Media Discover Freedom Of The Press
We have often referred to the bullying tactics of this White House and its Chicago-style politics. There have been a number of conservative leaders, including Sarah Palin, who have used similar language, and inevitably they have been attacked for allegedly crossing the line and for using overheated rhetoric in criticizing the president.
Today, in a major article in Politico, members of the sympathetic media are making the same charges. The report states that despite their liberal leanings, the media’s relationship with the “thin skinned, “controlling” and “stingy” White House has turned “surprisingly hostile.”
More and more reporters are becoming disillusioned with Obama’s broken promises of transparency. When Press Secretary Robert Gibbs recently asserted, “This is the most transparent administration in history,” reporters in the briefing room broke out in laughter. Consider the following excerpt:
“Day-to-day interaction with Obama is almost non-existent, and he talks to the press corps far less often than Bill Clinton or even George W. Bush did. … The ferocity of pushback is intense. A routine press query can draw a string of vitriolic emails. A negative story can draw a profane high-decibel phone call – or worse. Some reporters feel like they’ve been frozen out after crossing the White House.”
Print a negative story and you’re screamed at with expletives? Imagine if the press wrote a negative story about George W. Bush (which happened virtually every day) and Karl Rove had picked up the phone and yelled profanities at the reporter. Do you think it would take a year and a half to hear about it? It would have been on the news that night. The offended reporter would have become an instant celebrity for defending freedom of the press against “the authoritarian Bush regime.”
I suppose we should be thankful that some journalists are slowly discovering that freedom of the press is more important than spouting spoon-fed talking points like loyal lap dogs. At the same time, the Obama Administration’s treatment of the media is yet another disturbing example of the Left’s intolerance for dissent.
Gary Bauer-American Values
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Are We Being Blitzed? (ya' think?)
Obama Initiatives: Are We Being Blitzed?
From: Americans for Limited Government
By Victor Morawski
Many of us have from time to time fallen victim to the common human frailty of trying to do too much too soon, usually with negative results. We have made ourselves very sore or by diving into that new exercise program with a little too much fervor. Trying to take off some of those extra pounds in record time we have actually undermined our health and affected our alertness. In making too many changes too quickly in that new position to which we were promoted we ended up angering and alienating our coworkers.
It would not be hard to charge members of Obama Administration and other prominent Democrats with the same human frailty. In taking on comprehensive health care reform, two major stimulus packages, auto industry bailouts, major environmental cap and trade legislation, nationalization of the student loan program, privatization of NASA and initiating steps for illegal alien amnesty they may easily be charged with taking on too much too soon, out of an innocent and all-too-human excess of enthusiasm. And such a dizzying succession of actions is bound to get them into trouble.
But there is a far more insidious light in which the initiatives of this Administration and its Congressional supporters during the first year and a half of their tenure can be viewed---one which, while it may have the improbable ring of a far-fetched conspiracy theory, should not be dismissed out-of-hand and deserves serious consideration because, if true, it has some serious and profound implications.
Some have plausibly suggested their actions to date may be part of an overall plan to undermine and overwhelm American free market Capitalism using the Marxist-inspired Cloward-Piven Strategy (CPS). Named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and wife Frances Fox Piven, CPS is a strategy for forcing the collapse of an organization or economic system from within by overloading it with an unrelenting series of burdensome demands.
Directly inspired through their own admission by avowed Communist Saul Alinsky, their CPS primarily focuses on two of his famous Rules for Radicals. The first is RULE 4, “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.” His whole approach for bringing about change in the direction of socialism is often referred to as “boring from within.” Like termites that bring about collapse of a home’s foundation from the inside, Alinsky-inspired radicals are urged to undermine the basic structures of Capitalism by working from within them to bring about their collapse. And the President, who received his early training in community organizing from Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation and who represented ACORN, an organization whose voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy is arguably just such an Alinsky-inspired radical.
The second Alinsky rule---“RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." ---explains why Obama and his followers are trying to do so much so quickly and it isn’t due to youthful enthusiasm. This rule, according to one Midland blogger suggests, “Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest…”
In Backgammon, my hobby, there is a game plan that parallels this strategy. It is even called a Blitz or Attacking game and consists in relentlessly pressuring your opponent until you have entirely overwhelmed them. It can only be employed, however, in certain specific situations. Most Backgammon games do not employ a Blitz strategy but are relatively even-handed affairs of give and take with opponents having positions of more or less equal strength where one opponent finally gains enough of an edge to pull off a close win.
Most politics, like most Backgammon games, usually proceeds in a give and take arena of mutual compromise. As Progressive Richard Rorty once noted, gains made by the left are often achieved in this plodding two-steps-forward-one-step-back fashion.
The key to a successful blitz is knowing when the game situation is right to employ it. And who can doubt that, for the new Obama Administration, the situation was right in the political arena. With a Democratic President and significant Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress---including a filibuster proof super majority in the Senate---the time was right to mount a blitz to fundamentally transform America into, at minimum, a European style social democracy.
The key to a successful defense against the Blitz is to, first of all, recognize what your opponent is trying to do, and to put all of your efforts into first establishing an anchoring point to stop the attack.
Our strategy to stop the Obama Administration’s blitz is first to elect in 2012 leaders who will hold true to the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded as an anchor. In Backgammon it can be deadly not to recognize that you are being Blitzed. In politics it can be just as deadly not to recognize the attach that our nation’s foundations is under and to instead elect people who misread the politial arena as calling simply for more give and take quiet business as usual.
Victor Morawski, professor at Coppin State University, is a Liberty Features Syndicated writer for Americans for Limited Government.
From: Americans for Limited Government
By Victor Morawski
Many of us have from time to time fallen victim to the common human frailty of trying to do too much too soon, usually with negative results. We have made ourselves very sore or by diving into that new exercise program with a little too much fervor. Trying to take off some of those extra pounds in record time we have actually undermined our health and affected our alertness. In making too many changes too quickly in that new position to which we were promoted we ended up angering and alienating our coworkers.
It would not be hard to charge members of Obama Administration and other prominent Democrats with the same human frailty. In taking on comprehensive health care reform, two major stimulus packages, auto industry bailouts, major environmental cap and trade legislation, nationalization of the student loan program, privatization of NASA and initiating steps for illegal alien amnesty they may easily be charged with taking on too much too soon, out of an innocent and all-too-human excess of enthusiasm. And such a dizzying succession of actions is bound to get them into trouble.
But there is a far more insidious light in which the initiatives of this Administration and its Congressional supporters during the first year and a half of their tenure can be viewed---one which, while it may have the improbable ring of a far-fetched conspiracy theory, should not be dismissed out-of-hand and deserves serious consideration because, if true, it has some serious and profound implications.
Some have plausibly suggested their actions to date may be part of an overall plan to undermine and overwhelm American free market Capitalism using the Marxist-inspired Cloward-Piven Strategy (CPS). Named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and wife Frances Fox Piven, CPS is a strategy for forcing the collapse of an organization or economic system from within by overloading it with an unrelenting series of burdensome demands.
Directly inspired through their own admission by avowed Communist Saul Alinsky, their CPS primarily focuses on two of his famous Rules for Radicals. The first is RULE 4, “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.” His whole approach for bringing about change in the direction of socialism is often referred to as “boring from within.” Like termites that bring about collapse of a home’s foundation from the inside, Alinsky-inspired radicals are urged to undermine the basic structures of Capitalism by working from within them to bring about their collapse. And the President, who received his early training in community organizing from Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation and who represented ACORN, an organization whose voter rights tactics follow the Cloward-Piven Strategy is arguably just such an Alinsky-inspired radical.
The second Alinsky rule---“RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." ---explains why Obama and his followers are trying to do so much so quickly and it isn’t due to youthful enthusiasm. This rule, according to one Midland blogger suggests, “Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest…”
In Backgammon, my hobby, there is a game plan that parallels this strategy. It is even called a Blitz or Attacking game and consists in relentlessly pressuring your opponent until you have entirely overwhelmed them. It can only be employed, however, in certain specific situations. Most Backgammon games do not employ a Blitz strategy but are relatively even-handed affairs of give and take with opponents having positions of more or less equal strength where one opponent finally gains enough of an edge to pull off a close win.
Most politics, like most Backgammon games, usually proceeds in a give and take arena of mutual compromise. As Progressive Richard Rorty once noted, gains made by the left are often achieved in this plodding two-steps-forward-one-step-back fashion.
The key to a successful blitz is knowing when the game situation is right to employ it. And who can doubt that, for the new Obama Administration, the situation was right in the political arena. With a Democratic President and significant Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress---including a filibuster proof super majority in the Senate---the time was right to mount a blitz to fundamentally transform America into, at minimum, a European style social democracy.
The key to a successful defense against the Blitz is to, first of all, recognize what your opponent is trying to do, and to put all of your efforts into first establishing an anchoring point to stop the attack.
Our strategy to stop the Obama Administration’s blitz is first to elect in 2012 leaders who will hold true to the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded as an anchor. In Backgammon it can be deadly not to recognize that you are being Blitzed. In politics it can be just as deadly not to recognize the attach that our nation’s foundations is under and to instead elect people who misread the politial arena as calling simply for more give and take quiet business as usual.
Victor Morawski, professor at Coppin State University, is a Liberty Features Syndicated writer for Americans for Limited Government.
Do Not Shut Up
Subject: Do Not Shut Up
The left wants you to shut up. The left wants you to sit down. Don't do it.
We must all fight for freedom. But many are asking, "How?"
Across the country, I am helping American Majority and Smart Girl Politics put on Post-Party Summits.
The summits only cost $50.00. This weekend in Denver, CO, and Jacksonville, FL there will be two summits.
Learn how to be an effective community organizer for freedom. Learn how to be a more effective activist. Learn how to be a candidate for office.
The training is invaluable. The tools are essential. You need to stand up and speak up. You cannot sit on the sidelines any more in the fight for freedom.
Attending a Post Party Summit is a terrific way to find out how to get involved.
I hope to see you there. Click here to find the nearest Post Party Summit to you.
Sincerely yours,
Erick Erickson
Editor,
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
Obamacare=Higher Middle-Class Taxes
ObamaCare = Higher Taxes & Broken Promises
The Obama White House got slammed yesterday by two government agencies charged with analyzing the costs of ObamaCare. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported yesterday that the healthcare “reform” legislation will not, as President Obama repeatedly promised, reduce healthcare costs. To the contrary, it will “increase national health care spending by $311 billion” over the next decade.
Previously, anyone who said that more government intervention would lead to higher costs was accused of making “bogus” and “wild” claims. But according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, it was Barack Obama who was making bogus claims.
In addition, the Congressional Budget Office reported that fines stemming from the individual mandate would raise nearly $4 billion in tax revenue in one two-year period. But the CBO also noted that 76% of those affected by the individual mandate to purchase health insurance will make less than $120,000 a year.
As Senator Charles Grassley explained, “The mandate is a tax increase that hits middle-class America the hardest. And these people make less than $250,000, which breaks the president’s pledge to not raise taxes on individuals earning less than $200,000 and families earning less than $250,000 a year.”
The Obama White House got slammed yesterday by two government agencies charged with analyzing the costs of ObamaCare. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reported yesterday that the healthcare “reform” legislation will not, as President Obama repeatedly promised, reduce healthcare costs. To the contrary, it will “increase national health care spending by $311 billion” over the next decade.
Previously, anyone who said that more government intervention would lead to higher costs was accused of making “bogus” and “wild” claims. But according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, it was Barack Obama who was making bogus claims.
In addition, the Congressional Budget Office reported that fines stemming from the individual mandate would raise nearly $4 billion in tax revenue in one two-year period. But the CBO also noted that 76% of those affected by the individual mandate to purchase health insurance will make less than $120,000 a year.
As Senator Charles Grassley explained, “The mandate is a tax increase that hits middle-class America the hardest. And these people make less than $250,000, which breaks the president’s pledge to not raise taxes on individuals earning less than $200,000 and families earning less than $250,000 a year.”
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Still not getting it...
The most violence at ours was when nearby High School kids were smashing hamburger buns onto people then running away. Oh yeah also when 4-5 counter-demonstrator, infiltrators started chanting "Obama, Obama, Obama." This was met with an earth-pounding roar of USA! USA! USA! USA! from the tea party Americans. They still... don't get it. America was in deep trouble way before the OB regime came to power... They think this is Obama vs Republicans...duh...
From LauraIngraham.com
April 22, 2010
Shock: Police find Tea Parties more peaceful than anti-war protests
Posted by Staff
On Monday, the Christian Science Monitor bucked its mainstream peers by reporting something truthful about the TEA party movement: police officials have begun to relax security requirements at conservative rallies because of the remarkable absence of violence.
Yes, you read that right: despite nonstop media warnings about hateful protests, violence from TEA party attendants is so nonexistent that police feel safe allowing them to bring large items and sometimes even guns.
The Monitor was compelled to check things out when a TEA party in Raleigh, North Carolina, persuaded officials to overturn a ban on flag poles. Such items are typically banned because a flag pole is really just a very big stick that could be used as a weapon. The Monitor's research led the paper to admit that conservative protests are far less threatening than many past demonstrations.
Patrik Jonnsson's article drew a refreshing contrast between violent rallies of the Vietnam era versus the new model of peaceful civil uprising:
To be sure, permitting rules and police preparedness are often developed based on past behavior at various kinds of protests. Many go back to the 1960s and 1970s when violent rallies erupted over the Vietnam War. Such protests sprung up again during the presidency of George W. Bush, when protesters clashed with police in New York City and elsewhere during large-scale demonstrations against the Middle East wars. With tea party rallies so far proving more orderly, police have given them more latitude.
This flies directly in the face of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) comparing Tea parties to California in the 1970s - and that of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann comparing them to Selma during the fight for minority civil rights.
No matter how much prominent liberals talk about rampant violence, the facts on the ground tell a different story, and reporters end up leaving with rather dull footage - no police clashes, no tear gas, no images of people being carted away in handcuffs...
04/22/10 12:27 PM
From LauraIngraham.com
April 22, 2010
Shock: Police find Tea Parties more peaceful than anti-war protests
Posted by Staff
On Monday, the Christian Science Monitor bucked its mainstream peers by reporting something truthful about the TEA party movement: police officials have begun to relax security requirements at conservative rallies because of the remarkable absence of violence.
Yes, you read that right: despite nonstop media warnings about hateful protests, violence from TEA party attendants is so nonexistent that police feel safe allowing them to bring large items and sometimes even guns.
The Monitor was compelled to check things out when a TEA party in Raleigh, North Carolina, persuaded officials to overturn a ban on flag poles. Such items are typically banned because a flag pole is really just a very big stick that could be used as a weapon. The Monitor's research led the paper to admit that conservative protests are far less threatening than many past demonstrations.
Patrik Jonnsson's article drew a refreshing contrast between violent rallies of the Vietnam era versus the new model of peaceful civil uprising:
To be sure, permitting rules and police preparedness are often developed based on past behavior at various kinds of protests. Many go back to the 1960s and 1970s when violent rallies erupted over the Vietnam War. Such protests sprung up again during the presidency of George W. Bush, when protesters clashed with police in New York City and elsewhere during large-scale demonstrations against the Middle East wars. With tea party rallies so far proving more orderly, police have given them more latitude.
This flies directly in the face of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) comparing Tea parties to California in the 1970s - and that of MSNBC's Keith Olbermann comparing them to Selma during the fight for minority civil rights.
No matter how much prominent liberals talk about rampant violence, the facts on the ground tell a different story, and reporters end up leaving with rather dull footage - no police clashes, no tear gas, no images of people being carted away in handcuffs...
04/22/10 12:27 PM
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
We are in this video!
Guys,
We are in this video taken at last year's Walk For Life. What a surprise! A
friend of ours saw us and told us to go look at their site. I didn't really
think much about what she said until she came over and showed it to us.
Very fun!
Peter and Adrienne Robberson
The American Café
Someone shared a video with you on Vimeo
You can watch it here:
http://vimeo.com/10562040
 | Walk For Life 2010 Promo |
Forward this email to your friends and family so that they can see it, too.
Don't want these alerts anymore?
http://vimeo.com/settings/notifications
LOVE,
The Radicals Ready Their Agenda
Guys, Now is not the time to let up. They're just getting started...-Pete
Gary L. Bauer on American Values
Liberal politicians in the House and Senate are gearing up for a major push to advance their radical agenda while they still have an overwhelming advantage on Capitol Hill. Last week, Roll Call reported that a major homosexual rights bill called ENDA will be voted on in May. Reuters notes that cap and trade legislation will be unveiled in the Senate by the end of month, and Politico reports that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid met late yesterday and agreed to bring up an amnesty bill for illegal immigrants this year. Each issue is a priority of the far Left.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) elevates homosexual behavior to the same protected legal status as race and religion. Business owners and institutions that adhere to Judeo-Christian values will be forced to compromise their beliefs if this legislation passes. And this year, the Left has taken its extremism to a new level by including special protections for transgenderism and gender identity – whatever those are. With unemployment hovering near 10% and out-of-control deficit spending, why is appeasing the militant homosexual movement so high on Congress’ “to do” list?
If that radical assault on our values wasn’t bad enough, Obama’s allies in the Senate are pushing legislation to tax and regulate carbon. We live in a carbon-based economy, so when you hear “carbon,” think energy. Democrats want to tax and regulate energy production.
Think about everything you do in the course of a day that requires energy in any form. How many of you flip a light switch first thing in the morning? Do you drive to work? Use a computer or other machines? Do you like air condition in the summer? All of it will be taxed more if the Left gets its way. If you thought unemployment was bad now, wait until this massive job-killing tax hike leads to $7.00 a gallon gas.
And then there’s “immigration reform.” With this leftwing president and this liberal Congress, it can only mean one thing: amnesty. Reports indicate that President Obama has already started calling members of the Senate to push the issue. But I don’t think the public is in any mood for amnesty. In fact, the Arizona legislature just passed one of the toughest anti-illegal immigration laws in the country. A new Rasmussen poll finds that 70% of likely voters support the law, including 69% of Independent voters and even 51% of Democrats. Moreover, 73% say that securing the border is more important than legalizing “undocumented workers.”
With unemployment so high, there’s no shortage of workers – there’s a shortage of jobs. This is not the time to legalize millions of illegal aliens. But Obama and his allies may well need millions of new voters as the country turns against their radical agenda.
Gary L. Bauer on American Values
Liberal politicians in the House and Senate are gearing up for a major push to advance their radical agenda while they still have an overwhelming advantage on Capitol Hill. Last week, Roll Call reported that a major homosexual rights bill called ENDA will be voted on in May. Reuters notes that cap and trade legislation will be unveiled in the Senate by the end of month, and Politico reports that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid met late yesterday and agreed to bring up an amnesty bill for illegal immigrants this year. Each issue is a priority of the far Left.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) elevates homosexual behavior to the same protected legal status as race and religion. Business owners and institutions that adhere to Judeo-Christian values will be forced to compromise their beliefs if this legislation passes. And this year, the Left has taken its extremism to a new level by including special protections for transgenderism and gender identity – whatever those are. With unemployment hovering near 10% and out-of-control deficit spending, why is appeasing the militant homosexual movement so high on Congress’ “to do” list?
If that radical assault on our values wasn’t bad enough, Obama’s allies in the Senate are pushing legislation to tax and regulate carbon. We live in a carbon-based economy, so when you hear “carbon,” think energy. Democrats want to tax and regulate energy production.
Think about everything you do in the course of a day that requires energy in any form. How many of you flip a light switch first thing in the morning? Do you drive to work? Use a computer or other machines? Do you like air condition in the summer? All of it will be taxed more if the Left gets its way. If you thought unemployment was bad now, wait until this massive job-killing tax hike leads to $7.00 a gallon gas.
And then there’s “immigration reform.” With this leftwing president and this liberal Congress, it can only mean one thing: amnesty. Reports indicate that President Obama has already started calling members of the Senate to push the issue. But I don’t think the public is in any mood for amnesty. In fact, the Arizona legislature just passed one of the toughest anti-illegal immigration laws in the country. A new Rasmussen poll finds that 70% of likely voters support the law, including 69% of Independent voters and even 51% of Democrats. Moreover, 73% say that securing the border is more important than legalizing “undocumented workers.”
With unemployment so high, there’s no shortage of workers – there’s a shortage of jobs. This is not the time to legalize millions of illegal aliens. But Obama and his allies may well need millions of new voters as the country turns against their radical agenda.
BUSTING THE INTERNET "IDEOLOGICAL BUBBLE" MYTH
Is the Internet good for Democracies? Does the Internet foster investigation and research of all opposing views on a subject? This may surprise you!
BUSTING THE INTERNET "IDEOLOGICAL BUBBLE" MYTH
BUSTING THE INTERNET "IDEOLOGICAL BUBBLE" MYTH
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
The Incredible "Right"-ness of Being Seditious
Posted on RedState.com
-by Dave Poff
Monday, April 19th at 5:30AM EDT
63 Comments
So says Joe Klein and John Heilemann:
“I did a little bit of research just before this show - it’s on this little napkin here. I looked up the definition of sedition which is conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state. And a lot of these statements, especially the ones coming from people like Glenn Beck and to a certain extent Sarah Palin, rub right up close to being seditious.”
As Klein pointed out, the legal definition of sedition is “a revolt or an incitement to revolt against established authority.” And, sedition has been declared a felony in Supreme Court opinions, thus making Klein’s national television accusation a fairly serious one, one of which New York magazine’s John Heilemann agreed with. However, Heilemann added conservative talker Rush Limbaugh to that list.
How can I mock this, let me count the ways…and don’t even get me started on the New York Times, the LA Times, and a host of other seditious co-conspirators during the Bush years. Nevermind what our dear misguided friends did to undermine our war efforts and level the playing field for our enemies.
Recall, if you will, the First amendment which conveys to us the right to openly disagree with our Government. No where in there does it describe how nice we have to be about it…regardless former President Clinton’s recent attempts at defining that for us…or how kissy-face we’re expected to act about having it stuck to us day after day by our Government. Remember also the Declaration of Independence and that whole “long train of abuses and usurpations” bit or the part where we throw off such Government that reduces us under under absolute Despotism.”
The only “throw off such Government” talk I’ve heard in recent years was when it was the left wanting to do it to President Bush - “arrest Bush for war crimes” anyone?
I have yet to hear Palin or Limbaugh or Beck or anyone else for that matter call for “inciting rebellion against the authority of the state.” What I have heard is their voices, and millions of other American voices, speaking out against the Government for how dramatically they have abused that so-called “authority of the state.”
Still, I might have otherwise passed this drivel…but this bit stopped me in my tracks:
Heilemann also suggested that the alleged up tick in militia activity is a result of the Obama presidency. Klein said it was not only the Obama presidency, but that he was “African-American,” and had “Hussein” as a middle name, along with the “scary” economic crisis.
“Two are two things going on here and one thing is certainly that,” Klein said. “One thing is he is African-American, but that his name is Barack Hussein Obama. The other we’ve had a very scary economic crisis. And when people get scared, they get defensive and they get a little crazy.”
Really guys? REALLY? We “seditious” right wing nutjobs might routinely bring to light specific examples of the varied and sundry “abuses and usurpations” by our President and our Government, but the only ones that keep bringing up Obama’s color and name and policy positions are the ones most threatened by them-the whack jobs on the left that keep having to apologize for a President by making it OUR fault he’s failed at his job.
If speaking out about what’s going on in this country…and not being happy about it…is seditious, then count me in.
-by Dave Poff
Monday, April 19th at 5:30AM EDT
63 Comments
So says Joe Klein and John Heilemann:
“I did a little bit of research just before this show - it’s on this little napkin here. I looked up the definition of sedition which is conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of the state. And a lot of these statements, especially the ones coming from people like Glenn Beck and to a certain extent Sarah Palin, rub right up close to being seditious.”
As Klein pointed out, the legal definition of sedition is “a revolt or an incitement to revolt against established authority.” And, sedition has been declared a felony in Supreme Court opinions, thus making Klein’s national television accusation a fairly serious one, one of which New York magazine’s John Heilemann agreed with. However, Heilemann added conservative talker Rush Limbaugh to that list.
How can I mock this, let me count the ways…and don’t even get me started on the New York Times, the LA Times, and a host of other seditious co-conspirators during the Bush years. Nevermind what our dear misguided friends did to undermine our war efforts and level the playing field for our enemies.
Recall, if you will, the First amendment which conveys to us the right to openly disagree with our Government. No where in there does it describe how nice we have to be about it…regardless former President Clinton’s recent attempts at defining that for us…or how kissy-face we’re expected to act about having it stuck to us day after day by our Government. Remember also the Declaration of Independence and that whole “long train of abuses and usurpations” bit or the part where we throw off such Government that reduces us under under absolute Despotism.”
The only “throw off such Government” talk I’ve heard in recent years was when it was the left wanting to do it to President Bush - “arrest Bush for war crimes” anyone?
I have yet to hear Palin or Limbaugh or Beck or anyone else for that matter call for “inciting rebellion against the authority of the state.” What I have heard is their voices, and millions of other American voices, speaking out against the Government for how dramatically they have abused that so-called “authority of the state.”
Still, I might have otherwise passed this drivel…but this bit stopped me in my tracks:
Heilemann also suggested that the alleged up tick in militia activity is a result of the Obama presidency. Klein said it was not only the Obama presidency, but that he was “African-American,” and had “Hussein” as a middle name, along with the “scary” economic crisis.
“Two are two things going on here and one thing is certainly that,” Klein said. “One thing is he is African-American, but that his name is Barack Hussein Obama. The other we’ve had a very scary economic crisis. And when people get scared, they get defensive and they get a little crazy.”
Really guys? REALLY? We “seditious” right wing nutjobs might routinely bring to light specific examples of the varied and sundry “abuses and usurpations” by our President and our Government, but the only ones that keep bringing up Obama’s color and name and policy positions are the ones most threatened by them-the whack jobs on the left that keep having to apologize for a President by making it OUR fault he’s failed at his job.
If speaking out about what’s going on in this country…and not being happy about it…is seditious, then count me in.
Campus Attack on Christianity
From: Gary L. Bauer
Campus Attack On Christianity
Everyone knows that the Left has a stranglehold on higher education. Most university professors lean to the Left, and many are avowed communists. Christian parents are relieved if their children leave college with their faith and values intact.
A U.S. Supreme Court case being argued this week highlights the hostility Christian students face. The court is considering whether a Christian student group at Hasting College of the Law in San Francisco (part of the University of California) has the right to bar openly homosexual students from leadership positions. The student group, The Christian Legal Society (CLS), disallows “unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle,” which it says includes “homosexual conduct.” The college, a public law school, decided to withdraw recognition of the group (and funding) after it refused to comply with the school’s “anti-discrimination” policy.
Let me be clear: CLS does not bar students from attending meetings and other activities. All are welcome to do so. But they exclude those who do not follow its moral code—not just homosexuals but also fornicators, adulterers, non-Christians and others—from being voting members of the group and from holding leadership positions.
All groups discriminate in some ways. Could a non-Muslim head a Muslim student organization? No. Would it make sense for a male student to hold a leadership role in a campus woman’s group? Of course not. That the school would expel a Christian group exposes the larger problem of intolerance for disfavored views in our university system.
As you might expect, the court is sharply split over the case. New Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that no group should be allowed to discriminate for any reason. But conservative Justice Antonin Scalia asked whether a campus Republican club must admit Democrats or whether a Christian group must allow atheists to join and even conduct Bible classes. “That’s crazy,” Scalia said.
Court watchers believe this case is a proxy battle for a Supreme Court debate over same-sex “marriage” sometime in the next couple years. This case will probably be a 5-to-4 decision, and it’s impossible to tell how the court will rule. Either way, the case underscores how no court appointment—especially those to the U.S. Supreme Court—should be taken lightly by men and women of faith.
Campus Attack On Christianity
Everyone knows that the Left has a stranglehold on higher education. Most university professors lean to the Left, and many are avowed communists. Christian parents are relieved if their children leave college with their faith and values intact.
A U.S. Supreme Court case being argued this week highlights the hostility Christian students face. The court is considering whether a Christian student group at Hasting College of the Law in San Francisco (part of the University of California) has the right to bar openly homosexual students from leadership positions. The student group, The Christian Legal Society (CLS), disallows “unrepentant participation in or advocacy of a sexually immoral lifestyle,” which it says includes “homosexual conduct.” The college, a public law school, decided to withdraw recognition of the group (and funding) after it refused to comply with the school’s “anti-discrimination” policy.
Let me be clear: CLS does not bar students from attending meetings and other activities. All are welcome to do so. But they exclude those who do not follow its moral code—not just homosexuals but also fornicators, adulterers, non-Christians and others—from being voting members of the group and from holding leadership positions.
All groups discriminate in some ways. Could a non-Muslim head a Muslim student organization? No. Would it make sense for a male student to hold a leadership role in a campus woman’s group? Of course not. That the school would expel a Christian group exposes the larger problem of intolerance for disfavored views in our university system.
As you might expect, the court is sharply split over the case. New Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that no group should be allowed to discriminate for any reason. But conservative Justice Antonin Scalia asked whether a campus Republican club must admit Democrats or whether a Christian group must allow atheists to join and even conduct Bible classes. “That’s crazy,” Scalia said.
Court watchers believe this case is a proxy battle for a Supreme Court debate over same-sex “marriage” sometime in the next couple years. This case will probably be a 5-to-4 decision, and it’s impossible to tell how the court will rule. Either way, the case underscores how no court appointment—especially those to the U.S. Supreme Court—should be taken lightly by men and women of faith.
Grassroots Training Conference in Denver
Friends-
American Majority is partnering with Erick Erickson of RedState.com, Smart Girl Politics and the John Hancock Committee for the States to bring you the Post Party Summits, two days of intensive, full training to build upon what you know already, and further equip you to take back our nation.
The training will be April 30-May 1 in Denver and will feature Erick Erickson at the Friday evening dinner with the training sessions to take place on Saturday. Ned Ryun, our national president, will be conducting many of the training sessions himself, and I will be returning to go more in-depth on advancing liberty online. More than 15 sessions will be offered on investigative journalism, running for office, blogging, women in politics, micro-targeting precincts, fundraising and more. You can learn all about it at www.summit.americanmajority.org. The
I want to encourage you to take advantage of this opportunity-
As always, thank you for all that you do, day in and day out, for liberty- it is making a difference and we're proud to be returning to
--
Peter T. Robberson
American Majority-Mechanics
Peter@AMMechanics.org
American Majority is a non-partisan non-profit organization leading the battle in training and equipping the next generation of liberty-minded candidates, activists and community leaders. We believe that national change begins at the state and local level.
Silence is Consent
The hundreds of thousands of Americans that took off work to attend rallies across the Country on Tax Day have figured out that silence is consent.
Being silent when the Federal Government takes control of a controlling share of the Auto-Makers; Being silent when the Federal Government threatened to tax certain named individual's bonuses at 95%; Being silent when Federal the Federal Government tries to make the Internet a Public Utility and control its content. Being silent when the Federal Government bullies one particular network to go along with their agenda. Being silent makes us complicit in their actions.
Our silence over the last 50 years may well have cost us our Republic. The time is now. It was yesterday and last week. It is time to rise up and make your voice heard. We were founded as a Constitutional Republic on the principles of individual freedom, limited government and free market principles. If you don't see ten or twelve more freedoms lost every day you are not paying attention. We are hemorrhaging our freedoms. Our Silence is our Consent.
Being silent when the Federal Government takes control of a controlling share of the Auto-Makers; Being silent when the Federal Government threatened to tax certain named individual's bonuses at 95%; Being silent when Federal the Federal Government tries to make the Internet a Public Utility and control its content. Being silent when the Federal Government bullies one particular network to go along with their agenda. Being silent makes us complicit in their actions.
Our silence over the last 50 years may well have cost us our Republic. The time is now. It was yesterday and last week. It is time to rise up and make your voice heard. We were founded as a Constitutional Republic on the principles of individual freedom, limited government and free market principles. If you don't see ten or twelve more freedoms lost every day you are not paying attention. We are hemorrhaging our freedoms. Our Silence is our Consent.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Are you Tea-ed Off Yet? Get in the game or lose the game!
Fellow Patriots,
If you are reading this today you might be in the wrong place. Get yourself down to the second time in recent history when hundreds of thousands of Americans are saying ENOUGH is ENOUGH! Last year about 750 groups spontaneously erupted on Tax Day with gatherings and protests in their towns and cities to put our elected officials on notice that we will vote them out of office if they abandon Limited Government, Financial Responsibility and Individual Liberty. Rather than hear us and respond like an shamed employee placed on Probation they doubled down on their spending and outrageous behavior.
Later in the summer tens of thousands of regular citizens showed up at their various officials’ Town Hall Meetings to demand that they properly represent the interests of their constituents. Again
Come to Acacia Park if you are in
We’ll be there. Just a heads up; Reports are that a group from
Peter and Adrienne
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Emailing: NEARLY HALF OF US HOUSEHOLDS ESCAPE FED INCOME TAX
Taxes-From NCPA.org
April 14, 2010
NEARLY HALF OF US HOUSEHOLDS ESCAPE FED INCOME TAX
Tax Day is a dreaded deadline for millions, but for nearly half of U.S. households it's simply somebody else's problem, says the Associated Press (AP).
According to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research organization:
- About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009.
- Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability.
Most people still are required to file returns by the April 15 deadline. The penalty for skipping it is limited to the amount of taxes owed, but it's still almost always better to file: That's the only way to get a refund of all the income taxes withheld by employers:
- In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.
- Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress.
- Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.
The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners -- households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 -- paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government, says the AP.
The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.
"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
Source: Associated Press, "Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax," Yahoo! News, April 14, 2010.
For text:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100407/ap_on_bi_ge/us_no_taxes
For more on Taxes:
http://www.blogger.com/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=20
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Come to the Tea Party!
Come to the Tea Party!
http://www.theconstitutionalisttoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/TeaPartyPoster_web.jpg
A publication written by "We the People," The Constitutionalist Today is comprised of articles from a range of writers, journalists, and bloggers. As such, the opinions herein may not reflect the opinions of our staff, management, or editorial board.
Post-Party Summits!
Post-Party Summits: Organizing for a Free
Some of the most influential grassroots conservative groups in the country are joining forces to give activists the tools they need to drive real change in their communities. We believe real change begins at the local level, and to that end, we are empowering citizens like you to take back your communities, your state, and eventually
In addition to the host of trainings being held, several keynote speakers have confirmed their attendance at the Post-Party Summits, including Erick Erikson, CNN commentator and editor of RedState.com; Dana Loesch, blogger, radio host, and regular commentator on Fox News and CNN; S.E. Cupp, author, political columnist and commentator who appears regularly on “Fox & Friends,” “The Sean Hannity Show,” Redeye,” and “Geraldo At Large” and author of two books, “Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack on Christianity,” and “Why Your Wrong About The Right”; and Steven Crowder, comedian, columnist and commentator known for his political satire.
The Post-Party Summits will take place in the following cities:
We believe these Post-Party Summits will provide the training and resources conservatives need to combat a statist-driven government and win in 2010 and beyond. Please visitwww.americanmajority.org/summit for more information. We believe that these events will fundamentally change the grassroots by providing communication strategy, fundraising tactics, and new media training to help activists combat the political structure currently in place on the Left.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Forcing kids to Cross-Dress for Women’s History Month
"Posted by Stacy Nason in For Real?, Get Involved on April 12th, 2010
I came across this post on facebook… what do you think? what would you do if this was your childs school?
My son’s Elementary School forcing kids to Cross-Dress for Women’s History Month
You know…I’m always praising the Maple Shade School district where we live for the great job they do with my kids. Because of that, I have overlooked the Politically-Correct-insanity that has changed “St. Patricks Day” to “LEPRECHAUN DAY”, and Christmas to “WINTER Holiday”, or “Good Friday” to “Spring Day”…but NOW THEY’VE GONE TOO FAR!
I support the idea of teaching about Women’s History Month, in regards to our rights, equality, and roles in US and world history…but asking my 9 YEAR OLD SON to dress like a woman in a school FASHION SHOW in school in front of his peers is crossing the line for me. They sent home a memo telling us that regardless of male/female, ALL students must participate….and I am MAD.
How is dressing like a woman from any era going to teach him about history? Why not let him do a report, poster, or other project on this subject? If he was attending a vocational school in the field of textiles, women’s fashion, etc, then it would make sense. My son is adamantly opposed, and I dont see how FORCING my 9year old to CROSS-DRESS in front of the ENTIRE SCHOOL BODY is going to teach him ANYTHING about Women’s History.
I am not prejudiced, and I have gay and/or cross-dressing friends whom I love dearly, but this sounds more like a sneaky lesson in social tolerance, and that is MY JOB, not the school district or local government. If my son decided he wanted to do it, for “fun”, like as if it were Halloween, then that I would support.
I resent the fact that the Maple Shade School District is telling me that HE and I have no choice. That my son must dress like a woman, because “women’s fashions” are vital to his understanding of the history of this country….and we have NO options. Why not teach him/them about Betsy Ross, Susan B. Anthony, Harriet Tubman and/or Helen Keller?
Further, just like the whole “Healthcare” debacle, I believe it is for ME to decide, and not for the government, or governmental agency to force me to do something that is against my son’s identity, our religious beliefs or parental rights.
What are your thoughts on this? "
I came across this post on facebook… what do you think? what would you do if this was your childs school?
My son’s Elementary School forcing kids to Cross-Dress for Women’s History Month
You know…I’m always praising the Maple Shade School district where we live for the great job they do with my kids. Because of that, I have overlooked the Politically-Correct-insanity that has changed “St. Patricks Day” to “LEPRECHAUN DAY”, and Christmas to “WINTER Holiday”, or “Good Friday” to “Spring Day”…but NOW THEY’VE GONE TOO FAR!
I support the idea of teaching about Women’s History Month, in regards to our rights, equality, and roles in US and world history…but asking my 9 YEAR OLD SON to dress like a woman in a school FASHION SHOW in school in front of his peers is crossing the line for me. They sent home a memo telling us that regardless of male/female, ALL students must participate….and I am MAD.
How is dressing like a woman from any era going to teach him about history? Why not let him do a report, poster, or other project on this subject? If he was attending a vocational school in the field of textiles, women’s fashion, etc, then it would make sense. My son is adamantly opposed, and I dont see how FORCING my 9year old to CROSS-DRESS in front of the ENTIRE SCHOOL BODY is going to teach him ANYTHING about Women’s History.
I am not prejudiced, and I have gay and/or cross-dressing friends whom I love dearly, but this sounds more like a sneaky lesson in social tolerance, and that is MY JOB, not the school district or local government. If my son decided he wanted to do it, for “fun”, like as if it were Halloween, then that I would support.
I resent the fact that the Maple Shade School District is telling me that HE and I have no choice. That my son must dress like a woman, because “women’s fashions” are vital to his understanding of the history of this country….and we have NO options. Why not teach him/them about Betsy Ross, Susan B. Anthony, Harriet Tubman and/or Helen Keller?
Further, just like the whole “Healthcare” debacle, I believe it is for ME to decide, and not for the government, or governmental agency to force me to do something that is against my son’s identity, our religious beliefs or parental rights.
What are your thoughts on this? "
The American Cafe-Good News
The American Café,
Don’t know if you saw this today but Dawn Johnson withdrew her name for consideration to as the Assistant Attorney General. We have talked about how wacky and radical she is believing such things as sex in a marriage is rape, pregnancy is slavery and a woman cannot consent to becoming pregnant any more than pedestrian can consent to getting hit by a car.
Why can’t these women come to grips with the fact that they have serious personal/mental issues, a horrible childhood, and that they attract bad men like a magnet? It’s always the fault of everyone else…
Whatever……………..
Now keep your eyes open. Will she be appointed to the Supreme Court instead?
Peter and Adrienne
TheAmericanCafé.com
Facebook.com/theamericancafe
FW: Major Pro-Life Victory over Dawn Johnsen Nomination
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
