The New York Timesreports that Sen. Pat Roberts has "acknowledged that he did not have a home of his own
in Kansas. The house on a country club golf course that he lists as his voting address belongs to two longtime supporters and
It is genuinely amazing the way right-wing groups are framing proposed restrictions on 501c4 organizations as an attack on conservatives. Do they not realize
that liberals groups have c4 arms as well?
Phyllis Schlafly issues a warning: "Once there is no
objective morality, no universal good and evil, laws that are not acceptable to Christians, such as abortion, infanticide, easy
divorce, redefinition of marriage, and euthanasia can by imposed by the government. Christians should wake up and realize that
supremacist judges and public schools have been the main engines driving the replacement of Christian morality with the
utilitarianism and secularism of liberalism."
The headline says it all: "General: U.S. Christians targeted for murder."
Good point, Kevin Fobbs: "Black history month has been about celebration of achievements and it has been about action. So
take action and demand Obama’s impeachment now so that you and your family will have a chance to recoup and recapture the
American Dream that Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and so many others fought and even died for."
“Join a militia; I mean it, join a militia,” Garrow insisted. “Have a bug-out bag, be within fifteen minutes of the ability to clear out, have a year of food stashed somewhere, make sure you’re more than four hours’ drive away from a major center if you are going to a bug-out space…. I have a plane ready to roll too.”
We are being treated almost as if we are not to be trusted, we are not worthy; if we don’t share a particular ideology we are not to be listened to at all, in fact we are to be pooh-poohed and denigrated and to some degree it looks as though there’s an attempt to wipe us out.
Join a militia; I mean it, join a militia. When you get in the militia, find out if they’ve got a neighborhood watch kind of a system where they will actually help you if you are under attack by the police or the military who come in. Always remember, it’s overwhelming force that they will attempt to use on you, and the only answer to overwhelming force is overwhelming force, so you need to have that with a militia. A year ago I never would have stated these kind of things but today, if you ask me what I’m doing, all of the above.
Have a bug-out bag, be within fifteen minutes of the ability to clear out, have a year of food stashed somewhere, make sure you’re more than four hours’ drive away from a major center if you are going to a bug-out space. Once everything goes down if it’s an EMP, you’ll need to have that spread of distance to survive, otherwise of course the mass of people who are left after the major slaughter in a big city—those people won’t survive—but the ones that do manage to get out, they are going to be the smart ones, the ones to watch out for, you want to be far enough that ti will take them months to get to you. I also have a plane, I have a plane ready to roll too, it lands on water.
This week, President Obama nominated five people to federal judgeships in Florida and New Jersey. Three of these nominees are already judges; two are accomplished attorneys. But what is more relevant to the right-wing Liberty Counsel is that, according to the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow, “among the nominees are four African Americans, one of them homosexual.” (That's not actually true: one of the nominees is African American, one is Latino, and three are white).
Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver told OneNewsNow today that these judicial picks show “ideological bankruptcy” on the part of a president who is “destroying the judiciary.”
"So he gets a black man, who is a practicing homosexual, and now he wants to put this individual in an appointment for life on the federal bench," Staver lamented, referring apparently to Darrin P. Gayes, a state circuit judge in Florida who Obama nominated to a federal district court.
At no point in the article does Staver or OneNewsNow touch on the nominee’s qualifications, other than to note vaguely that “all five nominees are considered liberals.”
Among the nominees are four African Americans, one of them homosexual, and the final one is white.
Mat Staver, who heads Liberty Counsel, tells OneNewsNow the president is reaching out to two communities.
"So he gets a black man, who is a practicing homosexual, and now he wants to put this individual in an appointment for life on the federal bench," Staver advises.
He refers to the situation as "ideological bankruptcy."
President Obama is "destroying the judiciary because, when he leaves office in 2016, these judges will be around for 20 to 40 years," says the Liberty Counsel attorney. "That is going to be a bad legacy that Obama will leave behind that we'll all have to deal with in the aftermath."
Earlier this year, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio succeeded in torpedoing the nomination of William Thomas, a Florida state judge who was also openly gay and African-American. Rubio also blocked another African-American nominee, Brian Davis, for months before local activists pressured him to let the nomination go forward.
Today is National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which Bryan Fischer honored on his radio program by reading from a CDC fact sheet noting that "blacks make up only 12% of the U.S. population but had nearly half (44%) of all new HIV infections in the United States in 2010" in order to declare that he wants homosexuality to be illegal because he loves black males.
"This is black genocide," he said.
"Let me put it bluntly," Fischer declared. "If you are for the legalization of homosexuality, you are for the acceptability of homosexuality, you are for the normalization of homosexuality, you do not care about black males. You have no compassion in your black heart for black males because they're being decimated by HIV/AIDS ... So why am I opposed to the normalization of homosexual behavior? Because I love black males. I want black males to live long, prosperous, healthy, disease-free lives":
Conservative leaders are continuing to rally around Dinesh D’Souza, who has been charged with making illegal “straw donations” to the campaign of a Republican Senate candidate, by claiming — citing zero evidence — that the prosecution is due to D’Souza’s right-wing activism.
WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah posted a story today featuring congressmen Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Steve Stockman (R-TX) denigrating the prosecution as political maneuvering by the Obama administration.
But the most incendiary rhetoric came from Ben Carson, who compared the Obama administration to the Gestapo and said that President Obama will not “be happy unless Fox News were shut down and there was no more criticism of his actions.”
Dr. Ben Carson, the brain surgeon turned popular political analyst, told WND Obama administration officials are “acting like the Gestapo” with the Justice Department indictment of Dinesh D’Souza coupled with the Internal Revenue Service’s political targeting of the administration’s critics.
“I believe we are dealing with an extremely corrupt administration,” he said.
Dr. Carson himself became the subject of an IRS audit after criticizing Barack Obama’s policies at the annual National Prayer Breakfast in Washington last year.
“What he said was that his administration was not guilty of any wrongdoing with regard to the IRS and he blamed Fox News for reporting it,” Dr. Carson said. “I don’t think he would be happy unless Fox News were shut down and there was no more criticism of his actions.”
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., called the D’Souza indictment “100 percent” political.
“Of course it is,” she said. “It is payback from the DOJ. Plus, it sends a signal to anyone else for 2016 who may be thinking of producing a movie. It is up to the candidate to return the money. This should have been found when the FEC filing occurred. I don’t know the details, but this could cost Dinesh literally millions in legal defense fees, plus destroying his name and making him toxic to conservatives and Republicans. These are the goals of the political destruction machine at the DOJ.”
Likewise, Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, told WND, “Yes, I think it is political. It fits a pattern of abuse of power. As someone else said, President Obama is the president Nixon wanted to be.”
RWW’s Paranoia-Rama takes a look at five of the week’s most absurd conspiracy theories from the Right.
Children are our future, and our friends at Fox News warn us that “The Lego Movie” is trying to brainwash them into becoming mini-Marxists.
Maybe these communist kids will then take part in President Obama’s plan, revealed to us by Glenn Beck, to round up his enemies and force them into internment camps? We’re not saying for sure, just asking the question!
5. Legos Out To Destroy Capitalism
Fox Business Network is worried that “The Lego Movie,” “The Muppets” and “RoboCop” are attempting to “indoctrinate kids” with “anti-capitalist messages” … just like “It’s A Wonderful Life.”
4. 'Al Franken Wants To Require Pedophilia In All Public Schools'
In an absurd — even for him — email to members of his Pray In Jesus Name Project, right-wing activist Gordon Klingenschmitt insists that Sen. Al Franken’s Student Non-Discrimination Act will “require pedophilia in all public schools” and “require pro-gay child recruiting.”
But don’t worry, Klingenschmitt says he can stop Franken’s “‘No Child Left Unmolested’ amendment” through faxes (and your financial contribution): “Do you want Al Franken legislating pedophiles to recruit your kids? Let's petition all 535 Congressmen and Senators to STOP Franken's child-abuse.”
3. Satan’s Grammys
Leave it to Religious Right radio host Kevin Swanson to explain how the 2014 Grammy Awards transformed into a “satanic pagan orgy” that celebrated “fornication, twerking, stripping and satanic rituals.”
Of course, Swanson explains, the music industry’s “demonic approach to things” really traces back to The Beatles.
2. Antichrist 2016
Far-right pundits arestilldebating whether President Obama is the Antichrist or merely setting the stage for the Antichrist, but at least one Republican congressional candidate believes he has identified the Antichrist’s identity: Hillary Clinton.
Ryan Zinke, a Montana GOP state senator who is running for an open U.S. House seat, called Clinton the Antichrist during a campaign speech, which ended with him “handing out 50-calibre bullets to each of the four men who sponsored the event before a crowd of about 30 people.”
The Republican politician later backtracked when his remarks generated national headlines, saying that he was only joking and that he regretted that his comments were “a little bit harsh.”
Glenn Beck's incessant fear of technology is well-established, as every technological advance is seen by Beck as one step further down the road toward our inevitable dystopian nightmare. And this terror about what developing technology might do to us in the future was the theme of last night's monologue on Beck's television program, where he warned that "technology is authoritarian porn."
In particular, Beck was a bit alarmed by reports that the late Philip Seymour Hoffman would be digitally recreated in order to complete a key scene in The Hunger Games film he was working on when he died.
"There is no death," Beck said. "Is it not a little disturbing?"
"The transition is happening at a rapid pace," Beck warned, and doing so at a time when Americans are becoming dumber while the government is growing larger and more controlling.
"You, your children, and your grandchildren will be at their mercy," Beck warned. "Wake up! Wake up!":
Conservative author Diana West is out with a new WorldNetDaily column in which she warns that President Obama is turning America into a North Korean-style dictatorship with “one-party rule” and must face impeachment:
A few days ago, [Lars] Hedegaard wrote me with a new assignment:
“Would you write something about a disturbing phenomenon: the fact that Obama rules by decree and neglects the Constitution. How can this go on? Nixon was a complete amateur compared to this would-be Kim Jong-un. It looks like a coup d’etat. Nobody talks about it in Europe.”
Barack Obama, the government’s chief executive, is seizing powers that belong to the legislative branch. He’s not the first president to do so; not by a long shot. That’s also part of the ambivalence problem. Obama fits an accepted historical mode of abuse exemplified, for example, by the even more dictatorial FDR. Meanwhile, as Obama’s defenders correctly note, Obama, having issued 168 “decrees,” ranks on the low end among modern presidents. What distinguishes Obama’s fiats in our time, however, as Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, told CNSNews.com, is that Obama “has repeatedly made use of executive orders to change statute, to change law, to change legislation enacted by Congress.”
This is the formula for one-party rule. As such, it is outrageous, but it is just more static.
To be sure, some conservative Republicans – Sen. Mike Lee, as well as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, for example – are speaking out against what Cruz calls the “imperial presidency.” But will their impassioned voices become static, too?
But Obama’s systematic assaults on constitutional governance require more than defunding, and more than static. They require, first and most urgently, a full airing. Impeachment, which may begin with an impeachment inquiry, is the means the Constitution provided us. It offers the way “forward,” as the president might say, to re-establish that America is a nation of laws, not men.
Not to be outdone, Alan Keyes claims that the “would-be dictator” Obama is getting help from the “GOP’s quisling leaders” in his movement towards “tyranny.”
He called on voters to back candidates who have “pledged to impeach/remove Obama and his collaborators,” warning that “if things just go on as they are, liberty will fail for lack of a party of liberty willing to battle against the elitist faction’s budding tyrants.”
If the Executive fails to carry out laws made by Congress (like the DOMA for instance), or takes actions not authorized by law (as Obama has with immigration and Obamacare), the legislature has two ways of compelling him to act, or to cease from unlawful action:
1. the power of the purse – cutting off money to the Executive branch; and
2. The impeachment/removal power – removing the vice president and the president, so that the succession provided for by law brings someone to office who will enforce the laws and respect the Constitution.
Absent active congressional discipline, Executive power always inclines toward dictatorship. Vaulting ambition aside, the pressure of events may feed this tendency even when nothing else does. We’ve had activist presidents before – Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson, to name a few. But only in the last generation or so has Congress consistently failed to use its constitutional power to curtail and rebuke unconstitutional Executive actions.
Even more culpably, since control of the U.S. House was restored to them by grass-roots voters in 2010, the GOP’s quisling leaders have collaborated with Obama’s radical socialist schemes, giving him mainly ineffectual, lip-service opposition. Thanks to this GOP collaboration, Obama has behaved in a more and more openly dictatorial fashion. Like other would-be dictators, at first he abuses power cautiously. When he is not called to account, his impunity leads others to fear him. Their fear encourages him to escalate his abuses. As those greater abuses also go unanswered, fear commences to predominate, until at last few if any are left courageous enough to stand against him.
Was Obama’s move against Dinesh D’Souza a kind of Rubicon, across which we must expect new and higher benchmarks of tyranny? However that may be, thanks to the quisling temperament of the GOP leadership, only a determined push from the grass roots will re-energize Congress’ constitutional power to thwart dictatorship. America needs a Congress willing and able to call Obama to account by way of the Constitution’s impeachment/removal provisions. Without that impetus, the political class will fall-in behind his bid to free the U.S. government’s power from all semblance of prior constraint (too many of them quite eagerly).
The political change needed to get this result must either overthrow the quisling leadership of the GOP, or else forge the basis for a national grass-roots voter mobilization poised to replace the now shiftless Republican Party. If things just go on as they are, liberty will fail for lack of a party of liberty willing to battle against the elitist faction’s budding tyrants.
To remedy this deficiency requires an appeal to the people. The upcoming general election offers the chance to make such an appeal, in order to elect a Congress capable of driving back the elitists bent on liberty’s demise. If people demand an impeachment/removal Congress; if they back up that demand with their votes; 2015 will bring on a Congress differently composed. Reformed by the presence of constitutional majorities pledged to impeach/remove Obama and his collaborators, Congress will have what it takes to defeat Obama’s offensive maneuvers against America’s constitutional liberty.
Tea Party Unity Founder Rick Scarborough and Washington Times columnist Robert Knight are warming that comprehensive immigration reform will cause “millions of Mexicans and Central Americans” to “storm…the border,” add millions to “welfare rolls and Democratic voter lists” and spell “the end of two-party politics, and the end of national elections in which any conservative could win the presidency.”
In the latest Tea Party Unity newsletter, the two write:
With ObamaCare killing the economic “recovery,” and millions of Americans added weekly to the toll of those devastated by pink slips, higher insurance premiums and the loss of their doctors, the GOP should be able to ride the issue right into the voting booths in November.
However, never underestimate the GOP’s capacity for self-destruction. The party leadership is working on the one issue that could divide the party and depress turnout of the party’s base: immigration amnesty. Never mind that polls say Americans are not remotely interested in that issue right now.
House Speaker John Boehner is telling his troops that the GOP will come up with some kind of compromise that will allow the more than 11 million illegals to stay in the United States. Nobody is talking about what kind of signal that would send south of the border.
After the 1986 immigration amnesty, millions of Mexicans and Central Americans stormed the border, confident that they, too, would achieve legal status at some point. So forget the 11 million figure and ratchet it up to, oh, 20 to 30 million over the next few years.
Republicans insist they will produce a “good” bill that stresses border enforcement. There are two things wrong with this. One, this promise is always broken. Two, any bill that the House sends to Harry Reid’s Senate will come back stuffed with liberal schemes designed to put Republicans in deer-caught-in-the-headlights mode.
It will also include a thinly-veiled “path to citizenship,” so that millions can be added to welfare rolls and Democrat voter lists. In Texas, that would mean the end of two-party politics, and the end of national elections in which any conservative could win the presidency.
The newsletter also shares a Washington Timescolumn by Thomas Sowell, in which he compares undocumented immigrants to embezzlers and burglars hiding from the law, and dismisses the idea that children of undocumented immigrants who grew up the United States should be allowed to stay:
What about embezzlers or burglars who are “living in the shadows” for fear that someone will discover their crimes? Why not “reform” the laws against embezzlement or burglary, so that such people can also come out of the shadows?
Almost everyone seems to think that we need to solve the problem of the children of illegal immigrants because these children are here “through no fault of their own.”
Do people who say that have any idea how many millions of children are living in dire poverty in India, Africa or other places “through no fault of their own,” and would be better off living in the United States?