Demonizing Everyday Americans

Demonizing Everyday Americans

by Ken Blackwell

Ken Klukoswki contributed to this report.

There appears to be a concerted effort among the political Left and many mainstream media people to demonize and marginalize the expanding citizen-based movement known as the tea party movement. This effort flows from both a fear of what these tea parties represent and a contempt for everyday Americans. But those ordinary citizens are poised to be the ones laughing when it’s all over, when democracy takes its course.

There seems to be a consensus now among the liberal elite when it comes to the tea parties. Senior administration officials deride them, as do liberal congressional Democrats. These elitists characterize the tea partiers as extremists, some drawing analogies between these ordinary citizens and right-wing militias, fanatics, and religious zealots. Some members of Congress are even saying that these tea party people are racist, which is pretty much the worst label that can be slapped on you in modern politics.

And many leftist talking heads in the media parrot this message, with their own biting editorial, adding that some in the tea party crowd are dangerous. Some talking heads, including some Hollywood actors and others who don’t seem to have any credentials as policy analysts but are nonetheless given air time, are really playing up the racism angle, and even suggest that some tea party attendees may be domestic terrorists.

Try the decaf, people.

Agents of big government and their boosters in the mainstream media seem determined to throw cold water on this growing grassroots movement that is a reaction to the Obama administration’s power grab of the growth and expansion of this country’s central government.

There’s a great deal of diversity among tea party people. Some just want lower taxes, and some also want less regulation. Still others are pro-life voters or Christian conservatives that also want fiscal responsibility. Many others push for conservative judges, while still others hold up signs calling for a restoration of American sovereignty, or protecting America’s borders, or defeating cap and trade or card check.

But they all have two things in common: They all want smaller government, and oppose the trampling of the Constitution embodied in these efforts to radically expand the size and scope of government. And as part of that desire, they want this utterly-ludicrous spending binge to end before it bankrupts all of us.

There’s nothing extremist about that agenda, because common sense is never extreme.

Are there some people attending tea party rallies who are intemperate in their remarks? Sure. Whenever you get tens of thousands of regular folks together, you’ll always get a few who makes comments that they should reconsider. Even then, nothing we’ve seen is worse than the truly outrageous statements that we’ve heard from the Left in recent years about President Bush or Republicans.

Having been engaged in many gatherings of the tea party crowd, it’s offensive that many in the mainstream media are engaging in a systematic effort to marginalize American citizens who are simply trying to take a stand for individual liberty—a stand in opposition to big-government expansion. Also one of us speaking as an African-American (Blackwell), it’s especially insulting to suggest that these people’s opposition to President Obama is driven by racism.

America’s history of grassroots activism goes back to the founding of our republic. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people includes as a necessary element those same average, ordinary people being able to gather and speak out. This freedom to assemble was considered so essential to a free nation that our Founders put it in the First Amendment, right alongside the freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

Ironically, these rights are set side-by-side with the freedom of the press, as well. The leftists in the media would do well to remember that their liberty to be a free press comes from the same constitutional amendment as the tea party crowd’s liberty to gather together.

And our elected leaders would do well to remember that the First Amendment exists to protect average people from the government, not the other way around.

Blackwell and Klukowski are the authors of the forthcoming book, The Blueprint: Obama’s Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency, on sale April 27.

Obama, Democrats (Liberals, Socialist) vs Freedom

The Freedom Factor

by Bill O'Reilly

"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose." -- Kris Kristofferson

The raging debate over Obamacare is not exactly all about health. It's really about freedom, or lack thereof. It's simple when you cut through all the overheated rhetoric: The anti-Obama folks believe the president is imposing a massive federal presence that will erode personal freedoms. The pro-Obama crew supports a huge federal apparatus to impose "social justice," believing that is the government's moral responsibility.

The personal freedom issue is pretty clear, as well. We have less of it today than we did this time last year. In an aggressive power grab, the feds now control the health care industry, and the IRS has increased its already enormous power, as it will enforce Obamacare mandates. In addition, your private medical records will no longer be private. They will be accessible by federal bureaucrats. If that doesn't make you queasy, nothing will.

And then there's higher education. The president wants the feds, not private lending institutions, to distribute college loans, and it looks like that will happen.

And then there's the banking industry. The Obama administration seeks tough oversight rules and wants to call major shots in the financial world. Federal regulation could strangle some banks and force most of them to do exactly what the government wants.

And then there's the energy industry. The president wants to mandate how private business consumes energy and to dish out financial punishment if federal rules are not followed. That's the cap-and-trade deal.

In addition to the direct intrusion on business and private behavior (through health insurance), the redistribution-of-wealth train is roaring toward its next destination. That would be a national sales tax like they have in Europe. The president well understands the huge debt that is piling up because of all the federal spending. He has to raise more money. Wealthy Americans are going to get hammered by income tax and capital gains hikes, but there are simply not enough rich folks to counter the red ink. So get ready for a proposed new tax on stuff you buy.

Even though everyone will pay the sales tax, there will be a variety of rebates for poor Americans so they will not suffer from the sales tax. The middle class will most likely bear the brunt of it. But it may not happen -- Democrats in Congress might well be voted out of power next November. That's one of the high stakes in the midterm election.

Not since the early days of the Vietnam War has there been such a stark divide between liberal and conservative Americans, between Republicans and Democrats. The battle lines are clearly drawn: individual freedom versus federal power. Take your pick.

Tom Hanks - Go Away

Tom Hanks’ racism flow chart
Tom Hanks shocked many Americans when he said recently that, basically, World War II happened because America was racist and the Japanese were different looking. Hanks may have forgotten about a little event called Pearl Harbor. Glenn, Pat and Stu play the amazing audio and there is a warning attached - do not listen if you don't want all Tom Hanks movies ruined. There are a lot of great movies that fall under that umbrella, so choose wisely. ( Transcript, Insider Audio)

Pelosi + Massa = More Lies

Report: Pelosi’s Office Knew Of Massa’s Questionable Conduct In October

March 16, 2010 by Personal Liberty News Desk

Joe Racalto, the chief of staff for former Representative Eric Massa (D-N.Y.), informed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office of his boss’s inappropriate behavior toward several unmarried male staffers in October of 2009, an unnamed source told The Washington Post last week.

Earlier in the month, Pelosi indicated that her staff had only learned in February of the concerns regarding Massa, who recently resigned from the House amid an Ethics Committee investigation into his conduct, Fox News reports.

According to the Post, Racalto called Pelosi’s director of member services because he was troubled that Massa, 50, was living in a townhouse with numerous young male staffers and had been using explicit language in front of them. Moreover, Racalto was concerned about a lunch date that the congressman—who is married with two kids—had set up with an aide in his 20s who worked in the office of Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass.).

Although the Ethics Committee has concluded its investigation into Massa’s conduct—as his resignation put him outside the reach of any punishment it could impose—House Republicans are calling for an inquiry into the manner in which Pelosi’s office handled the accusations.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said that the committee should continue to investigate, as there are "an awful lot of questions" that have been left unanswered.

Shame on Obama

With all of the wars, pain, suffering and unemployment in the USA this is how much it worries the president of our country.   I am so ashamed of him.

Obama Hosts White House Movie Night with Hanks, Spielberg

Updated: Friday, 12 Mar 2010, 8:43 AM EST
Published : Friday, 12 Mar 2010, 8:38 AM EST

(NewsCore) - President Barack Obama hosted a movie night at the White House for Hollywood heavyweights Tom Hanks and director Steven Spielberg on Thursday - at which they watched a preview of the star duo's new World War Two miniseries "The Pacific."

From Cuban BLOG (Sin Evasion/Without Evasion)

A few weeks have elapsed since the shocking deaths at the Psychiatric Hospital in Havana, and the photographs of the emaciated and battered bodies are already circulating through numerous computers. The pictures, almost unreal, are reminiscent of those other bodies stacked in Nazi death camps more than 60 years ago, and, once again, put salt on the open wounds of Cubans’ public opinion.

I will not turn now to all the horror and suffering revealed in each photograph, to the incredible thinness of those unfortunate ones, to the blows, evidenced by the bruises on their meager bodies, to the disrespectful overcrowding of several bodies on the same dirty stretcher –thus sentenced to post-mortem promiscuity- to the insulting filth at the scene, or to the moral poverty of a health system that proclaims itself as the most perfect one in the planet and revokes the rights of others to question it. And I will not turn to those things now because, almost at the same time I was able to contemplate the unimaginable squalor in which these anonymous martyrs of State socialism died, I was browsing through the always-misleading pages of Granma, where the speech made by Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla appeared. The speech was made on March 3rd of this year during the latest session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, and I cannot decide if it disgusted me even more than the photographs. On the front page of the Thursday, March 4th printed edition, a quote from the words uttered without the slightest embarrassment by the high Cuban official jumps out as an irreverent mockery of the whole world:

“Cuba has a worthy and irreproachable track record in protecting the right to life, even by means of unselfish cooperation across its borders”.

It is impossible to sketch an insult out of words. I will just imagine each of these pictures of the deceased against paragraphs of the new herald of the State, to try to find some light, however dim, to explain how so much cynicism can fit into a government. Each of these photos, by itself, is an admonition and a condemnation of the Cuban regime. I wish I could further understand how a young person, such as Mr. Rodríguez Parrilla, looking almost naive, a nameless stranger only yesterday, whose hands were not blood-stained like those of his mentors, offers himself as the volunteer accomplice of crimes which until now –presumably- did not belong to him.

You cannot be civilized and, at the same time, keep your back turned to the Cuban reality. The government’s mask of compassion must not continue to mock essentially moral principles that implicate and compromise everyone. The dozens of emaciated pseudo-humans who have died or who still survive at Mazorra and other “hospitable” institutions of the generous State, political and common prisoners from the dark Cuban prisons, the memory of Orlando Zapata Tamayo and those who preceded him in martyrdom, and all of us who enjoy the dubious privilege of Human Rights Castro-style, should have a place in Geneva -even just a modest virtual, but permanent space- where we could represent ourselves before the world and where we would be listened to with the respect and the Rights we have not enjoyed in our own country for more than half a century.

Photograph taken from the blog “Penúltimos Días”

The Media and War

Patrick Kennedy went nuts on the floor this week, yelling at the media for not reporting on the war. In a Howard Dean-esque moment, he charged the press has been negligent reporting on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  He wants an immediate end to the wars, but his point is correct...where IS this media? The same media that couldn't stop reporting on the war while Bush was in office?

Obama Stimulating a Marxist Revolution Using Taxpayer Money

Obama Stimulating a Marxist Revolution Using Taxpayer Money

by Scott Wheeler

 

A Marxist group that has demanded the “destruction” of the U.S. and issued a call "to bring this government down" is the recipient of stimulus funds from the Obama American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). This same group, the Brecht Forum, has also called for the complete takeover of insurance companies and farms in America.

The controversial stimulus bill, as ARRA is better known, provided funds for the New York State Council on the Arts (NYSCA), which promptly granted the New York City-based Brecht Forum $5,000 in 2009 and $9,000 in 2010. The NYSCA had previously announced in 2008 that due to state budget cuts it would no longer be able to fund 573 organizations that it had previously funded. One of the groups on the list to be slashed was the Brecht Forum. After NYSCA secured $399,000 in stimulus money, the Brecht Forum once again had funding.

The Brecht Forum is host to the New York Marxist School and displays this statement on their website:

Can society be changed significantly for the better? What kind of changes would be needed? and, Who could bring about such changes?

Questions like these are what motivated Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels to develop a method for studying the dynamics of change in societies.

In 1975, a group of civil rights, community, labor, and student activists came together to found The Brecht Forum's New York Marxist School. They saw the study of Marxism as central, not as a dogma but as a living current of thought and as a vital tool for understanding capitalist society.

In a September 2009 lecture at the Brecht Forum, Jed Brandt, a longtime communist, political activist and outspoken atheist offered the following instructions:

“We have to bring this Government down! We have to help destroy this system and that requires increasing the alienation that working people and oppressed people feel. The way this change is going to happen is the destruction of The United States of America!”

Fox News Channel picked up on Brandt’s call to action and played clips several times the week of March 1st. My own investigation uncovered the link to federal stimulus dollars providing financial support for the Brecht Forum. The grants from NYSCA were ostensibly provided for artistic projects, for example, the NYSCA website shows the following as the description for the Brecht Forum grant:

“The Brecht Forum's 09-10 program features workshops in the participatory theater techniques developed by the noted Brazilian director Augusto Boal. The program includes monthly workshops led by members of the Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory and two master workshops led by Augusto Boal.”

The website for the Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory describes this form of art in rather revealing political terms,

“Augusto Boal has defined Theater of the Oppressed as a rehearsal for revolution.”

The website further describes its mission as using “interactive theater as an organizing tool” and works with “educators, human service and healthcare workers, union organizers and community activists” to solve perceived problems.

State of the Union Address Troubling

Roberts: Scene at State of Union 'Very Troubling'

Tuesday, 09 Mar 2010 08:20 PM
Article Font Size 
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts says the scene at this year's State of the Union address by President Obama was "very troubling," and he wonders if justices should attend in the future.
Obama chided the court during his speech for its decision that corporations and unions could freely spend money to run political ads for or against specific candidates.
Obama said the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests to spend without limit in elections.
Roberts told law students at the University of Alabama that anyone is free to criticize the court, but he was troubled the remarks came during that setting. Roberts says the State of the Union address has "degenerated to a political pep rally."

Spelling Lesson

SPELLING LESSON:

The last 4 letters in American is    ...  I CAN
The last 4 letters in Republican is ...  I CAN
The last 4 letters in Democrats is  ...  RATS

Makes sense to me........!!

Obama Now Selling Judgeships for Health Care Votes

Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he's obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson's brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Obama Is A Socialist

I am honestly confused. Why is it not permissible for us to call President Obama a socialist? Why do so many with a media platform dodge the question when asked point-blank if Obama is a socialist?

Maybe some in the GOP and the mainstream media simply don’t know or understand the definition. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “socialism” as: “Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods”

Even with the broadest of interpretations, Obama’s beliefs seem to fall within that definition.

Correct me when I’m wrong, but doesn’t the president want to greatly expand the federal government? Doesn’t he want and have government control of our automobile manufacturers? Doesn’t he want and have government control over our banks?

Doesn’t he want a government-run national health-care system which will control one-fifth of our economy? Doesn’t he want to take money from the “elite” and redistribute that wealth to the “poor?” When running for president, didn’t Obama himself say, "When you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.”

Doesn’t his party want to reinstate the “Fairness Doctrine” to muzzle conservative thought? Don’t all of these goals of the president and his party fall within the definition of “socialism?”

Obama has every right to be a socialist. Fortunately, our form of government still allows freedom of expression. Unlike Lenin or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela however, the president hopes -- with a huge assist from the liberal intelligentsia -- to recast the United States into a socialist nanny-state in small, incremental steps.

He may yet succeed. To paraphrase Edmund Burke -- one of Obama’s favorite philosophers -- “The only thing necessary for the triumph of socialism is for good people to do nothing.”

Well, one way to start to do something is to call Obama what he is: A socialist.

Handgun Ban

When Chicago passed a ban on handgun ownership in 1982, it was part of a trend. Washington, D.C. had done it in 1976, and a few Chicago suburbs took up the cause in the following years. They all expected to reduce the number of guns and thus curtail bloodshed.

In the years following its ban, Washington did not generate a decline in gun murders. In fact, the number of killings rose by 156 percent -- at a time when murders nationally increased by just 32 percent. For a while, the city vied regularly for the title of murder capital of America.

Chicago followed a similar course. In the decade after it outlawed handguns, murders jumped by 41 percent, compared to an 18 percent rise in the entire United States.

One problem is that the bans didn't actually have any discernible effect on the availability of guns to people with felonious intent. As with drugs and hookers, when there is a demand for guns, there will always be a supply.

Who places the highest value on owning a firearm? Criminals. Who is least likely to fear being prosecuted for violating the law? Criminals. Who is most likely to have access to illicit dealers? You guessed it.

President’s Cabinet

On a recent Glenn Beck Show, he had a graph that illustrated the percentage of each past President's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. You know what the private business sector is... a real life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages discussed by Mr. Beck.

T. Roosevelt......... 38%

Taft......................40%

Wilson .................. 52%

Harding.................49%

Coolidge............... 48%

Hoover.................. 42%

F. Roosevelt.......... 50%

Truman...................50%

Eisenhower........... 57%

Kennedy............... 30%

Johnson.................47%

Nixon.................... 53%

Ford...................... 42%

Carter................... 32%

Reagan..................56%

GH Bush............... 51%

Clinton .................. 39%

GW Bush.............. 55%

And the winner of the Chicken Dinner is..............

Obama.................   8% !!!

  Yep! Thats right!  Only Eight Percent!!!..the least by far of the last 19 presidents!!  And these people are trying to tell our big corporations how to run their business? They know what's best for GM...Chrysler... Wall Street...  and you and me?

How can the president of a major nation and society...the one with the most successful economic system in world history.... stand and talk about business when he's never worked for one?... or about jobs when he has never really had one??! 

  And neither has 92% of his senior staff and closest advisers.! They've spent most of their time in academia, government and/or non-profit jobs....or as "community organizers" ..when they should have been in an employment line.

Obama, Pelosi, Reid

That statement from Obama yesterday:

"Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, I am an ardent believer in the free market," Obama said in prepared remarks.

We should next expect Al Gore today to step before the microphones and proclaim his support for scientific inquiry, for Nancy Pelosi to announce her love of filibustering and the nuclear option, for Harry Reid to sing the praises of bipartisanship and Jeremiah Wright to reveal his love for Israel.

Nancy Pelosi Tries to Co-Opt the Tea Party

Here is a link to a BLOG entry I just read and the content of it is right on in my book.

Nancy Pelosi

Here is one little blurb from it:

The fact that Nancy Pelosi could become the speaker of the house, much less even be elected to congress should be a reality that boggles any sensible mind in America

Democratic Congress Attacks Natural Supplements

I spent another afternoon in disbelief, reading over a dozen emails regarding Congress’ improper use of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA). They misappropriated the act to pull Ephedra from the market. And now they’re trying to oust vitamin E!

Next stop… the rest of the alphabet.