Tag Archives: liberals

What Obama’s “Bulworth” Comment Shows About Us

bulworthtaylor

bulworthtaylor
Almost forgotten within the whirlwind of last week’s columns and news stories covering the Obama Administration’s scandals was a piece from The New York Times discussing the “onset of woes” he’s had to deal with. Various aides told The Times on, and off, the record how the President is doing all he can to make sure his second term agenda gets accomplished. They also mentioned how Obama is frustrated and “exasperated “with Washington, something which isn’t new to anyone who’s watched one of his news conferences.

The most telling comment in the piece is how Obama has talked about “going Bulworth” and just saying what he actually thinks. This is a reference to the Warren Beatty/Halle Berry film about a California senator who decides to tell everyone what he believes, no matter the consequences. The New York Post has taken it to mean Obama wants to come out and admit he’s a socialist, which the Bulworth character is. This could be true, but it also reveals a problem with our political system.

Politicians have a problem with being 100-percent honest. Big surprise, but a David Axelrod quote following the Bulworth revelation is even more telling. Axelrod told The Times, “But the reality is that while you want to be truthful, you want to be straightforward, you also want to be practical about whatever you’re saying.”

 

It’s not that politicians can’t tell the truth, it’s that they don’t think the public wants to know the truth.

 

The sad part is…they’re probably right.

 

More people would rather be told that things are “going to be okay,” instead of hearing the horrific reality of the situation.

 

The 2012 election is a perfect example of this. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan were vilified for discussing the nation’s $16-trillion in debt. Columnists like Paul Krugman claimed the nation’s debt isn’t an issue, while Obama told David Letterman “we don’t have to worry about it short term.” Letterman asked only one follow up but that shouldn’t be surprising. He’s not Jake Tapper.

 

When Romney spoke his mind in the “infamous” 47-percent quote, he was said to “not represent all Americans” and to have “written off half the nation.” Obama, again, told Letterman about how he wanted to represent the “entire country,” but didn’t talk the substance of Romney’s quote, why he may have said it or the context.

Guaranteed: more people saw Obama make those comments than any of Romney’s speeches on the debt.

 

However, it’s not just Romney who was vilified. Ron Paul was called a “dangerous man” for some of his positions. A look at the jokes the late night talk show hosts said about Paul, shows they saw him more as a “crazy uncle” and not a real candidate. Now, Paul is a horrible messenger from time to time (see his Chris Kyle tweet and his September 11th comment) but he’s at least willing to speak his mind and tell the truth. Something refreshing in politics.

 

As much as people claim to want the truth, the reality is much different. The truth hurts and people prefer “flowers and sunshine” to reality. There’s a difference between pointing out problems and solutions, and just telling people it will be okay. This is why politicians use double-speak and seem distance. A majority of people don’t want reality.

 

There is a way for conservatives and libertarians to break through this. Outreach. Real outreach, not the failed attempt of Project ORCA by Romney’s team during 2012. Get out in the community and be with people. See what they experience. Explain to them how freedom and liberty is important and show them how it can make their lives better. Support what Deneen Borelli and Wayne Dupree are doing in the Black community and what “True the Vote” is trying to do with the Hispanic community. Talk to friends. Engage them.

 

 

And keep politicians accountable. It’s not always pragmatic to change one’s mind. Sometimes it’s simply political. Get them to explain why they do what they do. Get them to tell the truth.

 

 

It’s the only way to prove Axelrod and his ilk wrong.

 

And to make sure Bulworth isn’t “just” a movie but reality.


 

Bill Maher and Bob Russell Agree: Hell Has Just Frozen Over

Obama's Gestapo

I wrote a blog article  a while back pointing out how Barack Obama (Osama bin Obama) is putting the finishing touches on turning America into a police state. I have caught a lot of flak for my views, and have been called paranoid and a fear monger for pointing out the things I see happening to my America.   It seems pretty clear to me what is happening and I know many people agree with me on this while others disagree to varying degrees.

What really surprised me was to hear Bill Maher agree with me.  To me, Bill Maher has always been a left-wing pompous jerk, with no semblance of reality apparent in anything he had to say.  When I saw this video clip I was astonished to say the least.  Bill Maher saying the same things I have been saying???  Maher must have lost his marbles or my ears were playing tricks on me!!!  But as I watched the clip I began to see something in him that changed my perspective.

I saw Maher stick to his guns when he got pushback, undeniably on shaky ground but pushback none the less, from those trying to dismiss his premise.  I was also surprised that Maher actually got some support from a member of the panel.  The lady, Anna Smith, was right there with him and rightly pointed out that much of this has been happening for a long time, although on a smaller scale, such as the “stop and frisk” she mentioned.  Not beingAnna Deveare Smith from New York, I was not aware that this was a common practice.  It is wrong and should be stopped.

What didn’t surprise me was Robert Traynham from MSNBC supporting the police state.  Obama is at the top of the police state command and gets the support of an MSNBC liberal, no surprise there.  As a side note, I wonder if Traynham would be so supportive if George W. Bush was in charge right now and a brown-skinned Muslim was the target of this manhunt.  Maher, also a liberal through and through, was adamant about his point and showed pictures and a video of the state of a militarized police force that is not designed to write a traffic ticket.

This makes me wonder about Maher.  With his stand on this police state issue he brings a rationale that is normally missing from his “I hate everything about America” shtick.  The one thing I have learned over the years is that liberals, the true “died in the wool” liberals, have a utopian view of the world in general and in America in particular.  Maher appears to be one of these.  I have never thought of him as even remotely patriotic, or even a true American, but this gives me a different perspective on him.

The true liberal looks to an idealistic utopia that is impossible to obtain, but they have that goal and believe down deep in their hearts that it can be accomplished.  All that is needed is the right group of people to make it happen.  It seems Maher is one of those utopian true believers.  From this video I believe he really thinks his view of America can become a reality.  It can’t ever work because mankind is terribly flawed and those like Obama are beyond flawed, flawed to the point of being downright evil.  I believe Maher originally saw Obama as the person that could pull off the utopia he envisioned but is now seeing what Obama’s agenda entails, and it frightens him. He said this is “very troubling” to him.  It is beyond troubling to me but I get his point.

Many people make the mistake of looking at Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Napolitano, Holder, and their ilk as liberals.  They aren’t liberals, they are Marxists, and in Obama’s case a Muslim Marxist.  They aren’t looking for some kind of utopia where everyone benefits equally and contributes equally.  They are looking to establish a Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia style dictatorship with them in charge and everyone else bowing to them.  I believe this is the reality that Maher has finally seen for what it is.  I saw and heard disappointment and shock in Maher’s expression and voice.  He seems to have come to a realization that what he thought Obama would do isn’t what Obama is doing.

Maher made the same case I have been making, but didn’t get the same kind of backlash I have received, at least not yet.  He made point after point about the actions of the police and stayed the course when others tried to intimidate him into accepting the necessity of what they did in Boston.  I heard liberals defending a police state atmosphere and telling Maher that the police state tactic is for our own good.  Hearing liberals defend a dictatorship astounds me and Maher rightly rejected their premise outright.

He rightly pointed out the case of the gunfire aimed at the boat Tsarnaev was hiding in.  He commented that they wanted him alive yet fired a sustained volley of bullets in their zeal to “take this kid alive” so they could question him.  If they wanted him alive why did they fire so many shots, and how did they manage to miss him with that many shots fired?  Trigger happy cops seem to be the normal thing these days.  I have written about that also, pointing out the number of innocent civilians who have been killed by the police without just cause, with the explanation of “oh, it was a mistake”.  That isn’t very comforting that I could be killed “by mistake” and those who kill me go right on out to do it again without any concerns about their actions.  Maher also pointed out that Tsanraev was given his Miranda rights way too early, thereby losing valuable information that could lead to the arrest of co-conspirators.

He agreed Miranda rights should be given but the law says 48 hours and the Obama regime jumped right in to make sure no information would be forthcoming.  Maher found this to be irresponsible and dangerous.  Again, Bill and Bob are on the same page.

I found myself watching this clip and seeing myself sitting in Bill Maher’s chair, saying the exact same words and making the exact same case.  As scary as that is, I find it refreshing at the same time.  Maher is ultra-liberal and I am ultra-conservative.  I have always seen he and I as polar opposites politically yet we see this situation from exactly the same perspective.  That is frightening yet encouraging on a level that goes far beyond liberal/conservative ideology.  When two people as diametrically opposite as Maher and myself agree totally something is terribly wrong, or something is very right, in our nation.

