Saturday, June 30, 2012

The revolution is underway!

By Larry Klayman

The incestuous legal and political establishment has struck again. Appointed by Republican "royal blue blood" President George W. Bush in yet another stupid and incompetent act by our former "imbecile in chief," Chief Justice John Roberts has just cast the final straw toward and thus triggered a new American revolution. Ironically, like King George III in the years leading up to the Declaration of Independence in 1776, Roberts has " ruled" against and deep-sixed the rights and freedoms of the people and rubber stamped that abortion of healthcare legislation which came to be known as Obamacare. Roberts, casting his lot with the other leftist justices who sit on the Supreme Court as President Barack Hussein Obama's butt boys and girls, in his majority opinion upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare last Thursday. To try to justify its "constitutionality," Roberts recast the illegal health care mandate — where Americans are forced to buy health insurance or be financially penalized with a stiff fine — as the equivalent of a new tax. King George III would have been proud!

I have said since his appointment by W. that Roberts was not a true conservative but instead a D.C. establishment figure who kissed enough derrieres and perhaps other body parts to get him his job. Indeed, while at his former law and lobbying firm, the Washington D.C. mega-enterprise named Hogan and Hartson, Roberts was active in supporting so called homosexual rights. Indeed, a quick Google search reveals that there has always been considerable speculation that Roberts is a closet gay. Given Obama's recent endorsement of "gay marriage," one can only wonder whether Roberts may have been influenced by the President's political largesse to "gaydom."

But there were other even more serious factors at play with this establishment hack. When earlier this year I moved and then filed an amicus brief to have Obama-appointed Democrat Justice Elena Kagan (who is also believed to be a closet homosexual) -either recuse herself or be disqualified by Roberts for having a conflict of interest in sitting and ruling on the Obamacare case — as she had advised President Obama on Obamacare as his Justice Department solicitor general — the chief justice effectively threw our pleadings in the trash, and instead issued an annual report which unabashedly declared that Supreme Court justices are "above the law" and accountable only to themselves and not "We the People." He wrote that he and his fellow justices like Kagan are unquestionably of stellar ethical character, do not have to abide by the Canons of Judicial Ethics — incredibly claiming without any legal basis that the Canons may be unconstitutional in any event — and they may do as they please. Sure enough, Justice Kagan voted with Roberts and the other leftist justices in upholding Obamacare. Had Kagan properly been recused or disqualified, even with Robert's defection Obamacare would have likely been shot down and relegated to the ash heap of legal history.

While destructive, outrageous, and illegal, Roberts' actions will prove to be historic in another important way. It confirms to the American people that we have no Supreme Court, much less a judiciary, that is willing to protect us from the tyranny of the other two branches of government. And, who will now protect us from the judiciary itself? It is now crystal clear that We the People need to take matters into our own legal hands, and do what must be done, without fear, to protect and preserve the freedoms our Founding Fathers pledged their sacred honor and risked their lives and fortunes in founding a new nation. The new revolution has begun in earnest!

In this regard, while the revolution must be won in the months ahead, there is one case concerning Obamacare pending which can immediately influence the direction this legislation ultimately takes. Previously reported by WorldNetDaily (, my group Freedom Watch is pursuing a lawsuit before another judge named Roberts, Judge Richard Roberts of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which seeks to pry the lid off of the can of corruption which lead to Obamacare's passage. Obama and his leftist comrades held secret behind closed doors meeting with lobbyists from Planned Parenthood, the pharmaceutical companies, and others who sought to line his pockets with political favors and campaign contributions. This helps explain why Obamacare not only contains an illegal mandate, but actually furthers the killing of unborn babies, reduces competition in the pharmaceutical industry to lower prices for consumers, and other atrocities against our freedoms and rights. If I am correct, this Judge Roberts is poised to order Obama to come clean on these illegal meetings and allow discovery into this sordid affair. By so doing, we will gather evidence which I will then present to a Citizens Grand Jury in Ocala, Florida. I am implementing this Citizens Grand Jury to seek Obama's indictment, and ultimate trial and conviction for this and other criminal charges of bribery, ineligibility and treason. He, and his enablers like Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan, must be held to account to "We the People" before our nation is totally lost to us. To set an example and mete out justice, we will also seek the indictment of Chief Justice Roberts and Kagan for violation of their oaths of office.

Yes, the people's revolution has begun and is underway. We cannot count on the Republican Party or its presidential nominee Mitt Romney to right the wrongs even in the unlikely event a miracle occurs and Romney is elected president. Indeed, Republicans effectively allowed Obamacare to be enacted (not coincidentally a clone of Romney's equally infamous healthcare legislation in Massachusetts), to provide a political wedge issue for the 2012 elections. Now their hollow promise to try repeal the legislation if they "win" in 2012 must be seen for what it is, largely a ruse to raise campaign funds and win votes. Their cries, given the dismal and cowardly Republican track record, must fall on our deaf ears.

Chief Justice Robert's majority opinion and complicity with Justice Elena Kagan, not to mention President Barack Hussein Obama himself, removes any vestige of doubt as to the state of the nation. We no longer have a Republic and We the People, just as our Founding Fathers were forced to do in 1776, must now take matters into our own legal hands!

© Larry Klayman



Friday, June 29, 2012


TIA Daily • June 28, 2012
The Consequences of Our Political Choices
The Significance of the Obamacare Ruling
by Robert Tracinski

Editor's Note: My local Tea Party group, the Jefferson Area Tea Party, is meeting tonight. We were supposed to be gathering for a talk by Oleg Atbashian of The People's Cube, but Oleg got trapped in Florida because of a hurricane. So instead, among other things, I'm giving a short presentation tonight on the Obamacare ruling and its implications. Here is what I plan to say.—RWT
We're back to square one.

I know today's Supreme Court opinion on Obamacare is a disappointment, but let's remember why it is a disappointment. No one had any great expectations that the Supreme Court would throw out the whole health care law—we though it might, but we didn't expect it—before late March. It was only after the oral hearings on Obamacare that we began to hope that a majority of justices would accept the constitutional arguments against it. So our expectations were disappointed only because they were raised.

Now those expectations were not entirely dashed. A number of people have pointed out that there is a silver lining in Chief Justice Roberts' ruling. The whole case for the constitutionality of Obamacare, as presented by the Obama administration and Democrats in Congress, was that the regulatory power given to Congress under the Commerce Clause is unlimited. But Roberts specifically rejected that argument and wrote into his opinion an explicit limitation on the scope of the Commerce Clause. Here is what he wrote:

"Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congress’s power to 'regulate Commerce.'"
Now that is the kind of thing we haven't heard in a long time. And he got four liberal justices to sign off on it.

But that's kind of a pyrrhic victory, because he did sustain the individual mandate under the government's power to tax, which apparently is unlimited. The whole point of limiting the power of Congress under the Commerce Clause is to stop legislation like Obamacare. So if it doesn't stop Obamacare, the limitation is a bit theoretical and airy-fairy.

The big lesson here is this. If you limit one of government's broad, sweeping, unlimited powers, you'll find that they get you with another of the government's broad, sweeping, unlimited powers. Remember the story of the little Dutch boy and the dike? He sticks his finger in a chink in the dike to stop the kingdom from being flooded. Well, we stuck our finger in the Commerce Clause chink over here, and then a new leak sprung up in the Taxation Power chink over there.

So it's a reminder of how vast and out of control government power has gotten, and how big a task we still have ahead of us.
As for the immediate implication, Chief Justice Roberts told us exactly what to do.

"Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation's elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices."
Repeat: "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices."

The American people made bad political choices in 2006 and 2008, and it's going to take three elections to undo them. It will take three votes to cycle through all of the seats in the Senate and reverse the huge Senate majority the Democrats had in 2008.

