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

*     *     *     *

'Die at 75' advocate's political motives hidden ~ By Jerome R. Corsi

‘Death panels’

Critics of Obamacare would argue that the alternative to Emanuel’s call for older people voluntarily to forgo costly medical care would be a government body that makes those decisions for the patient.

Sarah Palin

When former Republican vice-presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin warned that under Obamacare, the elderly and infirm would be forced to stand before “death panels,” she was widely ridiculed.

Since then, however, many promoters of Obamacare, including Howard Dean – the former head of the Democratic Party and a former medical doctor – have admitted the law’s Independent Payment Advisory Board is a “health-care rationing body” with the authority to “stop certain treatments.”

On her Facebook page in 2009, Palin wrote that Obamacare would have a “coercive effect” on patients because its advisory panels are part of a law that aims to reduce the growth in health-care spending.

That's right. She was widely ridiculed for it, but Sarah Palin tried to warn us, before Obamacare (Obama's Affordable Care Act) was even passed into law:

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.

If for whatever reason she was not taken seriously then, in 2008 and 2009, she should be now, being that one of the architects of the ACA now admits that "affordable health care" should not be given to those that have reached the end of their productive lives.

For those that doubt that people really care about this issue, I dare you to go to a dinner party and criticize those with family members in senior centers.  If you like food fights, that'll be the way to get one going.  Just sayin'....

'Die at 75' advocate's political motives hidden
No mention of his interest as chief architect of Obamacare

Jerome Corsi

By Jerome R. Corsi

Published: September 24, 2014


From wnd.com

NEW YORK – Missing in The Atlantic magazine’s recent presentation of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel’s column declaring his desire to die at age 75 is the fact that he is a chief architect of Obamacare, with a vested interest in curbing life expectancy in a system of limited resources that forces moral decisions concerning who will receive health care and who will not.

Dr. Ezekiel Manuel

In the column, Emanuel argues that improvements in health care that extend life expectancies through vaccines, antibiotics and technological innovations end up “stretching out old age,” resulting in “a progressive erosion of physical functioning.”

While Emanuel emphasizes the personal benefits of forgoing measures that extend life, the unspoken issue is the scarcity of resources in a system beholden to a fixed government budget.

If older people don’t follow his chosen course and willingly allow resources to be distributed more to the younger, productive workers in society, government bureaucrats will inevitably enter into those health-care decisions.

A longtime advocate of health-care rationing, Emanuel helped craft Obamacare as health-policy adviser at the White House’s Office of Management and Budget. He’s identified at the end of The Atlantic article as director of the Clinical Bioethics Department at the U.S. National Institutes of Health and head of the Department of Medical Ethics & Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania.

~~~ READ MORE on wnd.com ~~~

*    *    *    *

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

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: The electrifying Hannity interview with the OTHER Obama!

Though I wrote in the following video description that " I could actually like a person like Mark," please do not confuse that with him being a person I would vote for or agree with on most issues!!

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

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: Pressing the Reset Button was the wrong thing to do

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!

Post by Johnny2k's America.

Please allow me to lighten it up a little. Here is a meme that I came across today that emphasizes the meaning of "leading from behind." President Obama isn't determined enough to take on the intellect of Vladimir Putin.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Now is not the time to settle ~ By Erik Rush

While Romney receiving the nomination is by no means certain, it is imperative that we remain mindful of the fact that the elite GOP leadership has the potential to be every bit the enemy as the Democrat leadership. For decades, they could have been sounding the alarm, calling Americans' attention to the fundamental transformation (pun intended) that Democrats were bringing about via liberal (socialist) policies. Instead, they feathered their own nests, allowing generations of Americans to become less astute and less informed as to how manifestly dangerous these policies were. Many became what they beheld, and are now indistinguishable from the socialist elites in the Democratic Party.

Now, they would place yet another lukewarm Republican in the Oval Office, one who will be no better than the last two Republican presidents we endured. There's little doubt that some GOP power players are closet socialists themselves, but a strong contingent simply believes that "playing it safe" with someone who is not identified as a strong conservative will somehow win the day – like Bob Dole or John McCain.

This feeble logic has long since been nullified, and at this juncture more than ever, the American people do not want to settle for someone who is only a click or two on the political dial to the right of Obama. The voters who turned the tide during the midterm election want someone who is – at the very least – going to make every attempt to undo what our tin pot premier of a president has done.

I finally found the column I was looking for that would support and defend what I wrote a few weeks back in my commentary about "Dear skeptics and critics ... ~ By Herman Cain." In my remarks, I wrote:

When I hear the pundits say there is nothing that is exciting about the current field of potential Republican candidates, they are making a huge mistake. Really, I'd much rather hear them saying that it's hard to choose amongst the strong talent that is taking on the challenge to beat the current incumbent! I can't believe that they are trying to throw another election! What's wrong with them? And do you really want to listen to the establishment that ended up giving us John McCain?

In this column, Erik Rush mentions some very important points that we need to keep in mind. Erik reminds us that if we are going to be able to make Barack Obama a one-term President, Conservative Republican voters - "The voters who turned the tide during the midterm election" - need a candidate that we can "really get behind." Otherwise, it will be the same old story, and as Erik states, we'd be faced with voting for the least of two evils once again, like we had to do with McCain or Dole.

The establishment elites in the Republican party would pick Erik's cat if it turned out it was progressive enough. However, a writer (signed in as divemustgo) in the facebook comments at the end of Erik's column pointed out that Erik's cat would not suit the needs of the RINOs (Republicans in name only):

I'm liking Erik's cat over Romney at this point.

I asked Erik's cat what he thought of Obamacare and he said, "Ow." Then I asked him which Chinese dictator Obama most resembled and he said, "Mow."

With strong arguments like those, I think Erik's cat could beat Mitt in a debate, paws down.

So, the question remains if the GOP leadership will once again give us another lukewarm "least-of-two-evils" nominee, or will the Republican voters take charge and nominate a Conservative? Is there really a way to overcome the establishment elite in the GOP and MSM to keep them from choosing a candidate just a couple clicks to the right of Obama on the political dial?

There was another brilliant observation, by Debbie Shaw O'Bar, in the comments at the end of the column that may answer those questions. To quote her: "A big prob for us in '08 is that LESS THAN 12% of registered Republicans even voted in the primaries!" Yes! That is a major problem, and it is how somebody like John McCain became the Republican nominee. In order to defeat the establishment elite's choice, Conservative registered Republicans are going to need to get to the primaries and caucuses in early 2012 in much larger numbers than has happened in the past.

The bottom line is, as the title of Erik's column suggests, that now isn't the time to settle for whoever the establishment elite pushes on us. To win the general election and defeat Barack Obama, we need a candidate that we can get very excited about in November of 2012. This country desperately needs a Conservative leader, not a reader. Should we get anybody that is anything less, it wouldn't surprise me if the leading write-in vote is "Erik's cat" in November 2012.  I'm just sayin'...

*    *    *

Now is not the time to settle

ERIK RUSH

By Erik Rush

June 16, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

There are many fundamental facts of life that are simpler than we humans tend to make them. These are far simpler still than recognized "experts" would have us believe they are; this is because they often stand to receive ego gratification and/or power as a result of so doing.

Geopolitics, for example. Something as simple as "the law of the jungle" is all one really needs to comprehend in order to grasp a working knowledge of geopolitics. If you're weak, you can be taken advantage of; if you're strong, this is less likely. The reason that the rest of the world was able to enjoy the fruits of America's innovation and progress (as well as our charity) over the last 150 years was because we had the might to preserve that which we had built.

Then there's economics. If you consume less than you produce, you have a surplus. If you consume more than you produce, you have problems. Anyone who offers a more complicated or convoluted assessment than that probably has a self-serving agenda.

The selection of a presidential candidate is a lot like that, too – even though the 2012 election cycle promises to be like no other. Sometimes you have a candidate you can really get behind, and sometimes it's a choice between the lesser of two evils. In other unfortunate instances, it just doesn't matter; voters will be screwed no matter what they do. In a perfect America, of course, the first example would be the norm.

America is currently gravitating toward the European model, in which the last of the above examples will be the norm forever after. Right now, factions in the Republican Party are trying to find one of the first, someone we can get fired up about. Unfortunately, there are also those in the GOP who would make it another 2008 race, pitting the lesser of two evils against one another yet again.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Dear skeptics and critics ... ~ By Herman Cain

I realize that the road to the nomination and the White House is long and difficult. I know we will encounter many new challenges along the way and that many people see my chances as against the odds.

When one considers that I am up against the skeptics, the critics, the establishment, the Democrats, the liberals, gotcha journalism, a liberal-leaning mainstream media, the challenges of raising campaign funds and a host of other candidates seeking the same objectives, my candidacy is against the odds.

But then, that's been the story of my life and my career.

Maybe my middle name should have been David. He defeated a giant against the odds.

I am so totally pumped about Herman Cain! He has a major amount of courage that I've not seen in a Republican candidate for a long, long, time. Since the Reagan years, there really hasn't been a Republican ticket that was able to get me excited.

Sure, I was thrilled with George W. Bush, but he was all we had. Unfortunately, "W" disenfranchised many of the most Conservative among us Republicans by the time his term was over. TARP and immigration policy, along with the Ramos and Compean Border Patrol agents that never should have been prosecuted, were policies that were very discouraging for me and many of my fellow Conservatives.

Let me explain my opening statement about finally having a man with courage running for the GOP nomination. There is no doubt in my mind that Herman answers some of the questions on the minds of many when it comes to what some Conservative pundits have said recently. The rap on Herman is his lack of government experience and lack of name recognition. Those things were supposedly Herman Cain's major weaknesses. When you read this column, you'll find that Herman addresses those questions with great ease. Not only does he answer those questions, he actually turns those lemons into lemonade.

When I hear the pundits say there is nothing that is exciting about the current field of potential Republican candidates, they are making a huge mistake. Really, I'd much rather hear them saying that it's hard to choose amongst the strong talent that is taking on the challenge to beat the current incumbent! I can't believe that they are trying to throw another election! What's wrong with them? And do you really want to listen to the establishment that ended up giving us John McCain?

My commentary here with this column is based on what I wrote in a note on my facebook page last Saturday, May 28: "Don't bash the other GOP candidates! (However, Trump Trashing is allowed.)" How about if we just try to lift up any of the GOP candidates even if they are rivals of our favorites that we support?  In other words, I'd be the first to admit that a Palin/Cain ticket would work for me!

Republicans should want somebody that has it in his or her heart to WIN. Obama needs to be defeated in 2012. So, let's get serious about backing a candidate that could not only win the election, but also win the hearts of the American people. We have a lot of work to do. We need to restore the hopes and dreams of Americans if we are going to pull out of this funk that we've been experiencing. Did you hear that the housing market is getting worse? We need to get the confidence of the American people back up. That's what it will take to get the economy back in gear! And I think that gutsy Herman Cain guy is one that can do that. Just watch his latest video!

Video provided by thehermancain on May 30, 2011

Can you get excited about this man? Yes you Cain! Herman has emerged! Enough, already! I'm just sayin'...

Dear skeptics and critics ...

HERMAN CAIN

By Herman Cain

May 30, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Wow! I must be causing some people quite a concern as a candidate for the Republican nomination for president. The establishment skeptics are still stuck in the traditional campaign paradigm of immediate name ID, lots of money and experience in a worthy elective office. The critics are pounding on what they perceive as my weaknesses. And the Democratic National Committee now has me on its radar and is sharpening its blades for a Cain attack.

No one is more emblematic of the Republican establishment than Karl Rove. He has an unmatched political record from his tenure with former president George W. Bush. I greatly respect and admire what he has accomplished in his career.

But I would suggest that he take a few minutes to review my record as a leader in business and as a problem solver before he dismisses me as the radio talk-show guy from Atlanta with not much to offer as a presidential candidate. Mr. Rove's perspective also suggests that successful business skills are not applicable to changing the "Titanic" course our federal government is on.

People outside the political establishment are starting to recognize that those business skills are applicable. Maybe that's why Cain is rising in the polls.

One of my favorite political commentators, Charles Krauthammer of Fox News, described my candidacy as entertainment. I enjoy his perspectives because he is usually very thoughtful and often correct in his analysis. Unfortunately, this time he got it wrong. Some people would describe being able to give an informative and inspiring speech as an asset, especially if one is running for president.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Rule of law: Endangered species ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry brings up a subject that just makes me want to scream: Selective enforcement. I know, I know... it happens all of the time. The police do it occasionally  when enforcing traffic laws. Local and federal prosecuting attorneys do it, too, when they select the cases they will prosecute. It happens, sometimes for good reasons, and sometimes not so good. However, it can be downright scary when it comes to Obama's type of selective enforcement in order to "transform America."

As Henry points out, selective enforcement is just one of the ways that Obama is flagrantly disregarding the rule of law. My feeling, though, is that it can be, and is, just as dangerous as any of the ways that Obama flaunts the rule of law. When it comes to selective enforcement as a way to influence future elections, it is extremely dangerous. Check out the video below, where John Fund explains how selective enforcement of election laws could make it much easier for Obama to steal an election. Just sayin'...

More voter fraud that the DOJ won't enforce (for political reasons)

I am not sure which is really worse: The refusal to prosecute the voter intimidation case out of Philadelphia, or this. Either way, either those of us that vote conservative could be turned away from the polls, or many fraudulent voters for the Democrats will show up to vote. Either way, nothing the DOJ is doing is promoting an election that would even pass in banana republics! It's called "rigging the election!" The lack of action by the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ is NO accident. It's called selective enforcement.

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

Obama's defeat must begin in November by unseating the majority that now runs Congress. Then, perhaps, Congress can begin to repeal some of Obama's agenda, or at the very least refuse to provide funds needed for implementation. Immediately after the November election, every person who loves America – as the founders created it – needs to begin a private campaign to remove the last of the Marxist-leaning people who now dominate the federal government.

By Henry Lamb

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

© 2010

Federal law currently prohibits the use of marijuana. California spit in the face of the feds and enacted a law that makes "medical" marijuana available. Now, a ballot initiative in the November election would remove the "medical" requirement and allow any adult to grow and use marijuana at will in the Golden State.

The Obama administration has indicated that it will not waste Department of Justice resources by trying to challenge California's rejection of federal drug laws.

The Obama administration, however, is wasting Department of Justice resources by challenging Arizona's law that affirms the federal immigration law and authorizes police officers to ask for proof of citizenship from suspects who have been detained for infringement of any law.

The Obama administration is flatly failing to enforce federal law in both cases. It has deliberately chosen not to enforce the federal drug laws in California, and it has deliberately chosen not to enforce the immigration law in Arizona (and other border states), even though the Constitution requires the president "take care to see that the laws be faithfully executed." Why is he planning to challenge Arizona's immigration law in court, while ignoring California's marijuana law?

It's called selective enforcement.

In a nation based on the rule of law, the law is supposed to apply to every person equally, regardless of race, sex, financial condition, or political affiliation. Obama and his administration have made a mockery of this concept.

The Department of Justice chose not to prosecute the Black Panthers who stood in front of a Pennsylvania polling place brandishing nightsticks. Do you think the Department of Justice would take the same action against two white dudes dressed in camouflage outfits brandishing nightsticks in front of a polling place?

These are fairly small examples of selective enforcement, but they do shine a spotlight on this administration's disregard for their responsibility to uphold and enforce the law – and apply it equally to all people.

Far more important are the examples of Obama's complete and utter disregard for limitations of power placed on the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama ordered the chairman of General Motors to step down, to be replaced by a puppet of Obama's choosing. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama's people chose the auto dealers who would be put out of business. It makes no difference at all to Obama that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to take these actions. Incidentally, it was purely coincidental that the majority of auto dealers put out of business had supported Republican candidates. Yeah, that's their story, and they are sticking to it.

This propensity to act despite the law to achieve objectives Obama wants to achieve, makes Barack Hussein Obama the most dangerous president the country has ever known. He has said he fully intended to fundamentally transform the United States of America.

He has forced through Congress his brand of universal health care, a precursor to complete socialized medicine. There is no way private insurance companies can continue to operate under the requirements placed upon them by the health-care legislation. Suppose the auto industry were told that they had to insure auto owners after an accident – and repair the automobile – but could not charge a penny more than they charged people who had no accident. No private company can stay in business paying out more than they take in. The health-care law forces insurance companies into this position.

Through his appointments and support of legislation to give the president emergency control of the Internet, Obama has exposed his disregard for the First Amendment. This administration is actively seeking ways to control the free flow of information, especially from critics and those who oppose the Obama agenda.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Hopes and Changes: Are we getting what we deserve? ~ By John Kubicek

In this piece, I just wanted to make sure that you know that all is not lost. It may actually be a blessing. There are things you can do to make up for mistakes you've made in your life.

The hopes and changes that we will face in the coming years will surely happen if you do nothing. I am asking you today not to let that happen. I know that everyone of us can do something. We will only get what we deserve, despite how people voted in November 2008, if we do nothing.

By John Kubicek

Posted: April 28, 2010

What is harder than accepting all of the mistakes we’ve made in our lives? Stay tuned, I’ll do my my best to tell you. I will need to give you some background first, which will provide the basis for my thoughts that I want to get across.

Not much more than a week or two ago, my previous computer bit the dust. Despite my heroic efforts to sustain it’s life, I had to put it down. It was a very sad decision to make, but it was the most cost-effective choice, at least according to the “death panel.”

I am now working with a brand new companion. He’s not a clone of the old 2002 Gateway. Nope, but the precious goals and aspirations of the previous machine make up the genetics of the new guy, my constant companion made of circuits and gadgets.

In the process of getting acquainted with the technology of this newest century, I learned something. I found out that the learning curve is exponential: The more you learn, the faster you learn… But I digress.

In my haste last week to finally get my new computer going, I had attempted to write a column here, only to have it lost in cyber-space, due to my own incompetence. As a normal human, I get used to doing things one way, and then, things CHANGE. Not good. Change BAD. Or so I thought, until just a day or two ago.

CHANGES in things as we know them give us just two choices: 1) Lay down and die, or 2) DEAL WITH CHANGES!!! Was that clear enough? So I had to start getting used to a new computer. No, it was not easy. But I adjusted, and learned what I could. And I am sure I will continue to learn more! I am dealing with what was handed to me, and not by my choice. I had not hoped for change, but I took option 2 and dealt with it.

And guess what? There are things that many people had hoped for, and voted for, and yes, they are getting the changes… And I am pretty sure that people aren’t getting the changes they were hoping for. That is why I asked above, “What is harder than accepting all of the mistakes we’ve made in our lives?” The hard part is how to deal with our mistakes. Those that voted for Obama and now feel sorry for their decision now have to deal with it. The good news is that there IS a way to deal with it. It’s called the TEA PARTY MOVEMENT!

A week ago there was an outstanding column by Phil Elmore that you need to know about that may help you out. And if you are reading this column, then that means you probably have the means to take the actions that Phil talked about. You can join Twitter, Facebook and start a blog. None of it is that hard to do. For those that have a few more advanced skills, there is youtube and other sites to upload videos to. You can make a difference.

READ FULL STORY at BreakdownofAmerica.com

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

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

Correcting the collectivist course ~ By Erik Rush

Erik writes, "Is Obama's comportment rooted in narcissism, stupidity or delusion?" An intelligent person should be wondering which it is, or perhaps, is it all three?

So we have a job to do. Perhaps we should be thankful for those Dem double dog dares that have served to wake us up and make us take notice, because there are very few of us who don't bear some responsibility for things having gotten this out of hand. Now that we are awake, we can see that an electoral revolution and return to American principles of government is not only an imperative, but well within our grasp.

And what of the 15 percent or so Americans who are still asleep, or misguided enough to believe that the current course – toward hard-line collectivism – is tolerable, or even prudent?

Well … you can't please everyone. They'll just have to walk it off.

By Erik Rush

Posted: April 08, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Going back about 25 years, comedian Eddie Murphy had a great routine in his stand-up act involving a guy who was seen by his wife leaving his mistress' house. Later, when confronted by his wife, his answer was as stunning to Murphy's audience as it must have been to the wife:

It wasn't me.

To most intelligent people, such a reply could only elicit stammering and sputtering. How can someone deny having committed a deed when they've been caught in the act? It's positively inconceivable.

Follow me around. I don't care. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead.

– former presidential candidate Sen. Gary Hart, May 1987

Some readers will no doubt remember the unfortunate but perversely amusing escapades of former Colorado Sen. Gary Hart, who made a bid for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination during the 1988 campaign season. In April of 1987, rumors began to circulate that the married Hart was something of a womanizer. When asked about it by the press, he responded as above, essentially daring the press to dig as deep as they liked. Shortly thereafter, he was photographed several times cavorting with model Donna Rice, who was twenty-something years his junior.

Hart withdrew from the race, and Rice became more of a household name than the senator for a time.

Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself. …

– Barack Obama, 2008 campaign speech

So, during the 2008 campaign, Obama suggested that he be judged by the people with whom he surrounded himself. Another dare. He was subsequently shown to be surrounded by a veritable Rogue's Gallery of sundry gangsters, thieves, cheats, frauds and subversives.

Some might put this down to the president not being very bright, which has indeed been alleged. Others, perhaps, believe Obama is aware that others' assessments of such audacious statements are moot, given that he will never be called out by the establishment press concerning any of them.

The good news is that there is a very good argument that these things are chipping away at his credibility and his popularity. Given that many of those Americans who now oppose his policies actually voted for the man, it is a safe assumption that any number of these do heed the incongruities and will remember them come the next two elections.

This is based on what … this notion that Obama's a socialist?

– President Barack Obama, April 2, 2010

To many, no doubt the above query is as ludicrous as the president asking what evidence we have that he's black, or that he's male. There's a vulgar colloquialism wherein one admonishes another not to urinate down their back and tell them it's raining. Yet, this is precisely what our president is doing to us. This administration continues to advance an ankle-grabbing foreign policy, suicidal economic strategies and draconian, citizen-soaking solutions to predicaments that had their genesis in big government in the first place – all the while, denying that they're doing so.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Land of the free – or land of the bureaucrats? ~ By Star Parker

Here I go again. Posting another story that contradicts what the state-run media wants you to believe: That the Tea Party Movement and Conservatives are just a bunch of racists... 

I am trying to do my best to help more people understand what the Tea Party Movement (a non-violent civil rebellion) is all about. And of course, for those that DO understand that Conservatives and tea parties are about wanting to keep our liberty, please make sure that you help me and Star and all of the great Conservative commentators get the word out - WE ARE NOT RACISTS! And this is the perfect column that makes that point!

What is new today is we can no longer continue the illusion of having our cake and eating it. We can no longer afford to be both a big-government entitlement state and a free, creative and prosperous nation. It's the prosperity created by our freedom that has financed the entitlements. But now the entitlements are overtaking and strangling our freedom.

So now is a time of choosing. We're either going to remain the land of the free or transform into the land of the bureaucrat.

The antipathy of activists toward Mr. Obama is not about how he looks but what he has done – that he has chosen and imposed on us the path of bureaucracy.

By Star Parker

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

© 2010

Like chewing gum stuck to the heel of your shoe, racism seems to be stuck forever to American public discourse. No matter what we do or what happens, somebody will find a racial motive.

Democrats have passed government health care with no Republican votes. Their leadership threatened and bribed their own members to eek out a majority. They resorted to an arcane procedure that maybe 100 people in the whole country can explain in order to pass a massive bill that polls show a majority of Americans don't want.

The federal government, for the first time ever, will force every American to buy, with a big chunk of their income, a product designed by government bureaucrats, with an army of IRS agents snooping on each of us to make sure we did it.

And how are many liberals explaining why so many Americans are ticked off?

It's because our president is black. It's about racism.

I'm steamed. And even though I happen to be black – I've even spoken at some-tea party rallies – I still must be a racist.

Obama's approval rating has dropped from 70 percent when he was elected to 50 percent today. His disapproval has skyrocketed from 10 percent when he was elected to 42 percent today.

Per the Washington Post, in January 2009 58 percent of Americans said that the Obama presidency helped race relations. By January 2010, this was down to 40 percent.

Has this wave of disillusionment with Obama been driven by a sudden realization that the man Americans elected president is black?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's approval has dropped from 41 percent in January 2009 to 36 percent today, and her disapproval has risen from 42 percent to 54 percent. Is she black?

Were the raucous town halls last summer – which fueled the growing tea-party movement – where irate constituents gave their representatives a piece of their mind about Obamacare racially motivated?

Care to understand what all this is really about?

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Sarah Palin’s Loyalty is a Feature, Not a Bug ~ By Jenn Q. Public

I had been wondering about Sarah's support for John McCain, especially in reference to supporting the RINO rather than the Conservative J. D. Hayworth. However, after reading this short column, I can now understand the pickle that Sarah Palin was in.

That lesson about loyalty stuck with Palin. Choosing to support John McCain in the face of significant conservative opposition might not win Sarah Palin accolades for Beltway political savvy, but it says quite a bit about her character.

By Jenn Q. Public

March 27, 2010

When it comes to John McCain, Sarah Palin just can’t win.

Campaigning for the man who catapulted her onto the national stage has prompted some McCain detractors to demote her from conservative rock star to unprincipled RINO sell-out. But were she to snub her former running mate, she’d be branded a disloyal backstabbing ingrate.

There’s no question McCain’s campaign staff repeatedly smeared Palin to distract from their own ineptitude. And once or twice, McCain experienced Bidenesque foot-in-mouth disease when discussing Palin with interviewers. But author Shushanna Walshe notes there are “no hard feelings between the former GOP presidential and vice-presidential nominees, even after all the public warring continues between some of McCain’s closest advisers and Palin.”

READ FULL STORY at David Horowitz's NEWS REAL BLOG

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

American Dream Or The Redistribution of Wealth? ~ By Julie Fredrickson

From Julie Fredrickson's NOTES on Facebook

By Julie Fredrickson

February 12, 2010

Blog #3 American Dream or The Redistribution Of Wealth

Fasten your seat belts if you’re reading this blog you could be in for a bumpy ride. I plan to jump so hard on my soapbox that I may crush it. Just thinking about the philosophy of redistribution of wealth makes my blood boil.

A reporter with a camera crew in tow during the Presidential campaign in the fall of 2008 picked up a conversation in which a seemingly average Joe (later dubbed Joe the Plumber) had mentioned to Candidate Obama that he was a small business owner struggling to maintain a living. Senator Obama replied that he had nothing against a business succeeding; however he felt that when it did succeed we had an obligation to spread the wealth around. I literally screamed at the TV. When I heard his response, “Are you kidding me”? “Did he really just say that”? “Is he a socialist or what”?

We should have seen the warning signs that clearly pointed to Senator Obama's views. He had been influenced by ties to groups like Acorn who he had represented as legal counsel before becoming a Senator and his long time association to several unions and their leaders. His opponent, Senator McCain pointed to ties from Senator Obama to radical friends in Chicago that had catapulted Obama to his seat in the Senate. Upon closer inspection; we would have discovered ties to a corrupt political machine in Chicago where positions in the business world and the political arena were up for grabs to the highest bidder. A closer look at his long time mentor and spiritual leader, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, would have revealed a sometimes vicious radical who spewed hatred, prejudice and anger from behind the pulpit. Ties were also traced from Valerie Jarret, who is a senior advisor and assistant to the president for the office of Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs, to a close family friend, William (Bill) Ayers a known felon, was a self proclaimed founding member of a violent group called the Weather Underground, who’s goal it was during the Viet Nam war to overthrow the government of the United States culminating in the bombing of both the Capital building and the Pentagon.

READ FULL STORY >

Don't progressives like free speech? ~ By John Stossel

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By John Stossel Posted: January 27, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 From the commentary in the mainstream media, I thought there had been a coup d'etat in Washington. The New York Times said what happened "strikes at the heart of democracy." The Washington Post quoted an authority who warned it "threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the nation." No, not the Scott Brown victory. The media were upset because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that forbidding corporations and labor unions to spend money on political speech before elections is unconstitutional. A horrendous section of the abomination known as McCain-Feingold campaign-finance "reform" had bitten the dust. It was long overdue. The case grew out of a documentary critical of Hillary Clinton that Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, planned to show on cable television during the 2008 presidential primary season. The law said that was illegal. The 5-4 majority consisted of the four conservative justices and the swing justice, Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the main opinion. He couldn't have been more clear: "When Government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. ... The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves." He also said, "Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy – it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people – political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it." And, "We find no basis for the proposition that, in the context of political speech, the Government may impose restrictions on certain disfavored speakers." Of course, the "progressive media" condemned the majority for its judicial activism because the ruling overturned two precedents. I thought progressives favored judicial activism and dumping bad precedents. I also thought they favored free speech. Wrong. (To its credit, the ACLU was on Citizen United's side.) It depends on whose ox is gored. READ FULL STORY >

Massachusetts' Other GOP Winner ~ By Kim Strassel

From THE WALLSTREET JOURNAL ~ Opinion Journal

Mitt Romney should write off his health-care plan as a mistake that Democrats have made worse. By Kim Strassel OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH | JANUARY 21, 2010, 9:41 P.M. ET Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts has most Republicans hopeful about midterm elections. It has Mitt Romney hopeful about 2012. In many ways, the former Bay State governor never ended his 2008 presidential campaign. From a perch atop his Free and Strong America PAC, Mr. Romney has been raising money, nurturing his team, keeping himself in the national spotlight. With the Massachusetts Senate race, he sensed an unexpected opportunity to step to the front of the GOP presidential ranks. He played it nicely. Aware that many voters have mixed views of his governorship, Mr. Romney stayed in the shadows, leaving other notables to stump with Mr. Brown. Behind the scenes was a different story. Mr. Romney headlined fundraisers for the little-known state senator and used his own national mailing list to help raise dollars. He called on supporters to make calls on Mr. Brown's behalf, and he harnessed his media operations to bolster the candidate. His closest aides flooded to Mr. Brown, bringing with them the savvy of a national operation. Beth Lindstrom, a cabinet official in the Romney administration, served as Mr. Brown's campaign manager. Also in Brown HQ were Beth Myers, Mr. Romney's presidential campaign manager, and Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom, who worked on the now-famous TV spots showing a tax-cutting John F. Kennedy morphing into Mr. Brown. Mr. Romney got his due on election night. He was the first political figure Mr. Brown thanked for helping "show us the way to victory." Romney allies had already been busy touting his role. "There's no one who has done more behind the scenes and in front of the scenes than Mitt," Republican National Committee member Ron Kaufman told Politico—two days before the election. By midweek, the political pundits decreed Mr. Romney the other big winner. Some went so far as to credit him with the 41st vote, potentially saving the nation from ObamaCare. In doing so, they unwittingly touched on the flip side of this week's race. For all the benefits this contest held for the former governor, it also churned up what will prove the biggest obstacle to Romney 2012. Mr. Brown brazenly turned his Senate bid into a referendum on President Obama's health plan, and voters rewarded him with a job. Yet ObamaCare's model was the health reform inflicted on Massachusetts by a certain Republican governor in 2006, otherwise known as RomneyCare. READ FULL STORY >

Democrats 'plan to steal the vote'

From WorldNetDaily

If you thought health-care bill was scary, check out universal-registration scheme By Chelsea Schilling Posted: January 13, 2010 ~ 5:43 pm Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily A political correspondent is making waves with his stern warning that Democrats are scheming to manipulate the electoral process this election year by implementing a federal mandate to involuntarily register millions of people to vote – making the system ripe for unprecedented fraud and abuse. "Democrats were very rattled by the Nov. 3 election results," Wall Street Journal reporter and political commentator John Fund told a crowd in November 2009, at a David Horowitz Freedom Center forum. "What do liberals do when they lose elections? They change the rules." 'Definitely introducing a bill' Fund is warning that Sen. Charles Schumer, D.-N.Y., and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., plan to propose universal voter-registration legislation – possibly within weeks. "Schumer is definitely introducing a bill," Fund told WND. "It's not public yet, but he's definitely going to do so." A congressional staffer confirmed Schumer's involvement. "What we know from statements from advocacy groups that support universal voter registration is that they have been working with Sen. Schumer's office since approximately last spring to create a bill," the staffer told WND. "We don't know exactly when he will introduce it, but it has been predicted to be introduced in the near future for several months now. Schumer definitely has been, and seems to be, the point person on this." Neither Schumer's office nor Conyers' office has returned WND's numerous calls and e-mails requesting comment. While Schumer has yet to publicly share the plans, the staffer said advocacy groups have published materials calling for the use of a wide range of government lists and databases to add people to voter registration rolls. Fund said the health-care reform negotiations are lasting longer than expected, so he anticipates the universal voter registration legislation may be introduced in February or later. The congressional staffer said he believes a bill passed this year would probably take effect in time for the 2012 election. READ FULL STORY >

Saul, Barack and me, Part 2 ~ By Robert Ringer

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Robert Ringer Posted: December 18, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Read "Saul, Barack and me, Part 1. In the Prologue to "Rules for Radicals," Saul Alinsky expressed his contempt for "the Weathermen and their like," pointing out that there are no rules for revolution, but there are "rules for radicals who want to change the world." He believed in "a pragmatic attack on the system," and pointed out that the rules one follows make "the difference between being a realistic radical and being a rhetorical one who uses tired old words and slogans" – e.g., "pig" (for police), "white fascist racist" and "motherf-----." He felt that by acting in such a stereotypical fashion, young radicals only succeeded in turning people off. Alinsky then went on to explain that it was of critical importance for the young activist to "communicate within the experience of his audience" – which, he said, specifically ruled out attacks on the American flag. Clearly, Alinsky would have seen Obama as a model radical – smooth-talking, non-threatening, even wearing an American flag pin on his lapel during the presidential campaign after people became upset with him for refusing to do so. Alinsky made a special point of saying that if the real radical finds that having long hair sets up psychological barriers to communication and organization, he cuts his hair. Again, a picture of clean-cut Obama comes to mind – nary a dreadlock to be found on his radical head. Perhaps one of the most important clues Alinsky gave us to the coming of BHO and the modern progressives was when he said: "As an organizer, I start from where the world is, as it is, not as I would like it to be. That we accept the world as it is does not in any sense weaken our desire to change it into what we believe it should be – it is necessary to begin where the world is if we are going to change it to what we think it should be. That means working in [my emphasis] the system." Again, Alinksy pragmatism at its best – and I certainly agree with him. I have long emphasized the importance of maintaining an accurate perception of reality. Reality isn't the way you wish things to be; it's the way they actually are. The way you wish things to be can be your goal, but to reach that goal you have to start by dealing with today's reality. READ FULL STORY >