John R. Houk
© October 24, 2013
Something popped into my head while I was reading your essay. Yeah, I know, when the light comes on in the old grey matter it could be dangerous. You believe a revolution is imminent and the attempted take-over will be at the hands of the
Left … err I mean Progressives, correct? Frankly I do not disagree with that prediction.
But here’s the thing. What if a majority of the American electorate awoke from the Matrix slumber imposed by the Left and began voting against Progressive candidates and Establishment Republicans? What if true Conservatives began to have the proverbial upper hand politically at least as in the Reagan years? Would there still be a revolution in America’s immediate future?
Now here’s the thought that popped into my mind. No matter who dominates America’s political power structure a revolution would occur anyway. Why?
The reason is because the political spectrum in the USA is uncompromisingly fractured. There is the Progressive Left. There is the Conservative Right. There is an Independent electorate in the middle that is neither Progressive nor Conservative but just want the best environment to live their lives on whatever non-political path they desire to walk.
Honestly the semblance of balance has been the Center-Left and the Center-Right that have historically bargained in an agreed upon give-and-take legislative fashion. The last time that balance broke down in the USA there was a bloody Civil War with the weaponry of that time.
It is my opinion the Center-Left in America has totally disintegrated in America’s Constitutional power structure. In our current Two-Party system those we call the Establishment Republicans are the Center-Right. The problem with the GOP’s Center-Right is that the business-as-usual mentality has been infected with Center-Left or just down right Progressive thinking. The growing Conservatives of the Republican view (and rightfully so) as a betrayal of the history that brought America to the point of the most powerful yet Freest nation on the planet Earth.
This absence of political balance is what will lead to another Revolutionary War in the USA. I guess one could call a future internecine war in America the Second Civil War, but I tend to think it will be akin to America’s original Revolutionary War. Divisions in political loyalties will splinter urban areas as well as rural areas. The only reason entire States might take a side for or against a duly elected Constitutional government one political spectrum was able to subdue the other side of the political spectrum within a State.
No, the next war conflicting Americans will be whose political vision wins a bloody war with the winners Founding a new Constitution based on the victorious political spectrum.
God have mercy on us all on how such a war will culminate.
Hmm … Another dangerous thought: Perhaps a global war will set aside political spectrum conflict within the USA – at least temporarily. But again Danny isn’t the global conflict part of an International Progressive agenda to squash opposition to a Left Wing New World Order?
Time will tell.
John R. Houk
© July 24, 2013
America’s Left – which means the Democratic Party and President Barack Hussein Obama – preach the acceptance of Diversity, Multiculturalism and Equality. As benevolent as those terms are they mean one thing to Leftists and promoted as something else to the typical Joe American voter.
Joe American is told Diversity is fair and equal acceptance of belief systems and such ungodly practices as homosexuality. Compassion for all ways of thinking and lifestyle practices sounds very high minded and agreeable, right?
A Latin motto that can be seen on U.S. money and the Great Seal is E Pluribus Unum – Out of many, one. This addresses diversity in America. Below is the original intent of the motto. Also the early flow of immigrants in America expanded on the original intent:
On the Great Seal of the United States, the phrase appears in the banner held in the beak of the American eagle. The busy eagle is also holding an olive branch and a quiver of arrows in its left and right talons, respectively. The phrase is meant to symbolize the union of the 13 original colonies, and their close relationship with the federal government. Over time, people have also taken “e pluribus unum” to refer to the ethnic diversity in the United States. (What Does “E Pluribus Unum” Mean? wiseGEEK)
E Pluribus Unum does not emphasize an Out of many, ensure multiple ethnic and gender identities. Rather the motto emphasizes out of a diverse amount of people ONE America emerges. An article I found at The Road to Emmaus reproduced an essay from The Patriot Post. The essay addresses America’s immigration policy under the original intent of the Founding Fathers adoption of E Pluribus Unum. I like the assertions of the early part of the essay:
“[T]he policy or advantage of [immigration] taking place in a body may be much questioned; for, by so doing, they retain the Language, habits and principles which they bring with them. Whereas by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures and laws: in a word, soon become one people.”
Out of many, one.
That was the national motto proposed by Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in 1776. Both simple and elegant, it embodied the notion that all who had come to America’s shores, and all who would come, must be united—must all form one front—in defense of freedom and liberty. For 200 years, we were, largely, one people united behind constitutional republicanism. But soon after the social turbulence of the ’60s and the economic woes of the ’70s, that unity began to crumble. This was the era in which multiculturalism emerged—the era in which ethnocentricity became chic.
Arthur Schlesinger, a former Harvard professor and senior advisor to JFK, published a retrospective on this era in 1991 called “The Disuniting of America.” Schlesinger wrote primarily about the orthodoxy of self-interested hyphenated-American citizen groups—who, rather than unifying to become one, were diversifying to become many. He warned that the cult of ethnicity would result in “the fragmentation and tribalization of America,” the natural consequence being that these special-interest groups would be co-opted by the political parties.
“Instead of a transformative nation with an identity all its own,” Schlesinger wrote, “America increasingly sees itself in this new light as preservative of diverse alien identities—groups ineradicable in their ethnic character.” He asserts, by way of inquiry, “Will the melting pot give way to the Tower of Babel?”
The disuniting of America is a foundational concern underlying much of the debate about immigration.
The disuniting of America is a foundational concern underlying much of the current security, economic and social debate (both rational and irrational) about immigration. This is the concern that a nation, which is already ethnically fragmented internally, risks complete disunity of its national integrity in the absence of borders. (E pluribus unum? Posted by The Road to Emmaus, Written by The Patriot Post [07 April 2006 | THE Patriot Post.US http://patriotpost.us/ | Patriot No. 06-14] READ THE REST)
The Leftist concept of “Diversity” is not an American concept.
Multiculturalism and diversity go hand in hand. Multiculturalism is the practice of upholding cultural standards that are foreign to America rather than to assimilate into American culture. Assimilation brings unity of purpose to a nation. If each diverse culture separates from America in emphasizing a foreign heritage and language above that which unifies America then disunity will ensue. Disunity in a nation magnifies conflict. Conflict leads to social chaos. Intense social chaos leads to the fracturing of the fabric of a nation. When the USA fractures kiss that which has made America great goodbye. The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution which have formed a Union of States will become interests of past history rather than the center piece of American cultural unity.
Multiculturalism is a body of thought in political philosophy about the proper way to respond to cultural and religious diversity. Mere toleration of group differences is said to fall short of treating members of minority groups as equal citizens; recognition and positive accommodation of group differences are required through “group-differentiated rights,” a term coined by Will Kymlicka (1995). Some group-differentiated rights are held by individual members of minority groups, as in the case of individuals who are granted exemptions from generally applicable laws in virtue of their religious beliefs or individuals who seek language accommodations in schools or in voting. Other group-differentiated rights are held by the group qua group rather by its members severally; such rights are properly called group rights, as in the case of indigenous groups and minority nations, who claim the right of self-determination. In the latter respect, multiculturalism is closely allied with nationalism.
While multiculturalism has been used as an umbrella term to characterize the moral and political claims of a wide range of disadvantaged groups, including African Americans, women, gays and lesbians, and the disabled, most theorists of multiculturalism tend to focus their arguments on immigrants who are ethnic and religious minorities (e.g. Latinos in the U.S., Muslims in Western Europe), minority nations (e.g. Catalans, Basque, Welsh, Québécois), and indigenous peoples (e.g. Native peoples in North America, Maori in New Zealand). (Multiculturalism; Sarah Song; The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.))
Here are some excerpts from a Thomas Sowell essay on the evils of Multiculturalism:
Among the many irrational ideas about racial and ethnic groups that have polarized societies over the centuries and around the world, few have been more irrational and counterproductive than the current dogma of multiculturalism.
Intellectuals who imagine that they are helping racial or ethnic groups that lag behind by redefining their lags out of existence with multicultural rhetoric are in fact leading them into a blind alley.
Multiculturalism, like the caste system, paints people into the corner where they happened to have been born. But at least the caste system does not claim to benefit those at the bottom.
Multiculturalism not only serves the ego interests of intellectuals, it serves the political interests of elected officials, who have every incentive to promote a sense of victimhood, and even paranoia, among groups whose votes they want in exchange for both material and psychic support.
The biggest losers in all this are those members of racial minorities who allow themselves to be led into the blind alley of resentment and rage even when there are broad avenues of opportunity available. And we all lose when society is polarized. (READ ENTIRETY – The Dogma of Multiculturalism; By Thomas Sowell; National Review Online; 3/15/13 12:00 AM)
Frosty Wooldridge on the evils of Multiculturalism:
Those people with hyphenated nationalities manifest “multiculturalism.”
By its very name, it destroys one culture by breaking it into many. It’s like throwing a baseball through a window in a house, fracturing it into many pieces. The window can no longer protect that house from rain, winds or snow. Additionally, with numerous cultures come multiple languages. Linguistic chaos equals unending tension. The writer, Kant, said, “The two great dividers are religion and language.”
On the other hand, millions respond and respect their one allegiance as that of being an “American.” Thus, we grow as a country at odds with itself. We lose our national identity with every added citizen who calls him/herself a hyphenated American.
Europe provides a peek into our future. Their Muslim-British immigrants stand at odds with everything English. If you visit London, you will find two separate societies. The Muslim-French immigrants balk at everything French. The Muslim-Dutch backlash against everything in Holland. Ethiopian-Norwegians will not assimilate into Norway’s culture.
Today, America’s grand 232 year run fractures, falters and degrades under the march of “multiculturalism.” The word sounds unifying, inclusive and respectful. Yet how unified can a nation remain where a foreign language forces its way into our national character? Los Angeles provides a peek into our future where Mexican culture “overtook” its way into dominance.
A recent PEW report shows America adding 138 million people in four decades. Of that number, 90 million immigrants will reach America’s shores by 2050. One in five citizens will be born out of our country. They drag in 100 incompatible third world cultures.
The mind-boggling first question remains: should all these immigrants that arrive from failed cultures succeed in their demands that we respect the injection of their culture and language into ours?
Yes, integrity mandates respect for all cultures and people. However, when will Americans leap past “political correctness” to stop the death of America? (READ ENTIRETY – Multiculturalism – Destroying American Culture; By Frosty Wooldridge; Rense.com; 3/13/08)
Regardless of what Leftists tell you, Multiculturalism is nation destroying and NOT nation building.
“Equality” is another one of those words that evoke fairness. Here are three online dictionary definitions of equality:
1. [T]he state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities – Oxford Dictionaries
2. [T]he state or quality of being equal; correspondence in quantity, degree, value, rank, or ability.
[U]niform character, as of motion or surface. (Dictionary.com)
3 [T]he quality or state of being equal: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc.
▪ racial/gender equality ▪ the ideals of liberty and equality ▪ women’s struggle for equality (Merriam-Webster Learner’s Dictionary)
As a Conservative Equality and Liberty are not interchangeable as Leftists view the terms. The best concise differentiation I have found on Equality and Liberty that I have ran into so far is from the website Community Of Liberty:
Here is the overview of this lecture by Thomas West, the Paul and Dawn Potter Professor of Politics at Hillsdale.
The Declaration of Independence
The soul of the American founding is located in the universal political principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The meaning of equality and liberty in the Declaration is decisively different than the definition given to those principles by modern progressivism.
Liberty is the right to be free from the coercive interference of other people. It is derived from nature itself, and is a natural right—something possessed simply because one is a human being.
Equality means no one is by nature the ruler of any other person. Each human being is equal in his right to life, liberty, and property which the Declaration calls “the pursuit of happiness.”
Equality, liberty, and natural rights require a certain form of government: republicanism, based on consent of the governed. Legitimate government, based on the consent of the governed, must accomplish three things: the establishment of civil laws that protect man’s natural rights; the punishment of those who infringe on others’ natural rights; and the protection of natural rights through a strong national defense.
The people themselves also play a vital role in protecting their rights. They must be educated in “religion, morality, and knowledge.”
Modern liberalism uses the same language of “liberty” and “equality” as the Declaration of Independence. Yet modern liberals mean something other than what the Founders meant by those words. For the Progressives, “equality” means equal access to resources and wealth, while “liberty” means the ability to utilize a right, rather than the right in itself. Both of these ideas necessitate government programs that help mankind liberate itself from its “natural limitations.”
The Declaration of Independence and modern Progressivism are fundamentally opposed to each other. The modern misunderstanding of “equality” and “liberty” threatens not just the Declaration of Independence, but the whole of the American constitutional and moral order. (What Did the Founders Mean by Equality and Liberty? Community of Liberty)
Equality under the Founding Fathers is closer to equality of opportunity rather than an egalitarian Equality in the State that takes from some to distribute others that are less innovative or less entrepreneurial in their financial portfolio. Equality is not providing the same benefits to an immoral person as a moral person. Equality does not mean equalizing ungodly lifestyles to godly lifestyles. Equality does not mean shutting out Christianity in order for Secularism and other religions enjoy extra rights to equalize with the majority cultural religion America.
Liberty means individual autonomy beyond the collective to accomplish a financial portfolio according to one’s ability and to live a life of any ideology or religion that does not break the equal protections in the rule of law that is dispersed on a collective basis. The rule of law must be enforced equally to the entire collective of the nation regardless of Race, Religion or Personal Beliefs. If ethnicity, Religion and Personal Beliefs diverge from the rule of law then it is the ethnicity, Religion and Personal Beliefs that transform to the rule of law. In America the rule of law is influenced by the first British and Europeans that came to America for Religious Liberty not experienced in the Old World where the State Established Church was preeminent. Another group of British came to America seeking economic opportunity that was not available back on the European continent. People that became the intelligentsia of early America were trained in the classical academics and Christian theology of the period. Ancient writers from Greece and Rome were an influence in an emerging political philosophy that the Founding Fathers combined with Christian principles that coalesced the nascent socio-political structure that became a part of America’s Founding Documents culminating in the United States Constitution.
Political Correctness has been kind to ideological appellations of the left side of the political spectrum. Such names as “Progressive” and “Liberal” are as misleading as the terms Diversity, Multiculturalism and Equality. People who wittingly or unwittingly (unwitting = mesmerized by altruism) look leftward for a principal of life are LEFTISTS.
I originally intended these thoughts as an introduction to a Eugene Delgaudio email that informs about how the Leftist influenced government is silently criminalizing Christianity. The silence is because the Leftist natured Mainstream Media (MSN) does not report on the slow criminalization of Christianity on a National basis. On the other hand the MSM is quick to denounce anything related to Christianity that prays in a public forum that taxes are associated. Also the MSM is quick to denounce Christianity that confronts moral degradation in America such as homosexuality or pornography. This secret persecution of Christianity is reprehensible. I will use Delgaudio’s email in the next post so you too can feel my outrage.
John R. Houk
© July 13, 2013
I’m not really big on donating for political campaigns when there are no announced Conservative candidates to oppose a liberal incumbent. The Conservative Campaign Committee (CCC) has sprouted up to support Conservative candidates nationwide and rightfully so. I believe the CCC is an offshoot of the Tea Party Express which is an organization I follow so often I probably should join. In the 2012 election cycle the CCC went by Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama. If you Google that you will be directed to the CCC website.
Anyway the CCC sent a donation teaser recently that showed a war of words between Sarah Palin and Democrat Alaskan Senator Mark Begich. Begich must defend his incumbency in the 2014 election cycle.
And so the CCC donation tease is significant for those of us who believe that Sarah Palin is needed in leadership in the United States of America.
Sarah Palin got it right!
Sent by Tina Ward
Sent: 7/11/2013 7:21 PM
Sent from: Conservative Campaign Committee
ABC News has news headlines today about the war of words that has developed between Gov. Sarah Palin and Democrat Alaska Senator, Mark Begich.
And Sarah Palin’s comments couldn’t be more on the mark. Here’s what she said today about Begich’s awful record as a failed liberal – harming this nation as he continuously sides with Barack Obama:
“Mark, after looking at your voting record I can see why you are looking for a distraction. You have voted FOR Obamacare, FOR massive tax increases, FOR carbon taxes which could cost Alaskans 21,000 jobs, AGAINST pro-life legislation, and there’s so much more. You even flip-flopped to oppose the nation’s balanced budget amendment.
“You agree with, and vote with, ultra-liberal Senators Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid approximately 90% of the time. Mark, you recently said, “Alaskans pick who they want based on what’s good for Alaska.” Couldn’t agree more, Mark, which is why many hope to see great changes for our great state following the upcoming 2014 election.”
Democrat Mark Begich must be defeated – he voted for Obama’s stimulus. He voted for ObamaCare. He has announced that he favors further expansion of ObamaCare. That’s why we’ve launched an Independent Expenditure campaign to “Defeat Mark Begich,” and we need your help!
Winning this seat is critical to our efforts to electing a conservative majority in the U.S. Senate and ousting Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader. We know that Reid and the Democrats will spend whatever they can to make sure we are not successful. So we need everyone’s support for our campaign to “Defeat Mark Begich.”
You can make a contribution online – HERE.
You can also mail in a contribution to our headquarters here:
Conservative Campaign Committee
ATTN: Defeat Mark Begich
P.O. Box 1585
Sacramento, CA 95812
Thank you for your continued support of conservative candidates and our efforts to oust Harry Reid and his Democrat majority from the Senate in the upcoming Midterm Elections.
Paid for and authorized by the Conservative Campaign Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
If Sarah Palin puts together a Third Party I am in!
Palin: I’m Open to Starting New Political Party
By Sandy Fitzgerald
01 Jul 2013 10:23 AM
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin says she’s willing to start a new political party to create a home for conservatives who feel they’re being ignored by the GOP.
The one-time vice presidential nominee was answering Twitter questions on Fox News Saturday, when a user asked if she and Fox conservative commentator Mark Levin would be willing to build a “Freedom Party if [the] GOP continues to ignore conservatives.”
Palin replied, “I love the name of that party: the Freedom Party,” she replied. “And if the GOP continues to back away from the planks in our platform, from the principles that built this party of Lincoln and Reagan, then yeah.”
Many conservatives with “that libertarian streak” feel neglected, said Palin, and creating a new home for them might be a good idea.
She said she expects people to … READ THE REST
In this section of Tony Newbill email topics range from the IRS as a Leftist weapon against Conservatives, the U.N. Agenda 21 and Whistleblowers. It is my opinion a Whistleblower exposes information that is harmful to the public health or harmful to America’s constitutional Bill of Rights. This series of emails deal with Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and Karen Hudes.
Day After Obama Meets Treasury, Tea Party Targeting Begins
Sent: 6/17/2013 10:09 PM
This is rather telling.
Check it out:
Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?
THE AMERICAN SPECTATOR:
“For me, it’s about collaboration. — National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley on the relationship between the anti-Tea Party IRS union and the Obama White House
Is President Obama directly implicated in the IRS scandal?
Is the White House Visitors Log the trail to the smoking gun?
The stunning questions are raised by the following set of new facts.
March 31, 2010.
According to the White House Visitors Log, provided here in searchable form by U.S. News and World Report, the president of the anti-Tea Party National Treasury Employees Union, Colleen Kelley, visited the White House at 12:30pm that Wednesday noon time of March 31st.
The White House lists the IRS union leader’s visit this way:
Kelley, Colleen Potus 03/31/2010 12:30
In White House language, “POTUS” stands for “President of the United States.”
The very next day after her White House meeting with the President, according to the Treasury Department’s Inspector General’s Report, IRS employees — the same employees who belong to the NTEU — set to work in earnest targeting the Tea Party and conservative groups around America. The IG report wrote it up this way:
April 1-2, 2010: The new Acting Manager, Technical Unit, suggested the need for a Sensitive Case Report on the Tea Party cases. The Determinations Unit Program Manager Agreed.
In short: the very day after the president of the quite publicly anti-Tea Party labor union — the union for IRS employees — met with President Obama, the manager of the IRS “Determinations Unit Program agreed” to open a “Sensitive Case report on the Tea party cases.” As stated by the IG report.
The NTEU is the 150,000 member union that represents IRS employees along with 30 other separate government agencies. Kelley herself is a 14-year IRS veteran agent. The union’s PAC endorsed President Obama in both 2008 and 2012, and gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in the 2010 and 2012 election cycles to anti-Tea Party candidates.
Putting IRS employees in the position of actively financing anti-Tea Party candidates themselves, while in their official positions in the IRS blocking, auditing, or intimidating Tea Party and conservative groups around the country.
The IG report contained a timeline prepared by examining internal IRS e-mails. The IG report did not examine White House Visitor Logs, e-mails, or phone records relating to the relationship between the IRS union, the IRS, and the White House. (READ THE REST: Page 2 – Page 3 – Page 4 - Page 5 – Page 6 – Page 7 – Page 8: Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun? By Jeffrey Lord; American Spectator; 5/20/13)
How can Real Estate sustain Growth Recovery with this kind of Regulation…?
Sent: 6/21/2013 9:26 AM
How can Real Estate sustain Growth Recovery with this kind of Regulation which Stops Suburban Developments???
Obama Admin Plans To ‘Force’ Americans To Move Into Cities – “Redistributing” the Wealth
This does not look like a Capital Expansion policy that will lead to Higher Consumer Incomes overall , which will be need to see a Dow Jones growth indexing above current levels with Real estate recovering to the driving level it once was. So what other Industries will be driving those fundamentals?
[SlantRight Editor: Currently the above link leading to the homepage promoting the 2013 National Summit July 18-19. I am guessing after July 19 the front page might change.]
Building One America’s Second National Summit for Inclusive Suburbs and Sustainable Regions will involve local leaders and federal policy makers to seek bipartisan solutions to the unique but common challenges around housing, schools and infrastructure facing America’s metropolitan regions and its diverse middle-class suburbs. Participants will include local elected and grassroots leaders from America’s diverse middle class suburban towns and school districts, scholars and policy experts, members of the Obama Administration and Congress.
The summit will identify comprehensive solutions and build bipartisan support for meaningful action to stabilize and support inclusive middle-class communities and promote sustainable, economically competitive regions.
… (READ THE REST: Building One America – Organizing for Inclusion, Sustainability, and Economic Growth)
[SlantRight Editor: This sounds like the deviousness of building a better America through the evil of U.N. Agenda 21 to me.]
Whistleblower Reveals World Bank Corruption
Sent: 6/28/2013 10:04 AM
Whistleblower Reveals World Bank Corruption in New Interview exposes the Currency War that’s Coming!!!!!
World Bank: Money Laundering Criminals | Interview with Whistleblower; pay attention to this name. She is Karen Hudes. Hudes’ bio highlights her 21-year experience at the World Bank as Senior Legal Counsel:
She worked in the US Export Import Bank of the US from 1980-1985 and in the Legal Department of the World Bank from 1986-2007. She established the Non-Governmental Organization Committee of the International Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Committee on Multilateralism and the Accountability of International Organizations of the American Branch of the International Law Association.
Whistleblower Reveals World Bank Corruption in New Interview exposes the Currency War that’s Coming!!!!!
[SlantRight Editor: The below excerpt from the Activist Post places Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning on a favorable pedestal. This editor has always viewed Manning as a traitor. When Snowden first blew the whistle on NSA spying on ALL Americans’ privacy I hailed him as a hero; However after Snowden began sharing classified information with the Communist Chinese and probably the Russians, I began to view Snowden as a traitor.]
Whistleblowers continue to endure an increasing level of targeting and prosecution by an administration that touts its commitment to transparency. Despite this, many brave insiders continue to come forward to reveal the extent of corruption at the highest levels.
Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning are taking center stage at the moment. Yet, former World Bank Senior Legal Counsel, Karen Hudes, seen in the video below with Sean Stone, and a new video interview with RT’s Abby Martin is revealing equally important information about corruption at the World Bank, and a tiny group pulling the strings of politicians and the media to suppress knowledge of their activities.
The World Bank is already notorious for its wide range of human rights violations, land-grab schemes, environmental destruction and economic attacks on sovereign nations and local communities. Hudes offers some additional details about what she asserts is one single group controlling world financial markets and media. She also offers names of people who were involved in blackmail surrounding a 2007 prostitution scandal. …
Regardless of one’s view of the World Bank as an institution, Hudes’ information highlights that there are people who get into this type of work with good intentions, believing the propaganda they have been given. At the very least, her assertion that there is a network of insiders that will continue blowing the whistle about World Bank corruption bears watching. Lastly, it is worth noting her comments on the possibility of martial law in America and the steps being taken to avoid it. Time will tell.
The Tea Party does not Deserve this Insanity
Sent: 6/28/2013 12:13 PM
This is Insane and we the people of the tea party do not deserve this Label!!!!!
Juan Williams: Racist Tea Party Hates Immigrants
© Tony Newbill
Edited by John R. Houk
John R. Houk
© June 23, 2013
Here is a video I found at The Western Center for Journalism (WCJ) exposing the IRS as an Obama tool against Conservatives and Counterjihad writers/organizations. YET the IRS did not hold up one single Left Wing organization and gave so-called American-Muslim groups with ties to Radical Islam and Islamic Terrorism a path to Charity status within the U.S. tax code.
VIDEO: The IRS and Terrorists
HERE is the WCJ link to read the text version which is located below the video on their website.
Unbelievably the same IRS that targeted Conservative organizations looking for 501c(3) and 501c(4) tax status has reinstated the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as a tax exempt organization. The same CAIR that was stripped of the status for failing to file adequate returns AND still has not done has been reinstated to tax exempt status. Oh yes, the IRS has restored tax exempt status to the same CAIR that still is listed as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial in which convictions were handed out to HLF members for gathering tax exempt donations that were then passed on the Islamic terrorist organization Hamas. AND in case you haven’t heard Hamas is a Jew-hating terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel and often kills Jewish civilians oft times in a horrendous bloody fashion.
DHS, IRS, CAIR, tea parties
Sent by ACT for America
Sent: 6/10/2013 3:19 PM
Today we bring you two different articles that have a common theme.
The first is a WorldNetDaily story that begins this way:
You can thank the Electronic Privacy Information Center for forcing the Department of Homeland Security to release its list of “keywords” that are used by its agents to monitor you on Twitter, Facebook and other social networking sites.
The story then lists the various “key words,” and here’s what’s revealing. You’ll find “militia” but not “jihad.” In fact, you won’t find any “key word” that links specifically to radical Islam.
The second article is also a WorldNetDaily story, which exposes how the IRS restored tax-exempt status to CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations).
In 2011, the IRS stripped CAIR of this non-profit status for failing to file non-profit tax returns for years. Yet the IRS restored CAIR’s status despite the fact that CAIR still has not filed all the information required for previous years!
Meanwhile, of course, we’ve all read about the IRS targeting of tea party, pro-national security and pro-Israel organizations.
Do these two stories suggest a pattern to you?
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
John R. Houk
© June 5, 2013
I am leaning more and more toward the opinions of Danny Jeffrey. When Danny sees himself through the eyes of some of his readers he reports that he is a doom and gloom writer. I am not really sure if Danny actually believes this about being this kind of writer. I can tell you this though. He has been right on over time relating to his observations of Americans losing their spine because of the plague known as political correctness. Danny views Americans as becoming so programmed by political correctness that they are too weak to confront the transformative “Change” Barack Hussein Obama has been molding America into.
If Danny is again correct in his observations about the American emerging persona then the America Conservatives believe in is already dead. Danny’s analysis leads to only one solution AND that means only one shot to keep the Founding Fathers’ experiment of a nation in which the primary principle for being is Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The question then is – what is that one shot?
That shot is armed rebellion. The awakening of enough Americans occurs that a second Civil War erupts. The first Civil War was more than about freeing the Slaves. The Southern States were upset that a Federal government had power over their State sovereignty to tell them to free the Slaves. The Southern States formed their Confederacy in order to be a part of a nation in which the rule of law pertaining cultural custom was preserved to the individual States.
The second Civil War – if it comes to that – will be about preserving the Union according to the vision of the Founding Fathers in limited government and the belief that cultural harmony is maintained by a rule of law influenced by Christian Morality rather than a rule of law based on human fiat determining a moral society.
Yeah I did a little extrapolating that I am uncertain if Danny would agree with; ergo I inserted my two cents.
The kind of politics that Danny Jeffrey is talking about seems to assume Obama has no intention of leaving the Office of President of the United States (POTUS). As 2016 approaches some kind of Martial Law would be instituted under the guise of politically correct propaganda telling We the People should submit for the greater good of the nation. Danny believes that most Americans will comply and those that don’t comply will have their guns forcibly removed by some kind of government SWAT under the thumb of the new Obama regime. The Obama regime will undoubtedly have Leftist collaborators popular with Left leaning Americans. Think of a possible Marxist Oligarchic Politburo that will include say Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and perhaps some other Leftists you could think of.
Danny does not speculate how a Second Civil War would break out to form a more perfect Union. It is my guess there would be a few generals and admirals out there that do not desire to be under a Marxist thumb. A George Washington type general would have to emerge to instill trust in potential rebelling troops against the Obama Marxist Oligarchy. And such a general would have to emerge that also has the ability to reignite the remnants of Constitutional Originalist Conservatives willing to live and die to bring down an unjust government and restore Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
OR we can pray Danny is incorrect and there still are Americans with a Politically INCORRECT spine to begin Obama’s demise with a Conservative dominated House and Senate in 2014. This Conservative House can impeach Obama and this Conservative Senate (sans Dem leader Reid) can convict Obama. This is to all lead to the greatest prosecution for justice against the most corrupt government in American history.
OR Danny is correct and societal chaos will give Obama the excuse to institute Martial Law and only as the public openly dissents and various generals and admirals join public dissent then a Second Civil War saves or dooms America.
Hmm… This could be a Big Brother moment for Danny or me. I wonder if Obama’s IRS will give either of us an invitation.
John R. Houk
© May 24, 2013
Fjordman writes an essay entitled “Top Norwegian Prof: Critics of Mass Immigration Mentally Ill”. If you are an American I urge you to read this essay! The essay is about Free Speech in Norway and how the Left utilizes Hate-Speech laws to shut up Conservatives and those against the mass immigration of culturally different people to Norway. The culturally different people are not non-Nordic people of Europe or of the Oriental Asian persuasion. The immigration of people with a totally divergent culture to Norway is Sharia-Minded Muslims that are literally taking over broad swaths of Norwegian communities. This is significant because of the rise of crime perpetrated by Muslims against the Norwegians. Blond Norwegian gals are so concerned of the rape epidemic perpetrated by Muslims against non-Muslims that they are dying their hair to a dark brunette.
Why should Americans be concerned of how Islam affects Norwegian culture or how Norway’s Left propagandizes multiculturalism so much that they try to throw anti-multiculturalists and Counterjihadists in jail to repress threats to reversing the acceptance of multiculturalism?
The reason is Norway’s limitation on Liberty and Free Speech is a snapshot of America’s potential future. With Obama now being exposed as running a politically corrupt Administration that actually uses government agencies (Like the IRS, Justice Dept. or Agenda 21) to repress American Conservatives it is quite apparent the Norwegian snapshot looms near if we do not undo Obama’s “Change”.
John R. Houk
© April 5, 2013
Danny Jeffrey has posted “Middle East Problems … Only Beginning”. This is an awesome article about the Foreign Policy failures that afflicted three Presidential Administrations: Bush 1, Bush 2 and Obama.
I concur with Danny’s observations except perhaps with one small disagreement. Danny is critical of the Bush 2 agenda to implement democratic-republic forms of government in the Middle East with the belief that doing so would create better potential allies if voting citizens could make choices via elections to promote Human Rights and a better atmosphere for an economic-political situation to thrive benefitting the prosperity of the voters.
At the time I was 100% behind the Bush 2 Agenda to bring a democratic-republic form of government to the Middle East. Bush’s reasoning that nations that had experienced 25 to 50 years of oppression under Marxist/Leninist Communism began a freer life with Liberty’s benefits after the fall of the former Soviet Union.
The problem of nation-carving that Bush 2 (and to my chagrin) ran into was theo-political Islam. A monolithic religion patterned after the conquest paradigm manufactured by Islam’s prophet Mohammed. Unlike other religions Islam’s eventual holy writings lay out the principles that combine religion, politics and martial evangelism. Islam’s religion, politics and martial evangelism are all integrated on a unified basis as a platform to govern the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The non-Muslims allowed to live had to approve living an oppressed life as second class human beings surrendering any right of religious freedom and political freedom to the superiority of Islamic tenets. Any violation of those tenets by non-Muslims was and is regarded as an insult or an affronter to Islam and Mohammed.
For hundreds of years Islam was the minority religion in the Middle East, North Africa, conquered portions of Europe and India. Where Islam remained in control you can figure out why people began to convert to Islam making the indigenous religions the minority.
With a thousand years of Islamic Supremacist theo-political ideology ingrained into the conquered nations and tribes of people, it is fairly clear the reason why Bush 2’s democracy planting has not worked or when it did work the people chose Islamic Supremacism via the cultural implementation Sharia Law as the basis as the rule of law. Sharia and democratic-republic political structure are diametrically opposed to each other.
Bush 2’s error was not backtracking on this realization concerning Sharia and democracy. Rather President George W. Bush began either self-deception or overt deception to Americans by choosing to tell us that Islam is a religion of peace. Of course those tagged as Moderate Muslims affirmed Bush’s pronouncement of another peaceful Judeo-Christian-like religion as in Islam was and/or is true. This assertion of peace is propagandized to non-Muslims even though Islamic holy writings indeed advocate violence against non-Muslims and against Muslims that broke Sharia or apostatized.
Like Danny I was also under the sway of former Secretary of State Condi Rice’s Foreign Policy intellectualism. It has become apparent that Rice is akin more to Establishment Republicans and RINOs than to the principles of the Conservative base of the GOP. Let’s face it. The only reason the Republican Party exists as a political entity is because Conservative voters are the power base. The Establishment GOP and the RINOs have united to call the shots within the Republican Party via control of the purse strings. These elitists of the GOP pander to Conservatives to remain a political force in the USA. Condi Rice is a part of those elitists in the GOP.
Otherwise I am in complete agreement with Danny Jeffrey’s “Middle East Problems … Only Beginning”.