Ad

U.S. News

Mar 032015
 

By Robert Spencer — March 3, 2015

Netanyahu is a statesmen and a leader. Obama and Cameron are weak, self-serving, compromised, ignorant, slogan-spouting pygmies by comparison.

“Full text: Netanyahu’s address to Congress,” by Terri Rupar, Washington Post, March 3, 2015 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is addressing a joint meeting of Congress; here is a running transcript of his remarks.

 

NETANYAHU: Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you…

(APPLAUSE)

… Speaker of the House John Boehner, President Pro Tem Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Minority — Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

I also want to acknowledge Senator, Democratic Leader Harry Reid. Harry, it’s good to see you back on your feet.

(APPLAUSE)

I guess it’s true what they say, you can’t keep a good man down.

(LAUGHTER)

My friends, I’m deeply humbled by the opportunity to speak for a third time before the most important legislative body in the world, the U.S. Congress.

(APPLAUSE)

I want to thank you all for being here today. I know that my speech has been the subject of much controversy. I deeply regret that some perceive my being here as political. That was never my intention.

I want to thank you, Democrats and Republicans, for your common support for Israel, year after year, decade after decade.

(APPLAUSE)

I know that no matter on which side of the aisle you sit, you stand with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

The remarkable alliance between Israel and the United States has always been above politics. It must always remain above politics.

(APPLAUSE)

Because America and Israel, we share a common destiny, the destiny of promised lands that cherish freedom and offer hope. Israel is grateful for the support of American — of America’s people and of America’s presidents, from Harry Truman to Barack Obama.

(APPLAUSE)

We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel.

Now, some of that is widely known.

(APPLAUSE)

Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions at the U.N.

Some of what the president has done for Israel is less well- known.

I called him in 2010 when we had the Carmel forest fire, and he immediately agreed to respond to my request for urgent aid.

In 2011, we had our embassy in Cairo under siege, and again, he provided vital assistance at the crucial moment.

Or his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists.

(APPLAUSE)

In each of those moments, I called the president, and he was there.

And some of what the president has done for Israel might never be known, because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an American president and an Israeli prime minister.

But I know it, and I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.

(APPLAUSE)

And Israel is grateful to you, the American Congress, for your support, for supporting us in so many ways, especially in generous military assistance and missile defense, including Iron Dome.

(APPLAUSE)

Last summer, millions of Israelis were protected from thousands of Hamas rockets because this capital dome helped build our Iron Dome.

(APPLAUSE)

 

Netanyahu addresses the US Congress on March 3rd, 2015

Netanyahu addresses the US Congress on March 3rd, 2015

Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you’ve done for Israel.

My friends, I’ve come here today because, as prime minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons.

We’re an ancient people. In our nearly 4,000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the Jewish people. Tomorrow night, on the Jewish holiday of Purim, we’ll read the Book of Esther. We’ll read of a powerful Persian viceroy named Haman, who plotted to destroy the Jewish people some 2,500 years ago. But a courageous Jewish woman, Queen Esther, exposed the plot and gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies.

The plot was foiled. Our people were saved.

(APPLAUSE)

Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated — he tweets. You know, in Iran, there isn’t exactly free Internet. But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed.

For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran’s chief terrorist proxy. He said: If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.

But Iran’s regime is not merely a Jewish problem, any more than the Nazi regime was merely a Jewish problem. The 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis were but a fraction of the 60 million people killed in World War II. So, too, Iran’s regime poses a grave threat, not only to Israel, but also the peace of the entire world. To understand just how dangerous Iran would be with nuclear weapons, we must fully understand the nature of the regime.

The people of Iran are very talented people. They’re heirs to one of the world’s great civilizations. But in 1979, they were hijacked by religious zealots — religious zealots who imposed on them immediately a dark and brutal dictatorship.

That year, the zealots drafted a constitution, a new one for Iran. It directed the revolutionary guards not only to protect Iran’s borders, but also to fulfill the ideological mission of jihad. The regime’s founder, Ayatollah Khomeini, exhorted his followers to “export the revolution throughout the world.”

I’m standing here in Washington, D.C. and the difference is so stark. America’s founding document promises life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Iran’s founding document pledges death, tyranny, and the pursuit of jihad. And as states are collapsing across the Middle East, Iran is charging into the void to do just that.

Iran’s goons in Gaza, its lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Back by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Back by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world’s oil supply.

Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That’s just last week, while they’re having nuclear talks with the United States. But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran’s attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.

Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C.

In the Middle East, Iran now dominates four Arab capitals, Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut and Sanaa. And if Iran’s aggression is left unchecked, more will surely follow.

So, at a time when many hope that Iran will join the community of nations, Iran is busy gobbling up the nations.

(APPLAUSE)

We must all stand together to stop Iran’s march of conquest, subjugation and terror.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, two years ago, we were told to give President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif a chance to bring change and moderation to Iran. Some change! Some moderation!

Rouhani’s government hangs gays, persecutes Christians, jails journalists and executes even more prisoners than before.

Last year, the same Zarif who charms Western diplomats laid a wreath at the grave of Imad Mughniyeh. Imad Mughniyeh is the terrorist mastermind who spilled more American blood than any other terrorist besides Osama bin Laden. I’d like to see someone ask him a question about that.

Iran’s regime is as radical as ever, its cries of “Death to America,” that same America that it calls the “Great Satan,” as loud as ever.

Now, this shouldn’t be surprising, because the ideology of Iran’s revolutionary regime is deeply rooted in militant Islam, and that’s why this regime will always be an enemy of America.

Don’t be fooled. The battle between Iran and ISIS doesn’t turn Iran into a friend of America.

Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire first on the region and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire.

In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone.

So when it comes to Iran and ISIS, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy.

(APPLAUSE)

 

Netanyahu's speech is interrupted with applause nearly forty times and receives a long standing ovation at the end of his  address to Congress

Netanyahu’s speech is interrupted with applause nearly forty times and he receives many standing ovations during his address to Congress

The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember — I’ll say it one more time — the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can’t let that happen.

(APPLAUSE)

But that, my friends, is exactly what could happen, if the deal now being negotiated is accepted by Iran. That deal will not prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. It would all but guarantee that Iran gets those weapons, lots of them.

Let me explain why. While the final deal has not yet been signed, certain elements of any potential deal are now a matter of public record. You don’t need intelligence agencies and secret information to know this. You can Google it.

Absent a dramatic change, we know for sure that any deal with Iran will include two major concessions to Iran.

The first major concession would leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure, providing it with a short break-out time to the bomb. Break-out time is the time it takes to amass enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb.

According to the deal, not a single nuclear facility would be demolished. Thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium would be left spinning. Thousands more would be temporarily disconnected, but not destroyed.

Because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largely intact, Iran’s break-out time would be very short — about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel’s.

And if — if Iran’s work on advanced centrifuges, faster and faster centrifuges, is not stopped, that break-out time could still be shorter, a lot shorter.

True, certain restrictions would be imposed on Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s adherence to those restrictions would be supervised by international inspectors. But here’s the problem. You see, inspectors document violations; they don’t stop them.

Inspectors knew when North Korea broke to the bomb, but that didn’t stop anything. North Korea turned off the cameras, kicked out the inspectors. Within a few years, it got the bomb.

Now, we’re warned that within five years North Korea could have an arsenal of 100 nuclear bombs.

Like North Korea, Iran, too, has defied international inspectors. It’s done that on at least three separate occasions — 2005, 2006, 2010. Like North Korea, Iran broke the locks, shut off the cameras.

Now, I know this is not gonna come a shock — as a shock to any of you, but Iran not only defies inspectors, it also plays a pretty good game of hide-and-cheat with them.

The U.N.’s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught — caught twice, not once, twice — operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn’t even know existed.

Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don’t know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, “If there’s no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn’t have one.” Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that’s why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. That concession creates a real danger that Iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal.

But the second major concession creates an even greater danger that Iran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. Because virtually all the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade.

Now, a decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it’s the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It’s a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran’s nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could product many, many nuclear bombs.

Iran’s Supreme Leader says that openly. He says, Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount — 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.

My long-time friend, John Kerry, Secretary of State, confirmed last week that Iran could legitimately possess that massive centrifuge capacity when the deal expires.

Now I want you to think about that. The foremost sponsor of global terrorism could be weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for an entire arsenal of nuclear weapons and this with full international legitimacy.

 And by the way, if Iran’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile program is not part of the deal, and so far, Iran refuses to even put it on the negotiating table. Well, Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reach corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States.

So you see, my friends, this deal has two major concessions: one, leaving Iran with a vast nuclear program and two, lifting the restrictions on that program in about a decade. That’s why this deal is so bad. It doesn’t block Iran’s path to the bomb; it paves Iran’s path to the bomb.

So why would anyone make this deal? Because they hope that Iran will change for the better in the coming years, or they believe that the alternative to this deal is worse?

Well, I disagree. I don’t believe that Iran’s radical regime will change for the better after this deal. This regime has been in power for 36 years, and its voracious appetite for aggression grows with each passing year. This deal would wet appetite — would only wet Iran’s appetite for more.

Would Iran be less aggressive when sanctions are removed and its economy is stronger? If Iran is gobbling up four countries right now while it’s under sanctions, how many more countries will Iran devour when sanctions are lifted? Would Iran fund less terrorism when it has mountains of cash with which to fund more terrorism?

Why should Iran’s radical regime change for the better when it can enjoy the best of both world’s: aggression abroad, prosperity at home?

This is a question that everyone asks in our region. Israel’s neighbors – Iran’s neighbors know that Iran will become even more aggressive and sponsor even more terrorism when its economy is unshackled and it’s been given a clear path to the bomb.

And many of these neighbors say they’ll respond by racing to get nuclear weapons of their own. So this deal won’t change Iran for the better; it will only change the Middle East for the worse. A deal that’s supposed to prevent nuclear proliferation would instead spark a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the planet.

This deal won’t be a farewell to arms. It would be a farewell to arms control. And the Middle East would soon be crisscrossed by nuclear tripwires. A region where small skirmishes can trigger big wars would turn into a nuclear tinderbox.

If anyone thinks – if anyone thinks this deal kicks the can down the road, think again. When we get down that road, we’ll face a much more dangerous Iran, a Middle East littered with nuclear bombs and a countdown to a potential nuclear nightmare.

Ladies and gentlemen, I’ve come here today to tell you we don’t have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don’t have to gamble with our future and with our children’s future.

We can insist that restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world.

(APPLAUSE)

Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second…

(APPLAUSE)

Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world.

(APPLAUSE)

And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you.

If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires.

(APPLAUSE)

If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn’t change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted.

(APPLAUSE)

If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.

(APPLAUSE)

My friends, what about the argument that there’s no alternative to this deal, that Iran’s nuclear know-how cannot be erased, that its nuclear program is so advanced that the best we can do is delay the inevitable, which is essentially what the proposed deal seeks to do?

Well, nuclear know-how without nuclear infrastructure doesn’t get you very much. A racecar driver without a car can’t drive. A pilot without a plan can’t fly. Without thousands of centrifuges, tons of enriched uranium or heavy water facilities, Iran can’t make nuclear weapons.

(APPLAUSE)

Iran’s nuclear program can be rolled back well-beyond the current proposal by insisting on a better deal and keeping up the pressure on a very vulnerable regime, especially given the recent collapse in the price of oil.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, if Iran threatens to walk away from the table — and this often happens in a Persian bazaar — call their bluff. They’ll be back, because they need the deal a lot more than you do.

(APPLAUSE)

And by maintaining the pressure on Iran and on those who do business with Iran, you have the power to make them need it even more.

My friends, for over a year, we’ve been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It’s a very bad deal. We’re better off without it.

(APPLAUSE)

Now we’re being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That’s just not true.

The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal.

(APPLAUSE)

A better deal that doesn’t leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short break-out time. A better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in place until Iran’s aggression ends.

(APPLAUSE)

A better deal that won’t give Iran an easy path to the bomb. A better deal that Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally. And no country…

(APPLAUSE)

… no country has a greater stake — no country has a greater stake than Israel in a good deal that peacefully removes this threat.

Ladies and gentlemen, history has placed us at a fateful crossroads. We must now choose between two paths. One path leads to a bad deal that will at best curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions for a while, but it will inexorably lead to a nuclear-armed Iran whose unbridled aggression will inevitably lead to war.

The second path, however difficult, could lead to a much better deal, that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclearized Middle East and the horrific consequences of both to all of humanity.

You don’t have to read Robert Frost to know. You have to live life to know that the difficult path is usually the one less traveled, but it will make all the difference for the future of my country, the security of the Middle East and the peace of the world, the peace, we all desire.

(APPLAUSE)

My friend, standing up to Iran is not easy. Standing up to dark and murderous regimes never is. With us today is Holocaust survivor and Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel.

(APPLAUSE)

Elie, your life and work inspires to give meaning to the words, “never again.”

(APPLAUSE)

And I wish I could promise you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned. I can only urge the leaders of the world not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

(APPLAUSE)

Not to sacrifice the future for the present; not to ignore aggression in the hopes of gaining an illusory peace.

But I can guarantee you this, the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over.

(APPLAUSE)

We are no longer scattered among the nations, powerless to defend ourselves. We restored our sovereignty in our ancient home. And the soldiers who defend our home have boundless courage. For the first time in 100 generations, we, the Jewish people, can defend ourselves.

(APPLAUSE)

This is why — this is why, as a prime minister of Israel, I can promise you one more thing: Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.

(APPLAUSE)

But I know that Israel does not stand alone. I know that America stands with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

I know that you stand with Israel.

(APPLAUSE)

You stand with Israel, because you know that the story of Israel is not only the story of the Jewish people but of the human spirit that refuses again and again to succumb to history’s horrors.

(APPLAUSE)

Facing me right up there in the gallery, overlooking all of us in this (inaudible) chamber is the image of Moses. Moses led our people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land.

And before the people of Israel entered the land of Israel, Moses gave us a message that has steeled our resolve for thousands of years. I leave you with his message today, (SPEAKING IN HEBREW), “Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them.”

My friends, may Israel and America always stand together, strong and resolute. May we neither fear nor dread the challenges ahead. May we face the future with confidence, strength and hope.

May God bless the state of Israel and may God bless the United States of America.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you all.

You’re wonderful.

Thank you, America. Thank you.

Thank you.

 

via Video and transcript: Netanyahu’s historic speech to Congress.

Feb 162015
 

By Bob Price, Breitbart, 15 Feb 2015

EXCLUSIVE: Geert Wilders to Keynote Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Texas

Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders - Champions against Islamization

Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders – Champions against Islamization

Parliamentarian Geert Wilders will deliver the keynote address at the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest being held on May 3rd, in Garland, Texas. The Art Exhibit is being put on by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI). It will be put on at the same facility in Garland as the Honor the Prophet Conference that was held by a pro-Islamic group in January.

Wilders earned international recognition in the free speech movement when he was brought up on charges for speaking out against Islam at a March, 2014, rally where he promised to reduce the number of Moroccans living in the Netherlands. “The public prosecutor in The Hague is to prosecute Geert Wilders on charges of insulting a group of people based on race and incitement to discrimination and hatred,” prosecutors said in a statement, according to an article by Sam Webb on the DailyMail.

Geller-Art-Exhibit

“Politicians may go far in their statements, that’s part of freedom of expression, but this freedom is limited by the prohibition of discrimination,” prosecutors stated.

Time Magazine called Wilders “The ‘Prophet’ Who Hates Muhammad.”  Winston Ross wrote, ”Wilders may look just as cartoonish as The Donald. But unlike Trump, he’s a legitimate force in politics. For nearly a decade, he’s served as the leader of Holland’s anti-Islamic political party, and he regularly uses his platform to denounce not only violent jihadists but all of Islam.”

Breitbart Texas previously reported the announcement of the art exhibit. Geller’s event comes on the wake of the Islamic terrorist attack on the French magazine Charlie Hebdo in January. Following the attack, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) scheduled the “Stand with the Prophet” conference at the public school district’s conference center. Geller, the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), scheduled a protest outside the event that was attended by approximately 2,000 people.

“Enough is enough,” she explained in a statement obtained by Breitbart Texas. “They’re just cartoons. We’re holding this exhibit and cartoon contest to show how insane the world has become — with people in the free world tiptoeing in terror around supremacist thugs who actually commit murder over cartoons. If we can’t stand up for the freedom of speech, we will lose it — and with it, free society.”

In addition to the art and cartoons featuring The Prophet Muhammad, the exhibit will also have presentations from other free speech advocates.

“Of course, this event will require massive security,” she assured potential attendees. “But this exhibit has to be staged. If we don’t show the jihadis that they will not frighten us into silence, the jihad against freedom will only grow more virulent.”

The art exhibit and contest will culminate with the award of a $10,000 prize for the best artwork or cartoon. Geller also announced on Sunday that there will also be a $2,500 People’s Choice Award. People wanting to submit artwork or cartoons for consideration may do so by sending an email to MuhammasArtExpo@gmail.com.

The Expo will be held at Garland Independent School District’s Curtis Culwell Center on May 3rd, from 5 to 7 p.m. Central Time.

 

via Geert Wilders to Keynote AFDI Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Texas | Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs.

Jan 202015
 

By Melissa Clyne — January 20, 2015

Four GOP presidential hopefuls have scored invitations to speak this weekend at the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, a nonprofit affiliated with billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch that seeks to promote the benefits of free markets in a free society.

The Koch Brothers

The Koch Brothers

According to Politico, Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida, and Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin have been invited to address the group of wealthy donors at the Palm Springs, California, event, though none of the men or their spokespeople have said whether they have accepted.

A spokesman for Freedom Partners also would not comment to Politico on the closed-to-the-press function.

Freedom Partners, based in Arlington, Virginia, bills itself as a nonprofit formed to educate the public about the critical role of free markets in the furtherance of economic prosperity, societal well-being and personal happiness.

The group focuses four main issues: healthcare reform, federal spending, energy policy, and cronyism.

Ted Cruz and Rand Paul - Conservative super stars.

Ted Cruz and Rand Paul – Conservative super stars.

Freedom Partners donor meetings bring together wealthy conservative business leaders for seminars led by key conservative “politicians, operatives and thought leaders, including American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks, pundit Erick Erickson and pollster Frank Luntz.”

Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin

Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin

The network values “small government, free market policies” over social issues and an interventionist foreign policy,

positions that favor the likes of Paul, Walker and Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, though Pence is not expected to take part in this weekend’s gathering, according to Politico.

The weekend wraps up with donors pledging large amounts — up to seven figures, according to Politico — in support of “policy and political efforts” raised at the meetings.

 

via Koch Brothers’ Group Courts Cruz, Rubio, Paul and Walker at Donors’ Meeting.

Jan 132015
 

By Washington Free Beacon Staff — January 13, 2015

When doctors diagnosed 12-year-old Martin Pistorius with Cryptococci Meningitis, they told his parents he was as good as a vegetable and should be taken home to die.

Martin Pistorius - The experts said he was as good as dead....

Martin Pistorius – The experts said he was as good as dead….

Instead, Martin lived for years without improvement or visible changes, LifeNews.com reports.

According to NPR news, his father would get up at 5 o’clock in the morning, get him dressed, load him in the car, take him to the special care center where he’d leave him. Rodney said, “Eight hours later, I’d pick him up, bathe him, feed him, put him in bed, set my alarm for two hours so that I’d wake up to turn him so that he didn’t get bedsores.”

Martin and his bride Joanna

Martin and his bride Joanna

For twelve years, Martin’s family cared for him without any sign that he was improving. Joan started to despair and even told her son, “I hope you die.”

Today she acknowledges that was a horrible thing to say but says she just wanted some sort of relief. Remarkably, now Martin is 39-years-old and says he was totally aware of everything going on around him.

Martin says that after about two years in his vegetative state, he became “aware of everything, just like any normal person.”martin-with-book

He was trapped in his own body for 12 years but eventually awakened. He does need some assistance and cannot speak without computer equipment. He also uses a wheelchair to get around. However, he is now 39-years-old, maintains a job, and is married. Martin wrote a memoir about his story called Ghost Boy that was published in 2012.

** Martin’s inspiring story can be found here in greater detail.

 

via Man Spent 12 Years in ‘Vegetative State,’ Says He was ‘Aware of Everything’ | Washington Free Beacon.

Jan 052015
 

By Sandy Fitzgerald — Monday, 05 Jan 2015

A group of conservatives who tried to unseat House Speaker John Boehner last year is making another try, but this time around, at least two members of the circle say they want to run for the leadership seat themselves.

Reps, Ted Yoho, R-Fla., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas., and House Speaker John Boehner.

Reps, Ted Yoho, R-Fla., Louie Gohmert, R-Texas., and House Speaker John Boehner.

Texas GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert said on Fox & Friends Sunday that he is seeking the gavel, joining Florida Rep. Ted Yoho in a challenge against Boehner.

“We have heard from a lot of Republicans that said ‘I would vote for somebody besides speaker Boehner,’ ” said Gohmert. “But nobody will put their name out there. That changed yesterday with Ted Yoho.”

Yoho, who made his announcement on Saturday, and Gohmert do not have much support for their bids, reports The Daily Beast, but their campaigns could throw a wrench into Boehner’s re-election bid. According to House rules, a speaker is only elected when there is an absolute majority of votes. If that majority does not happen in the first vote, balloting continues until the absolute majority is reached.

There has not been a vote go to a second ballot since 1923, The Daily Beast reports, but given the continued outcry against Boehner, his opponents may be able to force that vote.

Maybe this Wednesday we will all see Boehner sobbing again... One can only hope and pray!!

Maybe this Wednesday we will all see Boehner sobbing again… One can only hope and pray!!

At least 29 Republicans need to vote against Boehner to force a second ballot, and last year, only nine voted against him. So far, just four lawmakers, including Gohmert and Yoho, have publicly said they will oppose Boehner in Tuesday’s vote.

But there may be more, with Rep. Walter Jones of North Carolina, who voted against Boehner in 2013, appearing likely to join the opponents’ ranks again, reports The Daily Beast, and newly-elected Alabama Rep. Gary Palmer has said he’s voting against Boehner as well.

Late last month, Jones said that between 16 and 18 lawmakers were talking about voting against Boehner, The Daily Caller reported.

More than a dozen tea party-aligned conservatives are likely to vote against Boehner on the grounds that he is not sufficiently steadfast in opposing President Barack Obama on a variety of issues, including the budget and immigration, The Daily Caller reported.

In addition to Yoho, Gohmert, and Palmer, others purported to be part of the anti-Boehner movement include Reps. Tom Massie, Kentucky; Tim Huelskamp, Kansas; Justin Amash, Michigan; and Steve Pearce, New Mexico.

Boehner, though, is entering Tuesday’s vote from a position of strength. His spokesman, Michael Steel, pointed out that Boehner was “selected as the House Republican Conference’s choice for Speaker in November, and he expects to be elected by the whole House this week.”

In addition, the conference selected Boehner to serve as its official nominee for speaker.

Yoho, meanwhile, told The Tampa Bay Times that this first vote as a representative two years ago was against Boehner, and as a Tea Party politician, says his vote was not a personal attack, “but the representation of the voice of a frustrated nation.”

He said he still believes, two years later, that the American people are ready for new stronger leadership, but still has confidence in the GOP.

“They want a leader who is inspirational in message, and resolute in defiance against this president’s disastrous policies,” said Yoho, who is a large animal veterinarian by trade.

“I didn’t want to go into this Congress with the momentum we have from the November elections without the ability to change leadership in the House,” Yoho said on Fox & Friends Monday. “This is not a surprise. This is something, when I went up there in January of 2013, I voted against Mr. Boehner along with ten other members. And, this has been a build-up since then.”

There is no question that Boehner is in Obama's pocket.  He has demonstrated that time and time again in spite of all his rants to the contrary.

There is no question that Boehner is in Obama’s pocket. He has demonstrated that time and time again in spite of all his rants to the contrary.

But if Boehner wins, Yoho said he’ll stand behind him or whomever is named speaker.

“I’ll go up to him. I’ll thank him, and I’ll tell him, ‘You’re the Speaker for the next two years, and I look forward to working with you to solve America’s problems,’ ” Yoho said.

 

via Reps. Ted Yoho, Louie Gohmert Challenge Boehner for Gavel.

Dec 042014
 

By Thomas Barrabi — December 03 2014 4:38 PM

NYPD Officer Who Killed Eric Garner Was Accused Of Misconduct Before Chokehold Death

A photo of Eric Garner is displayed at a makeshift memorial where he died during an arrest in July, in the borough of Staten Island in New York City Dec. 3, 2014.

A photo of Eric Garner is displayed at a makeshift memorial where he died during an arrest in July, in the borough of Staten Island in New York City Dec. 3, 2014.

New York police officer Daniel Pantaleo expressed remorse Wednesday for the death of Eric Garner, the 43-year-old unarmed black man he killed with a chokehold in July. Pantaleo’s statement was released minutes after a Richmond County grand jury in Staten Island opted not to indict him in connection with Garner’s death.

“I became a police officer to help people and to protect those who can’t protect themselves. It is never my intention to harm anyone and I feel very bad about the death of Mr. Garner. My family and I include him and his family in our prayers and I hope that they will accept my personal condolences for their loss,” Pantaleo said in a statement, according to NBC New York’s Steven Bognar.

Garner died July 17 after an altercation with a group of NYPD officers attempting to arrest him for allegedly selling cigarettes illegally. Pantaleo restrained Garner with a chokehold, a maneuver that the NYPD banned in 1993. Garner, who suffered from asthma, lost consciousness at the scene and suffered a heart attack en route to a hospital. A New York City medical examiner ruled Garner’s death a homicide by “compression of the neck.”

A Staten Island grand jury considered several possible criminal charges against Pantaleo, including criminally negligent homicide and manslaughter. “Oh my God, are you serious? Garner’s widow, Esaw Garner, told the New York Daily News after the decision. “I’m very disappointed. You can see in the video that [Pantaleo] was dead wrong.”

article-pantaleo-3-0802

NYC Police officer Daniel Pantaleo – Criminal with a badge!

Pantaleo was an eight-year NYPD veteran at the time of the incident, the Associated Press reported. The NYPD stripped him of his badge and gun on July 19 and relegated him to desk duty.

New York police union president Patrick Lynch defended Pantaleo in August and said that the officer was “very distraught” over Garner’s death. “No one wants to have to deal with the fact that someone died because of something they had to do. It’s a terrible loss,” Lynch said.

Pantaleo was sued twice in the past for alleged racially motivated misconduct while on the job. Two black men accused him in 2012 of subjecting them to an illegal strip search in broad daylight. Pantaleo purportedly “tapped” each man’s testicles during the search, which he claimed was a bid to discover any contraband, the Daily News reported. The suit was settled last January.

In a second lawsuit, a man named Rylawn Walker accused a group of NYPD officers that included Pantaleo of arresting him despite the fact that he was “committing no crime at the time and was not acting in a suspicious manner” and of including misleading data on a police report to justify the arrest, theStaten Island Advance reported. Charges against the man were ultimately dismissed.

 

via Who Is Daniel Pantaleo? NYPD Officer Who Killed Eric Garner Was Accused Of Misconduct Before Chokehold Death.

Oct 062014
 

By John Gizzi — Monday, 06 Oct 2014 06:29 AM

In what is fast becoming the U.S. Senate race watched most by the national press in 2014, conservative Republican State Sen. Joni Ernst leads in the latest Des Moines Register’s “Iowa Poll” and appears to have the momentum over Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley.

According to the just-released (and much-respected) “Iowa Poll,” Ernst leads Braley by a margin of 44 percent to 38 percent among likely voters statewide. This poll’s results were seconded by those in a recent Quinnipiac Poll, which gave the GOP nominee a lead of 50 percent to 44 percent over Braley, the handpicked successor of retiring Senator and fellow liberal Democrat Tom Harkin.

Joni Ernst

Republican State Sen. Joni Ernst

Coupled with the Hawkeye State’s niche as the first state in the 2016 presidential race, the scenario of the unabashedly liberal Harkin’s seat captured by conservative Republican Ernst — state senator, National Guard lieutenant colonel, and grandmother of six — has fueled national and even international press coverage. Nationally syndicated columnist George Will has already covered the Ernst-Braley contest, and correspondents from as far away as Denmark are planning trips to Iowa.

“We had a great debate [Sept. 28],” Ernest told Newsmax, “and it was great because I had the opportunity to contrast what I call the ‘Iowa way’ on cutting spending and regulation with my opponent’s ‘Washington way’ on the same issues.”

 

Ernst spoke to us last week between stops in her current bus tour of all of Iowa’s 99 counties. At each stop, the candidate, who swept the Republican primary after TV spots showed her recalling “castrating pigs” and packing a pistol in her purse, now discusses her “Iowa Way” agenda, often in homespun terms.

Recounting how she worked with Republican Gov. Terry Branstad to roll back regulations that were costing their state jobs, Ernst cited the story of a cleaning woman who wanted to produce goat cheese as a side occupation but was frustrated by regulations dealing with equipment and registration.

“We got rid of those regulations, and that lady was able to produce cheese and help our state’s economy,” she said, “and that’s just one example of how we took a state that a Democratic governor left in terrible financial shape and made it an attractive place to do business: cutting regulation and lowering spending.

“And, well, you see where [Braley] and Obama are on those issues.”

As for Obamacare, the Republican nominee sees “some good things in it, but things such as the problem of pre-existing conditions are addressed in the Republican Joni Ernst 2alternatives. It makes no sense to leave a bad bill in place when it has stupid things in it, when we can pass something fresh that includes purchasing health insurance across state lines and giving tax credits to employers who create insurance pools for their employees.”

She also noted that four-term Rep. Braley voted for Obamacare “and has never apologized for it.”

 

Ernst believes the major reforms in immigration are “a need to modernize the immigration procedure, to secure the border, and enforce the laws already on the books.” But, she quickly added, “I am opposed to the comprehensive measure [passed by the Senate] or anything that includes amnesty or a ‘path to citizenship.’”

As much as Ernst’s “farm girl” persona and plain-spoken style have boosted her candidacy, Braley has had problems of his own. In March, the Democratic hopeful was recorded at a session of trial lawyers saying how a Republican takeover of the Senate would mean “you might have a farmer from Iowa who never went to law school, never practiced law, serving as the next chair of the Senate Judiciary.”
The disparaging reference was to Iowa’s revered senior Sen. Chuck Grassley, to whom an embarrassed Braley apologized amid widespread press condemnation.

More recently, there was a widely reported incident of how the Braleys’ neighbors in Holiday Lake raised chickens who wandered across other people’s property and that the congressman’s wife, Carolyn, told them she would file a complaint with the homeowners’ association.

 

During their recent televised encounter, after Braley talked about how he worked with Republicans on key legislation, Ernst quipped: “Congressman, you threatened to sue a neighbor over chickens that came onto your property. … How do we expect as Iowans to believe that you will work across the aisle when you can’t walk across your yard?” (There is no evidence that Braley has actually threatened to sue the neighbors, and there are reports he told the home owners association attorney he wanted to “avoid a litigious situation.” But the complaints he and other Holiday Lake residents have raised about the wandering chickens have been documented.)

Bruce Braley

Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley

“Right now, Joni looks strong and Gov. Branstad appears headed for a sixth term—which will make him the longest-serving governor in American history,” former Polk County (Des Moines) Republican Chairman Kim Schmett told Newsmax. “And our Lieutenant Governor Kim Reynolds should also win easily. I think we’re seeing a Republican ‘wave’ out here.”

Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

 

via Ernst Takes Lead in Closely Watched Iowa Senate Race.

Sep 072014
 

By Kellan HowellThe Washington Times — Friday, September 5, 2014

Sen. Ted Cruz, Texas Republican, announced plans on Friday to introduce legislation to strip U.S. citizenship from Americans fighting with Islamic State militants.

ted cruz 7


Mr. Cruz will file the legislation when the Senate returns to Washington on Monday.

“Americans who choose to go to Syria or Iraq to fight with vicious ISIS terrorists are party to a terrorist organization committing horrific acts of violence, including beheading innocent American journalists who they have captured,” 

Mr. Cruz said in a statement on Friday.


“There can be no clearer renunciation of their citizenship in the United States, and we need to do everything we can to preempt any attempt on their part to re-enter our country and carry out further attacks on American civilians,”

he added.


During a speech at Americans for Prosperity’s annual Defending the American Dream summit in Dallas, Mr. Cruz said that the U.S. should not allow any American fighting with jihadist groups back into the country, but now is taking that idea a step further.
The new legislation would amend the existing conditions for stripping U.S. citizenship to include becoming a member of, fighting for, or providing material assistance to a designated foreign terrorist organization that is working to U.S. or its citizens.

Mr. Cruz is a unique messenger for the issue. He was born in Canada to American parents and though he moved back to the U.S. at a young age, he held dual U.S. and Canadian citizenship — though he said he didn’t know it until it was raised in the press last year. He renounced his Canadian citizenship earlier this year. (To the Washington Times from Col Jessup – What a bunch of hooey? He is obviously a better American Citizen than you guys….)


SEE ALSO: Ted Cruz wants U.S. citizens fighting with Islamic State banished from country


via Ted Cruz to introduce bill to strip citizenship from Americans who join Islamic State – Washington Times.

Aug 202014
 

Published in The Washington Post — August 20 at 1:32 PM

President Obama delivered the following remarks in Martha’s Vineyard on the beheading of American journalist James Foley by the militant group Islamic State. Transcript courtesy of Federal News Service.

 

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Good afternoon, everybody.

Today, the entire world is appalled by the brutal murder of Jim Foley by the terrorist group ISIL. Jim was a journalist, a son, a brother and a friend. He reported from difficult and dangerous places, bearing witness to the lives of people a world away.

He was taken hostage nearly two years ago in Syria, and he was courageously reporting at the time on the conflict there. Jim was taken from us in an act of violence that shocked the conscience of the entire world. He was 40 years old, one of five siblings, the son of a mom and dad who worked tirelessly for his release. Earlier today, I spoke to the Foleys and told them that we are all heartbroken at their loss and join them in honoring Jim and all that he did.

Now, Jim Foley’s life stands in stark contrast to his killers. Let’s be clear about ISIL. They have rampaged across cities and villages killing innocent, unarmed civilians in cowardly acts of violence. They abduct women and children and subject them to torture and rape and slavery. They have murdered Muslims, both Sunni and Shia, by the thousands. They target Christians and religious minorities, driving them from their homes, murdering them when they can, for no other reason than they practice a different religion.

james foleyThey declared their ambition to commit genocide against an ancient people. So ISIL speaks for no religion. Their victims are overwhelmingly Muslim, and no faith teaches people to massacre innocents. No just god would stand for what they did yesterday and what they do every single day. ISIL has no ideology of any value to human beings. Their ideology is bankrupt. They may claim out of expediency that they are at war with the United States or the West, but the fact is they terrorize their neighbors and offer them nothing but an endless slavery to their empty vision and the collapse of any definition of civilized behavior.

People like this ultimately fail. They fail because the future is won by those who build and not destroy. The world is shaped by people like James_Foley_US_Journalist_AP_360Jim Foley and the overwhelming majority of humanity who are appalled by those who killed him. The United States of America will continue to do what we must do to protect our people. We will be vigilant and we will be relentless. When people harm Americans anywhere, we do what’s necessary to see that justice is done and we act against ISIL, standing alongside others. The people of Iraq, who with our support are taking the fight to ISIL must continue coming together to expel these terrorists from their community. The people of Syria, whose story Jim Foley told, do not deserve to live under the shadow of a tyrant or terrorists. They have our support in their pursuit of a future rooted in dignity.

From governments and peoples across the Middle East, there has to be a common effort to extract this cancer so that it does not spread. There has to be a clear rejection of this kind of nihilistic ideologies. One thing we can all agree on is that a group like ISIL has no place in the 21st century. Friends and allies around the world, we share a common security and a common set of values that are rooted in the opposite of what we saw yesterday. And we will continue to confront this hateful terrorism and replace it with a sense of hope and civility.

And that’s what Jim Foley stood for, a man who lived his word, who courageously told the stories of his fellow human beings, who was liked and loved by friends and family. Today, the American people will all say a prayer for those who loved Jim. All of us feel the ache of his absence. All of us morn his loss. We keep in our prayers those other Americans who are separated from their families. And we will do everything that we can to protect our people and the timeless values that we stand for. May God bless and keep Jim’s memory. And may God bless the United States of America.

The video below shows the moments leading up to the beheading of James Foley by ISIS savages.  It is not graphic but you can see and hear the messages sent by ISIS and mouthed by Foley himself.

 

via Transcript: President Obama’s remarks on the execution of journalist James Foley by Islamic State – The Washington Post.

Aug 062014
 

Courtesy of BareNakedIslam — August 5th, 2014

While Obama demands $$billions for illegal alien parasites, hundreds more military commanders get pink slips, many while still in an active war zone

illegal-immigration-terrorism-hoax

Barack Hussein Obama’s purge of the military is being fast tracked. Joining the ever-growing list of ousted high-ranking officers, about 550 Army majors, including some serving in Afghanistan, will soon be told they have to leave the service as part of Obama’s grand plan to render the U.S. military impotent. 

FOX News (h/t Pat Dollard)  Gen. John Campbell, the vice chief of the Army, acknowledged Friday that telling troops in a war zone that they’re out of a job is a difficult task. The decision to cut Army majors comes on the heels of a move to slash nearly 1,200 captains from the ranks. Army leaders were criticized at the time for giving 48 of them the bad news while they were deployed to Afghanistan. The Army declined to say how many majors will be notified while they are at the battlefront.

“The ones that are deployed are certainly the hardest,” Campbell told reporters. “What we try to do there is, working through the chain of command, minimize the impact to that unit and then maximize the time to provide to that officer to come back and do the proper transition, to take care of himself or herself, and the family.” Campbell said it’s difficult to avoid cutting deployed soldiers because of the timing schedules.

All the soldiers being forced to leave have probably already been given a heads-up that they were at risk of the job cut and will meet with a senior officer, according to the Army. Those who are cut have nine months to leave the Army. And the soldiers who are deployed, including those in Afghanistan, will generally have about a month to move out of that job and go home to begin to transition out of the service. The cuts have been difficult for many young officers, particularly captains, who tend not to have enough years in service to retire.

 

obama-firing-military-general

To make the cuts, the Army looked at about 8,500 majors who joined the service between 1999 and 2003. Some may have about 15 years of service, depending on all factors that go into credit for years of service, and might be able to retire, but many won’t have enough time in the job, Campbell said Guard and reserve leaders are looking for officers, especially captains, so there could be opportunities for the soldiers to continue to serve, he said.

thank tax payers

The Army has close to 514,000 soldiers now, but will have to be down to 510,000 by October, shrink to 490,000 by October 2015 and be down to 450,000 by 2019. In addition, if Congress doesn’t act to prevent automatic budget cuts from resuming, the Army may eventually have to get down to 420,000 — a size that that leaders say may not allow them to wage even one major, prolonged military campaign.

The Army tried to avoid some cuts by slowing enlistments and using attrition and some voluntary separations. It also has been combing through files looking for soldiers with disciplinary or other problems in their annual evaluations to weed out lower-performing officers first, officials said.

via While Obama demands $$billions for illegal alien parasites, hundreds more military commanders get pink slips, many while still in an active war zone | BARE NAKED ISLAM.

Jul 102014
 

By Adam Kredo — July 10, 2014 1:25 pm

Lawmakers seek info on terror murder of U.S.-Israeli citizen

Congress is seeking to offer a reward of up to $5 million dollars for any information that leads to capture of Hamas terrorists responsible for the recent kidnapping and killing of a U.S.-Israeli citizen, according to a copy of new legislation obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

 

suspects

Suspects in the murder of the three Israeli teens

Bills working their way through the House and Senate would order Secretary of State John Kerry to offer a cash reward of up to $5 million for any information on the kidnapping and murder of Naftali Fraenkel, a dual U.S.-Israel citizen who was abducted by Hamas and found murdered along with two other Israeli teenagers last month.

The bills are being sponsored by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R., Colo.) in the House and Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) in the Senate.

The legislation would provide the cash reward “to any individual who furnishes information leading to the arrest or conviction in any country of any individual for committing, conspiring or attempting to commit, or aiding or abetting in the commission of the kidnapping and murder of Naftali Fraenkel,” according to text of the legislation.

Lamborn told the Free Beacon that the U.S. government is obligated to do everything it can to find Fraenkel’s killers.

“Naftali Fraenkel was an American citizen who was killed by terrorists and the United States should not rest until his killers are brought to justice,” Lamborn said. “My heart breaks for the families of Naftali Fraenkel, Gilad Shaar, and Eyal Yifrach.”

Lamborn expressed shock that the Obama administration has not more aggressively pursued the Hamas killers.

“Amazingly, the Obama administration still supports this terrorist Palestinian government, even after the death of an American citizen,” he said. “President Obama must stop supporting terrorists and renounce the Palestinian unity government immediately.”

Lamborn said that he and Cruz are working to “move this legislation forward quickly” so that tips and information can begin coming in.

Joint funeral for the murdered teens

Joint funeral for the murdered teens

Israeli authorities announced in late June that they had located the bodies of the three teens near the Palestinian city of Hebron following a weeks-long search for the children.

The abduction came just after Hamas agreed to participate with the larger Palestinian political establishment in a unity government meant to unite the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

One of the teens was able to phone police and report the kidnapping, according to dramatic audio released by authorities. Investigators further revealed that the teens were shot at least 10 times in what is believed to be a premeditated killing, according to reports.

Obama and Abbas

Obama doing kissy kissy with Mahmoud Abbas Palestinian president and terrorist.

The kidnapping also occurred as Hamas began its latest series of rocket attacks on Israeli citizens, which has prompted retaliatory airstrikes.

At least 100 rockets have been fired at Israel in the last day with more than 15 of these rockets aimed at Tel Aviv. Other rockets have been sent toward Jerusalem, forcing residents to seek shelter.

Hamas has fired nearly 700 rockets at Israel since June 30.

See what Benjamin Netanyahu had to say regarding the kidnapping and brutal murder of the Israeli teens in the video below:

via Congress to Offer $5 Million for Info on Hamas Kidnappers | Washington Free Beacon.

Jul 012014
 

By Timothy Birdnow — July 1, 2014

The Mayor of the City of St. Louis, the Honorable Francis Slay, has openly, willfully violated the state constitutional ban on gay marriage

Slay-slays-rule-of-law-1

Slay slays the rule of law…

Mayor Slay, perhaps taking his cue from President Barack Obama, who enforces only laws he likes, married several homosexual partners in a ceremony at taxpayer-funded city hall, then watched as the happy couples fired up cigars in violation of the city smoking ban. Slay has done this ostensibly to set the stage for a legal challenge to the law, which was approved with 71% of the vote in 2004. So, a typical Democrat simply ignores both the will of the People and the state constitution to get what he wants.

  • Article 1, Section 33 of the Missouri Constitution Bill of Rights states:
  • Marriage, validity and recognition.
  • Section 33. That to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.

And indeed it is so and has always been thus. Marriage is a word that means something specific, and to speak of “gay marriage” is to string words together that have no meaning. It’s rather like referring to “our corporate family”, something that also is done on occasion and which no rational person accepts as being in any way a familial relationship. In both instances a certain relationship can be established that bears a surface resemblance to family or marriage, but the reality is that neither are any such thing. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and its primary purpose is to procreate, and raise children who will become upstanding citizens. Oh, there are plenty of relationships that bear a similarity to marriage, and the passion involved may be equal but we do not define them as marriage. We do not allow marriage between brother or sister, and calling a committed sexual relationship between siblings marriage is unacceptable. We do not allow people to marry corpses (although a certain Muslim cleric says it’s lawful for a man to copulate with his dead wife for a period of time after she expires). One may not marry non-human life forms; a boy may not marry his dog. One cannot marry an inanimate object. You cannot marry more than one person at a time, and you have to be legally divorced to remarry. And two men or two women cannot marry. Oh, they can create a relationship that bears a resemblance to marriage, one they may think of as marriage, one that is committed and meets the emotional needs of the partners, but it is not marriage. And we should stop calling it that.

gay marriages in St Louis

Slay marries gays in St Louis

Homosexuals took to calling their lifestyles “gay”, co-opting a word that meant something quite different. We allowed this deconstruction of our language, and “gay” took a lot of the stigma away from what was once called sodomy. Then they began speaking about gay marriage, and now the term is “marriage equality”. Who can be against marriage or equality? The reality is that this is neither. Homosexuals always had the right to marry, just not to someone of the same sex.

Indeed, as a man thinketh so shall he be, and we have allowed the Left to subvert our language to the point where it is nearly impossible for us to win in the court of public opinion, because we are speaking a very different language from that spoken by the Left. The institutions that define the meaning of words and phrases to the general public are controlled by our friendly neighborhood Progressives. When we speak of rights we mean something that is inherent to our personhood, something given by God that requires no active support from anyone else. When liberals speak of rights they mean something quite different, they mean a societal obligation. Gay marriage is such a right, because it obligates society to recognize a condition that is at odds with traditional norms – and to actively promote it. But most people believe the liberal definition of rights, not our definition. Rights come from government, and when we speak of Natural Law and the inalienability of rights we lose our audience because they have never had this explained to them. Rights to at least a plurality of Americans are government granted perks.gays marry in St Louis

Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, as the Good Book says. The key to a healthy society is honesty. We have allowed liberals to erode our language and with it our minds. Or as has been attributed to Confucius:

“If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what must be done remains undone; if this remains undone, morals and art will deteriorate; if justice goes astray, the people will stand about in helpless confusion. Hence there must be no arbitrariness in what is said. This matters above everything.”

And so now we have the mayor of a major city spitting on the Rule of Law and calling it good. Now law — our most important mechanism for maintaining peace in our society — has become a mere inconvenience, and for a brave hero like Francis Slay to openly defy it is considered praiseworthy. That in an earlier period Slay would have been arrested by state authorities seems lost on our dear Progressive friends. But Francis Slay is a criminal and that is precisely what should be done with him.

But it’s courage when done in a liberal cause but lawlessness when done against them. President Obama sought to arrest honor flight vets who violated his closure of the WWII memorial (a purely political act on the president’s part) but allows Lois Lerner to run amok attacking political enemies of the administration. This is not really hypocrisy in the minds of the Left, because laws are purely arbitrary things, created at the pleasure of the ruling class and enforced solely to benefit our betters. Obama breaks the law as he sees fit, as does the Missouri governor Jay Millhouse Nixon, who is in danger of being impeached for using executive orders to override the rule of law. In the minds of good liberals like BHO, Nixon, and Slay there is nothing wrong with ruling rather than governing. They are the natural superior class and have every right to do so.

There is a word for that — it is tyranny.

via Articles: Slaying the Rule of Law.

May 122014
 

By Russell Berman – 05/11/14 10:53 AM EDT

The House has held Lois Lerner in contempt, but it won’t use its power to place the former IRS official under arrest, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said on Sunday.

lois-lerner-congress-pleads-5th

Lois Lerner – Another one of Obama’s faithful lapdogs

Under a precedent affirmed by the Supreme Court, each chamber of Congress can authorize its sergeant-at-arms to detain individuals it holds in contempt. But Boehner said on “Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo” on Fox News that he has no interest in doing that with Lerner, whom the House last week voted to hold in contempt over her refusal to testify about her role in the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups.

“I’m not sure we want to go down that path,” Boehner said. “It’s never been used,” he said of the provision allowing Congress to arrest individuals and place them in the Capitol jail. The Senate has in fact used that power, but not in the last 80 years. “I’m not sure that it’s an appropriate way to go about this,” Boehner said.

The contempt charge has been referred to the Justice Department, and Boehner said it is up to Attorney General Eric Holder to prosecute Lerner.

“Now will he do it? We don’t know, but the ball is in his court,” Boehner said.

Boehner - Once again derelict in his duties.

Boehner – Once again derelict in his duties.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Washington has said it is reviewing the referral. Lerner has repeatedly invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, but the House contends she waived that right by defending herself in an opening statement at a House hearing last year before she refused to answer questions from lawmakers.

via Will the House arrest Lois Lerner? | TheHill.

Apr 142014
 

by Mikael Thalen — Infowars.com – April 14th, 2014

Sen. Harry Reid: Bundy Dispute ‘Not Over’

After remaining silent for days, Nevada Sen. Harry Reid made comments regarding the ongoing dispute between the Bureau of Land Management and rancher Cliven Bundy today, accusing the Bundy family of violating the law.

“Well, it’s not over. We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over,” Reid told News 4.

Despite telling the Bundy family that a deal had been reached Saturday after federal agents were forced to retreat, the BLM reversed its promise Monday and told reporters that they planned to go after Bundy “administratively and judicially.”

“The door isn’t closed. We’ll figure out how to move forward with this,” BLM spokesman Craig Leff said. “The BLM and National Park Service did not cut any deal and negotiate anything, there was no deal we made.”

Unsurprisingly, reporters made no attempt to question Reid regarding his involvement after an Infowars report linked Reid to the attempted Bundy land grab.

The most read news story in the world Friday, Infowars reporter Kit Daniels revealed documents linking Reid and the BLM’s director, Reid’s former senior adviser, to a Chinese energy firm that has been working to remove Bundy from his home in order to install solar panel power stations.

harry-reid-solar

Crony capitalism and dirty land deals are the hallmark of Dirty Harry (Reid)…

“Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle,” one document states about Bundy’s cattle.

Harry Reid’s son, Rory Reid, has been the chief representative to the Chinese firm, which announced its plan to build a $5 billion solar plant on public Nevada land in 2012.

Despite multiple attempts by the BLM to regulate Bundy off the land his family has worked on for more than 140 years, in one instance claiming Bundy was harming an endangered tortoise that the agency itself was killing in mass, Bundy has continued to remain the last rancher in his area.

Range Showdown

Protesters at Bundy ranch….

Although corporate media outlets are attempting to sway public opinion, Bundy supporters continue to arrive at the ranch to provide support. Regardless of the federal government’s next move, the BLM’s heavy handed response to the situation, which included snipers, assaults, a no-fly zone, a First Amendment Area and threats of death, has shattered their public image.

Fresh off the historic victory, which saw federal agents back down to Americans and return nearly 100 cattle, Bundy supporters remain on scene, awaiting the federal government’s next move.

via Sen. Harry Reid: Bundy Dispute ‘Not Over’ Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!.

Mar 152014
 

By Bruce Walker — March 15, 2014

What does the Republican victory in Florida’s 13th Congressional District mean for November?

The Democrats ought to have won this race. Pinellas County is Democrat country. Many pundits have noted that Obama carried Pinellas County in both of his presidential runs and that Alex Sink carried the district when she ran for governor in 2010, but such analyses understate how consistently Democrat Pinellas County has been in the last dozen years.

SINK-JOLLY

Democrat Sink loses to Jolly in strongly Democrat Florida county

Since 2002 there have been ten presidential, gubernatorial, and Senate elections in Florida. Democrats have carried Pinellas County in the last five of those elections and have carried Pinellas County in seven out of these ten elections. In only three elections have Republicans won this county. In each case – Charlie Crist in the 2006 gubernatorial race, George Bush in the 2004 presidential race, and Jeb Bush in the 2002 gubernatorial race – Pinellas County gave the Democrat candidate a higher percentage of the vote than the Democrat got in the statewide Florida vote.

Pinellas County is not only more Democrat than the rest of Florida, but more Democrat than the nation as a whole. In the last five presidential elections – from 1996 through 2012 – Pinellas County has given the Democrat presidential candidate a higher percentage of the vote than that candidate won statewide in Florida or in the national popular vote.

In a normal election, if the Democrats nominated a popular, well-known moderate politician in a Democrat congressional district with an open seat, and if that candidate campaigned hard with lots of money and the Democrat leadership behind her, then the result should be foreordained. Instead, not only did Sink lose the popular vote in the special election, but because a Libertarian candidate, whose supporters are surely more hostile to ObamaCare than even Republican voters are, gained 5% of the vote, Sink ran far behind the historic Democrat vote in past elections.

There are interesting parallels between this 2014 Democrat defeat in Florida’s 13th Congressional District and the defeats Democrats suffered in House special elections in the months before the 1994 midterm-election Republican landslide. In both instances, the Democrat candidates ought to have won, if the normal political reflexes of voters had operated in the elections. In both instances, the national Democratic Party was forced to defend federally run health care schemes – ObamaCare in 2014 and HillaryCare in 1994. In both instances, the congressional special elections showed a clear shift of about 5% of the electorate away from historic support for Democrats to new support for Republicans.

David Jolly Mailer

Is David Jolly really a conservative?

That 5% shift may not sound like much, but a national shift of that much could be the difference between picking up six or seven Senate seats – a narrow majority that could be lost in the 2016 election – and a dozen or more Senate seats, which would be enough to force Obama’s last two years into a dreary process of reactive vetoes, and which would guarantee that a Republican president elected in 2016 would be able to pass enact revolutionary changes in federal law.

That 5% would be enough to sweep Republicans into control of dozens of state legislatures, which would mean that Right to Work laws, school choice statutes, state tax reduction and reform, and other changes could put the left on the defensive in many states that today the left rules by the acquiescence of conservatives. Winning even more secondary statewide offices would mean that officials like the secretary of state or state attorney general, positions which have vital roles in the battle against voter fraud, will fall into the hands of Republicans.

In fact, the 2014 midterm may end up looking less like the 1994 midterm twenty years ago and more like the 1974 midterm twenty years before the 1994 landslide. In the second midterm of Richard Nixon’s presidency, his party had to face voters who were not only angry at the failure of Nixon’s policies, but appalled by Nixon’s understanding of the constitutional role of Congress and the presidency (doesn’t that sound familiar?). In 1974, Republicans were swept out of power almost everywhere, regardless of the attractiveness of their candidates or even the funding of their campaigns.

Although Obama is much dumber than Nixon, the isolation, the unhappiness of the president’s congressional party, the corrosion of congressional power by an imperial presidency, and the utter inability of the president to grasp the profound restiveness of voters may make 2014 the grounds for a genuine pivot in American politics. If so, then Jolly’s victory in Florida is just the first blast of a loud trumpet.

via Articles: What Jolly’s Win May Mean.