Tag Archives: Occupy Wall Street

CNN Anchor Tells Citizens United President David Bossie You Can’t Judge OWS By ‘Worst Members’

With Occupy Unmasked being released today in select theaters, the September 21 edition of CNN’s Early Start with Zoraida Sambolin invited David Bossie, producer of the film and President of Citizens United to discuss the film.  However, things got hazy towards the end of the interview where Sombolin shamelessly tried to convey the narrative that Occupy is a “peaceful” movement.

Sambolin, ironically, fed into the premise of the film itself – which centers on “the liberal establishment and mainstream media portray[ing] the Occupy Wall Street movement as organic and nonviolent.”   In arguing how you can’t judge a movement by its “worst members,” she mentioned how “Adbusters” promoted the notion of “Occupying” Wall Street and decided to defend the movement – while castigating the Tea Party as “racist.”  However, Bossie wasn’t going to let that form of abject slander slide.

SAMBOLIN: Okay, let’s look at the time line just because I really want to hone in on this. I want to really establish who started this. So July 13 “Adbusters” magazine calls for the September 17 peaceful protest. And on September 9, We Are The 99 Percent tumblr. September 17, the protest begin in Zuccotti Park. October 1, 700 protesters arrested in March across the Brooklyn Bridge. And October 5, 39 organizations including labor unions join Occupy Wall Street — 25,000 people march and mass arrests, and there are mass arrests. So the timeline really starts rather peacefully. 



BOSSIE: It does. I don’t say that it doesn’t. What I’m saying is, that the — that the insidious nature of this, and really, you know, within our film, we have undercover cameras inside of our film that show these people are organized by the unions and they’re paid by the unions to attend these rallies, too. So it’s a little bit disingenuous for everybody to think that they’re just peaceful demonstrators who show up for no reason.

SAMBOLIN: The movie trailer compares Tea Party coverage with that of the Occupy movement. The Tea Party has been accused of racism, of inciting violence. Take a look at some of the signs from the Tea Party rallies as well here. Do you think that it’s really fair to judge a group based on its worst members? 



BOSSIE: First of all, comparing the Tea Party to the Occupy Wall Street movement is just nonsensical. There’s no comparison. When the Tea Party movement has a single person who shows up with some crazy T- shirt or a button on, they self-police themselves and they kick them out or the media picks on them and make them – the face of the organization. That’s ridiculous. 

The Occupy movement – there’s nowhere in the Tea Party movement are they destroying American cities, running rampage over the police department and confronting the police. It’s just – not even close.

Bossie mentions union astroturfing at these events, but he could have mentioned the direct involvement some members of the media had in this event.  Folks – who were not only involved in propagating a false narrative of the movement’s organic roots – but strategized and discussed ways to destroy our free market society.  Yes – I’m referring to former freelance writer for The New York Times and Salon.com contributor Natasha Lennard.

Furthermore, to bash the Tea Party because they’re racist is beyond absurd. The most famous incident involved racial slurs being hurled at Rep. John Lewis two years ago during the health care debate, which wasn’t authenticated – nor did any camera catch the alleged event – yet the media decided to propagate this false narrative of racism anyway.

Lastly, concerning Sambolin’s statement that Bossie and his film take the “worst members” of Occupy to portray them in a bad light is egregious.

Did the Tea Party leave thirty tons of garbage lying around Los Angeles?  Did the Tea Party engage in serial rape within their encampments across the country?  Did the Tea Party peddle drugs and intimidate people with violence? Where was the widespread and in-depth reporting on the sanitary conditions these camps inflicted on local communities and the serial criminality?

The Tea Party has had zero criminal charges filed against their members – while Occupy has had a whopping 417 cases of illegal activity cited against them. These aren’t isolated incidents. As always, CNN wanted to show the worst of the Tea Party and argue for the best of OWS.

Originally posted on Newsbusters.

Nearly Twice as Many Young Adults Say They Would Rather Work on Wall Street Than Protest Against It

76 percent say the lack of job opportunities is shrinking the middle class, as young adult unemployment remains at 12.7 percent

Washington, DC – (9/17/12) – Generation Opportunity, the largest non-profit, non-partisan organization in the United States engaging and mobilizing young Americans (18-29 years old) on the important economic issues facing the nation, released new polling data today on Millennials on the one-year anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Since its launch in June of 2011, Generation Opportunity has amassed a following of over 4 million fans on Facebook and is actively organizing Millennials across the country through grassroots tactics, voter registration, and voter turnout efforts.

“Young adults have been negatively impacted by the poor economy, high unemployment, and the lack of jobs both in their daily lives and in their long-term career plans and dreams. Amidst their frustrations and disappointments, the overwhelming majority of Millennials view the poor economy and lack of leadership by elected officials as the true sources of their problems – not fellow Americans who work on Wall Street. Young Americans reject the cynicism and angry theatrics aimed at those who can create more full-time jobs; instead, they simply want positive solutions that grow the economy and create more opportunity for all Americans,” said Paul T. Conway, president of Generation Opportunity and former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Department of Labor. “Young adults believe elected officials fail to represent their concerns and best interests, are clearly fed up with the status quo, and plan on making their voices heard in November.”

The ineffectiveness of Occupy Wall Street to capture the enthusiasm of or inspire activism among a wide number of young adults across America was documented by the Harvard Institute of Politics (IOP) at the end of last year. According to a December 2011 IOP study, just 2% of 18-29 year olds had participated in Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, and only 11% knew someone personally who participated in the effort (http://www.iop.harvard.edu/sites/default/files_new/fall_poll_11_M_topline.pdf).

The lack of full-time jobs and economic opportunity due to the poor economy continue to impact young Americans on a daily basis, jeopardizing their careers and dreams. Earlier this month, Generation Opportunity released the non-seasonally adjusted (NSA) unemployment data for Millennials for August 2012. The youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year olds specifically for August 2012 is 12.7 percent (NSA). The youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year old African-Americans for August 2012 is 22.4 percent (NSA); the youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year old Hispanics for August 2012 is 13.7 percent (NSA); and the youth unemployment rate for 18–29 year old women for August 2012 is 12.6 percent (NSA). The declining labor participation rate has created an additional 1.7 million young adults that are not counted as “unemployed” by the U.S. Department of Labor because they are not in the labor force, meaning that those young people have given up looking for work due to the lack of jobs. If the labor force participation rate were factored into the 18-29 youth unemployment calculation, the actual 18-29-unemployment rate would rise to 16.7 percent (NSA).

For Generation Opportunity, the polling company, inc./WomanTrend conducted a nationwide online survey of 1,003 adults ages 18-29 between July 27 and July 31, 2012. Randomly selected online opt-in panel participants were sent an invitation to the survey via email which included a secure link to the online questionnaire. Quotas were used to ensure the survey was representative of the larger 18-29 year old nationwide population with regard to race, region, and gender. The data were NOT weighted. The overall sampling margin of error for the survey is ±3.1% at a 95% confidence interval, meaning that the data obtained would not differ more than 3.1 percentage points in 95 out of 100 similar samples obtained.

  • 47% of Millennials would rather be employed by Wall Street than protest Wall Street.
  • Only 26% would prefer protesting Wall Street over working on Wall Street.
  • 76% believe that the lack of job opportunities is shrinking the American middle class.
  • Just 38% believe that today’s political leaders reflect the interests of young Americans.
  • 76% of Millennials plan to vote in the election for President this year.
  • 89% of young people ages 18-29 say the current state of the economy is impacting their day-to-day lives (Accepted multiple responses) (Randomized):
  • 51% reduced their entertainment budget;
  • 43% reduced their grocery/food budget;
  • 43% cut back on gifts for friends and family;
  • 40% skipped a vacation;
  • 38% driven less;
  • 36% taken active steps to reduce home energy costs;
  • 32% tried to find an additional job;
  • 27% sold personal items or property (cars, electronic appliances, or other possessions);
  • 26% changed their living situation (moved in with family, taken extra roommates, downgraded apartment or home);
  • 17% skipped a wedding, family reunion, or other significant social event;
  • 1% other;
  • 8% none of the above (accepted only this response);
  • 3% do not know/cannot judge (accepted only this response).
  • 84% of young people ages 18-29 had planned to but now might delay or not make at all a major life change or move forward on a major purchase due to the current state of the economy (Accepted multiple responses) (Randomized):
  • 38% buy their own place;
  • 32% go back to school/getting more education or training;
  • 31% start a family;
  • 27% change jobs/cities;
  • 26% pay off student loans or other debt;
  • 25% save for retirement;
  • 23% get married;
  • 12% none of the above (accepted only this response);
  • 4% do not know/cannot judge (accepted only this response).

Happy Birthday Occupy Wall Street

It’s Occupy Wall Street’s first birthday.  Occupy was supposed to address the frustration and anger of the 99% is probably one of the largest operations in political astroturfing in American history.  I’ll let Andrew Breitbart and his team explain the rest when Occupy Unmasked comes out later this Fall. However, even if it’s astroturf, Occupy was an outlet for the folks on the far left to vent.

These were people who were sick of the corporate greed, income inequality, capitalism, or any facet of socioeconomics that has turned this nation into what it is today – a beacon for freedom and opportunity.  In all, it’s the greatest temper tantrum thrown by the political left since the Weather Underground tried to ignite the failed ‘Days of Rage.’ As such, Days of Rage was an influencing element throughout this whole episode.  One of the underlying themes of Occupy is “give us free stuff” – which George Will aptly stated is the final stage of American progressivism after one hundred years of maturation.

One year into this movement, you would think the unyielding idealism of liberals would keep the passion for collectivism alive.  However, as Jazz Shaw reported yesterday:

About 300 people observing the anniversary of Occupy Wall Street marched to a small concrete park in New York’s lower Manhattan that served as headquarters for the protest movement and was its birthplace.

Police patrolled the crowd Saturday and took at least a dozen people into custody near Trinity Church that borders Zuccotti Park. Police confirmed they made arrests, mostly for disorderly conduct, but they did not have a total number.

Protesters marched from Washington Square Park and headed south down Broadway to Zuccotti Park, chanting as they went. The group later thinned out.

Shaw rightfully quipped “300 people? Seriously? This is New York City. You can get twice that many homeless to show up in under an hour if a donut truck breaks down near Central Park. Hell, if you get ten women to demonstrate their right to go topless in public, you can get three times that many reporters to show up in Gotham.”  Furthermore, “there’s an election coming up in barely six weeks with huge questions of policy on the line which are important to both sides of the debate. If you’re not going to do it now, when would you? Is there anyone running this show anymore?”

No, there isn’t anyone home anymore.  Such is the flaw of progressivism, which is to mangle and twist something until it is unrecognizable – which is what they plan to do with our constitution if given the chance.  Luckily, Occupy’s deficiencies consumed the movement before it was a true political threat.  According to Meghan Barr at The Associated Press, “the trouble with Occupy Wall Street, a year after it bloomed in a granite park in lower Manhattan and spread across the globe, is that nobody really knows what it is anymore.”

Barr, who reported on the one year anniversary on September 16, wrote that:

…the movement is now a shadow of its mighty infancy, when a group of young people harnessed the power of a disillusioned nation and took to the streets chanting about corporate greed and inequality. Back then it was a rallying cry, a force to be reckoned with. But as the encampments were broken up and protesters lost a gathering place, Occupy in turn lost its ability to organize. The movement had grown too large too quickly. Without leaders or specific demands, what started as a protest against income inequality turned into an amorphous protest against everything wrong with the world.

Yes, a few warriors remain at Zuccotti Park, “albeit in a far less cohesive form.”  Since they have lost their ability to organize – and rightfully so – “Occupiers mostly keep in touch online through a smattering of websites and social networks. There are occasional conference calls and Occupy-affiliated newsletters. Meetings are generally only convened to organize around specific events, like the much-hyped May Day event that ultimately fizzled last spring.”  To show that Occupy is virtually on life support, “the movement’s remaining $85,000 in assets were frozen, though fundraising continues.”

By contrast, the “racist” Tea Party is alive and well.  They’re de-centralized, but operate with efficiency and vanguards to the conservative principles that some Republicans fail to uphold. They gave the Republican Party their largest congressional power grab since 1948 and we’re able to put Ted Cruz, Deb Fischer, and Richard Mourdock on the ballot in their respective states’ senate elections.

Has Occupy done anything to gain traction politically, besides pooping on cop cars, throwing urine, and vandalizing property?

Apparently, things don’t change as they intend to hit:

40 ‘corporate targets’… including such big names as Fidelity Investments, Federal Reserve Bank, and Standard & Poors. Protesters are encouraged to ‘wear business attire,’ presumably so they can mix in with office workers. Occupiers, who hit the news in 2011 with tons of media fanfare, have faded into the background. Even The Washington Post, which has written repeatedly favorable stories about the group, questioned its importance…according to Reuters, these protests include surrounding Wall Street. ‘At 7 a.m. Monday, some protesters will try to surround the NYSE, while others will engage in a loosely choreographed series of ‘sit-ins’ at intersections throughout the financial district, according to OWS’s website.’

Since Occupy will be going into Hospice care soon, I think we’ll all remember it as a farce.  Another ruse used by the far left to exploit the wider liberal wing of the American electorate to do their bidding – bless their hearts.  In addition, we’ll remember Occupy for their serial criminality which includes, but are not limited to death threats, drug distribution/use, assault, vandalism, and the litany of sexual assaults that occurred within their respective encampments.  Rapes that Keith Olbermann said never happened.  Although, such acts of depravity didn’t stop the Democratic Party from fundraising off Occupy’s energy.

Nevertheless, on this day, the United States Constitution was ratified in 1787.  Happy Birthday U.S. Constitution!

Up Twinkles?

Originally Posted on Hot Air.

The company you keep…

At a Labor Day weekend barbecue in Minneapolis, Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) hosted some big talent to speak to a crowd of about 50-75 that consisted mostly of union members, public employees and campaign staffers and volunteers. The keynote speaker was self-described communist revolutionary, former Green Jobs Czar for President Obama and “9/11 truther” Anthony “Van” Jones.

