Jarvis Tyner speaks in Detroit on October 7 on the need for an all-out mobilization to defeat Tea Party and other right wing Republican candidates.
Surprise, surprise! Radical Communist Jarvis Tyner is backing his fellow travelers who have taken over the democrat party. He's trying to fire up the crazies to take on American Patriots in the Tea Party movement who are trying to save our nation from certain destruction.
From our friends in New Zealand at the New Zeal blog.
Communist Party USA Leader Openly Backs Obama and the Democrats
Jarvis Tyner, national executive vice-chair of the Communist Party USA, spoke in Detroit October 7, on the need to for "left and progressive" minded people to help insure a huge voter turnout for the midterm election.
The must radical elements of humanity, violent Communists, Socialists .... Marxists all .... are who now control the democrat party. These disciples of Lennon and Marx are evil. There is no other way to describe them.
Remember this when you vote on Tuesday.
You have a choice: Leave radicals, supported by the absolute worst of what society has to offer, in power, or vote for Common Sense candidates who will restore this nation to sanity.
Here's some great video of Christine O'Donnell on the campaign trail. Good look at the real Christine, not one the media tried to sell you.
This is an important election. Go to Christine's website and see how you can make sure she is the next Senator from Delaware, and the 41st vote against anything the Obama regime and Congress try during the lame duck session.
Remember, this is a special election, and Christine will be seated immediately, and be part of the lame duck Congress.
Sarah Palin made a surprise stop in Wheeling, West Virginia on Saturday. Sarah made her remarks and was then interviewed by Tea Party HD. She is fired up!
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.
~ Ronald Wilson Reagan
It was October 27th, 1964, forty-six years ago, today, that Ronald Reagan took to the stage in Los Angeles, Californian to speak to the nation. This televised speech, in support of Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater, has become one of the most iconic political speeches of all time. Entitled A Time For Choosing, over the years, it has become known as simply “The Speech.”
So essential is this speech, it should be required viewing by every man, woman, and child in America, if not the world. Every school should teach a class on this speech alone.
This is the essential Reagan. This is simply one of the most powerful speeches ever given to a people. Reagan lays out a strong indictment of Socialism and how, even then, the democrat party was destroying individual Freedom, individual Liberty, individual prosperity, and in turn, destroying the nation.
Sadly, with few alterations, this speech could be given word for word today, and be spot on. Of course, we'd have to replace millions with billions, and billions with trillions, but the same problems we had in 1964 are still with us today, only magnified by astronomical amounts.
Well, this has come to be partly because as powerful as Reagan's speech was, as inspiring as it was, more people chose to give up much of their freedoms, for the promise of an imaginary Utopia, just as voters blindly did in 2008 when another snake oil salesman came along, by the name of Barack Obama.
Obama, combined with the Marxists who had already been in control of Congress for over a year, has managed to wreak havoc on the entire nation by instituting the same old failed policies that Progressive-Socialists like Woodrow Wilson and FDR tried in their day. The same Marxist policies that have failed world wide everywhere they have been tried, and led to completely failed societies, are now being tried by Obama and his fellow travelers, and yielding the same predictably disastrous results.
In 1964 America had a real choice between two ideologies: One that offered real Freedom, real Liberty, and real prosperity, or one that would further enslave them, one that would make them less free, and less prosperous. One that would create an atmosphere of government overreach that would make it incredibly difficult to reach the American dream our founders had.
The American people, for any number of reasons, chose a path that promised them the land of milk and honey, if only they would succumb to the state.
History shows that over the next two decades things got steadily worse, culminating with the Carter presidency, and the darkest days since the Great Depression. Miserable times to try and succeed or even survive.
It took those two decades, from the time Reagan gave “The Speech” until 1980, before America was ready to listen to common sense, and elect Ronald Reagan, who became one of our greatest Presidents, and brought America back to greatness. Sadly, we forgot the lesson Reagan was trying to teach the nation in 1964, and would teach the nation throughout his eight years in office.
Well, here we are, forty-six years later, and frankly, we don't have two decades. Folks, we don't have two years. Thanks to the radical and dangerous policies of Obama and his Marxist-democrat party, America is staring into the abyss. We've never been so close to total destruction in our nation's history.
This time, instead of bombs, and invading armies, it's economic destruction we face. A destruction just as devastating as any nuclear weapon, or invading army could render. The insane policies of the Obama regime, and his enablers, have us right at the edge.
On October 27th, 1964 it was a time for choosing. On November 2, 2010 it will be a time for choosing again. History shows us what happens when we make the right choices, and what happens when we make the wrong choices.
What choice will you make? Will you stand up for Freedom and Liberty, for the Rule of Law, for the American Way, or will you just go with the flow, vote for the status quo, and certain destruction?
As Sarah Palin is fond of saying, only dead fish go with the flow, and in this case, if we don't change course in this country, and change course drastically, we'll all be dead fish.
Below is a complete transcript of Reagan's speech, with links to historical references.
Program Announcer:
Ladies and gentlemen, we take pride in presenting a thoughtful address by Ronald Reagan. Mr. Reagan:
Reagan:
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.
I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, "We've never had it so good."
But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We've raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we've just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.
As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to." And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.
And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.
This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.
In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, "The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says, "The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."
Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government" -- this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.
Now, we have no better example of this than government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming -- that's regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we've spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don't grow.
Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he'll find out that we've had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He'll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress [an] extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He'll find that they've also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.
At the same time, there's been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There's now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.
Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how -- who are farmers to know what's best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.
Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights [are] so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land." The President tells us he's now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we've only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we've sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.
They've just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings in their banks. And when the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.
We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer -- and they've had almost 30 years of it -- shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?
But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we're told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We're spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.
Now -- so now we declare "war on poverty," or "You, too, can be a Bobby Baker." Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we're spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have -- and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs -- do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We're now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we're going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we're going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.
But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who'd come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She's eligible for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing.
Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we're always "against" things -- we're never "for" anything.
Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.
Now -- we're for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we've accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.
But we're against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They've called it "insurance" to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they're doing just that.
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary -- his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he's 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they're due -- that the cupboard isn't bare?
Barry Goldwater thinks we can.
At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we're for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we're against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.
In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents worth?
I think we're for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we're against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.
I think we're for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we're against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We're helping 107. We've spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So, governments' programs, once launched, never disappear.
Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth.
Federal employees -- federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier over-planted his rice allotment. The government obtained a 17,000 dollar judgment. And a U.S. marshal sold his 960-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.
Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, "If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States." I think that's exactly what he will do.
But as a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration, because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his Party was taking the Party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his Party, and he never returned til the day he died -- because to this day, the leadership of that Party has been taking that Party, that honorable Party, down the road in the image of the labor Socialist Party of England.
Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the -- or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.
Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men -- that we're to choose just between two personalities.
Well what of this man that they would destroy -- and in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear? Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well I've been privileged to know him "when." I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I've never known a man in my life I believed so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.
This is a man who, in his own business before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work. He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.
An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas. And he said that [there were] a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, "Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such," and they went down there, and there was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long, he'd load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.
During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, "There aren't many left who care what happens to her. I'd like her to know I care." This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, "There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start." This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I've discussed academic, unless we realize we're in a war that must be won.
Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer -- not an easy answer -- but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.
We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace -- and you can have it in the next second -- surrender.
Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face -- that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand -- the ultimatum. And what then -- when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we're retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he's heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he'd rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us.
You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin -- just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." And this -- this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said, "The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits -- not animals." And he said, "There's something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.
We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.
This is a pretty cool video for the song "Inside This World of Mine" from Static Cycle that features Bristol Palin. The video was filmed in Chena, Alaska in an incredible ice hotel, and directed by Sean Morris, who can be found at http://www.AlaskanNomad.com
Bristol looks like she's having a blast here.
As you know Bristol has become quite the star on ABC's Dancing With The Stars. Bristol and her dance partner Mark Ballas have really excited fans of the show.
On Monday night Bristol and Mark danced the tango, scoring their highest points in competition so far, advancing to week seven.
If those two keep putting in solid performances like this, they have a really good shot at the title.
Personally, I just enjoy the chemistry those two have together. Reminds one of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers and the chemistry those two had. Bristol is obviously a talented woman and Mark is just the best. One thing is for certain, Bristol is proving she'll be able to go far in whatever endeavor she chooses in life.
This video was sent to me by a Marine buddy of mine. It's one of the most powerful tributes to those who sacrifice so much for us that I have seen. As the video says, “All gave some, some gave all.” We are blessed with the finest military on earth, because of the quality of those who join.
We must never forget these brave men and women and all they do.
We are getting some wonderful reports out of Washington State and the Dick Muri campaign. Muri, a retired Lt Col, and member of Combat Veterans For Congress, is in a virtual dead heat with far left Pelosi clone Adam Smith in Washington's 9th District.
Muri has been flying under the radar, and despite being outspent 6:1, is within the margin of error in the latest poling, thanks to a superior ground game and lots of volunteers.
Adam Smith has flooded the market with negative ads, while Muri has yet to run one single television spot. As close as this race is, and as fed up as voters are, it won't take much to close this deal.
With that said, the Muri campaign has put out an urgent request. The campaign needs $20,000 within the next 24 hours to do some aggressive media advertising. Can you step up and help? If so, hit Lt Col Muri's website https://dickmuri.com/donation and show some support.
From Dick's website:
Combat Veterans for Congress endorse former USAF Lt Colonel Dick Muri as a fiscally conservative candidate who will work to rein in the out of control spending by the Pelosi Congress. In addition to his achievements in the Air Force and on the Pierce County Council, Lt Colonel Muri received the 1996 John M. Anderson Military Citizen of the year award and then again was one of two civilians inducted in 2006 into the Fort Lewis Civilians Hall of Fame.
Washington's 9th Congressional District has the third highest concentration of veterans and active duty military out of all 435 districts in the country. Dick Muri's 22 years of service in the United States Air Force and experience at McChord Air Force Base make him an exemplary candidate to service the constituents in the district.
No challenger has ever come this close to unseating the far-left incumbent, Congressman Adam Smith. The race is now considered a "toss-up," and we need your help in the sprint to the finish.
Recently, Adam Smith has been using his campaign kitty -- 55% of which comes from lobbyists and Political Action Committees -- to attack Dick. Calling him a hypocrite and lying about his record on the Pierce County Council. It's a shame that the Congressman feels he needs to campaign in such a dirty fashion. Its sure sign of desperation.
Dick Muri has dedicated his life to public service, both in the military and in local government. Like he does on the Pierce County Council, Dick Muri will go to congress to serve the people, not corporate lobbyists and special interests.
This historical election marks a dramatic change in direction for the entire country.
This election is like no other. This may be the most competitive election in our nation's history. There is no such thing as a “safe” democrat seat. All are trouble, or at the very least, panicked.
There is only one problem: The RNC and the NRCC never envisioned anything like the wave that is coming. This is a real tsunami, created by real Americans. Grass roots Americans working hard. Making a difference.
The problem is (and this is a pretty good problem to have) these everyday patriotic Americans, who have been building momentum all over the nation, have simply out run the resources of the national and state parties! Most experts thought 40-50 seats would be in play, at best, and worked toward that goal. Now we understand that double that amount of seats (or more) are competitive. The party is simply overwhelmed.
That means it's up to YOU!
Sending Dick Muri to Congress will send a strong message to the President and the nation. Obama and his party's policies have failed miserably and have us all staring into the abyss. The best way to correct course is to defeat every democrat possible, and force Obama to change his ways. The very future of our nation depends on it.
Dick Muri is a Common Sense Conservative who understands what needs to be done.
I know there are a lot of campaigns out there, but no one has done so much with so little. It's a strong testament to Dick Muri's leadership skills, and his ability to motivate his troops, that he is on the cusp of a huge win.This is the sort of leader we simply must have in Congress.
Let's help Dick make this win happen. Send what you can to:https://dickmuri.com/donation and send a good man to Congress, and a strong message to Obama.
I know Lt Col West needs all of the support he can get, but this is kinda pathetic. Typical of Mitt Romney though. At least he's not waiting until AFTER the election, like he did with New Mexico's next Governor, Susanna Martinez, who he endorsed after she won her primary.
For the record, Sarah Palin endorsed Lt Col West way back in March, when it wasn't so politically fashionable.
It’s about time: Mitt endorses Allen West today. Take a lesson from Sarah Palin on political courage Mittens
Look, Allen West needs all the help he can get, but this is ridiculous. Mitt Romney waits until 10 days before the election to endorse Allen West?
Sarah Palin endorsed Allen West since March. For me, she demonstrated more political fortitude in getting behind such a great conservative candidate.
All of a sudden, since West is in a positive growth in the polls, getting him ahead of Ron Klein, Mitt finds it safe enough to endorse Allen West. This reminds me of Romney endorsing Marco Rubio so late in the game against Charlie Crist.
There are many reasons why Romney, for me, represents the same liberalism that I detest about the republican party establishment. Romneycare, his waffling on economic and social issues, etc. If Romney thinks this endorsement will ingratiate me to his candidacy, as somehow proving that he’s a conservative, he’s wrong.
Not much political or conservative bravery on the part of Mittens.
On Monday, Romney’s Free & Strong America PAC added Republican candidate Allen West to its list of 30 critical House races to watch (and donate to) in the coming midterm election…
By giving a shout out to West, Romney hopes he’ll be viewed favorably by West and his supporters after the election.
I know some of our readers will be reminding me of Reagan's Eleventh Commandment, “though shall not speak ill of fellow Conservatives.” But that's the really the deal here. Mitt Romney is not a “fellow Conservative.” He's not one of us.
No, Romney is another establishment hack. An unprincipled progressive who blows with the wind. He's also the guy the elite Ruling Class is backing for 2012. He's the establishment's show pony. Proven liar Jonathan Martin of POLITICO, who some say likes to dress up like Ethel Merman and sing show tunes, penned an article claiming all of the big money elites are getting behind Mitt. He's their boy. Sources also say Martin is a shill for Romney.
These are the same big wigs and party elites who backed losers like Senator Arlen Specter, Florida Governor Charlie Crist, and of course, Senator Lisa Murkowski, all of whom promptly left the Republican Party when it became obvious they couldn't win their primaries, or, as in Lisa's case, after getting whipped in the primary. All trashing the Republican Party along the way.
Of course, Lisa is the worst of the bunch. Once she got beat, instead of accepting the will of the voters, she first tried to shop herself as a replacement for the Libertarian Party candidate, and when rejected, decided to run a write in candidate, backed by unions, special interest lobbyists, and even democrat operatives.
Showing what they are really made of, the GOP Ruling Class elites refused to strip Murkowski of her committee assignments, even though she was no longer a member of the Republican Party, and actively trying to defeat Joe Miller, who IS the Republican Party nominee.
Much like the Ruling Class's fear of Sarah Palin, the fear of Joe Miller is he is a principled man who will seek to put an end to the corruption in Washington. He will end their gravy train.
Why does this matter? These people, these Ruling Class elites, these are Mitt Romney's kind of people.
Romney seems to have chosen a “careful” path toward the presidency: Stay in hiding, say nothing controversial, and then when all of the heavy lifting is done, good old Mitt will show up and offer his services to save us all.
America needs fighters, people who will go all in, to try and save the nation from certain destruction. We need leaders who say things like: “Politically, if I die, I die, but I won't sit down, and I won't shut up!”
Mitt Romney doesn't even come close.
What really offends me about Romney though, is here we are, a week away from the most important election in our nation's history, and this clown is angling to further his career.
Mitt Romney's naked lust for the presidency is repugnant.
What's sad is Romney is thought well of in some circles. He could have been out there for the last two years using his name, and that goodwill, to help defeat Obama's dangerous agenda, an agenda that has America staring into the abyss.
You know, had Romney been an actual leader, and had the cojones to step up in our nation's darkest hour, like many patriots have, he might have even made a difference, but we'll never know, because Romney is just too big of a political coward, and more interested in his own ambition, than the fate of the nation.
I agree with Cubachi, Romney could learn some lessons in courage, and leadership from Sarah Palin.
Just a reminder of the sort we are fighting against. This video was taken at the “One Nation” rally, that took place at the Washington Mall, in response to Glenn Beck's wildly successful Restoring Honor rally that was held on August 28.
The “One Nation” rally was sponsored Barack Obama's permanent campaign Organizing For America, as well as SEIU, the AFL-CIO, and all of the Soros funded groups, which run into the hundreds.
Notice all of the Socialist and Communist paraphernalia, and it's violent imagery. Hard to miss all the Che Guevara imagery are well. It's quite telling that one of the worst mass murders in history has become the symbol for the democrat party, and Obama.
It's not like America wasn't warned of this either. If you remember, in Houston, Texas, one of Barack Obama's campaign headquarters offices prominently featured a Cuba flag with Che's picture on it. World Net Dailyreported at the time it was disturbing that Obama attracts “people who think mass murderers are romantic revolutionaries.”
Americans were warned in 2008 who these people are, but most laughed it off. Well, who's laughing now?
This is why your vote next Tuesday is so important.
Americans have a clear choice: You can vote for Freedom, Liberty, and the Rule of Law, or you can vote for radical Communists who want to take all of your freedom away. Radicals who worship mass murders like Mao, Stalin, and Che Guevara.
Hey, you can lie about me POLITICO, Jonathan Martin, ya punk. You guys can lie about me, but you're takin' on the big guns, you're takin' on Beck. You know, you're an idiot if you take 'em on!
~ Sarah Palin
This is a delightful and fun interview between Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck. Glenn and his producer start out by goofing on the “Sarah is a diva” meme and then Glenn and Sarah rip on Jonathan Martin, one of the many corrupt JournoList members that work for POLITICO. Sarah calls Martin a “punk.”
Once done slicing and dicing that worthless website, the pair talk about the upcoming election and what needs to be done.
Fun stuff.
As to POLITICO, that site has more known members of JournoList than any other publication out there. We've reported before that POLITICO is little more than a propaganda tool for the left, and it's coverage is never to be trusted, without some independent verification by the reader.
Let me put it this way: POLITICO has all of the credibility of the Weekly World News, with none of the entertainment value.
What Sarah and Glenn are talking about is a particular piece of trash written by Jonathan Martin earlier this week entitled “Hurricane Sarah” that alleges all sorts of nonsense. Of course Martin, punk that he is, uses a favorite trick all “journalists” on the left, and particularly the hacks at POLITICO use in almost every story: “unnamed” and “anonymous” sources. "Sources close to the story." In this case, those sources are the voices in Jonathan Martin's head.
This is a long piece that has “anonymous sources” from various campaigns, as well as Beck's staff and others, claiming Sarah was unprofessional, hard to deal with, a diva, and on, and on. Not a single word in this piece of garbage is true, and every single politician and talk show host … oh hell, EVERYBODY, has demanded a retraction and a written apology!
Glenn Beck talked about it at the beginning of his Thursday show:
As Beck says, not one word in this hit piece is true. Not one word! He also demands a retraction.
Mark Levin demanded a retraction, as well, calling the story a “flat out lie”:
This is a flat out lie. Sarah Palin never backed out of any interview with me. Period. And John Martin, the reporter, never contacted me to ask me directly. I insist on a retraction.
As both Sheppard and the American Spectator'sJeffrey Lord point out, Sean Hannity has also demanded a retraction. Shepard and Lord both report Jonathan Martin, the low life that he is, is hiding under it's desk, and POLITICO has been silent to calls from Palin, Beck, Levin, Hannity, and the rest, for a retraction and an apology.
Stacy Drake reports that Senator Chuck Grassley and Congressman Steve King, both of Iowa, also call BS on the lies Jonathan Martin is spewing in this piece of trash POLITICO published.
Stacy slices and dices that nimrod quite well in a must read article.
Retracto, the Correction Alpaca over at Andrew Breitbart's Big Journalism weighs in here.
BTW, Jonathan Martin even LOOKS like a punk!
"Sources close to the situation" tell me Johnny molests collies in his spare time.
Look, the bottom line is this: POLITICO is a corrupt, not to be trusted news source. They lie about people, smear people, and just flat make things up, when no actually story exists. Jonathan Martin has a long history of this, and anything he writes should be suspect, including if he writes the sky is blue. That's how poor his credibility is.
The sad thing though is, as much as everyone would love for it to be different, Martin is the rule, rather than the exception, when we are talking about the so-called “main stream media.” The entire American “main stream media” is as corrupt as the day is long.
The bias is unbelievable. Not only do they lie and smear, they often cover up for their friends, and just fail to cover positive stories that matter. This has become such a standard practice that seasoned observers take it for granted, and casual observers don't even realize it.
Whether it's planting bombs on the gas tanks of Chevy pick up trucks, as NBC did, when they couldn't duplicate the urban legend saying they would explode on impact, or creating fake National Guard documents like CBS' Dan Rather and his producer Mary Mapes did 60 days before the 2004 presidential election, trying to corrupt the outcome, this is what they do.
Barack Obama took this to an entirely new level of corruption when he enlisted his now White House Chief of Staff, Pete Rouse to help him bribe a sitting Alaska State Senator with the offer of a job in his administration, if he would cook up an “October surprise” for then Governor Sarah Palin. Rouse even recruited an entire group of bloggers and reporters to make sure every lie was told to the entire world through compliant media outlets.
History shows that Troopegate (or Tasergate as Sarah calls it) was indeed an “October surprise” with the Branchflower Report “findings” being released three day before the 2008 presidential election, and Senator Kim Elton was paid handsomely for his efforts with a make work job in the Department of Interior.
Mission accomplished.
History also shows the Branchflower Report, just days after the election, was completely discredited by independent investigator Timothy Petumenos, on behalf of the Alaska State Personnel Board. The Branchflower Report was a total lie.
This truth has not been widely reported, but the lie has.
We are at war in this nation. We have a real life struggle of good vs evil. Liberty and Freedom vs Tyranny and enslavement. National survival and prosperity vs sure destruction and poverty. This is a war we must win.
On our side, we have history and the truth. Conservatism is a proven winner. It has worked every time it's been tried. This nation was founded on Conservative ideas, and the Rule of Law.
The radical left , which has total control of the democrat party, only has lies and delusional thinking.
Unfortunately, they also have near total control of not only the media, but most of academia. Our children are indoctrinated at an early age that America is bad, Conservatism is evil, and Marxism is the plan. The media and our educational system are two very powerful tools the radical left exploits daily.
We must realize this is indeed war, and war for the very soul of the nation. We must understand the media is dishonest, and never trust it. Always verify any story, especially one about a leading Conservative.
This is a war we must win. The nation's very survival depends on it.
What can you really do?
Be aware. Be aware of the lies being told.
Fight back. Refudiate the lies. When you see a writer who lies, call them out. Most online magazines have comments sections. Call the writer out, and point out the truth. Post links in support of the truth. Write letters to your local editors when your newspaper prints lies. Make phone calls to the local radio and TV stations.
If you see someone, even friends, retelling a lie they heard (whether they know it's a lie, or not) correct them. The facts are on your side. Never allow someone in your company to get away with repeating lies they heard in the corrupt media. You may make a few mad, but even more will respect you.
Organize. Get your friends together and make a plan. Set up a local watchdog group to keep an eye on both your local as well an nation media. When you see lies, call the liars out en masse. Never let up.
We can win this, we must win this. But it will be a long struggle. None of this will end on November 2nd, no matter how great our victory. Quite the contrary. The left and it's partners in media and academia will get nastier. They will get bolder in their corruption.
2010 is lost, and most on the left realize that 2012 is almost a foregone conclusion. What they don't lose this November, they are most likely to lose in 2012. Knowing this, and having the feeling they have absolutely nothing else to lose, they will trow everything they have at us.
The media seem fascinated these days asking Republicans if they would endorse Sarah Palin for President in 2012.
When CNN's John King asked that question of former Florida governor Jeb Bush Friday, he didn't bat an eye :
JOHN KING, HOST: We always reach out to our friends on Twitter and Facebook while we're having big guests on the program and we told them you were coming on to the program. Here's what one of our Facebook fans, Kyle Hunter, asked me to ask. Would he endorse Palin for president if he does not run himself?
JEB BUSH, FORMER FLORIDA GOVERNOR: A, I'm not running and if Sarah Palin's the nominee and if she's running against Barack Obama, you betcha.
KING: Do you see right now, you say you're not running, I take your word for that too. When you look around do you see a kind of Republican, I know you don't want to get into the names just right now, but a kind of Republican that you think this is the profile we want to run up against Barack Obama in 2012?
BUSH: Big and bold and aspirational that has a positive agenda that will compare, I think, favorably to that of the president's. We can't as Republicans, we can't just be against the president's proposals, we have to offer up compelling alternatives that are 21st century oriented that deal with these huge problems that we faced across the board of the policy world.
I just think there's a yearning for that and many of the gubernatorial candidates and soon to be governors will be acting on that and I think that's going to encourage all of our candidates to be bigger and bolder and more aspirational.
Makes you wonder if King was expecting Bush to dodge the question.
This should get some tongues wagging!
Jeb is more of an establishment Republican, not a movement Conservative. In my mind, this proves that Sarah Palin is proving the corrupt media, and the old guard GOP establishment, was completely wrong about her, and her ability to attract support from a wide range of voters.
Sarah knows what the great Ronald Reagan knew. Conservatism, real Conservatism, works every time it's tried. It's a proven philosophy that appeals to most Americans, and Sarah Palin is the only potential candidate who really lives and breathes it.
Ready to rubber stamp even the massive new energy tax
that will cost every Delaware family
thousands and could bring
Coons' family billions.
Shame on you, Chris Coons.
Delaware needs an independent voice, to stand up to the establishment. Christine O'Donnell.
Another devastating ad from Christine O'Donnell that hits Chris Coons on many levels.
The ad rightly shows Chris Coons, Harry Reid's pet Bearded Marxist, will be nothing more than a rubber stamp for the Obama regime. It also points out, like most democrats, Chris Coons, who raised taxes 54% in just three years, has never met a tax increase he didn't fall passionately in love with.
Another strong point made here is the fact Chris Coons' family's company stands to make billions of dollars off of cap and tax legislation that will destroy the American economy.
As her ad says, Christine will be a strong, principled, independent voice in the United States Senate. All of her hard work, stellar debate performances, and strong messaging is starting to show, as according to yet another poll, this one by TCJ Research, shows she continues to surge in the polls.
Go to Christine's website to learn how you can help her in many different ways to secure victory in November: http://christine2010.com/
I mean, we all have things we've done in the past that we're embarrassed about, but I'd rather have my being restricted to 100 yards away from elementary schools be public knowledge than that $5,000 Boxer campaign contribution.
~ David Zucker
David Zucker (Airplane!, The Naked Gun, etc,) has done it again! Zucker who saw the light after 9/11, and became a Republican, has created yet another great campaign ad aimed at a hapless, radical democrat. This time Zucker takes on California's Barbara Boxer and lampoons her now infamous “don't call me ma'am” incident.
This is absolutely brilliant.
In one stunning moment of jackassery and arrogance, Boxer summed up everything that is wrong with the Ruling Class in Washington. Zucker makes short work of Senator Don't Call Me Ma'am, and offers this video up as an apology for ever supporting her in the first place.
‘Call Me Senator’: Let This Video Be My Apology for Once Supporting Sen. Boxer
I'd like to thank Right Change (who sponsored and are planning an ad campaign to support the spot) and all the wonderful actors and crew who volunteered for the “Call Me Madam” video.
I was motivated to do something on this after I saw the video of Barbara Boxer interrogating the General.
I remember immediately feeling embarrassed that a member of Congress would treat an officer of the U.S. military like that. And doubly embarrassed that back in the early 90's I had contributed to Barbara Boxer’s campaign.
I was so outraged at the pure arrogance of that moment, that I sat down to write the spot, highlighting the pure absurdity of our California Senator dressing down a General for calling her “Ma’am.” No Naked Gun or Scary Movie ever had an opportunity as good as that one for pure ridicule. Never mind that the military are instructed to call their superiors including members of congress ‘Sir’ or ‘Ma’am’, including specifically, Members of Congress!
I thought an apology would have been appropriate, but to my knowledge, none has ever been made by Senator Boxer. This I find distressing, since apologies from public figures nowadays are the norm. I mean, it's not as if she texted her junk to Brett Favre. This was just arrogantly insulting an army officer. But I guess that's okay with her.
In the debate with Carly Fiorina, the subject was brought up, but Boxer was quite adept at deflecting it — and still without an apology. Let this video be my apology. Every time I see the public record listing my campaign contribution to Boxer — I wince. I mean, we all have things we've done in the past that we're embarrassed about, but I'd rather have my being restricted to 100 yards away from elementary schools be public knowledge than that $5,000 Boxer campaign contribution.
Ouch!
Barbara Boxer is a glittering jewel of colossal arrogance. As a reminder:
Check out Right Change to learn how you can help send Senator Ma'am packing.
Sarah Palin weighed in hard on Thursday over the despicable firing of Juan Williams by taxpayer funded NPR, calling on Congress to defund this house organ of the political left.
NPR & LSM: you're shocked at public outrage over your censorship of Juan? This is what happens when our Constitution starts shaking her fist
Once again, our Constitution protects all speech, not just the speech we agree with. Agreeable speech really needs no protection, does it?
This entire episode is yet another shining example of the huge myth that says the left is “loving,” “accepting,” and “tolerant.” The left only tolerates that which is in total lock step (goose step?) with it's radical agenda. Any deviation will be dealt with swiftly, and harshly.
This powerful video from Citizens Against Government Waste forecasts a bleak future for America, thanks to the insane spending spree our government has been on for years.
Donate to help end wasteful deficit spending at www.cagw.org. This new ad is part of an ongoing communications program in CAGW's decades-long fight against wasteful government spending, increased taxes, out-of-control deficit spending, and a crippling national debt that threatens the future and survival of our country.
We must reign in this unsustainable debt, or our nation will collapse.
The best ways to stop all of this is to show up and vote on the first Tuesday in November, and check out the CAGW website for more information on government waste: www.cagw.org
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
~ Pastor Martin Niemöller
No doubt by now you have heard all about the incredibly disturbing situation with Juan Williams and National Public Radio. (NPR)
On Monday while discussing Muslims, it seems Juan was a bit indelicate while making a broader point. The radicals over at CAIR (the Muslim answer to the NAACP) who cry foul at anything said critical of the so-called “Religion of Peace,” went nuts.
All Juan said was he finds himself feeling uncomfortable when he gets on an airplane and sees Muslims in their garb. (Who doesn't after 9/11?) Now Juan went on to say that we as a nation must learn to get past this. And, well, he's right …. to a point.
Thing is, NPR, which is taxpayer funded, has been looking to get rid of Jan, because he's a regular on more than a few programs on Fox News.
The quote posted above is from Pastor Martin Niemöller and, of course, he was talking about fascism in Nazi Germany. He's making the point that if people had stood up when the government came for one group, and said “Hell No! This dog ain't gonna hunt!” millions of people's lives would have been spared.
Well, we are at a point in this country, where the Marxist-progressive movement is starting to mirror the fascism of Nazi Germany. These people can't compete in the marketplace of ideas. Their ideas are proven failures, and have been for over a century, and around the world.
Marxism, which includes Fascism, Socialism, and Communism, has witnessed catastrophic failure, and seen 100 million men, women, and children murdered by the various states, such as Nazi Germany, Red China, the Soviet Union, and Castro's Cuba.
One thing that our readers know, and history verifies, it was American Marxist-progressives, at the turn of the 20th Century, who were the inspiration for the Nazis. Please remember what Nazi is short for: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or National Socialist German Workers Party.
Then we have the infamous JournoList, a cabal of so-called main stream “journalists” and members of academia. These are some of the top names in “journalism.” Names everyone who reads knows. When this scandal broke we learned how they all coordinated stories to not only attack the defenders of Liberty and Freedom, but conspired to cover up stories that would harm Barack Obama during the 2008 election. Stories, had they been reported fairly, that would have guaranteed a landslide loss.
We know these people also went into panic mode within minutes of John McCain announcing Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate. They coordinated attacks, made up lies, and even discussed how they could attack Sarah's brand new son Trig, and actually exploit the fact that he is a special needs child. The evil involved in this is off the charts gentle readers.
What we have learned is the Marxist-progressive movement, which has totally taken control of every aspect of the democrat party, has a propaganda machine that would have Joseph Goebbel salivating with envy.
Again, why does this matter? Well, as we reported months ago, most of the hundreds of members of JournoList, including names you know, and (God forbid) may have even trusted, are Communists, Socialists, and/or stooges directly connected to Nazi sympathizer George Soros, the self proclaimed “owner of the democrat party,” and quite possibly one of the most evil men alive today.
All of these people, the Marxist-democrats, the JournoListers, and most certainly George Soros, are incredibly anti-Constitution, anti-Rule of Law, and anti-American.
These people work daily through thousands of groups, many who have at least received seed money from Soros, to undermine the American experiment. These people smear anyone and everyone who doesn't march lock step (or is it goose step) with their insane ideology.
At the big “One Nation” rally (flop) an open gathering of Communists and Socialists, promoted by Barack Obama through his Organizing for America permanent campaign, that was held on the Washington Mall in response to Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor rally (where over 500,000 celebrated) many top Marxist-democrats where chastising Juan in speeches calling him an “Uncle Tom” and worse.
Juan is just as much a progressive as the rest of these losers, but since he also thinks for himself, sometimes strays off the plantation, and of course, appears on Fox News, he's become one of those “uppity” Negroes. The kind who would have found a cross burning in his yard a generation ago.
Look, I'm not one of Juan Williams biggest fans. I disagree with him on just about every level, but the man comes off pretty well for a progressive. His seems relatively reasonable, when compared to his fellow travelers. The only time he just goes stupid is when he's talking about certain strong Conservative women, like Sarah Palin. Then he goes full on stupid, just like his former friends. But you know what? I support the man's God given freedom to speak his mind. It's the only way we can be truly free, something those on the left fear more than death itself. You see, people who are truly free, won't put up with the nonsense the left is pushing.
Popular speech never needs defending. It's the sort of speech that makes you angry, or even sick to your stomach, that must be defended vigorously. One man's "hate speech" is another man's music. And I'm using the Marxist definition of "hate speech," which is anything the Marxists disagree with.
Speaking of Sarah Palin, she tweeted Juan, and weighed in with a powerful editorial via Facebook:
Juan Williams: Going Rogue
At a time when our country is dangerously in debt and looking for areas of federal spending to cut, I think we've found a good candidate for defunding. National Public Radio is a public institution that directly or indirectly exists because the taxpayers fund it. And what do we, the taxpayers, get for this? We get to witness Juan Williams being fired from NPR for merely speaking frankly about the very real threat this country faces from radical Islam.
We have to have an honest discussion about the jihadist threat. Are we not allowed to say that Muslim terrorists have killed thousands of Americans and continue to plot the deaths of thousands more? Are we not allowed to say that there are Muslim states that aid and abet these fanatics? Are we not allowed to even debate the role that radical Islam plays in inciting this violence?
I don’t expect Juan Williams to support me (he's said some tough things about me in the past) – but I will always support his right and the right of all Americans to speak honestly about the threats this country faces. And for Juan, speaking honestly about these issues isn't just his right, it's his job. Up until yesterday, he was doing that job at NPR. Firing him is their loss.
If NPR is unable to tolerate an honest debate about an issue as important as Islamic terrorism, then it's time for “National Public Radio” to become “National Private Radio.” It's time for Congress to defund this organization.
NPR says its mission is “to create a more informed public,” but by stifling debate on these issues, NPR is doing exactly the opposite. President Obama should make clear his commitment to free and honest discussion of the jihadist threat in our public debates – and Congress should make clear that unless NPR provides that public service, not one more dime.
Mr. President, what say you?
~ Sarah Palin
Something tells me Barack Obama is going to either hide under his desk on this one, or come out and say something outrageously stupid. He's not going to step up though, as these are his people. These are the sort that carry the water for “community organizing” street thugs.
Sarah is right though, we need to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and do it ASAP. This group funds both NPR and PBS. When the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was founded in the 1960s, it served a purpose. There were only three television networks, at the time, and they had little “public interest” programming.
As FDR had instituted the “Fairness Doctrine” which also killed free speech, just like the Marxists are wanting to do today, there was no talk radio. Most radio was AM, and was either Top 40 music, Country, or possible a combination of the two. NPR supposedly filled the void. Again a void created by the closest thing we ever had to a dictator in this country, the FDR administration, which killed free speech.
Today we have over 500 television channels available to virtually every American. Terrestrial radio is filled with all sorts of talk shows, as well as any kind of music you want to hear. We even have satellite radio that has hundreds of channels of just about anything one can dream of.
And let's not forget the internet, something that is also available, one way or another, to most of the American people. The information available online is virtually, endless, unlimited.
No legitimate reason exists to continue to fund this any more, especially since Both NPR, as well as the “news” programming on PBS is as far left as it gets. Like most of the media, NPR and PBS basically serve as stenographers for the left. House organs of propaganda.
Taxpayers have poured billions of dollars into this boondoggle since 1969. $400 million in 2008 alone. This chart lays it all out.
Enough is enough.
Besides, George Soros has opened his check book and is giving NPR as well as the notorious hate website, the Huffington Post, millions of dollars. Soros recently threw in the towel when it comes to funding the Marxist-democrat party, because even he knows they are going to be all but wiped out come November, and will have no power, thus unable to help him destroy America as we know it. Better to fund a compliant and quite willing media, instead.
Glenn Beck has been hitting George Soros, and all of the extreme radicals, who are actually controlling the Marxist agenda in this country, all week long on his television show.
Thursday's show was particularly strong as Glenn points out the absolute evil that has taken control of the American media, which you will see in the first few minutes of the show. Pure evil.
Also in the first segment, Glenn discussed a hit piece on Sarah Palin that appeared in POLITCO Thursday called “Hurricane Sarah.” There is literally not a single word in the story that is true. Not a single word!
Every person mentioned in this story has demanded POLITICO print a retraction and apology.
This piece of trash was penned by Jonathan Martin, a know member of JournoList. As it happens, POLITICO appears to have more known JournoList members on it's staff than any other media entity. With this sort of “quality” you can imagine just how slanted their stories are. Not worth the bandwidth they take up.
You can see the first segment of Glenn's powerful show below:
You'll notice, like Martin Niemöller before him, Glenn warns the left wingers in the media, that radicals like Soros, and Obama won't stop with getting him, or Fox News silenced. Sooner or later they'll get around to them as well. It's how these things always turn out.
You can see watch the rest of Thursday's episode, courtesy of our friends at The Right Scoop, by clicking here.
In case you've missed any of this week's (or any week's) episodes of Glenn's show, The Right Scoop has these archived daily, as well as many more must see videos.
If you are wondering what NPR does with your tax dollars, well it uses them to attack you, of course!
I think most of our readers are sophisticated enough to know what “teabagging” is, in the popular slang of the day. To put it gently, it's an act performed by homosexual males. The name was first widely used by CNN's Anderson Cooper, who …. well …. should know, if ya catch my drift. If you need more, look it up in the Urban Dictionary online.
The left, in all of it's vile glory delights in calling members of the Tea Party “teabaggers, ” exclusively. And yes, this includes our President.
With that said, I give you this little number: How to Speak Tea Bag, which appeared on NPR's website and was heavily promoted by them as "serious political commentary."
Nothing like being insulted with your own tax dollars, huh? These disciples of Saul Alinksy have the minds of a child.
Oh, and this sad chapter in American history gets better. We have learned that NPR is now going after another one of it's contributors, Maura Liasson, a very reliably lefty, and long time Fox News contributor. Andrew Breitbart has stated he feels Soros, and his many groups, are looking to intimidate members of their party, to make them think twice about going on Fox, in hopes of killing the “fair and balanced” programming formula.
Looking at the way Fox News surrounded the wagons and supported Juan Williams Thursday, and continue to do on Friday, Soros' plans look to be a losing proposition, to say the least.
All I know for sure, is events like these, are exactly why the elections less than two weeks away are the most important elections in our nation's history. Our one shot to reign in the insanity, and stop the radicals in their tracks.
Friends, you must vote, and you must drag everyone you know with you. No excuses. Not this time.
In America they first came for Juan Williams, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't Juan Williams.
Then they came for Maura Liasson, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Maura Liasson ...