This is the second of those elections. And as Mitt Romney reminded us, the only way to get rid of Obamacare now is to vote Barack Obama out of office. And not just to remove the president, but to get a strong Republican majority in the Senate. I don't think I need to remind people here in Virginia what that means for us.

So it's up to us now to fight for the repeal of Obamacare by making our wishes known at the polls in November. This is the most important fight of our lives, and not just because Obamacare is destructive and a power grab. It is important because of how Obamacare was passed.

Here's one of the things I noticed about the ruling. When Obamacare was passed, President Obama swore blind that the individual mandate was not a tax. And when Democrats in Congress were asked for the constitutional justification for the law, they cited their unlimited power under the Commerce Clause. So this ruling basically holds that Obamacare is constitutional—if we assume that Obama was lying and that Congress was dead wrong about the Constitution.

But we know that this won't really faze the left, because we know, from history, the kind of calculation they make. They don't mind lying and twisting the arguments to get a bill passed, and they don't even mind losing an election or two, if they have to. Because they know that once the law is passed—again, based on historical experience—once it is passed, it's there forever. Government grows, more people are made depending on government benefits, and they get to act as the benefactors who are handing out all of these free goodies, and as the people protecting these benefits against those mean-spirited Republicans who keep telling us that we can't afford it.

So you can see the strategic calculation. Lose an election today, but expand the state and win elections tomorrow.
This calculation works for them, so long as nothing ever gets repealed. It's a sort of Brezhnev Doctrine for statism. Back during the Cold War, Brezhnev was the Soviet dictator who said that once a country went Communist, it was never allowed to go back. So if someone decided to allow a little bit of freedom in Hungary or in Czechoslovakia, in rolled the tanks. People don't remember it much these days, but there were two competing theories about how to deal with this. The first was "containment," which is what we did for a long time. The idea was just to keep the Soviets from expanding, but we still accepted the advances the Soviets had already made.
The other strategy was called "rollback," which was the idea that we should try to dislodge the Communists from Latin America, from Eastern Europe, from places like Afghanistan. And the moment we did that—well, you know how it turned out.

What we need is a strategy of rollback for big government, for the welfare state. We need to show the Democrats that they can lose Congress and lose the presidency for the sake of Obamacare—and we'll still repeal the damned thing. That ought to reduce the incentive to shove through a piece of legislation that the American people hate.

We need to seek the same outcome that Ronald Reagan announced as his goal for how the Cold War would end: "We win, they lose." We started doing that in November of 2010, and we have to keep on doing it this year.

Postscript: The above is all I'll have time for tonight. Helen has given me a strict time limit, and she's not a woman to be trifled with.

For my readers, I'll add one more point. The Obamacare ruling doesn't just create an issue for the battle between left and right. It also sets up an important crusade within the right. As I have written before, the oral hearings on Obamacare, the seriousness with which the arguments were taken—and now the fact that those arguments were fully accepted by four of the conservative justices—all of that gives us a sense that it may be possible to revive constitutional protections for economic liberty. If Romney wins, this sets one of our top priorities for after the election. We need to make sure that the next Supreme Court appointee is not just someone who is vaguely "conservative," but someone who will accept the kinds of arguments that the four dissenters in this case accepted.
That fight is not over. It is just beginning.

Thursday, June 28, 2012




Dred Scott Decision (1857):
Although Chief Justice Taney believed that the decision represented a compromise that would settle the slavery question once and for all by transforming a contested political issue into a matter of settled law, it produced the opposite result. It strengthened Northern slavery opposition, divided the Democratic Party on sectional lines, encouraged secessionist elements among Southern supporters of slavery to make bolder demands, and strengthened the Republican Party. 



I guess you know this means THE SECOND U.S. CIVIL WAR.




One of your best articles here

Indeed, Obama is a Communist and admits as much in his very own words at Osawatomie, Kansas where on August 30, 1856 Southern militia under the command of John W. Reid and Rev. Marvin White where opposed by Northern irregulars led by John Brown.

This small scale battle in the "pre-U.S. Civil War" and the massacre by John Brown at Pottawatomie during the "Bleeding Kansas" holocaust where many Northerners and Southerners fought to the death over the question of whether the Territory of Kansas was to be admitted to the Union as a free state, or a slave state.

Why this Civil War symbolism by Obama?

More Importantly, why admit in public you're a Communist in a very anti-Communist and mostly Christian country?

I think Obama and Ayers are sending a "head's up" to their followers on the Left by saying in Communist code language, "Clear the deck for action."

The action being revolution.

Of course, this heavy handed propaganda and alarming symbolism serves to alert the opposition; however, Communists always believe they are the smartest people in the room, and us old peons are too stupid to understand what the "supermen" plan to do.

The next act of this drama will be playing everywhere in the near future: The Russian Revolution runs head on into the American Revolution.

As for the election of 2012:

"The great questions of the time will not be resolved by speeches and majority decisions...but by iron and blood." - Bismarck


Obama Legacy at Risk After Winning 100-Year Healthcare Fight...
President prepares three different speeches...
White House unusually quiet...
Pelosi: 'Are You Serious? Are You Serious?'
Leahy: 'Nobody Questions' Our Authority...
Conyers: It's in the 'Good and Welfare Clause'...


Wednesday, June 27, 2012


Spc. Mitchell Eidsvold (left), Spc. Michael Hons (center), and Sgt. Scott Jenson (right) of the 191st Military Police Company race toward the finish line of the Fallen Soldiers Memorial 12K run, while wearing full combat equipment and carrying the American Flag. The run took place in Devils Lake, N.D. on June 23, 2012. U.S. Army National Guard. (photo by Sgt. Brett Miller, 116th Public Affairs Detachment)





AmericanFlag By: Carlo Barbieri

America is facing a second Civil War of true and potentially bloody proportion. Many people may not be aware of this, for no shots have been fired and uniformed troops are nowhere to be seen, as traditional wartime rules normally dictate.

This nation is divided ideologically, in a truly radical way, as it was before the first Civil War.

The base of the “War Between the States” fought in the 1860s rested on economic factors, among others reasons. The farm states of the South feared that Abraham Lincoln’s election would bring an end to the free use of slaves.

In the current case, there are several reasons for this fierce battle between the contenders. States are not divided, but sectors of the population are. In particular, the middle class, which is being suffocated by the super rich, harshly taxed and pushed toward non-existence.

For reasons I will detail later, the American middle class, caught between the housing bust and recession, lost $25 trillion in the last decade, a period which became known as “the lost decade.” This means that every American, including newborn children, lost $85,000 during this period.

If we look at certain population groups such as the so-called “baby boomers,” they alone lost 25 percent of their resources or “wealth.”

These losses not only drained savings and earnings, but they were also reflected in increased costs. Health insurance soared by about 69 percent from 2000 to 2010. And after the proposed change in law signed by the current president to “give health care to everyone,” prices have already risen more than one-third and the services covered by them have decreased substantially.

With the collapse of public education, fired by teachers’ unions that do not admit improvements are needed in the system, the cost parents pay for private education has nearly doubled.

On the other hand, food prices have also increased exponentially – particularly in the production of corn which is being tapped as part of the environmental “green wave” to be rendered into ethanol to fuel vehicles.

With the limitations imposed by the “environmentalists,” oil exploration and refining on American soil has been cut back. As a result, the price of fuel has more than tripled in the last 10 years.

Economists at Goldman Sachs parody the Great Depression by calling this phase, “The Great Stagnation,” and a well-known billionaire, assuming the nation has already lost its battle to grow the financial numbers, refers to this situation as “the new normal,” that is, a new phase “normal” economy where more joblessness and less production are the rule.

The dollar has lost 82 percent of its value since the United States abandoned the gold standard in 1971, and of this, 35 percent has occurred since 2002.

Since the eighties, the productivity of the country has dropped, with jobs going overseas and workers flocking to unemployment lines.  With this financial flutter, the 1 percent of people who make up the richest members of the population keep about 90 percent of the new wealth generated. This new Wall Street cash remains in the clutches of the Wall Street insiders and does not end up in the earnings or investments of members of the middle class and retirees.

The debt of Americans has increased from 2 percent of their earnings in 1982 to almost 100 percent at the end of the last decade, while the average savings declined from 12 percent to about 1 percent during the same period.

Government employees earn, on average, 33 percent more than private sector workers and have health insurance that’s 17 percent better. Yet 12 percent pay less for it and retire in a shorter time.

At the same time, government seizes control of the states by providing subsidies for those in need: tickets to purchase gasoline, food stamps, rent assistance, aid for health care and telephone bills, housing for single mothers and subsidized transportation.  This assistance reaches tens of millions of people who do not work, but feel they are entitled to public benefits paid for with money that comes from those who are employed.

What is the reading that you can give these data?

• The Americans won the battle over communism, but lost to socialism.

• The middle class, which has always been the major factor of progress and political stability, lost its place in political decisions and their share in national wealth.

• The state is wasting money and productivity by paying salaries to people who have public sector jobs, but do no actual work.

• The American has turned away from its ideal, which had generated its golden age, to engage in consumer spending based not on wealth, but on debt.

• The American liberal political and economic decisions distributing the wealth have created a false sense that all is well with the American people.  But by becoming more dependent on the government, they have, in simple words, sold the dinner to get a hearty breakfast.

• Spending on foreign wars, questionable objectives and internal expenses increased populist spending and debt to unsustainable proportions.

And with this, we have the real reasons for a second civil war in this country.

This is fratricidal civil war that forces brother to confront brother. It is not just a battle between Democrats and Republicans, but fights within the parties themselves. As a result, the radicals gain notoriety and notice.

The “troops” are not standardized, and most have the sense that the error is large and needs to be fixed. But they cannot identify its origin and its solution even less. We still have skirmishes in all parts of the nation and a very blurred vision of the future.

But civil war is there, and more and more parts will be coming together. Surely, this year’s election should bring more light to this battle, where we have wasteful conservatives on one side and wild spenders on the other.

The war is getting clearer contours through debates among the GOP candidates, who have no ideological unity, which has made a liberal party of libertines.

The question is not only to know which side will win this war, but also what the breadth of the economy must be to withstand the burden of fighting and insecurity brought on by its more direct consequences.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012



The St. Pete – Tampa New Black Panthers

Hat Tip Ed
Here’s another threat:

The New Black Panthers are also threatening a “showdown” at the RNC Convention in Tampa.




"The main problem with socialism is that at some point you run out of Other People's Money"

Monday, June 25, 2012

Communist Defector Speaks Out on America’s Marxist Future

A top communist defector is warning of an unprecedented “alliance” between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party, reflected in the CPUSA’s endorsement of Barack Obama for president in 2008 and the party’s continued support for Democratic Party policies. But is this warning going to be too hot to handle for the media? And the Republicans?

Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest-ranking official ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc, says in an article for PJMedia that any doubt that the Democratic and the Communist parties had secretly joined forces was erased in 2009, “when Van Jones, part of a left fringe of declared communists, became the White House’s green jobs czar.”

Obama aide Valerie Jarrett had disclosed at a left-wing bloggers convention that “we,” apparently referring to herself and President Obama, had hired Jones for the job. However, Jones was fired when an outcry developed over his communist background, and the media quickly dropped any probes into Jones’ White House contacts.

Pacepa, who served as a top aide in the Romanian communist regime, tells Accuracy in Media, “The Democratic Party has become dangerously infected with the Marxism virus. I recognize the symptoms because I once lived through them, and I believe it is my obligation as an American citizen to help the conservative movement to prevent any further spread of Marxism in my adopted country.”

He adds that he is personally convinced that Obama is a Marxist.

His 1987 book, Red Horizons, exposed the nature of the Romanian Nicolae Ceausescu regime as well as “communist influence operations” directed against the U.S. and other Western nations. The contents of his book were broadcast into Romania on Radio Free Europe and credited with inspiring the counterrevolution that brought down the regime and the execution of Ceausescu.

Although he has written over the years for such publications as The Wall Street Journal, the American Spectator and National Review, his column in PJMedia represents the first time he has warned publicly that international Marxism has assumed a major influence over the Democratic Party. His second column for PJMedia examines appeasement policies by various Democratic administrations.

The issue of communist influence in the Democratic Party has already been on display this year, as blogger Jeremy Segal filmed Democratic Rep. Danny K. Davis, an old ally of Barack Obama in the socialist New Party, accepting an award in Chicago from the CPUSA. I brought this to the attention of Steve Chapman, a “conservative” columnist for the Chicago Tribune, who had attacked Rep. Allen West as crazy for discussing communist infiltration of the Democratic Party. I provided Segal’s video of the awards ceremony to him directly and yet Chapman remains silent.

Columnist Wes Vernon commented, “Since Chicago is the neighborhood of Chapman’s newspaper, one would think he could easily access (right under his nose) the goings-on of a local congressman’s award possibly just a stroll down the street from the Tribune Building.”

Instead, Chapman has now written a column for the conservative website Townhall mocking conservatives who resist the encroachment of Islamic law, also known as Sharia, in the U.S. legal system. Chapman’s column ran under the headline, “The Bogus Threat from Shariah Law.”

When alleged “conservatives” like Chapman refuse to take the problems of communism and radical Islam seriously, you know the liberal media will resist covering these matters. And that is why Ion Mihai Pacepa’s warning, based on decades of experience in analyzing communist influence operations and infiltration of the West, will be deliberately ignored.

Some conservatives are so desperate for any coverage critical of Obama that they jumped on his gaffe that the private sector is “doing fine,” as if this will enlighten the American people about the real agenda of the President. Mitt Romney’s campaign was quick to produce a TV ad based on the gaffe, generating some media attention, but don’t count on the Republicans to exploit the comments of Ion Mihai Pacepa. The cries of “McCarthyism” would fill the air. All of this means that the GOP presidential campaign will avoid addressing his key charge that the U.S. has a Marxist president and that he is pursuing a socialist agenda.

The Republicans, some of whom were also behind John McCain’s lackluster 2008 campaign, recoil even when they are handed a campaign issue on a silver platter—such as Obama’s lying about his past association with and membership in the Marxist-led New Party in Chicago. They want to stay above the fray, even as the Obama campaign demonizes the word “capitalist” and insists nonsensically that creating government jobs is the proper way to help the private economy.

But Pacepa speaks out, saying that, in addition to the White House hiring Van Jones, he saw the Marxist agenda at work in the agenda of the White House and the Democrat-controlled Congress during Obama’s first two years, when they “began dutifully following in Marx’s footsteps by redistributing our country’s wealth and putting under government control a part of its health care, banking system, and automobile industry.” His observation is this regard is not unique, but Pacepa goes further, citing evidence of how planks in the Communist Manifesto parallel the Obama legislative agenda. Yet, Romney doesn’t want to call Obama a socialist because of what the liberal media will say about the charge.

“Marxism is a malignant tumor on the body of any country,” Pacepa writes, highlighting the stakes involved in the presidential campaign. “This is another thing I learned during my years at the top of Marxist Romania. Marxism, like any cancer, works silently—you can feel it only after it has spread throughout the whole body, and then it is usually too late.”

Internationally, the warning signs also get ignored. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which includes Russia and China, just completed a major conference in Beijing and issued a statement denouncing plans for a U.S. missile defense and proposed military action against the regimes in Damascus and Tehran. Obama seems prepared to accommodate our adversaries on all fronts, although he has told the Russians that he can’t go all-out on their behalf until after he is re-elected.

The final statement from the SCO conference honors the United Nations Charter “as well as the basic norms governing international relations”—remarks that could have come from Obama’s State Department or Obama himself.

The SCO campaign to block Western attempts to undermine the Iranian and Syrian regimes represents what the Global Europe Anticipation Bulletin calls a “world geopolitical swing,” as the United States fades in influence under Obama. Yet, the media talk about an Obama “gaffe” and conservatives wonder if Romney can reduce the gender gap.

The issues are big and stark, and Pacepa knows it. He cites evidence for his charges about an alliance between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party USA in the statements of Joelle Fishman, a political operative in the CPUSA based in Connecticut. This writer interviewed Fishman, who runs the CPUSA Political Action Commission, at last year’s Take Back the American Dream Conference in Washington D.C., featuring Van Jones. She is a strong supporter of Barack Obama and personally campaigned for him.

On Monday, June 18, in Washington, D.C., Van Jones will be speaking at the next Campaign for America’s Future conference on a panel that includes MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry. The topic: “Winning in November—So We Can Win in December and Beyond.” No surprise here. MSNBC is at the service of the Obama Administration and doesn’t hold back at all, even making its TV stars available for partisan conferences.

What is interesting about Fishman, the communist daughter-in-law of Soviet spy Victor Perlo, is that she works with “progressive” Democrats and has a very close personal relationship with high ranking Rep. Rosa DeLauro, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who serves in the Democratic leadership as co-chair of the Steering and Policy Committee. A photo dubbed “The Kiss” shows DeLauro embracing Fishman.

Fishman and DeLauro appeared together on the host committee letterhead for a birthday celebration in honor of long-time CPUSA official Alfred L. Marder. DeLauro used the Congressional Record on March 20, 2012, to praise Marder, whose “New Haven Peoples Center” recently tried to obtain $300,000 in state money. Zachary Janowski, an investigative reporter for the Yankee Institute, covered this controversy in detail on his “Raising Hale” blog and was instrumental in creating public pressure against the grant.

DeLauro described Marder as “an institution in our community” and “perhaps best known for his work to promote peace, social justice, worker’s rights and equality.” DeLauro added, “His commitment to these issues is unwavering—regardless of controversy, he always stands firm in his fight to protect human rights.”

“During the McCarthy era,” DeLauro went on to say, “Al was one of those singled out for proudly sharing his thoughts and ideas. Standing firm in his support of civil liberties and the right of every American to freely express themselves, Al discovered his passion for civil and workers rights—two issues to which he has dedicated a lifetime of advocacy.”

In addition to being active for decades in the CPUSA, Marder was president of the U.S. Peace Council and a member and official of the World Peace Council, both of them international communist front organizations. DeLauro, of course, didn’t mention that.

The good news is that citizens of Connecticut are waking up. Veterans and local political leaders protested against the proposed state grant money for the communist headquarters. They got the money withdrawn. But the communists will be back. They never give up.

But while the state money has been withdrawn, at least temporarily, Zachary Janowski reports that the Board of Aldermen of New Haven, Connecticut, voted to allocate $25,000 in federal funds to the facility. The $25,000 in federal funds is from a Community Development Block Grant, a program of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. It is apparently part of the Obama “jobs” program.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at






'The most important week' of Obama presidency...
Ex-clerks say individual mandate is 'done for'...
Four possible outcomes...
NYT: 'Heartbreak'...
Supporters Slow to Grasp Legal Risks...
Tense wait...