Jones was well-accepted by the crowd and spent time before the scheduled program to answer questions and take photos. Though Jones was clearly being measured in his talking points, he was mostly polite and friendly, that is, when he wasn’t calling republicans “assholes,” which he did more than a couple of times.

Various speakers preceded Jones including several candidates for state offices and Senator Amy Klobuchar who is being challenged by Republican Kurt Bills. Klobuchar seemed to blush when praising Jones in her prepared remarks. She told the story of a conference in Chicago at which the two spoke and women lined up just to give him their phone numbers. Almost smitten, she was obviously proud to know and work with him for several years.

Ellison shared in Klobuchar’s fawning and began his introduction of Jones by saying that when he looks for progressive policy advice, he turns to Jones’ books, Green Collar Economy which extolls the idea that wealth should be redistributed via green initiatives, and Rebuild the Dream which focuses 4 chapters on the Occupy movement. Ellison said he turns to Jones’ work in magazines and other publications because in Ellison’s opinion, Jones is the “leading intellectual force in this country when it comes to progressive politics.”

Ellison is the Co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus which lists among its many socialist goals a commitment to the UN Millennium prjoect and redistributing wealth via legislation, to nudge companies and individuals into a green economy.

Jones, who has in the past said, “white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poison in to the people of color communities because they have a racial justice frame,” spent about 20 minutes delivering typical democrat talking points, claimed republicans want dirty air and water, and highlighted his speech with accusing republicans of allowing people to drown.

Comparing republicans to life guards without a job and the president as the currently employed life guard, Jones said this election is like a tsunami on the beach.

“We were watchin’ the flooding; … and I’m still praying for our friends in the Gulf… It would be like you had a big tsunami coming through, and people were drowning. And you sit back and say, ‘the more bodies on the beach, the more likely they gonna fire the lifeguard. And I’m getting the life guard’s job.

… Rather than coming together during the emergency, and helping my country… Imma going to try to hurt. Imma cut the lifeline. Imma stand on the oxygen tube… Because the more bodies on the beach, the more likely they are to fire the life guard.”

On the heels of disgraced and recently fired Yahoo News chief David Chalian’s comments about republicans being “happy to have a party while black people drown,” one has to wonder if Jones prepared his remarks to keep that narrative alive.

Following Jones’ address, the crowd was treated to some live music. In honor of Labor Day, the crowd was handed laminated lyrics sheets and joined in singing labor songs including “Ain’t Gonna Let Nobody,” a song about racial divide and Jim Crow.

Minnesota is no stranger to communists and radical leftists. Even the governor has ties to the likes of Van Jones. Do the people of Minnesota’s 5th Congressional District know the company their representative is keeping?

See the VIDEO here.

War College Article’s Offensive Scenario Defames Tea Party

A recent war college magazine posting has people up in arms about the role of the military in domestic operations, and mentions the “Tea Party” as a bad actor in the scenario.

I was up on Twitter tonight when I got a tweet from Ann Barnhardt of Barnhardt.biz. Her tweet alleges that a US Army War College publication called Small Wars Journal posted an article describing a potential scenario in which the Tea Party takes over a small town somewhere in the US and forces the state Governor and the President to act, calling up the United States military into action to return law and order.

Here is Ann’s tweet, which may be a retweet from someone else.

Ann Barnhardt – http://barnhardt.biz/

Ann Barnhardt ‏@AnnBarnhardt

Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Futurehttp://j.mp/QDaeTM 

In the article dated 25 July of this year, the authors Kevin Benson, a retired Army Colonel and Jennifer Weber, a historian specializing in the American Civil War outline a potential scenario where Tea Party Patriots upset at the government’s lack of enforcement of immigration laws and departure from the Constitution take over a small town called Darlington. The Tea Party militia forms and starts check points or choke points where they stop an harass non-whites who appear to be legal or illegal aliens. The governor ran his election campaign giving tacit approval to the Tea Party and feels for political reasons he is unable to enforce the laws to stop the local militia using National Guard or local police forces. In addition, local police are co-opted by the militia and are of questionable use in stopping the militia in any case.

If you can get over the obvious offensiveness of the connection of the Tea Party to racism and right wing zealotry, I find that this scenario is startlingly accurate and well thought out. The publication, Small Wars Journal, seems to be an academic publication aimed at educating military leaders at the war college level, those officers attaining the higher ranks past lieutenant colonel. Students at our war college are bombarded with and discuss scenarios like this all the time as part of their training and are educated to think outside the box. Our military has it’s whole purpose in defending the homeland from enemies foreign and domestic and the leaders of our military have to be educated to foresee the possible scenarios. While I think it is more likely that a group of Occupy Wall Street militia would be of more danger than the Tea Party, or even a far right faction of the local Muslim Brotherhood here in the homeland, I’m not overly concerned that the authors chose to use the Tea Party as their example.

The authors make the argument that the Posse Comitatus act would not be infringed upon because of the powerlessness of the governor and the local city government because of the influence of the militia, and the proclamation of the President whose duty it is to restore order. The Posse Comitatus act for anyone’s curiosity is the act that prohibits the military from acting within the continental United States. At least that’s what everyone thinks. Actually, a quick check with Wikipedia confirms that the military can and will be used to exercise police powers to restore law and order within the limits of the Constitution.

Says Wikipedia – “The Posse Comitatus Act is the United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) that was passed on June 18, 1878, after the end of Reconstruction. Its intent (in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807) was to limit the powers of local governments and law enforcement agencies in using federal military personnel to enforce the laws of the land. Contrary to popular belief, the Act does not prohibit members of the Army from exercising statelaw enforcementpolice, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order“; it simply requires that any authority to do so must exist with the United States Constitution or Act of Congress. In this way, most use of the Army and the Air Force at the direction of the President does not offend the statute, even though it may be problematic for political reasons.”

Oh, Ok. So the authors are right.

Case in point. I was in the National Guard here in Minnesota when I was activated to aid local law enforcement during the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis in 2008. Quick reaction forces were formed and trained, soldiers were posted at checkpoints in different areas of the Cities, tactical operations posts were manned and operated as communications hubs. All branches of the service were made available to help law enforcement, including the Coast Guard. From my vantage point at the St. Paul Airport where my soldiers and I manned a checkpoint I saw Coast Guard helicopters deploy from the airfield to intercept civilian air traffic that violated the city air space. (When high ranking politicians are in town for example, the government has the authority to declare a National Emergency for political purposes and enforce a no fly zone for a specific event like the RNC.)

I also saw quick reaction forces of the State Patrol deploy from my location to deal with anarchist groups downtown who were busy throwing human urine and feces at cops and breaking windows. I saw firsthand the kind of scenario the authors of this article are talking about. Forget for a moment that they were all Leftist, as rioters in these scenarios tend to be. From what I saw, the police forces of the Twin Cities reacted to the chaos with remarkable restraint and professionalism and the military served a proper behind the scenes role, as it should be. I didn’t see any tanks rolling down main street, though I did see that the crap throwing Occupy Zombies were cornered on a bridge by city officials driving a snow plow.

