Who Are The ANGRIEST People in America? ~ Video by Fortis Media

Not that this could ever happen, but given the current situation with the China virus, Covid-19, we may be a long time away from such great events as CPAC. You know, that "social distancing" thing. While this is going on, people will begin taking their classes online at the educational institutions, probably from K-12 to college level. Is that a bad thing? Should that be what we do, too?

This video, that I somehow came across, is from early days (last August 2019) of Fortis Media.  Upon watching from beginning to end, I knew that you'd want to see it, too!

My first takeaway, knowing about Fortis Media and JJ McNown, was just knowing JJ's youth, and how extremely grateful I am that God allowed us to come across this young man in the first place! And that there is a great hope that there are many more young folks of that generation (Gen Z), who can so eloquently explain America's greatness, despite the constant negative barrage from the teachers and professors throughout their educational experience.

But then the big takeaway came while watching the video. While JJ McNown would be a great speaker at a CPAC conference, couldn't we just accomplish that here online? We could try that, can't we? With the current China Virus going on, maybe this is the time to be doing that "distance learning" thing, during the "social distancing" thing, and I can't think of a better time to start.

I am sad to report that I've not heard from JJ McNown for awhile, and there haven't been any new videos on Fortis Media for a couple weeks. Can you all join me in prayers that he is okay, and will resume his wonderful work with his videos, very soon? Thank you.

Wrong target, wrong method ~ By Dave Welch

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Dave Welch

Posted: February 20, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

There are some fundamental differences in the motivation between the act of domestic terrorism committed by Joseph Stack on Feb. 18 as he flew his single-engine plane into the IRS building in Austin, Texas, and the act of religious terrorism and war committed by Islamic terrorists on Sept. 11, 2001 – but there are also underlying similarities:

• Both had a pathological hatred of an enemy power that drove them to use their body and an airplane as lethal weapons against that power;

• Both were willing to take many innocent lives in their cause;

• Both were driven to demonic insanity that is one of the results of embracing destructive belief systems.

The essential difference is that the first group was part of a religious jihad carrying out the master plan of a large organization based on the practice of Islam, while Stack was an unhinged individual who had lost hope and acted on out-of-control anger against the unjust workings of his own government.

While the unfortunately expected linkage of his rage to the escalating frustration that has erupted into the tea-party movement reared its ugly head in some of the media, there is not one shred of legitimate comparison. The tea-party organizations, town halls and "throw the bums out" mindset are certainly diverse in terms of spiritual, social, economic and political backgrounds, however the people have been uniformly law-abiding, productive citizens who have realized that sitting on the sidelines while their government spins out of control is no longer acceptable.

The common source of our angst in whatever form is our own government, under the authority of "We The People," whose leaders have largely fiddled while our Rome has burned. Stack's target was without question the most hated and feared arm of our government.

The Internal Revenue Service operates under the authority of Congress, carrying out policies adopted by leaders whom the people have chosen from amongst ourselves, by our vote or our absence. It is also the single most-feared entity not only because it has been given police powers to enforce the taking of citizens' income/property as allowed through the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – but also because, unlike most other federal agencies granted such powers, it reaches into the home and business of every person under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government.

The primary "product" of the IRS is collection of revenues through what is now the progressive income tax. This one means of taxation has allowed the escalation of government taking and of restriction of constitutional rights beyond anything until Democrats added "endangered species" and "wetlands preservation" to the federal police arsenal.

A brief and readable history of the income tax shows its creation by Abraham Lincoln in 1862 as a "3 percent tax on incomes between $600 and $10,000 and a 5 percent tax on incomes of more than $10,000," it's repeal in 1872, reinstatement in 1894, and finally becoming permanent after the 1913 "ratification" and subsequent adoption of a 1 percent graduated income tax. The lid was blown off by the Federal Revenue Act of 1918, which introduced us to the progressive income tax we now know and "love" so dearly – and took tax rates as high as 65 percent in 1 percent increments.

READ FULL STORY >

Glenn Beck: Sometimes it's better to be silent ~ By Alan Keyes

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Alan Keyes Posted: January 08, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010

It is better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. – Abe Lincoln

Though he has successfully exploited the righteous anger many Americans feel at the ongoing elite betrayal of our identity as a free people, Glenn Beck has responded to that betrayal in terms of raw emotion or calculated self-interest. He appears to have little or no understanding of the profound issues of principle that are now coming to a head, as never before in the history of the United States. Because of this inadequate understanding of the crisis, he apparently fails to appreciate the real issue raised by the controversy over Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility for the presidency ("Glenn Beck on birther issue: 'Dumbest thing I've ever heard' "). Contrary to Beck's assertion, I and others like me do not take the position that we know that Obama is not eligible for the presidency. We have simply observed that there is a positive constitutional requirement that he be a natural born citizen of the United States, and that the evidence thus far available does not establish that he is. We have asked that the courts or the Congress fulfill their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution, and that they pursue an authoritative investigation of the facts and issues involved in order to reach a substantive decision that addresses the constitutional requirement. Thus far they have refused to do so. Some, including both Democrats and Republicans, have responded to public concern by arguing that the majority will expressed in the 2008 election makes the constitutional issue irrelevant. But if it's correct to argue that, when the outcome of an election warrants it, the winners have a mandate simply to ignore questions of constitutionality, then the struggle for political power trumps respect for the provisions of the Constitution. The result: Once power has been obtained by electoral means, it is no longer subject to constitutional limits. Glenn Beck simply parrots the mad-stream media's malicious caricature of the eligibility issue. In doing so he allows himself to become part of the strategy now at work to destroy the moral and political authority of the U.S. Constitution. Beck makes statements like this that seem to show serious concern that the Constitution be respected:

Do you want to argue the Constitution? Good. Let's show the number of people in Congress and in the Senate that don't even read the Constitution – can't tell you right now if health care is even in the Constitution. Let's talk to the scholars. Let's talk to the average Joe that understands this isn't in the Constitution. Let's argue the Constitution on the laws and the systems that they are building today. Instead of arguing the Constitution and whether or not he was born in America, why don't we argue the constitutionality of a little-known thing called czars and the power that these people have?

READ FULL STORY >

Why 'Rogue' is a better book than 'Dreams' ~ By Jack Cashill

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Jack Cashill Posted: November 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 A few weeks back, the new head of the National Endowment for the Arts, Rocco Landesman, said of Barack Obama, "This is the first president that actually writes his own books since Teddy Roosevelt and arguably the first to write them really well since Lincoln." Landesman was not alone in his praise. This month's GQ has a faux-exhaustive article on "the untold story of the first man since Teddy Roosevelt to serve as author in chief." In truth, however, if Teddy Roosevelt came back to life today, he would find that he would have much more in common with Sarah Palin than Barack Obama, both as a fellow adventurer and as a fellow writer. I am not being ironic here: Palin's new memoir, "Going Rogue," is superior to the 1995 memoir that made Obama's reputation, "Dreams From My Father." A clue as to why can be found in one choice moment from "Dreams." At the time, 1988, community organizer Obama was contemplating law school, and he announced his potential choices as "Harvard, Yale, Stanford." What makes any narrative compelling is when the protagonist confronts obstacles and overcomes them through force of will and character. But when a mediocre student with LSAT scores too humble to reveal can casually limit his law school choices to Harvard, Stanford and Yale, the reader winces. It is as if the good witch told Dorothy to click her heels together on day one and skip the damn yellow brick road. There is no drama here. In fact, Obama's career has been greased by affirmative action and its bastard offspring – "diversity" – from prep school on. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Shades of JFK? - By Barbara Simpson

Barabara writes, "Originality is not one of Obama's gifts; he's drowning in confusion as to whether he's Lincoln, FDR or JFK. But that's part of political theatre. If this imitation of fame persists and the public continues to buy the fantasy, Barack Obama will be in the catbird seat." And his minions are easily manipulated by the media like sheep.

read more | digg story

Obama's Reaganesque speech - By Patrick J. Buchanan

Buchanan is apparently oblivious to the wolf in sheep's clothing, as he should know by now that President Obama will say anything to fool the people. I am usually agreeing with Buchanan, but not in this case, and maybe never again. Obama obviously threw in the parts that Buchanan liked, but that was because he isn't talking just to his minions now.

read more | digg story

Abe and Mary Todd Obama - by Doug Powers

From the soon to be famous "Leftysburg Address": "Four community organizers and seven friends thrown under the bus ago, George Soros brought forth to these 58 states, a socialist nation, conceived in secret, and dedicated to the proposition that all the wealth should be spread around and nobody should be punished with a baby..." Obama is no Abe Lincoln! From the article:

Just about the only valid comparisons I can find between Lincoln and Obama is that Abraham Lincoln didn't have a middle name, and for a long time the Obama campaign and the media pretended Obama didn't have one either. Also, both Lincoln and Obama facilitated emancipation. We all know about Lincoln's role in ending slavery – either as a primary objective or a byproduct of the end result of the Civil War, but Obama also played a role in emancipating many, many people. Because of Obama's pro-abortion stance, he has helped ensure that thousands and thousands of children are never enslaved. Joe Biden's vague resemblance to Lincoln's second VP, Andrew Johnson (pictured above), doesn't hurt either. [Continue reading]

digg story