Lone Survivor beats all box office predictions in impressive opening weekend ~ Glenn Beck

“As you will see, the most honorable thing a friend can do for his brothers, Marcus Luttrell has done and told this story and made it appropriate for their death. And you will be amazed at the honor of these men. Truly amazed and humbled,” Glenn concluded. “If you don’t walk out of there going, ‘What am I doing with my life?’ ‘What is important to me?’ If you don’t walk out of that movie theater feeling that, I don’t know, you need to watch it again or check yourself into a hospital to see if you have a heart or a soul.” ~ Glenn Beck

This news mirrors exactly what I expected to happen. It isn't because I'm psychic, either, but because I was aware of Marcus Lutrell's story, thanks to Glenn Beck. I had heard Glenn's interview with Marcus quite some time ago while listening to the show in progress (not just a repeat or a clip). I've also come across a lot of people that have told me that they plan to go to the theater to see this movie. I plan on seeing "Lone Survivor" in the next few days.

Based on the failed June 28, 2005 mission "Operation Red Wings." Four members of SEAL Team 10, were tasked with the mission to capture or kill notorious Taliban leader, Ahmad Shahd. Marcus Luttrell was the only member of his team to survive.

There is a good reason why I've voluntarily propagated this story even further. This is a message to Hollyweird. America isn't going for movies like "The Wolf of Wallstreet." It isn't what America wants to see. Patriots like movies that show courage and resilience and heroes that are fighting for America!

And guess what?!! Hey, Hollywood, there are many more patriots here in America than you ever dreamed of!

If you want Hollywood to know how many patriots there are in America, and if "Lone Survivor" is the kind of movie you want Hollywood to produce, please help this post keep propagating! You can share it with your friends on Twitter or Facebook or by word of mouth. Just sayin'...

Lone Survivor beats all box office predictions in impressive opening weekend

Glenn Beck

GlennBeck.com

Monday, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:18 PM CST

Lone Survivor, the film adaption of former Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell’s bestselling book of the same name, had a historical weekend at the box office.

“If you haven’t seen Lone Survivor, you need to,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “Second biggest opening in January of any movie. They were surprised by it… They thought it was going to be $14 million. It was $38 million. This thing is going to make well over $100 million and then some.”

Lone Survivor finished the weekend as the number one movie in America bringing in $38.5 million. It bested Disney’s Frozen, which came in at number two, earning $15 million in its eighth weekend, and Paramount’s The Wolf of Wall Street earning $9 million in its third weekend. The opening weekend marked the second biggest January opening ever after the $40.1 million debut of 2008′s Cloverfield.

~~~ READ MORE on GlennBeck.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

The raunchy 'real' world ~ By Patrice Lewis

If people could only stop bathing in the river of slime issuing from mainstream media sources and Hollywood, they might see there's a whole, huge subculture of teens who are growing up with old-fashioned virtues intact. This subculture is not only alive and well, it's thriving and growing.

In this column, Patrice Lewis discusses the criticism of her and others that are raising their kids with "morals and values that keep our children out of the 'real' world." Patrice explains that there are many parents like her, where their children are homeschooled, and many more are sent to private and parochial schools and that don't consume the junk on the idiot box, where "Hollywood is shockingly obsessed with sexualizing teen girls."

And who are the people that criticize Patrice and parents like her? It's those who are "bathing in the river of slime issuing from mainstream media sources and Hollywood," and who are "the useful idiots who watch" that "will continue to criticize those of us who raise our sons and daughters away from the 'real' world." Can or will the trend toward the raunchy "real" world continue? Patrice believes that it "is the time-tested, morally sound principles by which Real America raises its kids that are 'real'."

The raunchy 'real' world

PATRICE LEWIS

By Patrice Lewis

January 08, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

You know, the older I get, the more I'm convinced I live in a fantasy world.

In this cheery little artificial la-la land where I reside, boys are young knights-in-training and girls are virtuous and feminine. Children do not long for new and creative ways to self-destruct, and they have no wish to create havoc in their parent's home. And when everyone grows up, they court, get married and have babies (in that order).

People sometimes (with a straight face, mind you) accuse my husband and I of "depriving" or even "abusing" our children by homeschooling them in a rural setting. How, they wonder, will our girls ever adapt to the (cough) "real" world if they don't have the socialization opportunities of school? What do you mean we don't have television reception in our home? How will our kids ever learn what kind of behavior is expected of them unless they watch such intellectually lofty programs as "Glee" and "Gossip Girl"?

The implication is because our children are growing up valuing modesty, self-control, honor and self-respect, they are maladjusted little twits who will end up as drooling misguided troglodytes with the collective social skills of, say, wood lice.

Then I see a television program and realize why some people think our parental methods are destructive. We're raising our girls far, far away from the "real" world.

In the "real" world of modern America, girls are raunchy sexual creatures whose sole purpose from toddler-hood on up is to dress provocatively, adorn their bodies with tattoos, piercings and make-up, and whose sole goal in life, apparently, is to find out how many boys they can bed.

Needless to say, boys respond to this blatant invitation with vulgar abandon. They no longer need to respect girls since, after all, literally nothing stands between a boy's hormonal urges and completion of the act except for the girl's virtue. Meaning, nothing.

As a result, courtship has become a prehistoric joke, marriage is frequently optional, and no one waits to have babies any more. (And it's often insured that pregnancy does not result in a live baby at all.) When a school cancels a formal dance due to slow ticket sales because vulgar "grind" dancing was banned, you know things are bad. (Good for the principal for sticking to his guns.)

Since art reflects life, television shows celebrate these new standards. Or does life reflect art? Do television shows draw their inspiration from peoples' behavior, or do people behave the way they do because of what they see on television? It's a circular argument. (See Argument, circular.) But either way, the result is coarseness and vulgarity as the new norm.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Planned Parenthood, Marxism, and Hollywood: How the Left corrupted morality with the Free Love Movement

By John Kubicek

May 16, 2010

I was just about to post a column in this space written by Patrice Lewis called, "Keep your pants on, America!", but I made a decision not to. The reason for that decision was not because I was uncomfortable with the content and subject of the article - or that you might be - but because I thought of a different angle to take. (Well, Patrice, at least you inspired me tonight!)

It was a youtube video that Patrice had linked to in her column that I found to be very disturbing. Again, it wasn't because of the content or subject, but because it reminded me of who Planned Parenthood is. Before I explain further, you need to see this video. (Parents: Please divert the attention of any small children elsewhere before you begin watching this):

Video provided by cbrsw

Now, if you noticed in the video as I did, the characters obviously representing pro-life Christians are depicted as sinister, and they display their protests against abortion and ministry against promiscuity as being evil. Keep in mind that the cartoon in this video was apparently used by a Planned Parenthood affiliate in San Francisco, CA. for "educational" (propaganda) purposes.

Here is a brief snippet about Planned Parenthood from Wikipedia that I found:

Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), commonly shortened to Planned Parenthood, is the U.S. affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and one of its larger members. PPFA provides reproductive health and maternal and child health services. Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Inc. (PPAF) is a related organization that lobbies the U.S. political system for pro-choice legislation, comprehensive sex education, and access to affordable health care. (Emphasis my own)

Planned Parenthood was initially formed in 1916 by Margaret Sanger. Sanger "was an American birth control activist, advocate of eugenics, and the founder of the American Birth Control League." Her religion? Atheist. But get this: "Sanger was also an avowed socialist, blaming what she saw as the evils of contemporary capitalism for the unsatisfactory conditions of young white working-class women. Her very personal views on this issue are evident in the last pages of "What Every Girl Should Know."

Now, I don't know about you, but when I hear that somebody is a socialist, the chances are, I figure that they are also Marxist. This would most certainly apply to Sanger, I believe. And, here is why:

Marxist feminism is a sub-type of feminist theory which focuses on the dismantling of capitalism as a way to liberate women. Marxist feminism states that private property, which gives rise to economic inequality, dependence, political confusion and ultimately unhealthy social relations between men and women, is the root of women's oppression. (Emphasis my own)

And if that didn't convince you, what I also found on Wikipedia was this:

Radical feminism, which emerged in the 1970s, also took issue with Marxist feminism. Radical feminist theorists stated that modern society and its constructs (law, religion, politics, art, etc) are the product of males and therefore have a patriarchal character. According to those who subscribe to this view, the best solution for women's oppression would be to treat patriarchy not as a subset of capitalism but as a problem in its own right (see identity politics). Thus eliminating women's oppression means eliminating male domination in all its forms. (Emphasis my own)

So, basically, what the Marxists want people to believe is that women must not be oppressed by men... They must be "empowered." And here is what Patrice Lewis wrote about that in her column referred to above:

"For the first time in human history," says Letty Cottin Pogrebin, a founding editor of Ms. Magazine, "a woman could control her sexuality and determine her readiness for reproduction by swallowing a pill smaller than an aspirin. Critics warned that the Pill would spawn generations of loose, immoral women; what it spawned was generations of empowered women who are better equipped to make rational choices about their lives."


Empowered, that's it. Women acting like rutting cattle are empowered.

Okay, I believe that I've shown the relationship between Planned Parenthood and Marxism, but what does Hollywood have to do with this? Well, let's put it this way. When I was young child, born in the early 1950's, I loved the movies at the theatre. Disney movies were of course my favorite, but anything with John Wayne or movies like "The Longest Day" (war movies) were always a winner in my eyes. They were wholesome. And even "PT-109" about John F. Kennedy's experience in WWII was brilliant, and made him appear to be a hero (in contrast to John Kerry's military experience). That movie was in stark contrast to the promiscuity that ended up being what defined President Kennedy.

And it wasn't just at the movie theaters that things were so wholesome in my early childhood years. The television shows were pretty conservative at that time, too. The Mom and Dad (husband and wife, not just man and woman) slept in separate beds.

And then, in the mid-60's, it happened. Hollywood became "Hollyweird." Movies began to change ever so slightly. It took a while longer for TV to make the leap, but that was because of FCC regulations. Well, anyway, my parents didn't allow me to even go to James Bond (with Sean Connery) movies in my pre-teenage years. I was around 14 or 15 when I finally got to go to one of them, which was "Thunderball." Looking back, I can see why they didn't allow me to go, and I am surprised they ever allowed me to see one. Anyway, James Bond was always able to "get the girl" and though they didn't show any sexual scenes, you pretty much had an idea of what was going to happen or did happen, if you get my drift. And here is the thing about that: James Bond wasn't getting it on with a spouse, but always single, attractive women. Darn that Hollywood, they were starting the movement towards more and more risque flicks in a very covert way... Though body parts weren't displayed, it was the idea that sex with strangers was now okay.

It wasn't long before I had my driver's license, and was able to borrow Dad's car so I could go to the drive-in theaters with my buddies. It all started so innocent, as one of the first movies I went to with my friends was "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly." Sure, a little violent, as were the Dirty Harry movies, but Clint Eastwood always got the bad guys. No problem. But it wasn't long before other movies that weren't quite so wholesome became more of the norm at the drive-ins. Oh, wow, those films that showed bare breasts soon became the biggest hits among the teenage boys.

All the while, there was another social change going on. Viet Nam, which inspired The Hippie movement. The flower children. The love child. The psychedelic painted up VW buses. Communes. Free love. Yes, all of this was happening about the same time that Hollywood began to make movies that didn't exactly portray Christian and family values. And do you think that maybe the leftists/progressives/Socialists in Hollywood didn't influence the change? Ya think? After all, don't forget, Hollyweird IS on the "left coast."

And now we see what the progressive social changes have done for America, and the world, for that matter. A high divorce rate. Millions upon millions of abortions. Women with babies and never in wedlock. A lack of morals. Bill Clinton... But I digress.

The Marxists have all but arrived at their ultimate end game. They now have their guy in the Oval Room, a Marxist and his minions running the White House and at least half of Congress, not to mention all of the progressive bureaucrats entrenched in the government system, many of whom are unionized. And don't forget the indoctrination system of the public schools, where there is all of that "sexual education" going on.

But now, here is the question I really wanted to ask while in the process of writing this: Is there any way that we can go back to how it used to be? Yeah, I know, that's a pretty depressing thought, isn't it.

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)!

Celebs to kids: America stinks!

From WorldNetDaily

'55 rich white men drafted Constitution to protect their class – slaveholders' By Drew Zahn Posted: December 14, 2009 ~ 8:49 pm Eastern © 2009 WorldNetDaily Hollywood celebrities and education gurus have teamed together to distribute to schools across the country a dramatic new curriculum that casts American history as an epic march of victims seeking to shrug off the shackles of the warmongering, racist, capitalist, imperialist United States. The History Channel's airing of the "The People Speak" last night marks the public coming-out party of a movement that has been in place since last year to teach America's school children a "social justice" brand of history that rails against war, oppression, capitalism and popular patriotism. The television special featuring performances by Matt Damon, Benjamin Bratt, Marisa Tomei, Don Cheadle, Bruce Springsteen and others condemns the nation's past of oppression by the wealthy, powerful and imperialist and instead trumpets the voices of America's labor unions, minorities and protesters of various stripes. The accompanying curriculum guide for schools that show "The People Speak" in classrooms, for example, highlights an 1852 reading from abolitionist Frederick Douglass:

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy – a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.

The program and discussion guide is the most ambitious resource among many offered to America's schools by the Zinn Education Project, a collaboration of Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, as part of a push to encourage history instruction based on educator Howard Zinn's 1980 tome exposing the abuses of America's past, "A People's History of the United States." The project states its goal is to "introduce students to a more accurate, complex and engaging understanding of United States history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula. … Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' emphasizes the role of working people, women, people of color and organized social movements in shaping history. Students learn that history is made not by a few heroic individuals, but instead by people's choices and actions, thereby also learning that their own choices and actions matter."

Stephen Baldwin Slams Hollywood

Baldwin stated a fact that says, "Family programming and animated films make more money." When it comes to the violent and vulgar content, Baldwin Says; "Hollywood just stands around and says, ‘Oh well, the parents are responsible for whether or not those kids should watch that content.’ That’s just not true,” Baldwin insists.

By: Rick Pedraza Actor and media personality Stephen Baldwin says the “vulgar and offensive” content in Hollywood productions is one reason why the United States now has such high rates of unemployment, suicide and teen pregnancy. “The fact that they churn out more content that is gratuitously violent, sexual and vulgar, when in fact more family programming and animated films make more money – there’s you’re agenda problem,” Baldwin tells CNS News. Baldwin, attending last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington to sign copies of his new book, “The Death and Life of Gabriel Phillips,” tells CNS News that Hollywood produces too many anti-family films while pro-family films are the ones that sell, and that Hollywood is wrong for saying it’s “solely up to the parents” to control what their children watch. [Continue reading]

digg story ~ Submitted by rjwusa