Sean Hannity of Fox News slammed Hollywood Liberals again for their hypocrisy and ignorance after they recently released an anti-nuclear proliferation add. Watch the video and and Hannity’s comments here.

In the video, famous Hollywood actors like Matt Damon, Whoopi Goldberg, Danny Davito, Morgan Freeman, Michael Douglas, Robert Deniro and others call for the end of nuclear weapon proliferation and the reduction of the US store of these weapons to zero. They say that among other things, this massive arms reduction would bring about peace around the world and that it would be ‘cowardly’ not to try. These Hollywood personalities have no understanding of the need for guns among the private sector to defend families from random violence, and so they have no concept why a nation as powerful as the USA would need a nuclear arsenal for the same reason, to deter violence on behalf of rogue states abroad who wish us harm.

Sean Hannity cuts the heart out of their argument immediately with his comments at the end of his Fox News Show broadcast. The elimination of weapons does not eliminate evil, and it is precisely because evil exists that good people need the means defend themselves.

Hollywood Libs show their ignorance as well as their arrogance when they make these dopey claims to be against street violence and nuclear weapon proliferation. They are out of touch with the Average American and with reality. The key to preventing violence is not disarmament, but well thought out preparation. When two young men can make a bomb out of simple household items, and more sophisticated organizations build much more destructive weapons to kill on an even greater scale, the Hollywood Lib will bemoan the interolerable situation, wring their hands and place themselves in front of cameras. That’s not helpful, it’s stupid.

Sean in his comments eleoquently reminds his listeners of all the times disarmament led to trouble, when overbearing governments committed genocide countless time on their own people in the last century. He also points out the instability of the world and how a Hollywood Lib will criticize governments for weapons of mass destruction and the people for legal gun ownership, while they themselves have staff who protect them carrying high powered guns.

They don’t get it, but Sean does and so do most Americans. We need more than just a nuclear detterrent. We need a shield. The technology exists now to knock down nuclear weapons out of the sky before they deploy on the homeland, a purely defensive weapon that can save billions of lives, but the shield is incomplete and more batteries and development are needed. With the rise of Muslim Extremism, we don’t need fewer weapons, we need more, and more of the right ones. Because everyday extremists hurry to arm themselves with anything they can get to kill us, as our leaders at the same time, try to disarm us, even as they are arming rouge soldiers in far flung civil wars, like the genocide now going on in Syria.

These artists have a lot of nerve using their clout and fame to tell us to disarm ourselves, especially after the producing the kind of entertainment they’ve made that have made them rich. Nice Job, Hollywood. But no thanks. We’ll keep our weapons of mass destruction, with the hope of never using them, and we’ll build a shield, so we will be safe from harm. We won’t be drawn in with the lie that not having a weapon will make us safer.

Anyone familiar with my position relating to tort reform understands I feel this nation’s overly litigious nature is a factor in many of our current ills.
While I firmly stand by that assertion, I also believe a lawsuit can sometimes be the only way to bring much deserved attention to an issue that might otherwise be ignored.
Such is the case with a case filed by Bethany, Okla., pastor Keith Cressman. Though Christian messages are often banned as images or phrases on license plates, Cressman was taken aback by the inclusion of Native American theology during a recent visit to the DMV.
While a pro-life message was blocked in North Carolina just months before, the pastor said he was compelled upon accepting his new plates to become a “mobile billboard” for a belief he doesn’t share.
The tags bear an image of an archer who, according to Apache belief, will be able to bring rain by using a specific arrow.
An appeals court is allowing his case to continue after it was shot down by a judge after a prior hearing.
Speaking for his client, Center for Religious Expression attorney Nathan Kellum said Cressman is constitutionally protected from displaying “an image that communicates a pagan practice” that contradicts his own belief system.
While there are other personalized license plate designs from which he could choose for an additional fee, Cressman said he should not face a financial penalty for requesting inoffensive tags.
Once again, the dichotomous nature of modern leftists is on full display. While Christian themes are altogether unavailable, Christians themselves face a choice of displaying a heathen practice or paying a premium to choose an alternate image.
Click here to get B. Christopher Agee’s latest book for less than $5! Like his Facebook page for engaging, relevant conservative content daily.

When: Tuesday, June 18th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Confederate Corner with George Neat on Blog Talk Radio

What: Yes there are Confederates north of the Mason-Dixon line, and George Neat is one of them. And we’re happy to bring his views to you in the “Confederate Corner” radio show.

For more information on George and his political views, please drop by the Confederate Corner at GoldwaterGal.com. (http://goldwatergal.com/goldwater-gal-media/confederate-corner/)

Tonight: George will be talking about Obama wasting money, Star Wars, and the liberals keeping up their war on guns and free speech. Of course there will also be a Soldier Salute, and a “nearly-infamous” Crack Pipe Moment.

As a child born in the ’70′s, growing up in the ’80′s, it’s a wonder I am alive today to tell about it! I never thought I would ever be old enough, but here I am, saying what I never imagined I would say- those truly were the good ole days!

Though the results of a recent survey could easily be filed under “Duh,” it is important to illustrate the obvious agenda today’s mainstream media relentlessly pushes onto its near-catatonic audience.

The Pew Research Center determined news sources approach the topic of gay marriage favorably more than five times as often as they present any level of criticism. In fact, positive stories outnumber even neutral, unbiased coverage by three percent.

A mere nine percent of media reports highlighted opposing views, researchers found, despite results of a poll by the same group that shows 42 percent of the public disapproves of gay marriage.

Among the most unbalanced reporting found in the study came from MSNBC. Again, no big surprise. On that network, a full 64 percent of stories presented gay marriage in a strictly positive light while just six percent focused on opposition.

Fox News did a better job of remaining unbiased. In an effort to live up to its “Fair and Balanced” tagline, under 30 percent of the news giant’s gay marriage coverage championed the cause with eight percent providing a voice to detractors. As it should be, 63 percent of the network’s reporting featured varied opinions on the subject.

Journalism has long been trapped under the oppressive thumb of leftism as purported news anchors increasingly use their position to disseminate opinions instead of facts. As this and countless other similar studies prove, there is often little to distinguish mainstream reporters from the bevy of shameless political hacks. At least the hacks have the decency to be honest about their intentions.

Federal Reserve Building, Washington DC

For a very long time, rebooting the US economy has been left to a handful of central bankers at the Fed. After the swift and undemocratic action by the Bush and Obama administrations to cope with the financial crisis, Washington ceased to be a major player in the economy.  Short of dropping real dollars out of helicopters the Fed followed a basic game-plan: liquidity, liquidity, and more liquidity. But the Fed’s long run may be coming to an end. Why?

Considered virtually “fail safe” by Keynesian doctrinaires, the Fed’s liquidity strategy is not working.  By most accounts, the Fed has failed to achieve its stated aim, the creation of new jobs and the restoration of U.S. economic growth.  Though American financial markets are awash in dollars, US growth remains anemic, America’s fiscal situation continues to worsen and uncertainty plagues investors.

To some, this allegation may sound pessimistic, even blasphemous, but tough questions must be answered. What about the housing recovery, is it real or imaginary? What about the rising stock market fueled by fresh infusions of cash from the Fed? What about the claims of strong growth relative to the rest of the world? Perhaps there is something good about living in the biggest shack in the projects, but markets and economies are always about the fundamentals, and today the fundamentals are weak.

Real economic growth means job creation, technological innovation, entrepreneurialism, and rising standards of living for everyone, not just bankers like JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon and his New York Colleagues. It is now widely believed on Wall Street and probably around the world that the recent stock market rally is largely artificial; many are calling it “the Bernanke Rally.”

It is also no secret that the Fed continues to purchase US treasury bonds in order to suppress borrowing costs for reckless spenders on Capitol Hill. To prop up the real-estate market the Fed also purchases roughly 40 billion dollars of Mortgage Backed Securities a month – to relieve banks of their “toxic” waste. The point is cheap money is not a substitute for tangible, concrete economic growth.

What cheap money can do, however, is create bubbles, huge overvaluations of assets and goods akin to the dot.com bubble followed by the housing bubble. In a recent interview with Bill Gross, the founder of the largest bond investment company in the world, PIMCO, tells investors bubbles are everywhere.

But the shell game may be coming to an end. Fed officials including Bernanke himself, have already signaled a possible end to Quantitative Easing Infinitum (QEI). That being said, the likelihood the Fed will slow or halt the liquidity train is unlikely.  The risks to the fragile American economy are simply too great.

Still, forces in the global market the Fed cannot easily control may overtake any future shift in Fed policy. Bond yields are on the rise, not just in US treasuries but in bond markets around the world, from Japan to Italy. Stock market declines in Japan and the unrelenting debt crisis in recession plagued Euro land will also lean heavily on Wall Street. Add to this combustible mix Washington’s protracted debt ceiling battle and it’s hard to imagine a soft landing for the U.S. or the world economy.

In truth, the liquidity-fed illusion of economic strength furnished by a bullish stock market and low interest rates may no longer be enough to prop up consumer confidence. The real economy is not recovering. The average US household has not recovered its losses from 2008, state and local governments are still anchored to enormous health care and pension obligations they are struggling to meet. And the job market is feeble. Millions of Americans remain unemployed or underemployed. Many have stopped looking for work altogether.

Perhaps, these points explain why Ben Bernanke will not attend the Fed’s annual meeting in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, the first time he has not participated since 2006. This could signal his departure as Fed Chairman. It could also mean the end game for current Fed policy.

Cameron Macgregor is a former naval officer. He is currently a graduate student at George Mason University.

What about our Founding Fathers, are they saying, we gave you the makings of a great country, how did you let it slip out of your hands? Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, Washington, are they watching from above shaking their heads thinking how in the hell did they screw up such a good thing.

My father did not fight in World War 2 because he had a punctured ear drum, but he did his bit by working in the Brooklyn Navy Yards, working 12 hours a day 6 days a week. I had one uncle in the Navy, two uncles in the Army and one uncle in the Merchant Marines, my uncle who was in the Navy was torpedoed and spent three days in the ocean waiting to be rescued. I often wonder what they would think about this county today, because our freedoms, the ones they fought for, have been taken away little by little.

I often wonder if having a tyrant in office is part of Gods plan to wake us up, to make us realize what we have lost? It seems we have lost the first, second and fourth Amendments of the Constitution under this President, a President who thinks only he knows what is best for all people. A President who, if you speak against his policies and beliefs, will silence you with the full power of the Federal Government, how dare we disagree with him. We now have a President, who truly believes that Government is the answer to all things, but what can you expect from a man who has lived off the tit of the Government his entire life, who knows nothing about the private sector.

I often wonder about our soldiers fighting overseas today, are they sitting in foreign lands reading the headlines thinking what the hell is going on over there? Are they asking themselves, what am I doing here fighting, when their own Government cannot be trusted?  They fight to protect the Constitution, but they watch as the politicians in Washington step all over it.

I often wonder, when I shuffle off this earth what kind of country will my children and their children be living in. If it is anything like it is today, I feel very sorry for them, this is not the country I was born into. We now have a Government that has grown so big, that it cannot control itself, no one accepts responsibility and the blame is always someone else’s.

Tyranny is defined as the office, authority, or jurisdiction of an absolute ruler. That is truly, what Obama thinks he is, he forgets, we the people are his boss.

My latest book “What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids.”  Available Here

This is one man’s opinion.

Kingston Reif – a pacifist propagandist working for the extremely-leftist “Council for a Livable World” – has shown his utter ignorance, as well as his extremely leftist beliefs and desires to disarm the US unilaterally, on quite a few occassions, and in December, I even took the time to completely refute his utter garbage calling for scrapping the nuclear triad. Since then, however, Reif has not stoppped writing his ignorant leftist garbage, and has recently (on June 4th) written a screed in the liberal Time magazine criticizing House Republicans for “all sorts of madness on nuclear weapons, missile defense, and related issues” – especially their proposal to create an East Coast missile defense site in the northeastern United States (e.g. New York state or Maine).

Reif claims that it would be “unnecessary, technically dubious, and cost-ineffective”.

Regarding the latter, he invokes CBO’s estimate that creating such a site would cost $3.6 bn over 5 years, and another by the National Academy of Sciences saying that their proposed “evolved GMD system” would cost $25.4 bn over 20 years.

But those numbers are not only small by themselves, they’re even small when put into perspective on a per year basis. Reif, to exaggerate the cost and scaremonger taxpayers, conveniently omits the “over X years” part of the price tag.

Divided over 5 years, $3.6 bn is $720 mn; that is 0.152% of the DOD’s base budget for FY2014 even under sequestration ($475 bn), or % if sequestration is cancelled (the DOD’s base budget would then be $526 bn).

Divided over 20 years, $25.4 bn is $1.27 bn, i.e. 0.276% of the DOD’s base budget for FY2014 even under sequestration.

So the cost would be tiny – a small fraction of one percent of the base defense budget even with sequestration accounted for. A fraction of 1% of the DOD’s budget is all that it would cost to build an EC missile defense site.

Reif claims it’s “unnecessary.” But the DOD and the Intelligence Community estimate Iran will have an ICBM in 2015/2016. That is just 2-3 years from now. So the US has just 2-3 years to prepare itself for a potential Iranian ICBM threat. Iran has made considerable progress  in long-range missile development, including being able to launch satellites into orbit (e.g. with the Safir space rocket).

Reif invokes the recent statement by VADM James Syring, director of the Missile Defense Agency, that money for East Coast missile defense would not be used in the next FY. Of course, Syring was just expressing the position of the leftist Obama Administration – he can’t speak against his own president. But former Missile Defense Agency Director Henry “Trey” Obering, in a recent article, has expressed strong support for an East Coast BMD site.

In his screed, Reif totally contradicts himself, claiming, alternately, that the current ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California are either sufficient for protecting the East Coast or deficient and unreliable. He alternately claims they already offer adequate protection… or don’t work at all. So which is it, Kingston?

As for thereal experts on the issue (other than Gen. Obering), current Strategic Command leader Gen. Bob Kehler says that:

“I am confident that we can defend against a limited attack from Iran, although we are not in the most optimum posture to do that today… it doesn’t provide total defense today.”

The Commander of the Northern Command (charged with defending the US homeland and Canada), Gen. Charles Jacoby, says that the current GBI system is “sub-optimum.” This is no surprise; the interceptors in Alaska and California would be at the extreme margin of their performance envelopes if tasked with shooting down an ICBM heading for the East Coast.

A “sub-optimum” defense posture is not good enough. Not even close.

Moreover, in March, just 3 months ago, Gen. Jacoby told the Senate:

“What a third site gives me, whether it’s on the East Coast or an alternate location, would be increased battle space; that means increased opportunity for me to engage threats from either Iran or North Korea.”

Also in March, Gen. Jacoby told the House:

“I would agree that a third site, wherever the decision is to build a third site, would give me better weapons access, increased GBI inventory and allow us the battle space to more optimize our defense against future threats from Iran and North Korea.”

Doesn’t this nation owe it to the Northern Command – the one charged with protecting the homeland?

The requirement for a third site to protect against Iranian ICBMs was also stated in the 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review, which said:

“… defense of the US homeland will be augmented by Europe-based SM-3 Block IIB interceptors, which are planned to be able to provide an early-intercept capability against potential Iranian ICBMs.”

But the SM-3 Block 2B has been cancelled now, so an EC missile defense site is needed.

Reif also claims that the proposal is “technically dubious” because GBIs supposedly don’t work. Here, he’s wrong as well. GBIs have passed most of their tests, including a recent flight test, and more tests are planned for later months. The interceptors themselves work, as do their current, first generation kill vehicles (kinetic “warhead” counterparts). Critics love to seize on the two failed intercept tests from 2010, but in those tests, it was a new generation of kill vehicles that failed – not the older kill vehicles, and not the missiles themselves. The MDA, in any case, is working to solve the problem.

And even if and when a weapon fails, this teaches us something and doesn’t mean the weapon can never work. Quite the contrary. The Polaris submarine-launched ballistic missile – the first American nuclear-armed missile deployed on submarines – failed the vast majority of its tests: 17 out of 22. Yet, it passed 5, was ultimately proven to work (with President Kennedy watching), and was deployed on 41 USN ballistic missile subs – and later became the basis for the development of the Trident ballistic missile.

Reif bemoans the GBI’s low ability to distinguish real missiles and warheads from decoys. But the MDA actually had a program to solve that problem – called the Multiple Kill Vehicle, essentially a bus carrying dozens of small kill vehicles sufficient to kill all warheads and countermeasures – until April 2009, when President Obama killed the program and when General Obering had already retired. (General Obering, of course, points this out in his piece.)

So the problem of enabling GBIs to discriminate between genuine targets – like real missiles and warheads – and decoys can be solved quite easily, if the MKV program is simply revived.

Reif complains that there is “no guarantee” that this problem will ever be solved and the GBI system made highly effective. Actually, in life, there is no guarantee of anything. There is no guarantee that your car will always start (especially in winter), or that your bus, train, or flight won’t be delayed, or that even the best friends will not fail you, or that even the most reliable weapons will always work perfectly.

There is no perfect person, vehicle, weapon, plane, ship, or anything that humans make.

But if the development and improvement of ground-based interceptors is continued, and the MKV program revived, there’s a high likelihood that these interceptors will become highly effective.

Moreover, Reif and other missile defense opponents are contradicting themselves. On the one hand, they claim that US BMD systems can’t distinguish real warheads from decoys, but OTOH, they also claim that North Korea and Iran don’t know how to mate nuclear warheads to missiles.

But if they don’t know how, they also certainly don’t know how to make credible decoys (or mate them to missiles). Why? Because decoys, in order to deceive anyone, must EXACTLY match real warheads in size and flight patterns – they must look and fly exactly like the real thing. Any decoy not matching a real warhead EXACTLY in size, shape, and flight patterns will immediately be seen on radars as what it really is – a fake.

In order to make a fake of something that exactly matches that “something” in size, shape, and flight patterns, you must first be able to make the real thing. Otherwise, you don’t know how to mimic it exactly. It’s simple logic.

So simple logic alone utterly refutes the lies of missile defense opponents like Reif. It exposes their real motivation – ideological, implacable knee-jerk opposition to missile defense per se, which motivates them to make any false claims, even contradictory ones.

You can’t have it both ways, Kingston. Either North Korea and Iran  can make credible decoys and mate them with missiles – in which case they can do the same with real warheads – or they can’t.

In short, there is a clear need for the East Coast missile defense site; it would be cheap; and if the GBI system continues to be developed and improved, and if the MKV program is revived, the system can become very effective.

Like Reif, ACA’s Greg Thielmann falsely claims that an East Coast missile defense site – and deploying the now-cancelled SM-3 Block 2B missile also intended against ICBM – would be too expensive and that the Iranian ballistic missile threat hasn’t even even begun to emerge. He even claims it’s doubtful that Iran will have an ICBM by the end of this decade.

But that threat has already begun to emerge: the US intel community and the DOD estimate Iran will have an ICBM by 2015/2016, and it could simply buy one from North Korea or China. It has already (allegedly) bought Musudan-ri MRBMs (with a 4,000 km range) from North Korea and has developed its own solid-fuel Sejjil and Ashoura MRBMs with a range of 2,500 kms. Moreover, it has also launched a satellite into space, thus making a huge step towards constructing an ICBM and demonstrating the capability to mate nuclear payloads with missiles.

Again, this truth must be repeated: the technology used to install satellites on missiles is THE SAME as that used to mate warheads to missiles. Fact.

Moreover, the point of defense, including missile defense, is to stay AHEAD of the threat, not to barely keep up with it. Yet, the US intel community and the DOD project Iran to have an ICBM by 2015/2016, so the US now has only 2-3 years to build an East Coast missile defense site.

But Thielmann goes even further, falsely claiming that North Korea doesn’t have ICBMs either and that its successful December 2012 launch of a satellite on an Unha-3 (Taepodong-2) rocket, i.e. on an ICBM. Again, the technology used to marry satellites and warheads to missiles is the same.

Moreover, after that successful launch, the South Koreans retrieved the upper stages and the delivery bus of the rocket from water; TheDailyBeast investigative journalist Eli Lake was the first to report this fact. The retrieved pieces of the missile demonstrated that North Korea DOES have the ability to marry payloads to missiles. CDN’s Defense Issues Weekly duly reported the story.

North Korea’s TD-2 ICBM, capable of reaching the CONUS, was the basis for the successful space rocket. On top of that, North Korea also has the road-mobile KN-08 ICBM, whose existence and genuity were recognized by the DOD (spoken for by Joint Chiefs Vice Chairman Adm. Sandy Winnefeld) in March.

Thielmann also wrongly touts the utterly false numbers given for Russia’s and China’s nuclear arsenals by Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris (for Russia, 466 ICBMs and SLBMs and less than 1,500 deployed warheads; for China, only 300 warheads and 50-75 ICBMs and SLBMs). This is supposed to prove that even the Russian and Chinese nuclear threat isn’t big; like other advocates of America’s disarmament, he dramatically understates the real size of China’s nuclear arsenal.

But both countries have far more weapons than that. Russia has 434 ICBMs and 224 SLBMs (16 for each of its 14 ballistic missile subs), a total of 658 intercontinental missiles, and 1,550, not 1,466, deployed strategic warheads – right at New START limits. (It has significantly built its arsenal up since New START’s ratification, while the US has had to cut its own.)

China has at least 86 ICBMs, plus at least 60 SLBMs on its five Jin class submarines (which, contrary to Thielmann’s blatant lies, ARE operational, and China has 5 of these, not merely 2), plus another 12 on its Xia class sub. And China’s real nuclear arsenal numbers at least 1,600-1,800, not 300-400, warheads.

Thielmann also falsely claims that Russia and China have many common interests that make their attacks on the US unlikely. This is also a blatant lie.

The US and China share no interests whatsoever; their national interests are diametrically opposed. The US wants to safeguard freedom of navigation at sea and in the air, freedom of trade and travel around the world, and to preserve its own and its Pacific’ allies security, as well as the international rules-based order. China wants to replace the US as the world’s top power, turn the Western Pacific into an internal Chinese lake, seize the Okinawa, the Senkakus, the Spratlys, Taiwan, and goodness knows what else, and push the US out of Asia completely.

China has behaved in a very hostile manner towards the US, whether by harassing unarmed American ships, stalking American carriers, blinding American satellites with lasers, threatening war with the US, or launching massive cyberattacks on US networks. The same is true of Russia, whose President Vladimir Putin openly vents his hatred of the US at every opportunity, while conducting an arms race against America, bullying US diplomats, launching his own cyberattacks on America, and supplying America’s enemies around the world (including Iran) with weapons and nuclear fuel.

Russia and the US share very few, if any, interests.

Lastly, Thielmann falsely claims that missile defense is impeding new arms control agreements and “additional” cuts in Russia’s arsenal. This is totally false. Since the late 2000s, Russia has not been cutting anything; under New START, it has significantly increased its nuclear arsenal.

Moreover, both Russia and China know that America’s current and planned missile defense systems are of limited scope and capability – capable enough against Iran and North Korea, but not against Russia’s and China’s much more advanced missiles, let alone the huge arsenals that Moscow and Beijing have. The idea that US missile defense systems pose any threat whatsoever to Russia’s or China’s nuclear arsenals is utterly ridiculous – like everything that Thielmann and his Arms Control Association colleagues write.

Thielmann’s ACA program is ridiculously called the “Realistic Threat Assessment Project”; in fact, it’s a Threat Dramatic Understatement Project and should be called that way.

Thus, Kingston Reif’s and Greg Thielmann’s claims have once again been exposed for what they really are – blatant lies.

I am enraged by this administration’s recent attack on the military and even more so by the administration’s inability to allow these men and woman to live out their belief systems. If there is a war on women that has been started by the Republicans, then the war on God has been started by, fueled by, and actively pursued by the Democrats.

Now Democrats, before you get all uppity on me, remember, some of you have no problem blaming all Republicans for the bad decisions a Republican president and his staff made, so you need to swallow and own your own playbook. The Democrats own the White House and, therefore, all the tomfoolery coming out of it. This president, who says he is for freedom of religion, seems to have never stop living in “backwards day”.

This administration has strongly objected to an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would simply allow freedom of religious speech for soldiers. The amendment was authored by Rep. John Fleming, R-LA. It would have “required the Armed Forces to accommodate ‘actions and speech’ reflecting the conscience, moral, principles or religious beliefs of the member.”

Expert Infantry (CC)

The new rules being put in place by the administration would require soldiers to keep Bibles out of plain view. If soldiers are sitting on their bunks discussing the Bible, God, or Jesus and a non-believing soldier walks in and is offended they have to stop! Chaplains performing services can’t use the name of Jesus even if the family asks.

My favorite saying as of late is that the world must be spinning in the opposite direction.

Comrade Putin has declared in mother Russia that no hate speech towards churches or religions will be tolerated. Unlike the U.S., violations in Russia are publishable by imprisonment. Here in the U.S. of A. intolerance towards religion is encouraged, especially against those that are Christ-centered or hold an “unfavorable” viewpoint toward gay marriage, illegal immigration, and waiting to have sex before marriage. We are so screwed as a society.

Regarding the military: The current administration needs to get its head out of the very dark, odorful place it has had it in for many years and get back to reality. Anyone willing to fight for my freedom, take a bullet for me or my family, in simple words for the overeducated, anyone willing to die fighting for me, should be able to have and speak of any God, scripture, and belief system they want. If a soldier wants to “Hail Satan” then so be it.

There have been virtually no complaints by non-believing enlisted soldiers. The complaints come primarily from attorneys and organizations, cowards. These people aren’t on the front lines, they’re not fighting, and they typically have no relationship with our soldiers or their families. They’re cowards.
President Obama, get a grip on reality. I know you have no use for our military except as doormen and umbrella holders, but they have more courage, integrity, and love for our county and its people in their baby finger than you have had your whole life.

Do you doubt this is really happening? Here’s a quick snapshot of other reports about Christian service members and chaplains
being punished for their faith:

• The Air Force censored a video created by a chaplain because it included the word “God.” The Air Force feared the word might
offend Muslims and atheists.
• A service member received a “severe and possibly career-ending reprimand” for expressing his faith’s religious position
about homosexuality in a personal religious blog.
• A senior military official at Fort Campbell sent out a lengthy email officially instructing officers to recognize “the religious right in America”  as a “domestic hate group” akin to the KKK and Neo-Nazis because of its opposition to homosexual behavior.
• A chaplain was relieved of his command over a military chapel because, consistent with DOMA’s definition of marriage, he
could not allow same-sex weddings to take place in the chapel.

For the record I blame my “religious” brothers for the loss of these freedoms. We allowed this to happen. We never wanted to make waves because we were afraid that we might offend someone. These are the consequences of inaction. Slowly but surely we are losing our freedom to speak openly about our religious beliefs. I, for one, will not go down easily.

The fact America won the War of Independence should have everyone thankful: If Jefferson didn’t dissent, every American would talk like the prissy wanna’-be queen Piers Morgan.

Now that I’ve scared the crap out of conservative-minded readers with that thought, let’s wake up and face facts.

The reality that the government has reverted back in time to British troop tactics by confiscating your personal information on whim should have every American deeply troubled.

Are you free to speak out against your government? The Constitution says yes.

Are you free to embarrass the government and make it accountable for injustices? The Constitution says yes. The IRS, Progressives and Obama say no.

The IRS harasses conservative organizations standing up against the Sixteenth Amendment and Christian organizations feeding and doctoring the poor. It seems the CIA and NSA have been given full authority to wiretap everyone’s phone calls and internet conversations, rather than monitoring enemies only.

NSA and CIA information gathering is not those harmless, annoying pop up ads caused by internet services collecting information on your purchases. Internet services are allowed to share (not to sell your information) to companies looking for customers. Technically that doesn’t confer your personal information since you already gave your phone, address and e-mail to your server provider. Internet services can only share catch phrases and key words from places you shop and share that with companies bearing those words in their titles or descriptions. The most annoying thing that comes from sharing of information is computer pop-ups and ads.

Don’t grab the tin foil people. If you shop on line, your transaction is not completely private, because you are freely, openly shopping with companies. This sharing doesn’t allow internet servers or companies to give IRS information to invade banking records and transactions, tap phone calls and treat Americans like terrorists–rather than actually tracking terrorists before they blow up Boston streets or fly planes into New York and Washington, D.C. buildings.

Unfortunately, that is what the government is forcing some phones and internet services to do: Hand your information over to government.

And you thought powdered wigs went out!

Over two centuries-ago our Founders declared independence against Britain by signing Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. The accomplishment was considered treason against the crown. But technically that undertaking only broke the Divine Right of the King, which was authorized only by kings, not God or the people. King George violated the Magna Carta, therefore, Jefferson and the Founders had every right to dissent and address King George’s infringement against the Rights of Man.

We’ve lived peacefully, respecting the Constitution for centuries, yet government does the opposite to Americans and the Constitution..

The government is less interested in doing its job: Upholding the Constitution and serving the people.Washington is more interested in expanding power and authority over the people.

We are once again under siege by government wielding unwritten rights to impose its will against us. 

This is why Thomas Jefferson drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence: To stand up to government abuses against the rights of man written in the Magna Carta.

We have reentered the era where We The People must stand up in the fashion of Patrick Henry and declare as he did:

This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Americans are well aware  CIA and NSA wire tapping is nothing new. America must be on guard against the enemy, we expect the government to watch and prevent threats.

Before the Patriot Act, America had FISA. Before that, World War II and Cold War era watched enemies within the United States. Why; communists infiltrated the American government: The communists Rosenberg Soviets   sold our Atomic Secrets to the Soviets: 

In 1995, the CIA released ‘the Venona Cables’ [the] decoded Soviet communications that document, along with other espionage doings, the antics of Julius and Ethel. Khrushchev himself mentions the Rosenbergs in his memoirs, identifying them as spies for Russia.

The Rosenbergs got what they deserved, yet conservative Americans are now treated as threats while threats are ignored.

Americans want government to catch the bad guys; yet, the CIA and NSA have failed to prevent  some deadly attacks, because government focuses on Americans purchasing American flags and donating to tea party organizations and demands we tolerate enemies.

Case in point: Mohammad Atta came to America for flying lessons. He learned to fly planes—but not land them—in order to bomb cities by crashing jets into buildings. Flight instructors warned the FBI, but Janet Reno and Operation Able Danger ignored the 1999 findings on Atta.

Reno forbade FBI confiscation of Atta’s lap top: It might violate Atta’s Civil Rights. Reno gave Atta privacy privileges; Atta violated 3000 human rights.

Law-abiding Americans are harassed, not enemies, despite government having legal ways of weeding out enemies. The government despises conservative Americans speaking out against government. The IRS harasses and threatens Tea Party and Christian organizations, but never Islamist living inside America, who all pose threats to this nation: Islam demands liberty be destroyed in favor of Islamic Sharia law and Islamic takeover.

Yet many turn a blind eye, assuming government is supposed to have full authority over our lives. If that’s true, why do Americans demand rights to do as they please with their bodies and possessions? Answer: Natural Rights are instilled at birth.

We ignored government so long; it entered our homes and has become the monster hiding under the bed. 

Patrick Henry warned:

We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?

What else is government doing to us? Should we continue going along blindly, assuming everything is well when we see Americans pleading with Congress against abuses incurred by government agencies targeting anyone taking a stand for liberty and freedom?  We have Fourth Amendment rights, but rights mean nothing to a government that assumes it has unwritten authority and control to make us serve it with a by-your-leave.

The modern day government violates the United States Constitution in every way by overreaching into the states and people’s lives that locked doors and four walls no longer protect. When will we all stand up and declare:

What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

FreedomHouse (CC)

If the outside world was excited about a U.S. retaliatory plan for the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons against rebels, the families in the capital’s old Mezzah neighborhood struck a tone in utter contrast.

“America is inventing stories about chemical weapons,” one man told CNN’s Fred Pleitgen. “The Syrian government never used chemical weapons. The rebels have used them, not the government. So they are inventing stories because our army is winning.”

Another man, also shopping for household staples, said the U.S. action won’t make a difference. The government will prevail in the civil war, he asserted.

The intervention is in the wake of reports that the Assad regime is using chemical weapons against its own citizens. But, there remain reports that this simply isn’t the case on the ground. As Al Jazeera reports:

“The White House has issued a statement full of lies about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, based on fabricated information,” a statement issued on Friday by the Syrian Foreign Ministry said.

“The United States is using cheap tactics to justify President Barack Obama’s decision to arm the Syrian opposition,” it said.

Russia, a staunch ally of the Syrian government, also disputed the US charge on Friday.

President Vladimir Putin’s foreign affairs adviser, Yuri Ushakov, told reporters that the information provided by US officials to Russia “didn’t look convincing”.

Russian officials are also not supporting U.S. plans for a no-fly zone over Syria.

“There have been leaks from Western media regarding the serious consideration to create a no-fly zone over Syria through the deployment of Patriot anti-aircraft missiles and F-16 jets in Jordan,” said Mr [Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei] Lavrov, speaking at a joint news conference in Moscow with his Italian counterpart.

“You don’t have to be a great expert to understand that this will violate international law,” he said.

Mr Lavrov also said evidence presented by the US of chemical weapons use in Syria apparently did not meet reliability criteria set out by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

The three-year-long conflict in Syria has been increasingly involving neighboring nations, and Hezbollah leaders have stated that they do not intend to back down in the conflict. This does not bode well for any plans that the U.S. could have for assisting the Syrian rebels – without taking into account arguments from within the U.S. that getting involved at this point would only be giving weapons to existing enemies of the U.S. There is no secret that Al Qaeda has been making in-roads in the Syrian resistance. Add to that it appears that even Israel does not foresee a stable nation in Syria with or without Assad, there seem to be very few, if any, redeeming factors to the U.S. stepping in any more than it has already.

When:

Where: Saturday Night Cigar Lounge with Taylor on Blog Talk Radio

What: Saturday nights were meant for cigars and politics.

Hear Taylor and his co-host Liz Harrison talk about everything from the past week – from politics, to news, to books, and entertainment. Whatever comes to mind, and of course, sobriety is not likely.

Tonight: Big, big week this week and we talk to Jackie Bodnar from FreedomWorks about it. Is Edward Snowden a hero, traitor or both? Is the US lying about what the NSA program goes? Are the companies allegedly tied to it doing the same thing?

Starting right at the top, with the President, who doesn’t know about anything until he reads about it in the newspaper. The IRS targeting of conservative groups he “didn’t know about” until he learned it from press reports, even though the White House staff knew as early as 2011. The media were also his source for the questionable Associated Press phone record fiasco.

If he really doesn’t know what’s going on in his administration, which is highly unlikely since the politics have his modus operandi fingerprints all over these scandals, then he’s grossly incompetent. If he’s employing this plausible deniability tactic to maintain a distance with the abhorrent actions of his administration, then his moral authority to lead is even more dubious than previously determined.

Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, bloviated her incompetence in a congressional hearing room either not knowing, or not willing to acknowledge culpability, with anything regarding the Benghazi 9/11 attack of last year. As an exclamation mark to her obtuseness, she finally lashed out, “What difference does it make?” Well, Madame Secretary, to those who want to know the truth, it makes a lot of difference when those at the highest levels of government, including you, lie to us, and four loyal Americans are dead because of it!

Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary, while proving adept at covering for his boss, has lost all credibility with the White House press corps by his obfuscation and mendacity when pressed on recent administration scandals. And with regard to the Benghazi incident, obviously wanting to move on with a cavalier “there’s nothing to see here” kind of attitude, claims, “That was a long time ago.” Really! Nine months is a long time ago? So if you lied nine months ago that’s not supposed to matter when we have four dead, including an ambassador?

And we can’t overlook the utter incompetence of the Internal Revenue Service leadership. Former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller knew for over a year that the “Advocacy Group” in Cincinnati had been targeting conservative groups, disallowing tax-exempt status. He claimed to have initiated an investigation, but knew nothing about the results of the investigation, or who was running it.

Miller’s former IRS boss, Douglas Shulman, had twice testified to congress that the conservative group targeting was not happening. And when he was finally confronted with the facts, that it was indeed occurring, he claimed ignorance as his defense. And when queried by congressmen why he visited the White House 157 times, more than any cabinet member, while his predecessor had only visited once, he imperiously responded that the only visit he could recall was taking his kids to the Easter egg roll. Seriously, where do they find these guys?

Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS non-profit review division, is perhaps the only one from the administration who seems to have any semblance of integrity. At least she had the scruples to plead the 5^th, so as to not incriminate herself, although she likely then committed perjury before the congressional committee when she pompously declared, “I have done nothing wrong.” So much for her semblance of integrity!

Heck, IRS leadership can’t even muster the receipts for their conferences and lavish shindigs, including a $4 million “conference” in Las Vegas where they made videos of line-dancing IRS employees, and featured a “Star Trek” video production that would embarrass a high school wannabe movie maker. Next time you meet with the IRS, tell them you can’t seem to locate your receipts, and see how well that goes over with them!

And just this week FBI Director Robert Mueller proved his incompetence, as he could not name the lead investigator in the IRS scandal. The investigation was purportedly ordered by his boss, the president, over a month ago, and the head of the agency knows nothing of the status of the investigation, or who’s conducting it!

The only thing anyone in this administration seems capable of accepting responsibility for, or knowing anything about, is the one program run by Washington that seems to be working, and working well; the NSA data mining of American citizens. And regrettably it took a whistle-blowing contractor to expose the extent of that “big brother” program that’s monitoring every citizen’s phone calls, emails, and digital footprint, including social media.

Either the entire administration is clueless, incompetent, and refuses to accept responsibility for anything, or they’re all liars. Either way, we clearly have an out-of-control government, too large and unwieldy to manage, and a gaggle of politicians and bureaucrats too incompetent or dishonest to run it.

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board.  He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.