The Economic Abuse Of Veterans In America

By Brandon Smith | June 20, 2012 | Alt-Market.com

Volunteering to join the military has always been a process rife with internal and external conflictions.  A vital aspect of one’s ultimate decision to do so often depends greatly upon the era in which one becomes eligible.  U.S. citizens leaped at the chance to defend their country at the onset of World War II because the enemies were indeed a legitimate and obvious threat to the freedom and sovereignty of all nations.  During Vietnam, the waters were muddied (at least in the view of millions of citizens), and many Americans did not see the fight as their own.  The line between our system, and the enemies we were supposed to despise, had become progressively more foggy and disjointed.  For any wise and honorable man to go out of his way to risk his life, the fight must be clearly just, otherwise, he may feel that his death will serve no purpose.

Madison Ruppert: Secret backdoors in microprocessors discovered [Video]

NC Teacher Suspended for Hectoring Students About Respecting Obama

By John Sexton | May 21, 2012 | Breitbart News

Yesterday, Breitbart News reported a story about a North Carolina high school teacher who began screaming at students who dared to criticize President Obama. Today, the teacher in question, Tanya Dixon-Neely, was suspended with pay by the school.

NC Teacher Screams at Student: It’s Criminal to Criticize Obama

By Ben Shapiro | May 20, 2012 | Breitbart News

A YouTube video uploaded on Monday afternoon apparently shows a schoolteacher from the Rowan-Salisbury school district in North Carolina informing a student that failing to be respectful of President Obama is a criminal offense. Breitbart News has uncovered that the student is a high school junior, and that the teacher is apparently one Tanya Dixon-Neely.

The video shows a classroom discussion about the Washington Post hit piece about Mitt Romney bullying a kid some five decades ago. One student says, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?” The teacher says: “Not to my knowledge.” The student then cites the fact that Obama, in Dreams from My Father, admits to shoving a little girl. “Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” screams the teacher. Romney is “running for president. Obama is the president.”

“Bad Big Daddy”

By William R. Mann | May 12, 2012 | Canada Free Press

“The wise are instructed by reason, average minds by experience, the stupid by necessity and the brute by instinct.” – Marcus Tullius Cicero

God Bless Joan Swirsky for her recent Canada Free Press article, “Bad Mommy.” It is wonderful compendium about how America missed or ignored the signals of a growing Marxist menace in America.

Radical Feminism was but one prong on a fork of efforts, coordinated generations long ago of subterfuge with which to overlay our Republic with Communism. Just as Ulysses men were nearly overcome by the effects of eating the Lotus on their way back for their victory over Troy, so Americans must reject the multicultural, Progressive vision of this faux Collectivist Utopia. Behold Ulysses’ task:

“I was driven thence by foul winds for a space of 9 days upon the sea, but on the tenth day we reached the land of the Lotus-eaters, who live on a food that comes from a kind of flower. Here we landed to take in fresh water, and our crews got their mid-day meal on the shore near the ships. When they had eaten and drunk I sent two of my company to see what manner of men the people of the place might be, and they had a third man under them. They started at once, and went about among the Lotus-Eaters, who did them no hurt, but gave them to eat of the lotus, which was so delicious that those who ate of it left off caring about home, and did not even want to go back and say what had happened to them, but were for staying and munching lotus with the Lotus-eaters without thinking further of their return; nevertheless, though they wept bitterly I forced them back to the ships and made them fast under the benches. Then I told the rest to go on board at once, lest any of them should taste of the lotus and leave off wanting to get home, so they took their places and smote the grey sea with their oars.” – The Odyssey by Homer

It was obvious to the American and International Reds early-on that America would never be won over to Communism by threat, intimidation, or war. Like “Mack the Knife,” Liberalism has erringly flashed its collectivist “pearly whites” at us once too often. The hard working folks of America are waking up. But back in the Depression only the wary, cautious traditionalists and conservatives saw the warnings, or manned the political barricades. In their day, Conservatism was slandered continuously for 50 years until the election of Ronald Reagan, himself a convert from the lies of the New Deal. Conservatism has only recently become a popular choice.

Read and understand what happened to the earlier alarm-bell ringers:

• Franklin Roosevelt’s sycophants derided anyone who questioned the New Deal Statism. The New Deal was a rush to political gibberish. FDR, himself, could not even understand the Keynesian economic nonsense. But the Progressive Left [aka Marxists Socialists] forced it into mainstream political-economic thought by constantly calling into question “the failure of Free Enterprise” and supply & demand economics, and by blaming Herbert Hoover. In Foreign Policy, anyone who dared question the Fellow Traveler dalliances and sympathies of FDR’s favorite envoys, Harry Hopkins or Averill Harriman,  were branded themselves as unpatriotic “crackpots” [a favorite derisive term of the Left then and now. In psychology that is called Projection].
• Liberals were apoplectic over Ronald Reagan’s cooperation with Congress [as President of the Screen Actors Guild] to investigate Hollywood film-making. Oh … how terrible, that the average American’s Patriotism is so “jingoistic and fascistic” as to deny a multiplicity of visions in film for American Society! “Blacklisting” people who want to subvert and destroy America as founded is now a bad thing and this term is still constantly used by the Left against the Right [again … Projection]
• Then-Congressman Richard Nixon and his House Committee staff were vilified for decades by the Liberal and Progressive Left for going after, and convicting, the State Department darling [and Soviet Agent] Alger Hiss for perjury. Even after Hiss’ treason was confirmed through old KGB files after the fall of the USSR, the Left still denied that Hiss was a Communist. But the Left “got” their old enemies, Richard Nixon and Roy Cohn, in the end. It took them thirty more years, but the Left “destroyed” their old foes.
• Similarly, the Press and the Establishment distorted, maligned and chewed up the likes of Whitaker Chambers, Senator Joe McCarthy and anyone else who dared to question infiltration of Cabinets and Agencies by “active and sleeper” Communist Agents in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. This time around, defending traditional American values was called Red-Baiting. Does this mean that what the Left does is “Patriot Baiting?” Joe McCarthy, by alerting the American Public to the intrusion of anti-Democratic ideas, methods and goals by Communist Agents, Dupes and Useful Idiots in Film, Society, the Media, and Public Service, was widely applauded by the public at first, until the Leftist Press decided enough was enough. Joe McCarthy “had to go.” So, the Progressive Machine turned its fury on McCarthy and drove him out of Public Service and into oblivion. Historical revelation since then has shown that McCarthy was largely correct in his assertions. Government was thoroughly infiltrated by Soviet agents as captured or acquired old Soviet Documents showed.
• American Academia is a bastion of admirers of Comrades Lenin and Stalin. They teach that Communism has a Right wing and a Left Wing [guess which one is bad Communism]. Further they say Communism and Socialism fails only because it has not yet been used to transform a fully developed, bourgeois Capitalist Society like the United States. Their propagation of Communist methodology and theory, posing as collegiate higher education, has stripped education of its rigors. It has instead substituted slavish regurgitation of emotional utopian Socialist dogma. The hard, true academic work of reading, research, recall, assembly, evaluation, proposition and coherent expression of ideas is all but non-existent. Instead, they foist a flawed social science methodology called “Scientific Communism” [though Leftists would substitute the term “Progressivism”] which chooses desired outcomes and then forces data and evaluation to fit the thesis.
• Fast forward to what is happening today to Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who has dared to investigate the gaps and possible forgeries in Mr. Obama’s personal identity and public records. Obama’s Attorney General, the tainted Eric Holder [i.e., Ruby Ridge, Waco, Elian Gonzales, Black Panther Intimidation, Operation Gun-Runner connections] has charged Arpaio with profiling Hispanics as Illegal Aliens. What a convenient distraction and a lesson to all who would challenge monolithic Obamism. Now think about how weird such a charge is in Arizona, when the Feds will not secure the Border. This is now is the typical patter. Here is the Internationalist response by this Administration to securing our Borders and our National Security Interests: Persecute the Citizen, traditional American institutions, and American religions that threaten the Obama “Fundamental Transformation of America!”

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Bill Moyers: The Ghost of Joe McCarthy in Today’s Republican Party (alternet.org)
• History since then vindicates Joe McCarthy: Read Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s Reply to Edward R. Murrow (trutherator.wordpress.com)
• Allen West, Joe McCarthy and the Communists (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Part 2: Communism – it’s a party (lsnewsgroup.com)
• Keith Ellison responds to Allen West’s ‘communist’ claim: ‘Sir, have you no decency?’ (dailycaller.com)
• “Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies” (theconservativehillbilly.wordpress.com)
• McCarthyism: Was Senator Joe McCarthy Right or Wrong? (theconservativehillbilly.wordpress.com)

London 2012 Is Psychological Warfare [Video]

By Paul Joseph Watson | May 12, 2012 | Infowars.com

The London 2012 Olympics have barely anything to do with sport. Not only is Britain continuing pagan/Nazi traditions and symbolism, the event is also a police state showcase and a psychological warfare attack on the people.

Related Articles

• Drawing Inspiration From Hitler, UK Threatens To Arrest Thought Criminals Before Olympics (mountainrepublic.net)
• London 2012 Olympics: there will be queues, says Coe (guardian.co.uk)
• Missiles, Helicopters With Snipers and Airport Style Security at 2012 London Olympics (shoppingblog.com)
• London 2012 security: ‘Sonic weapon’ to be used (nbc29.com)
• The missiles next door: Rooftop London bases to protect Olympics (rt.com)
• London 2012 Olympics The Imgained Security Threat (lincolnshirecommentator.wordpress.com)
• RT: UK rolls out LRAD sonic gun for London Olympics (jhaines6.wordpress.com)
• London 2012 Olympics: ‘missiles left unguarded’ outside east London flats (12160.info)

A New Declaration of Independence

By Eileen F. Toplansky | April 28, 2012 | American Thinker

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary to ensure that a President, who has led the country to near ruin and who is working to discard the basic principles upon which this Great Country rests, be peaceably removed it is incumbent upon us that we submit the reasons to the people.

Without any in-depth research or vetting about his background, Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44^th president of the United States.  There were voices of caution who early on exposed Obama’s connections to former terrorist Bill Ayers, anti-American vilifier Reverend Wright, crook Tony Rezko, and anti-Semite Rashid Khalidi, but they were laughed at as the people allowed themselves to be demagogued on hope and change.  Evidence continues to suggest that Barack Obama’s long-form birth certificate is, indeed, a forgery.  This would make his presidential eligibility suspect.

Thus, the American people are at a critical watershed moment in our history.  The facts are in; Obama’s ideology and core principles are now public and exist for all to see.  We can no longer claim ignorance; we can no longer be naïve; we can no longer deny what is patently before us.  The record of this current president is a “history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these United States.  To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

Mr. Obama has “given himself the powers to declare martial law[.]  It is a sweeping power grab that should worry every American.”  Thus, “Barack Obama is very dangerous, the apotheosis of an insidious strain of authoritarianism that destroys from within.”  In a statement published on December 31, 2011, Mr. Obama states that “[t]oday I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012.”  Though he claims that he has “signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists,” it was Mr. Obama who “demanded the removal of any and all protections for US citizens and legal residents.”

And like King George III, Obama has now established the distinct possibility of placing “[s]tanding armies without the Consent of our legislatures” — although sadly, in this case, the Senate passed this unwholesome disgrace.  King George III would be pleased.

In fact, Mr. Obama sees fit to bypass the “pesky” Constitution whenever it suits him, thus ignoring limited-government tenets which were at the core of the Founding Fathers’ belief system.  Thus, the NDAA detention mandate allows indefinite military detention not just to foreigners; now “U.S. citizens are included in the grant of detention authority.”

In fact, should Mr. Obama be re-elected to a second term, “our rights to speech, religion and property, and to privacy in our persons and homes, will be transformed.”  Mr. Obama has already “hectored Christianity on matters of conscience.”  Through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as ObamaCare, Mr. Obama is forcing Catholic institutions to pay for insurance covering contraceptives.  Why, when “religious liberty was weighed against access to birth control, did freedom lose?” — a clear intrusion into the first of the five protections of the First Amendment.  Bishop Daniel Jenky has likened President Obama’s health care policies to the attacks on the Catholic church by Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin of yesteryear.  Dare we go down that totalitarian road again?

The onslaught against free speech has been heightened because of the “cooperation between [Mr. Obama] and the OIC or Organization of Islamic Cooperation.”  The “Obama administration stands ‘united’ with the OIC on speech issues,” thus silencing Arab reformers and anyone who makes any allegedly negative remarks about Islam.  The “repressive practices” of the OIC member-nations speak volumes about their restrictions on free speech.  Hence, “the encroachment of de facto blasphemy restrictions in the West threatens free speech and the free exchange of ideas.”  That an American president would threaten this most fundamental right is yet another resounding reason why he needs to be removed from office.

In December of 2009, Nat Hentoff, a nationally renowned authority on the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights, asserted that “[i]f congressional Democrats succeed in passing their health-care ‘reform’ measure to send to the White House for President Obama’s signature, then they and he are determining your health decisions[.]” Thus, “these functionaries making decisions about your treatment and, in some cases, about the extent of your life span, have never met you[.]  Is this America?”  Hentoff concludes his piece with the revelation “I’m scared and I do mean to scare you.  We do not elect the president and Congress to decide how short our lives will be.”

Thus, we still hold “these truths to be self-evident, that all [people] are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”  And “whenever any Form of Government becomes  destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles … as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”  We do not declare violent revolution but do demand the secure right to change the government through the ballot box.

But even this fundamental right is being seriously eroded as the Department of Justice openly and arrogantly dismisses genuine cases of voter intimidation with nary a word of concern by Barack Obama.  Although there is visual proof and  evidence of threats to the voting public as well as exhortations of death threats to a man on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder turns a blind eye.

By his selective indifference, Mr. Obama has created a racially divisive atmosphere in America.  He continues to promote this hateful attitude wherein the civil rights progress made in this country for all its citizens is ignored.  Surely, Mr. Obama has “excited domestic insurrections amongst us” as he engages in racial division, class warfare, and phony gender wars.  If Mr. Obama is, indeed, so interested in the rights of women, then why does he support Islamic sharia law, which demands second-class status for women?  These diversions serve to stir up resentments; unfortunately, they are successful in obfuscating the shameless actions of this 44^th president.

Mr. Obama is not content with taking the country down the path to “European socialism.”  His centralized control of the health care industry, his increases in entitlement programs, his redistribution of capital — in fact, his sweeping regulations that give the government new authority to control the entire financial sector — are reminiscent of Karl Marx’s 10-Point Agenda, and although communism was unknown in 1775, the signatories of the Declaration knew of the absolute power of the monarchy and would see through the oligarchic nature of this “ism.”

Amazingly, Mr. Obama has assured Russian leaders (who have gained their power through rigged elections) that American concessions are coming their way, but they [the Russian leaders] must wait because he is seeking re-election and he dare not tell his own people of his true intentions.  What credible reason would a loyal American president have for weakening American and allies’ defense systems?  During the open microphone conversation between Obama and Medvedev, a puppet of KGB Putin, the world learned whose interests Obama was truly serving.  Surely, this is “enough to chill friends and allies, democrats and dissidents, all over the world.”

Furthermore, Obama has “obstructed the Administration of Justice[,]” instead pitting one group against the other through “waivers.”  If ObamaCare is so laudable, why extend waivers in the first place?  In fact, it is yet another example of how manipulative Mr. Obama is when he tries to make the people “dependent on his will alone.”

Mr. Obama has ignored the laws of our country to impose an arbitrary and capricious rule of law by outside forces.  He finds it more expedient to pit the federal government against an American state which is trying only to enforce federal immigration law.  To this end, Mr. Obama has seen fit to “subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution[,]” which was so clearly enumerated in the Declaration of Independence as reason to reject King George III.   By issuing a Universal Period Review (UPR), the first of its kind, Mr. Obama has given the United Nations the right to dictate to Arizona.  Thus, the “stakes for our national sovereignty have just been raised.”  Despotic countries of the United Nations have now been empowered to dictate how Americans should conduct themselves.  Is this not reminiscent of King George III “waging war against us”?

Moreover, the Obama State Department ordered the “suspension of routine border inspection procedures in order to whisk (Muslim Brotherhood) Islamists into our country.  Thus, Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party did not have to go through the normal procedures of inspection.  Recall that the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission statement is “Allah is our objective, the Prophet is our leader, the Koran is our law, Jihad is our way, and dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!”  Negotiating with the Muslim Brotherhood is akin to negotiating with the dictator Hitler.  It is appeasement all the way.  Why does the Obama administration cavort with such people?  Does this not make him unfit to defend the interests of America?

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Romney Silent As Woman Says Obama Should Be Tried For Treason (buzzfeed.com)
• Obama: ‘2012 is Make or Break for American Marxism’ (gulagbound.com)
• Dictator Obama Issues New Threat to Supreme Court over ObamaCare (johnmalcolm.me)
• Barack Obama speaks out and declares support for same-sex marriage – The Guardian (guardian.co.uk)
• The Supreme Bureaucrats’ Decision on ObamaCare (johnmalcolm.me)
• Lawmaker’s ‘How to Slap Washington’ Strategy (johnmalcolm.me)
• Obama’s Second Term Transformation Plans (mb50.wordpress.com)
• #NDAA: This is happening in America? (alexanderhiggins.com)
• Obama Mentor Wanted Americans Put In Re-Education Camps (musicians4freedom.com)
• From Communism Day to Government Loyalty Day (musicians4freedom.com)
• In my humble opinion (100wnayelli.wordpress.com)
• Tennessee Sheriffs Cracks Down On Obama Federal Agents Gone WIld: NDAA Nullified And Kidnapping Charges Against Feds.. (12160.info)
• Nat Hentoff: I’ll vote for Romney … (wnd.com)
• A long way from ‘hope’ and ‘change’ (wnd.com)
• Virginia State Senate Passes Bill Forbidding Indefinite Detention of Americans: ‘Council of Governors’ member McDonnell could try to sabotage anti-NDAA law (destructionist.wordpress.com)
• Impeach Obama 2012! Join the National Campaign! (musicians4freedom.com)
• Chicago: the cesspool that gave us Barack Obama (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• ObamaCare Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics + More (papundits.wordpress.com)
• Judicial Watch’s ‘Most Wanted Corrupt Politicians’ for 2011: Executive Edition – Big Government (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Obama Gives Coal Miners the Shaft (gulagbound.com)
• Obama: More Flexibility After Elections (myfoxphoenix.com)
• The NDAA Provision for Detaining Citizens is Waived! Spread! (disclose.tv)
• The Revolt Against the NDAA Hits Congress (mb50.wordpress.com)
• Virginia lawmakers agree to reject NDAA (12160.info)
• Obama Sets NDAA Detention Guidelines (todaysnews4you.wordpress.com)
• Corporate Media Silent On Lawuit Over NDAA Being Used To Silence Journalists (jhaines6.wordpress.com)
• ‘Obama signed US into Police State’ [Voltaire Network] (powersthatbeat.wordpress.com)
• Obama Worse than Bush on Civil Liberties – Romney No Different From Obama (ronpaulnews.net)
• Pulitzer Prize journalist Chris Hedges suing Barack Obama for NDAA (vaticproject.blogspot.com)
• Piracy vs Privacy: Obama may ‘oppose’ CISPA but still sign it like NDAA (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
• Romney & Obama, the NDAA & Ron Paul (revolutionarypolitics.tv)
• NDAA lawsuit – update from RT (video) (occupyblogosphere.wordpress.com)

Initiated Force: Liberals’ Tool of Control

By Phil Elmore | February 22, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Phil Elmore notes the State’s ‘willingness to use violence to bring you to heel’

Liberals adore force. While they hate any firearms they do not wield, and they abhor the notion of self-defense and self-preservation (because leftist ideology is fundamentally self-destructive), they exult in making the other fellow toe the line. From cradle to grave, every waking moment of a man’s life must be controlled if that man is to make the “right” choices as dictated by a lib.

Leftists believe that individual freedom is a threat to all and that freedom of action must be curtailed. The means to make you do as they wish is violence, codified in complex laws and regulations and enforced by the jackbooted thugs of an all-powerful state.

What better symbol is there for liberal violence than the “Occupy” movement, endorsed by President Obama and plagued by rape, disease, defecation and vile threats of assault and murder? These marching, mindless, ravening hordes, these entitled thugs, epitomize where and to what lib rule is driving us.

All lib violence has as its common denominator the desire to make you do something against your will. Democrats and left-wingers salivate at the thought of making you do what they say. They will impoverish you, imprison you, ruin you as totally and as thoroughly as they can, if you oppose them. This is the very definition of initiated force, a concept that runs counter to every instinct and consequence of a free society. It is for this reason that political liberalism, accompanied as it always is by the irresistible compulsion to force your fellow men to obey you, is completely antithetical to the United States Constitution.

Said differently, leftists are un-American, un-patriotic, liberty-hating despots whose ideology is diametrically opposed to the ideals on which the United States was founded. All of this is rooted in liberals’ willingness to use violence to bring you to heel. The average Democrat cannot draw breath without pondering how he might put his boot on your neck.

Last week’s Technocracy concerned your nature as a discrete biological entity. The ideas contained in that column are not original; they are the product of libertarian philosophers both contemporary and ancient. One of those philosophers was a woman born in Russia who took the name “Ayn Rand.” Rand, who owed much to Aristotle and who reinvented several philosophical wheels over the course of her writing, offered a coherent argument on human beings, reason and the immorality of initiating force.

Rand believed initiating force – choosing to move a relationship outside the realm of reason into the realm of physical violence – was immoral among rational human beings. She based this assertion on the self-evident fact that your faculty of reason, your ability to integrate the data of your senses into concepts (from which you make decisions regarding goal-directed actions), is your only means of long-term survival.

You are not born preprogrammed; there is no other means of acquiring and applying knowledge. Psychic insight is unreliable. Religious revelation is subjective. Instinct tells you that you need certain things, but not specifically what they are or how to get them.

When you acknowledge this, you of necessity accept that you do not have the right to initiate force. All force has a physical component, but this does not mean all manifestations of force are some form of striking or restraining someone. Theft is force, because it deprives people of assets rightfully theirs. Fraud is force, because it is a form of theft.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• The Way of Peace (txwclp.org)
• game tries after initial forcing NT response (bvillebridge.wordpress.com)
• Rand (wg57.wordpress.com)
• How Liberals Successfully Silence Dissent (johnmalcolm.me)
• Non-aggression is not pacifism (dailycaller.com)
• Profit & Selfishness (involuntaryobservations.wordpress.com)
• Liberty, Capitalism, and Anarchy (oracleofreason.com)
• But Then We’d Have Anarchy! by Eric Peters (pointsofhype.wordpress.com)
• Today’s Occupier is Tomorrow’s Teapartier ? …. Hmmm (youviewedblog.wordpress.com)
• Golden Rule vs. Non-Aggression Principal (afterhisimage.wordpress.com)
• What is libertarianism? – Part I: principles (politicsontoast.com)
• What is libertarianism? Part II: markets (politicsontoast.com)
• Worship of the Mob: a discussion with L-wing bohemian types (disclose.tv)
• Learning from the Left (whoplanswhom.com)
• Libertarianism Does Not Equal Selfishness | Sheldon Richman | Reason | 23 March 2012 (reason.com)
• End Government’s Aggressive Violence (lewrockwell.com)
• Rand Paul’s War on Promiscuous Power (spectator.org)
• This Is the Rand Paul Essay I Would Have Written… (bothwell.typepad.com)
• No More Killing for the Government (lewrockwell.com)
• Martin Luther King Was A Dreamer, Not An Occupier – Part 1 (thecollegeconservative.com)
• Left-libertarians and aggression: a facebook conversation (stephankinsella.com)
• Non-violence more effective because everyone can take part – Mustafa Barghouti (jfjfp.com)
• Obama’s Inner Lenin Invoked in Desperate Re-Election Strategy (economicnoise.com)

The Supreme Court Again Upholds Your Right to Be Framed

By R.B. Parrish | May 4, 2012 | American Thinker

“A prosecutor … may receive absolute immunity from suit for acts violating the Constitution in order to advance important societal values.” -Elena Kagan, Solicitor General, 2009

After the Civil War, Congress passed several civil rights laws, including one allowing anyone whose said rights had been violated to sue those responsible, especially if these had been acting “under color of law” — that is, as part of law enforcement.

Naturally, judges, prosecutors, and police have hated that provision ever since, and the courts have done their best to bleed it of meaning.

In 2009, Elena Kagan, then-solicitor general, argued before the Supreme Court that prior to trial, a defendant has no right not to be framed, because false evidence does no real harm until it is actually used in court.

“Fabrication Of Evidence During An Investigation Does Not, By Itself, Violate The Constitution” read one of the subject headings of her brief.  And she quoted the opinion of a lower court:

“We do not see how the existence of a false police report, sitting in a drawer in a police station, by itself deprives a person of a right secured by the Constitution and laws.” (Pottawattamie vs. McGhee)

Justice was never so blind as this — but the Supremes, sitting as the very foundation of the legal establishment, didn’t bat an eye to object.  Indeed, one might have expected them to sing along in chorus.

It is the prosecutors, according to this point of view, who need to be protected — they are the ones in danger of being sued.  Hence, society’s primary interest must be in preserving their “courage and independence.”  (What prosecutor will pursue a case if he fears he will be sued afterward?)  And if this results in some innocent persons suffering and left without redress, that is just the price we have to pay “in order to advance important societal values” — that is, that same “courage” of our prosecutors.

This month, the Supremes (Rehberg v. Paulk, 9-0) have extended that concept: protection against suits is now affirmed not only for prosecutors, but also for witnesses…and even police officers when they testify.  And if those officers lie, it does not lessen the interest society has in preserving the principle (or establishing it anew) that pesky lawsuits must not be allowed to throw a beam into the spokes of justice.

Witnesses “might be reluctant to come forward to testify,” and even if a witness took the stand, the witness “might be inclined to shade his testimony in favor of the potential plaintiff” for “fear of subsequent liability.”

As for police officers:

If police officer witnesses were routinely forced to defend against claims based on their testimony, their “energy and attention would be diverted from the pressing duty of enforcing the criminal law.” 

Fair enough.  As well:

[A] police officer witness’ potential liability … could influence decisions on appeal and collateral relief[.]

So let the officers lie.  If it’s before trial, then no harm, no foul.

How does this play out in the real world?  The vast majority of criminal cases never go to trial at all; they are settled with plea bargains.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• The Kagan Deception (usapartisan.com)
• Elena Kagan, how could this Socialist in black pass confirmation? (icanbeatobama.com)
• Kagan: Going From O’s Solicitor to Supreme Court ‘Not a Change at All’ (theconservativehillbilly.wordpress.com)
• Kagan: Going From O’s Solicitor to Supreme Court ‘Not a Change at All’ (mikesright.wordpress.com)
• John McCain: I’m Voting Against Elena Kagan (cbsnews.com)

Government’s Trump Card: The Use of Force

By Robert Ringer | May 3, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Robert Ringer says going the way of Europe is least of our worries

The two most poisonous words in the English language are rights and entitlements. They mean essentially the same thing, and both are subjectively created in the minds of collectivist dreamers.

Though the notion of rights/entitlements has been around since the founding, and has been heating up at an accelerating pace since FDR first introduced Americans to the welfare state, it is Barack Obama whom historians will credit with bringing the issue into the debate arena.

His nasty, Alinsky double-down style has caused millions of heretofore sleepwalking citizens to wonder if his fundamental change of America is transforming it into the kind of country they really want for their children and grandchildren.

Right now, Republicans are obsessing about “reforming” entitlements, though few of them dare talk about taking away people’s artificially created rights (a right to an education, a right to a good job at a “decent” wage, a right to “affordable” housing, a right to free health care … a right to just about anything one can imagine).

Even though rights and entitlements are really one and the same, the word rights has a much stronger moral connotation. A right sounds very official, as though it were handed down from on high, while an entitlement has a twinge of victimization to it.

But whether one refers to involuntary gifts from his neighbor as rights or entitlements, the bottom line is that they are made possible only through the government’s never-fail trump card: the use of force. And it’s not a force for good, but evil.

Mao had it right: Political power does, indeed, grow from the barrel of a gun. Patriotic Americans like to delude themselves, but the reality is that government can do anything it wants to you, your children, or your property through the threat force – and the use of force, if necessary.

Even so, most people – including some of the most sophisticated media types – tend to ignore what government’s essentially unrestricted use of force means in real terms. Their normalcy bias tells them that we have checks and balances via our three branches of government, so a Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Castro, or Chavez could never happen in today’s America. Alas, they are hopelessly naïve.

Whether it’s Waco, Ruby Ridge, taxes, silencing free speech, or regulating activities individuals want to engage in, government’s use of force is always the trump card. This was made evident yet again when a video of another Obama far-left appointee, Alfredo Armendariz, went viral last week.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Rights, Entitlements, and the Government’s Trump Card: The Use of Force – by Robert Ringer (robertringer.com)
• Pentagon trumps poverty programs (politico.com)
• The Life and Death of the Old Right (johnmalcolm.me)
• Liberal Imperialism (spectator.org)
• John Stewart’s 19 Questions for Libertarians Answered by a Constitutional Conservative (texaslynn.wordpress.com)
• Why I don’t Call Myself a Libertarian (rossbot.wordpress.com)
• Non-aggression is not pacifism (dailycaller.com)
• Left-Libertarianism, Utopian Pipe dream? (lurdblog.wordpress.com)
• New World Order? (spectator.org)
• Time for a return of the Cypherpunks, Crypto-Anarchists & Techno-Libertarians? (jroller.com)
• The Injustice of Modern Warfare – Part I (libertarianreview.us)
• What is libertarianism? – Part I: principles (politicsontoast.com)
• Why I am Not a Libertarian – A Libertarian Response (youngcatholiclibertarian.wordpress.com)
• Anne Wortham: American Conservative/Libertarian (gadabout-blogalot.com)
• Today’s Occupier is Tomorrow’s Teapartier ? …. Hmmm (youviewedblog.wordpress.com)
• The Good Arguments Against the Kochs’ Using Their Property Rights Over Cato Are All Burkean and Communitarian. They Are Not Libertarian (delong.typepad.com)
• White House expands reach of sanctions on Syria, Iran (stripes.com)
• Obama Quietly Seeking to Cede U.S. Oceans to U.N. Law (johnmalcolm.me)
• Panetta caught in one-world scheme Defense secretary says ‘international permission’ trumps Congress (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Alarms over Obama coup against Constitution surging (wnd.com)

How Liberals Successfully Silence Dissent

By Phil Elmore | May 3, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Phil Elmore challenges conservatives to start fighting for keeps

Liberals adore the idea of silencing dissent. To this end, and because they believe they hold the moral high ground when contending with heartless, selfish, benighted conservatives, liberals will use a combination of intimidation, threats and dishonesty to destroy or remove any and all critics.

The Obama administration has tried several times to exploit this tendency among its more ardent followers. There was the White House email hotline, flag@whitehouse.gov; there was the running joke that was “AttackWatch” and its Twitter account; more recently, Obama’s flacks have been pushing the Orwellian “Truth Team.” Liberals are also abusing Twitter’s spam-reporting system to trigger automatic blocking of conservative Twitter accounts.

The goal, in every case, is to respond to the outrage that is political dissent in Obama’s America. The means is to threaten, to shout down and to shut up. Dare to express an opinion counter to Dear Leader’s Democratic Party line? Obama demands his violent and foul-smelling Occupy Wall Street rabble “get in your face” and yell at you until you stop talking. This is the “Coming Obama Thugocracy” Michael Barone predicted almost four years ago.

There was a time when liberals told us that criticizing judges for their extra-constitutional interpretations of the law was tantamount to agitating for those judges’ assassination. Today, those same liberals attack the United States Supreme Court if they suspect there exists even the possibility some of Obama’s unconstitutional legislation may be found so. When Democrats did not hold the White House, no less a lib luminary than Hillary Clinton famously screeched that we are Americans, and we have the right to disagree with any administration. Today, if you disagree with Obama, Democrat thugs are supposed to “get in your face” and explain to you the error of your ways.

There is no room for debate; there is no opportunity for discussion; there is no way even to argue, no matter how passionately. No, if you are a conservative, you are supposed to close your mouth-hole, and if you don’t like it, Obama voters can find some union thugs, some club-wielding racists, or some mob of whining communists to beat you until you can’t speak.

Conservatives and libertarians are in part to blame for this wretched state of affairs. We don’t fight well. We don’t stand up for ourselves, nor protect our own. We harrumph and we cluck and we shake our heads, refusing to challenge the logically flawed premises the libs foist on us. We agree with liberal useful idiots that Rush Limbaugh should not call a slut a slut, that what Mitt Romney does with his money is a greater outrage than what Barack Hussein Obama does with your money. We let the enemy frame the “debate.” We let our opposition set the terms. We never simply stand up and say, “I reject your flawed premise … and if you don’t get ‘out of my face,’ I will drop you where you stand.”

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Bill Maher adjusts himself (dailycaller.com)
• Liberal Website Looking To Get Out The ‘Slut’ Vote In November (washington.cbslocal.com)
• Liberal Silence: We Don’t Need To Talk About That Despicable Idiot Who Almost Became Vice President Anymore (minx.cc)
• With ‘Tyranny of Clichés,’ Jonah Goldberg Delivers a Second Triumph (johnmalcolm.me)
• Mark Steyn: The Liberal Enforcers (minx.cc)
• Rock The Slut Vote mobilizes for liberals (dailycaller.com)
• Huffington Vs. Obama? The Five Co-Hosts Ponder: ‘Trouble In Liberal Paradise?’ (mediaite.com)
• Derrick Bell, Critical Race Theory Pioneer, Remains a Hero to His Students (johnmalcolm.me)
• Civil Unrest: Liberals Most at Risk (johnmalcolm.me)
• This season of SNL won’t feature Mitt Romney (theblaze.com)
• Pointless quote of the day, 05.03.12 (theblaze.com)
• This shirt with a bird graphic cost Ann Romney $1K (theblaze.com)
• Everyone Booze Up and Riot (canadafreepress.com)

The subversive network taking over America

By Wes Vernon | April 30, 2012 | Renew America

The time has long passed when we could afford to look the other way on the extent to which subversive influences — communist and jihad-oriented Islamists — have for years been worming their way into the high councils of our government.

So let’s say this again: When the Cold War ended, the enemies of America did not just go away. America is under attack from Communists (with both a large and small “c”) and Jihadists.

These two threats to America (by violent means if necessary) have philosophical differences, but they are bound together by an identical ultimate goal: a one-world dictatorship where they can rule forever by the threat of death for dissenters. Recall this column reported a meeting where supposedly “intellectual thinkers” seriously contemplated the incarceration of 100 million Americans and killing 25 million of them — all in order to complete the takeover. (See “Hollywood’s red stripes” — 10/31/11.)

No congressional committee is investigating this threat to kill Americans and rule the world — a scandal in itself.

Priorities, please

So why on earth should we become embroiled in an out-to-lunch debate over whether every conspirator in this plot carries a Communist Party card in his pocket? Who cares? What matters is that they are moving closer and closer to our destruction and we’re demanding that a congressman who sounds the alarm can produce photocopies of the Communist Party USA cards (complete with official membership numbers) of the plotters. Have we lost all sense of proportion?

Earlier this month, as Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) was asked by a constituent, “What percentage of the American legislature do you think are card-carrying Marxists or International Socialists?” Congressman West answered that he believed “there are about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party that are members of the Communist Party.” When asked to name them, the freshman lawmaker replied, “It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.”

Combination: Uproar and….silence

Because West used imprecise language with the term “members of the Communist party,” critics took the opportunity to nitpick. The head of the Communist Party itself said West “didn’t know what he’s talking about.” Politico— the de facto magazine version of the Washington Post — called West a “McCarthyite.” Chicago Tribune columnist and editorial writer Steve Chapman demanded that House Republicans “either condemn West and expel him from the caucus or else confirm that his views are perfectly acceptable.”

Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media sent Chapman a video of Rep. Danny K. Davis, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, following the latter’s cheerful acceptance of an award from The People’s World (longtime Communist organ) at a meeting of the Chicago headquarters of the Communist Party USA.

Since Chicago is the neighborhood of Chapman’s newspaper, one would think he could easily access (right under his nose) the goings-on of a local congressman’s award possibly just a stroll down the street from the Tribune Building. But the video is available to the world via “Rebel Pundit” Jeremy Segal, a disciple of the late Andrew Breitbart. On the tape, Davis sheepishly evaded Segal’s persistent questioning. (Breitbart’s fight for America lives. Right on!)

No small matter

But here is the more alarming angle to this story — one worthy of a storied media outlet that in better times dubbed itself “the World’s Greatest Newspaper”: This same Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.) is a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. Talk about the proverbial fox in the henhouse.

That is the committee whose investigations inevitably lead it into the inner workings of the infrastructure (human and otherwise) required to see to it that we are protected from those who want us dead. And a member of that sensitive panel says (as Davis does in the video) that citizens should not be concerned with communists.

Beyond that, Davis is a mere reflection of the mindset that dominates the Congressional Progressive Caucus. The group is chock-a-block with members who have given aid and comfort to America’s enemies. We do not claim to read their minds to determine what motivates them. It is their records that matter.

What is a conspirator?

Back to the question: Was Congressman Allen West off base when he called out the Congressional Progressive Caucus? Answer: No.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Communists and Progressive Liberals: Comrades for Life (thecollegeconservative.com)
• Don’t Let the Organized Left’s Charges of “McCarthyism” Deter You – Allen West Is Right (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
• Allen West Says Congressional Progressive Caucus Is Communist But Won’t Name Names (thinkprogress.org)
• NAACP ousts Allen West after ‘Communist’ quip (rawstory.com)
• Congressman says 80 fellow lawmakers are communists (firstread.msnbc.msn.com)
• Brown: Is Progressivism the new Communism? (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Communists, Hiding in Plain Sight……? (icanbeatobama.com)
• “Allen West is denigrating the millions of Americans who voted to elect Congressional Progressive Caucus members…” (althouse.blogspot.com)
• Rep. Allen West goes too far in Commie comment (miamiherald.com)
• Allen West says many Dems in Congress are communists (kaystreet.wordpress.com)

Wisconsin Teachers Union Threatens Parent for Challenging Union Abuses

By Education Action Group | April 25, 2012 | Breitbart

RACINE, Wis. – Former Racine Unified school district board member Brian Dey has had his fair share of run-ins with the district’s teachers union.

He proposed Act 10-style cuts when he served on the board between 2005 and 2008. More recently, he pressed school officials to launch an investigation into the union’s allegedly illegal campaigning on school property.

But it was the outspoken education reformer’s comments about the apparent union connection to a “Student Bill of Rights” that prompted a Wisconsin Education Association Council attorney to threaten a defamation lawsuit to shut him up.

It didn’t work.

In an interview with EAGnews.org, Dey said he was somewhat surprised by the threatening letter he received from the WEAC earlier this month, but the experience has only strengthened his resolve to speak out about union abuses and the benefits of Act 10 in Wisconsin’s public schools.

“Initially I laughed because it’s similar to threats (from the union) in districts across the state against those who come out … for Act 10 and Scott Walker,” Dey said. “I’m not intimidated, nor am I going to be quiet about it.

“I don’t agree with collective bargaining for professionals, I just don’t.”

Collective bargaining for teachers is somehow at the center of a “Student Bill of Rights” allegedly drafted by students in Milwaukee and Racine, most of whom have been inducted into the radical group Youth Empowered in the Struggle (YES).

YES is led by left-wing Horlick High School teacher Al Levie, who is prone to dragging his students with him to protest and heckle lawmakers he doesn’t agree with. YES and Levie are also tied to Voces de la Frontera, an organization that advocates for extremely liberal immigration policies and collective bargaining privileges.

Teachers involved with YES are WEAC members, and a central issue of the “Student Bill of Rights” conveniently mirrors the union’s top priority – collective bargaining. The fact that students introduced the document after marching from Big Labor headquarters in Racine has convinced Dey that WEAC likely is involved with the “student effort.” He has spoken up about the issue on blogs and online news forums.

Now, WEAC’s high-dollar attorney wants Dey to shut his mouth about the situation, and to stop talking about union abuses he has highlighted for taxpayers in the past.

Cease and desist

Here are some excerpts from WEAC’s cease and desist letter, sent to Dey by union attorney Jina Jonen:

“I have received information that you have made defamatory and other false statements about the Racine Education Association (REA), Mr. Jack Bernfeld (REA Executive Director) and Mr. Pete Knotek (REA President) to the public, and in particular, on your blog and in the press.

“To give a few examples, contrary to your statements, the REA and/or its representatives:

– Did not draft or participate in drafting the student bill of rights;
– Did not organize any “sick out” last year when Governor Walker and his legislature stripped teachers of their right to have a voice in making educational decisions that drastically impact students and our schools;
– Did not advocate for or participate in any illegal actions regarding political campaigns, Act 10 or any other matters.”

Jonen then threatened Dey with a lawsuit if he doesn’t keep quiet.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• We Equivocate in All Circumstances (steveprestegard.com)
• WEAC Caught Hiding Pro-Walker Evidence (thecheeseheadconservative.wordpress.com)
• Democrat Barrett has momentum in recall primary (fox6now.com)
• The cost of teacher unions (steveprestegard.com)
• Democratic gubernatorial candidates hold forum in Whitewater (fox6now.com)
• Democrat Barrett has momentum in recall primary (heraldonline.com)
• Weekly Update: A teacher on unions, a tribute to a Parents Across America member and Mis-Education Nation (seattleducation2010.wordpress.com)
• Teacher unions vs. taxpayers: “The Bad Old Days” (steveprestegard.com)

‘Grand Wizard:’ More NBC Race-Baiting Under Steve Capus’s Watch

By John Nolte | April 24, 2012 | Breitbart

Not that we needed another example, but once again we have one more NBC “star” telegraphing to the world the poisonous leadership style Steve Capus has brought to the NBC Network.

Capus is the President of NBC News and MSNBC. According to the NBC/Universal Website, Capus is also the network’s “arbiter of issues involving ethics, style, standards, safety and other matters that affect the Division’s journalistic bearing.”

Which of course is pure nonsense.

At NBC News there simply are no standards or ethics, only an environment fostered by Capus that continually allows for the worst kind of divisive race-baiting we’ve seen in decades. And this cynical political maneuver that’s become a part of NBC’s DNA and identity, is a purely partisan tactical move designed only to keep Obama’s base angry and eager to vote against the “Grand Wizards” in the Republican party.

Yesterday, on the increasing execrable “Hardball,” the increasingly hateful Chris Matthews became the latest member of NBC News to connect the term “Grand Wizard” to the Republican Party (see the video below). If you remember, back in November, David Gregory, host of “Meet the Press” did the same.

This is no accident. It’s the planting of seeds using both subtext and text.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• NBC News President Steve Capus: Zimmerman’s edited call was a ‘mistake, not deliberate’ (nextlevelofnews.com)
• NBC News President: Network Should ‘Probably’ Apologize On-Air for Repeatedly Running Fake Zimmerman Clip (newsbusters.org)
• Cartoon Network’s Tinkle Boy Matthews Calls Republican Party “The Grand Wizard Crowd” (ferrellgummit.wordpress.com)
• Unhinged Chris Matthews Smears GOP Base as the ‘Grand Wizard Crowd’; Steele Fights Back (newsbusters.org)
• @ NBC News president says 911 tape editing was “a mistake and not a deliberate act to misrepresent the phone call” (mediaite.com)
• Obama: “If I had a son he’d look like Steve Capus” (bellalu0.wordpress.com)
• Foulball: Chris Matthews Invokes Republican ‘Grand Wizard Crowd,’ Then Takes It Back (mediaite.com)
• NBC News President Talks About Edited Call (m.deadline.com)

Investigate IRS Harassment of Tea Party Groups

By Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) | April 21, 2012 | Breitbart

A defining aspect of the American tradition is that groups of citizens band together for a wide variety of civic purposes.  They recruit volunteers, raise funds and spend those funds to promote whatever project or cause brings them together.

For more than a century, our tax laws have recognized that such voluntary associations – non-profits, we call them today – should not be taxed, because their proceeds are devoted entirely to improve our communities through education, advocacy, and civic action.  Section 501 of the Internal Revenue code recognizes them today, and civic groups like Move.org, the League of Conservation Voters, the ACLU, the National Rifle Association and various taxpayer groups have always been included in this definition.

We don’t apply a political test to these civic groups – we recognize the fundamental right of Americans to organize and to pool their resources to promote whatever causes they believe in – left or right.  Indeed, whatever their political persuasion, these civic groups perform an absolutely indispensible role in our democracy by raising public awareness, defining issues, educating voters, promoting reforms, holding officials accountable and petitioning their government to redress grievances.   Abolition, Women’s Suffrage, the Civil Rights movement – all would have been impossible without them.

In order to be recognized as non-profit groups, these organizations must register with the IRS – a purely ministerial function that has, in the past, been applied evenly and without regard to their political views.

At least until now.

It seems that Tea Party groups are now being treated very differently than their counterparts on the political Left.  For the last two years, many have been stone-walled by the IRS when they have sought to register as non-profits and most recently, they have been barraged with increasingly aggressive and threatening demands vastly outside the legal authority of the IRS.  Indeed, the only conceivable purpose of some of these demands could be to intimidate and harass.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• VIDEO: IRS Harrasment of Tea Party Groups #WAR (bostongazette.wordpress.com)
• Dayton Tea Party Responds to IRS Request (returnoftheconservatives.wordpress.com)
• Peaceful All-Inclusive Tea Party Gets Harassed by the IRS But Look at the Treatment Media Matters gets…. (icanbeatobama.com)
• I.R.S. HARASSING TEA PARTIES? “Send Us Everything.” The Waco Tea Party submitted an application … (pjmedia.com)
• NY Times Backs IRS Efforts to Out Donors to Tea Party, Other 501(c)(4) Groups (taxprof.typepad.com)
• House Demands IRS Documents on Alleged Harassment of Tea Party Groups (taxprof.typepad.com)
• “Political Non-Profits”- An Oxymoron?- The IRS Investigates (themoderatevoice.com)
• The Tyranny of Government: Justin Binik-Thomas tells his story (overmanwarrior.wordpress.com)
• Editorial: The I.R.S. Does Its Job (nytimes.com)
• I.R.S. Scrutiny of Political Groups Stirs Harassment Claim (nytimes.com)

Police State Indoctrination of the Young

 By docmedina | April 20, 2012 | The Intel Hub

A police officer walks into a middle school classroom. No, this is not the opening line of a joke, this actually happened at a local school and maybe happening in a school near you.

The police officer proceeded to tell the class that, disrupting the class was a felony and she would have no problem arresting a kid, taking them directly to jail, and not even calling the kids’ parents.

This from an officer said to have expressed her desire for something to happen at school since she misses patrolling the street.

Another interesting point is that this teacher had, only a few months back, covered The Constitution and Bill of Rights in her classes. The same teacher then brought in a uniformed officer to tell kids their rights would be trampled if they dared disrupt the class.

During my time in school it was not uncommon that a class would have 36 students, some of them unruly, to one teacher. Yet, I don’t remember a teacher ever calling an officer in to handle their classroom for them.

What of the officer attempting to help the ineffective teacher? We the people delegate our power to a select few public servants to keep order in our community. We trust these individuals to be of good character and sound judgement.

Threatening school kids with violating their civil rights, seems to be outside the scope of what these “officials” (public servants) are paid to do.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• INDOCTRINATION: Va. school teacher thinks ‘Republicans are stupid.’ As events in Wisconsin hav… (pjmedia.com)
• Indoctrinating Students (denisewritesit.wordpress.com)
• Let the Teachers Teach! (moderndaychris.wordpress.com)
• Ga. handcuff case renews school policing debate (newsok.com)
• Thinking of Kids This Week (wiseflybarb.wordpress.com)
• Mother Outraged after Kindergartner Forced to Sit in Poopy Pants in School (VIDEO) (blippitt.com)
• Public School Police Blotter (lewrockwell.com)

U.S. Press MIA: Pravda Reports Barack Obama Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence

By Dianna C. Cotter | March 29, 2012 | Pravda

On March 7^th, 2012, Pravda called out the U.S. press for its deliberate neglect of the largest scandal in modern American history. Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio released credible forensic evidence that Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States, presented to the world a forged Birth Certificate on April 27th, 2011.

Since then, the scandal has only expanded. Former United States Postal Service worker Allen Hulton has recently come forward with compelling testimony given under Oath, which leads to only one conclusion: Barack Obama attended College in the United States as a Foreign Student.

In the summer of 2008 the presidential primary season was winding down, and America could not help but note the fervor a significant number of media personalities expressed while supporting the candidacy Barack Obama. Indeed, it was collectively decided within the liberal media, that Obama’s associations with racist pastors and violent domestic terrorists was to be suppressed.

The exposure of the “Journolist” email scandal in 2010 made this glaringly clear: Stories like Obama’s ties to Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr.of the Trinity United Church, and more relevant, to Bill Ayers and his radical past in the Weather Underground Organization were to remain largely un-reported and uninvestigated. Any realistic investigation into Barack Obama’s background was to be minimized, inquiries eventually mocked, and investigators labeled racists.

These tactics have isolated honest media who could and should have reported on these and other important stories yet have inexplicably remained silent. Now we know why. More on this in a moment.

The Postman

Retired United States Postal Worker Allen Hulton recently signed a sworn affidavit for the Maricopa County, Arizona Cold Case Posse convened by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, attesting under oath, to conversations with Mary Ayers, the mother of Bill Ayers. He made his testimony public in a three hour long taped interviewed on March 19^th, 2012. Mr. Hutton, by signing an affidavit has subjected himself to laws regarding perjury, not something to be taken lightly as telling the truth is now for him a requirement of law.

His testimony states Mary and Tom Ayers (Parents of Bill ”I don’t regret setting bombs” Ayers) were sponsoring Barack Obama as a foreign student, and financially supporting his education.

This is a huge revelation on not one, but two separate fronts.

Bill Ayers of dubious “Weatherman” fame, was not just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood”, as then candidate Obama brushed aside. The video linked here comes from a televised DNC Debate in the summer of 2008. As Hillary Clinton revealed then, Obama served in a paid position on the Woods Foundation with Bill Ayers and the two were involved in several projects dispersing millions of dollars over several years.

Realistically, the Ayers family could be said to have adopted Barack Obama, if not as a son then certainly as a kindred Marxist spirit, and treated him to one of the finest educations possible.

There is little doubt Mr. Obama has been less than honest with regard to the Ayers family and their significance in his life.

As disingenuous as this is, it is by no means the most important revelation.

If correct, and Obama was introduced to Hulton as a Foreign Student, this means Barack Hussein Obama would have been using a Foreign Passport to get and prove his foreign student status for entrance into Occidental College, Columbia, and later Harvard Universities. Because Hulton has signed an Affidavit, this cannot be disregarded as mere hearsay; it is instead evidentiary in nature.

The significance of this development may not be immediately apparent until one recognizes American law regarding citizenship status. Citizenship laws as expressed in Title 8 of the United States Code states the use of a Foreign Passport constitutes adult recognition of relinquishment of American Citizenship:

8 USC 1481

(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality-

(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; 8 USC 1481

Using a foreign passport in order to obtain status as a foreign student is precisely that, proof of naturalization in a foreign state.

The child Barack Obama became an Indonesian Citizen when he was adopted by his stepfather Lolo Soetoro and the family’s subsequent relocation to Indonesia. Young Barack by law needed Indonesian Citizenship in order to attend school, and his adoption provided this. Indeed, in young Barack’s situation adoption was necessary to gain it.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Barack Obama Was A Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence | Western Journalism.com (estherlou.wordpress.com)
• Forgerygate: Ignoring Arpaio’s Report is a Scandal in Itself (johnmalcolm.me)
• Obama and Deception (oneway2day.wordpress.com)
• Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Has Obama’s usefulness come to an end? Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (zionistoutrage.com)
• Ex-communist nations expose Obama ‘fraud’ (wnd.com)
• Is Obama a CIA Controlled Manchurian President? (newsworldwide.wordpress.com)

Stand Your Ground, America

By Peter Ferrara |  April 18, 2012 | American Spectator

A sober look at the case against George Zimmerman.

How do you stand your ground if you are lying on your back getting pummeled in the face?

That one question alone shows that Stand Your Ground laws are not at issue in the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin controversy. But the tragic death of young Trayvon is only seen by those on the left as a valuable media opportunity to further exploit the millions of gullible Americans to advance the left’s political interests and agenda. Indeed, we have some people in positions of influence, both leading politicians and figures in the major media, who see their interest as exploiting the death to incite race unrest across America.

There is only one solution to this budding insurrection. Enforce the damn law!! That applies most directly in Florida now, where conservatives are in power, and they have to start acting like it.

The Perfect Resolution for Zimmerman

Enforcing the damn law is exactly what is happening now in the Zimmerman case, and it’s the perfect resolution for all concerned.

This case needs to be resolved by a jury, and can only be resolved by a jury, which is the only way to satisfy the public interest in this matter. There are too many people in America today who will not listen to the evidence, and will follow only their own racial prejudice.

But the evidence needs to be laid out in a court of law, and resolved by a jury of Zimmerman’s peers. That is the only way to satisfy the fair minded that justice has been done. I will discuss those who are not fair-minded below.

Despite what I say about the evidence below, this is not too much of a burden for Zimmerman. Even staunch advocates of gun rights and self-defense need to recognize that if someone is shot and killed even in self-defense, the ensuing investigation is not going to be easy for the shooter, in any event. Indeed, it should not be. Moreover, a jury trial gives Zimmerman the opportunity he needs to clear his name.

But based on what the established evidence on the public record indisputably shows, Zimmerman is going to be easily found innocent of the charges. That is more than well proven by eyewitness testimony and the physical evidence, despite what those who think they will benefit politically or socially from race turmoil want to believe.

Zimmerman himself is from a ethnically mixed family. He has a history of positive relations with African-Americans, even voluntarily tutoring black children at his own expense. He also has a distinguished history as a neighborhood watch captain, providing evidence leading to the capture, arrest, and conviction of criminals before.

On the night of the shooting, Zimmerman going to the store himself observed a black youth, 6 foot plus, high school football player walking alone in the rain and looking around, possibly for opportunity, in a gated community that had been robbed many times before. Zimmerman knew the community’s residents, and correctly identified the youth Trayvon Martin as not one of those residents.

Zimmerman properly called 911 to report a suspicious person in the neighborhood. When Zimmerman indicated he was following the youth, the operator told him, “You don’t need to do that.”Zimmerman was not legally obligated to obey that suggestion.There is nothing illegal about following what you think is a suspicious person in your neighborhood. Based on these facts, this is not even a case of racial profiling.

But Zimmerman obeyed the suggestion anyway. The taped conversation with the operator showed he left the trail to go find an address so a cop could come by and pick up the investigation. While Zimmerman was walking back to his car after reporting the address to the 911 operator, as he later told police, Trayvon Martin came up behind Zimmerman and asked Zimmerman if he had a problem with him. Zimmerman whirled to say “No.” Martin replied, “You do now,” and proceeded to punch him in the nose, breaking the nose and knocking him down.

Martin then jumped on top of Zimmerman, grabbing his head and repeatedly slamming it into the ground. Zimmerman is recorded on a 911 call repeatedly screaming “help!”

Zimmerman was licensed with a conceal and carry permit to carry a handgun, which he had with him that night inside his waistbelt. One news report stated that Martin saw the gun and said, “Now you’re dead,” going for the weapon. But Zimmerman got there first, using it to shoot Martin in the chest once, killing him.

These facts are corroborated by the physical evidence as well as eyewitness testimony, medical and police records, and taped recordings, including Zimmerman’s own uncontradicted testimony, which is part of the record. The police report recorded the broken nose and head injuries, which are apparent in a video tape of Zimmerman at the police station thereafter. The police report also records grass and grass stains on the back of Zimmerman’s shirt. The coroner’s report stated that the gunshot was at close range.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• The Truth About ‘Stand Your Ground’ (newser.com)
• Big Change at Group That Pushed ‘Stand Your Ground’ (newser.com)
• George Zimmerman’s Injuries Finally Make Mainstream Reporting (thewesternexperience.com)
• STAND YOUR GROUND LAW is active law in more states than just FLORIDA (bonjupatten.com)
• Online Profiling (thenewprint.com)
• Trayvon Martin Case Goes Beyond Race (Guest Voice) (themoderatevoice.com)
• Law gives Zimmerman extra chances in legal fight (heraldonline.com)
• Zimmerman judge to step down from case (upi.com)
• Zimmerman’s attorney to seek bail in Trayvon Martin killing (ctv.ca)
• The Growing Movement to Repeal ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws (ideas.time.com)

Back to Back: Dial ‘O’ for Murder & Sheriff Arpaio’s Press Conference – Obama Birth Certificate Forgery

Related Articles

• Obama Tool AG Eric Holder: ‘Instances of In-Person Voter Fraud Are Extremely Rare’ (ferrellgummit.wordpress.com)
• ‘Birther Movement’ aka; ‘Constitutional Requirement For President Eligibility’ Started By Bill Clinton In 2008! (politicalvelcraft.org)
• How Barack Obama will steal the 2012 Presidential Election. #VetObama (afteramerica.wordpress.com)
• Hollywood Producer Heard Bill Clinton Say Obama Ineligible (theobamahustle.wordpress.com)
• Filmmaker Tells How Clinton’s Were To Challenge Obama Birth Cert & Was Stopped By Murder Of Friend In 2008 (onthearizonaborder.wordpress.com)
• Bill and Hillary: The Original “Birthers” (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
• Voter Fraud? nawwwwwwwww (aleksandreia.com)
• Fox News smacks anchor for tweeting WND video…(Hillary Story, Etc…) (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Get Ready for Obama Fraud Part II:This Time They Don’t Care how Blantant (wyldgoose.wordpress.com)
• Obama Conspiracy 2.0: Obama Campaign Threatened to Whack Chelsea If Clintons Spoke About Obama’s Ineligibility (thewesternexperience.com)
• Obama Birth Certificate a “Forgery”, Arizona Sheriff Says (inquisitr.com)
• Arpaio hits ‘censorship blackout’ on Obama forgery probe (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Arpaio: GOP candidates ‘hiding’ from eligibility (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• As Sheriff Arpaio Continues His Investigation of Obama, the DOJ Escalates Its War Against the Sheriff (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
• The Mainstream Media Blackout Of The Arpaio News Conference | Expose Obama (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• Sheriff Arpaio: Obama birth certificate a ‘forgery’ – Washington Times (gds44.wordpress.com)
• Live Video: Sheriff Arpaio’s Ridiculous Birther Press Conference (littlegreenfootballs.com)
• Born in the Usa (hwnsurf.me)

Standing MLK on His Head: The New Civil Rights Movement [Video]

The following comparison between the “old” (MLK) and “new” (Sharpton/Jackson) civil rights movements is from Bradlee Dean’s blog at You Can Run International.

“In light of the recent mainstream media-created outrage over Trayvon Martin’s death, I couldn’t help but notice how far off the modern-day civil-rights leaders are from the creed of the civil-rights movement in the 1960s, led by a great man of God, Martin Luther King Jr. He was a prophet to the nation – a molder of consensus to guarantee equal rights under the law for all men, “endowed by their Creator,” as the Declaration of Independence rightly states.

Let me take you back to the 1960s. Every participant in the civil-rights marches was required to sign the following pledge before they could participate:

• 1. Meditate on teachings of Jesus daily.
• 2. Remember that the non-violent movement seeks justice and reconciliation, not just victory.
• 3. Walk and talk in the manner of love/charity, for God is love.
• 4. Pray daily to be used by God.
• 5. Sacrifice personal needs. Greed has to go out the window.
• 6. Observe with both friend and foe the ordinary rules of courtesy.
• 7. Seek to perform regular service for others and for the world.
• 8. 
Refrain from the violence of fist, tongue or heart.
• 9. Strive to be in good spiritual and bodily health.
• 10. Follow the directions of the movement and of the captain of the demonstration.

However, the self-made civil-rights leaders of today, such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, have left out their Bibles and their morals, as they debase themselves and reap nothing but mockery and reproach. Let me contrast the original pledge with the modern version of the pledge, as demonstrated by their actions:

• 1. Meditate on the media and anything but the teachings of Jesus.
• 2. Practice civil disobedience to just laws, through force, in hopes of an unjust victory.
• 3. Walk and talk in the manner of thuggery/pride!
• 4. Play the race card as you are enslaved through deception by a godless administration daily.
• 5. Sacrifice the needs of others, gain is the goal.
• 6. Send threats to those who disagree with you.
• 7. Seek to have it your way at all costs, lie if necessary.
• 8. Use fear and force.
• 9. Strive to take from others, because you deserve what you take!
• 10. Follow the directions of an unconstitutional and unlawful administration.

These modern civil-rights leaders are demoralizers of the faithful. They have turned civil rights into uncivil distribution of privileges, derived by the state. They have left off the Declaration of Independence, therefore throwing off freedom. Under their directives, racism is being taught to a new generation under the guise of decrying racism.”

Related Articles

• LA Press Club Event on Thursday: What if MLK Had Tweeted the Civil Rights Movement? (pinkbananaworld.com)
• Cooking Up Change: How Food Helped Fuel The Civil Rights Movement (npr.org)
• Great Website – MLK – More Than A Dream (crader.info)
• The Civil Rights Movement – – It’s About That Time For A Change! (ladyvluv1908.wordpress.com)
• Library Site Focuses Attention On The Civil Rights Movement In Northern Cities (keptup.typepad.com)
• ‘Mad Men’ makes rare nod to civil rights movement (thegrio.com)
• Obama Speaks On Trayvon Martin Case: VIDEO (towleroad.com)

Zimmerman family challenges Holder on New Black Panthers, says no arrests ‘based solely on your race’ [Letter]

		
View this document on Scribd

Hat Tip: The Daily Caller

Related Articles

• The Daily Caller obtains Trayvon Martin’s tweets (tarpon.wordpress.com)
• Daily Caller Sees Possible Head Injury In George Zimmerman Police Video (mediaite.com)
• Underhanded: The Daily Caller names names in Journolist exposé (shortformblog.com)
• Fox News: There Is ‘Absolutely No Coordination’ With Daily Caller On Takedown Of Media Matters (mediaite.com)
• Ed Schultz Blasts The Daily Caller For ‘Character Assassination’ Of Trayvon Martin (mediaite.com)
• THE DAILY CALLER: Interesting Nuggets From Media Matters’ Tax Records. My favorite: “Media Matter… (pjmedia.com)

Obama to the Court: I’m Following FDR’s Playbook

By Ron Radosh | April 4, 2012 | PJ Media

Many have commented on President Barack Obama’s remarks on the Supreme Court this week, when he stated “I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically-elected Congress,” referring to the passage of the unpopular ObamaCare, and the chance that in June, the Supreme Court will rule it unconstitutional.

The Wall Street Journal ‘s editors took on the president’s claim that a negative Court ruling would be “unprecedented”:

Presidents are paid to be confident about their own laws, but what’s up with that “unprecedented”? In Marbury in 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall laid down the doctrine of judicial review. In the 209 years since, the Supreme Court has invalidated part or all of countless laws on grounds that they violated the Constitution. All of those laws were passed by a “democratically elected” legislature of some kind, either Congress or in one of the states. And no doubt many of them were passed by “strong” majorities.

The so-called Affordable Care Act, moreover, was not passed with any kind of a strong majority. Democrats pushed it through the Senate on a purely partisan vote, attaining only a drop more than the 60 needed to prevent a filibuster. And in the House the vote was 219-212, despite a Democratic majority.

Now, Obama is too smart to not know about Marbury v Madison. As a graduate of Harvard Law School and later a “senior lecturer” at the University of Chicago, he obviously knew this case very well. Indeed, most students whose high schools still have history or civics have heard about it way before college.

So if we accept that the president was not ignorant of basic constitutional law and the concept of separation of powers, then we have to come up with other theories to try to explain why he made this statement.

The most obvious is that he was both trying to inflame his base before the election and to threaten the Supreme Court justices in advance, especially Judge Anthony Kennedy, the supposed swing vote who many think might side with the liberal justices. The president also said the following while making his remarks:

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Marbury v. Madison Debate Sparked by Obama’s Supreme Court Health Law Remarks (blippitt.com)
• The Vetting: Obama Channels Derrick Bell in Attack on Supreme Court (johnmalcolm.me)
• Unforced Error (wingoperie.wordpress.com)
• Obamacare and the Relevance of Marbury v. Madison (coppellpianoshop.wordpress.com)
• Rush Limbaugh: How to Respond to Obama’s Lies? (johnmalcolm.me)
• What’s Obama Thinking? Wickard, not Marbury (pjmedia.com)
• President said that justices were “unelected” and “unprecedented” (usaworldgaze.wordpress.com)
• Sowell on Obama (economicnoise.com)
• AG Eric Holder to 5th Circuit: We’re aware of Marbury v. Madison (legaltimes.typepad.com)
• Obama Eats His Words on Health Care Law (socyberty.com)

Mark Stevens: A Profile in Courage

By Jeffrey Lord | April 5, 2012 | American Spectator

Threatened for sticking with Rush, defiant advertiser declares “Battle for America.”

In whatever arena of life one may meet the challenge of his conscience — the loss of his friends, his fortune, his contentment, even the esteem of his fellow men — each man must decide for himself the course he will follow. The stories of past courage can define that ingredient — they can teach, they can offer hope, they can provide inspiration. But they cannot supply courage itself. For this each man must look into his own soul.
— John F. Kennedy in Profiles in Courage

Mark Stevens was 17 years old when his father died.

A self-described “lower middle class” rebellious kid from Queens, when Mark went about the task of ordering his father’s affairs, he discovered his father’s bank account — containing $84. He was told that his best option was “to go on welfare.”

Marks Stevens had another idea. Said Stevens in an interview with The American Spectator: “I knew then at 17 I wasn’t going on welfare.” If Mark was going to achieve anything in life, he would have to be responsible for making that happen.

He made it happen.

Today the suddenly fatherless 17-year-old with an $84 dollar inheritance is a highly successful businessman and bestselling author of 25 business books, the very embodiment of the American Dream. His marketing firm, MSCO, is “a business-driven, entrepreneurial-minded marketing and business advisory firm relentlessly driven to accelerate the growth of our clients.” The company, located in Rye Brook, New York, has 40 employees, and — since health care is very much in the news — yes, Stevens pays for their health insurance.

Life was good for Mark Stevens. Minding his own business, literally and figuratively, he got up every day and went about the business of business. Part of any business, of course, is advertising. And as a routine part of his business, Mark Stevens spends a considerable dime advertising MSCO in the expensive New York media. MSCO ads have appeared on CBS, Bloomberg, ABC, WINS radio in New York and even, where doable in the format, on NPR.

Then one day last month, out of the seeming blue, Stevens arrived at work to learn the startling news that his office was “getting actual phone calls” from people using (he eventually realized) phony names and leaving phony numbers. What were the callers saying? They called his female executive assistant a “slut.” Another employee, also a woman — a lawyer and like Stevens an up-by-her-bootstraps professional — was taking calls from hostile strangers telling her she was “anti-woman.”

What was this?

It didn’t take long for Stevens to find out.

One of the places MSCO was advertising was on The Rush Limbaugh Show. Mark advertised MSCO there for one reason — and that reason had nothing to do with politics. Simply put, Rush has a huge audience, an audience of precisely the kind of potential customers MSCO wants to reach.

Rush, Mark was aware, had generated controversy with a joking description of the leftist Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke as a “slut” — following a Limbaugh tradition of illustrating the absurd by being absurd. Mark thought it a mistake and he disagreed. In fact, Rush himself was shortly out there saying that his “choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

No matter.

MSCO was now being targeted because it was an advertiser on The Rush Limbaugh Show. The calls and now an increasing volume of hostile e-mail were pouring into MSCO.

Mark Stevens is a smart guy — and he quickly realized he was being targeted by somebody using a highly skilled, highly organized campaign that was deliberately designed to make the target feel besieged. When in fact marketing expert Stevens understood he was on the receiving end of a campaign involving a tiny handful of people extremely skilled in making others think dozens were tens of thousands.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• Craven Coke Caves To Anti-Voter ID Intimidation Campaign (nicedeb.wordpress.com)
• Limbaugh Advertiser Tells Megyn Kelly: Coordinated Effort To Ruin My Company Is ‘Internal American Terrorism’ (mediaite.com)
• Limbaugh Advertiser Says Ad Boycott Is “Terrorism” (webpronews.com)
• Mitt Romney: Profile In Non-Courage on Limbaugh “Slut” Comment (themoderatevoice.com)

Andrew Klavan: Stop the Hate!

Related Articles

• Andrew Klavan: Liberalism Exposed – Beyond the Elitist, Preening America-Hating Stereotypes (johnmalcolm.me)
• Bill Whittle: Why We Suck (johnmalcolm.me)
• Leading Hollywood Conservative Andrew Klavan Rips New Health Care Bill (prweb.com)
• Bill Whittle: How to Steal Power (johnmalcolm.me)

Obama Puts Out Figurative Bounty on Supreme Court

By Rush Limbaugh | April 03, 2012 | RushLimbaugh.com

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Obama and his attack on the Supreme Court yesterday.  It happened toward the end of the program in the last half hour and it was happening on the fly.  I didn’t really have enough time to listen in detail to what Obama said, and thus I didn’t have a chance to, in detail, reply.  I’ve now listened to what Obama said.  I’ve got three sound bites here.When I got home yesterday at about six o’clock last night I got a flash encrypted message from a friend who says, “You know, somebody in the court leaked to Obama. That’s why he went out there and did this today. Somebody called him. He lost the vote, the preliminary vote on Friday. He lost it, and somebody leaked it.” And that became an active theory that began to be bandied about amongst a lot of people that I know. Because people were saying,

“Why go out,” as Obama did yesterday…? It was in the form of a question. We must remember that he was asked a question about this. He didn’t launch into this on his own, but once he got the question, it was, “Katie, bar the door,” and he was off to the races.

And the question everybody was asking is: “Why do this? Why attack the court? Why intimidate them, why threaten them if they had voted to uphold the mandate?” And I have an answer for that. See, I know these people. I know liberals. I don’t want that statement to sound bombastic. You people here — new listeners to the program — that’s not a braggadocios statement. It’s not bombastic. It’s not outrage or any attempt to shock. I just know them, and so when somebody asks me, “Why would Obama say that if he didn’t have to? If he had been told that the preliminary vote on Friday was in his favor, why take the attitude that he took?” There is an answer to that. I don’t know if it’s right, but there is an answer.

He’s a thug.

And again, I’m not trying to be provocative when I say this. I’m just quoting Bill Clinton, folks. Bill Clinton referred to Barack Obama as a Chicago thug during the 2008 presidential campaign. This after Clinton some years earlier had told Juanita Broaddrick, “Put some ice on that lip” after she said he raped her. (I mentioned that for this “war on women” that supposedly the Republicans are waging.) But there’s every possibility that Obama feeling his oats, being told that the vote went his way, would still go out and do this, ’cause he knows there are more votes to come. I’m not predicting it. I’m just saying I could understand it.

It’s easier to understand that somebody leaked to him that the preliminary vote went against him and that the mandate fell by whatever the preliminary vote was and that explains his attitude yesterday. But I can see him saying what he said if the vote went in his favor as well, as a means of further intimidation, making sure they don’t change their minds or whatever. You might say, “Well, how would that work? Wouldn’t that just kind of make them be more resistant?” The reason this is all a crock in the first place is that (and we will go through this as we play the Obama sound bites) it is obvious that to the left this is an entirely political process.

There’s nothing judicial going on here. There’s nothing legal. This isn’t even really about the Constitution. This is about politics, pure and simple, and Barack Obama’s reelection. It’s all it is. But he says things in these sound bites which you’ll hear coming up and they’re chilling to me. “The court has to understand…” “The court must understand,” is one of his sound bites. No, the court must not — does not have to — listen to you. What is this, “The court must understand”? That is a threat! How many of you think it possible that Obama will make a trip to the Supreme Court before the vote, before the final vote? Can you see it happening? I can.

I’m not predicting it. (interruption) You’re shaking your head. You don’t think it would ever happen? Why would he be…? Why would Obama visiting the Supreme Court between now and June be any more unconscionable than what he did yesterday? (interruption) It’s a visual? No! He’s just going up to say hi to Kagan. He’s going up to say hi to Kagan and Sotomayor, to see how they’re doing. (interruption) He called ’em out of the State of the Union right to their face. Remember that with Justice Alito? Anyway, let me take a break. We’ll come back and we will get into some of these sound bites and we’ll tear this down as it happened sometimes line by line. Mike, be prepared when I say, “Stop.” There might be some frequent stops and starts as we go through this.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Reuters was just as excited as they could be over what Obama did. “Obama Takes a Shot at the Supreme Court Over Health Care — President Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping health care law would be an act of judicial activism that Republicans say they abhor.” Warning? Warning? And Reuters is happy! (That’s right! You take it to these conservatives!) Judicial activism? You know, the debate is constantly held: “Is he really this ignorant or naive, or is this just strategic?”

Everybody knows that judicial activism is not what Obama is explaining it to be. Judicial activism is the court MAKING law. Judicial activism is the court WRITING law. What Obama is trying to say here is that the court will be engaging in judicial activism if it judges the law according to the Constitution. That’s not what judicial activism is. I know exactly what they’re doing. They’re trying to take this term, and they’re trying to redefine it publicly to fit their needs and redefine the language (as they constantly are). But, folks, I’m gonna tell you something. It is preposterous, and it’s even a little scary to hear such abject ignorance from a supposed constitutional scholar.

This is a man, Barack Obama, who was once paid to teach law, constitutional law, and he doesn’t even know the meaning of the term “judicial activism.” No one ever accuses any judges of judicial activism for following the Constitution! Judges are accused of judicial activism for not following the Constitution, for legislating from the bench, for writing their own law. This is basic knowledge. Now, maybe this is why we’ve never seen Obama’s grade transcripts, if he really doesn’t know the difference. But I suspect that he does know the difference, and I suspect that he’s trying to redefine terms here to fit. Because this has become a template argument for the left.

You remember Jeffrey Toobin? You talk about a guy who’s done a 180 here, turned on a dime. During the week of oral arguments, Jeff Toobin, CNN legal analyst, was in an abject panic. These people on the left… And again, ladies and gentlemen, this is the solid truth. They do not expose themselves to any ideological thinking other than their own. They have assumed that conservatism is racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, all of these cliches they attach to it. And they’re not interested in talking to anybody that they think is a conservative. They really are not familiar with other ideas. They don’t speak the language. We, of course, can speak liberalism as well as they do. We understand it.

Read the full article here.

Related Articles

• The Vetting: Obama Channels Derrick Bell in Attack on Supreme Court (johnmalcolm.me)
• Romney smiles at Obama’s ‘judicial activism’ charge (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• Liberals and Conservatives and “Judicial Activism” (glitternight.com)
• Judicial Activism 2012 (wnyc.org)
• Obama Predicts Health Care Victory, Labels Vote Against Law As “Judicial Activism” (danmillerinpanama.wordpress.com)
• The Dictator Wannabe (thecheeseheadconservative.wordpress.com)

The Ryan Test: Demagoguery Versus Ideas

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Jonathan S. Tobin | August 11, 2012 | Commentary Magazine As John wrote earlier today, liberals are convinced that Mitt Romney’s choice of Paul Ryan to be his running mate offers them a golden opportunity to savage the Republicans about the Wisconsin congressman’s budget plans. Predictably, the New York Times delivered one of the first such salvos in its editorial posted […]

Smoking Obama’s Crack and Yearning for the Mud

August 12, 2012 By John Malcolm Leave a Comment

By Vanderleun | August 10, 2012 | American Digest [From 2008. Only the names have been changed because the target has changed.] This downward flight of intellectuals has been going on ever since the Romantic movement began its counter-revolution a couple hundred years ago. No matter how much they flap their lips it’s a fall, not […]