My brother was an officer in the National Guard at the time in Denver where the Democratic National Convention was taking place. He was asked to take command of a quick reaction force and we exchanged notes. From his standpoint, as confirmed in a briefing I attended with the Secret Service, the knuckleheads causing problems in Denver were the exact same goofballs that came up to Minneapolis. They were, you guessed it, Leftists!

Should people be concerned that the military can be used to quash civil unrest? I think that it is always a good idea for civil libertarians to be on guard on the over reach of their government. The constitution guarantees our rights, but it also provides us as citizens with responsibilities. We always forget that part. I would also like to state emphatically the majority of the US military does not view citizens of this country as the enemy by and large. There are always horrible examples of course, but those are few and far between, i.e. the Ruby Ridge Debacle and the Branch Dravidians tragedy in Waco Texas. We as conservatives and libertarians should always be on guard to push back against government over reach and remind our government of who they work for. After all, the government should fear the people, but the people should never fear the government.

I would also like to stress that we as conservatives and libertarians should refrain from being overly reactionary in our rhetoric. Talk of revolution in this very stressful time in our history is not helpful. While many of us are outraged at the direction of our country; the failure of the government to rein in the debt, their failure to enforce immigration laws already on the books, a move by big government progressives away from republican principles and towards a socialist nanny state, and the gutlessness of our politicians on the right to stand for their principles, all of these things are cause for concern. But we should however refrain from putting gasoline on the fire by talking about rebellion.

Think about our Civil War, how brutal and awful that was! Think to about the tragedy of Manifest Destiny and the removal of Native American tribes from the land! A new revolution on this continent would be a massive Air/Land campaign with tanks and airplanes that would fracture the states one from another. The military would be torn apart as young men and women of military age try to decide which side to join. The currency of the United States would be worthless as states succeed from the Union and form their own governments. Joblessness and tumult would cascade across the country. Things would be worse not better. I predict such a skirmish would be short but brutal, leading to the direct or indirect deaths of a third or more of our population.

If you want to avoid this nightmare scenario but want to affect change in a positive way to restoring the country to a Constitutional Republic, there is only one way: peaceful activism in the political process!

No the Tea Party is not the enemy and they are not racist, by and large. Yes, it was offensive for the authors of this article to imply. Am I concerned about this kind of rhetoric being transformed into a real life scenario, yes, but I am more concerned in the over reaction of many of my fellows. Don’t waste your breath and effort on minutiae. We can win in November and return sanity to our government.

So keep the faith!

I want to leave you with this comment by a military member who responded to this article posting and keep in mind that it was one of many. I think it accurately reflects the sentiment of many of our military members who defend our freedom every day.

by JC-Marine | August 4, 2012 – 8:06pm

As a retired Marine and as a retired cop, I find the authors’ fictional scenario quite disturbing and not well thought out.

What the heck happened to the Posse Comitatus Act?

Your scenario is clearly a law enforcement action. One that can and would be handled by state and local police — and the state’s National Guard if need be.

Roll federal tanks and APCs down main street, and you would have more than your fictional, evil Tea Party to contend with. You’d have everyone from high-school kids to retired folks running around shooting up your tanks and troops, while screaming: “Wolverines!

OK. Here’s one more. Be reassured.

by Hawken | August 4, 2012 – 7:54am

Are you kidding me? the tea party, a movement dedicated to the US constitution and smaller responsible government, a movement who has zero arrests in their rallies (unlike the occupy movement), this is what the military is preparing for?

The question is not if the US military can defeat any foe, of course it can, the question is whether it should. The US military if an arm of the people and not those in power. The US military is made up of its citizens, paid for by its citizens, if an armed resistance to a over-reaching government ever arises the military will have to think carefully upon its actions and not blindly follow those in power.

With laws such as the patriot act, national defense authorization act, NSPD 51, et. al., our federal government is showing that power does corrupt.

Thank you Ann, for bringing this article to our attention.

God Bless America, the Constitutional Republic of the United States!

*The author was an Army National Guard Logistician with 19-years experience, including domestic mobilizations and one long tour in Iraq. 

What a Tea Party Win Really Means for Washington

Despite having been outspent $19 million to $7 million, with help from Tea Party grassroots organizers and with the backing of Tea Party stars Sarah Palin and Senator Jim DeMint, Conservative Republican Ted Cruz emerged victorious over “establishment” backed Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in the Texas U.S. Senate runoff.

Which led the ever so “principled” editors at Yahoo News to ponder: “What a tea party candidate’s win means for Washington.”

Citing Amy Walter, ABC News Political Director, Michael Falcone, Chris Good and Elizabeth Hartfield chose to spin their “news reporting” by employing a well-know, oft used “progressive” tool: wild, unsubstantiated speculation. “Regardless of who wins control of the Senate this November, we know that the upper body in Washington is going to be as polarized and uncompromising as ever.”

It would have been remarkably refreshing had these ABC News/Yahoo News hatchet wielders directed their remarks towards the Democratic Senate majority, currently being “led” by the fearlessly nonpartisan ways of that universally acclaimed, history making legend Harry Reid of Nevada.  Reid must be totally fearless to have, in the most polarizing and uncompromising spirit imaginable, dutifully blocked all attempts by the House to do their job and govern.  Certainly, history will long remember Harry Reid.  After all, how many Senate Majority Leaders in U.S. history have managed to suppress all bipartisan attempts at legislation while simultaneously going three plus years without passing a budget required by law?

Legendary!

Unfortunately in utterly predictable fashion the upshot of their remarks came down to one sentence: “Ultimately, it also means that even if Romney is elected President he can’t expect to win votes on ‘team spirit’ alone.”

This from a “news” organization that notes a “sharp decline in terror attacks after bin Laden death”.  Of course, having the White House instruct the Department of Homeland Security to describe the Ft. Hood terrorist attack as “workplace violence” couldn’t possibly have had anything to do with a “purely objective” conclusion.  How could there possibly be any terror attacks to count, now that they are “officially” referred to as “man caused disasters”?  How could anyone deny a conclusion that is so obviously beyond all reproach?  Of course it is virtually impossible that the true intent of this “news headline” was to subliminally plant the thought that the “progressive” leading from behinder in chief is keeping America safe.  Perish the thought!

The same “news” people who ask “can Mitt Romney end the gaffe track?”  Of course, since graduates of “progressive” Party Pravda indoctrination camps, aka “journalism school” were rudely shouting questions at the GOP candidate while he was overseas visiting locations deserving of great respect, makes it easy to understand how Pravda devotees would be quite upset by their new attack target not falling for the bait.  What better way to strike back at Romney for not playing ball than to smear him with internet “headlines” where millions of potential “progressive” lemming useful idiot voters who can’t name their Senators or Congressional members but know the name of every lowest common denominator reality TV “star” might actually be persuaded to vote against “his holiness saint barrack’s” chief opponent?

What else would one expect from a “news” outlet that continues to insist that occupy Wall Street is “spiritual” in nature?  Yahoo News opines:  “Last Spring, as the Occupy movement struggled, vainly, to recapture its lost energy in New York and elsewhere, in Oakland it remained vital.”  The big headline was:  “How Oakland became the spiritual capital of Occupy Wall Street.”  It doesn’t take a member of the self-imagined self-appointed member of the “intellectual elite” to figure out why Oakland would be ground zero for the anti-American, pro Communist fringe leftist violence loving group.  Their daddy Van Jones has long based his anti-American community organizing efforts in Oakland.  Remember Jones?  He was the “green jobs czar” for the forked tongued, two faced, back-stabbing pathological liar currently occupying the Oval Office who had to be dismissed because he was a 9/11 truther.  Never mind that Jones is also a self-avowed Communist who now just happens to be working for deep pocketed long time anti-American fringe leftist financier George Soros.

The fact of the matter is, the anti-America, pro Communist fringe leftists have tried to impose their agenda upon America and Americans are rejecting it.  They are rejecting it so resoundingly that they are electing House Reps and Senators with the Conservative credentials needed to ensure that Mitt Romney doesn’t drift leftwards and go soft on repealing the radical fringe leftist agenda.  An agenda that is so openly hostile to America that every branch needs to be cut off and every root needs to be dug up until only a useless rotted stump remains.  The rotted stump that is to be preserved as a reminder to future generations the consequence of electing “progressives” to office.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/08/01/what-a-tea-party-win-really-means-for-washington/

Capitalism and Hard Work Helped China, But Occupiers Don’t Know That

With the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement permeating the American political landscape like a virus, we see a visceral hatred of free markets and capitalism.  We see signs that say “F your unpaid internship” and “Eat the Rich” displayed by people on the far left who seek to destroy out current form of government and implement a socialist progressive state.  For some, these misguided individuals can hardly be blamed.  The United States government did spend $700 billion dollars bailing out the banks to save them from their alleged reckless risk taking.  At the end of the day, TARP remains one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation in American history.  However, capitalism is not immoral.  In fact, it’s very amoral, but when used properly can be a mechanism to bring a state and its citizenry to a better state of living.

The occupiers should only look across the Atlantic, when they aren’t updating Facebook or Twitter about the evils of corporations, and see the crumbling socialist model the European nations have adopted to see that  they’re peddling failed economics. It’s wrong and it’s immoral. It’s immoral that socialists de-incentivize hard work, regard citizen money as the state’s, and use it to pay for lavish programs that eventually leaves succeeding generations in a state of economic despair in the form of debt so astronomical that services previously provided are drastically cut or dissolved leaving millions destitute.  Is that the end result of the progressive utopia?  I fail to see equality of outcome as anything, but dismal.  I mean wouldn’t you go crazy of every ice cream shop just had one flavor.  I feel occupiers don’t see that the end result of their agenda, if you could call it one, would turn America into a monolithic, poorly tasting, and dull country high on “sameness.”

What the free market has done for this country is to allow an entire generation of Americans, namely our parents’ generation, to achieve a level of success that was beyond their education background.  My grandfather built a manufacturing company from scratch, which at its height, supplied windows as far south as Savannah and as far west as Chicago.  It employed 400 people and allowed my family to reap the benefits of its success.  Grandpa Vespa only had a sixth grade-level education. That’s just one story.

Deng Xiaoping

Let’s go to the far east, in my old neighborhood, to China.  China was decimated by the communist policies of Mao Zedong.  The Great Leap Forward was a calamity with millions starving due to a failed industrial initiative, namely steel production, that diverted resources from rural farmers.  In the end, the Chinese ecnomy was on the brink of destruction by the time Mao died in 1976.  It was only after Deng Xiaoping took power, that China’s economy flourished with his market-oreinted reforms.  As Michael Elliott of Time Magazine wrote:

The reforms that Deng blessed started in the countryside, where farmers were allowed to sell surplus produce and, in time, were allowed to farm their own land on long leases rather than as part of a commune. “Township and village enterprises” — small firms, many of which grew rapidly in size — sprang up. Prices were freed. As the success of reform became evident in the countryside, it was gradually extended to the cities. Deng endorsed the creation of Special Economic Zones, islands of capitalism in a communist society. (The most famous SEZ, Shenzhen, just north of Hong Kong, knows whom to thank for its prosperity; Deng’s statue graces a square in the city.) So China started that long run of supercharged economic growth that has made it the workshop of the world

Furthermore, The loosening of regulations on private business allowed them to flourish and outpace state-run enterprises.  The Special Economic Zones,  attracted foreign direct investment and culminated with China being the economic tiger it is today. In all, the middle class of China grew from 5-15 million to nearly 300 million during this period of economic restructuring.  Yes, these are the horrible results of capitalism and free markets.  Occupiers are either jealous, idiotic, or blissfully ignorant. I think it’s a Frankenstein creature composed of all three. However, what is clear is that capitalism works.

 

 

 

Biased Media Reports Non-News

Once again, a proud, card-carrying member of the “progressive” Party Pravda is wasting readers’ time. The headline reads: “On eve of health ruling, Ruth Bader Ginsburg predicts ‘sharp disagreement’”.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77479.html

How is it possible that Kyle Cheney is getting paid to spell bind readers with such gems as: “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg laid waste Friday to all those rumors about the fate of the Affordable Care Act in the Supreme Court”? Yet the article contains no information about Ginsburg making such a claim?

Cheney continues Pravda’s collective non-information/misinformation campaign by saying: “Although she offered no insight into the tightly held decisions of her colleagues, Ginsburg did indicate that many of the court’s decisions over the next two weeks — which are also expected to include an FCC indecency ruling — might be close.”

“Might be close”? That is the basis for claiming to have a statement from Ginsburg that “laid waste” to “all those rumors” about the pending health care decision?

Seriously, is this what earns “reporters” a paycheck nowadays?

“Reporting” Ginsburg’s “revelation” that Supreme Court rulings on highly controversial cases in the coming weeks “might be close” is “reporting” “news” as cutting edge and unpredictable as each day beginning with a sunrise.

By intentionally including a reference to the pending health care ruling in a faux headline, yet including zero content in the article revealing any such information clearly demonstrates the impotence of today’s “mainstream media”. That this story reports “sharp disagreement” exists between members of the Supreme Court is as fresh and as newsworthy as: dog bites mailman.

The real, clear, political divide between traditional, patriotic Americans and their “progressive” adversaries the makeup of the Supreme Court currently reflects is the story. One that is not told.

The philosophical division between Constitutionally protective Americans and “progressive” assailants of America’s Republic is as distinct as is the temperature difference between earth’s equator and its two poles.

On the one hand there is the Tea Party, a spontaneous grassroots movement which clearly expresses a strong, unified desire to restore the United States to it’s Constitutional roots. A platform calling to reduce the size, scope, power and cost of government, and to reinstate the traditional American values of self reliance, individual liberty and a return to truly representative government. The Tea Party was hugely influential in the 2010 mid-term elections, when “progressive” Democrats were denied retention of unbridled, unchecked power. The Tea Party remains influential in the 2012 campaign to remove “progressives” from Congress, the Senate and the White House.

On the other hand there is Occupy. A handful of people who disagreed with the existence of income disparity were quickly co-opted by Communist aligned big labor unions thugs in an astro-turf copycat attempt to counter the voice of America’s no longer Silent Majority. This artificial movement rapidly discredited itself through illegal occupancy and destruction of public and private property, and by descending into disparate, disorganized messaging that contributed as much to America’s political discourse as a screen door does to the functioning of a submarine. Unlike the peaceful, respectful approach taken by the Tea Party, Occupy’s attempts to gain public support disintegrated into violence, arrests and criminal charges.

Why is Cheney wasting people’s time “reporting” on unremarkable utterances of a Supreme Court Justice who, while on a recent trip overseas, made public statements that disrespected the United States Constitution? Why is Ginsburg, whose views are considered seditious by many patriotic, Constitution loving Americans, painted in such a fawning light?

This is non-news presented to readers by a biased media source.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/16/biased-media-reports-non-news/

Why to Vote for Romney

Honestly, Mitt Romney was not the first choice as GOP presidential nominee for many voters. They preferred a handful of candidates to Romney. Despite Ron Paul’s many brilliant positions on fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, smaller less intrusive government, balanced budgets, and protecting American sovereignty, due to absolutely irreconcilable differences with him on matters of foreign policy, he was not among that handful of candidates.

The forces against America, be they global governance, environmental extremism, communism or islamo-fascism are interwoven and inter-linked on large scale international fashion in a world made much smaller by modern technology. These forces are unrelenting. For the sake of deterrence, America must be ready, willing and equipped to fight them on each and every battlefield. A return to an eighteenth or nineteenth century foreign policy would not foster that necessary capacity. Sad to say, “progressive” Woodrow Wilson destroyed that era of American foreign policy when he entered the USA into WWI.

That being said, the defeat of barack obama remains of paramount importance.

obama and his ideologically driven co-conspirators have spent a century erecting a bureaucratic shadow government (within the EPA, the DOE, the DOI and other departments) and big government dependency programs considered by too many Americans as “entitlements”, not to mention the now obscene number of illegal “czars”. These “czars” and bureaucrats answer to the Executive Branch, not to voters. Congress has not lifted a finger to stop the erection of this illegal shadow government. Rather, over the years they have voted for it. Thanks to this shadow government, Congress is quickly becoming irrelevant. If obama is re-elected, he will not hesitate to bypass what he clearly sees as Congressional “obstruction” by exploiting that shadow government to fully implement plans to “fundamentally transform the United States of America”.

obama MUST be removed as Chief Executive.
The survival of America is at stake. obama and his Occupy sympathetic “progressive” Democratic allies are hostile to America. In order to demonstrate 100% allegiance to America and not to Occupy, vote for the GOP candidate. Since his victory in the Texas Primary ensures he will have enough delegates to win the GOP nomination, vote for Romney. Every American is urged to demonstrate their commitment to removing obama by contributing to the inevitability of his defeat by voting for Romney.

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the Republic for which it stands. Do not pledge allegiance to any politician.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/why-to-vote-for-romney/

obama’s Had His Fair Shot

barack obama, in a calculated, targeted attack against Republican rival Mitt Romney, attempted to dismiss Romney’s key rationale for his presidential candidacy by saying: “When you’re president, as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits. Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot.”

Obviously, obama’s unfamiliar with the concept that jobs are downstream from profits, not the other way around. With the exception of the original staff, which is hired to launch a company via start up capital (notice that here too, capital comes before hiring), businesses hire more workers after they’ve made profits. Being profitable gives them the capital needed to pay for expansion, which then creates the need to hire additional employees. This is especially true of small businesses, many of which are decidedly not over funded with liquid capital.

According to “progressives”, the rich are somehow preventing the middle class from having a fair shot because the rich are depriving the middle class by not paying “their fair share” of taxes. As with other “progressives”, obama’s concept of the middle class having a fair shot is to steal money from those who’ve earned it through initiative, hard work, risk and sacrifice within the free market capitalist system. obama seeks to acquire capital from productive Americans through “progressive” taxation and use that capital, acquired through legal extortion, to hire unionized government workers. Workers who will not only be paid more than their counterparts doing exactly the same job in the private sector, but will have Cadillac healthcare and pension benefits provided to them by a taxpayer funded job from which they will probably never be fired.

Still wonder why “progressives” love those unions?

Such an arrangement is perfectly suited to “progressives” like obama, a major proponent of centrally planned big government. Workers dependent upon government for their livelihood are much more likely to re-elect proponents of big government. They’re also much more likely to be unconcerned with how much the rich are taxed, since the taxes of unionized government workers won’t be affected. Their big government big brothers will see to that. That is, if they’re even required to pay taxes.

Of course, the “they don’t pay their fair share” rhetoric is a complete sham. It’s a mere straw-man argument. On second thought…a sham? It’s a straw-man argument? No, truth be known, the “they don’t pay their fair share” rhetoric is a bold faced lie. The top 10% earners in America pay 70% of the income taxes while 47% of Americans pay zero income tax. They pay nothing.

How much tax on the rich would be enough? How much does obama’s plan need for the middle class to have “a fair shot”? The 100% rate barrack obama sr. sought to impose on Kenya’s rich after he seized power?

Can you say wealth redistribution dreams from my Marxist father?

This clearly demonstrates how clueless obama is about the way America was designed by its Founding Fathers. Having a fair shot in America has never been about big government stealing from the rich in order to finance the hiring of government workers. Having a fair shot has always been about a Constitutionally limited government not interfering with the private sector free market’s ability to afford equal opportunity to everyone, regardless of their starting point in life. In America, big government’s job is not to “take care of us”. In America, big government can never replace initiative, creativity, hard work, sacrifice, risk, and reward by free, private Citizens working to provide for their own needs within the private sector. If it ever does, America will have ceased to exist.

Instead of digging the United States into an ever-deepening hole by reducing available free market capital through higher taxes, how about creating some certainty for investors by making permanent changes to America’s needlessly complicated tax code? How about creating a simplified tax code that provides incentives for investment? How about creating a tax code that’s doesn’t punish small businesses by forcing them to divert scarce capital to pay the cost of hiring accountants and attorneys to decipher an ever “evolving” tax code each year? How about creating an economic environment where the rich, middle class and poor alike all feel it’s worth the risk to invest in a start up business? Thanks to existing, unnecessarily high “progressive” tax rates and expanding, needlessly expensive regulatory oppression, today starting up a new business is practically impossible.

Better still, how about obama going back to school to learn what America is really all about? In the meantime, he should leave running America to Americans. obama’s had his fair shot.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/obamas-had-his-fair-shot/

What the obama Administration Has Taught America

Facebook Inc.’s $16 billion initial public offering has made Mark Zuckerberg the 29th richest carbon based life form on Earth. Facebook provides entertainment and a fun way to spend your leisure time. America should love Zuckerberg. Whatever happens, do not ever criticize him for not paying his fair share of taxes…he’s cool in the administration’s eyes and they’re down with whatever he does. Heck, he might even turn out to be as cool as George Clooney.

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the top three U.S. oil companies alone paid $42.8 billion in income taxes in 2010. Ignore that fact and describe them as evil billionaires who don’t pay their fair share. After all, the petroleum, coal and natural gas industries all provide cheap energy to America, which stands in the way of implementing the administration’s agenda to fuel America with recycled unicorn poop.

It’s OK for the New Black Panthers to stand in front of polling places, wearing uniforms, wielding clubs and intimidating white voters with taunts of “now you’ll find out what it’s like to be ruled by a black man”. It’s also OK for Eric Holder, who publicly said: “I am not the tall U.S. Attorney. I am the black U.S. Attorney” to drop all charges against them.

It’s not OK for a “white hispanic” to defend himself from attack by someone who’s black

Tea Party demonstrators, who obeyed the laws, obtained permits, and cleaned up after themselves when they peaceable assembled to petition their government for redress of grievances are violent, racist extremists who should be monitored by the Department of Homeland Security as potential homegrown terrorists.

Occupy Wall Street, who squatted on public and private land for weeks at a time without permit, cost cities across the nation millions in clean-up and other costs, engaged in rape, drug use, public sexual acts, attacked police, destroyed property and generally disrupted the normal flow of life are great patriots. They deserve the public support of Barrack Obama, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, the DCCC, Elizabeth Warren, Barney Franks, Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Charlie Rangle, Dennis Kucinich, et al. As Nancy Pelosi said: “God bless them, for their spontaneity. It’s independent … it’s young, it’s spontaneous, and it’s focused. And it’s going to be effective.”

When kids are failing in school after being subjected to exposure to incompetent teachers who couldn’t teach a dog to bark yet can’t be fired because they’re protected by unions, lower testing standards. The possibility of hurting a student’s feelings by giving them a failing grade couldn’t possibly pass politically correct, everyone has to feel good about themselves at all times muster.

If you’re a kid who wants to hold a bake sale, open a lemonade stand or engage in similar activities which demonstrate initiative, ambition or a desire to utilize the free market in order to better yourself, you must be trained to first beg permission from the government. And boys and girls of all ages, don’t ever forget broccoli is good for you and snack cakes, candy bars and chips are bad. Since you’re too stupid to make the proper decision, government is going to enact legislation that deprives you of the right to choose.

Whenever “progressive” politicians are caught in an outright lie about where they were born, their bloodlines or military service rendered it’s due to a clerical error. If criticism persists, blame someone else for each and every one of your failures. When all else fails, play the race card.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/18/what-the-obama-adminstration-has-taught-america/

Choose Your Stimulus

The Spanish Economic Ministry denied there’s been a surge in withdrawals from the nation’s banks, while Spain’s Prime Minister warned that borrowing costs could reach “astronomical” proportions over fears about the weakness of Spain’s financial institutions.

Greeks have been taking their savings out of banks, with nearly a third taken out during this year’s first quarter. Since May 7th, at least 700m euros have been withdrawn from Greek banks. Uncertainty over Greece’s exit from the eurozone is stirring global fears about Europe’s monetary future.

France’s new socialist government will not ratify the European Union’s fiscal pact unless it contains stimulus provisions. “The treaty will not be ratified as is and that it must be completed with a chapter on growth, with a growth strategy,” said France’s new Finance Minister.

With a number of European countries again in recession, with zero growth in parts of the eurozone this year, calls for stimulus measures within Europe are growing.

Europe’s ideas about stimulating the eurozone economy will only lead the continent into deeper trouble. Taxing the rich, hiring more government employees and lowering the retirement age is not the way to create sustainable, long-term economic growth.

No matter how much money is raised through tax hikes, a portion of those funds are lost before they’re re-injected into the economy due to the cost of government overhead. That puts the stimulus process on negative footing before the discussion even turns to how the money’s to be spent, be it sending out welfare checks, funding food stamps or repaying political supporters by rewarding them with “shovel ready” government contracts.

Not that America should be overly concerned with Europe’s fate. Thanks to their scrupulous adherence to the dictates of political correctness and secular multiculturalism, they’ll be slaves to Sharia law in a few decades anyway.

America must learn from Europe’s mistakes.

Following down the path of taxing the rich, creating a cradle to grave entitlement society and continuous deficit spending in attempts to sustain a socialist utopian fantasy will destroy any country, including America.

Punitive taxing of the rich is a non-starter. Class envy warfare might be effective, emotionally charged rhetoric able to stir up a politician’s voter base, but it’s illogical. Were “those evil rich who don’t pay their fair share” in the U.S. to be taxed at a 100% rate, the revenue collected by the IRS would fund spending in Washington DC for a couple of months. Not years, a couple of months. How then would the government propose to pay for the rest of the year’s deficit spending? And after taxes have destroyed the wherewithal of the well off, who would then be taxed? Besides, rich folks, especially those engaging in successful business practices (as opposed to achieving wealth through inheritance or by winning the lottery) didn’t succeed because they’re imbeciles. If a country’s tax rates are unfavorable to their business, they leave that country and take their businesses, jobs and money with them. It’s not exactly climbing out on a limb to predict that a 100% tax rate would fall within their unfavorable category.

Creating a cradle to grave entitlement society is the best way to destroy initiative. It’s said that if you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. If you teach that man to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Imagine a group of one hundred people where only five know how to catch fish. In order to feed everyone every day, those five people would each need to catch twenty fish per day. How long would it take before some, if not all of those five fishermen grew tired of sharing their wealth with the other 95% and gave up fishing? On the other hand, if all the people were taught to fish and expected to catch their own, no individual would be responsible for catching more than one fish per day. If they managed to catch two fish per day, they will have created a surplus of wealth that benefits the entire group.

Continuing massive deficit spending obligates any nation’s budget to two unsavory alternatives. One is borrowing, which results in having to pay the money back with interest. Not only does being obligated to make those payments leave less money available to pay the cost of conducting regular business, it profits the lender to the detriment of the borrower. The other alternative is to devalue the currency by printing money, leading to inflation, which if left unchecked destroys the value of the country’s currency. Political instability caused by inflating the currency of the Weimar Republic led to the rise of Adolph Hitler. Shortages of hard currency led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

America has a choice to make. Shall it follow the smaller government design, complete with reduced spending, lower taxes, a growing free market economy and individual freedom preferred by the law abiding, peaceful Tea Party, whose lineage can be traced back to 1969 when the world joined Americans in viewing the pinnacle achievement of human history, the televised first moon landing? Or should America follow the design of the law breaking, violent Occupy Wall Street, who’s lineage can be traced back to Woodstock, the other big event of 1969, where unbathed people ingested copious amounts of drugs and rolled around in the mud having sex like animals?

As Conservative innovator and outspoken leader Andrew Breitbart said at the 2012 CPAC Convention in February: “I don’t care who our candidate is. I haven’t since the beginning of this. I will march behind whoever our candidate is because if we don’t, we lose. There are two paths: one is America, the other one is Occupy. Anyone that is willing to stand next to me to fight the progressive left I will be in that bunker, and if you’re not in that bunker because you’re not satisfied with this candidate, more than shame on you, you’re on the other side.”

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/choose-your-stimulus/

Expect the Institutionalized “progressive” Left to Come Out in Force

Comedian Bill Maher gave $1 million to one of President Obama’s SuperPACs. Actor Alec Baldwin’s on record saying that Obama’s re-election ‘In the Bag’. Lanny Davis, who writes for The Hill, is busy covering up for U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder during Congressional investigations into the murder of U.S. Border Agent Brian Terry and hundreds of Mexican citizens resulting from the Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms Fast and Furious gun-running scandal. MSNBC stopped inviting Conservative author Matt Lewis to contribute on-air after the site he works for, the Daily Caller, reported about the influence George Soros funded Media Matters for America wields over that Network. “Coincidentally”, Conservative pundit Pat Buchannan was also dropped by MSNBC around that same time.

As is always the case with any non-white or non-male Republican star, the institutionalized “progressive” left media is focused on Florida Senator Marco Rubio who, being a Hispanic from a crucial swing state, poses an existential threat to the re-election of Barack Obama. Not surprisingly, openly leftist actress Eva Longoria joined in the attack by saying “Marco Rubio has been coming up with some silly stuff that we really have to sort through”.

Meanwhile, the American mainstream media remains silent after a BarackObama speech where he joked: “I went to the speaker’s home town,” referring to a trip to House Speaker John Boehner’s battleground state of Ohio, “stood under a bridge that was crumbling.” Somebody in the crowd shouted, “Let him drive on it!”

Cue the sound of crickets.

This is the same press that had a field day back in 2008 when, on one or two occasions, a few folks attending McCain/Palin rallies shouted ugly comments from the crowd. These incidents were reported as major, top of the broadcast, front-page news. Repeatedly, with frequency and vigor.

During nationwide May Day demonstrations by OWS, occupiers themselves willing admitted that their protesters were taking marching orders from big labor and public service unions like the AFL-CIO and SEIU.

One of the leaders of the Occupy Cleveland movement, Brandon Baxter, was arrested for a terrorist plot to bomb a bridge in Cleveland Ohio. The plot has been directly linked to the Occupy movement. The names and the official complaint have been confirmed.

There were multiple incidences of violence around the country, with occupiers shouting the likes of “Pigs Go Home” and “Down with Capitalism”. With tear gas in Oakland, violence and vandalism in Seattle, SEIU members disrupting Los Angeles International Airport, with Occupiers calling themselves anarchists and hurling Molotov Cocktails; despite all evidence to the contrary, American taxpayer funded NPR is still calling the violent Occupy protests “restrained”.

By comparison, when the Tea Party was the topic de jour, Democrats and their “progressive” Party Pravda lapdogs were quick to blame the Tea Party for each and every violent incident around the country. More than one fringe leftist whack-job, impersonating responsible journalists on American television’s most irresponsible cable network, held Sarah Palin personally responsible for the Gabby Giffords shooting in Tucson Arizona. Their supposed rationale was her use of the word target when discussing campaign strategy. Never mind that in similar applications, the word “target” had been used frequently by members of the Democratic Party. Members of the institutionalized “progressive” left smear machine somehow forgot to inform the public that “target” was first used as political jargon by 1980 Democratic presidential candidate Walter Mondale’s political strategist Bob Beckel.

A review of the visitor’s log confirms that AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and former SEIU President Andy Stern have been frequent visitors to the White House. SEIU alone spent approximately $60.7 million to help elect Barack Obama to the White House in 2008. SEIU expects a return on their investment. Barack Obama was quick to embrace the Occupy movement when he saw his poll numbers sliding.

Before this November’s elections American voters should duly note such connections.

In case you haven’t noticed, or have yet to become fully convinced, bias within the institutionalized “progressive” left media is both very real and pervasive. With the presidential general election campaign about to get into full swing, expect it to get much, much worse. Truth coming from the institutionalized “progressive” left’s smear machine is as likely as them reporting that Elizabeth Warren can’t prove she has Cherokee blood in her veins.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/expect-the-institutionalized-progressive-left-to-come-out-in-force/

Occupy vs. Tea Party: The Series

YES! It is finally here! A reality television show that pits two of the most visible and vociferous political grassroots groups against each other in a battle of epic proportions.  Occupy vs. Tea Party is the brainchild of Mr. Gordon Gebert.  A musician by trade, Mr. Gebert hatched the idea of these two groups duking it out on live television upon seeing the growth of such activism after the coronation of Barack Obama.  He wanted a project that was fair, innovative, and fun in a time where politics is becoming all too personal. We can thank Hilary Rosen for that.  However, the dynamics of the show are actually quite interesting.

He said that the show’s will be in a one hour format (44 minutes with commercials) and will be a Survivor meets Big Brother meets Apprentice format.  Occupy and Tea Party contestants will be divided into teams of six with three females and three males on each side.  Each team will endure challenges, like in Survivor, and the winner would pick a debate topic for later in the program.  Gebert said “the meat of the show” is centered on the “Big Great Debate,” where we see our political allegiances duke it out in a battle royale over freedom, liberty, and the American way of life.  Gordon said he wanted to portray a debate that isn’t cut off by commercial breaks or abrupt endings due to time constraints, which I think a lot of us have felt frustrated about watching Hannity, The Five, or (gulp) MSNB—-(I can’t say it!)….the news in general!

At the conclusion of the debate, each side will vote a member off.  As a result, you will experience the typical fight to oust the lazy person, “the village idiot,” the poor debater, or the emotionally fragile. What fun!  The last two contestants will have one final Big Great Debate and the viewers will decide who won the contest.  Gordon feels that in similar programs, where voting off contestants is an integral part of the show, the viewer will find a Tea partier or, do I dare say, an Occupier, to connect with and will share in his or her dissapointment if they are voted off the program.

Gordon hopes that a major network will pick up the show for a weekly broadcast. He is currently raising funds to shoot the pilot episode for his summer preview.  However, if this show is picked up, then production will be given a budget to allow for such amenities and Mr. Gebert hopes that the increase in funds will enhance the quality of the show, provide more eye candy, and conduct more editing to help the narrative.  However, like in politics, it’s all about the money and if he can raise more than his targeted $50,000 budget for the pilot, he can pitch a better product to the network executives in early June or late July.  However, he knows the tough road ahead of him.  He admits that the only way he would be picked up by a major network is if they have a show that fails with audiences in their packed fall schedules.  Although, his optimism couldn’t be higher and there is always a few programs that don’t make the cut.  Case in point, Lone Star, 3 lbs, The Playboy Club, and The Paul Reiser Show were all sentenced to the chopping block.  At the very least, Occupy vs. Tea Party will be posted as a webisode on Youtube. This show has some serious potential and I wish Gordon Gebert the best in bringing this entertainment to a wider audience.

« Older Entries