People that are citizens and worked to support this country are being denied Medicaid because of a few dollars and I betcha that the illegals are getting all they want! I like Trump and what he has to say! We need a President that is not politically correct, I am not!
All Posts (30365)
Sort by
VERY GREAT EVIL AND IMMORALITY THAT HAS COME UPON AMERICAN HISTORY FOR EVER REMEMBER US AS THE GENERATION THAT LET AMERICA DIE! PLEASE SHARE THE AWARENESS ON EVERY WEB SITE YOU CAN AND ALL YOUR CONNECTIONS , FAMILY, NEIGHBORS, AND FRIENDS THANK YOU PRINCIPLES FOR FREE SOCIETY
THE WATCHMAN ON THE WALL SOUNDING THE ALARM
Daily Digest
THE FOUNDATION
“How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation?” —James Madison, Federalist No. 41, 1788
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
Slain Ferguson Girl Was A Life That Mattered
Jamyla is on the left; Photo courtesy of Eric KayneAnother life was lost in Ferguson this week, and hers was indisputably innocent. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports, “A 9-year-old girl doing homework on her mother’s bed was killed when someone fired shots into a Ferguson home Tuesday night, according to police and family. Jamyla Bolden’s grandmother said she ran into the bedroom after someone opened fire about 9:30 p.m. Jamyla’s mother was hit in the leg. Jamyla was fatally wounded. ‘I was holding her the whole time,’ the grandmother said of the child Wednesday. She did not want her name used because she feared for her safety. ‘I kept holding and holding her,’ the grandmother told the Post-Dispatch. ‘I still have her blood on my hands. She was still breathing. I was telling her to just breathe.’” Such senseless acts of violence are all too common in the St. Louis suburb where the radical group “Black Lives Matter” was born. Yet they’d rather protest and riot over the death of another man killed by police — after he pointed a gun at them. Just one man is marching for Jamyla. The police aren’t always blameless, of course, but the real blame lies with thugs who are young, male, urban and all too often black. To these killers, black lives don’t matter at all — not even the life of a nine-year-old girl. But there is a bit of good news: Ira DeWitt, wife of St. Louis Cardinals owner Bill DeWitt, is going to pay for the funeral. Rest in peace, Jamyla.
EPA’s McCarthy Admits Clean Power Plan Hits Minorities Hardest
In June 2014, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said the Clean Power Plan, which the Obama administration finalized earlier this month, “is about environmental justice … because lower-income families and communities of color are hardest hit.” Why, then, is the EPA enacting standards that adversely affect minorities? Last week, McCarthy similarly remarked, “We know that low-income minority communities would be hardest hit.” But there was one important distinction: She wasn’t referring to environmental hazards but the plan itself. In other words, the EPA’s massive power grab, which ostensibly “is about environmental justice,” instead hurts those it’s supposedly intended to protect. That’s not the surprising part — independent studies have already warned about the consequences. What’s surprising is hearing the head of Barack Obama’s EPA admit it.
McCarthy counters by arguing that consumers will see substantial savings by 2030 and that the government intends to help minorities neutralize the initial impacts by giving states that invest in new and upcoming energy efficiency programs a 2-for-1 federal credit. But as The Daily Signal’s Nicolas Loris writes, existing energy efficiency programs have failed to live up to expectations. And just because the government wants to make purchasing decisions for you doesn’t mean consumers are better off: “Arguing that increasing energy prices with regulations will save money by forcing energy-efficient product purchases is equivalent to cutting employees' salaries and telling them that they will save money by shopping at Target. Just as the option to save money at Target existed before the pay cut, families and businesses already have an incentive to purchase energy-efficient products. When the government mandates efficiency, it removes that choice and makes consumers worse off.” No one is against energy efficiency, but that’s best attained through innovation in the free market. When the government gets involved, the results are bad for everyone.
Los Angeles VA Found Shredding Unprocessed Claims
Working off a tip, the VA’s inspector general in February sprung a surprise inspection on the VA Regional Office in Los Angeles. He found that employees were about to shred nine unprocessed claims that veterans filed with the agency. Of those claims, two of them were from homeless veterans who were seeking disability compensation, The Washington Times reports. Another was from a veteran who said he could not be employed because of the severity of his PTSD. In short, the VA’s action would have entrapped those veterans in a bureaucratic morass. The IG’s report could not verify that VA supervisors had ordered the paperwork destroyed, nor could it determine how many unprocessed claims passed through the shredder. In response to its findings, the IG made surprise inspections in 10 other VA offices to see if the paperwork problem is systematic. Secret wait lists are one thing. Document destruction and the resulting denial of care is another.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
About That Reset With Russia…
By Patriot Post Staff
Barack Obama famously made resetting relations with Russia one of his very first foreign policy initiatives, even deploying then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for a ridiculous photo-op with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. (Lavrov can be seen in the photo above laughing in what could fairly be interpreted as genuine amusement that any U.S. president could be so naïve). Now, six years later, it’s apparent that we have indeed reset relations with Russia — to about 1977. From snapping up Crimea to fomenting insurrection in Ukraine to propping up Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, Vladimir Putin hasn’t missed an opportunity to poke us in the eye.
And now the latest such poke. This week, Russia and Iran announced the completion of a deal for the S-300 surface-to-air missile, one of the most capable such missiles in the world. Iran had originally attempted to acquire the S-300 in 2009, but Russia eventually backed out of the deal in the face of international pressure during the ongoing UN sanctions process over Iran’s nuclear program. But with sanctions now conveniently lifted thanks to Obama’s Iran deal, that same Sergei Lavrov has just wrapped up meetings with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in which the S-300 deal was confirmed.
The S-300 is a very low- to very high-altitude missile, able to intercept aircraft, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles out to nearly 200 miles. Iran has reportedly contracted for four battalions' worth at a cost of just under $1 billion, out of an annual defense budget estimated between $11-14 billion. Both Iran and Russia say the system will be delivered before the end of the year.
And we’re essentially paying for it with the $100 to $150 billion in sanctions relief through the deal.
Iran will almost certainly deploy two of the four battalions to cover its nuclear sites in central Iran and one battalion to protect Tehran. Each battalion comprises six launchers and a total of 24 missiles, plus a targeting radar, all of which are mobile. The S-300 will complicate enormously any attempt to fly into Iran’s airspace and attack its nuclear sites, which is Russia’s goal as well as Iran’s.
Why is Russia going through with this sale to a pariah nation like Iran? Partly because military systems are one of the very few Russian export items anyone wants to buy, but mainly because propping up those nations opposed to the United States has been Russian policy since 1945. As we said in 2009, Russian national interests were not going to change suddenly just because a neophyte in the Oval Office wished it were so — especially with a former KGB goon holding the reins of power in Russia. Anywhere Putin can cause headaches for the U.S. he will do so, which was obvious to everyone in 2009except the community organizer and his secretary of state. The S-300 deal is just the latest such move, but it won’t be the last. Reset, indeed.
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
- ANALYSIS: The Walking Dead Wisconsin Witch Hunt
- The Science Is… Oh, Never Mind
- Manufacturing Struggling to Get to Pre-Recession Levels
- Krauthammer: Iran Self-Inspections Are ‘Scandalous’
- Another ‘Black’ Guy Outed as White
- 50 Years Ago, Jonathan Daniels Died for Civil Rights
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
- Charles Krauthammer: The Immigration Swamp
- Terence Jeffrey: Our Politicians Are Broken, Not Our Immigration System
- David Harsanyi: The Beginning of the End of Religious Freedom
For more, visit Right Opinion.
TOP HEADLINES
- Three Million Could Lose Their ObamaCare Subsidies Next Year
- North Korea Warns of War After Exchange of Fire With South
- Christian Bakers Shock Same-Sex Advocates: ‘We Really Do Love You’
OPINION IN BRIEF
Charles Krauthammer: “Birthright citizenship is a symptom, not a cause. If you regain control of the border, the number of birthright babies fades to insignificance. The time and energy it would take to amend the Constitution are far more usefully deployed securing the border. Moreover, the real issue is not the birthright babies themselves, but the chain migration that follows. It turns one baby into an imported village. Chain migration, however, is not a constitutional right. It’s a result of statutes and regulations. These can be readily changed. That should be the focus, not a quixotic constitutional battle. … [I]t is estimated by the conservative American Action Forum that mass deportation would take about 20 years and cost about $500 billion for all the police, judges, lawyers and enforcement agents — and bus drivers! — needed to expel 11 million people. … [O]f course, it won’t ever happen. But because it’s the view of the Republican front-runner, every other candidate is now required to react. So instead of debating border security, guest-worker programs and sanctuary cities … they are forced into a debate about a repulsive fantasy. Which, for the Republican Party, is also political poison. Mitt Romney lost the Hispanic vote by 44 points and he was advocating only self-deportation. Now the party is discussing forced deportation. … Yes, I understand. The anger, the frustration, etc., etc., that Trump is channeling. But how are these alleviated by yelling ‘I’m mad as hell’ — and proceeding to elect Hillary Clinton?”
SHORT CUTS
Insight: “The ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle, home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics, he feels himself master of his fate. But otherwise he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.” —George Orwell
Upright: “Some laws that regulate legal immigration may need adjustment. But our immigration system is not broken. The politicians charged with enforcing it are. It is illegal to sneak across the border. It is illegal to overstay a visa. It is illegal to work in the United States unless you are a citizen, a legal permanent resident or have a visa that authorizes you to work. It is illegal to use a false or stolen Social Security Number, and it is illegal to use fraudulent documents to obtain work. But the laws that immigrants here illegally routinely violate are not routinely enforced — even in Washington, D.C., and its immediate surroundings.” —Terence Jeffrey
Amending the Constitution is unconstitutional? “It turns out that an amendment aiming to change the Constitution to end birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants — a move that squarely targets Latinos — could theoretically be found unconstitutional long before it could make it into the document in the first place.” —Huffington Post legal affairs writer Cristian Farias
Non Compos Mentis: “Britain built an empire on the slave trade. Germany perpetrated the greatest genocide in human history. Who says the Islamic State won’t be a U.S. ally someday? … [I]f Western history is any guide, the Islamic State could well be on its way to global legitimacy.” —former State Department advisor Rosa Brooks
Circling the wagons: “[Y]ou want me to indict and damn Hillary Clinton? I’m not going to do that.” —New York Times' Jeremy Peters
Late-night humor: “Hillary Clinton released an ad that emphasizes her humble economic background. In the ad she says, ‘Just 15 years ago, my family and I were evicted from our house.’” —Conan O'Brien
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.
P/C is a term used to criticize language,actions or policies of others. It generally means to restrict a freedom in that area of criticism. Some recent efforts to advance P/C are for affirmative action, hate speech, changes to school curriculum and discrimination. If left to the majority of the population to decide about these issues then it might have developed not offending the very people who would decide issues. But the people that push hard on P/C issues have become,themselves, the very onerous group that want control over a group or the populace in general. If they go too far they become true Fascists.
By Craig Andresen – The National Patriot and Right Side Patriots on cprworldwidemedia.net
Now that we know the truth regarding one of the Iran deal’s side deals…that the U.N. and the IAEA will allow the 7th century barbarians of the Iranian regime to inspect their own Parchin nuclear site and use their own equipment to gather samples before submitting their own reports showing there is nothing at Parchin to worry about…it’s time to look a little deeper into this new development…or should we call it a new scandal?
For weeks, since word of side deals between Iran and the IAEA went public, concern has grown regarding the contents of those side deals.
Obama told us all that it was no big thing…routine was the language he used. He said “If Iran cheats, we’ll know it,” and that the safeguards were all in place.
Obama sock-puppet, John Kerry called the side deals…routine…and said that nothing in the deals was based on trust. In fact, his direct quote was…“Nothing in this deal is built on trust. Nothing.”
No great surprise…Obama was lying…again and also no great surprise…
We've all heard or read the stats: currently, only the United States grants birthright citizenship to illegal aliens and 8% of babies born in the US are so-called "anchor babies" born of illegal aliens. In and of itself, this doesn't constitute a crisis, but, for many of us, it does illustrate how far we've strayed from the Constitution.
Like all babies, “anchor babies” too are sweet and cuddly, and deserving of mother’s love and society’s protection. But automatically conferring citizenship on babies of illegal aliens is an ideologically-motivated perversion not only of internationally accepted legal norms, but, much more importantly, of both the Constitution and the 14th Amendment as well.
By nimbly mischaracterizing the motives of birthright citizenship opponents, many in the media and blogosphere—to include attorneys who should know better-- have irresponsibly misrepresented the framers’ intent and have reduced the level of discourse on this legitimate constitutional issue to that of ad hominem, race-baiting, specious legal citations, contrived legal justifications, and mindless pandering. Shamelessly seeking ideological and political supremacy, to these people the Constitution and the rule of law mean absolutely nothing. And for a nation which once prided itself as being a “nation of laws”, that is inexcusable.
During an interview with Mr. Trump last night, what annoyed me greatly was Bill O'Reilly's characteristically bombastic--and wholly erroneous--claim that "the 14th Amendment says that any person born on US soil is a US Citizen. Period". Poppycock! He couldn't have read the amendment at all to reach this specious conclusion. And the fact that even Judge Napolitano, a Libertarian jurist, a few days earlier asserted this revisionist and ignorant view is nothing short of bewildering and scary. But, this does underscore just how flawed and fallible jurists and seemingly bright, well-informed talking heads can really be.
That said, for my own edification I decided to take the time to again review the actual words of the 14th’s framers, pertinent case law and the opinions of jurists and legal scholars on both sides of the question to determine the truth in this matter.
Here are my findings and conclusions:
First, while researching pertinent materials, I soon discovered that understanding the clear intent and meaning of the 14th Amendment was much simpler than anticipated. In fact, the meaning of the 14th was surprisingly straightforward. Lesson learned: if one simply abandons one’s ideological blinders for a moment and commit to an honest effort to objectively review a constitutional issue, clarity is nearly always one’s reward.
It also became apparent that from a strictly Constitutional standpoint, and despite many assertions to the contrary from both the left and the right, a constitutional amendment is NOT needed to deny anchor babies citizenship. In short, I was unable to find convincing constitutional evidence that so-called anchor babies can legitimately and automatically acquire U.S citizenship. Thus, a simple act of Congress--and most certainly NOT an amendment to the Constitution—in order to clarify the original intent and meaning of the 14th Amendment is all that is really needed.
Toward that end, introduced on April 2nd, 2009, and co-sponsored by 93 congressmen, inclusive of one lonely Democratic supporter, Mississippi’s Gene Taylor, HR 1868 (Birthright Citizenship Act of 2009) intended to amend section 301 of the Immigration & Nationality Act to provide that a person born in the US is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the US for citizenship purposes if the person is born in the US of parents, one of whom is: 1) a US citizen or national; 2) a lawful permanent resident alien who resides in the US; or 3) an alien performing military service in the US Armed Forces.” And if one simply reviews the original meaning of the 14th Amendment one can easily see that there is absolutely nothing at all revolutionary about this bill's language. In any event, the bill failed.
Intended to protect the rights of emancipated Negroes, the 14th Amendment specifically provided that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”
And as I very quickly learned, of central importance in this statement is the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, something birthright citizenship proponents have consistently and very conveniently ignored.
To begin, Sen. Jacob Howard of Michigan, co-author of the 14th Amendment, expressly asserted that “this will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers.” And it is in this plain-spoken construction birthright proponents somehow discover ambiguity or a totally different meaning. Amazing!
.
Under Section 1992 of the US Revised Statutes, the same Congress which adopted the 14th Amendment confirmed that “all persons born in the United States who are not aliens, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
In 1873, the US Atty Gen ruled the word “jurisdiction” under the Fourteenth Amendment to mean “the absolute and complete jurisdiction. Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the US but only to a limited extent. Political and military rights do not pertain to them.”
Sen. Trumbell noted during the drafting of the 14th Amendment that it was the amendment’s goal to “make citizens of everybody born in the US who owe allegiance to the US,” and if “the negro or white man belonged to a foreign government he would not be a citizen.”
On March 1, 1866, Rep. James Wilson of Iowa, House Judiciary Committee, added that “we must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to conclude that every person born in the US is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil (jus soli) to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign governments.” This statement served to nicely clarify Sen. Howard’s construction above.
John Bingham, framer of the 14th Amendment’s first section, stated that Sec. 1992 of the Revised Statutes meant “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the US of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of the Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”
And if we reach way back to our founders in search of a definition of citizens of a foreign power, Thomas Jefferson said “Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.”
To a man, among the framers the premise behind “within the jurisdiction thereof” was that all children born to parents who owed no foreign allegiance were to be citizens of the US; thus, not only must a child be born on US soil (jus soli) but born of parents whose complete allegiance was to the US.
Subsequently, Sen. Howard further explained that “only thru expatriation, which could be accomplished thru law alone, and not thru any immigrant acting on his own outside the law—and certainly not by any act of birth alone—could an alien become a citizen.” This, of course, would mean that the alien/sojourner would need to affirmatively renounce his allegiance to his/her country of origin before s/he could be considered completely within the jurisdiction of the US.
Sen. Howard also stated the following: “…the word 'jurisdiction', as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the US, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the US, whether exercised by Congress, the executive, or the judiciary; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the US now.” In effect, he was saying that an alien may, by treaty arrangements with his country of origin, avail himself of the protection of the US, much as sojourning US citizens in the alien’s country of origin would avail themselves of that country’s protection, but that an alien's physical presence in the US would not render him/her under the "complete jurisdiction" of the US. Simple enough.
The rationale behind not granting automatic citizenship can be illustrated by the fact that American Indians could not be subject to the jurisdiction of the US because the US dealt with them through treaties. By logical extension, aliens sojourning in the US are extended privileges and protections by virtue of treaties in force with their countries of origin, much as American citizens are granted similar rights and privileges—but not citizenship--when sojourning in those countries. Logically, therefore, only if an alien voluntarily and affirmatively renounces his citizenship and expresses an intent to swear allegiance to the US may the alien, through operation of law (a formal naturalization process), be granted US citizenship. Thus, in a nutshell, since neither children of tourists/sojourners nor of diplomats born in the US can be US citizens, children of illegal entrants cannot be lawfully granted the privilege of US citizenship.
In 1867, George Yeaman, American Minister to Denmark, in his highly respected treatise on allegiance and citizenship and for whom the framers had great respect, asserted that “the idea of a double allegiance and citizenship united in the same person, and having reference to two separate, independent, and sovereign nations or governments, is simply an impossibility.” Thus, dual citizenship was also a no-no. (Take note, BHO.)
P. A. Madison, a modern day master of constitutional analysis, points out that “since illegal aliens are unlawfully in the US, their native country has a proper and primary claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the US is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.” Slam dunk obvious, I’d say.
Also, Rep. Aaron Sargent, a representative from California during the Naturalization Act of 1870 debates, said the 14th Amendment’s citizenship clause was not a de-facto right for aliens to obtain citizenship. Significantly, none of his contemporaries disputed that assertion.
Adding to this mix, here is a little case law since the 14th’s ratification.
In the Slaughterhouse Cases(1873), the Supreme Court observed that the 14th Amendment overturned the Dred Scott decision by making all persons born within the United States and subject to its jurisdiction, citizens of the US; the ruling went on to point out “that [the 14th Amendment’s] main purpose was to establish the citizenship of the Negro” and that “the phrase ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, AND citizens or subjects of foreign states born within the United States", thus reinforcing Sen. Howard’s construction above. So, since they cannot be subject to US jurisdiction, children of citizens of foreign sovereignities and children of foreign ministers/consuls/ambassadors cannot be lawfully considered US Citizens. Makes perfect sense.
Then, in Elk v Wilkins (1884), the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not even confer citizenship on Indians—because they were subject to tribal jurisdiction, not U.S. jurisdiction. In effect, the court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the child, and not merely the fortuitous birth of that child on American soil. (Note: not until the Citizens Act of 1924 was U S citizenship granted to American Indians. As with many whimsical court rulings over the years, I was unable to understand the legal grounding for this reversal. Thus, it would seem that judicial arbitrariness is not an affliction peculiar to modern day American courts alone.)
In US v Wong Kim Ark (1889), the courts held that children born in the US of parents of foreign descent who, at the time of the child’s birth are subjects of a foreign power but who have a permanent domicile and residence in the US and are carrying on business in the US, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under a foreign power, and are not members of foreign forces in hostile occupation of US territory, become a citizen of the US at the time of birth. As expressed in the minority opinion, this decision violated the 14th Amendment. But, in any case, how many new illegal aliens have permanent domiciles in the US and how many of them are carrying on business in the US at the moment of their child's birth on US soil? I suspect precious few. But note that in this case the parents were, unlike illegal entrants, legally present.
In Steel v Citizens for a Better Environment (1998), the court stated that “jurisdiction is a word of many, too many, meanings.” However, and as can be clearly seen above, Sen. Trumbell and, yes, Sen. Howard, 14th Amendment co-authors, had long ago provided a clear, unambiguous definition by declaring that “the provision is, that all persons born in the United States, and ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof’’, are citizens. That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof. What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof'? Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.” And this from the framers' themselves! (Clearly, majority jurists in the Steel v Citizens court didn’t bother to research the framers’ clear intent and meaning. And one must wonder if a neophyte, such as I, can easily deduce original meaning, why can't trained jurists? Could it be incompetence or do political agendas get in the way of constitutional law?)
Despite the clear meaning and intent of the 14th's framers, we fast forward to the somewhat enigmatic ruling in US ex rel. Hintopoulis v Shaughnessy (1982), which some bloggers have used to justify birthright citizenship. In that case, and out of whole cloth, somewhere in the ruling it asserted, almost unconciously, that although a child born in the US to two illegal aliens was a US Citizen (????) that, nonetheless, “suspending the alien parents’ deportation based upon “the accident of birth in the US of their son would be to deprive others, who are patiently awaiting visas…” Thus, since the glancing allusion to the legality of birthright citizenship, though gratuitous—and erroneous—appeared in this suspension of deportation decision, birthright proponents often blithely and excitedly cite this case to substantiate the legality of birthright citizenship. Grabbing at straws, I'd say.
Then, true to activist form, in Plyler v Doe (1982) the court, apparently without access to the 14th framers’ erudition and written words, mysteriously ruled 5-4 that there is “no plausible distinction” with respect to “jurisdiction” between resident aliens who entered the country lawfully and those resident aliens who entered unlawfully. Wowee! Clearly a yawning divergence from the framers’ clear meaning and intent. Seems judicial activism was as alive and well in 1982 as it is today.
To me, these two rulings which capriciously and arrogantly turned Thomas Jefferson and the framers of the 14th on their heads are clearly unlawful at worst, convenient contrivances at best.
When I explained all this on-line to an attorney who is also a strong proponent of birthright citizenship, this was her reply: “I disagree with your interpretation of the phrase ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof'. The first rule of statutory construction is that we don’t look to the drafters’ intent if the words are plain and unambiguous…If the drafters meant to include some allegiance test, they would have. They didn’t.” That sort of revisionism, gobbledegook, willful ignorance and dishonesty is, folks, what this country is up against. My rejoinder was civil, but to the point: “It wasn’t MY lowly interpretation. It was the framers’ interpretation. But, ignore original intent and meaning? A living constitution is like having no constitution at all. We can merely make it up as we go along and continue to hand-off an increasingly irrelevant document to the next generation. While I sincerely hope this isn’t what you have in mind, at this juncture I can see there’s really nothing more to discuss with you on this or any other constitutional issues. How very sad.”
Finally, based upon what I now understand, we must be faithful to the 14th Amendment framers’ clear intent and meaning—surely a tall order with so many activists and social engineers infesting our courts these days. In the case of "birthright citizenship", Congress is constitutionally empowered to re-assert the original meaning of the the 14th Amendment, and that's precisely what it should do.
"What Does Your Bug Out Bag Look Like ?"
READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE AT... http://blackroberegimentpastor.blogspot.com/2015/08/what-does-your-bug-out-bag-look-like.html
My wife and I were a very nervous and excited young couple purchasing our first home. Our home builder was a dear friend of my parents. Upon going to closing, there were numerous odds and ends the builder had not completed. He vowed to complete my home asap and asked that I sign a paper for the bank stating that he completed all the work on my home.
My mom cautioned me not to sign the paper. Mom said, “Eaten bread is soon forgotten.” I ignored Mom's counsel. Sure enough, after my builder received his check from the bank, I had to chase him for over a year to complete my home.
Just like my builder said whatever necessary to get paid, politicians make voter-pleasing promises on the campaign trail. After they are elected, they forget their promises. Therefore, the final Jeopardy question is – Which GOP presidential contender will keep their word if elected? Having been burnt so many times, trustworthiness, character and backbone must be paramount in selecting our nominee.
In this primary season, we have witnessed honorable conservative candidates dialing back their original comments or apologizing due to pressure from the mainstream media and the candidate's handlers. This raises concerns in me about how these candidates will holdup under world class attacks once they are in the WH.
Leftists (mainstream media, Democrats and liberals) viciously insulted and accused president Ronald Reagan of every nasty thing imaginable. It takes a rare human being to stand firm in the midst of 24/7 relentless character assassination. Thus, my question. Which GOP contender will follow through with their conservative promises?
At the top of my list is Senator Ted Cruz. On several issues, Cruz seems to always end up on the opposite side of the GOP establishment and Leftist Democrats; in-sync with We the People. Cruz never follows the crowd. Eagles fly alone.
Remember Cruz getting hammered by Democrats and Republicans for fighting to defund Obamacare? Win or lose, We the People desperately needed to see someone on our side not simply rolling over and playing dead in surrender to Obama as he transforms our great country.
Cruz boldly says he is a Christian. During the GOP debate, I was struck by how naturally Cruz shared his dad's testimony; transformed from an alcoholic abandoning his wife and three year old Ted to giving his heart to Jesus and reuniting with his family. Politicians do not speak that freely about God and Jesus these days in the political public square. Obviously, Ted Cruz rejected the Left and MSM's memo banning God. As I said, eagles fly alone.
Some GOP contenders are wishy-washy on illegal immigration, even joining the liberal mainstream media in calling Trump racist for addressing it. Imagine how easily such a president's position could be swayed when he or she is trashed by the media.
Another GOP contender hopes to win black votes by exempting them from having to show a photo ID to vote. We do not want a president who is willing to surrender to the absurd Democrat party lie that it is too challenging for blacks to find their way to the DMV to acquire a photo ID. Americans do not want another president pandering to various voting blocs and selectively enforcing our laws.
While any of our GOP 17 are far superior to another socialist in the WH, a few are GOP establishment, big donor and Chamber of Commerce Trojan horses. They talk a good conservative game before the election. But once in the WH, they will prove to be a Manchurian candidate of the Washington cartel.
The Bible repulses the MSM like showing Dracula the cross. Still, Cruz quoted scripture, “you shall know them by their fruit.” Cruz said we see lots of “campaign conservatives.” He added that to win in 2016, we need a consistent fiscal, social and national security conservative. Cruz also touted that he has been a defender of life his entire career. This guy paints in bold colors folks.
Cruz looked America squarely in the eye and made bold promises during the GOP debate causing him to surge in the polls. On his first day as president, Cruz vows to rescind every illegal and unconstitutional executive action taken by Obama. He will instruct the DOJ to investigate the shocking videos and prosecute Planned Parenthood for any criminal violations. He will defend religious liberty, cancel the Iran deal and move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
Cruz also vows to repeal Obamacare.
Again, as I stated, while all of our contenders know how to say what We the People want to hear, the $64,000 Question (1950s TV game show) is which one is “for real?” Who will keep their word?
Here is Cruz's last statement of the GOP debate. “I will keep my word. My father fled Cuba, and I will fight to defend liberty because my family knows what it's like to lose it.”
I believe him, folks. I believe him.
Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee
By Craig Andresen – The National Patriot and Right Side Patriots on cprworldwidemedia.net
Of all the useless organization that exist on this earth, the United Nations (of thugs, thieves and despots) just may be the absolute worst.
Over the decades, the U.N. has allowed some of the worst actors on the human rights stage sit on their Human Rights Council…not because they in any way, shape or form, deserved to be there but because…on the Un’s rotating wheel of insipidness…it was simply their turn to sit there.
With regard to Iraq…the United Nations (of thugs, thieves and despots) allowed Saddam to thumb his Islamic nose at them…allowed him to ignore and violate 17 resolutions over a 12 year time span and contrary to liberal/socialist talking points…that is why George W. Bush took them to task…not over 9/11.
Now, in the latest of a long line of despicable behavior, the United Nations has launched into a whole new realm of Islamic-loving knot-headedness.
The U.N. has, in the side deal they struck with Iran that is not a part of the Kerry/Obama deal, as though Obama didn’t know this full well, Iran will be allowed to choose their OWN inspectors to inspect their nuclear facilities…home-brew inspectors that will, no doubt, find absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any nuclear bomb building (which I can all but guarantee you has already been accomplished) or evidence of any nuclear bomb research.
In other words…
Our forefathers knew their history. That’s why they were able to write such remarkable founding documents. The following song tells the story of the Scottish nobles selling out the common people of Scotland. That’s why it’s so important for the liberals to force common core on students and control the university. They limit knowledge to what they want people to know.
The following song Parcel 0' Rogues commemorates the elitist sellout of the common Scots by the Scottish nobility. Looking at the schemers in Washington - it's clear history repeats itself.
By: Craig Andresen and Diane Sori / Right Side Patriots on CPR Worldwide Media / www.cprworldwidemedia,net
Yesterday, in Part 1 of “Emails, Servers, Leaks, and Cover-Ups,” we outlined the more than suspicious nature of Platte River Networks, the company that has been in charge of Hillary Clinton’s private email accounts and server since 2013. Given how deep the scandal goes, not to mention the cover-up of the entire situation from alpha to omega…it should not be a bit surprising that the Director of Sales and Marketing for Platte River Networks, one David DeCamillis was once accused of 14 counts of fraud while raking in $1.5 million dollars as an executive for $500 million dollar Ponzi scam artist Lou Pearlman. DeCamillis then took the position at Platte River Networks and declared bankruptcy owing some $24 million dollars in debts.
All of this, along with the disclosures we related in Part 1 of this 2 Part report leads one to wonder just what sort of background checks or vetting was done by Hillary Clinton before striking the deal with Platte River Networks. Easy money would say none but…if you were going to violate the espionage Act of 1917 and knew you would have a great deal to hide…would you go with an above-board company or with an outfit like Platte River which is looking none too good right now?
And who do you suppose paid for the wiping of those servers? We suspect it was Arab monies, via donations to and possibly laundered through the Clinton Foundation that picked up that tab.
Let’s now get down to the emails of Hillary’s that we actually know of, who leaked them and why.
Last Tuesday, with a wink and a nod, Hillary finally agreed to turn over her private server to the FBI. Why? Because she had ample time to wipe it completely clean and sanitize whatever was there that forensic analysts would have found.
What was on that private server when the FBI finally got their hands on it?
Watching the Left eat its own would be funny if it weren’t so scary. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, US Senator from Vermont and a self-described socialist, was shoved aside and silenced last week while speaking at a campaign rally in Seattle. The party-crashers were members of the Black Lives Matters movement and they came to lecture the crowd on its own racism. Sanders yielded the microphone to an angry, rambling black woman before fleeing the stage entirely.
Within twenty-four hours, his campaign released a new platform addressing “racial justice.” It was obvious that Sanders was striking a conciliatory tone for not having been sensitive enough to black issues sooner.
The Sanders platform calls for “police forces that reflect the diversity of our communities.” While that may be boilerplate Democrat-speak, it’s not an innocuous policy proposal. Besides the fact that it’s proven difficult to achieve, forcing racial proportionality on police departments comes with its own perils.
“Looking like the community” is very important to liberals, and not just on the police force. They consider it to be of the utmost importance that the fire department, the president’s cabinet, and even the military “look like” the constituencies they’re supposed to serve. Apparently firemen put out fires better when there’s a Jew, an Italian, and a Puerto Rican on every fire engine. Don’t ask me why.
Diversifying a police department is easier said than done. City officials often mistakenly assume that police forces aren’t “diverse” enough because no one has yet laid out the welcome mat for minority applicants. They soon discover that recruiting minorities, particularly blacks, is arduous. Besides the fact that many young blacks don’t want to become what they despise, they often don’t meet basic qualifications. As NYPD Commissioner William Bratton said in June, “We have a significant population gap among African American males because so many of them have spent time in jail and, as such, we can’t hire them.”
Bratton touched a nerve with his remark but he also spoke the truth. One reason there aren’t more black police officers is standards—moral, legal, and academic. Police departments across the country have chosen to lower standards just to recruit blacks. Some departments have stopped requiring applicants to know how to swim while others will hire applicants who didn’t even finish high school. Departments often accept lower civil service exam scores from minority applicants. And it’s still not enough.
Proponents of “diversity” also blithely brush aside another issue—namely that their rhetoric is strongly suggestive of a quota system. Quotas were found to be illegal in Regents of California v. Bakke (1978), a landmark affirmative action case.
The man at the center of the case was an engineer and Vietnam veteran named Allan Bakke. He’s also white. While in his mid-thirties, Bakke decided that practicing medicine was his true calling in life so he quit his job with NASA and applied to medical schools. He could not secure a spot, despite his high test scores and obvious intelligence. After discovering that he was far more qualified than many of the black and Hispanic applicants who had been accepted under the minority quota, he decided to sue the University of California.
Bakke took his case all the way to the Supreme Court and won. The judges’ decision hinged on the quota system, which they ruled unconstitutional. Unfortunately, it was a very narrow victory, benefiting mostly Bakke himself. He was admitted to medical school and achieved his dream of becoming a doctor. Today he’s an anesthesiologist in Minnesota.
On the whole, however, it was a good day for affirmative action. The court ruled that a public university may consider race as one factor among many in its admissions considerations. Quotas, on the other hand, are verboten. Ever since Bakke, affirmative action supporters have meticulously avoided the “Q” word, without ever giving up on the idea. These days, public officials usually speak of “goals.” But what is a goal except a quota by another name? If, for example, Ferguson PD sets a goal for itself that it will reflect the demographics of the community it serves, that necessarily means that 67.4% of the officers will have to be black. Hiring decisions will have to be adjusted to meet that goal.
That’s called a quota and it’s illegal. Don’t let anyone tell you differently.
There’s another problem with police departments reflecting the communities that they serve and it becomes apparent when looking at communities that have very low minority populations. Can a small town that is almost entirely white refuse to hire minority officers because they don’t “look like the community?”
I think most people would say no, and so would I. But there’s a disconnect there. Why is “looking like the community” so vitally important in some communities but not in others? It seems that police departments have to be colorblind when colorblindness benefits minorities, and color conscious when color consciousness benefits minorities. In short, they have to be color conscious when deciding whether or not to be colorblind.
A case in point can be found in Granville, Massachusetts, a picturesque New England town that looks like something from a Norman Rockwell painting. Despite being 98.69% white, Granville hired an Hispanic police chief in 2005.
And no one cared. That’s not because the people of Granville are a bunch of hippy liberals. Granville is in fact the most conservative town in the state, according to Business Insider. The people of Granville didn’t bat an eye because they don’t feel entitled to a police force that looks like them. That idea is part of the larger black entitlement complex that they, as white conservatives, neither share nor understand.
It bears mentioning that Chief Jose Rivera, while he served as Granville’s Chief of Police, was the only full time officer in the department. That’s how small Granville is, and how safe. Should a town that’s almost 99% white be served by a (full time) police force that’s 100% Hispanic? I don’t have a problem with it, but then again I’m not a liberal. I don’t concern myself with racial bean-counting.
If lily white communities like Granville are going to be prohibited from hiring officers with an eye toward the racial makeup of their community, and highly “diverse” communities like Ferguson are going to be required to do exactly that, then someone will have to delineate a threshold between the two. At what point must a community shift from an ostensibly colorblind hiring process to an obligatory color-conscious hiring process? Ten percent minority? Twenty-five percent? Fifty percent?
I think we already know the answer to that question. All of that jive about “looking like the community” is a one-way street. If it helps blacks, great. If it doesn’t, it’s dropped like a bad habit. I call that black privilege.
“Diverse” police forces are not the answer to all that ails us. Besides the fact that recruiting blacks is more difficult than might be supposed, there are legal and moral issues to consider. Standards must be lowered and qualified people must be passed over.
I'm tired of the corrupt "party politics" of the GOP. When I vote for a candidate, I am voting for someone that will represent me in Washington. I am not voting for someone to represent the GOP.
I posted on this today on my blog "Parties-Shmarties - Get Me Some Tea!"
VERY GREAT EVIL AND IMMORALITY THAT HAS COME UPON AMERICAN HISTORY FOR EVER REMEMBER US AS THE GENERATION THAT LET AMERICA DIE! PLEASE SHARE THE AWARENESS ON EVERY WEB SITE YOU CAN AND ALL YOUR CONNECTIONS , FAMILY, NEIGHBORS, AND FRIENDS THANK YOU PRINCIPLES FOR FREE SOCIETY
THE WATCHMAN ON THE WALL SOUNDING THE ALARM
to read full articles go to http://pamelageller.com/
Pamela Geller - 7 new articles
In This Issue...
Police Raids On Islamic State Supporters in Europe After Secret Land Purchases
More on the ’Jewish Schindler’ Who is Rescuing Young Women and Girls from Islamic State Sex Slavery
Islamic State Executes “Spies Working for Crusader Coalition”: Muslims Tweet Photos, Cheer
NY Times “Shocked” “Perplexed” that Young Mississippi Muslim Couple Went Jihad
Muslim Militant ‘Gangs’ Fight to Control Streets in Europe
Sharia in Sudan: Women sentenced to lashes, fine for wearing trousers
Friends Of Hamas: Olive Bridge Fund, Lopatin Family Foundation, Leichtag Foundation
More Recent Articles
Search Pamela Geller
Police Raids On Islamic State Supporters in Europe After Secret Land Purchases
More of the poisonous fruit of Clinton’s ill-advised decision to go to war in Bosnia alongside the mujahadeen.
For years I have been saying it: Most Americans still don’t know or understand the implications of America’s support of the jihad in Europe, but that’s exactly what Bill Clinton’s intervention in the Balkans was. Clinton sent American soldiers to fight alongside Bosnian mujahedeen against the Serb Christians in the Bosnia war.
Jihadists have been waging war ion Macedonia. Last month, five police officers were slaughtered and more than 30 injured by Albanian Muslims in Kumanovo is an ethnically mixed town located about 40 kilometers (25 miles) northeast of the capital Skopje, near the border with Kosovo and Serbia....
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
More on the ’Jewish Schindler’ Who is Rescuing Young Women and Girls from Islamic State Sex Slavery
For months, I have been a vocal supporter of Steve Maman’s work rescuing girls from the devout Islamic State.
Please contribute to the fund to buy these girls freedom in these horrific slave auctions.
New York Times on Sex Slavery in Islam: “the Quran not only gave [ISIS] the right to rape — it condoned and encouraged it”
“’Jewish Schindler’ rescues Iraqi girls from slavery,” The Star, August 16, 2015
Montreal businessman Steve Maman is battling the Islamic State militant group with a campaign to free young women and girls from sexual captivity.
Maman
Steve Maman, a Montreal businessman, launched a campaign last year to save girls and young women from captivity in the brutal hands of Islamic State...
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
Islamic State Executes “Spies Working for Crusader Coalition”: Muslims Tweet Photos, Cheer
IMG_8521 IMG_8523 IMG_8524 IMG_8525 IMG_8528
Screenshots thank to Joy.
And then this from Blazing Cat Fur:
Screen Shot 2015-08-16 at 2.16.28 PM
Today’s Atrocity For Allah
ISIS execute 3 spies. It’s the usual script, a “confession” followed by execution. This time multiple handgun shots to the head.
You may if you wish view the video here. Note it is hosted on a Jihadi site.
isis crusader coaltion
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
NY Times “Shocked” “Perplexed” that Young Mississippi Muslim Couple Went Jihad
The New York Times, a Mississippi town, Mississippi University, everyone is “shocked” and “perplexed” that a young Muslim couple from the area would want to join the Islamic State. She was a cheerleader, an honor student, the daughter of a police officer and a member of the high school homecoming court who wanted to be a doctor. “Something must have happened to her,” Elizabeth Treloar, 18, said of Ms. Young, her friend. “She’s too levelheaded, too smart to do this.” What happened to her? She converted to Islam. And she was following the teachings of Islam.
On July 17, the day after a young Muslim man in Chattanooga, Tenn., fatally shot five United States servicemen, Ms. Young rejoiced, the affidavit...
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
Muslim Militant ‘Gangs’ Fight to Control Streets in Europe
It’s a war being fought throughout many European cities. In Denmark, it’s Muslim armies versus bikers, often classified as “gang violence.”
At the rate President Obama is importing these same Muslim communities, we can expect the same war in the streets.
“Muslim and Gypsy Gangs Battle For Supremacy on Streets of Europe,” by Oliver Lane, Breibart, 16 Aug 2015
“Brutal and ruthless” Muslim, and “violent” Roma gypsy gangs are terrorising the streets of dozens of major European cities, as they vie for control of lucrative black market trade.
Running drug rings and pimping prostitutes, as well as owning legitimate street businesses can be worth tens of millions of euros a year – and more – to...
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
Sharia in Sudan: Women sentenced to lashes, fine for wearing trousers
Sharia advocates in the US constantly lie to the American people about what sharia is and to whom it applies. They insist that it has to do only with Muslims. But this young woman is a Christian, charged under a Sudanese law forbidding “indecent dress” that is clearly sharia-based. Where are the feminists rushing to defend her? Too busy working up their next denunciation of “islamophobia”?
Fardos al-Toum
“Sudanese woman sentenced to lashes, fine for wearing trousers,” by Laura Smith-Spark and Margot Haddad, CNN, August 14, 2015 (thanks to TheReligionofPeace.com):
(CNN)A young Christian woman has been sentenced by a court in Sudan to 20 lashes and a fine for “indecent dress,” her lawyer said. Her crime?...
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
Friends Of Hamas: Olive Bridge Fund, Lopatin Family Foundation, Leichtag Foundation
The New Israel Fund is a proud, public backer of Breaking The Silence, an organization that has harmed Israel immensely worldwide. NIF raises more than $30 million annually from American Jews, and simply damages Israel with that money.
In addition to supporting a boycott, the people who fund NIF simply damage Israel in so many ways throughout the world. They are the definition of traitors.
olive bridge
According to NGO Monitor, Breaking the Silence is “Active in promoting ‘war crimes’ charges against Israel. They focus on international audiences, including presentations in Europe – which helps encourage foreign nations to attempt to bring Israeli soldiers before International Criminal Courts. After the 2009 Gaza conflict, several...
Read the whole entry »
• Email to a friend • Article Search •
Listen guys, I wrote a tea party ditty but I can't find a tea party minded rapper anywhere. I need music and voice put to this thing ASAP. If you have any ideas on a rapper, let me know, please.
Yes, Hillary is politically "DAMAGED" . . .for now. But, this particular Leftist machine is like no other I've ever seen. Since Obama walked into the WH, it's as if the dem machine received a surge from steroid injections. They became more aggressive, more determined, more violent towards their political "enemies", and more unified.
Remember this? "WE are the ones that WE've beeen waiting for!" - Barack Obama, 2008
They had also became MORE brazen and vengeful. Why? HOW?
The answers to those questions are one and the same. I'll use the world stage as an example. Who wins wars? The smartest and most patient adversary. The side w/ the most determination, resolve, and even the most cunning, wins. And, to be all of those things, one MUST also be ruthless.
In other words, winners exploit and take full advantage of their adversary's weaknesses. Also, DO NOT ever rule out having a certain level of respect, and perhaps even a measured "admiration" -- NOT for the "persons" themselves, but their abilities and successes. Winners LEARN more from the mistakes made by those they had defeated.
* * * * * * * *
Using what was written above, WHAT have TODAY'S elected GOP officials, AND their voting population, LEARNED from our recent history alone? (ACTIONS and PERFORMANCE) Imo, nothing. "We" are still drinking that "new Coca Cola" from the 80s.
I say w/ cold honesty, and awareness, that whomever believes that the Dem machine is weakened is IGNORANT and living in denial!
Lets use history again.
Although, and in spite of the FACT, that Hillary Clinton was completely "DISSED" by the DNC and the liberal media empire, the Clintons (as egotistical and narcissistic as they are) did NOT even consider splintering away from the Dem Party to achieve their ambitions in a "3p"; nor was Hillary ever even asked such a question. Quite the opposite. At the DNC convention in Denver, the crowd cheered wildly as "wild" Bill took the stage; announcing to the crowd that he knew of at least "8 million" voters (the Clinton fan base) that WILL be voting for Barack Obama. They put their PERSONAL feelings aside; and unified their forces. Thus, the Party survived.
But, WHY?
Though I totally disagree w/ them, the Left have an agenda; a plan. It's over a hundred yrs old. Their determination, PATIENCE, and resolve has been rewarded as they've gotten MOST of everything they've aspired towards.
While "we" have been playing catch-up -- "they" have been passing policies. Where "we" had focused on "bills" -- "they" had focused on AMENDMENTS.
So, now I ask, WHO "won" in 2010 and 2014? The LEFT did!
They are in no way out for the count in 2016. As far as "I'm" concerned, we can "win" an election. BUT, we had lost the Constitutional Republic a LOOONG time ago.
To achieve true change and reform, "change" must FIRST occur from WITHIN each of us. And that is the MOST DIFFICULT task of all.
That's how I see it.
Luis
Born in 1856, Booker T. Washington was an amazing black educator, orator, author and adviser to US presidents.Isn't it interesting that black men and women in America way back then were achieving extraordinary success? Meanwhile, liberals and Democrats claim America is such a hellhole of racism that blacks need cradle-to-grave welfare, affirmative action, lowered standards and numerous other special concessions to survive. Why am I seemingly the only black person on the planet highly offended by the Left's bigotry of lowered expectations? Actually, I know other blacks who share my frustration with blacks who think liberals and Democrats are their friends.Booker T. Washington so succinctly and perfectly described black race profiteers, I am convinced he personally knew Al Sharpton. Thus, Sharpton must have a portrait of himself in his attic like Dorian Gray. The portrait collects Sharpton's plethora of sins and keeps his appearance from reflecting his true age. I suspect this despicable race hustling conman has been peddling crap/hate for a very, very long time.Washington really nailed Sharpton and the Black Lives (Lies) Matter movement in his following quote.“There is another class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs – partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
Can you believe Washington said that back in the late 1800s? Black “losers” (a little Trump lingo) were exploiting race and looking for a free ride. As the saying goes, there in nothing new under the sun.So, here we go again. To commemorate the one year anniversary of the death of black thug Michael Brown, Black Lives Matter thugs trashed Ferguson again. Liberals still advise government to walk on eggshells to appease the BLM terrorists.Michael Brown robbed and assaulted the clerk of a convenience store. He died attacking a police officer. Period. End of subject. Why in the name of all that is righteous would intelligent people, black and white, reward this thug with civil rights hero status? How offensive is that? What a slap in the face to the legacies of real civil rights icons?Black Lives Matter thugs are allowed to roam the country wrecking havoc. At a major speaking event, liberal Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders allowed BLM thugs to storm the stage, take his microphone and run him off his own stage. How wimpy is that?Democrat presidential contender Martin O'Malley also allowed BLM thugs to hijack his event. O'Malley wimped out and pandered to the rude thugs. O'Malley's attempt at appeasement emboldened the thugs to demand that he apologize for daring to say “white lives and all lives matter.” O'Malley complied.Sanders and O'Malley displayed typical Democratic Party weakness and politically correct liberal thinking. Liberals believe because blacks were slaves in America, whites must be careful not to offend and have no moral authority to ever tell blacks no.These two Democrats immediately waving the white flag of surrender to BLM perfectly illustrates why Democrats must never be in-charge of our national defense.Black Lives Matter thugs are bullying everyone because they can. These evil hate-filled race profiteers ignored the facts in every incident in which a black is killed. The movement is a scam. BLM is really about gaining political power. It is not about resolving issues or racial unity. Nor do they want as Washington brilliantly stated, “the Negro to lose his grievances...”The insidiously evil movement is unworthy of respect from the American people. Pandering to BLM is a huge mistake; emboldening them to behave more outrageously and make more absurd demands.In Boston, BLM banned whites from a public forum.At a Chicago suburb high school white students were barred from attending a Black Lives Matter event.BLM leaders say they will “shut down” the Republican National Convention.In Denver, BLM bullies say screw history, we want the name of the city's Stapleton neighborhood changed.BLM thugs began digging up a confederate general's grave. .BLM launched a campaign to deface civil war monuments across America.BLM thugs are burning American and confederate flags.BLM has intimidated numerous major corporations. Cowering in fear, major store chains have stopped selling confederate flags.What continues to boggle my mind is why do liberal activists always fight for symbolic changes which do not impact blacks' lives in any way. And yet, not only do liberals ignore, they verbally beat up anyone who dares to address real issues plaguing the black community. What is up with that?Bottom line, America needs to stop pandering to Black Lives Matter haters and race profiteers. Tell these terrorists no. Tell them to shut up and go away. If not, the infectious BLM disease will continue to grow and spread, nurturing racial hate, pounding on it's chest and poisoning our great land.Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated AmericanChairman, Conservative Campaign CommitteeVERY GREAT EVIL AND IMMORALITY THAT HAS COME UPON AMERICAN HISTORY FOR EVER REMEMBER US AS THE GENERATION THAT LET AMERICA DIE! PLEASE SHARE THE AWARENESS ON EVERY WEB SITE YOU CAN AND ALL YOUR CONNECTIONS , FAMILY, NEIGHBORS, AND FRIENDS THANK YOU PRINCIPLES FOR FREE SOCIETY
THE WATCHMAN ON THE WALL SOUNDING THE ALARM.
Pamela Geller - 4 new articles
|
Saturday Night Cinema: Love Me Tonight
Tonight’s Saturday Night Cinema is a brilliant, groundbreaking musical that changed the way Hollywood makes such films. It’s an original, ingenious musical fantasy by Armenian-born Hollywood director Rouben Mamoulian. “It never neglects an opportunity to conjure with, the microphone or make the most of the camera.”
There are so many delicious moments — daybreak in Paris is a symphonic cacophony of city sounds, almost like Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue.
The infectious theme song, “Isn’t it Romantic,” innovatively bounces from the lovestruck Maurice Chevalier to his tailor, a cab driver, a songwriter, soldiers, a town fiddler until it finds its way to the lips of the object of...
Libya: ISIS executes 22, hangs them on crosses, burns Medical Center down, “A real massacre is taking place” 200 dead
The human toll and unimaginable fallout from Obama, the wrecking ball, continues. Was this Obama’s plan for Libya when he ousted Gaddafi? Where was the statecraft? What was the objective? The jihadis have wreaked havoc on that nation. Gaddafi not only contained the jihad threat in Libya, but in the region as well.
Obama’s “JV” team is taking over Libya.
Tripoli – Islamic State group jihadists have beheaded 12 people and hung them on crosses during a battle for the coastal city of Sirte, the national news agency LANA reported on Saturday.
The fighting for control of Sirte, hometown of slain dictator Muammar Gaddafi, has been raging since Tuesday, with one top Libyan diplomat warning of a “massacre”...
Muslims on Twitter Cheer Explosions, Massive Fire at Texas Chemical Plant: “May Allah Burn America”
Explosions, fire rock Texas chemical plant – CBS News
CONROE, Texas — A series of explosions rocked an oil field chemical supply company north of Houston on Friday, setting off a three-alarm fire that sent a broad, dense column of thick, black smoke towering into the otherwise blue skies.
Authorities knew of no injuries from the explosions and blaze that erupted about 4:30 p.m., said Conroe Fire Marshal Mike Legoudes.
Firefighters took about two hours to bring the fire under control at the DrillChem plant on the eastern fringe of Conroe, about 40 miles north of Houston.
“The facility was empty at the time of the fire and we are thankful that no injuries have been reported,” said DrillChem CEO Brandon...
Horrific moment ISIS throw two men off a roof for being gay – before they are stoned by baying mob including children
It is terrifying for gay people to live in a Muslim country that is under the sharia or even respectful of sharia law. What is so egregious is that openly gay men in the West like Anderson Cooper loudly and repeatedly condemn me for my counter jihad work and opposition to sharia. And he is hardly alone: the vast majority of gay organizations stand staunchly with their would-be executioners.
Sick.
“Horrific moment ISIS throw two men off a roof for being gay – before they are stoned by baying mob including children,” by Flora Drury, Mailonline, 14 August 2015
A gruesome video has emerged showing ISIS jihadists executing two men whose only crime’ was being gay.
The video shows two men being thrown to their deaths from a...
VERY GREAT EVIL AND IMMORALITY THAT HAS COME UPON AMERICAN HISTORY FOR EVER REMEMBER US AS THE GENERATION THAT LET AMERICA DIE! PLEASE SHARE THE AWARENESS ON EVERY WEB SITE YOU CAN AND ALL YOUR CONNECTIONS , FAMILY, NEIGHBORS, AND FRIENDS THANK YOU PRINCIPLES FOR FREE SOCIETY
THE WATCHMAN ON THE WALL SOUNDING THE ALARM.
Iran’s Supremo “not satisfied” with nuke deal, wants even more concessions
Obama and Kerry will no doubt jump to give him what he wants, but if they do, the opposition to the deal will grow even stronger than it already is. “Iranian hardliner: The supreme leader opposes the nuclear deal,” by Ali Akbar Dareini, Associated Press, August 15, 2015: TEHRAN, Iran — Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah […]
Obama Willfully Supporting Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood — on The Glazov Gang
On this new special edition of The Glazov Gang, I was joined by Nonie Darwish, the author of The Devil We Don’t Know. Nonie discussed Obama Willfully Supporting Al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood, unveiling a Radical-in-Chief’s treachery against the American people. Don’t miss it! And make sure to watch this new brief episode, Help Keep The […]
Shocker: Biden calls Chattanooga jihadist a “jihadist”
Crazy Joe was clearly going off script. Ash Carter articulated the Administration’s prevailing fantasy when he said that “officials may never know ‘what combination of disturbed mind, violent extremism and hateful ideology’ was behind the shooting.” “Biden Calls Chattanooga Shooter a ‘Perverted Jihadist,’” by Erik Schelzig, Associated Press, August 15, 2015: Vice President Joe Biden […]
UK theatre self-censors, cancels play about Muslims joining jihad groups
In shattered, staggering, subjugated dhimmi Britain today, nothing can happen that might possibly offend Muslims, and so this play had to go — because, you see, all Muslims abhor and reject the hijacking of their religion by jihad groups, but some nonetheless take immense umbrage at anyone scrutinizing or opposing those “hijackers.” “She and writer […]
Islamic State caliph held American hostage as sex slave
“The article went on to cite accounts that the prophet Muhammad ‘took four slave-girls as concubines,’ a purported religious basis for the practice.” Indeed it is, since Muhammad is for Muslims the supreme model for emulation (cf. Qur’an 33:21). The Qur’an also sanctions the practice, although unsurprisingly, the Post doesn’t mention that. It says that […]
Islamic State takes Libyan port city
Its “refugee” incursions into Europe will now only intensify. Among the “refugees” will be untold numbers of jihadis. There is no telling how many Europeans will die violent deaths as a result. “Black flags on Europe’s doorstep: Inside ISIS’s new capital Sirte on Libya’s coast,” by Tom Batchelor, Sunday Express, August 15, 2015 (thanks to […]
Pat Buchanan stands up for Obama against that mean Netanyahu
Pat Buchanan has for years been such a virulent opponent of Israel that he has frequently been accused of anti-Semitism, and this column condemning Benjamin Netanyahu for supposedly interfering in America’s internal affairs by opposing the Iran deal is not going to erase that impression. The paleocon Right hates Israel with such abiding passion that […]
UK Muslima who joined Islamic State now “desperate to come home”
Shukee Begum and others like her left Britain in order to join an entity that considers itself to be at war with Britain and has vowed to destroy it. To allow such people back into the country is suicidal. And that is exactly what Britain appears to be. “British widow who left the UK to […]
Osama’s son calls on Muslims to attack London, DC, Paris, Tel Aviv
Hamza bin Laden’s call demonstrates that al-Qaeda is competing with the Islamic State to be the first to sow large-scale bloodshed and destruction in Western cities. “Osama’s son calls on followers in Kabul, Baghdad, Gaza to wage jihad on the West,” Khaama Press, August 15, 2015: The son of the former Al Qaeda chief Osama […]
Lebanon: Sunni Muslim cleric arrested, organized his followers to wage jihad against Shi’ites
“Witnesses at the time said machine guns and rockets were used – and when the army went to Mr Assir’s compound, it found heavy weapons and military-style uniforms.” But you know, they were machine guns, rockets and heavy weapons of peace. How did this Muslim cleric come to misunderstand the religion he had dedicated his […]
Sgt. 1st Class Dillard Johnson is the deadliest US soldier on record – with 2,746 moslem kills.
Yet he only received a Silver Star. In any other army in the world, he would have received the equivalent of a medal of honor or victoria cross. America's highest decorations are reserved for life saving of one individual because the US Army no longer fights to close with and destroy the enemy and they don't care how many of our soldiers are killed or maimed. Think how many American soldiers were saved by the annihilation of the equivalent of an entire enemy brigade. The US Army is controlled by neo-communist Clintonista generals who believe that excellent combat heroes are "murderous thugs." They are pro-moslem and have fired many US officers up to bird colonel rank because they spoke out against the murderous moslem killer cult. It is our duty to stage the second American Revolution and eliminate all neo-communists from government, no matter what the cost.
Why is Yahoo searching for any useless trivia for use in order to criticize Trump, who is the only person on the political scene who is not afraid of the media? Its because yahoo is a goose-stepping stooge of the media propaganda monolith. They cannot suffer a brave man of integrity, to live. The US commie media can survive ONLY if there is not one voice against them. At the same time they crawl through spittle to protect dictator obama and hide his crimes against the people, from the People. Why is obama the only modern US president who is neither investigated, criticized or truthfully reported by the communist media?
US media is not a free media. They are controlled by communist Oligarch billionaires. The communist media acts as a n enemy of freedom because we live in a one-party minority-parasite dictatorship which includes the communist media as a practicing participant. How does the Tyranny of the Minority Work?
Communist-Minoritarianism (Tyranny of the Minority) has led to establishment of a one-party dictatorship in the USA, that benefits minority parasites at the expense of the whole population. The feds oppress the entire majority population (because the minoritarian government is not accountable to anyone except the ruling minority), and will not consider the rights and interests of the People. But the working majority finances them by paying exorbitant taxes and continuously rising fixed prices. The entire one-party Congressional process in America, has been restructured to serve the tyranny of the minority. To retain their free ride, above-the-law minorities are eager to commit genocide against the majority. The Law of the Jungle, only the strong survive, has identified the white majority in America as perishable. I disagree and I will fight that!
