress and they asked him about this targeting conservative groups and he said it wasn’t true. Well, no, we find out yes, it was true.”

She added, “They may try to say it was low-level people. It was not low-level people. They weren’t in Cincinnati. It was being directed out of Washington, and I have them on record saying that.”

Mitchell said the IRS practices are in violation of federal law.

She said it’s “a criminal offense to misuse information submitted by a taxpayer or an entity, anybody who submits anything to the IRS. The IRS agents are limited in what they can do with it, the scope of what they can say and do with it. So, clearly, the federal law has been broken.”

Asked whether it would be an impeachable offense if it emerged that the president or his officials were behind the IRS’ practices, Mitchell said, “Well, it certainly was for Richard Nixon 40 years ago this week.”

She added, “Isn’t that ironic? The House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against President Richard Nixon 40 years ago this week on May 18, and one of those was misuse of the IRS to go after political enemies.”

© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.


How Many Scandals Does it Take to Bring Down President Obama?

Three Scandals a Charm?

Posted on May 14, 2013


IRS, Benghazi, AP. Which of the 3 could take down Obama? Each in their own should be enough. All three together show the corruption at the core of liberals.
Check it out:

Sometimes when it rains on second-term presidents, they need more than an umbrella.

President Obama tried Monday to dismiss as “political games” persistent questions about how the White House handled last year’s attacks in Benghazi, Libya, while at the same time a new uproar about IRS scrutiny of conservative advocacy organizations ignited on Capitol Hill. Obama said if IRS agents willfully exercised political bias, responsible personnel must be “held accountable.”

As he was speaking during a brief news conference with British Prime Minister David Cameron, the reactions of House and Senate lawmakers suggested Obama did little to tamp down the Benghazi controversies, which have persisted since extremists killed four Americans there in September. Nor did he temper the bipartisan outrage following Friday’s news of an IRS inspector general draft report citing the agency’s mishandling of conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status, dating back to March 2010.

By the afternoon, the Justice Department was also in the hot seat after the Associated Press reported that, during April and May, the government secretly obtained phone and fax records connected to AP reporters and editors — part of an apparent hunt for government leaks. The phone data involved at least 20 personal, work and fax lines, including a phone in the Capitol that is used by multiple AP reporters, the news organization reported.

The AP protested the data-gathering in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, who was already scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Judiciary Committee.

Republicans, sensing stormy weather for Obama, leaped to defend the First Amendment, and to condemn the administration.

Continue Reading on www.usatoday.comIRS-Target-590-LI

Read more:

The Left to American Christians: Shut the Hell Up!

By / 11 May 2013 / 57 Comments

MH900430507Matthew 16:3-4 – And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4 An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed.

A couple of months ago I was conducting an Option 3 Drill of the Modern Army Combatives Program.  In this drill, you must utilize the techniques we have taught the soldier, and he/she must respond by being aggressive, close the gap (or come in closer contact with the opponent) and achieve the clinch (one of the 3 techniques taught) while the instructors and assistant instructors are punching the soldier. During this exercise one day, a soldier was hit in the face because she was not guarding it as she was trained to do.  She backed up a couple of steps and said “d%*n s^*t just got real”.  Recently, I felt that way when the report that the Pentagon was considering punishing soldiers for proselytizing (Sharing your faith in Christ) at work (here).

When we look at the timetable of policies, opinions, and regulations of this administration, a person can’t help but to wonder if they do anything else but hate Christianity with their anti-Christian agenda.  A few weeks ago the DOD released a power point slide adding Evangelical Christians (here) to the Extremist watch list.

As Christians it is a wake up call to the reality that it can happen here in America.  No, scratch that — it is a wake up call that it is happening here!  Everything that is happening right now is a warning sign that our religious freedom is being stripped away.

A prime example of this is the Sports Commentator who is in jeopardy of being fired over his comments about Jason Collins becoming the first openly gay Pro-Athlete.  He simply said, as a Christian, the Bible condemns homosexual activity (here).

As a side story to that — what is amazing is that President Obama called Jason Collins courageous for his coming out, but Mr. Obama couldn’t make a call to rescue the people under siege in Benghazi?  Our government and culture want you to just shut the hell up.  Shut up about Jesus, shut up about gay marriage, shut up about abortion, shut up about corruption, shut up about Obama and shut up about his regime.  JUST SHUT THE HELL UP!

Read more:
Get more Clash on, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

We Can’t Afford to Ignore the Tyranny that Exists



Last weekend, the President warned Ohio State graduates to ignore those voices that are constantly warning of tyranny. Of course, as many have pointed out since then, that would mean (among other things) not reading any history books on the founding of America, which would reveal the fact that our nation’s Founders were even more leery of government over-reach than the vast majority of modern patriots.

Not long ago, a friend recommended a book of mine on his Facebook page, only to have one of his other friends, a pastor, message him privately to warn him against that book. Of course, the helpful pastor was warning him about a book he himself had not bothered to read, based solely on the title.  It’s called Resistance to Tyrants: Romans 13 and the Christian Duty to Oppose Wicked Rulers.

 The bottom line of the pastor’s warning was this [paraphrased here]: I’ve looked up several definitions of tyranny, and we’re a long way from experiencing that. 

Which immediately set me to looking up the dictionary definition, in several versions. I won’t quote them all here. But the one below is very representative of what you’ll find elsewhere:

TYRANNY (noun):

  • arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. Synonyms: despotism,absolutism, dictatorship.
  •  the government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.
  •  a state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.
  •  oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler.
  •  undue severity or harshness.

In addition, some dictionaries will point out that the ancient Greeks especially employed the word to speak of any usurper, or one who had attained power unlawfully.

The “money” adjectives above, the ones that really describe a tyrant, are thus “arbitrary,” “oppressive,” “unjust,” “severe,” etc.

The unnamed pastor above apparently has not been paying attention.

For instance, as the new Benghazi hearings continue, it’s now plain as day that the administration’s story about the attack being caused by reaction to a YouTube video was a complete fabrication. The President and all his minions knew without a doubt from the beginning that this was not the real reason. And yet, to this day, the only person “brought to justice” over Benghazi is the man who made the video. He still sits in prison, as of this writing.

Today, we read that the IRS is admitting that it targeted the President’s political opponents for extra-special treatment during the last campaign.

 Anybody take a plane trip lately? How do you spell oppression? T – S – A.

Do a search for terms like “domestic drone surveillance,” “Utah Data Center,” and “Presidential Kill List,” and then come argue that we’re “a long way from experiencing” injustice, severity, and oppression.

Even if we explore the minority definition of tyranny, the Greek one about usurpation, we would have to admit that it’s been a long, long time since the federal government was anything but a tyranny, having usurped (or stolen) authority that they were never lawfully authorized by the Constitution. Who gave the feds the authority to regulate education, for instance? Answer: no one. They took that for themselves.

One of the writers of the Anti-Federalist Papers presciently predicted that the “commerce clause” of the Constitution would be used as an excuse to claim near-unlimited power. Oh, but wait, we’re supposed to ignore the voices warning of tyranny.

To complete the story I began with, the pastor in question went on to admit that he’d never really studied the passage of the Bible that was in question. He doesn’t think he needs to. All he’s ever done is repeat what he’s been told by others. Trace that back, and you’ll find all of them did the exact same thing.

This is how Christianity is turned into the spiritual equivalent of an anorexic teenager. Her pastors refuse to really set good food on the dinner table, and the ones invited to eat don’t complain.

You can be part of fixing that. Start complaining. Why hasn’t your own pastor warned from the pulpit of the encroachment and threat of government tyranny?

Arm yourself for refuting his/her pathetic answer. Right now, you can get the information-packed ebook No Cover for Tyrants: 1 Peter 2:13-17 Explained for only 99 cents for your Kindle.

New International Version Romans 13

Romans 13: 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4 For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”   10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

11 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. 12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.   (NIV)

“The Message” Version Romans 13

Rom 13: 1 Be a good citizen. All governments are under God. Insofar as there is peace and order, it’s God’s order. So live responsibly as a citizen. 2 If you’re irresponsible to the state, then you’re irresponsible with God, and God will hold you responsible. 3 Duly constituted authorities are only a threat if you’re trying to get by with something. Decent citizens should have nothing to fear.

Do you want to be on good terms with the government? Be a responsible citizen and you’ll get on just fine, 4 the government working to your advantage. But if you’re breaking the rules right and left, watch out. The police aren’t there just to be admired in their uniforms. God also has an interest in keeping order, and he uses them to do it. 5 That’s why you must live responsibly — not just to avoid punishment but also because it’s the right way to live.

6 That’s also why you pay taxes — so that an orderly way of life can be maintained. 7 Fulfill your obligations as a citizen. Pay your taxes, pay your bills, respect your leaders.

8 Don’t run up debts, except for the huge debt of love you owe each other. When you love others, you complete what the law has been after all along. 9 The law code — don’t sleep with another person’s spouse, don’t take someone’s life, don’t take what isn’t yours, don’t always be wanting what you don’t have, and any other “don’t” you can think of — finally adds up to this: Love other people as well as you do yourself. 10 You can’t go wrong when you love others. When you add up everything in the law code, the sum total is love.

11 But make sure that you don’t get so absorbed and exhausted in taking care of all your day-by-day obligations that you lose track of the time and doze off, oblivious to God. 12 The night is about over, dawn is about to break. Be up and awake to what God is doing! God is putting the finishing touches on the salvation work he began when we first believed. 13 We can’t afford to waste a minute, must not squander these precious daylight hours in frivolity and indulgence, in sleeping around and dissipation, in bickering and grabbing everything in sight. 14 Get out of bed and get dressed! Don’t loiter and linger, waiting until the very last minute. Dress yourselves in Christ, and be up and about!
(from THE MESSAGE: The Bible in Contemporary Language © 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson. All rights reserved.)


Why is This Important? Read on for the answer

Ariel Castro, Cleveland Kidnapper, Is a Registered Democrat

By / 9 May 2013 / 147 Comments

Screen Shot 2013-05-09 at 3.34.55 PMAccording to voter registration records, Ariel Castro, the Cleveland kidnapper, is a registered Democrat.  He was also the alleged leader among the three Castro brothers, who were arrested this week, and the owner of the house at 2207 Seymour Ave., where the three abducted local women had been kept in captivity for over a decade.

Why is this important?  Whenever a crime or a scandal captures national attention, the pattern in the mainstream media is to either identify the culprit as a Republican or hold silence — in which case we can rest assured that the culprit is a Democrat.

When the identity or the party affiliation is yet unknown, the pattern is to speculate publicly about the possibility of the criminal being a conservative, Christian, white, Republican, and a Tea Party member — and never that he could be a Hispanic Democrat voter playing bass in a meringue band.

In today’s divisive climate, the identity of a perpetrator is always a political issue, especially when a crime is committed by men against women.  According to the Daily News, “What the neighbors saw was terrifying and dehumanizing: Naked women on dog leashes, crawling in the dirt. A lady clutching an infant and pounding on a window for help.”

If any of the brothers were a Republican, this news would have been trumpeted by the mainstream media as tangible proof of the Republican War on Women — a narrative invented by Democrat strategists and maintained by the media in a successful effort to defeat Republican candidates in the 2012 election cycle.

Read more:

Muslim Cleric ‘Damned’ Dead Navy Seals at Ceremony

Military Families Allege Muslim Cleric ‘Damned’ Dead Navy Seals at Ceremony *UPDATED*


Family members of Navy SEALs who died on duty in Afghanistan claim that an Islamic cleric “damned” the servicemen’s bodies at their memorial ceremony.

Three families of Navy SEAL Team VI special forces servicemen, along with one family of an Army National Guardsman, appeared at a press conference on Thursday. They revealed information about how and why their sons along with 26 others were killed in a chopper crash in Afghanistan on August 6, 2011, a few months after successfully raiding Osama Bin Laden’s compound and killing the 9/11 terrorist mastermind.

The families of the servicemen say that America’s enemies were determined to strike back at our special forces for Bin Laden’s death, so they are questioning why military brass sent their sons into battle “without special operations aviation and proper air support” immediately after President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden announced to the world that SEAL Team VI killed Bin Laden.

Karen Vaughn, who lost her son Aaron, told reporters the area of Afghanistan that the SEALs were shot down in was hostile territory. Flying in a Chinook chopper named Extortion 17, the SEALS, according to Ms. Vaughn were going into danger in using an “antiquated” air vehicle:

We learned that this valley [in Afghanistan] was an incredibly hostile territory which our military had cleared on seven prior occasions and then turned it back over to the Afghanis who could not maintain its stability. We learned that night that the mission was so dangerous, that it had to be authorized out of theater, but even then the following took place. The most elite lawyers in our nation’s history and now unfortunately not so secret SEAL Team Six were flown into battles, Billy said that, on a CH47 Chinook Chopper.

This conventional airframe that these American were forced to do battle in that night was built in the early 1960’s and last retrofitted in 1985. We demand to know who made the call to send our sons into hostile territory or evidence proves a shoot down attempt had been in full force for weeks in less than adequate antiquated airframes documented to be in very poor condition.  We also demand to know who made the call to mix conventional aircraft and forces with special warfare operations. In our search, we also discovered that Extortion 17 entered the battle field that night completely unescorted with no pre-assault fire paving the way for that school bus to make it slow contemplated landing in that pitch black hostile territory. A territory that had been engaged in a military battle for three and a half hours.

Family members of the fallen say certain members of Congress and the administration have either been unresponsive or restrictive about any information they have requested about the deaths of their sons.

Additionally, Billy and Karen Vaughn described to reporters how the military Rules of Engagement likely contributed to the death of their son and the rest of his team.

A video of the ramp ceremony intended to honor the fallen American and Afghan servicemen shows an Imam praying over the caskets. According to the Vaughns, a certified translation of the Imam’s remarks revealed he “desecrated” and “damned” the bodies of the Americans in Arabic.

Military brass prohibited “any mention of a Judeo-Christian God” at the ceremony the press statement says, but “invited a Muslim Cleric to the funeral for the fallen NAVY SEAL Team VI heroes who disparaged in Arabic the memory of these servicemen by damning as infidels to Allah.”

Is This Man The Mastermind Behind The Benghazi Cover Up?



National Security Council speechwriter B

I wrote yesterday about how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) knew that the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 was a terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda operatives. We know the Obama White House put out the story for nearly a week that it was just Muslims upset over a benign YouTube video. In spite of knowing what was going on and having the ability to intervene, the Obama administration did nothing to stop or assist Americans who they knew were being attacked by Al-Qaeda. Instead, they chose to cover it up and intimidate witnesses. Stephen F. Hayes has an excellent piece at the Weekly Standard titled The Benghazi Talking Points, in which he fingers the man he believes is the main person behind the Benghazi cover-up, Ben Rhodes.

Of course, one would immediately have to wonder about those who would be around a man who has vowed to stand with the Muslims instead of America. If you recall, Barack Obama made a speech in Cairo, Egypt to an audience which included the Muslim Brotherhood, in which he distorted the Qur’an to put it in a good light and then attempted to make out like Islam had made great contributions to both America and the world. That speech was written by Ben Rhodes, Obama’s foreign policy speechwriter and now a part of a his National Security Council.


Hayes writes in his article about the talking points that were first put out to officials. He writes:

The talking points were first distributed to officials in the interagency vetting process at 6:52 p.m. on Friday. Less than an hour later, at 7:39 p.m., an individual identified in the House report only as a “senior State Department official” responded to raise “serious concerns” about the draft. That official, whom The Weekly Standard has confirmed was State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, worried that members of Congress would use the talking points to criticize the State Department for “not paying attention to Agency warnings.”

In an attempt to address those concerns, CIA officials cut all references to Ansar al Sharia and made minor tweaks. But in a follow-up email at 9:24 p.m., Nuland wrote that the problem remained and that her superiors—she did not say which ones—were unhappy. The changes, she wrote, did not “resolve all my issues or those of my building leadership,” and State Department leadership was contacting National Security Council officials directly. Moments later, according to the House report, “White House officials responded by stating that the State Department’s concerns would have to be taken into account.” One official—Ben Rhodes, The Weekly Standard is told, a top adviser to President Obama on national security and foreign policy—further advised the group that the issues would be resolved in a meeting of top administration officials the following morning at the White House.


There is little information about what happened at that meeting of the Deputies Committee. But according to two officials with knowledge of the process, Mike Morrell, deputy director of the CIA, made broad changes to the draft afterwards. Morrell cut all or parts of four paragraphs of the six-paragraph talking points—148 of its 248 words (see Version 2 above). Gone were the reference to “Islamic extremists,” the reminders of agency warnings about al Qaeda in Libya, the reference to “jihadists” in Cairo, the mention of possible surveillance of the facility in Benghazi, and the report of five previous attacks on foreign interests. 

Ed Lasky writes concerning Rhodes, “Ben Rhodes should be called to account for trying to divert blame away from Islamic terrorists and the Obama team members whose feckless negligence led to the Benghazi massacre.”

“I have previously written about Ben Rhodes and his role in the Obama White House,” writes Lasky. “It is shameful that this ‘kid’ (he is all of 35) has been given any responsibility at all in our government. In ‘Does it bother anyone that this person is the Deputy National Security Adviser?’ I noted his problematic background for someone given so much power by Obama. But then again he does specialize in fiction-writing. He earned a master’s degree in fiction-writing from New York University just a few years ago . He did not have a degree in government, diplomacy, national security; nor has he served in the CIA, or the military. He was toiling away not that long ago on a novel called ‘The Oasis of Love” about a mega church in Houston, a dog track, and a failed romance. ”

Lasky concludes that Ben Rhodes is the man that attempted to whitewash Islamists and the Obama administration, not only in the Cairo speech, but in the talking points promoted by the Obama White House in the days following the attack on Benghazi that left four Americans dead.

I guess we’ll wait and see if he is even called as a witness this by the House in this week’s hearings.

Read more:



Tyranny Continues to Grow

CA Governor Signs Law Allowing Confiscation of Firearms

On May 1, California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation that allows law enforcement to confiscate handguns and assault rifles from Californians who bought the weapons legally but have since had a disqualifying “criminal conviction or serious mental illness.”

Legislators believe up to 20,000 Californians will fall under this law, which could mean up to 40,000 weapons need to be confiscated. The legislation “allocates $24 million in surplus funds” to hire “dozens of special agents” to help recover the weapons.

Since California keeps a database of gun owners, they know where every gun is–or where it’s supposed to be–and they’ll use that database to locate them.

Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) said the money California has spent to maintain a “tracking program” on firearms has paid off and is now giving the lawmakers “the opportunity to confiscate [these guns].”

No word on when the confiscation will begin.

The Persecution of the Church Grows Stronger

Pentagon: Religious Proselytizing is Not Permitted

Pentagon: Religious Proselytizing is Not Permitted

By Todd Starnes

Religious liberty groups have grave concerns after they learned the Pentagon is vetting its guide on religious tolerance with a group that compared Christian evangelism to “rape” and advocated that military personnel who proselytize should be court martialed.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation is calling on the Air Force to enforce a regulation that they believe calls for the court martial of any service member caught proselytizing.

President Mikey Weinstein and others from his organization met privately with Pentagon officials on April 23. He said U.S. troops who proselytize are guilty of sedition and treason and should be punished – by the hundreds if necessary – to stave off what he called a “tidal wave of fundamentalists.”

“Someone needs to be punished for this,” Weinstein told Fox News. “Until the Air Force or Army or Navy or Marine Corps punishes a member of the military for unconstitutional religious proselytizing and oppression, we will never have the ability to stop this horrible, horrendous, dehumanizing behavior.”


Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told Fox News he was stunned that the Pentagon would be taking counsel and advice from the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

“Why would military leadership be meeting with one of the most rabid atheists in America to discuss religious freedom in the military,” Perkins said. “That’s like consulting with China on how to improve human rights.”

The FRC has launched a petition drive urging Defense Sec. Chuck Hagel to protect the religious freedom of troops “and not to proceed with the purge of religion within the ranks called for by anti-Christian activists.”

Pentagon officials met with Weinstein and his group were to discuss a policy called “Air Force Culture, Air Force Standards,” published on Aug. 7, 2012.

Section 2.11 requires “government neutrality regarding religion.”

“Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion,” the regulation states.

Military leaders were admonished not to use their position to “promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion.”

Weinstein said it’s time for the Air Force to enforce the regulation – with zeal.

“If a member of the military is proselytizing in a manner that violates the law, well then of course they can be prosecuted,” he said. “We would love to see hundreds of prosecutions to stop this outrage of fundamentalist religious persecution.”

He compared the act of proselytizing to rape.

“It is a version of being spiritually raped and you are being spiritually raped by fundamentalist Christian religious predators,” he told Fox News.

He said there is a time and a place for those in uniform to share their faith – but he took issues with fundamentalism that he says is causing widespread problems in the military.

“When those people are in uniform and they believe there is no time, place or manner in which they can be restricted from proselytizing, they are creating tyranny, oppression, degradation, humiliation and horrible, horrible pain upon members of the military,” he said.

Perkins said the military regulations have “Weinstein’s fingerprints all over it.”

“It threatens to treat service members caught witnessing as enemies of the state,” he said, referring to a Washington Post article highlighting Weinstein’s meeting with Pentagon officials. “Non-compliance, the Pentagon suggests, even from ordained chaplains could result in court-martialing on a case-by-case basis.”

The Pentagon confirmed to Fox News that Christian evangelism is against regulations.

“Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense, LCDR Nate Christensen said in a written statement. He declined to say if any chaplains or service members had been prosecuted for such an offense.

“Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis and it would be inappropriate to speculate on the outcome in specific cases,” he said.

Ron Crews, the executive director of the Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, warns that the Air Force policy would “significantly impact the religious liberties of Air Force personnel.”

“Saying that a service member cannot speak of his faith is like telling a service member he cannot talk about his spouse or children,” Crews said. “I do not think the Air Force wants to ban personnel from protected religious speech, and I certainly hope that it is willing to listen to the numerous individuals and groups who protect military religious liberty without demonizing service members.”

In an interview with the Washington Post, Weinstein called proselytizing a “national security threat.”

“And what the Pentagon needs to understand is that it is sedition and treason,” he told the newspaper. “It should be punished.”

Perkins said it was troubling the Obama Administration would place so much trust in someone like Weinstein.

“Unfortunately, it appears our military is on a forced march away from the very freedoms they are sworn to protect,” he said. “This language from Weinstein that Christians who share their faith or offer comfort to others from their faith in Jesus Christ is “sedition and treason” is a treasonous statement in and of itself.”

But Weinstein said they count thousands of Protestants among their ranks – and said they are simply going after fundamentalists.

“As soon as we find a fundamentalist Muslim, atheist, Jewish person or anybody else, we will be happy to fight them – but so far they have been few and far between,” he said.

Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, an executive vice president with the Family Research Council, told Fox News that he’s deeply concerned by what he call a pattern of attacks on Christianity within the military.

“Mickey Weinstein has a very visceral hated of Christianity and those who are Christians,” he said. “He’d like to see it eliminated from the military entirely.”

If the Air Force policy is implemented, Boykin said Christians who speak of their faith “could now be prosecuted as enemies of the state.”

“This has the potential to destroy military recruiting across the services as Americans realize that their faith will be suppressed by joining the military,” Boykin said.

In the meantime, Weinstein and his group said they will continue to push for the Pentagon to fully implement its ban on proselytizing.

“There is a time, place and manner in which proselytizing is not only allowed, but it’s something we support among our Christian clients,” Weinstein said. “However, you can’t scream fire in a crowded theater and you can’t scream Jesus in a crowded theater at certain times, places, and in certain manners.”

Sarah Palin and Mark Levin say you need to get Todd’s new book – “Dispatches From Bitter America.” Click here to get your copy!

Related posts:

  1. Pentagon Grilled About Christians in Military
  2. Congressman: There is a War on Religious Belief in Military
  3. Pentagon Blocks, Says it Will Free Access to Southern Baptist Website
  4. Pentagon Blocks Access to Southern Baptist Website
  5. Air Force Academy Backs Away from Christmas Charity


“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil . . .” – Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)

PLEASE take the time to read the entire article I’ve published below. This man says what I have been wanting to say but lack the articulation he has. – Jerry Broussard

How to Take Back the Country, Step One. . .

Written on Sunday, April 28, 2013 by



Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil . . . – Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)

Four is five, and five is four.

In my column, The Line, I explained the underlying core issue dividing our country and why it’s time to draw the line. If you’ve stepped across and joined me on this side of the line, welcome to the breed of Lt. Col. Travis. This column will lay out one of the greatest weapons we can use to win the ideological war. This article is a little lengthy and requires some concentration, but if you cozy up with a drink and some time, you’ll be glad you did.

A couple of weeks ago I was talking with a good friend about the state of the country. He quoted Isaiah 5:20 and said, “I always wondered how a person could call ‘evil good, and good evil,’ but it’s obvious, it’s happening now.” He was right. It’s happening now, and we’re allowing it.

The power of words is remarkable. As a former stage hypnotist, current speechwriter, and law student I well understand the effect certain words have on the mind. One or two words can change the entire perception of a sentence, and therefore, a thought.

This is what happened to our country. Over the years, one or two words, here and there, created a dramatic shift in the populous toward the liberal agenda. Ironically, no one has brought it to light. From my expertise in words, I believe that if conservative pundits and leaders will adopt the tactic that I explain below, and aggressively use it in their media interactions, we will see the populous shift back to supporting constitutional principles.

First, how it’s happening.

To understand how society has been manipulated by words, let’s take a look at the infamous math riddle George Orwell made famous. In his book, 1984, Orwell explained the slogan “2+2 = 5” as a dogma that the Party presented as truth. The reason for this was because the actual fact that two and two equaled four was politically inexpedient. Since the logic explaining why 2+2 = 5 is bent, the conclusion stood only because the Party said so. The result was indubitable deference to the Party: whatever it said, was the controlled truth.

The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?” – George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Interestingly, 2+2 can, through theory, mathematically equal 5. This gives a spooky awe to Orwell’s proposition. I’ve seen several different theorems that explain how two and two can make five but, in my opinion, two are especially intriguing. The trickiest theorem essentially states that upon starting with the truthful proposition that 20 = 20 (x = x), we can follow a logical sequence of “if thens” to finally prove that 4 = 5 (x = y).

Read the following slowly and do the math with me. Understanding this will prove both necessary and important when I explain how the left has used the tactic.

Instead of going through the full theorem, I’ll sum it up this way. To deduce from 20 = 20 that 4 = 5, you must use square roots. If one takes the equation 4 – 4.5, solves it and then squares it (-.5 x -.5) you’ll get .25; which is the exact same answer as 5 – 4.5 solved and squared (.5 x .5 = .25). So, if the square of the first equation, 4 – 4.5, equals the square of the second, 5 – 4.5, then the two equations are equal to each other. If they equal each other, then we may skip squaring each side and just work with their original forms. So, we have 4 – 4.5 = 5 – 4.5. We then solve each side to get -.5 = .5. Now add 4.5 to each side and, bam! The truth that 20 = 20 has now been deduced to show that it is the exact same as 4 = 5 (or 2+2 = 5) (new truth).

Of course, the presentation is much more convoluted than that, but those who are brushed up will spot the flaw. The problem is that, while the squaring the two equations creates the same result (.25 = .25), a negative number is not the same as a positive number. In other words, -.5 is not the same as .5, even though they both square up to equal .25. It’s all in the “if then” presentation. It’s a matter of the conclusion versus logic.

The second theorem goes through similar steps, but in the end its flaw is that it requires dividing by 0. The novice mathematician doing mental math performs the function despite the error and arrives at the controlled conclusion. The problem is that it’s mathematically impossible to divide any number by zero.

Now, welcome back. So, what does all this fuzzy math have to do with the left’s words? Well, if 4 can be 5, then of course it’s possible for good to be evil, and evil to be good. Fuzzy math teaches us “doublespeak.”

Although the term “doublespeak” is not explicitly used in 1984, most attribute its origins to George Orwell. The basic concept is to deliberately disguise, distort, or reverse the meaning of words. In mathematical terms, the target word (x) is assigned a new definition (y). But the definition has a flaw (like dividing by zero or presenting a negative to be equal to a positive). However, with the right presentment, the flaw can be overlooked and I can make good become evil and visa versa. Soon enough the majority of the population believes the new truth, even those on the right.

Let’s turn to some examples. Since the Gosnell trial hasn’t been respectively covered, let’s use that topic.

Somewhere along the line, we accepted the labels of “pro-choice” and “pro-life.” How ridiculous. Where is the word “abortion”? After all, that is the beginning point (20 = 20). The left justifies their it by claiming their label means they support “a woman’s right to choose.” Choose what exactly? To own an AR-15? To support cutting entitlements and scaling back government? Ending affirmative action? Freeing the market from burdensome regulations? Supporting traditional marriage as the only definition of marriage? No, the left vilifies all of these. They support a woman’s choice to have an abortion. Period. So, let’s call it what it is. They are not “pro-choice,” they are “pro-abortion.”

Start saying “pro-abortion” on a regular basis and watch what happens! Since the word “abortion” doesn’t feel very good, I suspect you will see an immediate back-pedal. “No, no, no. We aren’t ‘pro-abortion,’ we just support a woman’s right to choose, for herself, to have an abortion.” Illogical. The pro-abortionist tries to equate positives and negatives. One cannot support a person’s right to choose an abortion without necessarily supporting the practice itself. Their argument is the same as me supporting a woman’s choice to kill her neighbor. “I’m not ‘pro-neighbor-killing myself, but I support a woman’s choice to do it.”

Oh, but neighbor killing isn’t the same as abortion because the neighbor is alive? Now we’re dividing by zero. Is the living cell in the womb not just as alive as the living cell in the neighbor?

Oh? The cell is alive, but the fetus isn’t viable? Nonsense. The 6-moth old baby, the 6-day old newborn, and even the 6-year old child are just as dependent on their mother for survival as the 6-day old zygote.

And deeper we go, exposing how pro-abortionists divide by zero to make abortion equal “supporting a woman’s choice.” This is how four has become five . . . how evil has become good. Words and their presentation.

No. “Pro-choice” is pro-abortion. And pro-abortion is pro-dismembering fetuses. Hmmmm, maybe we should start using the latter term?

Feel the power of words? And that is just one example.

Try “affirmative action.” Break down its logic and you get the actual fact: race preference or race favoring. (Believe me, I’ve studied the line of affirmative action cases. You’d be amazed at the preference systems colleges have tried to give non-Caucasians.)

“Gun control” is doublespeak for gun taking through regulation. The faulty premise here is that the left claims “gun control” bills do not come out and call for an actual gun confiscation. This is their presentation: “No one is taking away your guns.” But they mask the negative integer. The regulations are actually so strict that it becomes nearly impossible to obtain or keep your guns and ammo. It is, at the very core, confiscation via regulation. (Regulatory takings are unconstitutional under Supreme Court case law. See also my column, The Emporer’s Pen and the Extent of His Power for more on this.)

“Entitlements” is doublespeak for dependence.

“An act of terror” is doublespeak for terrorist attack, or more bluntly, and as is the case in most situations, Islamic terrorist attack.

“Assault rifle.” Laughable. I would argue that every rifle can “assault,” since that word is only a noun and never an adjective. This is doublespeak for semi-automatic rifle.

And of course, “political correctness” is doublespeak for, well, doublespeak.

The list goes on, but the point is this, the left has successfully made evil good by using faulty premises and great presentation. The left is controlling the narrative because the right has rolled over and accepted doublespeak simply because the left has said so. Sadly, I can think of only one political leader who has ever challenged the flaw on the air. Everyone else is deathly afraid of being called “racist,” “sexist,” or whatever (do we need to break down the logic on those words too?).

It’s time to fight back with words.

I call on every patriot, pundit, and conservative who has a voice and a far-reaching medium to quit accepting the left’s manipulative doublespeak and start using truthspeak. Remember, one or two words can change the entire perception of a sentence, and therefore, a thought. Truthspeak resets the public’s perception and thoughts back to the original truth. This is why the left tries to eviscerate leaders like Allen West. Truthspeak is the left’s primary enemy, and he’s the only one I can think of off the top of my head who publicly speaks it.

Therefore, my fellow Americans, let us declare in our dialogues and monologues, our posts and our tweets, speeches and interviews that two and two do not equal five simply because it feels better to say. Good feelings were never the predicate of truth. Two and two make four, but only for as long as we guard its underlying logic. No more passive defensiveness. Go on the offensive! A Spade is not an upside down heart, so why accept the flaw and call it one? Call a spade a spade! Flood their minds with truth and watch the public support for the left buckle and fall.

Mark. My. Words.

That choice is yours to make. That choice—the dedication to one’s highest potential—is made by accepting the fact that the noblest act you have ever performed is the act of your mind in the process of grasping that two and two make four.” – John Galt

Read more:



Mother Jones: ‘Right-Wing Extremism’ Killed More Since 9/11 Than Islamic Terror

by Ben Shapiro 25 Apr 2013

On Wednesday, Mother Jones ran an article making a shocking claim: more Americans have been killed by conservative terrorists than by Islamic terrorists since September 11, 2001. “While America has been fixated on the threat of Islamic terrorism for more than a decade, all but a few domestic terror plots have failed,” the article explained. “Between September 11, 2001, and the end of 2012, there were no successful bomb plots by jihadist terrorists in the United States …. [R]ight-wing extremists killed 29 people during those 11 years.”

But is it true?

The Mother Jones piece is based on a study by the New America Foundation and Syracuse University’s Maxwell School. But that study routinely labels non-right-wing murderers right-wingers, and labels basic crimes involving murder “terrorist attacks.”

Here is their complete list of “rightwing terrorist attacks,” with number of killed in parentheses:

  • Christopher and Wade Lay (1): In May 2004, Christopher and Wade Lay shot and murdered a security guard during a bank robbery. The son-and-father criminal team said they wanted to steal the money to buy arms to fight the government thanks to federal action at Waco in 1993 and Ruby Ridge in 1992. This is conspiratorial nonsense, not right-wing extremism. It is also murder, not terrorism, in the technical definition – it was not violence aimed at civilians to achieve a political purpose.
  • Jim David Adkisson (2): Adkisson shot up a church in Knoxville, Tennessee  in 2008 after he was unable to get a job, opening fire on children performing a musical. In a four-page letter outside the church, Adkisson “repeatedly included disgust for what he perceived to be the liberals in our country,” according to local authorities. He had also recently lost his public benefits, and his wife was a former member of the church. Local authorities stated, “That might have been a trigger.” The motivation is at best split politically.
  • Keith Luke (2): A white supremacist broke into an apartment, raped a woman, and shot two more people in 2009. He planned to attack a Jewish synagogue. His motive: killing “nonwhite people.” That is not right-wing. That is white supremacist. But the left always lumps in neo-Nazi types with the right, despite the fact that the Nazi movement was left-wing in orientation.
  • Scott Roeder (1): Roeder assassinated Dr. George Tiller, an abortionist, thanks to his own anti-abortion motives in 2009. Again, this is an assassination, not a terrorist attack.
  • James Von Brunn (1): Von Brunn shot a security guard at the US Holocaust Memorial in Washington, D.C. in June 2009. He was a white supremacist and Holocaust denier. He was not a right-winger.
  • Robert Andrew Poplawski (3): Poplawski got into a fight with his mother over a dog urinating in their home in 2009. He opened fire on Pittsburgh police officers, killing three. He was an anti-Semite and feared a gun ban by Barack Obama. Again, this was not a terrorist attack.
  • Joshua Cartwright (2): Cartwright started a fight with his wife over the location of his Clearasil in 2009. His rampage didn’t stop until after he had killed two sheriff’s deputies. Because Cartwright was described by his wife as conspiratorial and anti-Obama, this was labeled a right-wing terrorist attack. It wasn’t a terrorist attack, and it evidences no motivation based on politics.
  • ShawnaForde, Jason Eugene Bush, Albert Robert Gaxiola (2):
  • Raymond Franklin Peake (1): Peake, a prison guard, shot a lawyer to death at a gun range so he could steal his gun for use to overthrow the US government in 2010. Again, this was a robbery, not a terrorist attack, and there is no evidence Peake was a right-winger.
  • Andrew Joseph Stack (1): In 2009, Stack flew his small plane into the IRS building in Austin Texas, killing an IRS agent. Stack’s suicide note contained rage at the IRS. His suicide note was openly communist: “The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.” He railed in that note against George W. Bush.
  • David “Joey” Pedersen and Holly Ann Grigsby (4): The white supremacist couple killed four people in the Pacific Northwest in 2011 because they were minority or had Jewish names. They wanted to target Jewish organizations. There is no evidence they were right-wing.
  • Wade Michael Page (5): Page opened fire at a Sikh mosque in 2012. He was brewing in the culture of Nazi hate music. There is no evidence Page was right-wing.
  • Brian Lyn Smith (2): Smith and his friend Kyle David Joekel were involved in the shooting of two sheriff’s deputies in Louisiana in 2012. Both were members of the sovereign citizens movement. This is the only attack on the list that could legitimately be considered a “right-wing extremist terrorist attack.”
  • Isaac Aguigui, Anthony Peden, Christopher Salmon, Heather Salmon (2): These four killed a former Army compatriot, and formed an anarchist militia group. They allegedly wanted to poison Washington State’s apple crop and blow up a dam. Aguigui was a page at the Republican National Convention in 2008. The killing was a murder, not a terrorist attack.

Realistically speaking, then, there were a grand total of 2 killings over the last 12 years by “right-wing extremists.”

The study lists just four Islamic terrorist attacks in that period:

  • Hesham Mohamed Hadayet (2): He shot two at the El-Al counter at Los Angeles International Airport in 2002.
  • Naveed Afzal Haq (1): He shot up the Jewish Federation building in Seattle, Washington in 2006.
  • Nidal Malik Hasan (13): The perpetrator of the Fort Hood terrorist attack.
  • Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad (1): He shot up a Little Rock recruitment office in 2009.

The list does not include the Beltway snipers (11 killed, including a 2002 shooting of a Tucson man); Mohammed Ali Alayed, who slashed a Jewish friend’s throat after reportedly undergoing a religious revival; Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, who used his SUV to attack students (9 injured) at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in revenge for “the deaths of Muslims worldwide”; the list goes on. The list also does not include honor killings (the equivalent to the George Tiller assassination), or random murders involving Muslims (the equivalent of half the items on the “rightwing terrorist attacks” list.

Naturally, the study does not bother to list left-wing terrorists.

The attempt by the left, including Mother Jones, to minimize the threat of Islamic terror inside the United States and to maximize the threat of “right-wing extremism” is all too obvious. By using the label “right-wing extremism” to apply to everything from neo-Nazis to anarchists, the left seeks to smear the right, the same way it smeared the right with the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords.

The truth remains that the Islamist threat in the United States is very real – and that only the dedication of law enforcement has stopped substantially more Islamist attacks. After the Boston Marathon bombings that killed three and wounded well over 170, only a truly philosophically perverse publication would claim that right-wingers are actually more of a threat to public safety than Islamists.

Ben Shapiro is Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News and author of the New York Times bestseller “Bullies: How the Left’s Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America” (Threshold Editions, January 8, 2013).

Socialist Obama Adminstration Getting More Arrogant

Big Sis: Obama Admin Can Pick Which Laws to Enforce

by Matthew Boyle 24 Apr 2013

During her testimony on the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declared that she, President Barack Obama and other political officials at the top of this administration have the authority to decide which laws to enforce, and which ones to ignore.

Napolitano made the declaration in an exchange with Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) when he was questioning her on how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have alleged that political officials in the Obama administration, including her, have blocked them from enforcing the law.

Sessions noted that ICE agents’ union president Chris Crane had testified on Monday “that agents are prohibited from enforcing the law and, indeed, the ICE officers have filed a lawsuit [to that effect].”

“I started out as a federal prosecutor in the Department of Justice in 1975,” Sessions said. “I have never heard of a situation in which a group of law officers sued their supervisor and you for blocking them from following the law. They weren’t complaining about pay, benefits, working conditions. They were saying their very oath they took, to enforce the law, is being blocked by rules and regulations and policies established from on high and that this is undermining their ability to do what they’re sworn to do.”

In her response to those remarks from Sessions, Napolitano said she believes she and other political officials have the authority to tell law enforcement agents which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore.

“There are tensions with union leadership, unfortunately, but here’s what I expect as a former federal prosecutor and attorney general, and that is that law enforcement agents will enforce the law in accord with the guidance they’re given from their superiors,” Napolitano said. “That’s what we ask of ICE, that’s what we ask of Border Patrol, that’s what we ask throughout the Department and I believe that would be consistent with all law enforcement. Agents don’t set the enforcement priorities. Those are set by their superiors and they are asked then to obey that guidance in accord with the law.”

Sessions was not pleased with Napolitano’s response, so he followed up by asking: ““Well, what Mr. Crane testified to was that there are law provisions that say an agent shall do this, that and the other, and that the policies set by their political supervisors refuse to allow them to do what the law plainly requires. You are not entitled to set policies, are you, that violate the mandates of congressional law?”

Napolitano answered that question by saying she “disagree[s] with almost everything” Sessions has said, “but we’ll just have to respectfully disagree with each other.”

“But, I think it does point to why this bill needs to be passed, because what we want our officers doing is focusing on narco-traffickers and human smugglers and money launderers and others who misuse our border and our immigration system,” Napolitano said. “By having a process by which those in the country illegally can pay a fine, pay fees, register so we know who they are, by dealing with the employer demand for illegal labor, by opening up the visa system, that will have the effect, basically, of confirming the focus of resources where they need to be.”

Despite Napolitano’s and the administration’s belief that they can tell law enforcement agents which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore, the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill cedes even more authority away from Congress and gives it to the administration.

In their lines of questioning with Napolitano during Tuesday’s hearing, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) focused on how the bill cedes authority. In a statement he issued after the hearing indicating he is not satisfied with the bill’s so-called “border security triggers” that are supposedly meant to ensure the border actually gets secured, Cruz said he does not trust the bill will actually secure the border.

“As it stands, the border security component – which numbers only 58 pages of the 844-page bill – largely cedes authority to the Department of Homeland Security to determine when and how the border would be secure,” Cruz said. “However, today’s hearing revealed that the last clear metric for border security – ‘operational control’ – reflected that in 2010, DHS had secured 873 miles of the more than 2,000 mile border. When that metric did not demonstrate success, DHS decided to simply abandon the metric. In order for a metric to be real, it must be meaningful. Currently, there are no objective metrics in place to ensure any triggers in this bill will be meaningful, all while the pathway to citizenship component remains contingent on this undefined border security.”

Lee similarly questioned why the Gang of Eight bill gives Napolitano and the administration so much authority. “Some of the questions that I have as I’ve read through this bill over the last few days relate to the amount of discretion you are given, you and your successors will be given over time, should this become law,” Lee opened his line of questioning with Napolitano on Tuesday.

Even Gang of Eight member Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) admits the amount of authority the bill would cede to the administration is controversial. “Biggest challenge on #immigrationreform has been well founded lack of trust that Obama administration will enforce the law,” Rubio Tweeted on Tuesday. “Its [sic] a big problem”

Arizona’s SB 1070

Raping Arizona… Part 2 – SB1070

Posted by on Apr 24, 2013 in

Yesterday we introduced you to what life is REALLY like on the southern border and it’s not what Janet Napolitano and John McCain would have you believe.  Arizona is being invaded by a criminal class and the pro-amnesty crowd is ignoring it and lying about it.

Today, I’m going to talk about SB1070, the state’s immigration law that drove President Obama and the open borders folks to distraction.  As a reminder, this is a series and upcoming installments will include…

  • Drug and immigration cartels.
  • The Fence.
  • The Numbers.  How many illegals are here and how many are coming across.
  • What is the Border Patrol doing and how effective are they?
  • How to stop the flow.
  • Gang of Eight Immigration Legislation, good or bad?

SB1070SB1070 created lots of controversy in Arizona’s effort to fight illegal immigration.  We got sued by all the usual suspects, lost in Federal Court, lost in the Ninth Circus and won in the Supreme Court.  The most controversial parts of the law included what opponents called “show me your papers” and a requirement that business use eVerify to verify that new employees are eligible to be hired.

Our Governor, Jan Brewer, has gotten plaudits around the country from conservatives for SB1070.  Let me be clear about this.  Jan Brewer is a political hack, she had nothing to do with writing SB1070, did not support it or comment on it as it made its way through the legislature and nobody knew if she would sign it or veto it after it passed.  She waited until the last day to sign, walked out on a stage and at least half the state – the conservative part – was shocked when she signed it.

It was a purely a survival move.  She had taken office when Janet Napolitano went to Washington and was in a four way reelection fight, she was running third and falling.  Her handlers played the game well.  Brewer read her lines very well, even stood up to Obama (although I think that was to sell more books – she’d just self-published an ebook that went through the roof after her airport confrontation with the President) and walked to an easy win in the primary and general election.  Again, Jan Brewer is a hack.

With respect to SB1070, I’ve been an opponent of it since day one.  I thought it targeted the wrong people, would create unnecessary dust-ups, like the litigation process we were tied up in for years, and would end up being ineffective.  I was right.

The point of SB1070 was never to enforce immigration law, it was to create a hostile environment so illegals would get out of Arizona and head for friendlier climes, like California.  They are bankrupting our state, California doesn’t seem to mind bankrupting theirs so there was hope SB1070 would give illegals the incentive to leave the state.  It did work for a little while, but eventually everything bogged down.  It’s expensive to administrate and the Feds didn’t want to take the illegal we were arresting.

First of all, the “show me your papers” part of the law.  In the world of stupid, that was king.  The State of Arizona has had a law on the books for decades that required every citizen to have a state issued photo ID on their person at all times.  It’s a misdemeanor and you are subject to arrest if you don’t have one when asked to identify yourself by a police officer.  All this section did, according to dozens of police officers I spoke with, was effectively put a lawyer in car with them every time they asked someone for ID.  It added nothing to their ability to do their job, took about zero additional illegals off the street and created a firestorm in the process.

The good part of the law was the eVerify requirement.  Businesses hated it and campaigned against it.  Even though it made the final cut, the law is toothless and doesn’t provide enough punishment for ignoring it.

eVerify is a great solution.  It’s 98% accurate, it’s free assuming you have an internet connection and it takes less than a minute.  It’s similar to the requirement for an I9 form that all businesses are required to collect on new hires, but it accesses the Social Security database and verifies that the employee is who he or she says they are.

SB1070 could have worked had the legislature found a spine.  The solution is simple and basically ignores the illegals.

First, require eVerify for every employee.  SB1070 gave a pass to existing employees and that is an open admission by the business lobby that they’ve got illegals on their payrolls.

Second, extend the eVerify requirement to rental housing.  Require that landlords or their agents have an eVerify result on every tenant in a rental property.

Third, make enforcement worthwhile and make compliance a matter of life and death.

The state would audit businesses and rental properties on a routine basis.  The business would be required to provide proof that they have eVerify forms for every employee or tenant.  If an employee or tenant is found to be an illegal alien, the eVerify form is an affirmative defense.

If they do not have the form it’s an automatic fine of $1,000 per missing form.  If the employee or tenant is found to be an illegal, the fine jumps to $20,000 and the business owner/landlord/property manager is charged with a felony.  The fine is not dischargeable in bankruptcy and if the business is unable to pay the fine it attaches to the owners.  The felony charge is not able to be reduced.

The fines are large enough that the state will aggressively pursue enforcement of the law and it won’t tie up police to enforce it.  Accountants will work just fine and they’re cheaper than cops.  In addition, the businesses that are most prone to hiring illegals are construction and hospitality.  You can’t get a business or liquor license in Arizona with a felony conviction.  Now you’ve got incentive for the businesses to follow the law.

Obviously this isn’t going to happen.  In the current legislation before the Senate the eVerify system is being scrapped and replaced with an new and undefined system and businesses have 10 years to implement it.  Get the idea?

We need to tell Congress that the Gang of Eight is wrong.  This current bill is amnesty for millions of lawbreakers, has no enforcement provisions that will be implemented and asks us to trust the same government that’s refused to secure the border for the past twenty years.

You can contact your Representative and your Senators HERE!

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil

Time to Start Profiling Muslims Instead of Christians

By /

MH900409382On Monday, as I heard the news of the Boston Marathon bombing, I heard some lame-brained reporter on the radio claim that, “this changes everything.” His follow-up was something about none of us being safe anymore. My first thought was, “What! Where has this guy been since 9/11?”

But then, I remembered that many Americans, led by politicians and the media, have accepted the notion that we are no longer threatened by Islamic jihad. They have been lulled to sleep by the lie that Islam is a “religion of peace.” With the killing of Bin Laden and our withdrawal from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they have been convinced by the campaign rhetoric that “Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive.” We are under the impression that we have been kept safe from Islamic jihad since 9/11, forgetting that the Ft Hood shooter was named Hasan and shouted, “allahyu akkbar.” That incident has been forgotten because the “enlightened” administration has labeled it “work place violence.” Until this week, Obama had dropped the term “Islamic terrorism” from his lexicon.

How fitting is it that the two brothers both ended up at Beth Israel Hospital in the caring arms of JEWS!!!!!? Now we will be subjected to a societal anal exam for weeks on end because of our self-loathing liberal political correctness which values “diversity” more than truth.

The main stream media is perplexed. “How could such nice boys have lived here for so long, become radicalized and done this? How do we prevent this? How can we be safe?” They refuse to accept that Islam is incompatible with western society. Every Muslim is a “person of interest”. We will be safer once we accept the truth. The truth will set you free. We must profile these people. The nitwits in the media and political class must stop perpetrating the lie that Islam is a religion of peace.

The reason we are not safe is because our society operates in a fantasy perpetuated by a government sympathetic to a religion of death. How blind are we when the terrorists are identified two years in advance and we ignore it?1 How appropriate is it that the car that the terrorists hijacked had that familiar COEXIST bumper sticker? When will we wake up and realize that these people do not want to co-exist with us?

This week a friend of a friend commented on Facebook that “99% of the people of the world are good.” I had to remind him that there are millions of Muslims in the world who want us dead simply because we are Americans, Christians or Jews. He then equated radical Islam to the Westboro Baptists. There is no comparing radical Islam to any other religion (except perhaps Satan worship). I don’t recall the Westboro Baptists killing anyone. They may be intolerant bigots, but they are not murderers. The two don’t equate.

Our country would be safer if people paid more attention to Robert Spencer than Barrack Obama or Chris Matthews. You say, “Who is Robert Spencer?” Of course you wouldn’t know because his thorough efforts to document Islamic terrorism have been deliberately ignored by the media. If you want to know what these murderers are up to, you will be more informed by following Spencer’s Jihad Watch website than any newspaper or television station. The sheer volume of Islamic terrorism that has occurred since 9/11 will astound you.

Read more:
Get more Clash on, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

A Comment by me, Jerry Broussard;

Isa 5:20-24

20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.

21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.

22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine
and champions at mixing drinks,
23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe,
but deny justice to the innocent.
24 Therefore, as tongues of fire lick up straw
and as dry grass sinks down in the flames,
so their roots will decay
and their flowers blow away like dust;
for they have rejected the law of the LORD Almighty
and spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel.

“Be Still and KNOW that I Am God” Psalms 46:10

Americans ‘snapping’ by the millions

Exclusive: David Kupelian reveals record fear, stress, suicide – and inspired way out

author-image David Kupelian |David Kupelian is an award-winning journalist, managing editor of WND and editor of Whistleblower magazine. A widely read online columnist, he is also the best-selling author of The Marketing of Evil and How Evil Works.

Terrorism. Chaos. Fear of the future. In the age of Obama, America is undergoing a “fundamental transformation” – that much everyone knows.

But what few seem to realize about this transformation is that the sheer stress of living in today’s America is driving tens of millions to the point of illness, depression and self-destruction. Consider the following trends:

  • Incredibly, 11 percent of all Americans aged 12 and older are currently taking SSRI antidepressants – those highly controversial, mood-altering psychiatric drugs with the FDA’s “suicidality” warning label and alarming correlation with school shooters. Women are especially prone to depression, with a stunning 23 percent of all American women in their 40s and 50s – almost one in four – now taking antidepressants, according to a major study by the CDC;

By the way, things are no better over the pond – and may be worse, according to one major study that concluded almost 40 percent of Europeans are plagued by mental illness.

Note: This report is is excerpted from the April 2013 issue of WND’s acclaimed Whistleblower magazine, “STRESSED AND DEPRESSED: The unreported health crisis of the Obama era.”

What on earth is going on? Why isn’t medical science – and for that matter all of our incredible scientific and technological innovations in every area of life – reducing our stress and lightening our load? Why doesn’t the almost-magical availability of the world’s accumulated knowledge, thanks to the Internet, make us more enlightened and happy? Why is it that, instead, more and more of us are so stressed out as to be on a collision course with illness, misery, tragedy and death?

Most important, what can we do to reverse course? Fortunately, amazingly effective help is available – but more on that later.

‘He wants people to snap’

“Life is difficult,” wrote psychiatrist M. Scott Peck at the outset of his international best-seller, “The Road Less Traveled.” Stress, difficulties, disappointments, accidents, disease, misfortune, cruelty, betrayal – they’re unavoidable in this life.

Yet, during eras when society and families are stable, unified and fundamentally decent and moral – as, say, America during the 1950s – the stress level for each person is minimized, or at least not compounded by a perverse society. Conversely, when – as is the case today – we have widespread family breakdown, a depraved culture that mocks traditional moral values, a chaotic economy and disintegrating monetary system and a power-mad government dominated by demagogues and sociopaths, the normal stresses of life are greatly multiplied.

Thus it has come to pass that America, long the hope of the world, has grown increasingly dispirited and angry, which in turn breeds anxiety, fear, confusion, hopelessness and depression.

After all, let’s face the hard facts: We just re-elected perhaps the worst president in history, someone manifestly obsessed with dismantling traditional, free-market capitalist America and transforming it into a socialist nanny state. That in itself is highly stressful – at least for the roughly half the population that still understands socialism always leads to a profound loss of freedom and prosperity.

Then there’s today’s relentless economic pressures: high unemployment (the actual rate is at least double that of the “official” government rate), foreclosures and bankruptcies, a stagnant growth rate, 11,000 new people signing up for food stamps every single day, rising taxes for the entire middle class whose net worth is simultaneously shrinking, ever-higher prices for food, gas and other essentials – and overshadowing it all, a galactic national debt burden, courtesy of a wildly out-of-control government unrestrained by either the Constitution or common sense.

That, too, is very stressful. Top it all off with an administration continually abusing the public for the sake of enlarging and consolidating its political power – for instance, by purposely making the “sequester” cuts hurt Americans, even our active-duty soldiers, as much as possible.

Make no mistake: This sort of stress on Americans is not only intentional on the part of Team Obama – it is strategic. Remember, these people are revolutionaries (that is, engaged in “bringing about a major or fundamental change,” as Merriam-Webster puts it) and utterly committed to replacing one societal structure – America’s constitutional, limited-government, free-enterprise system – with another – a socialist, wealth-redistributionist system run by an all-powerful government.

Such a radical change cannot be accomplished while Americans are calm, happy, content and grateful for their blessings. Citizens must be unhappy and stressed out. Indeed, widespread popular discontent has always been the required fuel for leftist transformation.

Just reading a few pages into Saul Alinsky’s notorious “Rules for Radicals,” one encounters repeated confirmation that the very key to radical “change” is keeping the populace angry, encouraging their grievances, stoking their resentments and making sure they are continually upset. That is the primary psychological dynamic of “community organizing” – and America today is led by community-organizer-in-chief Barack Obama, a long-time master practitioner and instructor in Alinsky’s neo-Marxist agitation methods.

Top radio talker Rush Limbaugh recently picked up on this normally unspoken aspect of Obama’s modus operandi: “I think he wants people to snap,” opined Rush. “I think Obama is challenging everybody’s sanity. Obama [is] literally pushing people to snap, attacking the very sanity of the country.”

Commenting on Obama’s sudden obsession with employing every means possible to deny law-abiding Americans their constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms, Limbaugh exclaimed: “All of this is so in our face. Everything that people hold dear is under assault. Deliberately making people upset! This is not what presidents do.”

It’s not what presidents do – unless they happen to be leftist revolutionaries, in which case “deliberately making people upset” is precisely what they do to accomplish their intended “fundamental transformation.”

We need to realize that Americans could not have twice elected a leader as transcendentally unworthy of the presidency as Barack Obama without first having had their minds and hearts captured. Through constant leftist indoctrination, emotional manipulation, ruthless intimidation – and then being rewarded once they have “converted” – perhaps half of the American electorate has been programmed over the course of decades by a subversive school system and equally perverse “news” establishment. Truth be told, both institutions have become full-blown abominations, occupying as they do near-sacred stations of public trust in American civilization.

Of course, at the nuclear core of the myriad assaults on traditional America is the rejection (at least by society’s elites) of God and repudiation of the Judeo-Christian values that underpin Western civilization. This in turn has led to pervasive societal disintegration and a Pandora’s Box of almost unimaginable problems.

Unfortunately, despite our nation’s growing number of seriously troubled people, psychiatry provides little help. It has evolved in our secular, mechanistic culture to see virtually all mental, emotional and spiritual problems as genetic or physiological in origin. No longer is there any such thing as sin. Nothing is moral or spiritual. Good character, introspection, understanding, repentance and forgiveness, so vital to genuine healing, are now irrelevant. Just write a prescription.

Since the current research fad is to conclude (as the National Institute of Mental Health puts it) that “depressive illnesses are disorders of the brain,” psychiatry has come to rely heavily on altering our brain chemistry by (in the case of depression) tricking it into producing higher levels of neurotransmitters like serotonin and norepinephrine. But this forces us to ask an obvious question: What are you talking about? Do you really believe that the 23 percent of American women ages 40 through 59 currently on antidepressants ALL have defective or diseased brains?

Or, is it just possible that, rather than tens of millions of inexplicably damaged brains, much of today’s epidemic of “depression” and other “disorders” has a lot more to do with the prevalence of stress, pressure, confusion, cruelty, anger, injustice, temptation and corruption all around us – and our inability to deal with it without being infected and hurt by it?

Finding the way out

There are, of course, proven commonsense steps each individual can take to minimize the effects of stress. Chuck Norris’ personal list of “12 ways to avoid depression” is as good as any available online, and encompasses everything from diet and exercise to meditation and gratitude to God.

But boiling the matter down to core essentials, there are really three time-tested elements required for staying healthy physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. They are:

1) A genuinely healthful diet: Newsflash – eating the wrong foods (or eating too much) causes huge problems. Obesity is not only stressful, but has myriad adverse health effects, including depression. Likewise, eating foods that are heavily processed, high-sugar, adulterated, chemicalized, processed, artificially flavored, colored, sweetened and preserved stresses both body and mind. As WND columnist and orthopedic surgeon Lee Hieb, M.D., puts it, “If my great-grandmother would not have recognized something as food … I don’t eat it.”

Mountains of research and dietary wisdom can be boiled down to this: Eat a variety of fresh, natural foods, especially vegetables and fruits and particularly lots of enzyme-rich raw foods. Fish and chicken are fine, so is red meat in moderation, same with dairy (eggs, milk and butter – not margarine), but buy natural/organic whenever possible.

2) Regular exercise: A good exercise regimen not only helps keep our heart (and the rest of us) healthy, it confers untold benefits, tangible and intangible – plus it is, all by itself, a major de-stressor! Again, WND columnist Chuck Norris, who as a six-time undefeated world karate champion (and reputedly the world’s toughest man) knows a little about exercise, says this: “Exercise is a cure for so many ills; depression is one of many. Exercise is so powerful on our mind that Men’s Health calls it the drug-free depression cure.” Enough said. Just do it.

3) Personal quiet time for prayer and reflection, allowing us the opportunity to seek the Creator’s will while letting go of accumulated anger, frustration and resentment toward others. (In other words, renewing our love for God and our neighbor.) Anger in all its forms has long been shown to be at the very root of many serious problems and illnesses, both physical and mental.

Pause button. One all-important point needs to be made here: It is not the stress itself that harms us, but rather, the way we overreact emotionally to it. And primarily, that reaction is one of resentment, either overt or subtle.

Grasping this often-overlooked fact leads directly to the bottom-line principle for successfully coping with stress, whether it’s related to money, work, health, relationships or trauma: Learn to calmly endure the stress (or as the Bible expresses it, “trials and tribulations”) with genuine patience and faith instead of anger and frustration, and an amazing thing happens: The stress, rather than making us sick and debilitated, actually serves to make us stronger, more at peace and more whole.

Help with this all-important facet of stress management comes, ironically, from the occupation Forbes calls the “most stressful job” in America – namely, the U.S. military.

Despite the tremendous ravages of war stress – 22 suicides per day among U.S. military veterans (on average) and an epidemic of post-traumatic stress disorder and other war-trauma conditions streaming out of Iraq and Afghanistan – a quiet revolution in overcoming stress is nevertheless unfolding within the military.

Like the constantly inculcated attribute of “resilience,” the military has also found the practice of “mindfulness” to be extremely helpful in overcoming stress. And the gold standard in this growing field is “Be Still and Know,” a simple and time-tested awareness exercise that been used in all five armed service branches for many years.

Currently relied on by tens of thousands of soldiers and veterans, “Be Still and Know” is the key ingredient included in a compact disc titled “Coping Strategies.” In essence, the 30-minute exercise helps users discover genuine patience, mental clarity and (a word the Founding Fathers used a lot) equanimity. It has been highly endorsed by both the U.S. Army’s chief of chaplains, Maj. Gen. Douglas L. Carter, who calls it a “great resource for our Soldiers,” and Col. John Bradley, M.D., long the chief of psychiatry at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

“Coping Strategies’” distributing organization, the nonprofit Patriot Outreach founded by U.S. Army Col. Antonio P. Monaco, offers the CD (or Internet download) free to all U.S. military personnel, veterans and family members upon request. It is also readily available to civilians, at a nominal charge to support the free grants to the military. Patriot Outreach’s program has been publicly praised by Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad as well as former GOP presidential candidate Sen. Rick Santorum.

Having written about “Coping Strategies” and the “Be Still and Know” exercise a couple of years ago, I recently checked in with a member of the Patriot Outreach team, Navy Vietnam veteran Lee Booton, for an update.

Booton, after experiencing a lot of combat, came home from Vietnam with a nice big fat case of post-traumatic stress disorder. (“In the middle of the night I was pounding on my wife, thinking I was still fighting the North Vietnamese,” he told me. “I felt horrible.”) Yet years later, when he was introduced to “Be Still and Know,” Booton knew it provided the answer he and other stressed-out soldiers were desperately seeking. Over the past five years, volunteering with Patriot Outreach, Booton has “met face to face with returning troops” and personally “handed out between 5,000 and 6,000″ of the “Coping Strategies” CDs to vets and encouraged others to download the exercises for free. (There are actually four exercises included in “Coping Strategies” – the main one, “Be Still and Know,” plus three others that focus specifically on “Overcoming Pain,” “Overcoming Fear” and “Overcoming Stress.”)

Does he ever hear back from the soldiers he helps? “Yes!” says Booton enthusiastically. “Sometimes they give me a big hug and say, ‘Boy, does that work,’ or ‘You helped save my life – this made it so much easier for me to deal day-to-day with all of my issues.’”

‘Cure stress’

“Be Still and Know” was developed by Roy Masters, who at 85 is the patriarch of stress experts, having taught this method since 1960 to millions, his fans including everyone from movie star John Wayne to Internet journalist Matt Drudge. He also hosts talk radio’s longest-running counseling show, “Advice Line,” on Talk Radio Network. The author of 18 books, Masters was featured on the Sean Hannity Show to discuss his newest book, “Hypnotic States of Americans.”

Recently, all four of the audio exercises on the “Coping Strategies” CD have been released in a new civilian version on a dedicated MP3 player called, “The Cure Stress Device.”

“In today’s high-tech, wireless world,” said Masters, “a little, self-contained audio device the size of a credit card seemed like the best delivery system possible.”

In a recent message he tweeted, Masters summed up more than 60 years of work in just 140 characters: “Learn to endure cruelty and injustice without resentment and after the stress has passed you will find the fulfillment you have been seeking.”

“Most stress,” explains Masters, “is simply cruelty, in one form or another, directed at us by other stressed-out human beings, who themselves have been victimized by cruelty and stress in their own pasts.

“Imagine, however, that someone said or did something cruel to you, but that you did not react in any way whatsoever – you did not become upset, resentful or even ruffled. You simply observed that this person was saying or doing something cruel, as though you were calmly observing the scene in a movie. You simply would not be stressed by what would appear to others to be a highly stressful encounter. Stress and cruelty affect us as profoundly as they do only because we react to them resentfully.”

The exercise works so well, he adds, because “it enables you to become objective, a little bit separate, detached and disentangled from all your troublesome thoughts, emotions, heartaches, fears and traumatic memories – and that, all by itself, is extremely helpful, and actually healing.”

‘You just be cool and calm’

“Stress” – our modern name for all the trials and tribulations the Good Lord in His wisdom deems necessary for us to grow in character and faith – is not the enemy. It is, however, the difficult but necessary part of life that tests us, proves us, and ultimately makes us better – or kills us.

Fortunately, in the loving sacrifice of his Son, not only did God make provision for the forgiveness of mankind’s sins, but He also gave us another priceless gift – the perfect example of how to deal with stress. Even while hanging on the cross in agony, Jesus did not resent his tormentors and even asked God to forgive them. That’s the essence of what we need to find.

In one sense, our task is simple: Since our past sins have been forgiven, and since the future is in God’s care alone, we just need to focus on discovering how to live right now, in this present moment, with faith, patient endurance and perfect integrity.

Now more than ever, it is essential that Americans get a handle on stress. The pressures of modern life are being greatly multiplied by the ever-present threat of terrorism and a socialist government that thrives on promoting everything dark, perverse and angry (and therefore stress-producing) in human nature. Remember, Winston Churchill called socialism “the gospel of envy.”

After Rush Limbaugh warned his listeners that Obama wants good Americans “to snap,” he added, good-naturedly: “You just be cool and calm. Everything’s going to be fine. I’ll tell you when it’s not.”

Indeed, to prevent Obama and company from completing their “fundamental transformation” of America, we are going to have to learn to stay cool, calm and collected – and not just on the surface, but deep down in our souls.

Know this: If you are upset at Obama and the maniacal left – if you’re angry, full of rage, feeling hopeless, frustrated, wanting to drop out, or wanting to lash out and act violently – believe me, that’s precisely what your adversary wants. Not only that, that’s how he wins, because when you’re upset and angry and overreacting – pardon me for putting it this way – you become stupid. That’s what’s wrong with the Republican Party. Its principles are magnificent (read the 2012 platform), but most of its leaders are intimidated by the ruthless Obama administration and the blatantly biased and abusive “mainstream media.” Thus, in their reactive, intimidated state of mind, they become ineffective, cowardly and contemptible (with a few notable exceptions, for which we are very grateful).

This is true not just of politicians, but all of us: No matter how smart, moral and right-thinking we might otherwise be, when we’re angry and upset we do not possess God’s grace, wisdom, courage and creative genius guiding our steps, and thus we are no match for the evil rising in America.

But if Americans would discover grace under pressure – hey, Ronald Reagan had it, why can’t we? – if enough of us found strength and resolve that were rooted, not in rage, but in righteousness and love of God and our neighbor, then nothing, and I do mean nothing, could stop us. Having regained our lost innocence, we would likewise see our beloved country restored to the noble land it once was.

“My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations; Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience. But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing,” James 1: 2-4 KJV.

The preceding is excerpted from the April 2013 issue of WND’s acclaimed Whistleblower magazine, “STRESSED AND DEPRESSED: The unreported health crisis of the Obama era.”



Still Think Islam Is A Religion Of Peace? – You Won’t After Seeing This

david wood

While many in the media, including Fox News, CNN, the Washington Post and others, including politicians like Barack Hussein Obama and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) continue to promote the lie that Islam is a “peaceful religion,” Freedom Outpost is allowing David Wood of “Answering Muslims” to respond to their claims from the Qur’an, in context, to demonstrate the lie that is being perpetrated on the American people the Islam is a religion of peace. Many of my own friends think Islam is harmless, but the reality of the Koran’s teaching tells us something very different. If you have any doubts that Islam is not a peaceful religion, this short video clip should convince any thinking person to reconsider an evaluation of Islam.

 Here’s one of David’s tweets to WhyIslam following the Boston Marathon bombing. David is calling into question the out right lying and deceptive practices of those in Islam in only revealing what they want to and then twisting even what they reveal to further their cause of jihad.

Wood puts in context the verse often cited by politicians and media pundits to affirm Islam is peaceful. They claim:

Qur’an 5:32 – For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

This is cited “to the children of Israel,” not to Muslims. In fact, it is taken from the Mishnah Sanhedrin, which reads, “Adam was created alone to teach you that if anyone destroys one life, Scripture reckons it as if he had destroyed a whole world; conversely, if anyone preserves on life, Scripture reckons it as if he had preserved a whole world.”

However, Muslims like Rep. Keith Ellison does not want to expose what is commanded of Muslims. He calls for context. So, Wood gives him context and here is what is in the very next verse, which is not about Israel, but about Muslims.

Qur’an 5:33 – The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle 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.

You see my friends Islam quotes out of context the verse and applies something meant for Israel to themselves, but they never tell you what they are commanded to do and why.

Thank you David Wood for making this point! Absolutely brilliant!

H/T FreedomFighterRadio

Read more:


Thank You British Press Editor

British newspaper calls Obama “ineffectual, invisible, the weakest president in history

Posted on 17 April, 2013 by Amy


by editor

Pip, pip, cheerio, chaps. Blimey, guv-nah! (Sorry, but that’s the best we can do at faking that language they speak in the United Kingdom).

The Express UK says what American newspapers are so hesitant to say, in an article entitled, “BARACK OBAMA: THE WEAKEST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY?”:

When the Brits said, “It’s tea time,” President Obama said, “Let’s play 18.”

INEFFECTUAL, invisible, unable to honour pledges and now blamed for letting Gaddafi off the hook. Why Obama’s gone from ‘Yes we can’ to ‘Er, maybe we shouldn’t’

Let us cast our minds back to those remarkable days in November 2008 when the son of a Kenyan goatherd was elected to the White House. It was a bright new dawn – even brighter than the coming of the Kennedys and their new Camelot. JFK may be considered as being from an ethnic and religious minority – Irish and Catholic – but he was still very rich and very white. Barack Obama, by contrast, was a true breakthrough president. The world would change because obviously America had changed.

Obama’s campaign slogan was mesmerisingly simple and brimming with self-belief: “Yes we can.” His presidency, however, is turning out to be more about “no we won’t.” Even more worryingly, it seems to be very much about: “Maybe we can… do what, exactly?“ The world feels like a dangerous place when leaders are seen to lack certitude but the only thing President Obama seems decisive about is his indecision. What should the US do about Libya? What should the US do about the Middle East in general? What about the country’s crippling debts? What is the US going to do about Afghanistan, about Iran?

What is President Obama doing about anything? The most alarming answer – your guess is as good as mine – is also, frankly, the most accurate one. What the President is not doing is being clear, resolute and pro-active, which is surely a big part of his job description.

Amazing, isn’t it, that people who have English as a second language would be able to state the situation so clearly


WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chechen Jihadists and the Dangerous Lies of the Liberal Media

By /

boston bombersLast week, I had a chance to speak with former Bush national security advisor, J.D. Crouch. He spoke about the War on Terror and said that former president George W. Bush wanted to take the war to the terrorists so that America would not have to become a police state to keep us secure.

We know how this turned out in the end, but this is a result of the enemy’s nature. They are not compartmentalized like soldiers on a battlefield. With Islam’s 1.8 billion world population, there is no way to know who is radicalized and who is not. In a just democratic melting pot, we do not know our enemies when we see them because profiling is an injustice according to progressive wisdom.

The media has not helped with this problem. Few media organizations want to discuss the fact that jihadists have been on a campaign to recruit naive American citizens to attack their own countries.

The liberal media was crawling all over this story hoping to be the first one to say that this was an attack caused by a white, disgruntled right wing conservative clinging to his guns and religion. It would have increased their dwindling ammo against the Right and this bomber would have become an example of how all of 2nd Amendment devotees were truly maniacs and dangerous to society. However, the truth is, it turned out to be the usual suspects, perhaps not usual as in Arab, but usual as in, Islamic terrorists.

So, are the two bombing “suspects” actually Islamic terrorists?

Let’s examine.

They hail from Chechnya, an Islamic nation that has recently sent fighters to join the Syrian wars. This nation is not far displaced from war and the two bombing suspects, Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, 19 and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, are old enough to have seen much of it. During the 1990s there were two Chechen wars for independence against Russia, but since then there has been plenty of Islamic civil unrest.

Chechnya is a majority Sufi Islamic nation, but ultra-conservative Wahhabism has been gaining strength in recent years and sending a wave of violence and fear throughout Chechnya. Wahhabis believe in the literal interpretation of the Qur’an. The majority Wahhabi state of Saudi Arabia produced the 9/11 terrorists and Osama Bin Ladin. The Saudi government is also funding Wahhabi schools in the United States. This has been a concern of those following the issue, mainly because textbooks from the schools teach violent and racist Islamic doctrine.

Chechnya has been in a near constant state of strife for decades. The fact that two young Chechens could be influenced into fighting for jihad is not far fetched, it’s the most likely situation. Whether they were a part of the increasing Chechen Wahhabi problem or whether they were radicalized by the large influx of Islamic Afghan war veterans into Chechnya, there is no way they were anything but jihadists.

When is the Jihad over?

It would seem to many Americans that the jihadist movement has lulled, but the truth is in Europe there has been a dramatic increase in plots and attacks in the past two years. The U.S. media does not report this news.


This graph from StratFor shows that jihadist have actually stepped up their plots in Europe and have had several successful attacks on that front. Belgium police recently foiled a plot on March 26. The police discovered that the terrorist, Hakim Benladgem had a massive amount of arms and had to be apprehended away from his apartment to avoid a standoff like the deadly firefight that occurred in Toulouse, France when French police attempted to arrest Mohammed Merah.

Now that France is engaged in a war with Mali, it will increase radical ambitions. Though Americans have been keeping jihadists busy with a perpetual war, it has cost many American lives, destroyed morale at home and cost the United States nearly $1.5 trillion.

At the end of the day, the Boston Marathon bombers used crude materials, ones that people could get anywhere. With the immigration debate looming, perhaps we should consider what standards will be required to keep those types of people out of the country rather than banning pressure cookers. Hakim Benladgem, Mohammed Merah and the two Boston bombers were all foreigners to the lands they plotted against. Fully freezing immigration would be to our detriment, but there is probably a definite way to decrease accessibility to their targets, us.

Can Islamic Nations Really Be Our Friends?

When asked about the bombings in Boston, an Egyptian Islamic cleric had nothing but praise for the two men.

April 16, Tahir TV: “Obviously I do not know who carried out the bombings but if it was carried out by the mujahideen it serves as a message to the West: We are still alive, contrary to the message Americans want to send. They have not finished off the mujahideen. Not just the mujahideen of Al Qaeda, but the mujahideen all over the world.”

This cleric goes on to say that he wishes he could join his brothers in Al Qaeda. Here is the full video: <iframe width=”640″ height=”360″ src=”; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

While I often use the term radical to distinguish violent Muslims from ones that are not actively engaged in war, when it comes to a majority Islamic nation, there is no such thing as radicalization. Either they are following Islamic principles that preach war against the West, Christians and Jews or they are not following Islamic principles. With the Arab Spring delivering whole nations over to Islamists, the threat of terrorism in our cities will only grow as we continue to treat these nations as friends and ignore everything they are doing behind the scenes. The very least we can do is stop letting them into our country.

Two sets of Statistic Studies that are very important and eye opening.

A recent “Investor’s Business Daily” article provided very interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International Health Organization.

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years after diagnosis:

             U.S.                    65%

             England              46%   

             Canada              42%  

Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received treatment within six months:   

             U.S.                     93%   

             England              15%   

            Canada               43%  

Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it within six months:   

             U.S.                     90%   

             England              15%    

             Canada               43%  

Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within one month:   

             U.S.                     77%   

             England               40%   

             Canada               43%   

Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million people:   

             U.S.                   71   

             England             14   

             Canada              18  

Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are in “excellent health”:   

             U.S.                    12%   

            England               2%   

             Canada               6%  

And now for the last statistic:  

            National Health Insurance?   

             U.S .                 NO  (until ObamaCare goes into effect)

             England            YES   

             Canada             YES   

            Check this last set of statistics!!   

The percentage of each past president’s cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. You do know that the private business sector is a real-life business, not a Government job. Here are the percentages.  

            T. Roosevelt………………. 38%   

            Taft…………………………… 40%  

             Wilson ……………………… 52%  

            Harding……………………… 49%   

            Coolidge……………………. 48%   

            Hoover……………………… 42%   

            F. Roosevelt………………. 50%   

            Truman……………………… 50%  

            Eisenhower……………. …. 57%  

            Kennedy……………………. 30%  

            Johnson…………………….. 47%  

            Nixon………………………… 53%  

            Ford………………………….. 42%  

            Carter……………………….. 32%   

             Reagan……………………… 56%  

            GH Bush……………………. 51%   

            Clinton ……………………… 39%  

            GW Bush…………………… 55%   

            Obama……….. ………. 8%  

This helps to explain the incompetence of this administration:

Only 8% of them have ever worked in private business! That’s right!  Only eight percent—the least, by far, of the last 19 presidents!  And these people are trying to tell our big Corporations how to run their business?   

How can the president of a major nation and society, the one with the most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk about business when he’s never worked for one?  Or about jobs when he has never really had one? And when it’s the same for 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers?  They’ve spent most of their time in academia, Government and/or non-profit jobs or as “community organizers.”  They should have been in an employment line.   

Pass this on because we’ll NEVER see these facts in the main stream media.

The Persecution Has Begun

CNN Analyst Suggests ‘Right-Wing Extremists’ Could Be Behind Boston Bombing

By Matt Hadro |

[UPDATE BELOW] CNN’s national security analyst Peter Bergen twice suggested that “right-wing extremists” could be behind Monday’s Boston Marathon bombings. Yet over an hour later, CNN reported that Boston Police were not holding anyone in custody as a suspect for the attack.

Appearing on CNN’s live coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing with host Jake Tapper, Bergen was asked to explain if the bombing could have been an act of terror. Bergen answered in the affirmative, and proceeded to name possible suspects depending on the type of explosive used. [Transcript below. Audio here. Video below the break.]

Who were Bergen’s suspects? Al Qaeda and “right-wing extremists.”

[UPDATE: 4/15/13 5:04 p.m. EDT] Peter Bergen again tossed out the idea that a “right-wing extremist group” could have carried out the bombings.

“I think the actual – the constituency inside the bomb will make a big difference about how we identify the person who did this,” he explained at the end of CNN’s 4 p.m. ET hour of live coverage. The perpetrators “could be a right-wing extremist group,” Bergen insisted, if the matter inside the bomb was not hydrogen peroxide, which he said is a “signature” of an al Qaeda attack.

[4:19 p.m. EDT]

JAKE TAPPER: Peter, does this – obviously we don’t want to speculate. We don’t know what this was. But is there reason for people who deal in counter-terrorism to think that this is an act of terrorism? Or suspect it strongly, at least?

PETER BERGEN: Sure. Although I’m reminded of Oklahoma City which was a bombing, which was initially treated as a gas explosion. So first reports are often erroneous. But the fact that there were two explosions – two bombings – one of the things I’d be looking at is once the device, if it is a device, is found, what kind of explosives were used? For instance, if it was hydrogen peroxide, this is a signature of al-Qaeda. If it was more conventional explosives, which are much harder to get a hold of now, that might be some other kind of right-wing extremists. We’ve seen a number of failed bombing attempts by al-Qaeda using bombs, (Unintelligible) and for instance, the Manhattan subway in 2009, Faisal Shahzad in 2010, the attempt to bring down Northwest Flight 253 over Detroit in 2009. But we’ve also seen other extremist groups, right-wing groups, for instance, trying to attack the Martin Luther King parade in Oregon in 2010.



TAPPER: And Peter, what are you waiting to hear for – hear about in these coming hours?

BERGEN: I think the actual – the constituency inside the bomb will make a big difference about how we identify the person who did this. Or the persons who did this. Because if it’s hydrogen peroxide, that puts (Unintelligible). If it’s something else –

TAPPER: Could be a different –

BERGEN: – could be a right-wing extremist group. Or some other group.

About the Author

Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow Matt Hadro on Twitter.

A Note From Me – Jerry Broussard

The Army’s training course identifying possible terrorist as Evangelical Christians has raised it’s ugly head with Peter Bergen’s comments. Be aware. It is only going to get worse.

Remember Jesus’ words; Matt 24:9-13; 9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold,

John 15:18-25; 18 “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19 If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. 20 Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. 21 They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me. 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin. Now, however, they have no excuse for their sin. 23 He who hates me hates my Father as well. 24 If I had not done among them what no one else did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both me and my Father. 25 But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law: ‘They hated me without reason.’

Mr. President. The Second Amendment is About Fighting Tyranny. Leave it Alone.

Showing Us Who He Really Is

By /


mask“How easy it is to abuse truth and language, when men, by habitual wickedness, have learned to set justice at defiance.” — Thomas Paine, “Common Sense on George III’s Speech”, 1782

“An organizer working in and for an open society is in an ideological dilemma. To begin with, he does not have a fixed truth — truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist.” — Saul D. Alinsky, Rules For Radicals, 1971

As many of us know, the President is one of the most ardent followers of Saul Alinsky. For both, the truth is relative. Consider what the President said earlier this month in his speech in Colorado:

“And so we’ve seen enacted tougher background checks that won’t infringe on the rights of responsible gun owners, but will help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.”

Conveniently wrong, but truth is relative.

In the same speech he says,

“Over the past 20 years, those background checks have kept more than 2 million dangerous people from buying a gun.”

If that mattered a hill of beans to him why has his administration prosecuted only 44 “of the 15,700 fugitives and felons who tried to illegally purchase a firearm” in 2010 alone?

During the 2008 elections, in a comment about the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, he said that he believes:

“‘[T]hat the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right.’”

I’m sorry. If he admits that the “Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms” isn’t the next part of his statement a bit contradictory with the rest of the Second Amendment’? You know, that part that says “shall not be infringed? Either we have the full right, un-infringed or we do not have it at all. It’s not a half and half thing. (And since when did our rights get “conferred” upon us? Those delineated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights come from GOD as the Founding Fathers acknowledged.)

The Founding Fathers, in backing the Second Amendment said things like,

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”

That’s Alexander Hamilton, who later added,

“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government.”

Sounds to me more as if the Founding Fathers — and the words they chose — meant for the people to be able to defend themselves against the government! That’s who “the representatives of the people” are: the President, the House and Senate, the Courts and the State and local governments. So the President’s assertions that it “does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right. [my italics]” is not just wrong, it’s in direct opposition to what Alexander Hamilton and other Founders have said!

Now the President is using the Sandy Hook massacre to further his cause via using the parents as backdrops, and one of them taking his place in the weekly radio address (and traveling at our expense to do his bidding). Their grief, difficult as it is to say anything negative about it, is being used to stoke fear into the hearts of the rest of us. It happened to their children. It could happen to ours. Thus, “gun control” must be the answer. We must take the guns away from everyone.

No. They don’t start there. They start with alleged “assault rifles” and high capacity magazines, then they go to other weapons and their ultimate goal: no one will have guns but the government. (Oh, and the people they say can have guns: celebrity body guards, gangsta-rappers; you know. People who need them.)

The President using fear — and, yes, grief — to try to control those who do not know their rights, do not think for themselves, do not do their own investigating of the facts, is (to me) despicable. He’s relying on the least informed, least educated and weakest of us to be able to control the rest of us, pitting one set against the other. Divide and conquer is his forte and he has used it for quite a while now. No, I’m not saying the parents of Sandy Hook are the least informed, etc. I’m saying that the parents’ loss is being used against those who are least informed, etc.

When a President uses tragedies of the Sandy Hook sort to start the process of disarming the people he has an agenda that cannot be good for the people. When he uses a tragedy like Sandy Hook’s parents’ loss as a backdrop and a selling point, he’s selling fear. When he uses fear…

“Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it.” — John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776

He tells us who he really is.

“Going, Going, Go____”

More Brazen Power Grab Attempts, and a ‘Complicit’ Mainstream Media


By:   Marilyn Assenheim

Mark Steyn has commented, repeatedly, that “He who controls the narrative controls the debate.”  That observation, however, should not be news to anyone. America is living a nightmare that makes “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” look like a picnic orchestrated by pixies. If the topics presented are frightening, the media’s performance is worse. Facts are either hidden from us or are perverted into something they aren’t. Two stories that appeared this week are offered as evidence.

Hidden: Senator Ted Cruz (R. Texas) this week released information about six cases that were brought, by the Lyin King’s administration, to the Supreme Court in 2012. The Court dismissed them.  These cases were attempts by the government to grab unheard of control over individual freedoms. In six, separate cases, the federal government attempted to:

  • Electronically track Americans without their consent and without cause.
  • Divest persons of their private property without making fair compensation.
  • Dispense with statutes of limitations on incidents that transpired years ago, in order to initiate lawsuits.
  • Federally mandate who churches chose as ministers.
  • Override state laws based on presidential caprice.
  • Fine the public without a fair hearing.

Were you even aware of this? Think this information is scary? Those cases were all ruled on and unanimously dismissed. It bears repeating: So horrendous were these attempts at seizure of control that the Lyin’ King’s own Supreme Court Justices made them unanimously kaput. Yet only Senator Cruz’s office publicized this news. It was subsequently covered in a small article in CNS News. Senator Cruz applauded the fact that the Supreme Court had knocked down six cases of attempted tyranny. He said those cases demonstrated “…an astonishing view of federal power on behalf of the Obama Administration. Luckily, we do not have to live in that America…” Senator Cruz was optimistic. Perhaps he should have added “Not yet.”

Misrepresented: Senator Mitch McConnell’s (R. KY) offices were illegally bugged.  A private conversation was secretly recorded then published about a prospective contender for his Senate seat, actress Ashley Judd (a carpetbagger from Tennessee). The mainstream media, print, radio and television, breathlessly reported the story. But what did they report? That Senate Minority Leader McConnell was the victim of a crime? No. The story was that Senator McConnell indulged in “character assassination” against Ms. Judd. No one asked how character assassination was possible when the private conversation was never made public by the tarred evildoers. No one pointed out that everything said about Ms Judd (her mental illness, her bizarre attitudes about procreation and religion) in Senator McConnell’s office, were repetitions of comments that Ms. Judd had made about herself during interviews.  No one mentioned that Richard Nixon, a Republican president, had been sent packing, accompanied by universal howls of protest from a frenzied media, for an identical crime. No. Because the crime was committed against Republicans the MMS refuses to recognize that the law was broken at all. Instead, Senator McConnell has been mocked for insisting that a crime was committed. We already know that freedom of the press is the only Constitutional amendment that is invulnerable, lies notwithstanding. So brazen and commonplace has this conviction become among the MMS that Mother Jones Magazine, the periodical benefitting from the crime, isn’t afraid of prosecution. Instead, they arrogantly demand that Senator McConnell comment on the information illegally obtained by them. Is this a cause for fear? And how.

Language matters. Actions, and inactions, have serious consequences. The longer we tolerate the left’s control of the narrative, the longer we tolerate craven Republican politicians and the longer we accept leftist calumny without riotous argument, the less likely it becomes to ever find truth… much less have footing in any dispute.


Matthew 24:12

Hate And Evil Are 2 Very Real Issues Men Need To Overcome

Posted by on Apr 11, 2013 Bllod Text Black


As I watch the coverage these last couple of days of the deaths of Margaret Thatcher and the son of mega-church pastor Rick Warren I am truly in awe of the depravity of those who seemingly have nothing better to do than dance on their graves. No, it’s more than that…it’s the complete lack of human compassion for another. It would be the same disorder we would pronounce on a serial killer who kills without remorse, without reason and without feeling. Those dancing in the streets of London today proclaiming “the witch is dead” are dancing on the grave of a woman who has not been in power for over 20 years. What exactly did she do to them to warrant this behavior? Rick Warren’s son probably never once interacted with one of these haters on the internet in a fashion that would warrant such vitriol, yet here we are with such comments as, “it’s obvious God doesn’t listen to Rick Warren” I mean seriously…who does that? In a 2001 Newsweek article by George Will, In Jedwabne, attempts are made to explain an aspect of human nature which may coincide with what is going on in our current culture.

July 10, 1941, half the Polish town of Jedwabne murdered the other half. Of 1600 Jews about a dozen survived. The atrocities that occurred in this town was not the result of years of propaganda by the Nazis, in fact, the Germans had only occupied the town for two weeks before the mayor and his officials met with the German officials and coordinated the massacre. Everyone participated in some fashion and even peasants arrived at the town as though they were traveling to a fair. As men, women and children were stabbed, beheaded and stoned some fled to a pond and drowned their babies and then themselves to escape the tortuous deaths awaiting those who remained.

Prior to the Germans arriving the Jews and Poles co-existed. The town was under Russian control, thus, immune to years of German propaganda blaming the Jews for economic depression and medieval myths about ritual murders of children by Jews, or by lust for plunder. There is no social conditioning theory which could offer an explanation to account for their behavior.

Prof. Jan Gross’ book, Neighbors, attempts to address the behavior of this particular community. Gross refers to Eric Voegelin’s thoughts about the “simple man, who is a decent man as long as the society as a whole is in order, but who then goes wild, without knowing what he is doing, when disorder arises somewhere and the society is no longer holding together”. Gross concludes, why in Jedwabne did neighbors murder their neighbors? Because it was permitted. Because they could.

Those dancing in the streets or gleefully blogging and tweeting over the death and suffering of others should take note of the lessons in Jedwabne, and possibly take an honest look at themselves. The allowances made for anonymous hateful remarks on the internet and demonstrations celebrating the death of individuals who never committed mass murder, child rape, or genocide should raise serious concerns for the rest of us. If anyone ever asks me why I so vigilantly support the 2nd amendment, I need look no further than human history (if you honestly think the Holocaust was the last example of such human depravity you haven’t been paying attention). I for one won’t be running to any pond.

The Rush Toward Sodom Has Accelerated


Homosexuality: The Political Battering Ram


“I believe granting liberty to gay people advances a compelling government interest, that such an interest cannot be adequately advanced if “pockets of resistance” to a societal statement of equality are permitted to flourish, and hence that a law that permits no individual exceptions based on religious beliefs will be the least restrictive means of achieving the goal of liberty for gay people.”

– Chai Feldblum, an open Lesbian who was nominated to serve as a Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Barack Hussein Obama

The lid has yet again been blown off of the radical homosexual agenda. As the Supreme Court held hearings on the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8, Obama spent $350 million on sexual indoctrination classes for children. The timing is impeccable.

Through the Personal Responsibility Education Program, students will be taught that no type of sex is wrong and the only “unsafe” behavior is becoming pregnant.

One can look to New York City, who implemented a similar type of sexual indoctrination on NYC schools in 2011. This curriculum is taught to grades 5, 8, and 10, which students receive standardized testing on.

Here are some examples of their twisted curriculum:

  • High-school students go to stores and jot down condom brands, prices and features such as lubrication.
  • Teens research a route from school to a clinic that provides birth control and STD tests, and write down its confidentiality policy. (Interesting, I will say that again – they are to write down the confidentiality policy. Did you hear that parents?)
  • Kids ages 11 and 12 sort “risk cards” to rate the safety of various activities, including “intercourse using a condom and an oil-based lubricant,” mutual masturbation, French kissing, oral sex, and anal sex.
  • Teens are referred to resources such as Columbia University’s website Go Ask Alice, which explores topics like “doggie-style” and other positions, “sadomasochistic sex play,” phone sex, oral sex with braces, fetishes, porn stars, vibrators and bestiality. (see Exodus 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

Do not those that developed this curriculum belong in jail?

Within a year after this perversion was implemented, an article was released in the Wall Street Journal which revealed cases of sexual misconduct by teachers, and that the teachers’ unions were protecting the teachers who received little to no consequence for their crimes against children.

For example, teacher William Scharbach was found to have inappropriately touched and held young boys. “Respondent’s actions at best give the appearance of impropriety and at worst suggest pedophilia,” wrote the arbitrator, the fox in the chicken coop who was hired by the union to protect the union, before giving the teacher only a reprimand. The teacher didn’t deny the touching but denied that it was inappropriate. This is criminal!

Also coinciding with the radical push for sexual deviancy upon America’s children, we cannot forget about Dan Savage, a radical homosexual who dared God’s justice by authoring a book titled “Skipping Towards Gomorrah.” Savage uses the guise of anti-bullying with his Obama-endorsed organization “It Gets Better” – which is nothing but an attempt to normalize homosexuality. Savage attacked the Bible and bullied Christian teens at a high school journalism conference. Yes, I said high school.

It was reported that the first thing the bully said was, “I hope you’re all using birth control,” that the Bible was “bulls—”, and then spewed out sexual innuendos during his speech. The bully also set an atmosphere of hostility towards Christians who espouse beliefs that he was literally taking on himself – he was attacking students while crying “victim”. More than 100 students stood up and walked out of his derogatory, perverted, deranged, vulgar, and backward-meaning speech.

If Dan is not licking doorknobs in hopes that others get sick with the flu, then he (and his husband) is a guest at the White House for President Obama’s 2011 LGBT Pride Month reception, as well as attendees at the White House anti-bullying conference.

Keep in mind this is the same president who overlooked the ice investigation into the pentagon (5000 pentagon employees were investigated for child pornography), who appointed over 225 homosexuals and transvestites into key positions in government (including Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who “queerified” Harvard), and who appointed as a safe school czar Kevin Jennings who wrote the forward to a book entitled, Queering Elementary Education. (LINK) Jennings’ hero was Harry Hay, an icon for NAMBLA (North American Man and Boy Love Association) whose motto is “sex before 8 before it’s too late” when marching in gay pride parades.

The NEA has worked hand in glove with this agenda as well. They already had an LGBT caucus for teachers, but in 2010 felt it necessary to celebrate a new caucus: the “drag queen” caucus. The NEA also refused to pass Amendment I-24, designed to protect students from sexual misconduct by teachers. Many feel they refused to pass the amendment in order to protect teachers who have sex with students.

No wonder this bully felt so emboldened to attack a bunch of high school students, and right under the noses of their parents.

Dan Savage is also the same radical homosexual who said on HBO he wished all republicans were “f—ing dead.” In 2006, Savage said that a particular candidate for Senate “should be dragged behind a pickup truck until there’s nothing left but the rope,” which, by the way, stands contrary to the radical homosexual agenda’s premise for hate crimes legislation.

He also said on Bill Maher’s show, “I sometimes think about f—ing the s— out of Santorum. I think he needs it. Let’s bone that Santorum. I’m up for whipping up some Santorum in Santorum.” Savage also once claimed “the only thing stopping his d**k from being put in Brad Pitt’s mouth is a piece of paper”, speaking of legislation. Did you catch that? I thought he was married. Out of his own mouth, he just admitted that “homosexual rights” is not about marriage; it is about promiscuity. He contradicts himself at every turn, my friends.

If the president and homosexual lobby went out to prove my point they could have not done a better job. In concert, these two radicals are clearly and literally at war with God and America, as you know it.

The radicals are now operating in the light of day what they used to do through deceptive measures.

The American people have found out the radical homosexual agenda’s every deception through their “civil rights” cry, their “hate crimes” cry, and now their “bullying” cry. At every turn their false premise is discovered.

People have seen clearly, after Savage’s demonstration, their version of tolerance and love – it is quite the opposite. Attack and then cry victim is their face for the world to see. It is bigotry to the fullest – hate and intolerance towards anyone who resists their perversion.

America must come to the very realization that this agenda undermines everything we are. People like Dan Savage used to be jailed for their perversion, now they are hailed by this corrupt administration. When paralleling the actions of the radical homosexuals such as the Dan Savages of the world to the actions of our founders, we now understand why God calls it an abomination.

America, it’s time for you to learn from history, so it does not repeat itself. We can even look to Canada, who implemented homosexual marriage in 2005, and see the moral devastation.

It is clear to see that, unbeknownst to the average homosexual, the radical homosexual agenda is being used as a political battering ram to target our children and silence anyone who opposes their deviant and criminal behavior in an attempt to demoralize and enslave the American people.

John Adams, the second President of these Untied States, said, “Our Constitution is made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Charles Carroll, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, reminds us that “Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of FREE governments.”


My own observation regarding this article by

The rush toward Sodom is becoming an all out turbo enhanced acceleration. This is the result of the Church not being the Church. We are admonished as Christians to be Salt and Light in our society. In Biblical times, salt was used to slow down the purification process of meat. As Christian “Salt” we are responsible to slow down the purification process of society and light the way toward the Lord Jesus Christ. Because we started “playing church”, instead of being the Church, our society has accelerated it’s decline morally and we are facing the persecution unlike the world has ever seen. That is why judgement has to begin with the Church.

Do we have enough fight in us? Will God answer our prayers for revival, or has He turned a deaf ear because of our indifference? Either we fight harder knowing the persecution that will follow, or open our mouths wider as they shove their lifestyle further down our throats.

Jerry Broussard


More Evidence of the Prophesied Persecution of The Church

Gestapo 2013? Colorado State Police and Homeland Security Target Christians

By /

Screen Shot 2013-04-10 at 9.29.25 AMI recently received a letter from one of law enforcement’s finest.  He had attended a seminar in which he was told to be on the lookout for Christians.  The letter was written by an attendee, Ron Trowbridge, Undersheriff in Prowers County, Colorado.  I would like to thank Sheriff Trowbridge for the letter and the 25 years he has spent protecting the public in his county.  Fear of reprisals from either the Colorado State Police and Homeland Security, fail to stop this patriot from exposing what our law officers are being subjected to.

Because of his bravery, we are able to get an inside look on how nefarious forces within our government are attempting to indoctrinate our law officers.  As this letter proves, our officers cannot be intimidated. Nor can they be turned on the people they serve.  The people of Prowers County are very lucky to have him.
Without further delay, here is the letter unedited and complete in it’s original form:

From: To: Subject: CSP Training Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 10:30:22 -0600

On April 1, 2013 I attended training in La Junta, Colorado hosted by the Colorado State Patrol (CSP).  The training was from 12:00 pm to 4:00 pm and covered two topics, Sovereign Citizens, and Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs.  I was pretty familiar with motorcycle gangs but since we often deal with the so-called sovereign citizen groups I was interested to see what they had to say.  The group consisted of police officers, deputies, and CSP troopers.  There were about 20 people in attendance.

Trooper Joe Kluczynski taught a 2-hour section on sovereign citizens.  Kluczynski spent most of his two hours focusing on how, in his view and apparently the view of Homeland Security, people turn to the sovereign citizen movement.  Kluczynski started off by saying there are probably some sovereign citizens in this room and gave a generalized list of those groups that have sovereign citizen views.  Among those groups, Kluczynski had listed, were those who believe America was founded on godly principles, Christians who take the Bible literally, and “fundamentalists”.  Kluczynski did not explain what he meant by “fundamentalists” but from the context it was clear he was referring again to those who took the Bible literally or “too seriously.”

While Kluczynski emphasized that sovereign citizens have a right to their beliefs, he was clearly teaching that the groups he had listed should be watched by law enforcement and should be treated with caution because of their potential to assault law enforcement.  Kluczynski explained why he believed these groups were dangerous saying they were angry over the election of a black president.  When someone in the group suggested the failing economy was probably much more to blame, Kluczynski intimated that those who are not going along with the changes in America will need to be controlled by law enforcement.  Kluczynski even later questioned some of the troopers present if they were willing and prepared to confiscate “illegal” weapons if ordered to.

Kluczynski’s assignment with the CSP was an Analyst for the Colorado Information Analysis Center, (CIAC).  CIAC is funded by Homeland Security funds and run by the CSP.  Kluczynski said he gets his information from the Department of Homeland Security.  Kluczynski said he was leaving the CSP at the end of that week (March 29, 2013) to begin his new career with Homeland Security.  I thought he was perfect for the job.

Ron Trowbridge
Prowers County Sheriff’s Office

Read more:

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: