Exclusive: Marco Rubio Endorses Joni Ernst For Iowa Senate ~ by Charlie Spiering

Ernst, who received national acclaim for an ad in which she says she "grew up castrating hogs on an Iowa farm," is out with a new spot in which she rides her Harley Davidson motorcycle to the gun range.

So, when I spotted this sharp candidate for the Iowa U.S. Senator spot in the GOP for the 2014 Midterm election, I knew I was on to somebody very special.

I had previously mentioned another candidate that is in the running:

The only other GOP U.S. Senate candidate in Iowa that I was aware of until yesterday was Mark Jacobs. There are six candidates running, and now I know of two. I am assuming that Jacobs' campaign is going well, as a lot of TV advertising money has been spent so far.

Weirdest thing ever: Mark Jacobs has been totally crossed off my list since my last post about Joni. Not just because I like Joni Ernst's chances, but because I found out something about Jacobs that greatly disturbed me. You see, I saw this ad on TV that said that Mark Jacobs had supported the Cap and Trade legislation that was being discussed in Congress back in 2007, while he was the CEO of an energy company. It was obviously one of those PAC ads, so I took it for what it was worth, and of course, Jacobs recently came out with an ad to respond to it. However, as it turns out, Jacobs was spinning what the ad said, saying that it took him out of context. After reading a story in the Sioux City Journal, I am totally convinced that Jacobs is now far down on my list of who I'd vote for on June 3 in the Republican primary.  He wasn't being honest, and was trying to say he was for it before he was against it:

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mark Jacobs said Thursday his stated support of a proposed federal policy to reduce carbon dioxide emissions was expressed not as an individual opinion but in his role in leading an energy conglomerate.

I'm not writing this, though, to trash Mark Jacobs. God forbid, he could still win the Republican nomination, and I would be forced to somehow vote for him next Fall over Bruce Braley.

So, back to Joni. Yes, Joni Ernst, she seems to be the one that I'd vote for in a heartbeat. (There you go, folks, now I have also endorsed her, as if it matters!) Looking at who has endorsed her, including Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and now Marco Rubio, I'd say that I'm not alone, and I'm in good company in picking an awesome candidate to be solidly in support of! Just check out Joni's new ad that just came out:



It seems to me that the more I know about Joni Ernst, the more I have to say she is the candidate of choice for anyone that wants this "type of tough, no nonsense conservative that we need in Washington," as Senator Marco Rubio says she is. I have no reason to doubt Rubio's opinion in this endorsement. I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• May 1, 2014 ~ HAYWORTH: Jacobs says cap and trade support was corporate stance

• March 26, 2014 ~ Sarah Palin Endorses Joni Ernst for U.S. Senate in Iowa

• March 26, 2014 ~ Palin Endorses Ernst in Iowa Senate Race

Exclusive: Marco Rubio Endorses Joni Ernst For Iowa Senate

by Charlie Spiering

5 May 2014, 5:57 AM PDT

On Breitbart.com

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) is endorsing Iowa’s Joni Ernst in the Republican Senate primary, Breitbart News has learned.

Ernst, an Iowa state senator, is running a close race in Iowa with Republican businessman Mark Jacobs.

“Joni is running for United States Senate in Iowa and is the type of tough, no nonsense conservative that we need in Washington,” Rubio said in an announcement highlighting the endorsement of his Reclaim America PAC.

Former Gov. Mitt Romney and former Gov. Sarah Palin have also backed Ernst, who made national headlines with a campaign video highlighting her experience in castrating hogs.

“Elected to the Iowa State Senate 2011 Joni has fought hard to cut the “pork” in Iowa which she will tell you is just second nature, being raised on a farm and handling pigs most of her life,” Rubio said.

This is the first endorsement by Rubio’s Reclaim America PAC in a Senate primary, which he described as "unique."

~~~ READ MORE at Breitbart.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

No man is an island ~ By Patrice Lewis

Ever since I first heard of any kind of environmental hysteria, which was during the Jimmy Carter years, I had my suspicions. For the last four decades of my life, I kept hearing that our dependency on foreign oil was detrimental to our national security. But yet, the same people that told us to cut back our thermostats to 60 degrees are the ones that are keeping us from drilling for our own oil. What is wrong with that picture? Do I really have to explain? It is such a contradiction of policy and public indoctrination, that how can you take environmental hysteria seriously?

And then, there is the way that our freedom keeps eroding. Erosion is a process, right? Over time, the Grand Canyon was created. Over a much shorter time, our beaches erode, and the process is accelerated with hurricanes. Well, folks, the hurricane is coming. I'm speaking of our liberty being eroded down to the bare bone before our eyes, and it will come from the far left environmental extremists.

In my humble opinion, I believe that the truth about environmental activism is that it's just a cover to justify limitations on our freedoms. I am sure that you are aware that our kids are terrified every day with the constant images of world-wide environmental catastrophes. Now that the public indoctrination centers have hooked the children, the next phase is to turn religion green:

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

I can only conclude that the Left is whittling away at our liberty. And to think, environmental hysteria is just one of the weapons of choice for the Progressives. But in this case, they have a united global front going for them, through the United Nations. Keep in mind, to paraphrase something that Ronald Reagan told us, "if America goes, you will have no where left to go for freedom." Not even a remote island. Just sayin'...

My first thought upon reading about this exercise is that the Norfolk Islanders are forfeiting their freedom for environmental slavery. It is about to become a penal colony to progressivism, an experiment in green shackles that the fascist overlords hope will spread. Today, the island. Tomorrow, the world!

The old saying "No man is an island" is certainly being underscored. As the inhabitants of Norfolk Island are about to discover, even the freedom to be left alone in the middle of nowhere is coming to an end.

No man is an island

By Patrice Lewis

November 13, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



There are two types of "green" people.

The first type live green because it's cheaper than the alternative. If they can't afford gasoline or a car, they bicycle. If they can't afford to buy food, they grow their own. If they can't afford the cost of bringing electricity to their home, they live without or go off-grid.

The second type live green ostensibly because they're concerned about the environment. Specifically, they believe humans are causing global warming and that people must scale back their lifestyles and resource consumption to live more sustainably on Mother Earth.

The biggest difference between the first and the second type of "greenies" is the first type has no interest in forcing you to live the way they do. They are simply doing what's best for their bottom line.

The second type would love nothing more than to compel you to live according to their beliefs. With nothing short of religious fervor, they try to convert you through a biased media and public-education indoctrination; and if that fails, they will force you to comply through government-backed regulations.

In short, we could describe the first group as frugal and the second group as thugs.

Keep this in mind as I introduce you to Norfolk Island, a tiny dot (population 1,800) in the middle of the vast ocean between Australia and New Zealand. Once upon a time it was a cruel place, part of Australia's penal colony system, but today it is a beautiful little jewel in the middle of the water.

I found it one evening by trolling Google Earth for isolated islands after my husband and I joked about moving when conditions in the U.S. became too socialistic. When I mentioned it in a column last year, I received a charming e-mail from a woman named Coral who invited me to visit. (Coral, if you're reading this, my e-mails back to you have always bounced. Please try contacting me again.) The impression I received is that Norfolk Island is a place I'd love to see.

But no more. Poor little Norfolk Island, it seems, is about to undergo an experiment in the name of fascism … (cough) sorry, I mean environmental activism.

The "warmies" (as the Australian environmentalists are called), with the enthusiastic participation of the Australian government, have concocted a scheme whereby the Norfolk Islanders will be issued a "carbon credit card" pre-loaded with a set amount of carbon credits to use over the course of a year. Every time the islanders buy gasoline, purchase some "fatty" imported food, or fly to the mainland to visit relatives, they get dinged. At the end of the year, those with leftover credits can sell them or cash them in, while those who used up their carbon credits early must buy more.

During the second year of the experiment, the number of carbon credits will be decreased. Ditto during the third and final year of this experiment. The goal, allegedly, is to make the islanders "trim, taut and terrifically moral." But of course, you and I know the real goal: to compel the islanders to live like good little global citizens according to the stringent and merciless criteria of the "warmies."

Reporters writing on this experiment were careful to select only cheerfully compliant people to interview about their thoughts. Garry Egger, professor of lifestyle medicine at Southern Cross University, is quick to point out his scheme will be voluntary and could provide islanders with cash for unused carbon credits. "We are not trying to impose ourselves on anybody out there," he said.

But in another article, Mr. Egger reveals his true agenda: "If (Norfolk residents) are in favour of it then it would justify scaling it up to a country level and ultimately to a world level."

Andrew Bolt, a columnist with the Herald Sun in Sydney, points out how this kind of social experiment was proposed in 2006 in Britain. The idea was endorsed and its proponents "insisted the Government defy howls of protest from mere voters." [Emphasis added.] Mr. Bolt also quotes members of Parliament as saying, "Widespread public acceptance, while desirable, should not be a pre-condition for a personal carbon trading scheme; the need to reduce emissions is simply too urgent." This was said, presumably with a straight face, before the members of Parliament were "driven off to dinner."

Australian Greens candidate Clive Hamilton believes "that climate change in the very near future will be 'so horrible that we [must] look to any possible scenario to head it off, including the canvassing of "emergency" responses such as the suspension of democratic processes.'" [Emphasis added.]

In other words, these enviro-fascists believe mythical global warming is so important that it makes for a wonderfully convenient excuse to "save the planet" through enslavement. The experiment with Norfolk Island demonstrates that environmentalists, at their core, are bullies. They want you to behave the way they dictate or else (ominous music in background).

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Presidency in free fall ~ By Herman Cain

Liberty or tyranny. Freedom or slavery. We still have the choice. Why do you think I am so desperately trying to get out the truth? Whether here or on my youtube channel, I do my best to get a whole lot of attention; not to me, but to the people that know how to make a whole lot of sense.

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

So, I put the stuff out there, as much as I have time to do, on a daily basis. Believe me, I soak in a lot more information than I can ever have time to deliver to you. Every day, I am faced with decisions about what to produce. This column or that column, this news segment or that news segment. I have to decide what will do the most good towards the goal of spreading the idea of liberty.

So, I had to make that same decision once again last night. Not only did I want to pick the right column to put on this blog, but also which videos I wanted to include with it. (That's something I have been doing a lot more of lately; putting related videos with the columns I post is a time-consuming part of the projects.)

And the most difficult thing is knowing all the disparaging of tea partiers that I would like to be able to counter, and not having any more time than I do, I have to decide what to post or upload (video) that will counter the normal everyday slander.

But to see what has happened in the last three months has broken my heart, but not my spirit. I have been saddened by a drastic decrease in the views to this blog site. But yet, maybe there is something good from that. It does not mean that somebody won't come along and say, "Hey, I never heard about this stuff before, I wasn't aware of people like Herman Cain."

It is why I do what I do. Just hoping that one of you learns something that I had to learn along the way. It isn't about gaining fame and fortune. I know I am not going to reach millions of people. I'll leave that to the professionals, like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Herman Cain. Just sayin'...

Many congressional Democrats running for re-election are distancing themselves from the president, the health-care deform bill and the Cap-and-Trade-and-Tax-and-Kill bill. And they don't even talk about all of the spending, which has not been the solution to economic growth. In fact, they want to spend more!

And now the Democrats have decided to wait until after the November elections to pass legislation on the expiring current tax rates. This is a signal that the president and the Democrats are going to raise taxes. We just do not know whether it will be on all of us or some of us.

Instead of a parachute, this president and Congress are determined to put this economy and nation into a nose dive.

Presidency in free fall

By Herman Cain

Posted: September 27, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010



In less than two years, this presidency has produced an unprecedented turnover rate of top administration advisers, a failed stimulus spending bill, failed economic policies that have left the economy stalled, much higher than expected unemployment, a hugely unpopular health-care bill, a financial regulatory deform bill, a list of expensive and poorly executed populist programs that flopped, out-of-control federal spending, uncertainty about success with the war in Afghanistan and increased tensions with Iran, North Korea and China.

Millions of voters have come to realize that this presidency lacks leadership, direction, decisiveness, economic urgency and, most of all, solutions. This combination of deficiencies has produced a more than uninspired citizenry, except for the most loyal and misled supporters of the president.

And just like the Obama supporter who confronted the president at a supposedly friendly town-hall meeting last week, people are exhausted from listening to all of the failed attempts to spin failures into successes with speeches and media sound bites.

A disheartened Obama supporter called my radio show last week and asked if I could name one thing that Obama had done right, since it seemed to him that all I talk about are the things that have not worked. I honestly tried to think of something significantly positive, but I could not. There have been too many disappointments and broken campaign promises.

This presidency is in free-fall, which means this nation is in free-fall.

But after further reflection, there is something this presidency has inspired. With the help of an incompetently led Congress, Obama has successfully awakened a citizen's movement that has stunned the political establishment in both parties.

Herman Cain : We the People

Video provided by GAFrontPage

The political establishment and the Obama media call it those tea-party people. They can't seem to understand why people are upset. Maybe they're not listening.

The administration, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, other Democrats, the Obama mainstream media and other liberals have responded to the citizens' movement with nothing but name-calling attacks on the tea-party people. Those tactics have not worked. In fact, they appear to have further energized the citizen's movement. Demonization and intimidation of "We the People" is not working.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

The Great Pretender ~ By Robert Ringer

It is always more fun putting these blogs together when there is a relevant video to include, especially one that is entertaining. This one here was the perfect fit for Robert's column:

The Platters - The Great Pretender

Video provided by bintangtheater1

Of course, as fun as it is to entertain you for a few moments, I don't want the above video to distract you from what Robert was saying in this column. I noticed that Robert was mentioning Huckabee's show last week, where "He paraded out one guest after another – entrepreneurs, inventors, engineers and chemists – to present remarkable solutions for cleaning up the oil in the Gulf." And yet, Obama did nothing. It reminded me of what I wrote regarding Erik Rush's column last night, "It's the sabotage, stupid!" I wrote:

It's probably just me, but it's almost as if the Obama administration allowed the oil rig disaster and resulting spill to get as bad as it is so that there would be a much bigger crisis that they wouldn't let go to waste.

And this column by Robert Ringer seems to be even more support for my suspicions. Just sayin'...

Obama has been following FDR's dictatorial playbook to the T. In his 1937 inaugural address, at a time when unemployment was still rising (15 percent on Inauguration Day), FDR bodaciously said, "Our progress out of the Depression is obvious."

Sound familiar? It should. With the economy on the verge of total collapse, The Great Pretender continues to look his teleprompters in the eye and tell Americans how he's saved the country from a depression and that "the worst is now behind us." He always sounds so darn convincing when he says these things, but I hear through the White House grapevine that on at least one occasion after slinging this kind of B.S., he was overheard singing to himself in the Oval Office:

Oh yes, I'm the great pretender,
Pretending that I'm doing well.
My need is such, I pretend too much,
I'm lonely but no one can tell.

Lacking a really great crisis, The Great Pretender, hopefully, is going to feel a lot lonelier starting next January.

By Robert Ringer

Posted: June 18, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The Marxmeister in the White House now says he takes full responsibility for ending the oil mess in the Gulf. He also says he wants to "know whose a-- to kick," that he "can't suck it up with a straw," and … well, you know … the ongoing narcissistic spiel – "I, me, my … blah, blah, blah" – day after day, week after week, ad nauseam.

Watching his recent performances on the Gulf oil disaster made me think about a monster hit The Platters had in the '50s called "The Great Pretender." Little did they know that the champion Great Pretender wouldn't even be born until 1961 – probably in Kenya … but, then, no one is really sure about that because no one is allowed to see his birth certificate.

Everyone but 1) those on the far left, 2) Bill O'Reilly and 3) the loons (O'Reilly's word) who have yet to return from lunch realizes that The Great Pretender has had a Marxist agenda since even before his pot-smoking days at Columbia. Names like Wright, Ayers, Lloyd, Dunn, Sunstein, Holdren and Jones (both Jeff and Van) are well-known to those who have taken the trouble to learn about The Great Pretender's agenda.

As ever more people come to realize that the country has been hijacked by this angry young Marxist, many would argue that a better title for him might be The Great Reactor. Obama listens to the news – especially Fox News – then reacts to his critics by saying or doing whatever they accuse him of not saying or doing, or by changing his tune regarding something he's said or done that offends too many people. Sort of humorous to watch – if the fate of an entire country were not at stake, that is.

Perhaps I'm getting soft with age, but I almost feel sorry for The Great Pretender. His flipping and flopping and spinning and twisting and contradictions have become downright embarrassing. He's Abbott and Costello and Laurel and Hardy all rolled into one. I admit it – I'm truly embarrassed for him.

Now, of all people, Mike Huckabee – continuing his swift turnabout in an effort to make voters forget about his slobbering interview of Michelle Obama (who, he tried to convince us, wakes up every morning frantically worrying about childhood obesity) – has succeeded in making The Great Pretender look like an incompetent, arrogant boob.

Hopefully, you saw The Huckster's show last weekend. He paraded out one guest after another – entrepreneurs, inventors, engineers and chemists – to present remarkable solutions for cleaning up the oil in the Gulf. It truly was amazing to watch the simplicity of the methods presented, as contrasted with The Great Pretender's spending his time talking about kicking a--, wagging his finger at everyone and bending over and picking up a lonely tar ball on the beach in his daily photo-ops.

Was the oil spill really just an accident? Probably. BP America Chairman and President Lamar McKay recently said that it was caused by "a failed piece of equipment." I'll buy that, at least for now. But it doesn't matter. Rahm never said that you have to create a crisis. He already knew there are crises popping up all the time. All he said was that you should never allow a good one to go to waste.

In the case of the BP oil accident, it was a slam-dunk. More to the point, it was like unlocking the door to the EPA's cage. Obviously – surprise, surprise – offshore drilling is now out of the question, right?

So it puts a few hundred thousand people out of work (ripple effect) … so what? The progressive must do what he must do to protect "the people," even if it means taking away their jobs and giving them higher gas prices to boot. What in the world would we do without government to protect us?

So, yes, the BP crisis will not be wasted if it results in an end to offshore drilling. Nevertheless, I think The Great Pretender is going to have to come up with another crisis – or two – before November to pull off a number of miracles for the Demagogic Party.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

It's the sabotage, stupid! ~ By Erik Rush

It's probably just me, but it's almost as if the Obama administration allowed the oil rig disaster and resulting spill to get as bad as it is so that there would be a much bigger crisis that they wouldn't let go to waste. And then Obama used his Oval Office speech to push cap and trade. This column by Erik Rush seems to support that theory. So does the fact that other countries that have the ability to assist the United States and offered their assistance were turned down. The administration's claim was that it would have violated the Jones Act, which doesn't hold water, or oil for that matter, because the act could have been waived. Just sayin'...

I don't think the Deepwater Horizon oil rig itself was sabotaged to cause this disaster – but it has no doubt been perceived as most convenient by the administration. The hitch is that, unless Obama plans to seize power through a coup, Americans are already so disgusted with him that they're likely to be ready to run him out of Washington on a rail by November 2010, let alone 2012.

So, while visions of cars from "The Jetsons" dance in some Americans' heads, let us remain focused on communicating to our neighbors what this administration is really about and doing our part to derail the obscenity that is cap-and-trade.

By Erik Rush

Posted: June 17, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

This is really getting a little tedious.

Along with millions of Americans, on Tuesday night, I watched President Obama's Oval Office address to the nation on the subject of the Gulf oil spill and the "multitude of challenges" our nation currently faces. I happened to be in the "green room" of a network-news studio with a bunch of pro analysts; the opportunity to gauge their reactions proved quite valuable.

Of course, I already have a good idea of what average Americans are thinking (as opposed to pro analysts); I hear from them all the time. And it wasn't long at all before the American people – in interviews, the blogosphere and messages to their favorite pundits – began delivering their own analysis. This, not surprisingly, was very similar to what I had heard from the pros – prior to their having even hit the airwaves.

The American people – like me and those celebrated analysts – believe that Obama is simply using the Gulf oil-spill crisis to further his agenda, that being the comprehensive government takeover of as many areas of the private sector as possible and implementing big-government collectivism. Some call this communism.

Although the president appears to be ignoring what the capriciousness of his actions suggests, it was not difficult for even the least attentive viewer of his speech to discern that his plan to create additional bureaucracy to oversee the oil industry, penalize British Petroleum for its part in the crisis and tout alternative energy solutions is merely a tissue-thin ruse for exploiting the situation toward further advancement of his malevolent program.

We can't afford not to change how we produce and use energy. …

– President Obama, June 15

I was almost shocked that Obama stooped to employing this overused multilevel marketer's platitude as part of his rationale. Well, we did ask for transparency, and Tuesday night's oratory was about as transparent as this president is going to get. His hawking the necessity for America to begin the wholesale use of inefficient, expensive alternative energy sources was clearly Obama-speak for passing cap-and-trade, which promises to do for America what it did for Europe – transfer massive amounts of taxpayer wealth to governments and their chosen energy-industry bed buddies for a hundred years to come.

The transition to clean energy has the potential to grow our economy and create millions of good, middle-class jobs. …

– President Obama, June 15

The president is well aware that this statement is rubbish. The so-called transition to clean energy has the potential to create millions of government jobs for former ACORN employees and volunteers, and other individuals of their questionable character, and little more than this in the short term.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

He wasn't just whistling Dixie ~ By Henry Lamb

In this column, Henry tells us more about what Barack Obama meant by fundamentally transforming the United States of America. And folks, it isn't good. As you will read, and see (be sure to refer to the videos at the bottom of this page!), you will find out that despite what BHO says in scripted speeches about being for "free markets," when he's not at his teleprompter, he has a tendency to say what he really believes.

By Novemember 2, 2010, it is our hope that all citizens that don't believe in Socialism or Marxism will vote all of those people out of office. If you know somebody that doesn't understand that Socialism and Marxism results in the loss of their freedom, please make sure that they know before the election in November. And if they don't want to believe that Obama and his minions are Marxists, show them columns like this. It is up to us to make sure people are educated.

Henry Lamb doesn't write these columns just for the money. He is doing his best to give us the tools to educate those that may otherwise be ignorant of what is going on. It is then up to us to make sure we share the information (like what I am doing at this very moment). Just sayin'...

The fundamental change Obama promised is this: a change from America's historic constitutional republic form of government to a new, modernized Marxism delivered in little bites with nifty new sound-good names: health-care reform; card check; smart growth; cap-and-trade; comprehensive planning; and a laundry list of additional schemes, plans, and programs, all designed to tighten the government noose around the neck of every citizen.

Obama meant what he said, and he is doing exactly what he said he would do. He is fundamentally transforming the United States of America. He will undoubtedly continue this transformation until the voters transform the Marxist majority that now dominates Washington. Nov. 2 is fumigation day.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: May 15, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

He said he would "fundamentally transform the United States of America." He wasn't just whistling Dixie. He meant what he said, and he set out to do it the minute he took office.

People close to him knew exactly what he meant and what he intended to do, and were ecstatic at the opportunity to vote for him. The vast majority of the black community who voted for him had no idea what he meant, but voted for him anyway because he was black. Southern Democrats had no idea what he meant, but voted for him anyway because he was not a Republican. Independents thought he meant that he would "change" the process in Washington and offer some "hope" for political integrity.

What he meant is now painfully clear: Obama is on a mission to transform the government of the United States of America into a government based on Marxist principles, acting to achieve Marxist objectives, using the Marxist tactic: whatever it takes.

Obama is quick to ridicule (See Video 1 below) those who point out his socialist leanings. But in unguarded, unscripted moments – without the benefit of his teleprompter – he reveals what he really believes (See Video 2 below) about "spreading the wealth" and limiting personal income.

He went even further in a recent speech, explaining that we have to rebuild the economy on a stronger foundation. There is no stronger foundation, of course, than a market in which people are free to become willing buyers of products and services from willing sellers at prices mutually agreed upon. It is precisely when government begins to "improve" upon this concept that the market begins to weaken and becomes less than free.

Obama says he believes in markets that are "free and open" to all who are willing to work. Then he explains how he believes that government should intervene (See Video 3 below) in those markets to make them stronger. He says, for example, that government should provide loans to students to pay for tuition. Why?

There is no authority within the Constitution for the federal government to lend money to individuals. Moreover, in a free market, if there is a demand for tuition loans, the market will provide those loans. Government has neither authority nor need to be in the student-loan business. Nonetheless, Obama has put the private student lenders out of business and put the federal government in business where it has no business being.

Why? Obama's Marxist philosophy dictates that the more government controls, the better life is for all. If government controls student loans, then students will study in the fields government wants to exploit and will not study in those areas government wants society to avoid.

Obama believes that government should fund "basic research" and provide "incentives" for development in energy. This is not belief in a free market as he says; this is market manipulation, which is the essence of Marxism.

A free market cannot tolerate tax levies placed on certain products to discourage their use, while providing subsidies for other products to encourage their use. Nevertheless, government maintains enormous bureaucracies to intervene in the market with extensive taxes and subsidies in an effort to control the market.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

RELATED VIDEOS:

Video 1 - Ridicule

Video provided by PresidentObama3

Video 2 - He reveals what he really believes about "spreading the wealth" and limiting personal income.

Video provided by henryzeke

Video 3 - How he believes that government should intervene

Video provided by henryzeke

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

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

It's government that has 'made enough money' ~ By Erik Rush

If you didn't figure it out back when Barack Obama told "Joe the Plumber" that he wanted to "spread the wealth around," the President is a bit more to the left of being a Socialist. Now he says that at a certain point, "you've made enough money." That should be the evidence you need to verify that the President doesn't honestly believe in prosperity for anyone but a certain few (like employees of Goldman Sachs or Fannie and Freddie). Prosperity for the government, in Obama's mind, is the power that the government can gain by being able to "serve man," and the control over the people that is the obvious result.


For your enjoyment, I found the "To Serve Man" episode at CBS.com, and have that linked for you.

This comes to mind again when one considers the climate legislation (cap-and-trade) this administration and congressional leaders have in the hopper. It's entirely baseless and has been advanced utilizing fear-based environmental propaganda, but it stands to benefit government hacks and their unscrupulous cronies in the private sector, while economically raping working Americans and small business – so it's very much on the table.

Well, I think at a certain point, you've made enough money.

– President Obama, April 29, 2010

Well, Mr. President, at this certain point, a lot of us think the government has made enough money, although it obviously hasn't come by that money honestly.

By Erik Rush

Posted: May 13, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

On May 11, President Obama announced his nominee for the Supreme Court vacancy being left by Justice John Paul Stevens. As one would expect, due public assessment of Solicitor General Elena Kagan's record, skills and political alignment ensued in the press and cyberspace. Among conservatives, certain red flags went up concerning some of her views.

While the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is a significant development – particularly in the case of this president – my reaction was what many might call blasé. Not a big yawn, but close. Kagan's a typical big-government progressive, though perhaps not as far left as the president might have chosen. Other than that, she's just another academic with no dynamic experience in her field.

As much as some on the right may recoil at the statement, Kagan's lack of experience is, in the practical sense, something of a "so what?" After all: this is the administration with no experience in government or business that thinks the government ought to control business.

Someone as gifted as Elena could easily have settled into a comfortable life in a corporate law practice; instead, she chose a life of service.


– President Barack Obama, May 10, 2010

While Obama's little speech was peppered with numerous references to instances wherein Kagan had facilitated the government's protection of the American people from big, bad corporate abusers, my characteristically fertile mind cued in on Obama's very liberal use of the verb "to serve" in reference to Kagan. It wasn't the first time I'd heard him make such references.

The regular reader of this space will be familiar with my occasional use of popular culture analogies to clarify America's various difficulties – so here's another:

In the March 2, 1962, installment of the television series "The Twilight Zone," the Earth is visited by an advanced race of beings who promptly solve all of humanity's most pressing troubles. Thus, the visiting spacemen have no problem enlisting grateful humans to visit their home planet, supposedly an Edenic paradise.

The decidedly disturbing closing scene features a shipload of humans blasting off, as a horrified human translator unsuccessfully attempts to stop them. Turns out he had just finished translating one of the aliens' tomes, a book entitled "To Serve Man."

"It's a cookbook!" he screams after them. It's the last words they will hear from Earth.

My personal spiritual bent places a high value on service; then, there's the writer in me that warily scrutinizes the words people use. In any case, that's the way I have come to view politicians' lofty claims of the high calling they claim to honor in service to the American people.

Truly, their idea of service far more resembles food service than civil service. Perhaps it is the profusion of misrepresentations and abject lies that our president generates that has precipitated my contemplation on this, though Obama is certainly not the only one currently employing that sort of rhetoric.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

RINOS' last stand in California ~ By Roger Hedgecock

Though I am familiar with California politics, being here in the land of Bibles and guns of the great Midwest, I know many of the readers of this blog live in California. So, I am posting this great Roger Hedgecock column for those of you in the Golden State, and any other state that may be stuck with nothing but RINOs for candidates.

If I was voting in California, though, I would be very worried, especially with the front-runner Meg Whitman, who happens to be influenced by former Obama jobs czar and Communist, Van Jones. That would be enough for me to pull the lever for a different RINO running for the Republicrat nomination for governor. Just sayin'...

But as California becomes the "Greece" of the U.S. with the state caught between the rock of a strangled economy and the hard place of implacable public sector unions who won't give up a penny in wages or benefits, does Poizner have the proposals which recognize the problem and offer solutions?

Not really. Much like the recent faux campaign in the U.K. in which all three parties refused to tell British voters that Margaret Thatcher was right when she said socialism would fail when it ran out of other peoples' money, the campaign for governor of California is some kind of opera where all the candidates avoid mentioning the coming calamity of certain state government insolvency.

Unlike the straight talk and decisive actions of real Reagan conservatives like New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, the California governor's race is a masquerade of RINOS.

By Roger Hedgecock

Posted: May 10, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The prairie fire of a political movement known as the Taxed Enough Already party has changed the politics in nearly every state this year.

I say "nearly" because the last stand for RINOS, for what we called "country club Republicans" in the Goldwater days, for the "we're not conservatives," "Democrat lite" Republicans – is here in California.

The major candidates for governor (Arnold is at long last term limited out) are former eBay CEO Meg Whitman and state insurance commissioner Steve Poizner. Neither candidate is generating grass-roots, tea-party enthusiasm.

Whitman has a compelling success story in creating jobs in private business. Her political story is less stellar. She didn't bother to vote until recently.

As a candidate, she rules out across-the-board tax cuts in a state with some of the highest tax rates in the country – a state that is now experiencing (as Art Laffer would predict) falling tax revenues.

Whitman's reaction to the Arizona immigration law was a vow to veto any such legislation if elected governor. She has supported "comprehensive" immigration reform – code for illegal-alien amnesty.

Whitman backed the federal TARP bailout bill. As a member of Goldman Sachs' board of directors in 2001 and 2002, she benefited from financial investments now banned.

She professes an admiration ("I got to know him very well") for Van Jones after she met him on an Arctic cruise dedicated to showing the passengers the ravages of "global warming." Apparently, as a result of Mr. Jones' influence, Whitman will not support repeal of California's job-killing state "cap and trade" law.

Whitman's appeal for votes (her $59 million donation to herself has drenched the state in TV and radio ads) in the California Republican primary June 8 comes down to two themes: "I know how to create jobs" and "The other candidate is no conservative, either."

Whitman, by every account I've seen, was a superb private business executive. Her collaborative work practices applied during a tech boom inspired creative non-union employees to create wealth for more people over a shorter period of time than has rarely been seen in history. None of this experience will translate to success running California state government.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

The Democrats' media hatchet men ~ By Jack Cashill

Jack Cashill points out that when it comes to the media reporting on the tea parties, their big scam is that it is all about race, which of course, everyone knows, is not the case. Not whatsoever. In fact, the media spin is the same when it comes to the Arizona immigration law recently passed. In fact, ANY TIME there is any dissent about any of Obama's agenda, the media will point out immediately that the dissenters are racist. When is the media establishment going to learn that those of us out here with any common sense think that the race card strategy is really getting old?

As the folks at Eggs and Enlightenment well understood, Cleaver doesn't have to demonize anyone. His hatchet people in the media will do it for him.

Two years ago, Cleaver and the Dems were peddling hope. Today, apparently, all they have left to sell is fear, and the people at McDonald's are beginning to see through it.

By Jack Cashill

Posted: May 06, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Amidst the early morning cacophony at the McDonald's on 14th and Prospect in Kansas City's urban core, Sonny Gibson calls the meeting to order with a gavel that commands attention – the blunt end of a hatchet.

All told, there will be about 50 people in Sonny's audience, perhaps 45 of them black, about half of comparable vintage to Gibson, a veteran local historian.

Gibson leads with a discussion of the issues of the day from all over the world and from all points of view. Despite what the media want you to believe, there is no orthodoxy here.

Although Gibson may wield a literal hatchet, the most dangerous hatchet men are the metaphorical ones who occupy the city's and the nation's newsrooms.

One of their victims has come to McDonald's seeking help. Gibson turns the floor over to him. Jacob Turk, the Republican candidate for Missouri 5th District congressional seat, is clearly distressed.

Backed by the local media, his opponents' people have been spreading the word through the inner city that Turk is a "teabagger" and that tea-party people are little more than soft-core Ku Kluxers.

In trademark blue suit and red tie, the dogged and sincere ex-Marine appeals to his friends at McDonald's. They know him well enough to ignore the smears, and several of those in attendance vouch for Turk's good heart.

About the tea-party movement, they are much more leery. In that I have spoken to tea-party groups in Missouri, Kansas, New Jersey, Florida and California, Turk has asked me to come and set the record straight.

If the movement has a racial "problem," I explain, the problem is that the largely suburban and rural participants are not concerned with race. It is not on their agenda.

The media would have you believe race was their obsession. "Health care," "cap-and-trade," "card check," "debt" – were merely code for race by another name.

The McClatchy Papers report on the Capitol Hill health-care protest of March 20 was an incendiary case in point. Roared the headline, "Tea-party protesters scream 'nigger' at congressman."

Had an extraterrestrial arrived in American a week prior he would have known enough to doubt this accusation. In 2010, even the Aryan Brotherhood would not have risked screaming the N-word on the Capitol steps.

The Kansas City Star, a McClatchy paper, proved more gullible than my extraterrestrial. The Star immediately posted the article with – mercifully – a more benign headline. Still, the body of the article reinforced the original headline.

To stir his readers to outrage, McClatchy hatchet man William Douglas makes iconic civil-rights veteran John Lewis the subject of the abuse. He is the "congressman" alluded to in the headline.

According to Lewis, however, what the protesters shouted was not a racial slur, but "Kill the bill, kill the bill." If Lewis heard anything more derogatory, he does not seem to have told Douglas about it.

Rep. Andre Carson of Indiana, who was walking with Lewis, claimed to have heard "maybe 15 people" dropping the N-bomb. In the age of the ubiquitous video camera, this was a preposterously reckless charge.

Douglas likely knew enough to avoid Carson. He identifies only Turk's opponent, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, as having heard the slur. Note the way Douglas runs these sentences together.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., said he was a few yards behind Lewis and distinctly heard "nigger."

"It was a chorus," Cleaver said. "In a way, I feel sorry for those people who are doing this nasty stuff."

Douglas leaves the impression that Cleaver heard a "chorus" of people shouting racial slurs when Cleaver said no such thing.

As to the "scream," none of the multiple video cameras, including the two held by Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., walking next to Cleaver, recorded anyone screaming any racial slur. The $100,000 award for proof of even a whispered N-word remains unclaimed.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!

Obama: Hiding himself in plain sight ~ By Joseph Farah

So, Barack Hussein Obama was on the 1000th episode of "America's Most Wanted," and it's really too bad that he wasn't one of the featured most-wanted criminals being sought after.

Shouldn't the act of purposefully dismantling the Constitution be a crime? Isn't the President sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution? Isn't that treason if he doesn't? Joseph Farah has some profound things to say about that in this column.

America's founders knew the real danger to liberty is always posed by government – first and foremost. That's why they strictly limited the power of the federal government. That's why they took the shackles off the people and placed them intentionally on the government. That's what the Constitution truly is – a profound and clear statement on the limitations of government power and a profound and clear statement on the inalienable rights of citizens.

Today we've got it all backward.

By Joseph Farah

Posted: March 06, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Barack Obama is everywhere.

There's no escape.

If you turn on the tube, there he is.

He's always speechifying. He's always lecturing. He's running the perpetual campaign.

If you think you can escape by turning on entertainment shows, like Fox's "America's Most Wanted," think again.

Tonight he will appear on that show's 1,000th episode to tell you and host John Walsh what a great job he and his administration are doing fighting crime in America.

Obama is not America's most wanted leader – and that's why he's saturating the airwaves with himself.

But "crime-fighter" is not the association most of us make with Obama. It's more like "job-killer." It's more like "wealth-destroyer." It's more like "crisis-creator."

Maybe you're curious about how Obama has fought crime.

Actually, he is stepping up another wholly unconstitutional approach begun during Bill Clinton's administration – co-opting with money and equipment state and local law-enforcement agencies that are supposed to be independent of federal authority and control.

He'll also discuss the impact "America's Most Wanted" has had on "thousands of victims and millions of people in its 22 years on the air."

Give us all a break!

This is not only undignified, it's overkill.

If Obama wants to fight crime, he can start by following the law himself – namely the supreme law of the land, the Constitution.

Why would Americans want to listen to the scofflaw-in-chief pride himself and his administration on crime-fighting? It literally boggles the mind.

And, make no mistake about it, that's what Obama is – from the health-care power grab to cap-and-trade, to stimulus spending to taking over part of the auto industry to the bailouts of banks – his solution to problems real and imaginary is always a grab for federal and presidential power.

This is the real crisis in America – illegal government.

The criminals are in power. Obama's not fighting crime; he's da capo dei capi – boss of all bosses.

Maybe next he'll be a guest on "The Sopranos."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

No, we can't just get along ~ By Barbara Simpson

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Barbara Simpson Posted: February 01, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 What on Earth was that last Wednesday night? Who was that man on the podium? Was it the president of the United States or "Big Daddy" who's mightily ticked with his family and pretty much everyone else? You had the eyes of world media glued to Washington. You had senators, congressmen, Supreme Court justices, top military, staffers, guests and friends – all in one room to hear one person speak to them and to American citizens. In fact, the citizens are the real audience of this event. They elected the president, and it's the time when he's supposed to bring everyone up to date on the administration's progress. Technically, it was the State of the Union address by the president. It's a constitutionally required task for the person in the Oval Office, and there's no doubt it's a big deal! For any president, it's a time in the spotlight when his performance is there for all to see. The idea is that the audience is supposed to hear from the man what was done, why, how it worked, where we are now and what's in store for the next year. It's the mother of all progress reports, and under normal circumstances that's what we'd get. Not this time! These are not normal circumstances. This time what we got was different. Actually, it was more than different, partially because this country faces enormous crises but also because of the person who is president. Regardless of what was said, how long it took to say it, whether it was controversial, accurate or even true, this time it was not so much a speech. It was a lecture by an irritated and angry "Big Daddy." It's clear that Barack Obama was – and probably, still is – mightily ticked with what's happened to his grand plans for transforming the United States. He was elected to the strains of "God Save the King," and he believed every word of it. He was lauded as the one who could do no wrong, could do anything and everything, and would change things for the better for everyone. He was short on details, but his overarching plans sounded just great. People were so enamored with his "blackness" that they neglected to hold his plans to a real test during the campaign. The attitude seemed to be, if Barack said it, it was OK because he could do no wrong. READ FULL STORY >

Obama's bag of tricks empty ~ By Erik Rush

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Erik Rush Posted: January 28, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 The pressing question Americans and some members of the press have been asking over the last week or so, even prior to President Barack Obama 's State of the Union address last night, is one that has given rise to some frustration and a sense of futility on my part. That question would be: Will the Democratic leadership in Washington now heed the message of Scott Brown's election and "get with the program" as far as what Americans really want? Some regular readers of this column (and, I would surmise, some who are not) will have already recognized that this question assumes a flawed premise – this being, that the Democratic leadership in Washington is concerned with what Americans want to any degree at all. At the risk of appearing condescending: In order to appreciate the dynamic at hand, those who are currently inclined to make the above query will have to execute the intellectual leap to the realization that the Obama administration and congressional leaders are wholly unconcerned with our wants, needs and general well-being. Their agenda is to effectively supplant our system of government with a radically dissimilar one; as such, it is diametrically opposed to the existing paradigm, which includes deference to the will of the people. It's pretty simple when you think about it. This is the reason they have prioritized such things as health care and climate change, issues only around 40 percent and 18 percent of Americans (respectively) count as high-priority concerns (Gallup, Jan. 20). Our leaders' road map toward ostensibly ameliorating deficiencies in these areas would, however, convey upon them unprecedented political power and economic control. Within hours of Republican Scott Brown's dramatic victory (in capturing the Massachusetts Senate seat previously held by Ted Kennedy), President Obama was on the air with Democrat hack (as well as former Clinton White House communications director and current ABC News correspondent) George Stephanopoulos, executing some truly Orwellian damage control. Claiming that "the same thing [voter anger] that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office," the president immediately lapsed once again into "Blame Bush" mode: "People are angry and they are frustrated," said he. "Not just because of what's happened in the last year or two years, but what's happened over the last eight years." His practice of transferring culpability is reportedly wearing thin even among Democrats. READ FULL STORY >