"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of ABORTION?" ~ Video by Fortis Media

Before I could post this video by JJ McNown on Fortis Media, I had to watch it several times. I have to give parents a heads up that this may not be something for children to see. But, this is something that the adults in the room NEED to see, and to help us understand the issues regarding abortion.

I can guarantee that you will see the great courage of this young man in order to make this video. And I strongly believe that it was the colossal amount of faith to make this a public production, knowing that there will be those that will attack JJ's message. Well, here I am, adding myself as a target along with JJ. And I am hoping that many more will join us in spreading this Word. Yes, Life begins at conception.

Here is the video. Again, this may not be suitable for young viewers. Please use your best judgment.

Netanyahu tells truth about mufti's role in Holocaust ~ By Pamela Geller

Exclusive: Pamela Geller defends Bibi against onslaught of media attacks

Netanyahu did the world a great service by calling attention to this. The intensity of the attacks against him only testifies to how much he struck a nerve. In the mainstream media, Islam and Muslims must never, ever be criticized.

Pamela Geller is probably on an enemies list for what she writes here, not to mention other columns she has written. Because I am re-posting this column, I am sure I'll also be on an enemies list. But the question is, which enemy list? That of an Islamic organization? A liberal media organization? A George Soros institution? Obama's minions?  Whatever... I'm pretty sure there's already a list with my name on it, somewhere. Well, I'm just one more person that hasn't drank their Koolaid and I'm not afraid to get the truth out. Just sayin'...

*    *    *    *

Netanyahu tells truth about mufti's role in Holocaust

The condemnations have been way over the top: Benjamin Netanyahu is being denounced by the media and political elites all over the world, in a way that the openly genocidal jihadist Mahmoud Abbas never has been. Netanyahu's crime? He told the Zionist Congress last Tuesday, "Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time; he…

Cruising toward destruction ~ By Patrice Lewis

Remember these words you will hear people say: "It can't happen here." Patrice Lewis, in this very powerful column, discusses what is happening in America, and how it parallels Austria in the late 1930's. This column will discuss facts that are based on a column, "Don’t Let Freedom Slip Away," by Kitty Werthmann.

First, Patrice writes about what happened in Austria in 1938 and how it got started, summarizing Kitty's column:

A broken economy is what started the Austrians down this path. Hungry, unemployed and scared, they voted 98 percent to annex Austria to Germany and have that guy with the funny mustache solve their problems. After all, he had all the answers.

And at first, it worked. Unemployment virtually disappeared. Everyone was fed. Women received equal rights. Then education became secularized. Compulsory service in the labor corps was implemented. Daycare became available 24/7. Health care became socialized and free. "All day care and education were free," writes Werthmann. "High schools were taken over by the government, and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing and housing." Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. Undesirables were euthanized. Guns were registered and later confiscated.

Tra la la, does this sound familiar? Does anyone on the progressive side of the spectrum see the eerie similarities, or do they still claim it can't happen here?

Okay, maybe that just sounds so implausible. Euthanization? That could never happen here in America! (Of course not. In America, they just take people off life support because the insurance company won't pay for it after a short period of time.)

But, never mind, because there are other things that were done in Austria, and are pretty much being done now, here in America, that don't sound quite so implausible. From her column, Kitty describes how the economy was being run after the Nazi's took over:

We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

Well, again, let me just repeat what Patrice had written above: "... does this sound familiar? Does anyone on the progressive side of the spectrum see the eerie similarities, or do they still claim it can't happen here?" Just sayin'...

Once upon a time, there was a solution to this inevitable collapse and subsequent totalitarianism. That solution was to toss out the massive bureaucratic nightmare into which our government has mushroomed, and instead embrace the streamlined plan originally outlined when our nation was founded.

Sadly, I fear it is too late. Our debt is too high, our entitlements too entrenched and our apathy is too deep. And the "funny" people with all the bright ideas are already in place. For citizens caught up in this unfolding economic nightmare, I can only suggest you Pray, Prepare and Participate.

The Pray and Prepare parts are obvious, but what do I mean by Participate? I mean vote. Rally. March. E-mail. Don't let our guns, our speech and our other freedoms dissolve any more than they already have. Watch out for funny guys who promise solutions to all our problems as long as we give up something in exchange.

Remember, please remember, that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I really don't want to live in 1938 Austria.

Cruising toward destruction

By Patrice Lewis

Posted: September 25, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The Titanic

My husband and I have always wanted to take a cruise to Alaska. Sounds fun, doesn't it? The luxury, the scenery, the freedom from responsibility. Despite the fact that we couldn't afford it, we decided to borrow money to take a cruise.

Well the cruise was wonderful, though now we have to borrow money to make the loan payments on the cruise, as well as borrow more money to make the interest payments on the loan. But we loved that cruise so much we're booking another one next year. It's OK, we can borrow the money. We plan to take another cruise the year after. And the year after that. And the year after that.

Meanwhile, we'll blame someone – anyone – for the fact that we're so deeply in debt. I think I'll blame, um, my brother. It's not our fault that we can't stop ourselves from digging the debt hole deeper, or that much of the debt is incurred for frivolous reasons. It's my brother's fault.

What's wrong with this picture? If you're the federal government, apparently nothing.

We now know that the actual figure of America's debt is much higher than the petty and trivial sum of $14.3 trillion given by the Congressional Budget Office. And make no mistake, $14.3 trillion is not pocket change (for a knock-you-flat visual of a trillion dollars, click here).

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," says Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University. That's because the CBO doesn't count the euphemistically called "off-budget" obligations like Social Security and Medicare. (This is like my husband and I deeming our mythical cruise payments to be "off-budget" in our yearly expenses.)

So how much does our nation owe? Mr. Kotlikoff says the debt is actually $200 trillion – 14 times the "official" amount. That's a lot of cruises. And our nation is taking more and more trips.

Does this sound sustainable to you?

Sinking the Good Ship America

Of course not. How can America possibly pay back $200 trillion? It can't. Sooner or later the people who keep lending us money will stop. When that happens, I see no possible alternative except a collapse of our national economy.

The danger of a financial collapse goes beyond the day-to-day struggles of Joe Sixpack. The danger is that Americans will look for solutions in all the wrong places, the same way Germany and Austria looked for solutions to its debt and inflation problems in the 1930s. Their solution took the form of a failed artist with a funny mustache who told people what they wanted to hear and promised to make it all better by blaming someone else. (The Jews were a convenient target since my brother wasn't born yet.)

In 1938, an Austrian woman named Kitty Werthmann was an eyewitness to the creeping totalitarianism of Hitler's Germany. Now living in South Dakota, she wrote an eerie and horrifying account of what happened during her childhood. It's easy to understand the horrifying part. But it's eerie because we are following, virtually word for word, the same path in this country, albeit at a slower pace.

"Totalitarianism didn't come quickly," writes Werthmann. "It took five years from 1938 until 1943 to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little, eroded our freedom."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

My final thoughts on this column with the help of a classic cartoon from 50 years ago: "Watch out for funny guys who promise solutions to all our problems as long as we give up something in exchange."



Oh, before you go, just one more thing. When you hear them say, "It's for the children," be afraid. Be very afraid. This is the elixir of the snake-oil salesman. Don't give up your freedom in exchange for government promises to take care of you from cradle to grave.

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

UPDATE 09.28.2010 ~~ I found a RELATED STORY that I had posted on August 9, 2009. The story seems to illustrate the danger that is facing this country as stated in this column by Patrice Lewis:
Red Alert! Infowars under direct attack by Obama Brownshirts

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

Economic judgment day ~ By Robert Ringer

Just in case you aren't frightened enough by Robert Ringer's column, "Economic judgment day," I have added the two videos below. I am basically doing what I can to make sure that people are aware of what could face us. I say that, because as Robert points out, there is an alternative to just heading for the hills because of the coming economic storm: "Stay put, dig in your heels and do your part to spread the truth – about inflation, about entitlements, about the sanctity of liberty and about the loathsome nature of government."

The Warning Signs (I guess Glenn Beck isn't the only one sounding alarms)

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

Beck: The Hindenburg Omen

Video provided by FoxNewsChannel (Youtube channel)

Yep, I think that Glenn Beck's segment, "The Hindenburg Omen," is the perfect video to sandwich between the first video about the warning signs, and Robert's column, which discusses what might happen in an economic meltdown. Glenn has it right. Maybe it is time for this nation to turn to God. And as Robert writes, "I've already made my choice. What about you?"  I have. Just sayin'...

Just as communists are wrong to believe they can change human nature and "convince" people to willingly give up their freedom and property, so, too, is it a mistake for defenders of liberty to believe they can convince those who worship big government to believe in freedom.

Contrary to the "summer of recovery" blather we are being fed on a daily basis, the truth is that the economy is getting worse by the day – and the worst, by far, is yet to come. Economic judgment day may be a bit late in arriving, but it is coming. So you have only two choices: Fight or flight. I've already made my choice. What about you?

By Robert Ringer

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

© 2010

Ever since Barack Obama fooled independents into giving him the keys to the car (his metaphor), the talk about economic judgment day has increasingly intensified. But what, exactly, would have to happen to bring about a total collapse of the U.S. economy?

One path to economic judgment day is for the government to allow market forces to rule, which, because of decades of government meddling in the economy, would surely bring about a full-scale deflationary depression. Though the iPod, flat-screen-TV, eat-out-four-nights-a-week crowd doesn't want to hear about it, the truth is that a deflationary economic judgment day would be a good thing because it would cleanse the economy of artificially high wages, profligate spending and malinvestment.

In a deflationary scenario, most people, to be sure, would be much worse off, but a small percentage of folks would actually come out ahead. That's because a deflationary depression is a time when, in effect, property is returned to its rightful owners.

The second possibility for economic judgment day is runaway inflation, which I have been predicting for the past 30 years. This would almost certainly lead to social chaos and anarchy, more likely than not followed by a dictatorship. The reason runaway inflations tend to result in dictatorships is because the natives become restless when they discover that government's paper money is worthless.

Having said all this, I must admit that I sometimes feel like Wile E. Coyote. Every time I believe the government is trapped by economic reality, I hear that infamous "Beep Beep" and end up scratching my head. With its high-speed printing presses, its ability to borrow virtually unlimited sums of money and a monopoly on the use of force, government always seems to escape the consequences of its actions and lives to see another day. But unless someone figures out how to make gold out of paper money real soon, the inevitable is already written in stone.

It is American entrepreneurs who have held up the U.S. economy for all these years by doing what they have always done best: create wealth. It is they, not government, who create jobs and increase living standards. But if BHO continues to press the welfare pedal to the floor – which he clearly has every intention of doing – an inflationary ending is virtually assured.

Remember, the continued onslaught of valueless paper money disrupts the market and causes confusion, apprehension and, eventually, panic. People are afraid to enter into long‑term contracts, because they have no idea what money will be worth in the future.

Businessmen decrease investments in new plants and equipment (as they are now doing), because they do not know if their real profits will be worth the risk. The latter causes shortages, which leads to even higher prices.

If inflation is not eventually curtailed, a final collapse of the economy begins when people start to guess at what future prices will be. This sets off a chain reaction where sellers increase prices even faster than the supply of money increases.

At that point, government faces its last chance to avoid a total collapse of the economy. Henry Hazlitt put it well when he said, "Every inflation must eventually be ended by government or it must 'self‑destruct.'" This self‑destruction is exactly what has happened to nation after nation throughout history.

The case most of us are familiar with is Germany's runaway inflation in 1923. Consider these figures: Between 1914 and 1923, the German government issued an additional 92.8 quintillion (92,800,000,000,000,000,000) paper marks, a 245 billionfold increase in the money supply. Prices, in turn, rose 1.38 trillionfold. Interest rates rose as high as 10,000 percent per annum on some debt instruments.

As you would guess, people eventually refused to accept paper money in exchange for goods and services. The economy collapsed and chaos and crime ensued. And waiting in the wings, preparing hysterical answers for hysterical people, was Adolf Hitler, who understood all too well that only an authoritarian police state could restore order.

Nevertheless, I'm glad the Obamessiah was able to fool the public and win out over Mush McCain. Why do I say that? Because if McCain had ended up on the throne, no matter how liberal he may have been, the Democrats and their left-wing allies in the media would have had a field day blaming the inevitable economic collapse on the evils of capitalism. (Remember, Obama has been in power going on two years and he's still blaming George Bush for everything!)

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Gun control is using 2 hands ~ By Patrice Lewis

To emphasize Patrice's point about gun control, I felt the need to place a video below that I just found:

William Shatner on Gun Control - It's How Well You Aim the Gun

Video provided by jaimekid

Absolutely nobody - I repeat, NOBODY - could ever emphasize the argument against gun control better than William Shatner, playing the part of Denny Crane on Boston Legal! As he says, "Thank God for guns!" Of course, the scene in the video above relates to what Patrice says, that: "I will continue to bitterly cling to my God-given right to protect myself, my family, and my property with firearms from those who would steal my possessions (thieves)..." But, then, there is the remainder of that sentence she wrote that is even more important (see under the video below):

Obama Pushes Anti-Gun Treaty

Video provided by sustainablehome

"...or my freedoms (government)."

Please keep that in mind.  If you think it could never happen here, well.... Do ya see the graphic below? As I've said before, "Guns are our anti-Obamacide."  Just sayin'...

• Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

• An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

• Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

• Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

• You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.

• The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.

• Guns have only two enemies; rust and politicians.

And finally: a free man cannot be defeated. He can only be killed. That becomes a much easier task if you've disarmed him first.

By Patrice Lewis

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

© 2010

An English reader of my blog picked up a post from last November called "Gun control is using two hands." It depicted a series of posters explaining why the Second Amendment has practical safety applications for American citizens. This reader took exception to how enthusiastically Americans embrace our God-given right to defend our persons and our property from those who would do us harm. "The American love affair with guns is indeed strange to an outsider," she wrote. "Though one can understand the historical imperative, some of the arguments used to justify gun ownership in the 21st century seem to border on the religious and can be just as irrational."

I found this to be a fascinating perspective. So gun ownership is no longer justified in the 21st century? Those of us who believe the Second Amendment is more critical than ever border on the "religious" in our beliefs and are "just as irrational?"

I don't believe this is necessarily an English perspective; I believe it is a liberal perspective since, frankly, I hear this viewpoint just as often from Americans.

Progressives who believe gun ownership is no longer "justified" have not studied history. Those who refuse to learn from history – duh – are doomed to repeat it. And I can guarantee with absolute certainty that if the Second Amendment were struck down tomorrow, certain people within our government would happily seize that opportunity to do things they knew they couldn't get away with before. Like become despots. (Aesop said it best: "Any excuse will serve a tyrant.")

Human nature hasn't changed just because it's the 21st century. There are still people who want to increase their power and control over others. There is never a point where historical precedent is unimportant. What has happened in the past can (and always does) happen again – hence our "irrational" American insistence in keeping the Second Amendment intact and unaltered.

Every generation says, "It can't happen here." Every single generation. When China fell to communism, the despots went door to door. When Russia fell to communism, they went door to door. When Hitler took over, his minions went door to door. No one ever thought they could or would do it, but they did.

Throughout history, foolish and trusting people the world over have ceded their guns to their government and were slaughtered for their efforts. Remember, when you remove peoples' right to bear arms, you create slaves.

I know Progressives look at things with an entirely different point of view than Constitutionalists. They have such a lovely naïve and touching faith in human nature. Really they do. But such childlike wonder and trust does not translate well into national policy and the assurance of continued liberty. Progressives might be able to claim with calm assurance, "It can never happen here" or that gun ownership is no longer "justified" in the 21st century, but I for one don't have the shining optimism liberals apparently hold about the flawlessness of human nature. I will continue to bitterly cling to my God-given right to protect myself, my family, and my property with firearms from those who would steal my possessions (thieves) or my freedoms (government).

Those who express bafflement at our "obsession" with guns misunderstand our concerns about losing the right to stay armed. Sure, guns are great for hunting and darned nice if they can stop a crime. But that is not why the Second Amendment was put in place. The Second Amendment has never been about hunting or crime protection; it's about keeping our government in check. Why oh why can't Progressives understand this? (Oh yeah. It's because they see nothing wrong with rampant government. Got it.)

This battle between government power and an armed citizenry was recognized as far back as 600 B.C. when Aesop said, "Those who voluntarily put power into the hands of a tyrant or an enemy, must not be surprised if it is turned against themselves." If the government somehow managed to banish all guns tomorrow, how long do you think before we'd be laboring under tyranny?

The surge in gun sales when Obama came into office was not the result of a sudden and passionate love of hunting; it was because people instinctively recognized that our government is becoming a larger threat to our personal liberties. Gun ownership is a tool to keep that threat in check.

Quite simply, the Second Amendment has become a power struggle between the government and the people. The government wants more power over the people. The people want more power over the government. No surprise there.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Muslims' and blacks' 'oppression' racket ~ By Erik Rush

Erik discusses how America was taught "tolerance" of the radical racism and sedition from those who were once "oppressed" through two generations of propaganda. Obviously, there are still some of us left that see and understand how suicidal it is for America to virtually ignore the dangers that face this country. Too many Americans may not know that our freedom could be at stake. Just sayin'....

So, Americans are being admonished to minimize or ignore clear threats to our security and survival and tolerate the racism and sedition of those who were once oppressed by virtue of the fact that they were once oppressed. Thanks to two generations of propaganda, there are now enough Americans receptive to these messages to "buy" them – insane and suicidal though they may be.

These beliefs survive and flourish because that is now what the market will bear.

By Erik Rush

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

© 2010

For centuries, it has been Muslims' standard operating procedure to build mosques in the places of conquered enemies' razed churches, temples, government buildings, palaces, etc. This bit of historical trivia and its implications are not being reported by the establishment press, however. It has been left for others to call the mosque slated to be built within a stone's throw of Ground Zero in New York City what it is: a massive wad of germy, gelatinous phlegm launched directly into America's face.

Last month, when they should have been beaten in the street for even considering the approval of the mosque's construction, New York City's Community Board 1 unanimously approved the plan for Cordoba House, a 15-story "mosque, museum and cultural center." Apparently, the duplicitous Imam Feisal Abdula Rauf (a principal of the Cordoba Initiative) managed to convince the Manhattan intellectuals on the Board that this effort will help to "heal" the rift between Muslims and New Yorkers.

Sort of like erecting a statue of Adolf Hitler in Tel Aviv might have improved the relationship between Germans and Jews in the late 1940s, I suppose. Rauf is also a member of the Free Gaza Movement, which helped bankroll the flotilla intercepted by the Israeli navy on May 31.

On June 6, author/activist Pamela Geller, director of Stop the Islamization of America, appeared on CNN with Muslim journalist Ahmed Soliman to discuss the local uproar that arose following the city's approval of the project. As Gellar calmly explained what an affront this disgrace would be and why, the insipid CNN anchorette absolutely could not restrain herself from defending the scheme and repeatedly interrupting Geller. The smarmy Soliman obviously knew he was in a friendly country.

Americans are not being informed of the fact that it is Islamic practice to build over "conquered territory" as well as lie to infidels, much in the same way a law-enforcement official might lie to a seasoned criminal during an interrogation; in the case of jihad, this sort of action is considered quite moral.

Moderate-appearing Muslim leaders lie regarding their radical intentions, and Americans buy it because CNN anchorettes tell them to – much in the same way they habitually misrepresent subversive machinations in general these days.

Meanwhile, there is a symposium being organized by the New Black Panther Party, some of its satellite organizations and old-school black radicals for this fall in New York – this, of course, unless they all manage to gun each other down in the interim. At first blush, I'm sure many a reader will muse as to why an outfit such as the New Black Panther Party (whose slogan is "Freedom or Death") even exists, but it does.

"The 2010 Black Power Convention" will be put down as political eccentricity to some, but it represents a potent anti-American, anti-white and anti-Semitic creed that is more dangerous in some ways than the 1960s brand of radical black nationalism. Given the duration and consistency of the "black oppression" message as it has been advanced by career civil-rights activists since desegregation, many blacks – particularly young ones – are even more cynical and jaded today vis-à-vis their future, their place in America and whites than were their grandparents.

Malik Zulu Shabazz, national chairman of the New Black Panther Party, and "Minister" Hashim Nzinga, the party's national chief of staff, are advertised as "the conveners" of this event. Neither of these gentlemen – and I use the term loosely – appears old enough to have experienced any meaningful instances of racism in America, yet their rhetoric more than suggests that blacks are in imminent danger of outright enslavement once again.

So, what's the tie-in between a proposed mosque in New York and an NBPP hate-fest in the fall?

Well, when superstar athletes are paid tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions of dollars in endorsements by multi-billion dollar merchandisers, people ask in astonishment how these corporations can justify bestowing such princely sums upon these people.

The answer? Because that's what the market will bear. The benefit to the companies outweighs the cost – which means they're making a whole lot more than they're paying the superstars.

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)!

Don't cry for me, Arizona ~ By Burt Prelutsky

Burt reflects the opinion of many people across this land that support the new Arizona immigration law. In this column, he goes after the critics of the law that seem to be able to say whatever they want to, many of them that use race-baiting, hypocrisy, and lies about what the law does.

In my opinion, it should be a criminal act for anyone to compare the new law in Arizona in any way, shape or form to what took place in Nazi Germany. Hitler, in case it slipped your mind, was arresting, torturing and murdering Germans for no other reason than that they were Jews, Catholics, gypsies, invalids and homosexuals. Members of the Gestapo weren't simply asking to look at green cards and sending non-citizens back to Poland, France and Holland. They were sending them to Auschwitz.

Ironically, Article 67 of Mexico's Immigration Law states: "Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal, are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country." In spite of which, President Calderon had the gall to compare our border fence to the Berlin Wall. Nobody bothered pointing out to the jackass that there's a world of difference between building a barrier to keep illegal aliens out and erecting one to prevent one's own citizens from escaping.

By Burt Prelutsky

Posted: May 07, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

When you're a right-winger living in California, you tend to envy people who live elsewhere. For a long time, I've envied Texans. For one thing, judging by my e-mail, most of my biggest fans seem to live in the Lone Star State. But, also, aside from an occasional cretin like Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texans seem to elect more than their share of stalwart conservatives.

Another state I came to admire was Oklahoma. That was after discovering that it was the only state in the Union in which Obama failed to carry a single county in 2008.

Now, of course, I've lost my heart to Arizona. At last, a state has sounded the alarm about illegal aliens. Sure it was a long time coming, but at least Gov. Jan Brewer and the Arizona Legislature have finally stood up for the law of the land. Even John McCain, who has spent years sounding like an immigration lawyer, jumped aboard the bandwagon.

On the other side, we have virtually every hack politician with a Hispanic last name ready and eager to display his ignorance, bigotry and lack of patriotism. I mean, really, is there an uglier, more disgusting sight than a bunch of dunderheads complaining about racial profiling when their own actions and statements are based solely on race?

Arizona has been overrun by at least half a million illegals who have placed unbearable burdens on its schools, hospitals and emergency rooms. They have made Phoenix the kidnap capital of North America and turned its countryside into an open sewer for drug smugglers. It took the cold-blooded murder of an elderly rancher before the good folks of Arizona said, enough is enough.

We keep hearing the same stale propaganda that these sneaks are the people who'll do the jobs gringos won't. Well, I have a news flash: With unemployment hovering at 10 percent, if those jobs ever existed in the past, they don't exist today. Besides, why should they get the jobs that could go to people waiting patiently for their names to be called in Ghana, Poland and Vietnam?

The only people who oppose Arizona's new law – a law based, by the way, on our own federal law – are members of the Catholic Church hierarchy who are anxious to fill church pews; drug lords who want to maintain a steady flow of product, users and salesmen; President Calderon, who wants those American dollars to continue flowing south to keep the Mexican economy afloat; American politicians with names like Hernandez and Gomez, who want to increase their power base; and punks like Mayor Gavin Newsome who represent places as left and loony as San Francisco. We shouldn't overlook the DNC, an organization so corrupt that Mafia dons attend their seminars to pick up tips from the likes of James Carville and Rahm Emanuel.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

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

The hysteria of 'violent' right wing ~ By Benjamin Shapiro

Benjamin Shapiro annihilates Frank Rich's attempt to compare those against Obamacare with Kristallnacht of the Hitler regime.

The hysteria over the "violent" right wing is just that – hysteria. The true danger here comes not from the grass-roots right, but from the Astroturfed left, which is being orchestrated and trained by the Obama administration and its media minions to attack Americans who still believe in America's founding principles.

By Benjamin Shapiro

Posted: March 31, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

One week after the passage of President Obama's quasi-socialized health-care scheme, 54 percent of likely voters support repeal. And according to Frank Rich, each and every one of those voters is a budding Nazi.

"How curious that a mob fond of likening President Obama to Hitler knows so little about history that it doesn't recognize its own small-scale mimicry of Kristallnacht," Rich writes. "The weapon of choice for vigilante violence at congressional offices has been a brick hurled through a window. So far."

It is Rich, naturally, who knows nothing about history; his ardent support of President Obama blinds him to the slander he has perpetrated on both Americans and Holocaust victims. Kristallnacht was a government-sponsored program of terror and murder in which 91 Jews were murdered, tens of thousands of Jews were thrown into concentration camps, 267 synagogues were razed to the ground, and Jewish businesses through German territories were destroyed and looted. It is despicable to compare one brick through a glass window with an organized campaign of slaughter and violence.

More than that, Kristallnacht was a case of the government persecuting its own citizens. It was not a spontaneous uprising of violent thugs, nor was it a Los Angeles riots-style melee. Kristallnacht was programmed from beginning to end by the Nazi regime. The basic truth is that socialized medicine – an attack on the private sector and on private individuals in the name of the collective – reflects Kristallnacht on a philosophical level far better than a nut hurling one brick through one window at Louise Slaughter's office.

Rich is simply parroting the Obama administration's latest meme: Tea partiers and anyone else who opposes the Obama program is racist, homophobic, un-American scum of the earth, violent in temperament and simple in mind. Rich, with all the subtlety of a nightstick upside the head, expresses the meme this way: "The conjunction of a black president and a female speaker of the House – topped off by a wise Latina on the Supreme Court and a powerful gay congressional committee chairman – would sow fears of disenfranchisement among a dwindling and threatened minority in the country no matter what policies were in play." In other words, if the president were white, the speaker of the House male, Sonia Sotomayor a white male and Barney Frank a strapping heterosexual, the Obamacare plan would have gone through like clockwork.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

The Deem-ocrats ~ By Craige McMillan

Craige writes a nice short, to-the-point column about the process the "Deem-ocrats" could possibly use to get the health care deform legislation to the President's desk.

So why stop with legislation? Why not simply bypass the midterm elections entirely? "The incumbent Congress is hereby deemed re-elected!" End of story. No illegal voters required. No voter intimidation required. And those going to a congressman's office to complain are simply arrested by the police. No explanation necessary.

By Craige McMillan

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

© 2010

"The legislation is deemed passed!" Gavel sound, please. "We didn't actually vote to pass it, you see. But if we had voted, we're sure – no, very sure – no, more than that, we're almost completely sure – that it would have passed. That's if we actually had voted to pass it, which, of course, we didn't!"

So, instead of all that messy, nasty, divisive voting stuff, the Congress will just vote to treat the legislation as if it had passed. "Because we know it could have – would have – if we had voted for it, OK?"

Ah, yes. To paraphrase Mussolini, "What is a small constitutional clause that requires voting, in the affairs of a great state?"

America's communists (they go by the name of progressives these days) have always viewed government as a cult of personality: Hitler, Stalin, Mao – it's never the process or the laws; it's a cult of personality. Here in America it's the cult of Obama.

Under government by personality, the people's representatives have always done what they were told. "The legislation is deemed passed. Number One, make it so."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Who's the greater threat – the rich or politicians? ~ By Walter E. Williams

Walter E. Williams explains how politicians and their supporters use the politics of envy to pit us against the rich, the reason why they do that, and the danger that leads our country to.

We Americans have forgotten founder Thomas Paine's warning that "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."

By Walter E. Williams

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

© 2010

Bill Gates is the world's richest person, but what kind of power does he have over you? Can he force your kid to go to a school you do not want him to attend? Can he deny you the right to braid hair in your home for a living? It turns out that a local politician, who might deny us the right to earn a living and dictates which school our kid attends, has far greater power over our lives than any rich person. Rich people can gain power over us, but to do so, they must get permission from our elected representatives at the federal, state or local levels. For example, I might wish to purchase sugar from a Caribbean producer, but America's sugar lobby pays congressmen hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to impose sugar import tariffs and quotas, forcing me and every other American to purchase their more expensive sugar.

Politicians love pitting us against the rich. All by themselves, the rich have absolutely no power over us. To rip us off, they need the might of Congress to rig the economic game. It's a slick political sleight-of-hand where politicians and their allies amongst the intellectuals, talking heads and the news media get us caught up in the politics of envy as part of their agenda for greater control over our lives.

The sugar lobby is just one example among thousands. Just ask yourself: Who were the major recipients of the billions of taxpayer bailout dollars, the so-called Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)? The top recipients of TARP handouts included companies such as Citibank, AIG, Goldman Sachs and General Motors. Their top management are paid tens of millions dollars to run companies that were on the verge of bankruptcy, were it not for billions of dollars in taxpayer money. Politicians preach the politics of envy whilst reaching into the ordinary man's pockets, through the IRS, and handing it over to their favorite rich people and others who make large contributions to their election efforts.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

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

Today's bad guys truly are fascists ~ By Joseph Farah

Joseph Farah explains the political spectrum further. Progressives don't like being labeled as Fascists, however, the label actually fits them well.

What's the center of the political spectrum?


Limited self-government under the rule of law and accountable to the will of the people – just the unique formula invented by America's founders.


Therefore, I can proudly and accurately say, "I'm a centrist – just like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison."

By Joseph Farah

Posted: February 26, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Self-described "progressives" seldom respond well to being labeled fascists.

They usually consider themselves to be the very antithesis.

But, as I wrote in my column last weekend, "The real political spectrum 101," they really are not so different.

In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to find any substantive difference.

Even moderate Democrats today, people like Pat Caddell, are calling today's American "progressives" – people like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid – "statists." Can any reasonable observer deny they are just that? Don't they believe the state has the answer to all problems? Don't their actions suggest they think government can pretty much always do a better job than the private sector? Are they the folks pushing the "public-private partnerships"? Heck, didn't they facilitate the public takeover of General Motors?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but those are the very definitions of "fascism."

The political ideology of fascism has nothing to do with killing Jews or even imperialistic ambitions. It has to do with government controlling corporations, doling out favors to some and punishing others and harnessing the power of success by corporations for the benefit of the state.

Again, it's a tiny step short of communism, which calls for state ownership of the means of production. Fascists like Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler recognized the inefficiency and foolishness of that utopian notion.

Mussolini put it this way: "Fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is a merger of state and corporate power."

Here's another key quote: "State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the state are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management."

Sound familiar yet?

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Why the left excuses communist horrors ~ By Walter E. Williams

From WorldNetDaily

By Walter E. Williams Posted: November 18, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Last Tuesday, I had the pleasurable task of being master of ceremonies for the Atlas Economic Research Foundation dinner in Washington, D.C., that celebrated the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Founded in 1981, the Atlas Foundation assists the formation of free-market think tanks around the world to spread the ideas of personal liberty, private property rights and limited government. So far, they have been successful in at least 70 countries. Attending the two-day celebration were think-tank representatives from many of these countries, including those from Croatia, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Mozambique, South Korea, Russia and Brazil. Alan Kors, University of Pennsylvania history professor, gave the evening's keynote address. What he revealed about the dereliction and character weakness of academics, intellectuals, media elites and politicians is by no means complimentary, but worse than that, dangerous. Professor Kors said that over the years, he has frequently asked students how many deaths were caused by Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong and their successors. Routinely, they gave numbers in the thousands. Kors says that's equivalent to saying the Nazis are responsible for the deaths of just a few hundred Jews. But here's the record: Nazis were responsible for the deaths of 20 million of their own people and those in nations they conquered. Between 1917 and 1983, Stalin and his successors murdered, or were otherwise responsible for the deaths of, 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, Mao Zedong and his successors were responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese. Professor Kors asks, why are the horrors of Nazism so well-known and widely condemned, but not those of socialism and communism? For decades after World War II, people have hunted down and sought punishment for Nazi murderers. How much hunting down and seeking punishment for Stalinist and Maoist murderers has there been? In Europe, especially Germany, hoisting the swastika-emblazoned Nazi flag is a crime. It's acceptable to hoist and march under a flag emblazoned with the former USSR's hammer and sickle. Even in the U.S., it's acceptable to praise mass murderers, as Anita Dunn, President Obama's communications director, did in a commencement address for St. Andrews Episcopal High School at Washington National Cathedral where she said Mao was one of her heroes. Whether it's the academic community, the media elite or politicians, there is a great tolerance for the ideas of socialism – a system that has caused more deaths and human misery than all other systems combined. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Nazism and socialized medicine ~ By Joseph Farah

From WorldNetDaily

By Joseph Farah Posted: October 05, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Don't you dare point out in polite company that socialized medicine in Germany provided the mechanism for the Holocaust. Don't do it. Even though it's undeniably true from a historical standpoint, Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and their accomplices in the Big Media will vilify you, ridicule you and accuse you of minimizing the tragedy of the Holocaust. But I don't really care if they play that card with me. They've already played the race card. They've already played the Nazi card. They've already played the "extremist" card. Consider me inoculated from the venomous poison of these vipers. Here are the facts you should know before accepting a nationalized health-care system that will place in the hands of government the very keys to your life and liberty. Adolf Hitler didn't launch national socialist health care in Germany. It began in the latter part of the 19th century under Otto von Bismarck, ironically as part of his "anti-socialist" legislation. Bismarck, like many of today's U.S. politicians, believed introducing a form of what I call "socialism lite" would stave off he more virulent forms of the disease. The Weimar Republic that preceded the Nazi takeover had already witnessed the transformation of the German health-care system from one focused on individual practitioners and individual patients to one more concerned with general public health. Prevention became the watchword. Doctors became more like state functionaries concerned with the nation's general health that individuals accountable to patients for health care. When a worldwide economic crisis hit in 1929, government expenditures for health care were slashed as were those for public housing, welfare payments and creation programs. The government health-care system began to apply cost-efficiency calculations to medical treatments. The first victims of were those considered weak and "unproductive" to the interests of the state. The eugenicist ideas of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, a hero of today's collectivists promoting socialized medicine, were studied and adopted by the Germans. Charles Darwin's notions about "survival of the fittest" were applied to social engineering policies. Before Hitler ever came to power, Germans were already euthanizing or sterilizing large numbers of the mentally ill and the mentally retarded. [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]