Am I really worse than ISIS? ~ By Phil Elmore

Phil Elmore

Phil Elmore tells of Twitter vitriol sent his way after Paris attacks

They don't feel any remorse. Despite the cold-blooded murders in Paris, the problem is that there are Muslims that are whining about Americans who are supposedly "Islamophobic." Phil explains that in this column, and especially here:

It tells us something profound, in fact, given the sheer and breathtaking volume of Muslim terror attacks occurring throughout the world, that the first and most vehement reaction by supposedly “moderate” Muslims is to whine that we are unfairly painting their death cult with a broad brush. Instead of standing with the West, they condemn us for “Islamophobia.” Instead of looking to their own religion and asking why so many of Allah’s followers murder innocent people, they lecture the West on tolerance. Instead of adding their voices to those mourning the dead, they use social media to sneer defensively at the living.

No, I really couldn't say it any better than Phil did in the above quote. However, I do have something to say in addition to Phil's thoughts: To anyone that thinks AND says that the "filter" for allowing Syrians to come here should depend on the refugee's claimed religion, that is the biggest mistake a politician could make! First of all, that is so contrary to our Constitution of the United States, specifically, the First Amendment!

Wait, maybe we should back up a little here. We really want to be compassionate, but we might want to do all that is possible to be vetting ALL refugees before we allow possible terrorists into the country. But in the mean time, we know that anyone that values our safety and security will probably be facing the same kind of condemnation in the furious torrents of absolute hostility that Phil experienced. Just sayin'...

*    *    *    *

Am I really worse than ISIS?

An interesting thing happened Friday. Muslim terrorists, presumably with ISIS, attacked targets in Paris in a coordinated and bloody effort that left hundreds wounded and at least 129 dead. Like so many here in the United States, I took to Internet and social media to listen to the live news feed while crawling through various Paris…

VIDEO: Why We All Should Be Proud to be an American

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

The following video is related to this very subject, only this time it is about Conservatives BEING the most patriotic according to a Harvard study.

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!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

An army of liberal trolls ~ By Phil Elmore

Remember that Mozilla’s CEO lost his job because he once held an opinion that is considered by liberals to be politically incorrect. His position had nothing to do with his job and, more significantly, the company for which he worked took no position, donated no funds, for or against gay marriage. This is a slippery slope because liberals already feel quite free to threaten conservatives with death. They particularly enjoy threatening conservative women with rape. And now that there are liberal voices calling for the imprisonment of those who “deny” man-made climate change, does it really take a leap of logic to see where this leads society? If the demonization, marginalization and persecution of conservative opinion does not stop, we’re one short chute away from a world in which liberals might actually screw up the courage to murder the conservatives they hate so much.

I know that Phil is absolutely right on the money with this commentary. I mean, it's still pretty sad, but it certainly does - unfortunately - reflect the culture we live in. The changes in accepted moral standards have been drastically "scummed down" during my lifetime. Literally having had my mouth washed out with soap as a youngster for the slightest of offensive curse words should tell you something! (Okay, it may also tell you that I'm getting old, but please ignore that.)

In the earlier days of my online blogging experience, it wasn't long before I became aware of the existence of the liberal trolls. At first, it really bothered me, because they didn't just attack what I was writing about; it was the personal attacks that I had to deal with! They seemed to know the right button to push that would hurt the most. I kept having to ask myself, "Who ARE these people? What do they have against me?" Though I eventually learned the answers to those questions on my own a long time ago, Phil's column is confirming that I was correctly realizing that it wasn't about me specifically, but the Conservative ideals that I believe in.

That being said, there was a deeper and darker part of this column that we need to pay close attention to.  I'm pretty sure that the thought of being loaded on to freight trains is frightening, but seems to be implausible... we would hope! But the implications of the violent rhetoric from the Left these days does not allow me to just ignore what Phil is saying. And it isn't just the liberal trolls saying Conservatives should be dead or raped that is disturbing, either. No, it is the liberal academia, liberal mainstream media, and even liberals that became bureaucrats and politicians that should worry us.  There are those that would like to silence us for saying what we believe.  When you read Phil's column, and this post, I think you will understand what I mean.  I'm just sayin'...

(PS:  There may be a sequel to this story, so stay tuned!)

RELATED STORIES:

• November 25, 2012 ~ Decisive action against Obama's left-wing 'trolls' ~ By Jerome R. Corsi

Typically, trolls operating on WND forums attempt to defend Obama by posting specious and diversionary arguments with the goal of changing the subject and obscuring topics that could damage Obama, such as his birth records, life narrative, political history and policy preferences, including his current positions as president.

• April 07, 2014 ~ The Story That Made Beck Say ‘We Are Becoming a Thugocracy’ - By Erica Ritz

“If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us,” laments blogger Andrew Sullivan (who is gay), in a widely circulated blog post.

*    *    *    *

An army of liberal trolls
Exclusive: Phil Elmore warns we mustn't discount 'tidal wave of hate' presented online

Phil Elmore

By Phil Elmore

Wednesday, April 9th, 2014

From wnd.com Commentary

There’s a reason popular culture matters. It’s because it is not what politicians say that changes minds. The opinions of your fellow human beings are formed through their interactions with technology. From the moment you first get your news from Twitter to the hours you while away looking at shared opinions and entertainment on Facebook, from the stories that are carefully selected for your television news to the radio commercials you listen to, from the pop-up “surveys” you see on your monitor to the lyrics in the pop songs you play on Pandora, your default opinions are formed in this background noise, this wash of attitudes and presumptions that comprise your laundry list of assumptions about life.

The left understands just how powerful is this technological lever when moving society’s opinion. To this end, the libs, the leftists, the “progressives,” employ – figuratively if not literally – an army of trolls. Their mission is to scream more loudly, to squawk more belligerently, to rail more vociferously against any voice they dislike. Any statement of conservative or libertarian opinion must be shouted down through online comments and rebuttal, because to permit conservatives free speech is to concede that there might be two sides to an argument. It is to admit that a right-wing voice might be as legitimate, as socially acceptable, as a left-wing voice.

~~~ READ MORE at wnd.com Commentaries ~~~

*    *    *    *

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!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Seven Hard Truths Liberals Just Don’t Want To Hear ~ By Kurt Schlichter

Liberalism is magical thinking promulgated by cynical exploiters upon the eternally gullible and the chronically lazy. It’s a political Ponzi scheme, and today’s participants are the unlucky marks coming in at the end of the grift.

Liberalism will collapse of its own dead weight. And when it does, you true believers better be ready for the hard truth that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

I need to continue on from what Kurt Schlichter said was Hard Truth Number 7:

And that leads to Hard Truth Number 7: This can’t go on.

Lady [Margaret] Thatcher famously formulated that, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” And you will.

What I need to tell you is there are even more Hard Truths that you should know about:

Hard Truth Number 8: When the Ponzi system goes broke, the most likely result will be tyranny, and probably genocide. You probably will not be able to vote Conservatives into power; forget about trying to remove the likes of Harry Reid from control of the Senate; and we won't be taking back the White House anytime soon, either. In places like North Korea, the Dear Leader gets 100% of the vote.

Hard Truth Number 9:  There are Liberals that knew very well about the first eight Hard Truths, and that was their plan all along! Well, their plan for at least 100 years, anyway, was to upend our culture, eliminate religion, divide the population by race and class warfare, and dumb down the kids with the indoctrination centers they call public schools...

But, perhaps, there is one more Hard Truth to discuss.  What I consider to be Hard Truth Number 10: There are hardcore, gun-toting, Bible clinging "redneck" patriots out here that are going to make your plan much more difficult to achieve. This is Amazing America!!! This isn't the end of what some of us have to say.  It is not over yet!  I'm just sayin'...


H/T to Jan Morgan for leading me to this video!

H/T to Louis Van Marm, one of my Brother Tea Partiers, for the email that lead me to Kurt Schlichter's awesome column, and for a follow-up email that gave me encouragement to stay inspired to keep blogging and hoping that we can still turn this country around!

Seven Hard Truths Liberals Just Don’t Want To Hear

Kurt Schlichter

By Kurt Schlichter

March 31, 2014

From Townhall.com

It’s difficult to understand liberals when you don’t live in their sheltered cocoon of participation trophies, faux caring and feel-good lies.

Those of us who labor in the real world – who built this country, who make it work and who defend it – deal with reality. Most liberals don’t. And that can be baffling, because when they speak they sound like visitors from the planet Nimrod.

Now, some liberals do understand the real world. They are the cynical liberal icons, the ones who know their entire ideology is a scam designed to wring power and wealth from the gullible.

They are the rich ones who cry about poverty and racism then gleefully consign poor and minority kids to public school failure factories by doing the bidding of their unionized teacher partners and torpedoing educational choice. Their own kids wouldn’t get within a mile of an inner city public school, except maybe to swing by in the Mercedes C-Class they got for their 16th birthday to buy some weed from the gangbangers infesting it.

~~~ READ MORE at Townhall.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

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

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

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

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

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

UNBELIEVABLE OBAMA GAFFES, Mistakes, Lies, and Confusion

Video provided by ensignbay on Sep 27, 2009

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

And that's what liberalism is.

It all stems from a mind-set of intolerance.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

*     *     *     *

Welcome to this edition of Time 2 Escape WIFLI Briefing!

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

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

*     *     *     *

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

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

JOSEPH FARAH

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

That’s the way I look at it.

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

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

Do you know what my political views are?

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

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

Isn’t that amazing?

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

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

ERIK RUSH

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

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

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

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

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

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

RELATED VIDEO:

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

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

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

Video provided by rossache19 on May 14, 2012

*    *    *    *

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

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

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

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

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

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

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

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

MYCHAL MASSIE

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

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

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

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

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

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*    *    *    *

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

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

ROBERT RINGER

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

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

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

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

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

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

~~~ READ MORE ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Please report me to #AttackWatch ~ By Phil Elmore

Phil Elmore explains the Orwellian tactics that the Democrats/Liberals/Progressives are taking in order to protect their control of We the People. Let me summarize what Phil is saying in simple words: It is time to make the Obama strategy "shovel ready." (There, now you have the ammunition to also report me to #AttackWatch!)

Please report me to #AttackWatch

PHIL ELMORE

By Phil Elmore

September 21, 2011 ~ 9:00 pm Eastern

© 2011

More than two years ago in Technocracy, I wrote of the "culture of informing," a "tattletale nation of citizens suspiciously monitoring their fellow citizens' law-abiding behavior." I also characterized a then relatively newly elected President Obama, whom I referred to as our technology dictator, as a totalitarian who, among other things, wishes to control the Internet itself to stifle free speech and silence criticism. Especially interesting in light of my recent excoriation of James Hoffa for calls to violence among union members (and my denunciation of apologists trying, dishonestly, to dismiss Hoffa's agitation) was the fact that I referenced, in 2009, lib violence directed at silencing conservatives – all in the name of squelching what bug-eyed leftist Nancy Pelosi described as "un-American" dissent. Taken as a whole, the move by liberals to establish thoughtcrime, to criminalize dissenting political opinion, was and is nothing short of Orwellian in scope and intensity:

When Obama's transition website, Change.gov, can be retroactively scrubbed to remove all references to his confiscatory plans to disarm American citizens, Orwell's prediction of a revisionist state has already come true. When Obama can go on record as saying that he supports single-payer socialist medicine, then baldly lie and say he doesn't, Orwell's vision of a dishonest and double-speaking state is reality. When Homeland Security declares that almost all conservatives and libertarians in the country are domestic terrorists, Orwell's nightmare of a government making dissenters "unpersons" is only too real. When your pediatrician's office wants to know if you own any guns, Orwell's citizen spies are already poking through your trash and peeking in your windows.

When your president urges you to report to the government any citizens who dare to question his socialist schemes, asking you to send an email to flag @ whitehouse.gov, technology has ushered us into Orwell's past future, and we have all become Winston Smith.

When George W. Bush was in power and libs found their patriotism questioned for their demoralizing attacks on the missions undertaken by the United States military, Hillary Clinton famously screeched that she was "sick and tired" of such criticism. "We are Americans," she cawed, "and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!" Under Bush, the libs successfully redefined "patriotism," at least in popular culture, as dissent. No longer was patriotism defined as support of one's nation and the expression of that support for your country's military efforts.

READ MORE on 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

The cultural tyranny of junk-science 'studies' ~ By Phil Elmore

What else do these "studies" prove? Why, they prove that "dieting is a waste of time" – even though anyone who sticks to a consistent diet can, will and does lose weight. They prove that "men need cuddling more than their girlfriends" – even though this idea belies every direct experience of every heterosexual male since the beginning of time and certainly in the context of contemporary culture. They prove that creative people are arrogant jerks – even though a relatively small survey that relies largely on self-reporting cannot possibly be accurate enough for us to draw such conclusions with any confidence. They also prove that Democrats lack patriotism and seeing the American flag motivates people to vote Republican – even though ... well, OK, not all of these "studies" can be wrong.

A speech was given by the late Michael Crichton at a Caltech Michelin Lecture on January 17, 2003, called "Aliens Cause Global Warming." There is a segment of that speech that I was reminded of when reading Phil's column:

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

You see, "consensus science" is almost always the result of "studies" that become cultural consensus. This confirms what Phil is writing about in his column. Or, at least it helped me understand what Phil is saying a little better.

I'd like to think that I motivated Phil to write this column to some extent. Perhaps, I may have even beaten him to warning you of the ridiculousness of "studies" when I produced a blog back in July. Perhaps he was aware of that column where I discussed the junk-science of the Harvard (aka "Hawvawd") study.  Phil mentioned that study in his column (as you'll read in that paragraph I quoted above).

What I want you to see here is that "studies" can be biased from their conception.  It's the reality of the 21st Century.  Cultural behavior has become easier yet to modify by using social media to convey various ideologies, supported by those good old "studies," in this century. And, in effect, it seems to always end in "Cultural Tyranny." That is, until a new study comes out; kind of like when the theme, "based on studies," went from global cooling in the '70's to global warming in the '90's.  I'm just sayin'...

*     *     *     *

The cultural tyranny of junk-science 'studies'

PHIL ELMORE

By Phil Elmore

August 03, 2011 ~ 2:13 pm Eastern

© 2011

Are you stupid? If you're reading this in Internet Explorer, you must be. I know, because somebody I think might have been a scientist, or something, says so.

Wait … what?

Previously in Technocracy, I felt it necessary to point out that, no, liberals aren't smarter than conservatives. I called the attempt to use junk science and intentionally distorted or misinterpreted statistics a cultural libel that propagates myths, lies, and misinformation intended to marginalize those whom liberals hate and fear:

Simple lies, distortions and urban legends propagated about conservatives and libertarians all pale in comparison to what is the most coveted of all libelous popular-culture mechanisms. I refer, of course, to the study. A "study," no matter how it is produced and, more importantly, no matter how ineptly it is analyzed, is repeated without question in the popular media if that study furthers a left-wing political perspective. Such studies are presented with pious credulity as liberal holy writ, from which absurd, illogical and irrational pronouncements are foisted on the public.

… The fundamental lesson here is that correlation is not causation. Further, a failure to consider the demographics of the study will inevitably taint the conclusions drawn from the results.

Now an "IQ test" given to Web surfers purports to show that users of Internet Explorer are all stupider than users of other browsers, many of which are presented as more hip, more modern, or functionally superior:

Researchers gave over 100,000 Web surfers a free online IQ test. Scores were stored in a database along with each person's Web browser data.

The results suggested that Internet Explorer surfers had an average IQ in the low 80s. Chrome, Firefox and Safari rated over 100, while minority browsers Opera and Camino had an "exceptionally higher" score of over 120.

[The consulting firm that conducted the study] stressed that using IE doesn't mean you have low intelligence. "What it really says is that if you have a low IQ then there are high chances that you use Internet Explorer," said AptiQuant CEO Leonard Howard.

The study is, on its face, rife with potential errors, not the least of which is that there is no way to verify the nature of the sample (which I have a hard time believing is random enough). More disturbing is that this "study" claims the Explorer users averaged an IQ in the 80s – a number so low that one wonders how those tested were able to switch on the computer and navigate to such a test without drooling into spit-cups nestled in their open and obsolete CD drives. I mean, honestly: 80? If you have an IQ that low, there's a good chance you live in a group home and aren't allowed to use a computer unsupervised.

There is no indication that any conclusions about the political leanings of the participants has been offered by AptiQuant, the consulting firm posing here as scientific or psychological research firm. It's probably only a matter of time before some lib somewhere tries to draw that conclusion, as the shortest increment of time yet measured by humanity is the interval between some undesirable fact or act and the assertion by leftists that right-wing tea-bagging hobbit terrorist radical extremist ideologues are responsible.

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

Glenn Beck vs. the mob ~ By Ann Coulter

Bullying is on the rise everywhere in America – and not just because Obama decided to address it. It's because no one hits back. The message in our entire culture over the last two decades has been: DON'T FIGHT!

There were a lot fewer public confrontations when bullies got their faces smashed.

Maybe it's time for Beck to pony up some of those millions of dollars he's earned and hire people to rough up the liberal mob, or, at a minimum, to provide a legal defense to those like Profitt who do.

These liberal pukes have never taken a punch in their lives. A sock to the yap would be an eye-opening experience, and I believe it would do wonders.

They need to have their behavior corrected. It's a shame this job wasn't done by their parents. It won't be done by the police.

As long as liberals can't be normal and prosecutors can't be reasonable, how about a one-punch rule against anyone bothering a stranger in public? Then we'll see how brave these lactose-intolerant mama's boys are.

Believe me, liberal mobbings will stop very quickly after the first toilet-training champion takes his inaugural punch.

Hi, it's me, John Kubicek, otherwise known as johnny2k. There are a few things that we need to discuss regarding this article by Ann Coulter.

I like Ann, I like what she stands for, and that she sticks to her principles. She's a great writer, and she's fun to watch or listen to when she is serving as a Fox News contributor from time to time. Some people would call her brash, but that is just her style. If you were going to look back at all the things that she says about liberals, you'd find that she is generally correct. And that is the whole point to what I want to say about this column.

Ann's generalizations about Liberals are, well, they're generalizations. I know a lot of liberals. And I am sure you do, too. Are they all rude, obnoxious, godless, imbeciles? I would say no, and I'm sure you will too. In general, many of the most liberal people I am acquainted with are just the opposite. But then, I'm not usually hanging out with radicals and people that would associate with the kind of people that ruined Glenn Beck's family outing at the movie (see the related links below).

I do not want to offend my liberal friends, and they would feel the same way about me. When Ann wrote this column, she made it seem that ALL liberals are gutless bullies. Well, that is where I have to disagree with her. However, what I will agree with Ann on is that the people that displayed the kind of disgusting behavior toward Glenn Beck and his family this last Monday night were liberals. As Ann stated, "I could draw a mug shot of every one of Beck's tormentors, and I wasn't there." And, I'm okay with stating my belief that they were liberals, because I do not know any Conservative that would ever behave that way, even if they outnumbered the liberals 100-1. About the only kind of "mob" that I know most Conservatives would participate in would be a flash mob, singing Christmas carols in a mall.

As I said, it isn't my intention to trash my liberal friends. For the most part, I understand HOW many of the liberals I know came to their philosophies. That's a no-brainer. The liberals in the media and education found how easy it is to spread that sentiment. It's fairly easy to influence young minds with the emotions of envy and "social justice." It was apparently not all that difficult to get people to confuse equal opportunity with equal results. And about compassion? Can we say entitlements? What politician that wants to be re-elected and joins the crowd in the Beltway would ever want to try to take away the entitlements that about half of America now enjoys?

No, I'm not here to insult my friends who happen to be liberal. The only thing I can not defend, though, is why they think the way they do, and how they would be tied to people that would be as destructive as were the individuals that harassed Glenn Beck and his family. I know that if my Conservative friends ever acted that way, and they started or tried to instigate physical violence, I would disassociate myself from that group immediately. However, I've yet to see Conservatives or tea partiers resolve our issues in that manner. Vulgar language and bullying wouldn't even be considered, either, by my Conservative friends.

So, remember, this is John Kubicek speaking about what Ann Coulter generalized about liberals' behavior. My friends aren't going to be involved in the mob mentality that the Beck family experienced. Whether Conservative or Liberal, Christian or not, black or white, or any other assorted labels, it doesn't matter to me, as long as your behavior is civil to your fellow human beings. Regardless of your political persuasion, please remember that the generalizations are based on what just a few people do, and I am hoping that was the point that Ann Coulter was making. I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• Loving left accost Glenn & family

• Part II: Loving left accost Glenn & Family

• Woman Seated Near Beck at Movie Claims Innocence…But What Does Twitter Tell Us…(With UPDATES!)
  

*    *    *

Glenn Beck vs. the mob

ANN COULTER

By Ann Coulter

June 29, 2011 ~ 5:54 pm Eastern

© 2011

Glenn Beck

Of all the details surrounding the liberal mob attack on Glenn Beck and his family in New York's Bryant Park last Monday night, one element stands out. "No, it won't be like that, Dad," his daughter said when Beck questioned the wisdom of attending a free, outdoor movie showing in a New York park.

People who have never been set upon by a mob of liberals have absolutely no idea what it's like to be a publicly recognizable conservative. Even your friends will constantly be telling you: "Oh, it will be fine. Don't worry. Nothing will happen. This place isn't like that."

Liberals are not like most Americans. They are the biggest p---ies on Earth, city-bred weaklings who didn't play a sport and have never been in a fight in their entire lives. Their mothers made excuses for them when they threw tantrums and spent way too much time praising them during toilet training.

I could draw a mug shot of every one of Beck's tormentors, and I wasn't there.

Beck and his family would have been fine at an outdoor rap concert. They would have been fine at a sporting event. They would have been fine at any paid event, mostly because people who work for the government and live in rent-controlled apartments would be too cheap to attend.

Only a sad leftist with a crappy job could be so brimming with self-righteousness to harangue a complete stranger in public.

A liberal's idea of being a bad-a-- is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can't afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger's face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall.

They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people's manners. I know I'll be safe because this person has better manners than I do.

These brave-hearts know exactly what they can get away with. They assault a conservative only when it's a sucker-punch, they outnumber him, or he can't fight back for reasons of law or decorum.

Liberals don't get that when you're outnumbering the enemy 100-1, you're not brave.

But they're not even embarrassed. To the contrary, being part of the majority makes liberals feel great! Honey, wasn't I amazing? I stood in a crowd of liberals and called that conservative a c--t. Wasn't I awesome?

This is a liberal's idea of raw physical courage.

When someone does fight back, liberals transform from aggressor to victim in an instant, collapsing on the ground and screaming bloody murder. I've seen it happen in a nearly empty auditorium when there was quite obviously no other human within 5 feet of the gutless invertebrate.

People incapable of conforming to the demands of civilized society are frightening precisely because you never know what else such individuals are capable of. Sometimes – a lot more often than you've heard about – liberals do engage in physical violence against conservatives ... and then bravely run away.

That's why not one person stepped up to aid Beck and his family as they were being catcalled and having wine dumped on them at a nice outdoor gathering.

No one ever steps in. Never, not once, not ever. (Except at the University of Arizona, where college Republicans chased my assailant and broke his collarbone, God bless them.)

Most people are shocked into paralysis at the sight of sociopathic liberal behavior. The only ones who aren't are the conservative's bodyguards – and they can't do anything without risking a lawsuit or an arrest.

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

Let foreign profits come home ~ By Herman Cain

And when Congress and the president extended the lower tax rates for two years in 2010, they just extended tax uncertainty for two more years, which is bad for business.

Businesses plan their growth based on what they know, and the less they know about what taxes are going to be on domestic and foreign profits, the less they plan to grow. Businesses need and want tax certainty in order to begin to grow aggressively again, which would lead to significant job growth.

The liberals will always fight against such changes in taxation whenever control of people's money is moved from government back to the people who earned it.

Big-government liberals are going to scream "crimes against humanity, old people, children and the poor" because they do not like totally un-taxing anything. They do not want taxpayers to discover that the right kind of tax cuts will actually help the economy and help put people back to work.

Here's the news this morning: New unemployment claims went up to 412,000. The economy is not turning around, and this country faces a debt crisis. What will it take to get our economy back on track? Will Obama screaming, "crimes against humanity, old people, children and the poor," as he basically did in his speech yesterday, along with wanting to raise taxes on the "rich," get the economy back on track? Or, should we be listening to Herman Cain's ideas?

In Herman's column, he discusses the fact that corporations have no incentive to want to keep their investments in the United States. If we were to reign in the amount of taxes that corporations were to pay to do business in the United States, the economy would be booming. And how would we "pay for it?" Our tax revenues would INCREASE as more people are employed, and there would be fewer people that would need government assistance.

There is much more to Herman's column that wasn't included on this page. It is important that you read the entire column. And if you heard Obama's speech yesterday, you will know that Herman Cain has the polar-opposite ideas about what America could and should be.

There is something else that I want to share with you. It would frustrate me to no end if Conservative Republicans don't bother to consider Herman Cain as a viable contender to be the GOP's candidate for President. Just trust me on this. You need to learn about Herman Cain. And if you are like me, and like what you see, let Herman know.

Let foreign profits come home

HERMAN CAIN

By Herman Cain

April 11, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

For decades, Democrats have insisted on taxing profits generated by U.S. companies in foreign countries, because they thought it would force businesses to keep the investments in the U.S.

Wrong!

The unintended consequences were just the opposite effect. A business-friendly environment always works better than force.

President George W. Bush was able to get the repatriated tax rate lowered to 5.25 percent in 2003, and nearly $350 billion came back into our economy. Today, it is conservatively estimated that nearly $1 trillion might come back if we take the tax on repatriated profits to zero.

Yes, zero!

Our economy gains nothing as long as those profits remain abroad. Common sense says we have everything to gain if we let those profits come home without a tax.

Some multi-national businesses might use those profits to expand operations here in the U.S., which would mean more job opportunities for the 15 million unemployed people. Or, maybe companies would increase salaries and wages for their employees, or they might pay a dividend to their stockholders.

And remember, many senior citizens depend on their dividend income, if they have any, as a way to supplement their paltry Social Security checks. With the price of gasoline doubling in the last two years, and expected to go even higher along with the cost of everything else, a dividend increase would be some welcome relief to many seniors.

Liberals will argue that there's no guarantee that those "evil corporations" would do any of these things if they were to get such a windfall in cash. They are right, but it's their money and their choice. It's not the government's money or the government's choice to make. I trust businesses and business leaders to make the right choices for their owners and customers, not the government.

We live in a global economy in an age of global information. Global businesses are constantly looking for countries that are business-friendly, tax-friendly and labor-friendly. And contrary to what liberals would have you believe, businesses do not always jump to the country with the cheapest labor. Lower taxes and growth potential are usually at the top of the priority list.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

The problem isn't the lack of tax revenues. It's spending without a way to pay for it, especially after we EAT the RICH. My thanks to the IOWAHAWK blog that led me to this video!

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