If someone would have told me a week ago that I would be in agreement with Bill Maher I would have told them, “when that happens you will know Hell has frozen over”.  Well, I guess it must be cold in Hell today because I find myself standing side-by-side with Bill Maher on this Boston bombing situation.  As frightening as that is it gives me hope that America just might survive.  When two people like Maher and myself see what is happening and come to the exact same conclusion I know that I am not as far out in “tin foil hat” country as some would like to convince me I am.

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

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

May 1, 2013

 

 

 

The Interview: Terry McAuliffe & the Boston Attack

Intimidating pressure cookers like this will be a thing of the past after Democrat Terry McAuliffe becomes Virginia governor.

This post is intended as satire, any likeness to real or imagined people is unintended. This is a work of fiction

Intimidating pressure cookers like this will be a thing of the past after Democrat Terry McAuliffe becomes Virginia governor.

Intimidating pressure cookers like this will be a thing of the past after Democrat Terry McAuliffe becomes Virginia governor.

(A source within the McAuliffe for Governor campaign leaked a copy of this transcript from an interview with a New York Times Sunday Magazine reporter. I felt I owed it to my readers to give them an advance look at this latest development in the Virginia governor’s race.)

 

NYT REPORTER: Governor McAuliffe, ha, that’s a bit premature, Mr. McAuliffe I could not help noticing at today’s media event that you were surrounded by all the genders of the rainbow, all ages and all races. And what’s more, everyone was wearing jogging clothes and actually smelled a little sweaty. Do you think the symbolism was important for your new legislative agenda?

Terry McAuliffe (D–Flim Flam) candidate for governor in Virginia: (Laughs) Well President Obama and Mayor Bloomberg had already booked the famous Boston marathoners, so we made do with local volunteers and a few of the better kept homeless. I will say we had a few problems convincing the older gentlemen to put on those tiny running shorts, but everyone was a good sport and happy to do a few laps around my indoor track to get in character for the event.

 

NYT: Tell us about this new legislation.

McAuliffe: It’s very simple. This is a problem and I have a government solution. After I’m sworn in, during my first hour as Virginia’s new governor I intend to introduce legislation to implement what I call common–sense pressure cooker control that all American’s can support.

 

NYT: How will it work?

McAuliffe: The centerpiece of the legislation is a one–per–month limit on pressure cooker sales to civilians. Purchasers will be entered into a statewide Culinary Registry where their name will be matched against previous purchases. This is a painless process for shoppers, which we will begin in upscale department stores. If their name comes up as having purchased a pressure cooker less than a month previously, they will be directed to a nice toaster oven or blender. In fact, if they are willing to give us their email address, the state will notify them when they are eligible to again purchase a pressure cooker.

 

NYT: The program will be limited to Bergdorf Goodman and Neiman Marcus?

McAuliffe: Certainly not. I’m aware that good value can be found at Target and something called ‘Big Lots.’ In fact, I intend to close the so–called ‘second–hand loophole.’ We will regulate sales at flea markets and thrift stores. Just because you may ‘no hablo’ doesn’t mean you should not register your purchase. I’ll give the secretary of technology six months to come up with an ‘app’ that will allow Smartphone registration in smaller stores and at garage sales.

 

NYT: So the legislation is just a limit on the number of purchases?

McAuliffe: No, I should have said a comprehensive, common–sense approach. There will also be a limit on the size of pressure cookers. No one really needs one of those high–capacity pressure cookers. Herbert Hoover only promised a single chicken in every pot, not an entire flock. And at our house my cook, Consuela, has never had to use a high–capacity pressure cooker. And that includes the really big fund raising events Bill Clinton attended before he became a vegan.

My kitchen experts also tell me that with the shrinking size of the American family and the distaste professional women display toward cooking, pressure cookers of 3 or possibly 4-quart capacity will be sufficient.

In addition, we also have design guidelines for cookers sold in Virginia. We want manufacturers to cut down on the number of dials and vaguely threatening controls found on some pressure cookers. In my experience newlywed cooking is frightening enough without adding an ominous pressure device to the mix.

 

NYT: Will this legislation have any impact on the Virginia economy?

McAuliffe: Of course I don’t want to do anything that would harm job creation. That’s one of my most popular focus group tested talking points. We certainly don’t want an Obamacare situation here. So there will be a size limit exception for commercial establishments that may require a larger–capacity cooker for their clientele. Right now homeless shelters, soup kitchens, prisons and Old Country Buffett are exempt from both size and purchase limits.

 

NYT: But what about existing large capacity pressure cookers that are already owned?

McAuliffe: The size of the existing pressure cooker market is nothing like that of the gun market, thank goodness. Plus there is no National Cooker Association pressuring gutless legislators. I feel that as inexperienced newlyweds burn things in pressure cookers, divorce papers are filed and just the general wear and tear of moving occur, the large capacity pressure cooker inventory will be reduced to a manageable size.

 

NYT: What about the public health component of your program?

McAuliffe: That’s important, too. The director of the state department of health will be encouraging pediatricians to ask their minor patients if they live in a house that contains pressure cooker and if so where is it stored. It’s important to know who has access to the cookware. We are also considering including a few questions on the amount of salt used in cooking and the presence of trans–fats.

 

NYT: Do you feel these common–sense regulations will remove the threat?

McAuliffe: This will certainly reduce the threat that originates in the kitchen, but at the same time, I don’t want to overlook the delivery system used in the Boston attack. I think the day of large, military–style backpacks is over. Black, camo or other assault backpacks are simply not necessary for civilian transport. When we were all still reeling from the tragedy, I was leaning toward banning backpacks entirely, but when my daughter pointed out the crucial role backpacks play in our education system, I relented.

 

NYT: What backpacks will be allowed in the future?

McAuliffe: We are currently writing the new regulations, but I think most backpacks that feature licensed characters or come from OshKosh B’Gosh, REI or Victoria’s Secret will be allowed, particularly if the backpack has those sexy little stringy straps. I also intend for the state patrol to conduct “backpack buy back” programs where outlawed backpack owners can turn in illegal backpacks in exchange for reusable grocery bags.

 

NYT: How long before Virginians can expect to see a difference?

McAuliffe: As the War on Poverty has proved, no problem that government attacks is really ever solved, but I think this is an important first step. 

Liberals, It’s Time To Admit You Were Wrong

Obama-Care7

O.K. Liberals it’s time, it’s time to admit you were wrong about Obamacare. Swallow your pride and admit you were wrong. If you watch T.V. (and not MSNBC) I mean real T.V. you would have to have to noticed the photo of a six foot seven inch stack of paper containing all the new regulations and taxes that Obama-Care is going to burden this nation with, that photo alone should be enough to shock any Liberal into reality.

Come on Liberals, it’s time to admit that Obama bribed, strong-armed and threatened most of the Congressmen that voted for the bill, even though they knew in their hearts it was the wrong thing to do. Voting for a bill that no one read, is a crying shame that even you should be angry about. Why even as I write this there are Democrats teaming up with Republicans (who warned you this would happen) in a fight to repeal parts of this obnoxious law that will only hurt all Americans. I am willing to wager that your Highness Obama has still not read the bill and has no clue what is truly in it.

A bill that was supposed to reduce premiums for all Americans is now more than doubling the price of insurance and that is only the beginning, A bill that was supposed to cost 980 billion dollars over ten years is now costing nearly three trillion dollars with no end in sight. Only an idiot would believe that giving people unlimited insurance coverage would make premiums go down.  Come on Liberals it’s time to admit you were wrong.

A bill that was supposed to be a job creator is now killing jobs left and right. Businesses are not hiring people because of the added expense, not only because of the cost of the insurance, but also because of all the new regulation that Obama-Care brings. Businesses are cutting hours of their employees just so that they can survive and keep making a profit, I know profit is a dirty word for you Liberals, but without it why would anyone open up a business. I know only Liberals are allowed to make profits.

Keep your insurance and keep the doctor you have now, is what his Highness told us, another promise that goes un-kept. If you have insurance that is not what the government thinks you should have, you are forced to buy what they think is right for you (What happened to freedom of choice?) Already doctors are either leaving the business of not taking insurance entirely and accepting cash only. A recent survey found six out of ten doctors would retire early because of Obama-Care.

What happened to doctor patient confidentiality? Why that too is gone, your doctor must put all your medical records on-line, not only that, we now have to fill out a questionnaire revealing our whole background to the I.R.S.  if you don’t, you will be fined. I don’t know about you but the less the Government knows about me, the better I can sleep at night.

No death panels, another lie, Oh, they don’t call them death panels, but the result is the same. A panel of appointed Government know-it-alls (not doctors I might add) are going to approve or disapprove medical procedures, if they decide that a person is not worth having a certain procedure, tuff-nuggies, as we used to say.

It now says that even after this law is in full swing, there will still be over twenty-five million people without insurance (sought of defeats the whole purpose don’t it.) Liberals, I know you think that the rest of us are stupid, but the whole plan from day one was to push everyone into a Government run single pay system, we knew that from day one, you are not fooling anyone. Correction, the 32% that still favor Obama-Care I am sure do not know, nor do they care as long as it is free.

Come on Liberals admit you were wrong, it’s time to drive a stake through this monster of a bill and kill it, wait I forgot who I am talking too, you are Liberals, you never admit that you are wrong no matter how much evidence proves you wrong. If you would admit defeat than you would not be Liberals, sorry, what a waste of time this was, how can I even think that a Liberal would admit they were wrong and do what is right for the country, silly me.

Obama-Care7

 

You can find my new book “What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Right Here

“Representation” Democratic Party Style

Bible, flag, guns, Our rights

John Morse, Colorado State Senate President

Democrat leader of the Colorado State Senate, John Morse, recently stated, publicly, that he just ignores his constituents, and tells his fellow State Senators to do the same, because he doesn’t like their stand on gun control.  Now isn’t this just the height of arrogance and tyranny?  He is a “servant of the People” who swore to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”?  That dismissive and disgusted tone in his voice when referring to “some people” should be an alarm to anyone, including voters registered as Democrats.

Americans, this is what we are facing with increasing frequency from elected officials at all levels and in both political parties.  This is truly a “bi-partisan” power grab we are facing. The increasing degree of arrDemomcrat Logoogance on the part of elected officials shows how far they have gone in their plan to take total control over our lives.  It is one thing to have “discussions behind closed doors” and another thing altogether when they just come out and brazenly boast about their actions against We the People.

This man and his entire party are trampling on the Constitution and making no attempts to hide it any longer.  They are taking an “in your face” stand, daring We the People to do something about it.  The bully has thrown down the gauntlet for everyone to see.  He is openly challenging citizens to put a stop to tyranny, his tyranny.  The entire Democrat Party, and the Republican Party as well, are telling We the People that they can do as they wish and the Constitution means nothing.  Republicans posture and beat their chests for a while and then compromise on “common sense gun control measures”, meaning they sign off on taking away our right to own firearms as stated in the 2nd Amendment.  The straw argument that “no one should have the right to own a nuclear missile” just doesn’t fly with citizens.

republican logoThere are some in Congress, and in state legislatures around the nation, that are standing up for us and for the Constitution.  They are being pilloried by the political class of both parties and the lame stream media for doing so.  Anyone who has the temerity to challenge their “all-knowing wisdom” is declared an “enemy of the state” and subject to a drone strike at any moment because, according to Attorney General Eric Holder, “if the President does it, it is legal”!!!!   This is the stuff of dictatorships not a Constitutional Republic.

I wrote a couple of articles last month that address the problem of politicians and their handlers who deny the rights of We the People.  In the first one I appealed to people with name recognition and/or immense wealth to “put their money where their mouth is”, and challenged conservative voters to stand behind them in this battle for liberty.  In the second one I appealed to citizens who are registered Democrats to think about what their party is doing to their nation, and to their individual liberty.

This attitude oBarbed Wiref “we know better and will ignore you peasants” has passed the point of concern and has come to the point of outright danger.  If they no longer feel any necessity to hide their contempt for American citizens and for our way of life, We the People are facing imminent subjugation. Our rights to self –defense are being gutted by a government that holds the opinions of its citizens in disdain and total disregard.  They see themselves as the only ones capable of making decisions that are “in our best interests”.

Our government is engaging in actions that many see as a preparation step for the taking up of arms against its own citizens.  The Department of Homeland Security has secured contracts for the purchase of billions of rounds of hollow point bullets, designed for maximum damage to the human body (these aren’t for “target practice”); tens of thousands of fully automatic rifles, the true “assault rifles”, not the semi-automatic kind you and I possess; are re-fitting thousands of armored “Urban Rescue Vehicles”, the kind with gun ports, for use in American cities; and helicopters fly through our skies shooting machineguns in simulated “domestic unrest” scenarios.Dept Homeland Security Logo

Martial Law may be right around the corner.  The government could isolate citizens and confiscate their firearms, or kill the citizen who refuses to surrender their protection, over little or nothing, mostly “imagined offenses” as is happening in California right now.  They like to throw the mental health issue out into the arena because they know Republicans will hide behind the need to “keep the guns out of the hands of the mentally deranged”.  Of course, that category now applies to any veteran, whether they have seen combat or not.  And who will define “mental illness”, Sen. Diane Feinstein?  Even now people who believe the Constitution is the law of the land and the basis for our nation are called “extremists” by those in power in both political parties.  How much of a step is it to declare these same “extremists” as mentally ill for the purpose of denying them their 2nd Amendment rights?

The Democratic Party, and their allies in the Republican Party, have this all designed to destroy the ConstitutionConstitution and to subjugate We the People.  Establishment operatives in both political parties have joined forces to impose their will on the citizens of America.  They don’t care what we think, what we want, or what is lawful.  They desire the power to dictate our lives to us and this Colorado State Senate president has come right out in the open and stated as much.  The message to We the People is “agree with us voluntarily or we will impose agreement on you”.  Nanny Bloomberg is doing the same thing in New York City, telling people of the nation that he will impose our best interests on us if we refuse to acquiesce voluntarily.  This has to stop, and We the People must stop it, if liberty is to be re-established.

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

March 24, 2013

 

Ana Marie Cox Thinks Breitbart and His ‘Minions’ Are Bad Bad People

Screen Shot 2013-02-28 at 11.41.56 AM

Ana Marie Cox of the Guardian isn’t on our team. That’s fine.  However, to label us the “jackass” wing of journalism only demonstrates the left’s inability to hold their own side accountable. She seems to feel that all of the criticism she outlines in her piece about conservative media are absent on the left.  This Friday will mark the one year anniversary of Andrew Breitbart’s passing, and it seems Cox is frustrated, angry, and perhaps threatened by the legacy he left behind.

Let’s just get this out of the way right up front: Ana Marie Cox built her career on blogging jokes about anal sex at the reprehensible guttersnipe site Wonkette. She presented herself as a rambunctious youngster, but it turned out she was already pushing 30 and just naturally behaves like a annoying, hyperactive juvenile. Both Time and later the Guardian hired her in full knowledge of this colorful journalistic career.

Now that we’ve established Cox’s bona fides as a scribe and scholar…

First, there is no such thing as being “mean” in media. As Breitbart famously said, “truth isn’t mean. It’s the truth,” and sadly that characteristic fails miserably with left-wing journalists.  It’s not mean to point out that Ana Marie Cox built her career on blogging anal sex jokes. It’s just the truth. It’s not mean to point out that Rachel Maddow seems content with airing edited video in order to smear Sen. John McCain’s remarks about gun control.   Good Morning Americaedited First Lady Michelle Obama’s inaccurate statement about the tragic death of Hadiya Pendleton in Chicago because of time constraints.  It was censorship.

Mrs. Obama claimed, “And she was caught in the line of fire because some kids had some automatic weapons they didn’t need.” This quote appeared online, but not on the February 26 interview with Robin Roberts.

[…]

However, when the interview aired on “Good Morning America” on Tuesday, viewers heard the first lady said this:

“She was absolutely right. She did everything she was supposed to do. She was standing in a park, with her friends, in a neighborhood blocks away from where my kids grew up, where our house is. And she was caught in the line of fire. I just don’t want to keep disappointing our kids in this country. I want them to know that we put them first.”

ABC edited the response visually by using a cutaway in the middle of the answer of Ms. Roberts listening.

Cox wrote that the right-leaning media outlets have an MO that seeks to

 be outrageous, scurrilous and completely unfair. And then, when you get a rise, just shrug and say: “What’s your problem: can’t take a joke?”

But for something to be humor, it has to be funny. And as comedy goes, the Free Beacon’s jokes have all the subtlety of Jackass. The only difference is that instead of creating dubious hilarity at the spectacle of their self-inflicted pain, they’re using equally ridiculous stunts to laugh at yours. Clinically speaking, we call people with that attitude “sociopaths”, but in the political realm, [Michael] Goldfarb’s [founder of the Washington Free Beacon] punchlines – emphasis on punch! – are just the latest iteration of a burgeoning style of discourse whose practitioners have become influential enough to deserve their own designation.

So, editing video to smear – or convey a false narrative – is fair and accurate, Ms. Cox?  To smear James O’Keefe as a racist, who you also criticize in your column, without proof isn’t scurrilous? By the way, Salon.com, who published the piece from left-wing journalist Max Blumenthal, printed a correction stating:

The Feb. 3 “James O’Keefe’s Race Problem” reported that O’Keefe, the conservative activist arrested on charges he plotted to tamper with Sen. Mary Landrieu’s phone lines, helped plan a conference on “Race and Conservatism” that featured white nationalist Jared Taylor. The freelance photographer who attended the event, and snapped O’Keefe’s photo there, now says the right-wing provocateur helped out at the conference,but cannot confirm that he helped plan it. The story has been corrected.

The article also said that O’Keefe was terminated by the right-wing Leadership Institute in 2008, after videos were released of O’Keefe calling Planned Parenthood and offering to donate money to abort black babies. He was let go in 2007. Leadership Institute co-founder Morton Blackwell told the New York Times O’Keefe “wanted to do sting operations that would affect legislation; he made some calls which have been covered in the news media to Planned Parenthood. That was beyond the scope of what we had hired him to do. We are an educational organization. We are not an activist organization.” Blackwell says he told O’Keefe to choose between his job and his activism, “and he said he was committed to the activism,” according to the Times. The date of O’Keefe’s termination has been corrected, and Blackwell’s explanation has been added to the story.

Cox also slams O’Keefe for using “highly selective cuts,” which is the seat of irony.  Besides the examples I listed above, MSNBC was caught editing the recorded testimony of Neil Heslin, whose son was a victim of the Sandy Hook tragedy, on Capitol Hill.  Contrary to what the media reported, he wasn’t heckled during his testimony.

MSNBC has a history of editing video to slam conservatives. In 2009, MSNBC edited out a black man carrying an AR-15 rifle in order to engage in racial commentary about the Tea Party. In 2012, they edited out Mitt Romney’s comments about the perils of too much regulation in business, and cut to him discussing the checkout process at the WaWa Deli in order to portray him as out of touch. Lastly, let’s not forget how NBC edited George Zimmerman’s 911 call to make him sound racist.

However, Cox’s conclusion to her piece that left me aghast.

…the perversity of this post-Ann Coulter generation is that they believe the world is run by nerdy liberal elitists , that their antics are a righteous rebellion instead of an attempt to assert the law of jungle. Perhaps it is true that liberal nerds have made great strides in governing – certainly, our president is one – but the reactionary insurgents’ anti-establishment pose, which goes along with shoving a camera in someone’s face, breaks down when you consider the actual policies advocated by the guy behind the viewfinder. Policies that, say, continue to suppress voting rights of minorities won’t make them punk rock heroes.

The only thing remotely disruptive about the material generated by the Bratbarts is its incivility. In itself, that is simply a style, not an argument or a critique. Incivility can be OK: I am a big believer in disrespecting those in power, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with being flippant – there are times when it is the only proper response to authority. As journalist and defender of the lowbrow Gilbert Seldes put it:

“Comedy is last refuge of the nonconformist mind.”

But confusing satire and hazing? Mixing up muckraking with misinformation? Revelation with subterfuge? Laughter with cruelty? Those are the tactics of would-be authoritarians, not outlaw liberators.

Of course, Cox had to boot-lick Obama towards the end.  It’s a sign of respect for the great one, which ironically comes before she professes her advocacy in disrespecting elected officials.  I’m sure she will be equally harsh on the Obama administration, which has “made great strides” in collecting names for kill lists, convincing the New York Times towithhold information about drone bases, and blowing away Americans abroad with drone strikes. The legality of which is still in dispute.

Lastly, when the liberal media went “birther” on Sen. Ted Cruz (R- Texas), isn’t that a form of hazing?  Isn’t insinuating his Canadian roots a cruel exercise in “revelation with subterfuge?”  Isn’t that “mixing up muckraking and misinformation?  Cruz happens to be a conservative sticking to his principles, and his Canadian roots are an extraneous detail since he was born to an American mother, making him eligible to run for president.  Yes, in 2016, we could possibly see a Cruz candidacy.

So, Cox thinks that we on the right sit at the “mean” table in media.  Then again, if the liberal media didn’t act like “jackasses” themselves – we wouldn’t be so angry.

The Sequester Lie

Eagle- America Deserves Better

Eagle Fighting for FreedomThe big deal they are making over this sequester nonsense is giving me a headache.  I have made this point on several social network site discussions so I thought I would put it all together on one place.  Obama, his cabinet minions, and all of the members of Congress come out and say; Social Security checks will stop, meat plants will shut down, the FBI won’t be able to track terrorists, the Border Patrol won’t be able to secure the borders, airports will nearly shut down, pony rides in national parks will end, the sun won’t come up on March 2, and on and on and on.  And the RINO’s in Congress aren’t doing any better.

This is such tripe that it is actually embarrassing, and infuriating at the same time.  This is the best we have to govern our nation?  For anyone who doesn’t already know, let me lay out a few facts that you won’t hear on any “news media” outlet, including FOX News. The “media” covers the false flag talking points arguing but not the factsEagle- America Deserves Better. NOTHING IS BEING CUT!!!!  That is just the truth of it.  The “baseline budgeting” system our government runs under calls for about 1.8% – 2% increase every year.  This is how they do it, every year.  They build in an automatic increase in every department in government, and they do it for the very reason you are seeing played out again for the 300th time in the last 25 years.

Follow me here because this is the crux of the game being played by both political parties.  Spending goes UP, every year, in spite of the “horrendous cuts” they are “forced” to make.  The federal government is expected to spend approximately $3.7 trillion in 2013, yet they are wringing their hands and fretting over cutting $85 billion out of that total, which is 1.1% by the way.  According to figures released by the Heritage Foundation the federal government spent $3.6 trillion in FY 2012. If we take $85 billion off of the projected $3.7 trillion in 2013 we still find the government spending $3.615 trillion in 2013.  What the “the sky is falling” politicians are telling us is that spending $61.5 billion MORE,  1.66% more, in 2013 than they spent in 2012 is somehow a cut in spending, and will cause untold calamities if it happens.  How does that work?  I must have had a defective education because that doesn’t look they are spending less to me.

The “hawks” on defense want social items cut and the “hawks” on social items want defense cut.  So, they come to a republican logo“compromise”, eventually.  They posture and argue and pound their chests for their cause and in the end some things may get cosmetic ”cuts” (read less increase than planned) but spending overall still goes up.  They have “fought” on television, on radio, on the floors of the chambers and told us how ”terrible” life will be if we cut their pet project.  Both political parties get their sound bites in so low information voters on both sides of the aisle get just enough to think someone actually cares about what affects them and hence can count on that vote the next time it is needed.

The question I have, and one that never gets answered, is “if the country is going to almost totally shut down because we “cut” $85 billion, why are they spending $3.7 TRILLION and where does the rest of it go?”  This “spending cut” is going to cause firemen, policemen, and teachers to be laid off?  Since when does the federal government pay for these services?  Isn’t that why I pay county property taxes and state taxes?  Social Security checks won’t go out, pony rides in national parks will end (sad face), soldiers won’t haveDemomcrat Logo what they need to fight, and 700,000 federal employees in the Defense Department will be laid off? WHY??? Won’t the $61.5 billion MORE they plan to spend this year cover those social security checks, pony rides, soldier supplies, and employees just like they did last year?  Every politician and every bureaucrat comes out and cries about how their particular area is going to die a death of financial starvation, yet government is going to spend more money than last year.  Sorry, I guess I am just too stupid to understand their logic; at least they think so.

And to spending cuts, I have yet to hear Obama speak about cutting back on his vacations to Hawaii and Spain, golf with Tiger Woods, a special Leer jet for his dog to go to Martha’s Vineyard, or a junket on Air Force One to Nevada or wherever  to announce another of his “green energy” or “jobs” scams that he could have announced from Washington.  I haven’t heard about ‘Ole Nan’ giving up her first class jet for a broom.

Rand Paul recently returned $600,000 that he was authorized as a Senator but didn’t spend.  Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma has been doing this for years.  A side question is “how much money do they get for ‘office expenses’?”  Apparently too much!!

I also haven’t heard anything about cutting congressional or White House staff, not to mention the pay raises they seem to get quite often.  We hear the horror stories about how We the People will suffer due to “cutbacks” but never how Congress or Il Duce Obamathe Executive Branch plan to do with less.  It is always We the People who must do with less while they spend more on themselves, with never a true cut in government spending. Rush recently mentioned on his radio show that 7 of the 10 richest counties surround or are very near Washington, D.C. (De Cesspool). No recession in or near Washington!!!

In the real world they are scamming liberal and conservative voters alike.  The people running OUR government take We the People for being so stupid we can’t figure this out.  The sad fact of the matter is that about 51%, at least, buy into this lie. How do people like Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Diane Feinstein, Sheila Jackson Lee, Charles Rangel, Hank (Guam might tip over) Johnson, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Eric Cantor, Jeb Hensarling, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, etc. continue to get elected?

Much of the problem comes from the Republican Party yet these same people who turn their backs on conservatives get elected time and again. WHY????  I don’t know of a single major promise Republicans have made in 20 years that they have actually followed through on, yet they continue to receive the same support from the same people.

The problem is that we have no other options. It is either ultra-liberal Democrats or very-liberal Republicans.  We vote time and again for the lesser of two evils because that is all the options we have.  That has to change if we are going to salvage the Republic established in 1791 and defended for all these years by the blood of American patriots.  The biggest problem facing America is career politicians and bureaucrats who could care less what We the People think or what the Constitution says.  A 3rd party encompassing the 67% of We the People who make up the TEA Party could cure these problems.  Where are the leaders to step up and lead????

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 24, 2013

Acorn-Affiliated Blueprint NC Puts A Hit On State’s Republican Leadership

Screen Shot 2013-02-23 at 2.14.47 AM

The war of ideas is alive and well. In North Carolina, it’s taken a vicious turn,with progressives targeting the state’s Republican leadership and Governor Pat McCrory, who was elected in 2012.  Spearheading this effort is a 501 (c)(3) group known as Blueprint NC, which, according to their website:

is a partnership of public policy, advocacy, and grassroots organizing nonprofits dedicated to achieving a better, fairer, healthier North Carolina through the development of an integrated communications and civic engagement strategy.  Ultimately, Blueprint aims to influence state policy in NC so that residents of the state benefit from more progressive policies such as better access to health care, higher wages, more affordable housing, a safer, cleaner environment, and access to reproductive health services.

It’s liberalism on steroids – which is bad for economic health.  Mark Binker of WRAL.com, which covers the news in Raleigh, Durham, and Fayetteville, wrote yesterday that Blueprint NC drafted a memo, which aims to put “crippling” pressure on conservatives in the state.

According to documents included with the memo and interviews, the strategy outline was produced by Myers Research and Strategic Services for Project New America. It was originally provided to Progress North Carolina, a liberal nonprofit that has aggressively attacked McCrory during the 2012 campaign and his early term in office. Progress North Carolina shared the memo with Blueprint NC, a nonprofit that coordinates the activities of liberal-leaning nonprofits. In turn, Blueprint NC distributed it to its member organizations.

An electronic version of the memo appears to contain at least three separate documents. One is an email from outgoing Blueprint NC Communications Director Stephanie Bass describing the material and emphasizing that it is “CONFIDENTIAL to Blueprint, so please be careful – share with your boards and appropriate staff, but not the whole world.”

Sean Kosofsky, Blueprint NC’s director, said his group did not pay for or commission the research. “We were just forwarding it on,” he said.

The second document is a “talking points memo” that outlines strategies for progressive groups. Policy wins for the political left, the memo said, would likely be defined as “mitigating” legislation, rather than pushing their own agenda items.

The most effective way to mitigate the worst legislation is to weaken our opponents’ ability to govern by crippling their leaders (McCrory, Tillis, Berger, etc…)” the memo reads, referring to the governor, House Speaker Thom Tillis and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger.

The memo goes on to describe a “potential two-year vision” during which the groups would “eviscerate the leadership and weaken their ability to govern.” The bulk of the document is a poll memo that talks about how to frame opposition to conservative tax and education policies. The survey was conducted between Jan. 29 and Feb. 2.

Given how progressives handled Americans for Prosperity rallying in support of Michigan’s Right-to-Work legislation last December, I think we can all imagine what “crippling their leaders” means for this cadre of left-wingers. Conservative nonprofit groups also draft memos outlining political strategy, but seldom does it contain explicit orders to go after someone personally. However, another interesting development, with the leaking of this memo, centers on WRAL itself.

The Civitas Institute, a conservative organization operating within North Carolina, posted on their blog yesterday that Binker left out key facts in his piece about BluePrint, namely that the A.J. Fletcher Foundation, another civic engagement nonprofit in the state, gave the progressive group $35,000.  Additionally, the Foundation gave:

$380,000 to the NC Justice Center which initially housed BlueprintNC when it was formed (the foundations 990 IRS reports are not current so there may be more) . The Goodmon family which owns WRAL has 4 family members on the board of the Fletcher Foundation including Barbara the President and Jim the chairman of the board. The Executive Director was formerly the head of the NC center for Voter Education, one of the original members of BlueprintNC. In addition Chris Fitzsimon, former WRAL reporter,  is head of the liberal NC Policy Watch, the original lead attack group in the Blueprint coalition. Fitzsimon is also provided free airtime on Goodmon owned WRAL-FM from which he launches daily attacks on political opponents. The Fletcher Foundation has been a long time funder of Policy Watch is now housed in the Justice Center.

WRAL is also actually doing one of the items in the strategy memo. The memo on page 3 calls for tracking McCrory “Campaign Promises” and “slam him when he contradicts his promise.” WRAL appears to have taken that for action by launching their “Promise Tracker“, complete with cute little ”Skull & Crossbones” symbols.

Then again, how could this group operate surreptitiously – and methodically – in planning to bring North Carolina’s Republican leadership to its knees?  As LaborUnionReport wrote about Blueprint on RedState, the organization likes to keep a low profile.

Blueprint has been created as a strategic initiative – focused on creating collaborative change and not focused on a public identity beyond our partners. Blueprint does not seek recognition for itself, but prefers that its partners be recognized for the good work that they do. [Emphasis added.]

Also, Blueprint’s allies seem to be the depraved spawn of ACORN.

Report added:

In 2010, Blueprint NC’s “partners” were  identified by the Civitas Institute which revealed a conglomeration of national and state “progressive” organizations—including the AFL-CIO’s A. Philip Randolph Institute, as well as the anti-life group NARAL.

[…]

In fact, Blueprint NC’s Director, Sean Kosofsky, is a NARAL alum, according to this bio:

Sean Kosofsky is currently the Director of Blueprint North Carolina. He is the former Executive Director of NARAL Pro-Choice NC, and has been an active visible LGBT leader since 1994. He was the Director of Poliyc for 12 years for Michigan’s leading LGBT rights organization, Triangle Foundation.

Blueprint NC also appears to be very well funded. The Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, which was established in 1936 as a memorial to the youngest son of the founder of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, gave Blueprint NC $850,000 for “general operating support” in 2010.

The [Z. Smith Reynolds] Foundation is apparently still giving Blueprint NC money—to the sum of $400,000, according to a report in Friday’s [Charlotte] Observer. However, due to the light being shined on Blueprint NC’s strategy (and, consequently, the[ Z. Smith Reynolds] Foundation), that support may now be in jeopardy.

Nevertheless, the strategy detailed in this memo could easily be executed in other states by affiliates of BluePrint – which is probably their plan.  The ‘Obamafication’ of the Democratic Party, and the liberal movement in general, has led to a progressive crusade to forcefully drag our nation to the far left.  Conservatives, at present, seem to be incognizant of the ramifications of this highly-coordinated campaign, and don’t seem to be in rapid response mode in countering this liberal grassroots operation.

The progressive left has all the advantages in digital strategy, voter targeting, and youth outreach.  Republicans are dreadfully behind the curve in this technological front that is critical in turning the tide against the liberal leviathan that has been unleashed against us. In the meantime, Civitas is holding their leadership conference on March 1, and I hope the various panels discuss BluePrint and this memo in order to fight back.

Excerpts of the memo are below.  Full memo at the bottom of the page.

 

Blueprint NC Secret Memo by

 

 

Chris Dorner & Jake England: Mass Murderers or Folk Heroes?

Chris Dorner

With all of the support given to Chris Dorner after his murder spree I find myself looking for a person I can call a hero for “standing up for himself”.  I found him in Tulsa, Oklahoma of all places.  The Tulsa story didn’t get the same publicity Dorner Chris Dornergarnered but the story is essentially the same.  Dorner is in the process of being canonized by leftists across this nation for murdering people who had nothing to do with his firing from the Los Angeles Police Department over questions of conduct.  I don’t know for sure why he was fired, and no one probably ever will know as the truth won’t be allowed to see the light of day.  The Los Angeles Police Department will cover their tracks and whitewash the affair, as will supporters of the actions taken by Dorner.  No one cares what the truth is, only that their side wins.  It doesn’t help that the LAPD took to tossing a hail of bullets at anyone driving a pickup truck in California without bothering to find out who was in the vehicle, but that is another issue.

The fact of the matter is that Dorner is a mass murderer, plain and simple.  There is NO excuse that can be made to justify what he did, or is there?  I find the justifying circumstances in the Tulsa case I mentioned to actually be more valid and horrendous than in Dorner’s but the killer here isn’t being made into a folk hero.  WHY, you ask???  I will get to that in a bit.  Right now, let’s review the Dorner case.

Dorner was fired from the LAPD, ostensibly, for reporting the misconduct of another officer, breaking the “code of silence” imposed on law enforcement. Not unlike the “code of silence” imposed by the Mafia and their subordinate and successive gangs is it?  This goes back and forth enough to make one’s head spin.  I heard a blip on television of Marc Lamont Hill, a “professor” at Columbia University, actually calling Dorner a hero.  I don’t understand why any television “news”Marc Lamont Hill outlet would put this simple-minded racist, Marc Lamont Hill, on the air and allow him to spout the trash he spouts.  It also boggles my mind that this quack is teaching kids, or rather indoctrinating them.  Hill called Dorner a “modern day Django”. Django, it seems, is a movie about a black man “having fun killing white people”.  To “Professor” Hill, Dorner is a hero for going out and killing white people who had nothing to do with his situation.  Sure, that makes perfect sense.  After all, killing white people because they are white is not a racial hate crime is it?  Every childhood movie hero of mine made his fame by killing innocent bystanders because of the color of their skin, yeah right!!!!

Now back to the Tulsa killings in April, 2012.  Jake England should also be considered heroes Jake Englandby “Professor” Hill.  They went out and avenged the senseless murder of England’s father by a black man.  England killed blacks because a black man killed his father.  Seems perfectly rational when you go by the “Professor” Hill theory!!!!  All England did was “avenge” a wrong done to he and his family.  Since a black man committed the offense, black people, not anyone in particular just any black person, should pay the price of revenge.

According to the standard set by “Professor” Hill and all of the other left-wing nuts, any action taken is acceptable if justified by “having been wronged” by a group or class of people.  The little caveat of “while I don’t condone killing innocent people” just doesn’t quite work for me when it is tacked on in front of praising a mass murderer. “I don’t condone killing innocents” either but England suffered much more than Dorner, and by Hill’s theory, had even more justification to commit the acts he committed.  It shouldn’t matter that the five people he shot had nothing to do with his father’s murder, they were black and that should be enough, using the “Professor” Marc Lamont Hill theory.

Our Republic is going downhill fast, due in part to the kind of rationale shown by “Professor” Hill and the other nuts who justify Dorner’s actions.  There is always a perfectly rational explanation for anything that is done by a black person or a Marxist with a “cause”.  If Timothy McVeigh had been black or a leftist he would have been hailed by the left as a “modern day whoever” for killing innocent civilians as revenge for the actions of Janet Reno and Bill Clinton in the Ruby Ridge (Randy Weaver and family)  and Waco (Branch Davidian) murders.  I don’t remember any conservative applauding McVeigh for killing 168 people, including many children, who had absolutely nothing to do with either of the Janet Reno murder scenes.  McVeigh is simply considered a mass murderer by people from both political spectrums, as he should be.

People getting on television and trying to justify the unjustifiable due to a particular political spin is reprehensible, to coin a word popular with liberal/progressives.  Cold blooded murder is not justifiable under any circumstances yet we find justification every time a liberal/progressive supported group or person commits any horrendous act.

This “my side is always right” attitude we see from the left is destructive in more ways than one.  It justifies bad behavior on any scale by using a false flag argument that revenge is acceptable when the cause is one they agree with.  We are seeing the left condone the use of drones to kill American citizens who have a belief in the Founding Fathers and the Constitution of thConstitutione United States of America because they don’t like anyone to the right of Marxism.

The difference between the Dorner and England cases is miniscule in the commission of crimes but vast in the reaction from those who seek to destroy liberty in America.  To use a cartoon I saw a few days ago, “taking away my guns for a crime committed by someone else is like taking my car away because someone in another state drove drunk”.  There is another one about the neighbors and the number of kids they have but I won’t use it.  I don’t drink alcohol and I don’t go on murder sprees so why should I be punished for the crimes of others?  The attitude of the left is one of subjugation to their agenda and this is no different.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

February 19, 2013

Last Ounce of Courage: A Movie For Patriots

Last Ounce of Courage Cover

  I just finished watching an incredible movie.  A few months ago I saw previews of a movie called “Last Ounce of Courage” and Last Ounce of Courage Covermentioned to my wife that I would like to see it.  She found it at Amazon.com and ordered it.  This movie had been sitting in a box with some others for quite some time and she pulled them out today and we decided to sit down and watch it tonight.

The story is about a Vietnam veteran who lost a son in Iraq or Afghanistan, not really sure which, but where isn’t important.  The story is what is important.  Bob Revere is a mayor of small town America who watched his son go off to war and saw him return in a casket.  The story line revolves around Christmas but the underlying reality of today’s America is what matters.

Bob Revere is a Medal of Honor recipient from Vietnam who takes a stand for freedom when the ACLU, and the media naturally, threatens his town with lawsuits and other strong-arm tactics over acknowledging that Christmas is celebrated as the birtBob Revereh of Jesus Christ.  Revere embodies the spirit of America and what we are losing because We the People have allowed ourselves to be intimidated into acquiescing to the views of a very small minority of people who are agnostic, pagan, and/or just downright evil.

Anyone that knows me can tell you that I am about as tough and hard-nosed as anyone can be but I found myself teary eyed through the entire movie.   It made me swell with pride and ache with sadness and concern at the same time.  This movie took me back 42 years to my time in the military.  It took me back to a time when friends died on distant battlefields in third world hell holes that no one remembers or cares about today.

I think of friends who died in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Central America, and South America; in unknown and unacknowledged counter-insurgency operations all around the globe.  Many died in places no one ever knew about because the operations were so highly classified that company and group commanders didn’t know where they were or what they were doing.

It made me think of the sacrifices made by the 1.3 million who have died since the beginning of our Republic and the countless millions who have suffered crippling injuries, both physical and mental, to preserve the ideals founded in 1776 and written into the Declaration of Independence; and later, in 1791, written into The Constitution of the United States of America.  It made me think of the millions more, like myself, who were fortunate enough to serve in the military without the debilitating injuries so many suffered through, and still suffer through today.

Our nation is losing the freedoms so many have sacrificed so much to provide for us.  Like Bob Revere we have become comfortable with giving in to tyranny without realizing we are doing so.  In one line in the movie Revere says “that’s just the way it is, kid” when talking to his grandson.  Many sit in comfy homes, with plenty to eat, with warm roofs over our heads, and do little or nothing to honor the sacrifices of so many who deserve to be honored. Honoring them is more than a parade on Memorial Day or Veterans Day.  While these things are important, they aren’t the most important things we can do.

Little by little, a government run by dictatorial minded thugs intimidates us into giving away the legacy left by those who have put their lives on hold, or sacrificed themselves, for an ideal that was more precious to them than their own lives.  We give in to the threats of lawsuits by bullies because we want to “just get along and live in peace”.  During the Benghazi hearings Hillary Clinton said “at this point, what difference does it really make?”.  My blood boiled when I heard those words come out of the mouth of one of the most despicable people to ever sit in a seat of government.

What difference does it really make, indeed!!  The more important question is “What difference do I make?”.  What difference do I make  in the bigger picture of liberty for my children, my grandchildren, my great grandchildren.  Like Bob Revere, I served my country honorably in the military.  But again, like Bob Revere, that isn’t enough.  Our future generations need us more than we have ever needed anyone.  The “greatest generation” fought Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini in World War II to defeat the most evil forces on earth at the time, all to preserve my chance to live free.  Like Revere’s grandson I hadn’t been born yet when my father joined millions of other men to put Bob Revere Grandsontheir lives in harm’s way for a future generation they would birth.  The wars of my day, I thought, were for freedom of our country but they really weren’t, at least not directly as World War II had been.  The wars against Communist expansion were more about the freedom of others living in countries far away from our shores, yet stopping the expansion of evil, in the long run, was necessary for the protection of our land also.

We are in a war today, right here in America.  It isn’t a shooting war, yet, but is a war none the less.  Our war is against the principalities and powers of darkness as described in the Holy Bible, powers that control our government.   We are fighting a war for the very soul of a nation and a future of liberty for our children and future generations.  If we lose this war it will be decades before there will be a chance for freedom, if that chance ever comes.  We are fighting corrupt politicians like Bob Menendez who has sex with underage girls, paid for by our tax money and protected by a corrupt political system that values their power more than they value morality and what is right.  Menendez is only one of many corrupt politicians and bureaucrats who demean the values America stands for, yet sit back and condemn those of us who value honesty, integrity, and morality.Sen. Bob Menendez

The TEA Party rallies and recent gatherings at state capitols to support the 2nd Amendment are encouraging but more needs to be done.  People have finally become alarmed enough to stand up and be counted even though they know a despotic government is recording their words, their actions, their phone calls, e-mails, and internet site comments.  All this is being done to intimidate us into silence or to build a lists of “enemies of the state” to be arrested and murdered when the time comes for the final takeover.

Some cower in silence, and/or temper what they post, out of fear of reprisal from the government.  I have been told numerous times that I should stop writing the articles that I write and posting what I post on social network sites, or tone down the rhetoric out of concern for who might be reading and taking notes.  I am critical of despots in government, regardless of political affiliation, and that is dangerous I am told.  The media is already in the pockets of the despots but the independence minded patriots are not, and will not be intimidated into silence.

We the People can win the war against tyranny but we can’t do it by being silent.  We don’t need to run out into the streets shooting guns and yelling, but we cannot win by sitting silently and allowing the thugs in government to run roughshod over our freedoms either.

Go to the movie theater and watch this movie, or better yet buy the DVD and watch it with your children and neighbors. Pass it around to those who will watch it and stand up for freedom.  No one who has fought for freedom, or anyone who has lost a loved one in that fight, will be able to sit through this without tears.  I can’t imagine how anyone who loves freedom will be able to watch without being touched deeply.  I sit here and write this with tears in my eyes, thinking of the sacrifices of so many and how close we are to throwing all of those sacrifices away out of apathy.

Please share this article with everyone you know, make it go viral in honor of those who have given all for your freedom and those who are still sacrificing for liberty today.  You can watch the trailer here.  Also, go to www.standusa.com and join in the community of Americans taking a stand for liberty, I have.

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 10, 2013

Jesus, Another Innocent Man Wrongly Convicted

bitter christianFew pastimes are more entertaining than witnessing a smug, non–orthodox Jew giving instruction on New Testament theology to Christians. Last Saturday the most reverend Lisa Miller in her Washington Post ‘Belief Watch’ column asked readers, “Is gun ownership Christian?

This puts believers at an immediate disadvantage because Christ did not spend much of his ministry discussing consumer goods. He mentions the odd cloak, fragrant ointment, sword and widow’s mite, but one would not confuse Him with Ralph Nader or other marketplace stalwarts.

Besides, since Miller picks and chooses what she believes in regard to her own faith, she has no problem distorting the Gospel in an effort to draft Jesus into Code Pink.

She begins by completely misunderstanding the significance of Jesus on the cross. Miller writes, “The Christian Lord allowed himself to be crucified rather than fight the injustice of the death sentence imposed on him.” To co–opt Mark Twain; this is an inability to distinguish between lightning and the lightning bug.

On the contrary, it was not a miscarriage of justice. The sentence was the fulfillment of divine justice. Christ willingly substituted Himself on the cross in place of a sinful mankind. God did not alter the terms of the first Covenant with Abraham. There was a price to be paid for man’s rebellion and he decided to pay it Himself. (This refusal to “evolve” on the part of the creator, should give pause to modern “Christian” leader’s attempts to revise and soften the New Testament, but it doesn’t.)

Consequently, Christ was not the earliest recruit for the left’s anti–capitol punishment movement. Christ died for our sins. He willingly paid the price we could not pay and ushered in the New Covenant.

There would be no Christians without Christ’s death on the cross. Even if the Jerusalem chapter of the Innocence Project had tried to get Him off the hook, He would have refused the offer, because to do so would have rendered His work pointless.

After that inauspicious beginning, Miller moves on to the point of her column, “How do such Christians reconcile their stalwart commitment to the Second Amendment with their belief in a gospel that preaches nonviolence?” And then she quotes Matthew 5:39 – “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”

This leads me to believe Miller was also not a fan of the excellent “Machine Gun Preacher”

Then it left me wondering if I had missed a recent development on the violence front, so I did an online search on “strike AND cheek AND gunfight” to see if there had been a rash of concealed carry permit holders (CCW) lighting up people who slapped them.

That search string was a bust, so I tried “strike AND cheek AND shoot” with the same result. Evidently there is no problem with Christian gun owners initiating violence. Miller’s goal appears to involve persuading Christians to join the ranks of the defenseless. This decision, however, would not be made in a vacuum. Should a Christian head of household decide to disarm because he believes guns are inherently evil, like cigarettes or 16 oz. sodas, his decision would not affect him alone. His wife, his children and mom in the basement would all instantly become draftees in the War for Pacifism.

And the family would be misguided draftees at that. As Adam Clarke points out in his commentary on the passage, these “exhortations belong to those principally who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake.” Say for example, an orthodox Christian that leftists like Miller slap up the side of the head for refusing to support homosexual marriage. Following Matthew, the Christian would turn the other cheek as he said he does not approve of the homosexual lifestyle either.

The verse is most certainly not directed toward ancient or modern Christians with a desire to defend their persons or their family.

Then Miller snidely intimates that “conservative Christian leaders are not falling over themselves to proclaim in public their pro–gun theologies.” But then Miller proceeds to list various Christians who are doing just that.

She takes issue with Richard Land, a former Southern Baptist Convention official, who said during a December interview on National People’s Radio (NPR) that he supports arming teachers. And Miller concludes with David French, senior counsel for the American Center of Law and Justice, who told her “Turn the other cheek does not mean turn your wife’s cheek or turn your children’s cheek.”

Miller — who works for an organization sporting guards who check commoners before they are allowed to enter — replies, “Provocative, but unconvincing. Jesus identified with the weak, not the strong; with the victims, not the shooters (or the people with the guns).”

Wrong again. Jesus praised a Roman centurion who controlled his own sword and 90 others — for his faith, saying, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.” What’s more, Jesus reached out to the weak and the victims, but unlike leftist community organizers, He considered Himself a shepherd and the shepherd doesn’t hand the wolf a napkin as he approaches the herd.

There is another verse that’s very germane to this discussion, although Miller manages to overlook it. Luke 6:42 advises, “Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”

Miller would do more to protect the innocent life of children if she would worry less about the imaginary threat of “assault weapons” in the hands of Christians and more about the real threat of “assault doctors*” who are responsible for the deaths of over 1 million innocents each year during abortions.

 

*Thanks to my wife, Janet, for this inspired term that aptly describes a depraved occupation.

Here We Go Again: A Discussion with Numbers USA’s Rosemary Jenks

Screen Shot 2013-01-30 at 10.12.17 AM

Screen Shot 2013-01-30 at 10.12.17 AMWith the “Gang of Eight” announcing their immigration reform package yesterday, I’m sure many American found the deal sensible, rational, and fair.  It’s a bipartisan deal, which pleases the independent segments of the electorate, and has Sen. Marco Rubio endorsing it wholeheartedly.  Immigration keeps the United States economically vibrant, unlike Europe, which has become older, grayer, and more Islamized.  We should welcome immigrants, but not at the cost of undermining our economic interests – which is what NumbersUSA, an organization dedicated to common sense immigration reform, is trying to tell members of Congress.  I was able to speak with Rosemary Jenks, NumbersUSA’s Director of Government Relations, about the new proposal last night.

On NumbersUSA’s website, they lay out the details of the package:

 1. Create a tough but fair path to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States that is contingent upon securing our borders and tracking whether legal immigrants have left the country when required;

2. Reform our legal immigration system to better recognize the importance of characteristics that will help build the American economy and strengthen American families;

3. Create an effective employment verification system that will prevent identity theft and end the hiring of future unauthorized workers; and,

4. Establish an improved process for admitting future workers to serve our nation’s workforce needs, while simultaneously protecting all workers.

It doesn’t sound like snake oil, but anything from government that sounds too good to be true – tends to be that way.  Case in point, the passing of Obamacare.  However, to low-information voters, or those who aren’t privy to immigration data, it represents, as Jenks said:

…part of the problem with the immigration debate because when you see an outline of a proposal, and you don’t know a whole lot about the issue, it tends to look pretty reasonable.  It’s only when you get into the details that things start to fall apart. So, you know for example – the bottom line is that this proposal is virtually identical to the proposal from the Gang of Eight in 2007. And I actually like Sen. Sessions’s title for them better, which is “masters of the universe.”  They basically have been meeting behind closed doors.  They don’t allow anyone else into the meetings – anyone who might disagree with them – and then they come out with this grand announcement, and assume that everyone will fall in line and vote for it. But the problem is that this proposal is not well thought out in terms of what’s best for America. And part of the reason for that is that involved in their little secret meetings, and closed-door negotiations, are groups like the AFL-CIO, the Chamber of Commerce, and organized religion, the ethnic advocacy groups – special interest groups have all had their say, but the one group that’s always left out of these negotiations is the America people. So, here we go again – starting this whole process, and we’re looking at essentially the same proposals with the same meaningless so-called triggers that aren’t actually triggers – and massive amnesty.

Closed-door negotiations? It’s a bit ironic that comprehensive immigration reform that intends to keep us an open, immigrant friendly nation needs to be fleshed out in secret meetings.  However, what shocked me was the involvement of the AFL-CIO.  The Democratic wing that’s beholden to union interests have usually opposed illegal immigration since they allow, for example, contractors to underbid union contracts.  Why are they for amnesty? Jenks explains that:

basically, the unions have an interest in amnesty because immigrants, legal or illegal, is the only growing population of union-dues paying members. If they want to continue their dues, the need to legalize the illegal population to keep them here, keep them unionized, and keep them paying dues.  So in exchange for that amnesty, they’ve made a deal with the Chamber of Commerce, in which the unions give up on guest workers – to get amnesty – and the Chamber gives them amnesty to get guest workers.  So, everybody wins, except the American worker.

However, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) did say, at the close of the press conference yesterday, that the proposal will tie  immigration the influx of legal immigration to the nation’s unemployment rate.  However, Jenks wasn’t convinced that this item in the package will be taken seriously.

 Well, the fact that they’re talking about giving expedited amnesty to AG workers [agricultural workers] and to dreamers – and then some kind of extended amnesty to all of the rest of the eleven million illegal aliens in the country, despite the fact that we have 7.9% unemployment tells me whatever they have in mind for the future is certainly not going to happen because they’ve already vastly exceeded the ability of our economy to employ these people. We’ve already got twenty million Americans who can’t find full-time jobs.  So, we’re going to add eleven million more?

The growth industries in the U.S. economy are mostly highly skilled, high-tech occupations.  So, why would we then be giving a massive amnesty –expedited amnesty – to AG workers, and creating a new guest worker program for low-skilled labor?  It doesn’t make sense.  We should be reforming our legal immigration system to meet the needs of the 21st century. Instead of doing that, they’re basically just packing on a whole bunch of new programs that will continue to flood the labor market, primarily the low-skill labor market, and increase the competition for our own most vulnerable workers. And who’s going to pay for it?  The taxpayers.

Yet, Brad Plumer posted on The Washington Post’s WonkBlog yesterday – and said that illegal immigration has “slowed since 2007.”  So, what’s the big deal?  Isn’t that a positive indicator?

there has been – it appears – through some Census data – that the number of new illegal aliens coming into the United States slowed somewhat during the recession, but there’s also evidence that the number has started to pick up again.  It’s entirely possible that’s because of all this talk of amnesty – but the bottom line is illegal immigration is going to be affected by some small degree by economic changes in the United States.  But the fact is that the illegal population has stayed at about an estimated eleven million. It hasn’t actually dropped.  We still have a huge problem, and you can’t stop illegal immigration by redefining it as legal.   That’s not a long-term solution.

What alternative policy does NumbersUSA endorse to solve this crisis?  Jenks said that since its inception, NumbersUSA has supported the proposals laid out from the 1995 U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, which was chaired by former Texas Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.  Jordan, a Democrat, and her commission had these key points in their report.

  • a scale back of family chain-migration by implementing a prioritization of family relationships to determine who will be admitted through family-based immigration. Spouses and minor children of US citizens would continue to be admitted as first priority;
  • elimination of other family-based admission categories, including:
    • Adult, unmarried sons and daughters of U.S. citizens;
    • Adult, married sons and daughters of U.S. citizens;
    • Adult, unmarried sons and daughters of legal permanent residents; and
    • Siblings of U.S. citizens.
  • a focus on the admission of highly-skilled individuals to support the national interest by bringing to the U.S. individuals whose skills would benefit our society. Recommended the elimination of the admission of unskilled workers and elimination of the diversity visa lottery;
  • immigration admissions level of 550,000 per year, to be divided as follows:
    • Nuclear family immigration 400,000;
    • Skill-based immigration 100,000;
    • Refugee resettlement 50,000.
  • Stressed deportation is crucial. Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: those who should get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave.

Without a doubt, amnesty will be unpalatable to Republicans in the House.  As a naturalized citizen, who immigrated via adoption from South Korea, I want America to remain an open nation.  However, there are rules.  It’s unfair to the legal immigrants to be cast aside because millions of illegals broke the law.  They’ve waited patiently, and now they’re about to be cut in line.  There’s something unethical about it, but we shall see how conservatives react to this new amnesty push – even with the stringent standards attached to the pathway to citizenship.

Originally Posted on PJ Tatler.

Liberal Chick Says God Hates Guns and Gun Owners Need to Repent!

liberal_chick

Unbelievable! Are these people for real? Is this a parody? Sadly, even if this is a parody, there are really people out there like this!

YouTube Description:

She’s back and as loopy as ever. Liberal Chick says Jesus wants gun owners to repent. She says women should not resist assault and should wait for angels to protect them. Whacked!

A couple of comments from the YouTube video:

From altops: Luke 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword (gun/weapon), let him sell his garment, and buy one.

Mitch Swoboda Exodus 22:2 “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed

Whoops! New NY Gun Law Forgot To Exempt Cops On High-Capacity Mags

Screen Shot 2013-01-17 at 9.40.24 PM

Screen Shot 2013-01-17 at 9.40.24 PMThere’s a reason why moving slow on legislation is good.  If it’s too big, or you do it too fast, you often complicate the problem.  New York has just passed the most stringent anti-gun laws on the books.  Yes, government did something! However, as progressives crack open the champagne, they forgot to exempt law enforcement on the measure banning high-capacity magazines.  Then every single cop in New York has essentially broken the law. The new law limits firearm magazines to seven-rounds in New York.

According to Jim Hoffer of ABC Eyewitness News, “as the statute is currently written, it does not exempt law enforcement officers. Nearly every law enforcement agency in the state carries handguns that have a 15 round capacity. A spokesman for the governor’s office called Eyewitness News to say, ‘We are still working out some details of the law and the exemption will be included, currently no police officer is in violation.”

 Of course, it’s bad PR to say that cops are law breakers.  Perhaps, this little kerfuffle could’ve been settled if the NY legislature didn’t go through hyperspace to push through this new anti-gun bill.  Furthermore, in a time when we want to deal with mental health and firearms, you’re first instinct isn’t to scare people from treatment.  Allahpundit of Hot Air, citing a piece in USA Today, wrote that:

Mental health experts say a new tougher New York state gun control law might interfere with treatment of potentially dangerous people and even discourage them from seeking help.

The law would require therapists, doctors, nurses and social workers to tell government authorities if they believe a patient is likely to harm himself or others. That could lead to revoking the patient’s gun permit and seizing any guns…

“The people who arguably most need to be in treatment and most need to feel free to talk about these disturbing impulses, may be the ones we make least likely to do so,” said the director of law, ethics and psychiatry at Columbia. “They will either simply not come, or not report the thoughts that they have.”

“If people with suicidal or homicidal impulses avoid treatment for fear of being reported in this way, they may be more likely to act on those impulses,” he said

[…]

That’s a solid result for gun control. The police are momentarily in limbo legally and the threat to the public might actually increase as would-be spree killers decide it’s now too risky to seek therapy. Get Cuomo’s office a video camera and a group of kids reading letters about gun control, stat.

Originally posted on PJ Tatler.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »