Category Archives: A Broken System

Voter Fraud: What Americans Think



voter fraud
When Democats and/or liberals resist efforts to ensure the integrity of our electoral process, they often say, “What voter fraud?” They continue to resist any efforts (like voter ID) that would help ensure that you are who you say you are when you register and/or vote. They claim that requiring voter ID is akin go voter supression, and that voter fraud is so rare that errors should side with permitting anyone to vote.

Voter fraud DOES exist. For example, in the 2012 presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State John Husted announced that he had discovered that 17 non-citizens had illegally cast ballots. Husted also found that 274 non-citizens remain on the voting rolls. And in Florida, “One Naples voter admitted she was an illegal alien – but election records show she voted six times in the past eleven years.”

Well, it seems as if American citizens are fed up with the entire situation. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 78% of “Likely U.S. Voters” believe everyone should be required to prove his or her citizenship before being allowed to register to vote, up from 71% a year ago.

And 61% of voters believe laws that require proof of citizenship before allowing voter registration does not discriminate against such voters, while 29% think it does. That 61% is up from 58% in March 2013. Supporters of proof-of-citizenship laws say that they are intended to keep ineligible voters from casting votes, while opponents claim they are intended to keep eligible voters from voting.

Then there is Melowese Richardson, who said on camera that she voted for Dear Leader Barack Hussein Obama six times, once for herself and five times for other people. She was recently embraced and congratulated for her efforts by Al Sharpton at a voting rights rally in Cincinnati. A vast majority of Americans are fed up with people like her as well. A Rasmussen survey shows that 70% of “Likely U.S. Voters” believe all voters should be required to prove their identity before being allowed to vote, while only 25% oppose such a requirement.

And the legal tide seems to be turning a well. A federal judge ruled on March 19 that Arizona and Kansas may require residents to prove they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote. This is a clear rebuke to the DOJ and Obama Administration: both had strongly fought the move.

How CPAC Stacked the Deck on the Amnesty Panel

illegal-aliens-obamacatchreleasevoteHere’s a handy rule of thumb: If two of the four members of an immigration panel have Hispanic surnames you can bet it’s an amnesty panel in disguise. That was certainly the case at CPAC’s ‘Can There Be Meaningful Immigration Reform Without Citizenship?’

(This phenomenon is evidently peculiar to Hispanics. If two people named Schmidt and Kruger were on a panel it would be unfair to assume they enthusiastically support bomb damage reparations from WWII.)

Alfonso Aguilar and the Rev. Luis Cortes were joined by moderator Mercy Schlapp — a veteran of the Bush White House that was pushing amnesty until 9/11. The anti–amnesty speaker was Derrick Morgan of the Heritage Foundation and the afternoon’s advocate for the feudal system was Helen Krieble.

Schlapp set the tone when she remarked on the favor illegals were doing the economy by being here. Much like burglars boost an area’s GDP when they make the rounds of pawn shops.

Sbe was followed by Kreible, president of the Vernon K. Kreible Foundation, who said the debate should be about American principles: Equal treatment under the law, individual freedom and personal responsibility. So far so good, but then she reduced our choices to a false binary: Grant amnesty or do nothing.

The realistic option is removing the job incentive for illegals. But that is not a choice Kreible will ever entertain, because that would mean business can’t import serfs. She claims it’s wrong to set “artificial” limits on the number of workers you can hire. It’s Kreible’s belief that borders are a government matter, but workers are a business matter. In practice this means the federal government can keep Mohamed Atta out, unless he plans to mow your lawn.

What Kreible objects to is that ‘citizen’ word. She wants to implement a “red card” program that puts citizens in the penalty box. She would import workers without conveying citizenship or the right to remain after the job is over. This is similar to the wildly successful Turkish guest worker program the Germans had. Only problem is the Turks are still in Germany.

And while individuals should be “responsible,” American business is exempt. Right now if a US business thinks US workers want too much money, the business is free to open a subsidiary in Mexico and hire all the Mexicans it wants. But that’s a problem for agribusiness corporations, because shipping Alabama to Chihuahua would be a logistical nightmare. What’s more, sometimes the Mexican government seizes private business, you can’t trust the cops, ‘mordida’ cuts into profit margins and there’s always that decapitation problem.

So for Kreible the business solution is to flood the labor market by bringing Mexico here and let taxpayers deal with social costs.

Unfortunately for her there is no moral, ethical or conservative justification for bringing in foreign labor when unemployment in the US is over 7 percent and labor participation rates are at an all time low.

Alfonso Aguilar, director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, evidently believes the word ‘conservative’ is a verbal spice you sprinkle on leftist policies to make them more palatable for genuine conservatives. He wants conservatives to “own” the immigration issue by out–pandering the Democrats.

Aguilar contends the entire illegal problem is a result of “big government” setting quotas and holding the quaint notion that US jobs should go to US citizens. He recycles every lame, reverse racist amnesty cliché he could find, beginning with illegals are doing the jobs Americans won’t do.

After that howler he became incoherent. Aguilar says illegals taking jobs here “creates jobs for working class Americans.” He claims that illegals did not disregard the rule of law because they didn’t come here voluntarily. Instead business brought them here. This was genuine news to me. Who would have thought coyotes were members of the Chamber of Commerce?

Aguilar also introduced the concept of “circular immigration.” Letting illegals come here and return to their home country as many times as they and Greyhound wished. Although something tells me the circle would stop abruptly in the US when it came time to collect Social Security.

He was followed by the Rev. Luis Cortes who is the president of Esperanza. The organization’s website motto is: “Strengthening our Hispanic community” meaning it’s La Raza with a Bible. Cortes’ solution is to make citizens of anyone who ranks Cinco de Mayo ahead of the 4th of July. Otherwise, “it gives Democrats an issue.” And afterwards Democrats won’t need an issue because with 9 million or so new voters they’ll never lose another presidential election.

The most insulting aspect of the panel was how the pro–amnesty participants evidently believed using the word ‘conservative’ to describe leftist policies would somehow convince a gullible audience.

A conservative immigration reform would be built on trying something new: Enhancing the law we have now. Make it a felony to hire an employee that failed an E–Verify check or hire an employee without checking E–Verify. And strictly enforce the prohibition against illegals enrolling in any welfare or social programs.

Drying up the job market will accomplish two goals. First many of the illegals will self–deport. Second it will raise wages for US workers and lower the unemployment rate. Right now many jobs go unfilled by citizens because they aren’t willing to accept the prevailing wage scale in Juarez because they don’t live in Juarez. If employers were forced to pay wages high enough to attract US citizens, more citizens would work.

That’s a conservative, free market solution that’s good for the country and preserves the rule of law. Unfortunately the ‘C’ in CPAC now appears to stand for ‘capitulation.’

It Is Time, Democrats, to Send Mr. Reid Home

In these ridiculous times, where transparency is clandestine, science proves instead of disproves, and falsely instilled self-esteem trumps real education, I truly don’t expect even the most honest of Liberal or Democrat – and certainly not any Progressive – to understand, or even hear, what I am about to say, but for the good of our country I pray that they do. Truth be told, we rank-and-file Americans cannot trust the “Frank Underwoods” who lurk inside the Washington Beltway – on both sides of the aisle – to do anything on behalf of their constituencies any longer. They are frauds and converts to the oligarch. It is time we start depending on ourselves to affect real, true and honest change.

The examples of just how power-centered and self-serving the oligarchs in the US federal government have become are too many to list, although, if push came to shove, we could start amassing a list, in and of itself worthy of entry into the Guinness Book for longest continuous list of political transgressions against a people. From the IRS coercion of Conservative non-profit groups, to the political payoff that the billion-dollar so-called stimulus was to Blue State governments and labor unions, to the “too-big-to-fail” redistribution of taxpayer dollars through TARP to the über-greedy financial elites for their irresponsible financial skullduggery, the Janus-faced disingenuousness of our elected class – a disingenuousness meant to stave-off the torches and pitchforks of the taxpaying public – knows now shame…and yet we continue to tolerate it.

Stunning. Have we become that self-loathing as a people?

But even while we tolerate the power-hungry manipulations of the elected class – the elitists, the Progressives, the oligarchs – they have always been careful to at least pretend to care about the people. The entire game Progressives play is based on the false-premise that the “better educated” know how to care for the masses better than the masses know how to care for themselves. The illusion foisted by a great many Inside-the-Beltway Republicans (read: establishment Republican…Ann) is that they are standing with and for “the people,” executing a pursuit of limited government, fiscal responsibility and individual freedoms. Yet we all know that government does everything (but for achieving military superiority) poorly and at a greater price than the private-sector. And we all stand witness as government keeps expanding, both in size and scope. Now we can add overt disdain for the American people to that list.

On February 26, 2014, United States Senator and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), stood on the floor of the greatest chamber of debate – or at least what used to be – and openly expressed his hatred for the American people. Once again, abdicating his responsibility to serve his constituents, while playing partisan politics at the expense of the nation, Mr. Reid said, in defending the Patient Protection & Affordable Healthcare Act:

“Despite all that good news, there’s plenty of horror stories being told. All of them are untrue, but they’re being told all over America.”

I will overlook – for the moment – the fact that the most powerful man in the US Senate can’t speak proper English when entering his testimony into the Congressional Record. Lord knows there are members of Congress guilty of more egregious butchery of the English language.

It is beyond dispute that millions of Americans have been adversely affected by this unconstitutional piece of legislation. Millions have been denied the medical insurance they prefer while millions more have been told they must either pay more or go without; left to pay an IRS extracted penalty. Still hundreds of thousands more are being put into life-threatening situations where medical treatment deemed necessary for survival is not either outside their capability to afford, not authorized, or both. The putridly ironic thing about all of this is that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was imposed on the American people under the ruse of it being “for the common good.”

To say that Mr. Reid’s comment adds insult to injury is to affect injury to insult. And while it is serving as great fodder for the elitist Washington punditry, it is much more serious an issue than that, and two-fold.

For those whose lives have now been called into question; whose life-saving treatments have become too expensive to afford; or whose treatments have now been denied, this is a direct threat – and a government mandated threat, at that – to the guaranteed right, offered us as US citizens under the bedrock understanding of Natural Law, to “…Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” While self-serving, power-hungry, elitist manipulators like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi stare, wax-faced, into the television cameras extolling all of the “common good” that the Affordable Care Act is doing, millions face the prospect of dying for the Progressive Movement’s dream of a one-payer, nationalized health insurance system…health insurance, not healthcare, system.

While this faux benevolence is continuously presented as compassionate, needed and “the right thing” to get behind by the oligarchs and their toadies – the Progressive mainstream media, it is neither compassionate, needed nor the right thing to do. It is a redistribution of wealth that is literally costing people their lives…here…in the “land of the free.”

And what does Mr. Reid say about those who are facing the loss of their lives because of the ACA? What does he say about the real-life, fact-based stories of those who have been denied “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” because of Progressive benevolence?:

“…Tales…Stories made up from whole cloth…Lies, distorted by Republicans to grab headlines or make political advertisements…”

And as egregiously rancid as this reality is – and it is, the idea that the most powerful man in the US Senate would openly call those facing debilitated health and/or death because of his Progressive ideological zealotry “liars” is not only unacceptable, it should serve as the defining reason for why he should be: a) removed from Senate leadership by his Democrat colleagues immediately; b) reprimanded and censured but the whole of chamber immediately; and c) retired by the people of Nevada at the next election.

Our American system of government was based on the idea that those who would be elected to office – be it at the federal state, county, township or municipal levels – would be understood as those in the service of the public; public servants. Today, this notion – this foundational understanding of our American governmental system – has been grotesquely bastardized , done so with all the Progressive glory that could be mustered in its execution; destroyed at first by expunging the check and balance of States’ Rights through the ratification of the 17th Amendment all the way through to the imposition of having to purchase a private-sector product (health insurance) to be considered a true and faithful American citizen. Our country has been fundamentally transformed…“top-down, bottom-up, inside-out.”

George Washington, a man who could have been king would he have wanted the title, warned – warned – in his Farewell Address of the evils of “factions” (read: political party):

“However combinations or associations of [factions] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government – destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion…

“Let me now…warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy. The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.

“Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it…”

We, the American people, should not suffer the unbridled arrogance of Mr. Reid, evidenced not only by his lust for partisan faction, but by his open and overt disdain for our fellow citizens; fellow citizens now disenfranchised by the Progressive understanding of “the common good.” Mr. Reid is the perfect example of the “evils of faction.” He is a disgrace to his elected office. He is a disgrace as an American. And he is not suited to his station in the US Senate.

If Democrats in the US Senate – as well as in general – do not seize this moment to make an example of Mr. Reid, then from this day forward let the Democrat Party be known as the toady to the Progressive Movement; the entirety of which is unworthy to lick the heel of Mr. Washington’s boot.

Seinfeld on Parenting?

EARimages

This one had my head spinning. I had to watch and listen twice! Now, I know, some may say this guy has issues of his own, but the audience was proof that he was on target.

Jerry Seinfeld was on the new Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon and I am sure his audience was not a bunch of old folks.

After a few minutes of standup comedy, Seinfeld sat down with Fallon and got into a conversation about parenting. Seinfeld stated that he was not in agreement with this “new style” of parenting and reminded the audience that when many of us were kids, our parents didn’t give a da@@ about a lot of things.

Seinfeld went on to say that our parents never made deals with us to eat our food, brush our teeth, and so on. Our parents didn’t have to ask us 147 times to go to bed, “get back into your bed,” “what did I tell you?” “did you brush your teeth,” “did you use water,” and so on and so on.

How many books do you read your children at night? How many hours of TV do they watch in their bedroom before going to bed? The inmates are running the asylum!

Look, I’ve had 4 children. Based on how different each was, they may as well have been born to 4 different sets of parents. My ex-wife and I had different parenting styles. (I am not picking on my ex-wife. Simply stating fact and using my own real-life example since I can’t use yours!)

I heard on a regular basis on how she couldn’t get them to eat. She couldn’t get them to go to sleep, clean their rooms, make their beds, do their homework.

On the other hand, when they were at my house, we all ate at the dinner table at the same time. We cleaned up together. Everyone was in bed at the assigned time. Beds were made and rooms cleaned every Saturday before they went outside. Sounds a little like a militant lifestyle? Well, so what?

Kids love consistency. Kids want to know things are the way they should be. They want to be able count on mommy and daddy and other adults to be there for them, to guide them and help them. Sometimes help is not in the form of, “it’s OK honey, you broke the TV while playing ball in the house, I am sure you didn’t mean it”…  (insert buzzer sound here) Wrong answer!

Life has consequences. When you are doing something you shouldn’t be doing like, drinking and driving, speeding in a residential zone, cheating on a test, or consistently showing up late for work, it’s not going to be all right. They all carry serious consequences… jail time, fines, failing a class, or getting fired.

The best time for your kids to fail and feel the consequences is at a young age while they are still with you. Parents discipline in a loving and caring way, not demeaning.

According to Dr. Robi Ludwig, Psychotherapist, there is a real backlash against these helicopter parenting strategies, described by Seinfeld, and practiced by millennial moms.

Helicopter parenting is when parents hang over the kids, never allowing them to feel bad about anything, fail, or make non-life threatening mistakes. These kids ultimately learn nothing about real life or how to interact in the real world.

Dr. Ludwig goes on to say, “certainly there is a generation of moms who waited a long time before they had kids. They’re working many hours. So due to guilt or just falling in love with motherhood, they’re creating this whole ritual” of a feel-good eating experience or a bedtime experience or whatever.

Many of the offspring of these helicopter parents and the kids of the “no score,” “no-grades” era are having real problems in today’s society and in the workplace.

When they encounter problems with authority at work many go into shutdown mode. Friends who own businesses have plenty of stories to tell about that generation. People who show up late… a lot! And use excuses like: traffic, couldn’t find a parking space, long line at Starbucks, I’m not a morning person, or talked to another parent too long when I dropped my kid off. Really?

In the past, I have had employees who got extremely upset with me because they weren’t paid for 40 hours even though they only worked 36. Let that sink in. Then there were those who came in at 8:35 or 8:40 when everyone else starts at 8:30. They went to lunch at 11:45ish come back at 1ish when lunch is 12 to 1, like everyone else. It was my experience that most of these people grew up in a very “open” parenting environment.

According to Dr. Ludwig these kids who were raised by a helicopter mom consistently say they are not so happy with the way the world worked out. The world does not actually revolve around them. Shocking!

Dr. Ludwig says it’s better for children not to think that everything is going to be easy because life is not easy. And in order to be successful in the world, you have to be prepared for reality. You have to believe in yourself. But you have to know things are not always going to go your way and learn how to strategize.

By not allowing children to achieve on their own, good or bad, I believe we are doing them a disservice. They need to see what working hard will get you and what working “kind of” hard gets you and what “not trying at all” gets you.

To Seinfeld’s point, our parents didn’t care if you were always happy, got everything you wanted, or faced hardships. These things built character and they taught us how to deal with them and work through them. Parents need to be there to guide and encourage, not do and shelter.

America, be parents, or be prepared for your kids to be lost!

 

Justice for Justina Pelletier

Lou Pelletier and wife

What is happening to the United States of America?  What is happening to our Republic?  I remember a famous quote made by Benjamin Franklin when asked by a citizen, “what kind of nation have you given us?” to which he replied, “a Republic, madam, if you can keep it!”.

Our Republic, founded on the ideals of liberty and justice for all, has become liberty and justice for the chosen few but peasant obedience for We the People.  The legislative branches of both state and federal government no longer listen to Justina Pelletier 1nor do they represent the Constitution or the very people they pledge to “SERVE!!!!!!”.  The executive branches at both levels pretty much do as they please, forget all the limits imposed by the Constitution, and don’t dare to mention all the promises they made to get elected in the first place.  The judicial branch, our system of justice has turned into the system of legalities that can be changed, bought, and ignored on the whim of any judge or politician.

For 12 months a teen girl has been held hostage in Boston Childrens Hospital, kept away from her parents, kept away from the doctor she was sent there to be attended to by, kept away from the doctor who originally diagnosed her illness and sent her to Boston to see this specialist so she can have better care.  Her name is Justina Pelletier.   Today she is being transferred to a different facility but her parents are still not allowed to attend to her.  This transfer is the equivalent of Bill Clinton’s “depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is”!!!!! Different building but controlled by the same people.  That isn’t “change you can believe in”!!!!!

Her medical condition has steadily gone downhill while at Boston General Hospital.  Her parents and their lawyers are under a gag order but, facing the eminent death of his daughter, he violated that order and has spoken out.  Just a side-bar, but why should these people not be free to speak about the situation?  What are the bureaucrats hiding?  Now the father could face jail time for contempt of court for speaking out in a desperate attempt to save his daughter’s life.

The parents are nearly broke from the expense of this, not to mention the mental despair and heartbreak they are experiencing.  How is it that a bureaucracy can do this to people without any recourse?  This morning the father was talking about the day one of the physicians came in to see Justina in a hospital room and a social worker came in and physically dragged him out of the room saying he had no right to see her.  He had only been treating her for something like 2 years!!!!

The governors of Massachusetts and Connecticut can put a stop to this.  So can the Attorneys General of either state, but they won’t.  No elected official anywhere will give these people the time of day when they are being essentially persecuted by a bureaucratic system that doesn’t care about the rights of those they have subjected to what I see as mental and financial torture, for no better reason than I can see but their own lust for power over WE the People.  The politicians once again stand behind the bureaucrats instead of We the People.

How often do you now read or hear about local police departments killing citizens either “by mistake” or from just downright Gestapo and SS tactics from Nazi Germany.  Rarely is there any punishment meted out to the police who commit these Nazi style terror attacks.  Just like they treated the Jews isn’t it, except it isn’t European Jews this time!!!!!  Now we have medical people performing essentially the same tasks.  Cops can arrest a person for asking a question they don’t like and hospitals can just take control of children without justification, to do as they wish medically; including experimenting, ala Dr. Mengele.

What are the people in that hospital doing to that girl that has to be hidden from the parents and doctors who have treated her, and her sister, for years?  What are they doing that makes a court ordered “gag order” necessary?????  Why does a judge stand on the side of tyranny, forbidding a person the right to speak on any issue, especially one concerningJustina-Pelletier 2 their own child?  Why are these blatant violations of the rights of citizens ignored by officials elected on the promise to uphold the rights of WE the People?????  More of the “your children belong to the state” mentality?????

What they are doing to this family is WRONG!!!!! If the bureaucratic system can do this to them what is to keep them from doing it to you?????  All of us need to stand up for this family, and in so doing we stand up for our way of life and our own liberty.  If someone had snatched this girl from her front yard, even if doing so “for her own good”, it would be called kidnapping and would be a federal offense resulting in many years in prison.  But because it is an entity backed by the political system it is just fine and dandy?????

The situation with the Pelletier family isn’t a aberration, it is all too common today.  They are being subjected to Nazi style treatment from a government that is supposed to be based on the rights of the citizens.  WE come first not the government or their bureaucratic drones.  Well, that is how it is supposed to be but how often do we see that today?  Those in control are spitting in the eye of the nation, and spitting on the Constitution and the God given rights guaranteed by said document.

Contact the governors, and Attorneys General of these states and let them know that you will not be silenced.  We the People need to fight this fight with the Pelletier family.  They can’t do it alone and neither can you or I.  We are in this together, all of us.  Every time a citizen is treated as the Pelletier family is treated We the People need to rise up and let them know we will not tolerate it.

We have bowed to the pressure of bureaucratic tyrants long enough.  This is one way to force them to bow to the real power in the nation, We the People.  WE either exercise that power or we forfeit it to the tyrants.  The choice is yours!!!!!

If you can help the Pelletier family financially, please go to this link:    www.freejustina.com

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

 

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

February 19, 2014

 

 

John Boehner’s Incremental Amnesty Surrender Strategy

130319-three-amigos-boehner-jeb-bush-rove5Mathematicians have long contended that if you give a million monkeys a million typewriters and an infinite amount of time, eventually the simians will produce the King James Bible. Maybe so, but why inflict such a difficult challenge from the get–go? It could severely damage monkey morale.

I suggest assigning monkey scribes the task of producing the House GOP leadership’s “Immigration Reform Principles.” They should be able to knock that out in about a day — even with frequent banana breaks — and if they don’t replicate the document exactly, what the monkeys produce can’t be much more incoherent than the steaming pile the House leadership authored.

The document begins by stating: “Our nation’s immigration system is broken and our laws are not being enforced.” Naturally, their solution is to jettison the law. I’ve already outlined why amnesty is a bad idea for Republicans in an earlier column located here. So I won’t belabor that point, but what I would like to do is analyze Boehner & Company’s strategy for any evidence that it will accomplish their misguided goals.

Based on statements to the media and the “Principles,” Speaker Boehner’s concerns focus on three main areas:

  1. Negative media coverage of Republican opposition to amnesty
  2. Pressure from farmers and corporate America who want cheap imported labor that considers insultingly low wages a big raise from what they got back home
  3. Overwhelming Hispanic voting support for Democrat politicians

What Boehner does not appear to be worried about is the loss of support from the GOP’s conservative base after amnesty is passed.

So to achieve his goal of improving the Republican image, getting lobbyists off his back and showing Hispanics that he’s a verdadero amigo, Boehner wants a “step–by–step” process that constitutes an incremental surrender to Democrats and other tribal advocates. Boehner’s document begins with a list of bromides the House GOP leadership uses in an attempt to pull the wool over conservative’s eyes: “zero tolerance,” “visa tracking,” “employment verification” and I think an end to chain migration, but the “Principles” are so vague on that point it’s hard to tell.

I guess we will have to await clarification from the monkey’s version of the document.

But the linchpin of the “principles” is the statement: “There will be no special path to citizenship for individuals who broke our nation’s immigration laws – that would be unfair to those immigrants who have played by the rules and harmful to promoting the rule of law.”

Instead Boehner unveils a grand public relations coup: Republicans propose to let illegals stay in the U.S. as Untermenschen. Whoops, sorry, I mean as legal residents but not citizens. They must pass background checks, pay “back taxes,” speak English (unless stopped by a policeman), give up any and all “rights” to welfare and be able to read the Constitution in Chinese. (No wait, that’s only if they want to vote in Alabama.)

This is like a land owner telling a trespasser who’s been on squatting in the house for years that he and his family can stay in the house he doesn’t own, but you won’t give him a clear title.

As they say in The Game of Thrones: You know nothing John Boehner.

After decades of being media whipping boys, elected Republicans not only don’t know how to advance an argument, they don’t even know how to avoid a public relations disaster.

Boehner — not the monkeys — will have recreated Exodus with Hispanics in the role of the Israelites. And just like the Jews trapped in Egypt, they can work all they want and the generous GOP will even give them straw for the bricks, but they will never have the vote or the dole.

And God help us, Chuck Schumer gets to be Moses.

As soon as the ink is dry on their 2nd class citizen documents, the formerly illegal are going to be demonstrating against Republican Apartheid. It’s going to be the story of the decade for the Mainstream Media and John Boehner gave it to them on a platter.

Every Election Day the 2nd classers will be demonstrating outside Republican polling places, yelling and brandishing signs for concerned network correspondents.

Queremos que el voto y lo queremos ahora! (We want the vote and we want it now!)

Estoy soñando con el voto (I’m dreaming of the vote)

Segunda clase es la ciudadanía apartheid (2nd class citizenship is apartheid)

Dicen a la familia a venir del Norte (Tell the family to come North)

Then there are the human tragedy stories that bring home the cost of Republican heartlessness courtesy of NPR. The grownup anchor babies who have to tell madre y padre they can’t go to the polls today and vote like they did in Venezuela under Chavez, because John Boehner says they’re less than citizens.

And don’t forget the groundskeeper who lost a foot to a runaway weed beater while working on some one percenter’s estate. He and his family are living in a Kelvinator box under a bridge abutment because he can’t work and he can’t collect U.S. disability checks thanks to Ebenezer Boehner. With tears in his eyes, Piers Morgan will tell viewers, “He was good enough to mow the lawn, but he’s not good enough to cash a disability check.”

That’s the kind of publicity that will have younger citizens leaving their Chipotle burritos uneaten as they run to the nearest party headquarters so they can register to vote Republican and grind the brown man down.

My prediction is six months max and Boehner will be throwing himself on Nelson Mandela’s grave and begging Obama to sign his Full Amnesty with Added Reparations bill.

Why endure the agony of an incremental amnesty? You can’t be half pregnant and you can’t pass a half citizenship bill. Boehner needs to either surrender now and line up a nice lobby job or finally start listening to his own disenfranchised conservative base.

To Whom Do You Want To Entrust Your Well-being?

By Michael Lewinski 02/05/14

I believe it was Sam Adams who said in essence at the close of the 18th century that the American war was over, but the revolution was just beginning and was in its earliest phase. At the beginning of the 21st century, we find ourselves at a juncture in history where the final act in the American Revolution could finally be playing out in the struggle between those who believe individuals should control their destiny and those who believe it should be determined by the state.

During the Revolutionary War it is estimated that one third of the population supported the revolution, one third supported the crown, and one third was disengaged. Americans have always been divided on important issues. It is no different today, with Conservative patriots representing the revolutionary spirit and Progressives promoting the Tory Statists perspective, while large numbers of Americans are disengaged regarding the struggle for America’s soul.

President Obama, when first elected, promised to fundamentally transform America. In pursuit of his Progressive vision for America, we are learning that the autonomy of the individual and the role of civil society are being diminished while the authority and control of the State grows evermore intrusive into the lives of is citizens.

An example of this was provided by Presidential adviser, John Podesta. In a discussion of the Common Core standards he asked, “Why should some towns and cities and states have no standards or low standards and others have extremely high standards when the children belong to all of us and would move [to different states in their educational lives]?”

Have you got that? Our children don’t belong to themselves or their parents. They are available to serve the interests of the collective. This is the whole thrust of the Progressive Tories’ vision for America.

Which America are you striving to leave for the benefit of your children? With whom do you stand? Which is your cup of tea? The Tories, the Patriots, or one of the many who can’t look beyond today and could care less?

Obama’s speech: translated so useful idiots and low information voters can understand it

emptychairredoLast night was without a doubt the most vile, disgusting, and terrifying State of the Union speech in our Nation’s history. I do not mince words here. What the people that are paying attention witnessed last night was the first American dictator.

Comrade Obama’s speech was exactly what you would expect to hear from a Socialist third world leader. He did what all dictators do; he refused to take responsibility for his failures. He promised to rule without Congressional approval and he mandated, dictated, and cut off all debate; and he did it all in a way that most didn’t even realize.

You see, Communism and Socialism if implemented correctly can sound very appealing to an uneducated ear. His speech had a populist tone to it and he made it sound like he is a person for all the people. The truth is he is anything but. The most disheartening part of his speech was the fact that both parties actually clapped and applauded as the imperialist in chief boldly and bluntly told the American how he planned to strip away our freedoms!

Comrade Obama’s speech last night was less exciting than a deep sea fishing tournament featuring the old lesbian water polo and synchronized swimming team. It was chock full of lies and revealed just how far our great nation has fallen.

Let’s translate a few of his more radical and reckless statements:

First on the list is the blame game.

He said, “Our differences shut down government” Wrong, he and his cronies shut down the government and then blamed it on Republicans. The liar in chief even admitted that he wanted the shutdown to be “as painful for Americans as possible.”

“The debate is settled, climate change is real.”

So because the weatherman in chief must have consulted with God and Mother Nature herself we are to just take his word and believe him? Climate change is nothing but hot air. Some of the hottest days on record were in the 1910’s 1920’s and 1930’s according to the World Almanac. This was also at the very start of the Industrial Revolution. Hardly enough time to affect the weather.

“Whenever and wherever I can take steps without legislation I will”

What happened to checks and balances? They were put in so we could avoid having an imperial dictator like Obama. What about the enumerated powers of the United States Constitution? Why aren’t the Republicrats standing up and stopping this nonsense? Who has the intestinal fortitude to stand up to him?

“Congress needs to get on board.”
This was a veiled threat aimed at weak kneed Senate Republicans. Translation: “if Republicans don’t pass my Socialist agenda I will just pass whatever I want through executive orders.” This statement was designed for cover for Democrats who then can run around in 2014 saying Republicans blocked Obama’s policies.

Democrats are always blaming Republicans and calling us obstructionists for not going along with destroying the country with their leftist, reckless, agenda. They like to label us the party of no. Well if that means we are doing everything we can to stop Obama’s goal of fundamentally transforming America than your damn right we are the party of no.

When it comes to blocking legislation that brings us further and further along the path of Socialism we need to be the party of Hell NO! When Democrats try to pass legislation to remove our ability to protect ourselves we need to remain the party of Hell No! When they try to spy on us, target us, and deny us our freedom of speech we need to be the party of Hell No!

Americans have fought and died in foreign wars against the same kind of dictators that we now find in our beloved White House. We must protect this country from all enemies both foreign and domestic. The time may come when in order for us to survive as free people we will have to put a stop to this administration and this president.

I am not suggesting anything here I am simply stating that as Americans we are not going to live under bondage and slavery. This is why it is so vitally important that we win in 2014 and in 2016. We need to stay focused, vigilant, and involved. We need to tell anyone who will listen and show them examples of how this administration is limiting our freedoms. As Thomas Jefferson said, “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

Suggested by the author:

How gun free zones and liberal policies contribute to mass shootings

Barack Obama, liberal policies fan the flames of racism against White America

2013 was one big 404 error

Obama’s DHS: Drones, Hollow Points, and Secrecy

A hapless journey’s end

The Unbridled Hate of Hate Speech Laws

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” This quote, often attributed to Voltaire, is at the heart of our First Amendment right to free speech, at least where the authority of our government is concerned. A free society, and, in fact, a free people, must be able to speak freely in order to challenge power, ideological aggression or the coercion of faction. To limit or eliminate this fundamental right; this essential check to balance, is to limit or eliminate freedom in its most cursory form. Put succinctly, limiting free speech rights is tyranny in its most basic form.

It is for this reason that the Progressive Movement’s continued assault on free speech rights – both here in the United States and throughout the free world – is of such immediate concern.

On January 16, 2014, TheHill.com reported:

“Thirteen House Democrats have proposed legislation that would require the government to study hate speech on the Internet, mobile phones and television and radio.

“The bill, sponsored by Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (P-NY) and 12 other House Democrats, would look at how those media are used to ‘advocate and encourage violent acts and the commission of crimes of hate.’

“The Hate Crime Reporting Act, HR3878, is meant to update a 20-year-old study from the National Telecommunications & Information Administration. That study, delivered to Congress in 1993, looked at hate speech on radio, TV and computer bulletin boards.

“Jeffries says the NTIA needs to see how hate speech is transmitted over the various new modes of communication that have sprung up over the last two decades…

“‘This legislation will mandate a comprehensive analysis of criminal and hateful activity on the Internet that occurs outside of the zone of the First Amendment protection.’”

The other co-sponsors of this bill include: Reps. Gregory Meeks, (D-NY); Ann Kuster, (D-NH); Michael Honda, (P-CA); Judy Chu, (P-CA); Bobby Rush, (P-IL); Carolyn Maloney, (P-NY); Pedro Pierluisi, (D-PR-At Large); Tony Cardenas, (D-CA-29); Mark Pocan, (P-WI); Eleanor Holmes-Norton, (P-DC-At Large); and Ron Kind, (D-WI).

Again, the entirety of the issue of “hate speech” is predicated on who is defining “hate.” Put another way, one person’s “hate” is inevitably another person’s “free speech.” Cases in point: Nazi, Soviet and Communist Chinese censorship.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (Emphasis added)

So, the desires of the sponsors of HR3878 – and, in fact, the whole of the Progressive Movement – are juxtaposed to the guarantees of the United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights. If the US Constitution guarantees that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech,” then no speech – no matter how offensive, societally unacceptable or politically incorrect – can be abridged, sans speech that directly incites violence toward another or which directly calls for the violent overthrow of the United States government.

Therefore, assurances made by the sponsors of HR3878, that only “criminal and hateful” speech occurring “outside of the zone of the First Amendment protection,” are presented disingenuously at the proposal’s genesis because no speech can be considered – short of speech that directly incites violence toward another or which directly calls for the violent overthrow of the United States government – “criminal” and/or “hateful” by constitutional measure.

Understanding this as fact, it is not out of line to charge that the sponsors of HR3878 are either, constitutionally illiterate, deceptive in their intentions or both. Only the constitutionally illiterate would fail to understand the First Amendment free speech clause was meant to prevent factions from silencing dissenters of the majority, thus executing one of the pinnacle purposes of the Charters of Freedom: protecting the rights of the minority. Conversely, if the sponsors of this piece of legislation do understand the unconstitutionality of their proposal, they advance the measure for nefarious reasons; reasons antithetical to true freedom and liberty for all.

But this shouldn’t surprise anyone who has been paying attention to Progressive Movement from its inception.

In a recent analysis entitled, It’s Not a War on Christmas, I make the observation:

“If the elitist oligarchs of the modern day Progressive Movement are to assume complete control; complete authority to execute social justice, economic justice and redefine the many ideas of equality, then they must dispense with the idea that they – themselves – are not at the top of the power pyramid; at the top of the intellectual ‘food chain’…

“By playing on emotions – the most potent tool in the Progressive arsenal – and painting those who hold true to their…beliefs as being “un-inclusive,” “intolerant of others,” and “insensitive”…, Progressives aim to ‘shame’ the truly tolerant and inclusive… By shaming or making the majority of Americans ‘uncomfortable’ for the accusations of intolerance and insensitivity, Progressives aim to force an abdication of traditional American values and beliefs. In doing so they inch closer to their goal of expunging the notion of Natural Law from the societal and then governmental lexicons, successfully achieving elitist, oligarchic and totalitarian control over the defining of rights, the common good, and the role of government in our lives.”

This reality applies to the false-flag concept of “hate speech” laws. It can also be applied to the totalitarian “double-jeopardy” of “hate crime” laws as well. To the latter, a crime is either a crime or it is not a crime. By creating a more severe punishment for a “class,” “demographic” or “preferred faction” of people, Progressives seek to artificially elevate the severity of a crime only when that crime is committed against the few, while citing the crime as less severe when committed against all others.

In the end, it is the Progressive Movement’s modus operandi to manipulate the citizenries of free nations through emotion and “feel good” sounding pieces of legislation, all sold to us as a bill of goods addressing the “common good.” In reality, these false-flag, emotion-based pieces of legislation – these “social justice” initiatives – serve to usurp the freedoms guaranteed to us in the US Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

They are exercises in soft tyranny meant to create power for – and deliver power to – the elitist oligarchs and the tyrannical.

They serve to pollute the airs of freedom; to smother Lady Liberty; and to, eventually, oppress the masses into subjugation.

Of course, to Progressives, those are words of “hate.”

Amnesty: The Next GOP Leadership Betrayal

House GOP leadership prepares to negotiate amnesty with Democrats.

House GOP leadership prepares to negotiate amnesty with Democrats.

House Republican leadership is preparing to betray the base. Again. To illustrate the magnitude of the sellout I was going to use a hypothetical analogy with Democrats and their base. Initially I was going to posit that Sen. Tim Kaine (D–Secular) had changed his mind about abortion.

For years Kaine has said that although he’s personally opposed to abortion, he is not willing to impose his beliefs on a ‘woman’s right to choose.’ Essentially confessing that his Catholic faith is not strong enough to get in the way of his political ambitions. (In his last campaign he became even more weaselly, saying he didn’t want to stand in the way of a woman exercising her “constitutional choices,” unless the choice involved a handgun.)

In my hypothetical Kaine would announce he had decided that what the Catholic Church teaches and the Bible says is the truth and he will no longer support any abortion unless it is to save the life of the mother. Kaine would also declare that he will no longer vote for any taxpayer dollars to be given to Planned Parenthood since both his beliefs and opinion polls show Americans don’t think tax money should pay for or help support abortion facilities.

It’s a great analogy but it has one problem: No one would believe it. The analogy is too fantastic for even temporary suspension of disbelief. Brent Bozell, chairman of ForAmerica, put it nicely this week: “So what’s the difference between Boehner and Pelosi and McConnell and Reid? Answer: The Democratic leadership honors its promises. Republican leaders have abandoned theirs.”

This House GOP leadership betrayal is passage of an amnesty bill, probably before the November election. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R–Sellout) says leadership supports an amnesty bill for 12 million illegals that includes tighter border enforcement as a sop to conservatives.

Boehner pays far more attention to agitation from people who shouldn’t be in the country than they do to conservative citizens. And unprincipled businessmen who want a steady supply of imported serfs are far more influential than mere voters.

National Republicans are forever pursuing the ‘independent voter’ at the expense of the base. Democrats on the other hand solidify their base first and then move to the independents. You think that might be why they win elections?

Besides the betrayal of the base, which is bad enough, what political goal do these masterminds in House leadership (to borrow an adjective from Mark Levin) think they are going to accomplish?

Boehner has picked an issue that was a failure the last time Republicans supported it. Ronald Reagan signed a one–time–only–amnesty–that–will­–also–seal–the–border–tighter–than–a–teenage–miniskirt.

The results of that amnesty were fourfold:

  1. Granted citizenship to people who came and stayed illegally
  2. Produced millions of new votes for Democrats
  3. Legalized low–skill labor for employers & reduced wage rates for citizens
  4. Attracted another 12 million illegals who want their amnesty now.

Does Boehner expect amnesty to attract Hispanic voters? California Hispanics now make up the largest ethic group in the state as a result of amnesty and Democrat failure to seal the border. There is not one Republican statewide official. California is a GOP desert as Hispanics proved singularly ungrateful.

Does Boehner think amnesty will improve the party’s image? A Gallup poll lists a total of 3 percent of the populace ranking immigration “reform” as a top priority and I’m guessing all their names began with Jesus.

Does Boehner think amnesty will mean more contributions from big business? Possible and it may last a cycle or two, but once the amnestied voters gravitate to Democrats, Republicans will start losing. And the Business Roundtable doesn’t back or finance losers for long.

Immigration polling, which has evidently frightened the GOP leadership, is dishonest. Respondents are offered unrealistic or nebulous choices. For instance the Public Religion Research Institute proclaims, “Support for a path to citizenship has remained unchanged…an identical number (63%) supported a path to citizenship for immigrants currently living in the United States illegally.”

Yet their poll offers three choices that are false or too general to be useful: “become citizens provided they meet certain requirements,” “become permanent legal residents but not citizens” or “Identify and deport them.”

“Certain requirements” is not defined and therefore is useless in determining public policy. Poll respondents can interpret “certain requirements” in a number of ways ranging from “learn to speak English like Tom Brokaw” to “stand in a long line for an autographed photo of Obama.”

“Legal residents but not citizens” is an outcome that creates a permanent helot class that won’t survive the first Democrat Congress. And no sane conservative has ever advocated mass deportation. We believe they got here under their own power and they can leave the same way.

I have yet to see a poll that asks a question that offers a conservative choice. For instance: Do you support a step–by–step approach to the immigration problem that begins by removing the economic incentive for illegal immigration thru a law that makes it a criminal offense for employers to hire illegal aliens?

If illegals can’t work and they can’t collect welfare or rebates from the IRS then the invasion will begin to reverse. Presto the “immigration problem” solves itself! Sure the bill won’t pass the current Senate, but so what? It offers a conservative alternative to the amnesty now crowd and it preserves the rule of law, but that pales in comparison to Boehner’s dreams of campaign contributions from the Business Roundtable.

Before elected officials — Republicans again — got cold feet in Prince William County, illegals were fleeing after an anti–illegal enforcement act was passed. The county saved millions as they fled to nearby “sanctuary” cities and states. The same can happen in a nation that takes its own immigration laws seriously.

Unfortunately that is not this nation and it’s not this Republican Party.

THE 1600 PENNSYLVANIA STREET GANG

ObamaBully

Many of you know that I grew up in Boston. No, not outside of Boston. Not North of Boston. Not 2 hours from Boston. But in Boston proper. I grew up in the days when the Mafia acted in plain view. They were powerful and didn’t care who saw what. They were above the law and knew it. They owned the law and the people were afraid, some in fear of their lives, some in fear of their welfare.

I’ve been told the Chicago Mafia is much more ruthless and powerful. I can’t imagine. What I grew up with was pretty bad.

You see, they could walk up to a busy intersection, shoot someone in the head, watch him fall to the ground, pop him a few more times for good measure, and through all this, no one would “see anything.” When the police arrived, eventually, and all the local proprietors were questioned, no one ever saw anything, ever! They knew something unspeakable would happen to them and no one could help them.

This is how the American people are feeling about the Obama administration. This “Gang” never stops. This Gang is above the law, with President Obama acting as “Don” or leader and Attorney General Eric Holder as his “Capo” or captain. This Gang has so crippled the people of this country that we have gone from a nation to fear and respect to a nation to be ridiculed and laughed at.

The Gang has ruined our relationships oversees. Nobel peace prize winner and freedom fighter Lech Wałęsa recently said that Mr. Obama has ruined the credibility of America.

Americans should have seen this coming as far back as the 2009 elections. The New Black Panther group intimidates white voters ON VIDEO. Don Obama’s ultimate law officer, Capo Holder, does NOTHING! DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams quit his job because he was basically told to back off. When he wouldn’t let it go, the Gang made it very uncomfortable for him.

Election fraud is not investigated. Tens of thousands of dead and illegals voted in the last presidential election and Capo Holder did NOTHING!

Many states have legalized marijuana, however, it is still against federal law and Capo Holder does NOTHING! The chief law enforcement officer of the United States, Capo Holder, won’t bother the states as long as they adhere to a few guidelines, one being it can’t be sold to minors. Because that law works so well on cigarettes and booze. No minors ever get those. (Yes, that’s sarcasm!)

The Gang won’t enforce a law banning same sex couples from receiving veterans benefits. Capo Holder said that even though it’s the law “Decisions by the Executive branch not to enforce federal laws are appropriately rare,” (though not with this Gang), this one makes sense because the law will eventually change. (Is that how our legal system works now?)

The Gang won’t prosecute Goldman Sachs or its employees for financial fraud. Capo Holder said, “We conducted an exhaustive investigation of allegations brought to light by a Senate panel investigating the financial crisis. And feel there is not enough to prosecute.” Huh? Every other agency but the Gang has found evidence of fraud.

Family members of Don Obama have somehow eluded immigration laws and the DOJ because the Gang has protected them. His uncle in Boston has owned a liquor store, been “technically” deported several times, failed to show up for deportation hearings several times, and been arrested for drunk driving. Even after all that, he is still running around free in this country! His aunt is fleecing welfare and wants more AND she is not even an American citizen.

Fast and furious caused the death of a Border Patrol Officer (at least one officer that we know of, and countless other people) and the Gang refuses to allow the DOJ to investigate.

Meanwhile, the Gang is actively pursuing at least one law-abiding German immigrant family to deport them back to their country of origin. Why? Their visa expired and their reason for seeking political asylum isn’t good enough for the Gang. A judge granted their asylum petition, but Capo Holder’s DOJ takes time out of their busy schedule to overturn the ruling and is deporting them anyway.

Yet the Gang refuses to pursue more pressing issues of national security, immigration, and voting laws and simply enforce the other laws on the books? What does this family have that the others don’t have? It’s actually what they don’t have… a connection to the Gang.

I could write so much more on this. Don Obama issues laws AKA Executive Orders. For someone who was supposed to be a constitutional professor he has no clue as to how a “bill becomes a law” and the checks and balances called out in the Constitution.

He obviously doesn’t understand that the presidency and a dictatorship are NOT one in the same.

People, PAY ATTENTION, the REAL MOB is working the White House. You have to play by their rules. Laws are only for you to follow and them to change on a whim. And should you happen to get in the way… there’s always the IRS.

Wake up America… or you’re going to lose it!

The Republican Party: When the Body Guard joins the Bully!!!!!

Eagle- America Deserves Better

Rush LimbaughI was listening to Rush Limbaugh (Wednesday Dec. 17, 2013) and he had a very interesting call from a woman relating to a survey Limbaugh discussed about men not arguing with or disagreeing with their wife.  The survey found that when men never challenged the wife’s decisions the marriage got worse instead of getting better as is the common belief.  The caller made the point that men who never stand up for their opinions and beliefs don’t get respect from women.

I am not trying to quote her but rather describe the impression conveyed to me as a listener.  She made a point that I have made many times.  I don’t know who she was or where she was from but she sounded like a plain everyday American citizen.  The interesting thing is that she applied this survey to politics in a way that is practical and makes sense, and goes beyond gender in the analogy.  She said that women respect Democrats, even when they don’t agree with them or like them, because they stand up for what they believe in, right or wrong.

I have written many times about my attitude towards Democrats and Republicans.  I have a respect for Dingy Harry Reid that Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, John McCain, or any other “moderate” Republican, will NEVER see come their way.  I despise everything Reid stands for, and would like to see him go to prison for the rest of his life for the Demomcrat Logocorruption and the violations of the rights of We the People, and the Constitution.  He has continually ignored the very Constitution he swore an oath to protect and defend.  But Reid is fighting for the tyranny he believes in, and regardless of whether I like his beliefs or not, I respect him for being willing to fight.

Okay, so now you know I don’t care much for Harry Reid.  The caller, like me, has no respect for the Republican Party because they are seen as wimps, and can never be depended on to stand up for us against bullies.  The constant “bi-partisanship” is not politically attractive to the average woman, or man, in America.  No woman wants to be bullied by a man, but no woman wants a man who will let others bully her either, or for that matter let her bully him.  Same goes for citizens and politicians.

The TEA Party, as defiled as it is, has a 67% following among American citizens.  We the People, the 67% TEA Party We the People, swept Republicans to record setting election results in 2010.  This woman caller seemed to be under the TEA Party banner philosophically.   The “body guards” (Republican Party) we hired in 2010, the ones who told us they would protect us cower in the corner while the Democrat bullies pound us into submission.  What good are they?  And now they are joining in with the bullies to pummel the Constitution and We the People.

Sarah Palin identifies with both men and women because she is rightly seen as one of us.  She is a fighter, a combatant in the war being waged for liberty.  When I see a “Joan of Arc” being attacked by those I send to defend her I am not Sarah Palininclined to ever trust them again.  I voted for Republicans in 2008, 2010, and 2012.  Now I hear them call me the enemy and a roadblock to “progress”!!!!!   The body guard has decided to join in with the bully and hope they get a small piece of the spoils.  And they can be sure they won’t be attacked by the bullies if they cower and passively go along with the bullying.

There are those men and women who stand up for us in the realm of politics.  Men and women in Congress like Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Louie Gohmert, Jim Bridenstine, Michelle Bachman, Marsha Blackburn, etc. ARE standing up for the Constitution and freedom of choice of citizens.  Not only are these “dedicated body guards”  seriously outnumbered by Democrat bullies, they now find themselves being stabbed in the back by those other “body guards” who promised to stand with them against the bullies.  The average American citizen wants security but not the kind of “security” we are getting out of those we send to “administer” our government functions.  We the People don’t want to be protected from ourselves.  We want to be protected from the bullies running a tyrannical government.

I don’t pay a bodyguard to join the bully and help him terrorize me.  We the People “hired” the Republican Party in 2010 to protect us from the bullies in the Democrat Party.  What do we see in 2013?? The Republican Party establishment, led by Karl Rove, Grover Norquist, Reince Preibus, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, John Cornyn, John McCain, Lindseyrepublican logo Graham, Peter King, etc. ad nauseum; attack those who are doing what we pay them to do.  These “RINO” Republicans have joined in on the bullying we “hired” them to stop.

Ted Cruz and those who stand with him are doing the job we paid them to do.  This caller to Limbaugh made the point that those standing against the Democrat bullies are the ones she admires and respects.  I was able to identify with her about three sentences into her call.  She first talked about the personal relationship a woman wants with a man and then made a political comparison.  I am not a woman but I understand basic human nature.  I don’t want “friends” who will turn on me when I need them and I don’t want political “representatives” who will turn on me because that is the easiest and most profitable path for them.

People who give me the “if you don’t blindly vote for Republicans you are voting for Democrats” line are wasting their Don't Tread On Metime.  I will vote only for those who will be the bodyguard I pay them to be and no one else, regardless of party.  The days of me voting for Republicans because they aren’t Democrats are over.  I really don’t see any benefit to vote for them.  When they aren’t cowering in fear they are joining in on the bullying, and that isn’t something I am going to vote to continue!!!!!

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

January 5, 2014

 

Re-Writing Benghazi for Political Purposes

In typical Progressive fashion, the New York Times set itself to re-writing the events of al Qaeda’s 2012 attack on the US embassy compound in Benghazi, Libya; an attack that took the lives of four Americans, including a US ambassador. At any other point in the history of our country, the assassination of a US ambassador by a foe that launched an attack against American citizens the magnitude of September 11, 2001, would be greeted with a united front; embraced as tantamount to an act of war. But the United States has been co-opted by the Progressive Movement and when one of their own is in the White House – or when one of their own is positioning for the White House – history is subject to revision.

Incredibly, the New York Times – long understood by “the aware” to have ceased being a provider of truth and fact, in deference to position and ideology – has issued a “report” that not only flies in the face of the facts (facts acknowledged not only by State Department officials intimate with the events, but by factious elements of al Qaeda in Libya) but go well beyond any semblance of credibility in its conclusions:

“The investigation by The Times shows that …Benghazi was not infiltrated by Al Qaeda, but nonetheless contained grave local threats to American interests. The attack does not appear to have been meticulously planned, but neither was it spontaneous or without warning signs.

“The violence, though, also had spontaneous elements. Anger at the video motivated the initial attack. Dozens of people joined in, some of them provoked by the video and others responding to fast-spreading false rumors that guards inside the American compound had shot Libyan protesters. Looters and arsonists, without any sign of a plan, were the ones who ravaged the compound after the initial attack, according to more than a dozen Libyan witnesses…”

This accounting completely disregards many facts that congressional hearings have brought forth from State Department and CIA operatives knowledgeable on the events of September 11, 2012. It also defies testimony by those with infinitely more knowledge on military capabilities than a lone researcher at the New York Times, including elected intelligence committee members from both sides of the political divide:

“‘I dispute that, and the intelligence community, to a large volume, disputes that,’ Michigan GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, told FOX News Sunday.  He also repeatedly said the story was ‘not accurate.’

“Rogers was joined on the show by California Democrat Rep. Adam Schiff, who said, ‘intelligence indicates Al Qaeda was involved.’”

That said, the efforts by New York Times researcher David D. Kirkpatrick are not centered in confronting the facts of the events of Benghazi, they are focused on changing the narrative ahead of the 2016 General Election.

It cannot be denied that then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton – now the Progressive front-runner for the Democrat nomination for president two years out from the 2016 General Election – was considerably marginalized by not only ineffective stewardship of the embassy compound in Benghazi in the days prior to the attack, but by the almost non-existent  response during the attack and the incredibly  inept response to the slaughter when called on the carpet by those elected to represent the people. This “triple whammy,” if left “un-spun,” would cripple the candidacy of even the most connected of Progressives – even with the support of a favorable mainstream media.

Enter the New York Times and David D. Kirkpatrick. Devoted sycophants to the Progressive cause, they have embarked on the rejuvenation of Ms. Clinton’s political reputation by attempting to re-write the facts of the event, already proven, in an effort to move her out of the ring of responsibility; in an effort to remove the stain of culpability and responsibility from the fabric of her candidacy. Sadly, even those in the mainstream media who exist on the Right side of the political divide, are tunnel-visioned in their focus; focused on the report and the reports conclusions rather than the motives behind the creation of the report – a work of fiction in its conclusions.

If the establishment Right – both inside the beltway and in the mainstream media, along with the Conservatives in the new media, fail to spotlight this blatant attempt to re-write history; fail to spotlight and explain the motives behind this manipulation of the truth, then we, as a nation, will have fallen – once again – for the Progressive tactic of re-definition of words, facts and events, in their quest to advance the Progressive agenda – and agents who would advance that agenda – into the accepted American lexicon.

The fact of the matter – and this cannot be denied when the facts are acknowledged and accepted – is this: Ms. Clinton failed to answer the “emergency 3am phone call” and because of that people died and an act of war against the United States by our global foe – al Qaeda and the radical Islamists who fuel the movement – was executed. In Ms. Clinton’s failure to act as an adequate steward of the US State Department, and in her refusal to resign for President Obama’s completely disingenuous excuse for the catalyst for the attacks – an excuse that Mr. Kirkpatrick and the New York Times have advanced – she has exposed herself as just another Progressive political minion who will do anything and say anything to gain power; who will lie, cheat, steal and deceive to advance the Progressive cause.

But then, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

When will GLAAD Criticize Islam like They Do Phil Robertson?

Phil Robertson

Why is it that the Democrat Party, Republican Party, the media, homosexual groups like GLAAD, pro-abortion groups, and all other liberals who spout vile things about the TEA Party and Christians never have one word of criticism about Islam?????   Phil RobertsonA Christian can’t decline to bake a cake without national outrage but homosexuals being hanged for “aberrant sexual behavior” in Moslem nations bring no response.   If I called a homosexual any “defamatory name or term” such as “teabagger” I would immediately be inundated with the harshest of criticism but Moslems glue a man’s private parts closed and fill him with food and water until he is about to explode then hangs this same person and not a word is heard from the left wing homosexual crowd.

Phil Robertson expresses his views that homosexuality is a sin, and according to the Holy Bible they won’t go to heaven, but that he bears them no malice if that is how they wish to live their lives.  He is immediately pounced on by the twerps at GLAAD and every other Christian hating group under the sun.  Robertson is “suspended indefinitely” for his transgression.  I hear Moslems regularly calling for the murder of homosexuals, and actually see pictures of homosexuals who have been hanged or beheaded for homosexual activities.  I’m sorry GLAAD; I don’t recall your outrage at the “intolerance” of Moslems!!  I don’t recall a national outrage at this or the barbaric murder of Christians by Moslems in foreign nations.  Cat got your tongue?????  Where is the homosexual lobby outrage over Alec Baldwin and his continued verbal abuse of “faggot” reporters?????  Continuous homosexual slurs from Baldwin and not a peep out of those so outraged by Robertson’s innocuous comment.

Moslems hate America for its acceptance of pornography yet I never hear any liberals call them closed minded bigots.  Christians and Moslems both disapprove of the immodest way American women often dress yet it is the Christians who are taken to task and called names by liberals.  Why don’t these same liberals call Moslems closed minded prudish bigots for demanding women wear a burkha?????  Nudity and sex in movies and on television are just as unacceptable to Moslems as Christians, yet Moslems are not called “intolerant”.  I guess the difference is that Christians allow othershanging homosexuals4 to live their lives as they see fit. Moslems kill those same people.  Who is it that is intolerant again????? Maybe GLAAD should change their organization name to COWARDS!!!!!

And what about the “war on women”, allegedly being waged by conservatives??  Moslems either hang or stone a woman to death for adultery or the heinous crime of being raped.  Often it is a case of gang rape and when they are done, these savages murder the woman for “allowing herself to be defiled”.  And what about the genital mutilation of girls as young as six years old, or old men “marrying” an 8 year old and sexually abusing her to the point of her death?  When is the National Organization for Women going to denounce these practices????? Oh, sorry, they are busy denigrating Sarah Palin who is also being denigrated by the Democrat Party, and of course, the politically correct Republican establishment crowd.

Now we have NAMBLA (National Man Boy Love Association) claiming that pedophilia is just as much a valid sexual persuasion as homosexuality.  Christians who call this activity child sexual abuse are smeared once again as closed minded bigots determined to deny the civil rights of others.  Of course, on this one the Moslems are right there with NAMBLA.  Homosexuality is a crime punishable by death unless the self-righteous Moslems are the ones defiling the young boys in the name of “allah”, at which time homosexual activity is quite acceptable.

So, GLAAD, whIran hangs homosexuals3y do you call a national boycott and file lawsuits over a man declining to bake a cake or take a picture based on his personal religious beliefs yet say nothing about people actually murdering homosexuals?  Why do you demand Phil Robertson be destroyed for expressing his opinion yet say nothing when Ahab the Arab hangs your kind for homosexual activity?  Take your dancing debauchery of “gay rights” parades to say, Tehran or Mecca.  See if they call you names or hang you!!!!!  Selective tolerance once again?????  Cowardice maybe?????  As far as I see you are tolerated a great deal by all of us “bigots”.  TEA Party Christians aren’t your enemies, Moslems are your enemies.  You are fighting the wrong people.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

December 26, 2013

It’s Not a War on Christmas

SAMSUNG DIGITAL MOVIE

As the season of “peace on Earth, goodwill toward men” goes forward, so too do the disingenuous protests of the secular activist Progressives; protests against anything that might be construed, interpreted and/or seen as the religiously based, existing in the public square, be it the government square or the private-sector square. Many Americans find the objections of these secular Progressive activists to be not only in bad taste, but an assault on reasonable sensibilities and traditions. But to the secular Progressives, this annual “offensive” is a necessity; a “nudge,” if you will. And it has a lot more to do with an overall ideological goal than it does with removing Christ from Christmas.

It is true that, whether you believe Christmas is centered on a celebration of the birth of the Christ Child or not, Christmas is a federally recognized national holiday. Christmas was designated a federal holiday by the United States Congress and President Ulysses S. Grant in 1870, however this only applied to federal employees in Washington DC, the designation expanding, applying to all federal employees in 1968. To this legal end, Christmas is codified. But even before the holiday’s official recognition by the United States government, Christmas was a culturally recognized holiday around the world:

“Christmas is an annual commemoration of the birth of Jesus Christ and a widely observed cultural holiday, celebrated generally on December 25 by billions of people around the world. A feast central to the Christian liturgical year, it closes the Advent season and initiates the twelve days of Christmastide, which ends after the twelfth night. Christmas is a civil holiday in many of the world’s nations, is celebrated by an increasing number of non-Christians, and is an integral part (central event) of the Christmas and holiday season.”

Given that the Founders and Framers of the United States of America rooted the entirety of our Founding Documents in the Natural Laws found in the Judeo-Christian philosophy, the recognition of a day designated to celebrate the Alpha and the Omega of this philosophy is not only fitting, but serves to offer up an opportunity to embrace a retrospect of what the root philosophy of all Americans is and should be.

To be sure, the United States is, in fact, a nation of immigrants; a diverse collection of cultures that over time have infused our unique American culture with rich and honored traditions. But, in each of these cultures, as part of each of these traditions, has always been, at their core, a celebration of thanks to the Deity, to God, to a Higher Power over the flawed egos of man. Perhaps that is what makes the traditional season of Christmas one that transcends cultures and languages; lines on a map; and political ideologies…all but for Progressivism’s most zealous.

At the core of turn-of-the-century Progressivism lays the notion that man can be perfected, nay, must be perfected if, in fact, there was to be a “Second Coming.” In an excerpt from The Social Gospel at DiscoverTheNetworks.org, authors, Daniel Flynn and Jonah Goldberg are credited with exposing:

“Flourishing in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Social Gospel Movement was a Protestant intellectual phenomenon headed by clergymen who sought to reconcile Christianity with a Progressive social agenda; who saw the state as the instrument by which God could intervene in human affairs and promote the collectivism supposedly advocated by Jesus. This collectivism, said exponents of the Social Gospel, held the keys to the eradication of all manner of societal ills: inequality, alcoholism, crime, racism, poverty, ignorance, exploitation, and violence.

“Whereas Conservative theologians saw redemption and reconciliation strictly as matters between each individual and God, Progressives in the Social Gospel Movement held that redemption could only be achieved collectively, by means of unified, social and political activism. They maintained, moreover, that the Second Coming of Christ could not occur until humankind had eliminated all social evils by means of such activism. One notable mouthpiece of the Social Gospel was the Baptist minister and theologian Walter Rauschenbush, who said: ‘Individualism means tyranny.’”

Today, with the injection of hyper-secularism into Progressivism, an almost atheistic tenet has taken hold of the modern Progressive Movement. 21st Century Progressives (or modern day Progressives) are more inclined to believe that man – not a Higher Power, a Deity; not God – is the issuer of rights; that the rights we enjoy not only as Americans, but as “citizens of the world,” are derived from governments and not from Natural Law; from elitist oligarchs and bureaucratic experts and not by Intelligent Design.

So it is that modern Progressives need to expunge the idea of a higher power from the American (and, in fact the world) lexicon. If the idea of God, or Deity or Higher Power is to exist, then the authorities of man to establish right from wrong, good from bad, normal from abnormal, tolerance from intolerance, can always – always – be questioned. If the elitist oligarchs of the modern day Progressive Movement are to assume complete control; complete authority to execute social justice, economic justice and redefine the many ideas of equality, then they must dispense with the idea that they – themselves – are not at the top of the power pyramid; at the top of the intellectual “food chain.” The only way to do this is to eliminate the idea of the Higher Power; the Deity; God.

When one understands the need for secular Progressives to directly attack the idea of God; of Christ as the Son of God, it makes sense to take the fight to the opposition on their home turf, in this instance, Christians and Christmas (although Easter is actually the holiest day in the Catholic/Christian faith).

By playing on emotions – the most potent tool in the Progressive arsenal – and painting those who hold true to their religious beliefs as being “un-inclusive,” “intolerant of others,” and “insensitive” for their wont that Christmas include the idea of the Christ Child, Christianity and Judeo-Christian ethos, i.e. The Nativity in the public square; Christmas Carols that feature Christian lyrics; and even merchants saying the salutation “Merry Christmas” for its root word of “Christ,” Progressives aim to “shame” the truly tolerant and inclusive (any true understanding of Christianity reveals that Christians, and not Progressives, are the truly tolerant and inclusive). By shaming or making the majority of Americans “uncomfortable” for the accusations of intolerance and insensitivity, Progressives aim to force an abdication of traditional American values and beliefs. In doing so they inch closer to their goal of expunging the notion of Natural Law from the societal and then governmental lexicons, successfully achieving elitist, oligarchic and totalitarian control over the defining of rights, the common good, and the role of government in our lives.

To wit, this is not a “war on Christmas,” as Bill O’Reilly would say. This is a war on the very notion of the existence of God.

Merry Christmas, everyone.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »