Miranda Blue's blog

Ben Carson: Women's Lib Movement Created 'Me Generation' That Helped Lead To Ferguson

Conservative activist Ben Carson was a guest on America Family Radio’s “Today’s Issues” last week, where he expounded on his previous comments that young African American men like Michael Brown are getting killed by the police because they “never really learn how to relate to authority in the proper way.”

“Certainly in a lot of our inner cities, in particular the black inner cities, where 73 percent of the young people are born out of wedlock, the majority of them have no father figure in their life. Usually the father figure is where you learn how to respond to authority. So now you become a teenager, you’re out there, you really have no idea how to respond to authority, you eventually run into the police or you run into somebody else in the neighborhood who also doesn’t know how to respond but is badder than you are, and you get killed or you end up in the penal system,” Carson said.

“If the so-called leaders were really interested in the community, they would be trying to deal with that problem, because that’s happening every single day,” he added.

When host Lauren Kitchen Stewards broke in to tie his remarks to young people’s “sense of entitlement,” Carson traced it all back to the women’s liberation movement.

“I think a lot of it really got started in the '60s with the ‘me generation.’ ‘What’s in it for me?’ I hate to say it, but a lot of it had to do with the women’s lib movement. You know, ‘I’ve been taking care of my family, I’ve been doing that, what about me?’ You know, it really should be about us,” he said.

Judson Phillips: 'Could Ferguson Be Their Dress Rehearsal For Something Bigger?'

In a blog post that he emailed to his group’s members today, Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips asks why “the left is so focused on Ferguson” and concludes that the explanation must be not that “they care anything about the dead gang banger” but that they want to violently topple “the American system.”

“Could Ferguson be their dress rehearsal for something bigger?” he asks.

Phillips calls on “real Americans” to step in and stop the effort to use welfare to collapse the economy, leading to violent riots and the ultimate goal of building a new system featuring “tyranny, poverty and mass murder.”

But why is the left so focused on Ferguson?

Could Ferguson be their dress rehearsal for something bigger?

Look at the groups at Ferguson. You have every type of far left anti-American group from ANSWER to the Revolutionary Communist Party. There are even some radical Islamist groups there.

First, do you think they care anything about the dead gang banger?

Not in the least.

They want to create trouble.

All of these groups have a couple of things in common. The hate the American system that has made us a free, great and prosperous nation and they want to bring that system down. They would prefer to do that violently.

While these groups have different ideas about the systems they want to replace the American Republic with, all of their choices have a few common denominators. None have liberty. They all feature tyranny, poverty and mass murder.

But why Ferguson?

The left has constantly sponsored the never ending expansion of the welfare state. Barack Obama, in his Amnesty is welcoming millions of illegal aliens to America and giving them welfare benefits. The Great Society created a permanent welfare class when it was passed in 1965.

But as Margaret Thatcher once warned in Great Britain, “The problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”

The welfare state in America is unsustainable. That’s not a political point. That is a mathematical point. America has over $105 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. With a Gross Domestic Product of only $16 trillion a year, it is obvious America has some serious fiscal issues.

At some point, the budget will have to be cut and spending will have to be curtailed. What happens then?

In many European nations, such as Greece, when welfare benefits were cut, rioting followed.

Is that what is really going on in Ferguson?

Are these groups using Ferguson as a testing ground for their tactics in a future larger round of civil unrest?

Given their goals and the histories of these groups, that is a perfectly logical explanation.

For real Americans, this should be our clarion call. If these groups have their way, we will see real violence in the future, all across America.

And the scary thought is that Barack Obama is encouraging them.

Rick Wiles Wonders If Ferguson Protests Are False Flag To Push Gun Control And Start A Civil War

End Times radio host Rick Wiles interviewed Gun Owners of America’s Larry Pratt on his program yesterday, and the conversation inevitably drifted to whether the Ferguson protests are in fact a false flag operation to give President Obama political cover to unilaterally implement gun control laws.

“I was thinking how easily something like this could get out of control and there’s gunfire in the cities, if they go into the suburban neighborhoods and begin burning buildings and upsetting cars, homeowners are going to come out with their firearms and begin defending their property. And that sets the stage for Emperor Obama to say, ‘We have to get guns off the streets and this Congress has refused to implement my gun control legislation, therefore by executive order I am doing this, this and this,’” Wiles speculated.

“If he were to do something like that, I think he would trigger, very likely would trigger, a response that would completely put him back on his heels,” Pratt responded, adding that “precisely somebody talking the way you just hypothesized is why they have their guns, so they can protect themselves from tyrants.”

“And the more this guy wants to look like a tyrant the more he’d better stay within Washington, D.C., because if he starts trying to put his imprint on the rest of the country in terms of gun control, that will be a game-changer,” he added.

Wiles repeated his frequent claim that the “delusional” Obama’s “mission is to start a civil war.” Pratt agreed that Obama is on an Alinskyite mission to “bring the system down,” which he will perhaps accomplish through immigration policy.

Later in the program, Wiles wondered if Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel decided to step down this week because he refused to comply with an Obama plot to use the Ferguson case to “whip up social unrest in American cities” in order to stage a military takeover.

“I’m actually speculating that it may be connected to Ferguson, that the Obamanistas are doing their best to whip up social unrest in American cities and the defense secretary perhaps didn’t sign certain orders to activate national guard troops and to do certain things in the state of emergency,” he said. “That’s just my speculation, but it was an unusual event for him suddenly to be pushed out at the same time that we’ve got Ferguson taking place.”


 

 

CWA Renews Fight Against Women's History Museum, Claims It Would Be 'Offensive To Military Members'

Earlier this year, conservative groups led by Concerned Women for America tried unsuccessfully to stop the House from approving a plan to move forward on the building of the National Women’s History Museum, claiming that the museum would be a “shrine to liberal ideology, abortion, and liberal advocates." Since then, that bill has been held up in the Senate by Republicans Tom Coburn and Mike Lee.

Now the coalition is resuming the fight after hearing that the new museum might be included in a public lands section of an upcoming defense budget. In a press release yesterday, CWA President Penny Nance claimed that the museum would “promote a skewed view of women on key issues like abortion, the free market, and feminism.” Nance also declared that the museum “would in fact be offensive to military members” by including exhibits mentioning people like feminist Bella Abzug, who advocated cuts in military spending.

In an op-ed for Brietbart News, Nance writes that she is against the “identity politics” of the museum in the first place, opposes it especially because she suspects (with no apparent evidence) that it would glorify “whiny” feminists instead of people like a female Peshmerga fighter who died fighting ISIS last month.

On October 11, Rengin Yusuf died.

She was a mom, a warrior and a young Peshmergan fighter who died in battle against ISIS. According to Sandor Jaszberenyi’s piece in the Wall Street Journal, she was part of a brave group of women who are particularly successful in combat, due in part to ISIS’s belief that being killed by a woman fighter excludes one from the complimentary 72 virgins in Paradise.

Rengin should be a feminist icon, but she won’t be. American feminists won’t like her brand of feminism.

Besides taking a firm stand against Jihadists, she also didn’t buy into gender politics, asking before her death — along with her fellow fighters — to not be identified as “women Peshmergas” because as Jaszberenyi puts it, “a Peshmerga is a Peshmerga, or in Kurdish, ‘someone who confronts death.’”

Contrast her idea of true feminist empowerment with the whiny “#banbossy” campaign and other phony feminist “battles” of the American left.

Women warriors do not serve in this nation to be viewed as a minority interest group. We are fifty-one percent of the population and won’t settle for a pat on the head. We are Americans and deserve to be fairly represented in every museum.

But if we are wrong and the majority of American women want gender division, then at the very least the museum must fairly portray the philosophical diversity of American women on hot button issues like abortion and marriage. Unless the safeguards are added to the current bill language, the museum will predictably become a shrine to the Left’s view of feminism on our National Mall. It will serve to indoctrinate future generations in the Bella Abzug brand of feminism, not the Rengin Yusuf kind.

Congress needs to stop playing identity politics.

Nance, as it happens, was offered a seat on the commission planning the museum but refused it unless she was allowed to be the commission's chairwoman.

Pat Robertson's Thanksgiving Message: Gay Rights Are Leading To America's Destruction

“The 700 Club” today ran a story about the religious faith of the pilgrims, which prompted Pat Robertson to warn that everything that the pilgrims and the founding fathers worked to build would be destroyed by the success of gay rights — or “aberrant lifestyles” — in the courts.

“Ladies and gentlemen, our warning should be today, we can’t lose that,” he said. “And when you have courts that are taking away the very essence of our democracy, the ground from which this great country came, when courts are saying that is unconstitutional, when they’re exulting aberrant lifestyles and saying that’s constitutional, when they’re defying the very essence of this nation, they are sowing the seeds, not of a new, prosperous nation but the destruction of the one that’s already here.”

 

Pat Robertson Declares Racism Dead, Calls For 'Racial Agitators' To 'Cool It'

On “The 700 Club” today, Pat Robertson addressed the protests that have been breaking out all over the nation in response to a grand jury’s decision not to indict a white police officer for the shooting death of unarmed Missouri teenager Michael Brown.

Robertson said that while “there’s no question” that “African Americans in this society for decades have been subject to discrimination” and that “there has been police brutality in various cities,” that’s all over now and “we live in what amounts to a pretty much even-tempered type of society.”

“Police are very careful in dealing with people, they’re trained to be careful with minorities, and the abuses of the past are pretty much a thing of the past,” Robertson said.

Robertson attacked “the Al Sharptons of the world and other racial agitators” for talking about social justice in the case when “this isn’t a case dealing with social justice.”

“I’m all for social justice, and I think most of us are, but this case is somebody who may have been mentally disturbed, we don’t know that, he may have been high on something, we don’t know that, but whatever it was, the police officer had to defend himself and he was attacked in his police car. So why don’t they just cool it?”

The televangelist said that President Obama, in his remarks on the verdict, should have blamed Brown for his own death because he had broken the law: “What he should have said is what I just finished saying: The young man was breaking the law and he should have been restrained and he did things that were not in keeping with law and order. If he’d said that, it would have been a whole lot better.”

 

Schlafly On Immigrants: 'The Class Of People Coming In Now' Just Don't Understand America

In an interview with WorldNetDaily published on Friday, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly said that while previous generations of immigrants “became 200 percent Americans,” the “class of people coming in now…don’t really have any comprehension of our system of government and look to big government to be their guide of whatever they want to do.”

Schlafly has previously said that Latino immigrants “don’t understand” the Bill of Rights.

“Obama’s moving ahead with his attempt to do all kinds of illegal things in order to bring in illegal aliens and give the Democrats more votes,” she said. “That’s what it’s for.”

The veteran activist said she has talked to many immigrants who came to the U.S. as teenagers two or three generations ago. Their parents taught them to leave their native ways behind and fully immerse themselves in America.

“Those people came in and became 200 percent Americans,” Schlafly said. “But that’s not the class of people coming in now, who don’t really have any comprehension of our system of government and look to big government to be their guide of whatever they want to do.”

Schlafly also told WND that President Obama is to blame if riots break out after the grand jury verdict in Ferguson, Missouri because he “fomented [unrest] in order to hopefully win the election”:

But conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly believes Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder also used the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri, for political purposes.

“I think that Obama and his attorney general really fomented [unrest] in order to hopefully win the election on November 4,” Schlafly said. “They wanted to inflame people in order to get their voters out to vote. I think it was deliberately done, and they weren’t content to just let the process take its course.

“I think it has backfired, and the Republicans won a tremendous victory despite everything,” she added.

A grand jury is deciding the fate of Officer Darren Wilson. An announcement on whether there will be charges could come any day.

Schlafly, whose recently published book “Who Killed the American Family?” came out just days before she turned 90, said Obama and Holder will be culpable if riots break out in Ferguson.

“But whether the public will see it that way, I don’t know,” she said.

'Impeach Or Insurrection': VDARE Writer Calls For Nativist Third Party If GOP Fails To Impeach Obama

James Kirkpatrick, a writer for the white nationalist website VDARE (home of former National Review columnist John Derbyshire and racist conservative strategist Steve Sailer) argued last week that if the GOP fails to impeach President Obama over his executive action on immigration, nativist Republicans should form a third party along the lines of the fiercely anti-immigrant United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).

“The alternatives are clear,” Kirkpatrick wrote on Friday: “impeachment, or insurrection.”

The truth is only real legal weapon the Republican Congress has isimpeachment—a tool that was put in place by the Founders for precisely this kind of situation. If Republicans don’t impeach, it’s hard to see why Republican voters should care about winning them the next election, or indeed any election to come.

For American patriots, the solution then will be political insurrection via a Third Party and/or the c reation of a new political force with the power to cripple the GOP and draw votes from Democrats via the white working class.

This is precisely what is occurring in the even more difficult political environment in Great Britain. The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) recently inherited another defector from the Conservative Party, which is also being betrayed by its leadership. Mark Reckless took the honorable route of putting himself up for re-election in his old constituency and has won a crushing victory. This opens the way for UKIP to become a force in Parliament for the first time. [ Rochester: Farage looks to more UKIP gains after success, BBC, November 21, 2014]

And if UKIP can do it in a media climate even worse than that of America, there’s no reason Americans can’t.

Parties die if they don’t respond to changing conditions. The person who can control a thing has a power to destroy it. Immigration patriots have, if not the power to fully control the GOP, at least the power to prevent it from ever winning another election.

The alternatives are clear—impeachment, or insurrection.

Mo Brooks: Immigration Action Will Lead To 'Insolvency And Bankruptcy Of Our Government'

Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., said last week that President Obama’s executive action granting temporary deportation relief to some undocumented immigrants was part of a plot to “dilute the vote of American citizens by bringing in millions of foreigners who are going to be dependent on welfare and handouts and hence will be dependent on the Democratic Party for their livelihoods.”

Brooks told talk show host Dale Jackson that if not for the immigration reform bill signed by President Reagan in 1986, “Barack Obama probably would not have been president” and “Obamacare probably never would have passed.” (Rep. Steve King made similar remarks earlier this year.)

“And of course ultimately what’s going to happen is insolvency and bankruptcy of our government because we cannot continue this welfare path that we are on,” he added.

This is amnesty, and the long-term goal of this president is to reverse the will of the American people as evidenced in 2010 and 2014 and to dilute the vote of American citizens by bringing in millions of foreigners who are going to be dependent on welfare and handouts and hence will be dependent on the Democratic Party for their livelihoods. That’s what this is about, is to change elections five, 10, 15, 20 years from now. But for the bipartisan amnesty bill of 1986, Barack Obama probably would not have been president, and they know that. Obamacare probably never would have passed, and they know that.

And they don’t want to take that chance in future elections, so they see this as planting a seed that over many, many years will ripen into many Democratic Party victories. And of course ultimately what’s going to happen is insolvency and bankruptcy of our government because we cannot continue this welfare path that we are on.

Texas Approves Textbooks With Moses As Honorary Founding Father

The Texas State Board of Education approved several dozen social studies textbooks after a contentious battle over their treatment of subjects including climate change, the role of slavery in the Civil War, Islam, and biblical influence in America’s founding. One major publisher, however, withdrew a book from consideration, saying that it was unable to meet all the standards set by the school board.

The Texas Freedom Network, which live-blogged today’s vote, said that much problematic material had been removed from the proposed textbooks, including climate denial and “offensive cartoons comparing beneficiaries of affirmative action to space aliens,” but that references to Moses as an influence on the Constitution and the Old Testament as the root of democracy remained. But TFN notes that publishers posted a number of last-minute changes to the textbooks yesterday, leaving board members and observers without time to figure out exactly what was in the approved texts:

The Texas Education Agency posted scores of pages of publisher comments and textbook revisions after the last public hearing on Tuesday. Miller said scholars did not have an opportunity to review and comment on the numerous changes publishers have submitted since the last public hearing on Tuesday. Some of those changes appeared to have been negotiated with state board members behind closed doors.

During a months-long process, publishers made a number of improvements to their textbooks. Those improvements included removing inaccurate information promoting climate change denialism; deleting offensive cartoons comparing beneficiaries of affirmative action to space aliens; making clearer that slavery was the primary cause of the Civil War; and revising passages that had promoted unfair negative stereotypes of Muslims. Scholars and the general public had ample opportunity to review and comment on those revisions.

However, the new textbooks also include passages that suggest Moses influenced the writing of the Constitution and that the roots of democracy can be found in the Old Testament. Scholars from across the country have said such claims are inaccurate and mislead students about the historical record.

The textbooks were approved despite a last-minute attempt by Truth in Texas Textbooks, a group with ties to the anti-Muslim organization ACT! for America, to remove accurate information about Islam, reduce coverage of civil rights (which it found to promote unsavory “racial politics”), and insert information about Young Earth Creationism sourced to the conservative website Conservapedia. [TFN’s summary of Truth In Texas Textbooks’ complains is in this pdf.]

The Texas Tribune adds that the group’s last-minute request also included downplaying the environmental impact of coal mining and noting in a chapter about colonization that Native Americans already discriminated against and oppressed each other:

The Truth in Texas Textbooks Coalition, all but unheard from for months while new social studies textbooks and instructional materials were being vetted, submitted a 469-page report in late October identifying more than 1,500 “factual errors, omission of facts, half-truths and agenda biases” in proposed materials.

Among its objections: A passage on coal mining should say it has “minimal effect on the environment"; a chapter on Spanish colonization of Latin America should point out the “continuous discrimination and oppression practiced by the native American peoples on each other”; and a statement that Shariah law requires religious tolerance of non-Muslims should be removed.

...

The group was formed by retired Lt. Col. Roy White, a Tea Party activist who also leads the Bexar County Chapter of ACT! for America, an organization dedicated to fighting extremist Islam. Its founder, Brigitte Gabriel, is known for her views that Muslims in the United States pose a danger to national security.

TFN tells us that it appears that Truth in Texas Textbooks did not succeed in getting any "substantive changes" into the books.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious