VIDEO: When the President was the Great Uniter he was elected to be...

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

WIFLI Briefing for May 31, 2012 ~ Vetting the transmogrifying Barry

First of all, I want to thank Mychal Massie for exposing me to a word I was not aware of prior to his column (which you can access from the text and link that I provide later on):

Transmogrifying:
... to change in appearance or form, especially strangely or grotesquely; transform.

Yes, it's true. The President has transformed, in a transmogrifying manner. He has gone from an exalted intellectual and prolific public speaker to ... um, somebody that should have been vetted and thoroughly investigated for a fraud that makes Enron's scheme seem lame. His job performance hasn't quite reached the glory that Obama minions in the establishment media claimed that we would enjoy.

No, it didn't quite work out that way, as you will see in the video below.

UNBELIEVABLE OBAMA GAFFES, Mistakes, Lies, and Confusion

Video provided by ensignbay on Sep 27, 2009

Please pardon me for a moment while I bait radical lefties with a quote from Rush Limbaugh:

And that's what liberalism is.

It all stems from a mind-set of intolerance.

"Don't you criticize Obama! That's criminal! You can't criticize a sitting president! That's sedition; you can't do it."

~ Rush Limbaugh, in a transcript from May 21, 2012

My greatest fear is that Mitt Romney will steer completely away from any attack on Barack Hussein Obama, and lose the election. I think we went through that 4 years ago when John McCain did the same thing. So here we are, with a few of the Conservative syndicated columnists, as well as citizen journalists, once again trying to do the job that the GOP campaign should be doing - if they really wanted to win this time around.

To be completely honest, I'm not at all comfortable with the Romney campaign leaving it to the Conservative side of the new media on the web to do the "dirty work" of vetting the sitting President.

The fact is, if Obama wins another term in office, I'm concerned about the deployment of drones in 63 sites in America. But meanwhile, Gov. Romney, with all of the money available for his campaign, could easily win the election, but not if he is afraid to criticize the President.

That bothers me, because Hunter Rogers wasn't afraid to ask questions and take on a teacher who is an avid Obama supporter, trying to spew even more propaganda solely for the purpose of deterring any kind of truth being told when it comes to vetting the transmogrifying President. Does Romney's avoidance of telling the truth about Obama display fear and/or weakness, or just some of the same old GOP indulgence in attempting not to look mean? Or both?

In quite a few of my previous posts, I've expressed the extreme danger of an attempt by the government - or any other entity, like the Obama supporters (minions) - trying to silence our dissent. The bottom line is that the government now has the power to do so. And when the liberal mainstream media is in the bag for Obama, who is to say that it would ever come to light should any of the Conservative writers and citizen journalists just happen to disappear?

The big risk that those of us that speak up are now facing is that the current administration will stay in power, and there will never again be an opportunity to utilize the 1st Amendment, the part of the Constitution that would be protecting Hunter Rogers, when exposing the truth about the man that currently occupies the Oval Room (between cigarette breaks). The danger to be aware of, patriots, is that the intolerance that Rush spoke of will eventually go further than MSNBC diatribes about the evil dissenters (Conservatives).

So, if it costs me my life and/or liberty to be part of the vetting of the sitting President, I'll at least know that I may have been braver than the presumptive Republican candidate. I'm just sayin'...

*     *     *     *

Welcome to this edition of Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing!

What is WIFLI?
You may be wondering what the acronym "WIFLI" means. I started out by calling these issues the Time 2 Escape Daily, but that didn't work out very well. I quickly learned that putting these issues together on a daily basis was a task I was unable to accomplish. To replace "Daily" in the title, I borrowed the acronym WIFLI, which literally means "When I Feel Like It." Putting together a post on this blog WIFLI works much better for my schedule, and for the higher quality of each issue that is eventually published!

FAIR USE NOTICE: This edition of the Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.

*     *     *     *

I'm very sad to say that, unfortunately, I haven't yet made it on the SPLC list of the 30 radical right extremists to watch. My feelings are hurt, but I'll keep trying.

Proud extremist in defense of liberty
Exclusive: Joseph Farah exults in fact 13% of SPLC enemies list are WND-affiliated
From WND Commentaries ~ By Joseph Farah ~ Published May 25, 2012

JOSEPH FARAH

When an extremist group like the Southern Poverty Law Center labels you one of the top 30 most dangerous radicals in America, you must be doing something right.

That’s the way I look at it.

If I didn’t make the list, my feelings would be hurt.

But what is it that makes me such a dangerous, right-wing leader to Morris Dees and company?

Do you know what my political views are?

They are a mirror reflection of those of America’s Founding Fathers.

That’s how far we’ve come in America in the last 223 years since our Constitution was ratified and George Washington was sworn in as our first president. Today, the values of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and the rest of those who sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to birth liberty in the New World are considered “dangerous,” “radical,” “right-wing,” “extremist” – at least by the standards of SPLC Inc.

Isn’t that amazing?

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

Rehash Obama's past? You bet we should!
Exclusive: Erik Rush is hopeful that educating Americans will yield opposition to prez
From WND Commentary ~ By Erik Rush ~ Published May 23rd, 2012

ERIK RUSH

A few days ago, news junkies learned of a story [see video below] that has since picked up momentum, and whose accompanying video segment has gone viral online. This involves a North Carolina high school student named Hunter Rogers, who was berated by his teacher after he questioned her on the relevance of President Obama’s past versus that of presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney. The teacher went medieval, alternately belittling and threatening Rogers while spewing inane propaganda and inaccuracies in a classic shrill, histrionic fit.

Whether this teacher is intellectually challenged, or was having some sort of emotional episode, the question of whether or not she ought to retain her teaching credentials should be taken seriously, since instructors like her are a significant part of the reason for social unconsciousness on the part of Americans in general. If you’ve not had the opportunity to listen to this exchange, you’re really missing out, because it exemplifies not only the abysmal level of competence on the part of some of our educators, but the irrational allegiance some Obama supporters have to him.

As the reader may have noticed, elements of the press have picked up on news stories and commentary relating to President Obama’s myriad radical associations over the years, the fact that these were overlooked (to put it extremely mildly) during the 2008 campaign, and that candidate Obama was never properly vetted.

Some believe that this pursuit is folly, not only from the vantage point of being old news, but reasoning that if it didn’t gain any traction the first time around, it is unlikely to do so now. Then, there is the inevitability that the left will accuse anyone so doing of beating a dead horse out of antipathy for the president, racism and things of this nature.

Leaving aside the double standard that most certainly exists with regard to everyone but Obama being fair game for public scrutiny, there are a few reasons I disagree with these assessments. I believe that there is potentially a great deal to be gained by rehashing Obama’s history and, given the stakes, every reason to include it in our proverbial arsenal.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

RELATED VIDEO:

[Please note that there is some explicitly offensive language in this video. I wish I could apologize for the embarrassing speech, but I can't.  You know, the use of profanity could never happen in a public school. No teacher could keep his or her job, and we know the offending student would be immediately expelled...  Wait!  Really?  Okay, well, that was how it was when I was in school.

To save you a little time, I found that the really juicy rhetoric begins at about 6:00 into the video.]

Teacher yells at student because of a question he asked about Obama!

Video provided by rossache19 on May 14, 2012

*    *    *    *

The Intolerance of Liberalism
From RushLimbaugh.com Archives ~ Rush Limbaugh transcript ~ Published May 21, 2012

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I'm sitting here thinking more about the ideology of intolerance, the classic liberal. That intolerant teacher in North Carolina was a bully, telling her students that it was criminal to criticize Obama. You know, when you get right down to it, maybe one of the best ways to explain liberalism to the uninitiated is to simply say that it is intolerant. It's a philosophy of "no." It's a philosophy of domination and "no," and it's not at all what people think it is.

It's not open-mindedness. It's not tolerance. It's not good intentions. It's not sweetness and light and love and all that. It's a philosophy of "no." It is intolerant. Socialism, fascism, communism, all forms of liberalism dictate behavior. You must conform. Individuals? Private businesses? You must conform to what they say. And if you don't they'll pass laws and regulations that force you to. And in order to have uniformity, there must be an enforcement mechanism, because people are not the same.

People don't want the same things. They don't believe the same things. But if you are going to have uniformity -- which is what liberalism wants, 'cause that's equality to them: everybody being the same. Outcomes especially. Being the same. Nobody richer than anybody else. If you are to have that, you must have an enforcement mechanism that shuts down what? Creativity, choice, and innovation. You have to shut down all the things that differentiate people.

And in a free society, the things that differentiate people are creativity, choice, and innovation. And that has to be shut down. That is why, folks, an ever-expanding government is job one for liberals. Whatever expands government, whatever makes it bigger: Global warming, feminism, amnesty for illegals, whatever. Whatever needs more regulation, whatever needs more control, is sought "for the common good" and uniformity.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

Why these are the last days
Exclusive: Mychal Massie points to media, education, government, rejection of God
From WND Commentary ~ By Mychal Massie ~ Published May 21, 2012

MYCHAL MASSIE

Looking forward based on the zeitgeist of today, there is no small amount of oratorical and ecclesiastical commentary, but I will still offer my thoughts pursuant to same.

My first thought is that those blacks crying that “they can’t get a break because of the color of their skin, they ain’t got no job, and the white man’s holding blacks down,” should do the following: Shut up, stop making excuses, remove the racial blinders, and take a good look around them. As long as Fox News sanctions the raw racism of the Marxist-negress Jehmu Greene and gives credibility to the Sharptons and Jacksons – black people have no leg to stand on when it comes to the oft-voiced mantra “white racism.”

My second thought – no one population group enjoys a more transpicuous double standard of overt racism than is permitted blacks. Black racism is endorsed by ignoring and denying it; malevolent anti-social behavior is encouraged vis-a-vis identifying same as the resultant latent effect of white oppression, and self-segregation is celebrated.

Specific to those points, the cultural divide could be transmogrified into a colorblind and inclusive America, but a rabid Marxist-negress like Jehmu Greene doesn’t want that. Emblematic of her kind (think the Obamas and the Alinskyites), they need victims in order for them to brand others as oppressors – which in turn allows them to foment cries of injustice, allowing them to define and determine the remedy to end oppression. For those like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, it enables them to live lifestyles that 99 percent of blacks cannot begin to imagine. For Fox News, it allows them to subvert and destabilize any hopes of a quick ending of racial animus and disharmony any time soon.

For all of the tax dollars and foolish theorization of how to teach children, public schools are best described as early breeding grounds for future radicals, the home of teachers who will go on strike at a moment’s notice, but the majority of whom cannot teach their way out of a one-student class. [See the video I included above, "Teacher yells at student..."]  Based on the students graduating from most public schools today, it will be a very long time before American students enjoy the lofty positions of academic excellence those of my generation enjoyed – unless, of course, one counts the growing intrusion of homosexuality, child predators and teacher-student sex as academic achievement.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

As a citizen journalist who is only trying to inform my fellow Americans who will bother to vote on November 6, 2012, I made the decision to include this column by Robert Ringer. It is my hope that teachers like the one in the classroom trying to indoctrinate the supposed mush-minded students (see the video above), who tried to tell Hunter Rogers that he is not allowed to criticize the President (that law, of course, only applies to Republicans), will go apoplectic when they read this. That's my goal, along with getting on that SPLC list of radical right-wing extremists.

Obama and Stalin: How they're alike
Exclusive: Robert Ringer sees both leaders as soulless beneficiaries of propaganda
From WND Commentaries ~ By Robert Ringer ~ Published May 30, 2012

ROBERT RINGER

There have been scores of books that have attempted to pull the media mask off of Barack Obama and reveal the naked communist that resides within him. Some, like Dinesh D’Souza’s “The Roots of Obama’s Rage” and Stanley Kurtz’s “Radical-in-Chief,” have been especially revealing.

None of these works, however, has come as close to entrapping the purveyor of the biggest political scam in U.S. history as Edward Klein’s new book, “The Amateur.” I have to admit I was surprised when I saw that the book had risen to No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list, even though the far-left media have virtually ignored it.

But give credit where credit is due. The New York Times, as it has done throughout its long history, once again placed the integrity of its industry-standard best-seller list above its ideological beliefs.

Though they are trying hard not to acknowledge the existence of Klein’s book, the left-wing media by now must be quietly apoplectic – especially when reading about Klein’s tell-all, three-hour interview with Jeremiah Wright. Among other revelations, Wright told Klein he was offered $150,000 by an Obama surrogate to keep his mouth shut during Obama’s run for president.

Tens of millions of us unenlightened folks realized early on that the Barack Obama the media had invented was a total fraud. To borrow Obama’s own words from his book “Dreams from My Father,” he was, from his first day in public office, “a spy behind enemy lines.”

Though he was actually referring to his time in corporate America when he wrote those words, his background, as well as his words and actions since becoming president, make it clear that Obama considers the real enemy to be the United States of America. Which means that the day he was sworn into office (you know, when he promised to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States), he became the enemy from within who immediately had access to every top-secret U.S. document.

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Depends on what the meaning of the word 'destroy' is ~ By Erik Rush

Progressives (American neo-Marxists) have long known that given the American sociopolitical dynamic, this nation would require a significantly different "undoing" than would Egypt, a European nation or some Central American banana republic, for them to effectively actualize their vision. This is what they have been working toward for decades, and what the Obama administration has accelerated dramatically since 2009.

Americans want comfort and stability – in some cases, even more than their liberty – and this attitude has been encouraged by liberals over the years via the psychology of dependency and entitlement. So, just how unpleasant will things have to get before the American people become willing to trade their remaining liberties for food, fuel, medicine and safety from hordes of gang-bangers and looters?

Erik tries to assure his readers that when he and others talk about Obama "destroying" America, it isn't meant as physical destruction. And really, it hasn't just been Obama that is responsible, though he may be the progressive that finally pushes America over the edge of the cliff. The progressives have spent the last century eroding away the American spirit that has kept this country free.

Depends on what the meaning of the word 'destroy' is

ERIK RUSH

By Erik Rush

February 17, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

As America's economic and geopolitical situation becomes more and more grave, conservative and libertarian-leaning observers become baffled and at odds with each other over their respective analysis of the Obama administration's policies.

President Obama's nauseatingly contrite foreign policy and appeasement of Islamists have emboldened our enemies worldwide, and it may well be years before we know to what degree this has factored into recent events in Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Yemen, Tunisia and other Middle Eastern nations. His singleminded determination to continue "spending while the economy burns" (whilst attempting to convince us that he is being prudent) appears nothing less than madness to many.

However, the charge made by some (including myself) that the president is intent upon "destroying America" has invited ridicule, since the left and the press in particular typically paint all Obama detractors with a very wide brush. Logically, of course, it doesn't make any sense that a world leader of any political persuasion would intentionally destroy his country.

Well, this would depend upon what the meaning of the word "destroy" is.

If the meaning of "destroy" is turning America into a barren, smoldering, toxic moonscape from coast to coast, something out of "The Road Warrior" or "Resident Evil," then Obama almost certainly does not wish to destroy America. This paradigm of destruction would be dismissed by Americans as ludicrous – at least as far as someone wanting to bring it about intentionally.

But there are other kinds of destruction. A family can be destroyed without its members being slaughtered and their house burned down. Varying brands of calamity and/or dysfunction have served to consign family units to a state of non-being. It happens all the time. Similarly, nations throughout history have been destroyed without the wholesale annihilation of their people, their farms being burned and their cities razed to the ground.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

What now, Glenn Beck? ~ By Robert Ringer

I believe Beck when he says he will never give up. I believe him when he says if he is forced off television, he will find another platform that is even bigger. I believe him when he says he is willing to die if that's the consequence for speaking the truth.

Those are Robert Ringer's words found in this column, and I agree completely with those thoughts. In fact, I found myself enthusiastically nodding in total agreement with Robert all the way through the column.

What is sad is that the only people who will ever know just how historic the event was are those who were in attendance, because, as I said at the outset, the media coverage was shameful.

Oh wait, Robert, there ARE some people that understand the historic significance of the Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Rally that weren't there. I was there in spirit, as I am sure many were. Which reminds me, it was more than historical significance that was involved. There was also a very strong spiritual significance that was very easy for me to understand, see, and feel. I was able to watch the entire event on my computer through the live Ustream video feed that Beck had set up on Facebook. I also recorded the C-SPAN video feed on to my TiVo which I used to make the videos that you will see below.

As Robert mentions, he was there. And I watched it all, and there in spirit. However, I would be willing to bet that Al Sharpton or anyone in the press who was critical of the event haven't seen ten minutes of the Restoring Honor rally. And if you have only read about it in the mainstream liberal press, then I have something for you to see, even though it is only the tip of the iceberg. However, the nearly 30 minutes of video that you can watch below will at least show you that there was more meaning to it than Al Sharpton or the liberal press would tell you. In other words, hold your criticism until you see the whole picture! (HINT: Click on the C-SPAN link above to see the whole picture!)

Hold your criticism until you see the whole picture - Part 1


Hold your criticism until you see the whole picture - Part 2


Hold your criticism until you see the whole picture - Part 3

The above videos provided by TheREALjohnny2k

The question that Robert asks, "What now, Glenn Beck?" is an important one, and neither Robert nor I can answer that. We're not sure that Glenn even knows. But, we do know who does know: God! And I am pretty sure that Glenn Beck will be playing a very big part in a spiritual war, "a showdown between good and evil." Just sayin'...

I pray that Glenn Beck will not lose his eyesight, but if it should happen, I believe he will become more powerful than ever and thus an even a greater force for good. If this tragic circumstance should occur, I believe he will see it as a Jobian moment – a Divine test of his belief. It could, in fact, be the very thing that spurs him to run for president, despite the fact that he has clearly stated he has "zero interest in the job."

Anyone interested in human nature cannot help but find it fascinating that many of the greatest men and women throughout history have been vilified and hated by a large percentage of the population. And whenever that be the case, you can count on an equally large segment of the population adoring that same person. It's a scenario that fits Glenn Beck to a T.

The details of how the Beck saga unfolds from this point forward are unknown, but one thing is certain: His journey will continue to be an historic one. Something is happening in this country that has never happened before – at least in my lifetime. It almost tempts one to say that it's a showdown between good and evil.

What now, Glenn Beck?

By Robert Ringer

Posted: September 03, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



The way the media covered Glenn Beck's 8/28 Restoring Honor rally at the Lincoln Memorial is shameful, but not unexpected. That said, as clueless as Geraldo Rivera is, I'll give him credit for covering the event extensively.

But never underestimate Geraldo's ability to come up with absurdities. In this case, the absurdity was to have Al Sharpton as a guest on his show Saturday night – for the full hour! – to comment on the Beck rally and compare it to his own "Reclaim the Dream" rally on the same day.

I found it highly insulting to have the format of the show be a comparison between Beck's historic gathering and Sharpton's anemic attempt to recreate a 1960s-style civil-rights march. What made it even more pathetic was that every time Sharpton spoke on Geraldo's show, he had something negative to say about Beck or the Restoring Honor event. He came across as an angry, unknowledgeable child desperately in search of a scapegoat for his own lack of accomplishments.

Quite obviously, I was not at the Sharpton rally, but numerous reports from creditable sources place attendance in the 2,000-3,000 range. By contrast, the Beck event – which I did attend – drew a minimum of 500,000 people. (Trust me, minimum.) What is sad is that the only people who will ever know just how historic the event was are those who were in attendance, because, as I said at the outset, the media coverage was shameful.

The entire three hours of the Restoring Honor rally was filled with a spirit of goodwill and inclusiveness, with a focus on God as the answer to restoring the greatness that once signified America. By contrast, Sharpton's pitiful attempt to counter the Beck rally was (according to news reports) filled with the same old angry rhetoric that smacks of black liberation theology. (You know, "You must give back that which you have taken.")

READ FULL STORY

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

A nation divided ~ By Henry Lamb

There are some things I think that I should clarify before you read Henry's column.

The first clarification is that Henry wrote, in the second paragraph, that "Restoring Honor," Glenn Beck's 8/28 event, "was planned months ago to celebrate the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King's 1963 'I Have a Dream' speech." Actually, no, that isn't what it was about at all. As seen on the "Restoring Honor" facebook page, there would be a much better explanation for the event:

Throughout history America has seen many great leaders and noteworthy citizens change her course. It is through their personal virtues and by their example that we can live as a free country. On August 28th, come celebrate America by honoring our heroes, our heritage and our future.

Join the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and many more for this non-political event that pays tribute to America’s service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.

Our freedom is possible only if we remain virtuous. Help us restore the values that founded this great nation. Come join us on August 28th in our pledge to restore honor at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C.

Okay, now that we have THAT slight error in the column taken care of, there is one more little statement that needs to be attended to for the sake of clarifying what the liberal media want people to believe. Though I don't think that it was intentional, Henry wrote, in speaking about Sharpton's event called "Reclaim the Dream," that his people put out a call to "black organizations to come to Washington to out-demonstrate Beck's event". That somewhat distorts the meaning of the "Restoring Honor" rally. Glenn's event wasn't what should be called a "demonstration." Sharpton and the mainstream media would like you to believe that "Restoring Honor" was a political event, a tea party "demonstration," but that is very far from the truth. Actually, if they wanted to call the Beck event a "come-to-Jesus revival meetin'," I wouldn't have a problem with that. In fact, I would celebrate it! And I did celebrate it, and I did shout out to Jesus yesterday morning while watching it! Just sayin'...

The nation is sharply divided. The upcoming elections provide an opportunity to reject the Hobbes-Rousseau-Marx-Sharpton-Obama vision of a society enslaved by an omnipotent government. It may be our last chance.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: August 28, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

To see the nation divided, watch the people who gather today at the Lincoln Memorial to hear Glenn Beck and the people who gather at Dunbar High School to hear the Rev. Al Sharpton.. Beck and his group want to restore the principles of the founders; Sharpton and his group want to transform America into a progressive utopia.

Beck's demonstration, dubbed "Restoring Honor," was planned months ago to celebrate the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King's 1963 "I Have a Dream" speech. Sharpton's coalition was outraged by the audacity of a white man – especially Glenn Beck – attempting to hijack King's dream. They immediately sent out a call to black organizations to come to Washington to out-demonstrate Beck's event with their own competing event they named "Reclaim the Dream."

Beck has used his national television program to promote King's idea that all people should be measured by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin. Were Sharpton and his colleagues following King's teachings, they would be attending Beck's event, not trying to belittle it by scheduling dueling demonstrations. King worked to achieve a color-blind society; Sharpton and his followers are working to secure special status for blacks. King worked to remove the social bonds that enslaved black people; Sharpton and his colleagues are working to enslave black people to ever-more government handouts.

Skin color, however, is not what divides Americans. Americans are divided by different visions of how society should be organized. Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" demonstration seeks to restore the vision held by the founders of this great nation. Theirs was a vision of sovereign individuals voluntarily selecting representatives from among their neighbors to create a government to do only those chores enumerated in the Constitution they wrote.

Sharpton and his crowd see another vision. They see a government empowered to take whatever resources it wants from the people who have resources, to make sure that all people have at least a home, adequate food, a job with a livable wage, health care and an education.

The founders' vision celebrates individual responsibility, hard work and successful accomplishment. Sharpton's vision assumes that an individual's success was gained unfairly by taking advantage of others. The founders' vision expects people to be responsible for their own needs and to give freely of their resources to help those in need. Sharpton's vision expects government to ensure that the earth's resources are distributed equitably to everyone.

Sharpton's vision, or what he and others like to call the "progressive" agenda, is actually a holdover from the philosophy of folks such as Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Karl Marx. Hobbes believed that "The control of power must be lodged in a single person, and no individual can set their own private judgments of right and wrong in opposition to the sovereign's commands." This is the same philosophy Sharpton displays when he wants the control of power to be lodged in the federal government against which no private judgments of right or wrong may be lodged against the government's command. This is why it is so terribly important for Sharpton's Democratic Party to be in control of the government. When Democrats control government, the Hobbes-Rousseau-Marx philosophy always prevails. When Republicans control government, the Hobbes-Rousseau-Marx philosophy prevails only some of the time.

Glenn Beck is looking far beyond Democrats and Republicans, all the way back to the founders who constructed this nation on the principles of freedom they considered to be essential: 1) recognition that the right to life, liberty and property is a gift from the Creator, 2) that government is a creation of free people and is empowered only by the consent of the governed, and 3) government is best that governs least.

Listen to this column online.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The blackface of tyranny ~ By Erik Rush

I almost didn't post this to the blog this morning. But after reading it several times, I felt assured that it was not racist. In fact, I quickly realized that much of the "racism" actually comes from those that have co-opted the politics of African-Americans, leading their population along a road to ruin by the Marxist programs. Erik says it better than me, so read what he has to say about the blackface of tyranny.

President Obama's socialistic governance is but one train stop on the way toward a wholesale implementation of Marxism in America. As long as we retain a system whereby an unpopular government may be removed by the electorate, however, the vision of Obama and those like him will remain in jeopardy.

And don't think for a minute that they aren't aware of this.

By Erik Rush

Posted: April 01, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

First of all, then we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama.

– Rev. Al Sharpton, March 21, 2010

Regarding Al Sharpton's above remark (made immediately after the passage of the health-care "reform" bill by the House of Representatives): First of all, then I have to say that the fact that Al Sharpton has secured sufficient credibility to be considered for consultation by respected national news venues is disgusting and shameful. In addition to epitomizing "the n-word," this is a man whose claim to fame is having attempted to frame police officers for a brutal felony in order to foment racial tension and advance his agenda of personal aggrandizement.

Let's get that straight right now … then we can go on to the fact that Obama's presidential win was a slim one, and that he was widely and deceptively sold to American voters as a centrist, rather than a socialist or a Marxist. The American public overwhelmingly want nothing to do with either.

I remember 30 years ago, when I would occasionally find myself at a private gathering, a coffee shop, or on a college campus, listening to some raggedy black nationalist ramble on about how people like them, given the opportunity, would change the U.S. into a "Marxist paradise."

Inwardly, I laughed, of course. "Like that'll ever happen," I thought.

Suffice it to say that I was wrong. You heard it here.

Because that's exactly what's taking place, though the radicals in question are not exclusively black. Although he wasn't of the raggedy variety, Barack Obama's black nationalist-cum-Marxist worldview and his overview of America was the same as those urban communists I encountered in my youth, those of the same stripe as Van Jones and William Ayers. They – like countless other uber-leftists who were insinuating themselves into the power structure at that time – despised more or less everything about America, save for the opportunities it presented them personally. Obama, like his academic mentors and peers, pursued his education with an eye on power, taking advantage of metastasizing liberal ideals and newly initiated preferential policies.

In the "perfect storm" of a press saturated with insipid leftists, popular disgust with a politically enfeebled, free-spending Republican president, and a benefactor with almost bottomless pockets (in financier George Soros), this nebbish was able to capture the presidency. Surreal, but true.

I have previously discussed the phenomenon of the left having advanced a distorted vision of black Americans – what I refer to as negrophilia – which contributed to Obama's election to no mean degree. Add to this the depth of ignorance in which black Americans continue to be mired, wherein they continue to believe that opportunists like Sharpton and Obama are their benefactors, while conservatives and Republicans are demons from the foulest depths of hell. Millions remain unaware that one of the platforms upon which the Republican Party was formed and first ran was the abolition of slavery, and that the GOP also promoted the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which the Democrats filibustered. After its passage, segregationists in the Democratic Party co-opted the civil rights agenda and enrolled black Americans in the culture of dependency, ostensibly as "restitution" for their suffering.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Limbaugh: Media 'scum' lying about fake racist quotes

From WorldNetDaily

'They ought to be ashamed of themselves – they're nothing but hacks' Posted: October 13, 2009 ~ 8:28 pm Eastern By Chelsea Schilling © 2009 WorldNetDaily Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh went on a scathing attack of news reporters today for publicizing racist-sounding remarks he never made – and he's demanding retractions and apologies from every journalist who repeated the "libelous" statements. While Al Sharpton and some NFL players try to block Limbaugh's partial acquisition of the St. Louis Rams, claiming he's used racially charged rhetoric, Limbaugh says he never made the inflammatory comments. The following is one of the alleged quotes media have attributed to Limbaugh:

I mean, let's face it, we didn't have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: Slavery built the South. I'm not saying we should bring it back; I'm just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.

Limbaugh called the statement "outrageous slander" on yesterday's program. "Slavery – indentured servitude, whatever you want to call it – is abominable, particularly in a free country," he said. "If I had said what they say I said, I would be gone. There would be nobody around." On today's show, Limbaugh declared, "The idea that somebody could reportedly say, 'Hey! Slavery is great. You know what, it keeps the streets safer at night!' in 1998 and it's only now surfacing? "I guarantee you the Clinton war room would have been all over it in 1998. This quote sat dormant for 11 years? And all of the sudden it shows up in vengeance in conjunction with a report that I am a minority participant in a bid for the St. Louis Rams?" NFL players association chief DeMaurice Smith, Al Sharpton, some players and sportswriters are protesting the possible acquisition and citing the alleged quotes as reason for their objections. In an Oct. 12 letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Sharpton accused Limbaugh of being "divisive" and "anti-NFL." Today, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell responded by saying the league doesn't want owners making racially charged statements, according to the New York Daily News. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]