We're all communists now ~ By Ellis Washington

The official Soviet party newspaper was called "Pravda" (truth), but printed only lies and communist propaganda. The Soviets mastered absolute control of all media so that the people remained ignorant, fearful and suspicious of the U.S. America's media has long championed socialist propaganda. Thank God for WND!

Since about 1937 when FDR's "New Deal" programs were ruled constitutional, America has gradually devolved into a socialist nation which if Obama gets re-elected in 2012 will push our nation totally into communism. Lenin boasted, Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted. America's only hope is to ally with independent-minded people like the tea party, deconstruct every brick of the communist welfare state via the electoral process while purging the GOP of RINOs, take back the courts and reestablish a political discourse rooted firmly on the foundations of God, natural law, fair capitalism and the original intent of the framers of the Constitution.

See "What is Communism?" at 1:04 mark:

Video provided by PIMannix on May 24, 2007

In a very important column written by Ellis Washington, he explains how "socialism" is just a euphemism for "communism." To make it more clear what he meant, I looked up euphemism to find out that it means "the substitution of a mild, indirect, or vague expression for one thought to be offensive, harsh, or blunt."

I salute Ellis for making this point. I know, it is really difficult to accept that the word "socialism" could ever be considered to be "mild." Yet, millions of Americans apparently think that there is no problem with socialism. It is a word that no longer seems to be offensive. And how could that possibly happen? You'll find out when you read this column, from beginning to end. Watch the video presented above, from beginning to end.

Now, one more thought I had after reading this column. I got down to the part where Ellis began with, "America's only hope...", and there were a lot of things that would need to get done. How, Ellis?

Ellis, are you really saying that obscure individuals like me can make a difference, and accomplish the tasks that you spelled out in that paragraph?

Let's be honest. "Fighting City Hall" is not an easy task. Even if you find a way to touch a lot of people, you can find your venue quickly erased. Ask Glenn Beck. Or just ask me, someone who was formerly on youtube that had 4.3 million total views of my 1300+ videos, only to be simply and swiftly terminated. ... Never mind.

While I'm happy to tell you that I absolutely agree with what Ellis tells us that needs to be done, there should be no doubt that some of us will end up paying a price. I'm not even sure how big of a price will need to be paid. There are some like Michael Murphy that were willing to pay the ultimate price. And then there are some like Victoria Jackson, and many more like her, that would give up potentially lucrative Hollywood careers to tell it like it is.

So, to stop the disease of socialism - soon to devolve into communism - that is infecting America, what price are you willing to pay? Are you willing to speak up after calculating the possible consequences? Would you be willing to share what you learn? I know many people that do, and they are my heroes. But, are there enough of us without your help? I'm just sayin'....

We're all communists now

ELLIS WASHINGTON

By Ellis Washington

April 30, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

– Sir Winston Churchill

Communism in America was exposed in a 1958 book by conservative writer Cleon Skousen, "Naked Communist." State-controlled capitalism, Federal Reserve, federal taxes, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unionism, welfare statism (subsidies) and pension plans, are examples of the thousands of treasonous Ponzi schemes and slush funds politicians have used since the 1850s to dumb down society, buy votes and broker power.

Examine this simple syllogism below from the own mouths of the forefathers of communism:

• Marx: Democracy is the road to socialism;

• Lenin: Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism;

• Marx: The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.

The logic is both diabolical and totalizing. Socialism is merely a euphemism for communism. Ergo, we're all communists now.

Skousen's book cited 45 communist strategies used to systematically deconstruct American institutions – Christianity, economics, education, capitalism, science, politics, the courts, natural law, etc., by purposely collapsing the system via the Cloward-Piven Strategy – top down, bottom up, inside out, and from the ashes erect a glorious new society based on Marxist atheism and the god of the state. Let's examine whether Skousen's predictions have come to fruition:

Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

Disarming the U.S. didn't start during the anti-war protests of the hippies, anarchists and socialists of the 1960s. Homegrown traitors of America have disarmed America by giving military secrets to our enemies. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg and physicist's Robert Oppenheimer and Klaus Fuchs are just the most conspicuous. We have disarmed our military by promoting appeasement generals, putting women in combat positions and allowing homosexuals to serve openly.

Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.

Wilson's League of Nations (1919) became the United Nations under FDR at the San Francisco Conference in April, 1945, just 13 days after he died in office after serving four terms tirelessly deconstructing American society brick by brick and turning it into a servile welfare state. NATO is the U.N.'s de facto military presently fighting in Libya under the George Soros responsibility to protect doctrine. Many more U.N. wars will follow.

READ MORE at WND.com

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

War socialism ~ By Ellis Washington

Pay very close attention to this column. Read it carefully. I will be explaining why this is so important in a moment.

The more things change the more they stay the same. Look at the propaganda posters above promoting "change" through national socialism, Democratic socialism and Marxist socialism. Remember that progressives and Democratic socialists like Obama always campaigns as doves or sheep, but under the dove's feather lies a humanitarian hawk, and under the sheep's clothing lies a ravenous, warmongering wolf promoting war as an instrument for achieving their progressive, fascist values by any means necessary.

Hot wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya; war unionism in Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, California, New Jersey; international economic wars in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Britain, France, Germany; anarchy in the Middle East and genocide in Africa … It's all war socialism, and it's all purposefully planned to destroy the West, Christianity, Israel and capitalism by collapsing the system into totalitarian chaos, systemic atheism, and from the ashes to create a fascist New World Order.

He wrote, "She began to see war as an instrument for achieving her liberal, even radical, values." No, Ellis Washington didn't write that. That quote is from Tom Hayden. And who is Tom Hayden? From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Thomas Emmet "Tom" Hayden (born December 11, 1939) is an American social and political activist and politician, known for his involvement in the animal rights, and the anti-war and civil rights movements of the 1960s. He is the former husband of actress Jane Fonda...

Really? If you read on in the Wikipedia page on Tom Hayden, you'll see that he was very involved in anti-war and civil rights activism during the Viet Nam years. So, of course, that explains what he wrote about Samantha Power... except maybe not in the way you were thinking. It is all part of the grand plot to create chaos.

Samantha Power knows about the civil unrest that occurred with the combination of the anti-war and civil rights movements during the Viet Nam War years. There were riots on the streets. Protest marches on college campuses ultimately resulted in violence; I won't forget the deaths of the four students at Kent State, at the hands of soldiers (National Guard). In the late 60's and early 70's, chaos and violence reigned.

But here is the dirty secret about the progressives and socialists that needs to be exposed: They (the Socialists) teamed up, using the good old "good cop, bad cop" ruse for one purpose only. Nothing like an unjust war in order to stir up the population, all the while, using the "Responsibility to Protect" ideology of George Soros and his minions (like Cass Sunstein and Samantha Power).

Okay, this is way too deep without writing a book about it. I'll leave that to Ellis Washington or Jonah Goldberg. And I know that Glenn Beck will continuously attempt to educate as many people as he can reach, even without being on the Fox News Channel, when that happens (soon). But now, do you understand why I started this post out with, "Pay very close attention to this column. Read it carefully."? I know, it is mind boggling. And it is so much like the game of chess. Pawns play a big part of the game.  Pawns are expendable once they can be used down the line in order to set a trap for the opponent. And in real life, the pawns are called "the useful idiots." I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:
Cass Sunstein and his Lady Macbeth ~ By Ellis Washington
Is this Obama's next target after Libya? ~ By Aaron Klein
1 size fits all (whether you like it or not) ~ By Patrice Lewis

*   *   *

War socialism

ELLIS WASHINGTON

By Ellis Washington

April 16, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Samantha Power,
wife of Regulatory Czar,
Cass Sunstein

[Samantha] Power generalized from her Balkans experience to become an advocate of American and NATO military intervention in humanitarian crises, a position which became known as being a "humanitarian hawk." She began to see war as an instrument for achieving her liberal, even radical, values.

~ Tom Hayden, 1960s socialist radical

What is war socialism? Conventional thinking says that liberals or Democratic socialists like Presidents Wilson, FDR, JFK, LBJ, Clinton and Obama hate war, while conservative warmongers like Theodore Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan, Bush-41 and Bush-43 can't wait to start another war. This conformist view holds that Democratic socialists only go to war when forced to – Wilson (World War I), FDR, Truman (World War II, Korea), Clinton (Bosnia), Obama (Libya), or to clean up unpopular wars started by their jingoistic GOP predecessors – JFK, LBJ (Vietnam), Obama (Iraq, Afghanistan).

However, this view conflicts with history. Although Wilson, FDR and Obama ran for president promising not to take the U.S. to war, these men and their "brain trusts" understood war as the tried and true method to most quickly and comprehensively achieve most of their progressive socialists goals like the League of Nations, United Nations, the Federal Reserve, Federal income tax, Social Security, the welfare state and Obamacare.

"War socialism under Wilson was an entirely progressive project," wrote Jonah Goldberg in his 2007 book "Liberal Fascism," and long after the war it remained the fast track to mandating progressive policies without assent from Congress or the courts. Goldberg continued, "To this day liberals instinctively and automatically see war as an excuse to expand governmental control of vast swaths of the economy. If we are to believe that classic fascism is first and foremost the elevation of martial values and the militarization of government and society under the banner of nationalism, it is very difficult to understand why the Progressive Era was not also the Fascist Era."

The progressive revolution was mainly a middle-class movement, a counter-revolution just as opposed to the industrial revolution and laissez-faire capitalism from above as it was to Marxist radicalism from below. Progressives, in their arrogant utopianism and idealism, believed they could forge a new synthesis, a new duality, what the fascists called the "Third Way" or what Richard Ely, an intellectual godfather to both Wilson and Roosevelt, termed the "golden mean" between laissez-faire individualism and Marxist socialism.

Progressives' obsession was to enforce a unifying, totalitarian ethical regime that stripped the individual of the freedom to pursue any happiness outside the omnipotent State. The progressive revolution, along with the fascists and Nazis, possessed a fanatical delusion to transcend class differences within the national community and create a new order. George Creel put it bluntly: "No dividing line between the rich and poor, and no class distinctions to breed mean envies."

George Soros, a radical socialist billionaire, is in the forefront of promoting war socialism on a global scale. Among his multi-tentacle organizations includes one called The Global Centre for Responsibility to Protect. This group is the world's leading champion of the military doctrine called Responsibility to Protect created by two of global group's advisory board members, Ramesh Thakur and Gareth Evans. Also on the commission board was the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, which was founded by White House aide Samantha Power, who is the wife of Cass Sunstein, Obama's regulatory czar.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

The Liberal-Fascist Axis, Part 2 ~ By Ellis Washington

The following is a continuance of Ellis Washington's column, "The Liberal-Fascist Axis." Ellis continues he discussion about the relationships between liberalism and fascism.

Okay, so neither Ellis nor I, nor anyone else, like Glenn Beck... or you, have yet to be hauled away to detention camps... "Yet" is the key word. A couple of days ago (June 9), though, Glenn Beck gave us a warning when he asked, "Where does it end?" 

In the 1st segment of the show (you will see Part 1 of 3 in the video below), Glenn is explaining how just in the last week, things were getting very different. The President is going to go "kick someone's ass," and the Obama minions are beginning to want Obama to start changing things. Huh? I thought a lot of change has already been going on since this regime took power. So, what's there to worry about? I'd have to be crazy to think that anything more extreme could happen... But, as always, I'm just sayin'...

Epilogue

Slavery, abortion, Social Darwinism, eugenics and fascism make up the five-headed monster of modern times. Each head reveal the Nazi doctrine of Lebensunwertes Leben (life unworthy of life). In the modern era, these ideas and policies are directly responsible for the genocide of hundreds of millions of people.

American fascism is exhibited today in policies like: Obamacare, TARP, Obama's takeover of the banking and auto industries, exploiting the Gulf oil leak to destroy the oil industry through federal takeover while forcing Americans into unsustainable alternative energy uses, thus further decimating our economy.

Absent Christianity and Natural Law, Obama's revolutionary policies will only augment the ever-expanding socialist state under the Liberal-Fascist Axis.

By Ellis Washington

Posted: June 12, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The left supported Hitler not because he deceived them. They knew Hitler would kill. He said he would. In fact, it was why they supported him.

~ Latvian documentary "The Soviet Story" (2008)

WARNING: This video contains disturbing images.

Video provided by stclymer

I am more than willing to drop the radical pose for the radical ends.

~ Van Jones (Communist, Obama's former green czar)

(See the video at 8:42 where Glenn Beck mentions this quote.)
From his show on June 9, 2010:

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

Prologue

Slavery, abortion, Social Darwinism (evolution), eugenics, fascism (i.e., Nazism, communism, liberalism), are perhaps the five most diabolical and irredeemable ideas of the past 160 years; yet despite civil wars, world wars, social revolutions, civil-rights acts, Christian revivals and political reforms, this five-headed monster is still alive and thrives under the totalitarian cult of liberalism, now called "progressivism."

1. Slavery

Slavery has existed since the earliest annals of human history and has been practiced at some period by virtually every nation and tribe on earth. In America, it took a bloody Civil War to bring an end to this "peculiar institution" in 1865 and later by law via the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments.

The Democratic Party proliferated and profited most from slavery, and yet because of liberal hegemony in the academy, courts, Congress, media and Hollywood, the virulently racist background and political madness of liberalism has been largely erased from the history books, and all sins forgiven. Why? Because the Democrats co-opted the black vote in the early1930s, and LBJ and got all the credit for passing the Civil Rights Act (1964, 1968) and the Voting Rights Act (1965).

2. Abortion

Abortion is the act of a woman causing the premature termination of her baby and pregnancy. Despite volumes written on abortion, few writers have made the unmistakable connection between the twin evils of abortion and slavery – such as, for every 1,000 black babies born in America, there are 472 unborn black babies aborted, or for every two black babies born, one black baby is aborted.

The NAACP and the civil-rights movement essentially support the genocide of their own race.

I made the existential connection between slavery and abortion in a Socratic dialogue:

Socrates: Indeed. You must first tell us why this day does America allow an average of 1.5 million abortions annually and 40-53 million abortions worldwide? Why have between 40-50 million abortions occurred in America alone since Roe v. Wade (1973)? This, in a country that in your own Declaration promised each of her citizens "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?" Why, Mr. ACLU?

Attorney ACLU: {indignant} B-B-B-But, but, but, but abortions are an entirely different issue than slavery.

Socrates: I agree if by "different" you mean in the manner of execution. However, the public policy is the same: One person, the slave master with slavery and one woman/Supreme Court justice with abortion, has the legal authority to kill another human being, correct, Attorney ACLU?

3. Social Darwinism (evolution)

Social Darwinism understands that the laws of Darwinian evolution by natural selection are applicable to social structures and public policy. Despite the instant and worldwide cult following of evolution since the 1860s, Darwin was rightly skeptical and in a famous letter to Asa Gray Darwin shared his doubts about evolution, writing: "… I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science. ... It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] and holes as sound parts."

In his 1882 book, "Selection in Relation to Sex," Social Darwinism was his major thesis:

Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man … hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

Who determines who lives and who dies? Progressives, of course.

4. Eugenics

"Eugenics is the study and practice of selective breeding applied to humans, with the aim of improving the species." Eugenics was founded by Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton. Margaret Sanger zealously propagated eugenics before becoming the founder of Planned Parenthood, one of the largest abortion providers in the world. Sanger's entire idea for eugenics (of which abortion is its logical consequence) was to bring genocide to the black race, which Sanger and many progressive intellectuals believed was by nature unworthy of full participation in civilization.

5. Fascism

Throughout history, liberalism, totalitarianism, terrorism, anarchy and fascism have been bedfellows – during the Age of Enlightenment (Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, Jefferson), through its systemic corruption during the French Revolution (the Jacobins, Robespierre) and later during 19th-century German Romanticism (Schopenhauer, Wagner, Kaiser Wilhelm, Darwin, Nietzsche). The 20th century saw liberalism morph into the progressive movement and the modern welfare state (Lippmann, Croly, John Dewey, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Obama) where the apotheosis of the State has essentially replaced God, reason, constitutionalism and Natural Law.

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,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

The Liberal-Fascist Axis ~ By Ellis Washington

I have to wonder how Ellis can get away with writing such "extreme" columns about topics like this without the government coming to shut him up. And the same for Glenn Beck on his radio and TV shows. For that matter, you and I would seem to be in line for some type of retaliation, just for posting this or reading it. Why hasn't the Obama cabal come after us (yet)? A friend told me the other day why he felt the Obama government was ignoring things that would seem to be so damaging to them and their agenda: They just don't care what we think, say, or write. Kind of like how they didn't care what we thought about ObamaCare. For now, they can just call us names, demean us, call us crazy... (That is just part of the principles of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals")

Well... the friend may have been partially right. Maybe for now, they don't care. They seem to just do whatever they want, almost as if they don't have to worry about an election unseating them from power in 2012 (or even in 2010?). Or... they're just taking names for right now, and we'll be on that list once the ObamaCide commences. Just sayin'...

RELATED VIDEO:

George Bernard Shaw Defends Hitler, Mass Murder
(Warning: Not suitable for younger children.

Video provided by stclymer

This is the sophistic justification liberals, socialists, Democrats and globalist have used so effectively for decades. People ask the question: When in history has Marxism, liberalism, socialism, welfare statism, communism, redistribution of wealth worked for any society? Of course, the answer is never – but since liberalism in my view is a totalitarian cult of politics, facts don't matter to true believers, and liberals will retort with the mantra demonstrative of Obama's presidential election – We are the ones we've been waiting for! In other words, the reason liberal fascism, communism or the socialist welfare state hasn't worked in the past was that the wrong people were running it … until now?

By Ellis Washington

Posted: May 29, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Shaw idolized Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini as the world's great "progressive" leaders because they "did things," unlike the leaders of those "putrefying corpses" called parliamentary democracies.

– Jonah Goldberg, "Liberal Fascism" (2007), p. 134

George Bernard Shaw

"The Soviet Story" was a revelatory "documentary on progressivism." (see video above) In a revealing excerpt, George Bernard Shaw, the famous playwright and literary critic was filmed in the early 1930s openly defending Hitler, mass murder and genocidal eugenics. The documentary explains liberals' love affair with fascism, saying: The left supported Hitler not because he deceived them. They knew Hitler would kill. He said he would. In fact, it was why they supported him.

The progressive movement has always been filled with socialist and liberal intellectuals who love to praise depraved tyrants like Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin and Hitler as men of action who, unlike the bureaucrats in our democracies, could get things done. Remember Stalin apologist Walter Duranty, a foreign correspondent for the New York Times who during the ghastly purges in the Ukraine in 1932-33, where over 7 million people were starved, Duranty heartlessly rationalized, "In order to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs."

The leftists of the Liberal-Fascist Axis have never been shy about their admiration for totalitarian government, using the Machiavellian idea of the end justifying the means as a common pretext for killing millions of people through ideology, eugenics, war, the Holocaust, abortion, social revolution, ghettoization, redistribution of wealth, the Green movement, etc.: All diabolical means are permissible for progressives to achieve their utopian kingdom of power and control on earth.

At one point in the documentary, Shaw is speaking directly to the camera in positive tones about killing those members of society "who are no use in this world":

You must all know half a dozen people at least who are no use in this world, who are more trouble than they are worth. Just put them there and say Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can't justify your existence, if you're not pulling your weight in the social boat, if you're not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us, and it can't be of very much use to yourself.

Although Jesus commanded us to love thy neighbor, Shaw demands an answer to his affronting question: "Sir, or Madam, now will you be kind enough to justify your existence? If you can't justify your existence … we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us, and it can't be of very much use to yourself." Here, Shaw is touting the Nazi doctrine of "life unworthy of life" (Lebensunwertes Leben).

Remember, at the end of liberal fascism is always death.

Twenty-five years before Hitler built his first gas chambers to exterminate the Jews, the progressive prophet of death George Bernard Shaw prophesied in a lecture to the Eugenics Education Society on March 4, 1910: "We should find ourselves committed to killing a great many people whom we now leave living, and to leave living a great many people whom we at present kill. We should have to get rid of all ideas about capital punishment. … A part of eugenic politics would finally land us in an extensive use of the lethal [gas] chamber. A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people's time to look after them."

In 1934, just one year after Hitler came to power, Shaw said: "If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way." The Nazis heard Shaw's plea of Lebensunwertes Leben and used the diabolical gas Zyklon B to effect their evil madness upon the Jews and against civilization.

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,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

I blame Bush for Stalincare ~ By Ellis Washington

At the bottom of this column by Ellis, I included the video of the now famous words of Rep. Alcee Hastings (the disgraced former Federal Judge). This is just to emphasize the Machiavellian type of Chicago-style thugocracy that is transforming America before our eyes. This is what we are up against now. Sure, Ellis is right, it would not have happened had we not had the Bush RINOs in the White House prior to the election of our Dear Glorious Leader that we are now enduring. But, as he says below, "we are living in tyrannical times."

It is vitally important, in my own humble opinion, that Conservatives spend our time uniting patriotic Americans, and just forget about the blame-game. Let's think about the future, and not the past. Please?

Indeed, we are living in tyrannical times, and that's why I blame Bush 43 for faking like he was a Ronald Reagan conservative in 2001, all but ignoring conservatives for his first nine months in office, until 9/11, bankrupting America during his two terms as president, two ill-advised wars, demoralizing the voters with a $7 trillion prescription-drug bill, a Kennedy education bill ("No Child Left Behind"), TARP and bailing out corrupt Wall Street investment banks.

These socialist policies allowed the Marxist Barack Obama to ascend to power; a man who utterly hates America to the core and is hell-bent on seeing this country pay for all her sins by systematically deconstructing America from a republic and transforming her into a servile, socialist state.

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

American medicine is the best because it is private and it must stay that way.


~ Ronald Reagan

The shameless tactics of Chicago thug politics were demonstrated on March 21 where President Obama and the Democrats used every Machiavellian tactic to pass his government-controlled health-care bill by a vote of 219 to 212. The real intent of Democrats was articulated by Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., who was impeached and removed from the bench as a federal judge before being elected to the House. Before the bill was signed, Hastings said, There ain't no rules here, we're trying to accomplish something. ... When the deal goes down, all this talk about rules … we make 'em up as we go along. (See video below)

Rep. Hastings' sentiments are the deserved legacy the GOP has bequeathed to America, a legacy whose latest manifestation is Obama's $940 billion socialist health-care bill. That's why I will not join the chorus of Republicans, conservative commentators and radio talk-show hosts in blaming this all on President Obama and the Democrats. That's too easy and fails to get to the heart of the matter.

How did America devolve into making entitlements a constitutional right protected by the Supreme Court? It didn't suddenly happen on March 23, 2010, when Obama signed the health-care bill into law. Obama was unwittingly closer to the actual date that America began her tragic love affair with socialism when he said at a rally last week at George Mason University: "We have waited long enough, and in just a few days a century-long struggle will culminate in a historic vote."

What he meant by that phrase ("century-long struggle") is that socialist health care for all was envisioned as early as Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09), a Republican who left the GOP in 1912 and ran under the Bull Moose-Progressive Party, where he got 27 percent of the vote and opened the door for America's first fascist president, Woodrow Wilson (1913-21) to get elected.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

RELATED VIDEO:

March 20, 2010 - Key House Democrat: "There Are No Rules Here ... We Make Them Up As We Go Along"

Video provided by JohnBoehner

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

Liz Cheney and 'the DOJ 19' ~ By Ellis Washington

Ellis tells about Liz Cheney's ad, from KeepAmericaSafe.com, and why the "DOJ 19" liberals and RINOs are criticizing her for using the phrase, "The al-Qaida 7."

The Obama administration is seemingly hell-bent on "fundamentally transforming America" as the president has stated on many occasions. One way to achieve his socialist revolution is by deconstructing all of America's fundamental institutions. Giving constitutional rights to avowed Muslim terrorists is merely a means to Obama's diabolical ends to purposely destabilize American society, thus setting the pretext to eventually create a one-party oligarchy.


Remember the words of chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel, which were repeated by both Obama and Hillary Clinton: You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

Truth is the best defense.

Attorney General Eric Holder

Liz Cheney, daughter of Dick Cheney, Bush-43's VP, is an unapologetic conservative and cofounder of the advocacy group "Keep America Safe." She has created a recent controversy with liberals and RINOs across America who are feigning outrage at an ad Liz Cheney's organization aired that used the phrase "The al-Qaida 7" – an unflattering epithet implying that seven of the nine Department of Justice lawyers recently appointed by Attorney General Eric Holder have ties to the defense of known Muslim terrorists.

March 03, 2010 ~ Keep America Safe: Who Are The Al Qaeda Seven?

Video provided by PaulWilliamsWorld

The central question regarding the al-Qaida 7 is not whether it is permissible or even expedient for DOJ lawyers to represent the obviously guilty, because under our system of laws, criminals are entitled to counsel, but why did they do it? If they were motivated by empathy for the terrorists, then Liz Cheney is right for stating this fact. However, if they are strict constitutionalists and desire protection of our constitutional principles and were motivated by legal principle, then Cheney is wrong.

In response to Liz Cheney's attacks against the al-Qaida 7 earlier this week, a group of 19 former top officials of the Bush Justice Department signed a declaration defending DOJ policy, including: Larry Thompson (deputy attorney general, Bush-43), Peter Keisler (acting attorney general, Bush-41), Matthew Waxman, Charles "Cully" Stimson (deputy assistant secretary of defense, Bush-43), Brandford Berenson and Daniel Dell'Orto (White House counsel, Bush-41).

Other DOJ sympathizers included John Bellinger III, a former legal adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and currently a partner at the law firm of Arnold and Porter, who said regarding Liz Cheney's criticism of DOJ: "We've had a long-standing tradition in our country for lawyers to represent unpopular causes, and they shouldn't be attacked for doing so." Ken Starr, current dean of Pepperdine Law School, former solicitor general and special prosecutor during the infamous Clinton-Lewinsky sexual harassment scandal of the 1990s, said: "You do not impute the causes of the client to the lawyer who is called upon to make sure that that client's rights are being protected."

Really, Dean Starr? Where is that idea found in the Constitution?

Their GOP credentials notwithstanding, it appears that these lawyers, who I'll call "the DOJ 19" all signed that document defending Holder and seem to hold a biased view against America's original intent of the constitutional framers founded in natural-law jurisprudence. Instead these careerists are zealously defending existential DOJ bureaucracy, centralized big government and the rights of the guilty above the rights of the innocent.

The DOJ 19 defend terrorist-sympathizer Eric Holder and the al-Qaida 7, who have time to do pro bono work for Muslim terrorists – but how much time have they given to defend vilified American heroes like: Michael McCabe, Julio Huertas and Jonathan Keefe who caught Ahmed Hashim Abed, plotter of the murder of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004? The bodies of the four Americans were burned and hanged from a bridge while Iraqis cheered on in jubilation.

The Liz Cheney controversy brings up deeper constitutional issues of natural law, original intent and the personal guarantees the constitutional framers codified in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

RELATED LINK:
KEEPAMERICAFREE.COM

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

When killer whales kill: A biblical view ~ By Ellis Washington

In Ellis Washington's column, he explains the theological order of humans versus animals, known as Natural Law, and how progressivism and Darwinism have perverted the Judeo-Christian views.

The anti-Christian view rooted in the ideas of the progressive movement is controlling today. Progressivism is a diabolical philosophy that since the 1890s has propagated such perverse public policies as: the welfare state, eugenics, forced sterilization, abortion, Marxism, radical environmentalism, pragmatism, utilitarianism, feminism, socialism, naturalism, animal rights – all within the paradigm of social Darwinism.


The sacred worth of humans has been deconstructed into a cold cost-benefit analysis of progressive economists.

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

In the long run we are all dead.


~ John Maynard Keynes, progressive economist

It has been a little over a week since the tragic death of Dawn Brancheau, a veteran trainer at SeaWorld in Florida who was killed by a serial killer whale named, "Tilikum."

Eyewitnesses said that Dawn did not accidentally fall into the tank of the animal as officials from SeaWorld originally claimed, but that while the trainer wasn't looking the killer whale grabbed her hair and mercilessly mauled her in the water. SeaWorld quickly revised their storyline of the tragic accident:

SeaWorld acknowledged two hours later that Tilikum had grabbed Brancheau by her ponytail and yanked her into the water. The park then made its head animal trainer available to the media to explain and defend its methods of training and maintaining its whales.

These unscrupulous acts on SeaWorld's part are beyond the pale. The park must be held accountable, and Tilikum the killer whale should be immediately destroyed.

This euthanasia policy isn't without precedent. I remember reading about a mountain lion that had killed a jogger in California. Officials tracked the offending animal down and immediately killed it so that the public could be put at ease when out enjoying the wilderness.

Other stories of killer sharks, bears, lions, tigers, bulls, etc., that had to be hunted down and destroyed because these wild beasts killed people are not uncommon in America and around the world. Where did people get the idea that animals which kill people must immediately be destroyed? Well, the same place we got the ideas found in natural law, the common law, the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights – it all came from the Bible.

Perhaps surprising to most people is the fact that God has explicit commandments on how to deal with animals that kill humans. Early Catholic theologians like St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas and others followed a natural-law philosophy of the universe that animals should be hunted and eaten by others. This was reflected in their theology.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

RELATED STORY:

The Chain of Command ~ By John Kubicek

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

Darwin is freezing over ~ By Ellis Washington

In a great column by Ellis Washington, he shows us how Darwinism and Anthropogenic (man-caused) Global Warming are such similar scams.  They are both "humanist religions," but there is one big, big difference. That is the money element.  In AGW, there are billions and trillions of dollars to be made. I'll just let Ellis fill in the details, as he does so well here.

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen.


~ Sir John Houghton, founder of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

… I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science. ... It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] and holes as sound parts.


~ Charles Darwin, letter to Asa Gray

As this man-caused global warming (now climate change) fraud comes crashing down upon the heads of all the state-controlled scientists, U.N. bureaucrats, Al Gore, political hacks on both sides of the aisle and humanist academics, I am reminded of an aphorism I wrote in an earlier article: "Show me a monopoly and I'll show you a tyranny."

I cannot help to see this manmade climate change scam being our modern-day equivalent to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution 150 years ago, which I consider scientific mythology or fairy tales for adults.

In a fine article published in the U.K. Daily Mail by Jonathan Petre of professor Phil Jones' BBC interview, the title said it all: "Climategate U-turn as scientist at center of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995."

One hundred fifty years ago, Charles Darwin, an unremarkable British naturalist, was able to beguile the entire education, political, scientific and intellectual world with his sophistic and unscientific theories of the origin of man as chronicled in his two famous books: "The Origin of Species" (1859) and "The Descent of Man" (1871). As it was then so it is now; Darwin and his zealous legions of followers had not one shred of verifiable evidence for their theory. Truth and logic are not required to join the cult of Darwin or global warming; complete religious devotion is.

But for some Chinese hackers publishing private e-mails between professor Jones and his colleagues at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit and Pennsylvania State University, the public may have never known that all of their data on climate change was counterfeit and contrived; but more importantly, that the entire theory of manmade global warming was a willful scientific fraud from its beginning.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Sowellian economics ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.

~ Thomas Sowell

Intellectual, economist and Hoover Institute Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell has made many magnificent contributions to the marketplace of ideas to which few others in American history can compare. For example, in his 1981 book, "Knowledge and Decisions," Sowell made this prescient observation: "Historically, freedom is a rare and tragic thing. It has emerged out of the stalemates of would-be oppressors. Freedom has cost the blood of millions in obscure places and historic sites ranging from Gettysburg to the Gulag Archipelago."

There is so much to learn from Sowell. A leitmotiv I find in many of his works is his cost-benefit economic paradigm applied to culture and society. Sowell delineates a trenchant critique against self-poverty-generating decisions, some of which include joining a gang, having a baby out of wedlock, getting married before becoming intellectually mature and economically secure, being easily deceived by the rhetoric of poverty pimps and civil-rights charlatans and, most importantly, foolishly thinking someone owes you anything because you don't have something (or everything). Such approaches the essence of the mind of Thomas Sowell.

Sowell is one of my intellectual mentors. I have followed his career for many years. In 1988, I changed my worldview from liberalism to conservatism during my first year at Harvard's graduate school and law school and began reading Sowell religiously in a newspaper called "The Conservative Chronicle." In the early 1990s, I remember sending him some of my earliest manuscripts I had written on political philosophy and constitutional law, asking for his assistance on getting published. He sent me a form letter of sources I should review on writing … Ouch!

In many of Sowell's works, economics, race and politics are juxtaposed with the knowledge, choices and decisions of ordinary citizens under a moral and cost-benefit paradigm – evaluating tradeoffs where limited resources have alternative uses, as opposed to relying on patronizing rhetoric from progressive academics, political hacks and community organizers.

For example, in his two classic books on economics, written in 2004, "Basic Economics" and "Applied Economics," Sowell outlines the fundamentals of the discipline so that the layman can understand them along – with his insightful way of using economic models to avert cultural and societal pathologies like crime, ignorance and promiscuity. Sowell's tutelage may sometimes be cruel, but his remedies will liberate all those wise enough to free themselves from the galling chains of socialism.

Sowell's "transactional" approach to social and economic policy is one of the hallmarks of his oeuvre. For example Sowell writes:

Lofty talk about "non-economic values" too often amounts to very selfish attempts to impose one's own values, without having to weigh them against other people's values. Taxing away what other people have earned, in order to finance one's own fantasy ventures, is often depicted as a humanitarian endeavor, while allowing others the same freedom and dignity as oneself, so they can make their own choices with their own earnings, is considered to be pandering to "greed." Greed for power is more dangerous than greed for money and has shed far more blood in the process. Political authorities have often had "revolutionary values" that were devastating to the general population.

Placing Sowell's ideas in a historical context, for the past 120 years since the advent of the progressive movement in the early 1890s, progressives, politicians, academics, scientists, activist judges and so-called intellectuals of the left have made a cottage industry of deifying non-economic values and forcing them via public-policy dictates and activist court opinions down the throats of the American citizens. These onerous policies and addictive government remedies have only aggravated the plight of society, especially America's most vulnerable citizens (i.e., blacks, Appalachian whites, Hispanics, Indians).

READ FULL STORY >

Black conservatism on the march? ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington

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

© 2010

No greater injury can be done to any youth than to let him feel that because he belongs to this or that race he will be advanced in life regardless of his own merits or efforts.


Do what you can with what you have and never be satisfied.


~ Booker T. Washington

Prologue

This column analyzes the state of black conservatism in America today. Black conservatism stresses traditionalism, robust patriotism, free-market capitalism and aggressive social conservatism within the context of the black church. Principally, black conservatism emphasizes personal responsibilities, irrelative of socioeconomic class and institutional racism. In the tradition of African-American politics and intellectual life, black conservatives tend to support the self-help/moral philosophy of Booker T. Washington (1856-1915) as contrasted with the activist/progressive philosophy of W.E.B. Du Bois (1868-1963).

Analysis

For many black conservatives, the singular objective is to bring social redemption and economic success to the black community. Four core concepts of black conservatism are cited in the important book "Black and Right: The Bold New Voice of Black Conservatives in America," editors Stan Faryna, Brad Stetson and Joseph G. Conti. They are:

• The pursuit of educational and professional excellence as a means of advancement within the society;

• Policies that promote safety and security in the community beyond the typical casting of a criminal as a "victim" of societal racism;

• Local economic development through free enterprise rather than looking to the federal government for assistance;

• Empowerment of the individual via self-improvement (virtue), conscience and supernatural grace.

While the actual numbers of black conservatives is difficult to deduce, a useful list of black conservative groups can be found at: Black Conservatism and Who is your favorite Black Conservative?"

In February 2008 I drafted a series of strategies and proposals for affecting a quantifiable black presence in the Republican Party, which was published in WorldNetDaily.com. Later I sent this article to all 50 Republican Political Action Committees in America and to the Republican National Committee. Here are some excerpts:

My main intent is to help the Republican Party return to being the party of Lincoln, the party of the disenfranchised, not by government largess no matter how well-intentioned, but by helping black people to help themselves. In my weekly column on WorldNetDaily, I delineate many strategies that can help the Republican Party recapture the majority black vote they once enjoyed from 1870-1932, after which time blacks left the party en masse in the early 1930s at the urging of W.E.B. Du Bois and the NAACP to vote for FDR.

Black people have voted Democrat at over 90 percent ever since that time. With your help, I want to change that tragic scenario that has so decimated the real and vested interests of black people all over America. …

The response from the RNC and all 50 GOPAC organizations? Absolutely nothing! How can the GOP reclaim the black vote if they don't give a damn about black intellectuals like me?!

READ FULL STORY >

Dred Scott and corporate personhood ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: January 30, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 WorldNetDaily

The negro has no rights which the white man was bound to respect. – Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857)

I can summarize in five words the Supreme Court's Jan. 23 landmark decision, "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission":

Corporations are persons; money = speech

The First Amendment plainly states, "Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech." However, since the 1907 Tillman Act, American businesses and corporations, the lifeblood of our market-capitalist economy for more than 230 years, have had their political voices injustly restricted through limits on how much money they can contribute to political campaigns. Alex Barker, writing for the Financial Times gave the shameful historical background of the Tillman Act:

The 1907 Tillman Act – named after "Pitchfork Ben" Tillman, a vile racist senator who made his name rampaging through the South attacking blacks and Republicans with his "Red Shirt" band of paramilitary terrorists – was the first attempt by Congress to clean up politics. Tillman's motive – stopping funding to civil rights politicians – was pretty disgraceful. But the means he sought was supported by the likes of Theodore Roosevelt, who were more interested in tackling dirty politics.

The decision in "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" removed unconstitutional restrictions on the free speech of businesses, associations, organized labor and certain advocacy groups with regard to their participation in political campaigns. Regarding this case, the demagogue Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) said, "This is the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scott case." In the 1857 Dred Scott decision, the Supreme Court ruled that black Americans who were either slaves or the descendants of slaves could not be, and never had been U.S. citizens. READ FULL STORY >

Congratulations, Sen. Brown ~ By Ellis Washington

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Ellis Washington Posted: January 23, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2010 Editor's note: Ellis Washington's new radio program, "The Washington Report," airs Thursdays at 11 a.m. Eastern on 1620 AM in Atlanta, Ga. It can be heard online at the Radio Sandy Springs website.

It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~ Samuel Adams

I love those stirring words of Samuel Adams (1722-1803), one of my favorite historical figures, also known as "The Father of the American Revolution." Would to God we had 535 Samuel Adamses in Congress today. During pivotal times of our history, Massachusetts has been at the epicenter of America's republic. We all remember the two great tea parties that began a tsunami of political reform starting in Massachusetts and quickly spread throughout the country:

• May 10, 1773 – The Boston Tea Party lit the fuse of the American Revolution, which eventually destroyed the shackles of British tyranny, monarchy and confiscatory taxation policies from the colonies;

• April 15, 2009 – The first Tax Day Tea Party was started on Tax Day in Boston, Mass., leading to a steady decline of President Barack Obama in the polls and increasing opposition to his radical Marxist agenda to "remake America," including his socialist health-care program currently stalled in Congress.

The first act of defiance by our forefathers 237 years ago established the republic; the last act will perhaps save our republic from the fascist policies of President Obama and the Democrats. With Tuesday's victory of Scott Brown over Massachusetts Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley, seismic shock waves were sent across the world. The sword of Damocles now hangs ominously over the head Obama and Majority Leader Harry Reid's tenuous 60 votes required to pass their Marxist health-care bill in the Senate. READ FULL STORY >