Sunday, June 24, 2012

Saturday, June 23, 2012

One Big Ass Mistake America


This is a fun exercise, but all premised on the assumption that the Tyrant will abide by the results of the election. He’s already tossed the Constitution in the trash, and now we hear buzz of democrats wanting him to rule, not govern. What’s to keep him from saying that the election was invalid for some reason and refuse to recognize the results? If Romney wins, I think we should ALL plan to visit Washington DC on Inauguration Day, noting that DC’s laws against gun possession have been invalidated. Beck, why don’t you call a “Restoring the Constitution” rally on the Mall for that date. If the Tyrant leaves, then the Republicrats will at least get the message. If the Tyrant does not leave, well, the garrison of DC can’t possibly stop half a million. The question is, not does the Tyrant have the balls to ignore the Constitution, but rather do WE have the balls to enforce it?



Friday, June 22, 2012


ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — Federal prosecutors are seeking more than 12 years in prison for a Muslim convert from Brooklyn who pleaded guilty to posting online threats against the creators of the “South Park” television show.

Sentencing is scheduled Friday in Alexandria, Va., for Jesse Curtis Morton, who founded the now-defunct Revolution Muslim website. Earlier this year, he admitted using the site as an outlet for al-Qaida propaganda. He also conspired with another man to deliver a thinly veiled threat to the creators of the “South Park” television show for perceived insults to the prophet Muhammad.

Defense attorneys are asking for a prison term of less than five years.

The other defendant in the case, Zachary Chesser, got a 25-year sentence, but he also tried to travel to Somalia to join the al-Shabab militant group.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012



FLASHBACK: Attacked Trying 'To Hide Behind Executive Privilege'...
...'over documents he's supposedly never seen?'
Family of slain border agent 'disappointed'...
Issa to Holder: Get ready for contempt vote...
Dem Rep blames Bush -- again...
Holder retracts claim Bush team knew...
ROMNEY: 'Another broken promise'...




They’re not even trying to hide it any longer.

Notice the creepy, ubiquitous Obama iconography.
You can’t escape it. And consider — you’re putting your ballot in a cardboard box with an Obama logo on it — what could go wrong?
Just wondering: when did it become acceptable among Democrats to openly collaborate with Communists, whose stated goal is the destruction of the American economy?

Or, put another way, when did it become acceptable for Democrats to intentionally destroy the economy in order to “transform” (their word, not mine) America.

Socialism, Communism and any other branch of Marxism is completely incompatible with the United States Constitution. And any Democrats who sympathize with these philosophies have automatically disqualified themselves from holding office. Because they simply can’t honestly take an oath to uphold that which they despise.



( — Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) defended his comments about some members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, in their ideology and policy, being communist when asked about the topic on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal on Monday.
Back on Apr. 11 at a town hall event in Florida, West was asked how many members of the “American legislature do you think are card-carrying Marxists or internationalists —? And West said, “I believe there’s about 78 to 81 members of the Democratic Party that are members of the Communist Party — it’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.” [...]

Rep. West said: “Well, it’s not about me trying to identify any individuals. I’m talking about principles of governance and philosophy. If you understand, when you say ‘progressives,’ that is directly related back to the term or the label ‘communist’ at the turn of the century — that was a change in marketing, if you want to call it that.”

“But let me ask you the question that you have to come to understand,” said West, “What do you call individuals that would vote against this country having a balanced budget amendment but yet out of their caucus would promote a constitutional amendment that would redistribute wealth in the United States of America? I think that is against our fundamental and foundational values and principles that we have here in this country. So, I’d be happy to have this discussion about ideologies any day with you. Come on down here to Washington, D.C., and also there’s a couple videos of me a pretty good historical explanation over about 4 or 5 minutes on that.”


PAPER: Obama's grandfather tortured by the British? A fantasy (like most of the President's own memoir)...


Tuesday, June 19, 2012


Anti Islam Christian Protesters Show Up to Arab International Festival
The crusade against Islam is gaining steam in the USA! This is just one small example of Americans NOT following the appeasement policy of Europe. A pity our current regime doesn't have the same balls to confront Islamists.

Among the most tense moments during the Friday showdown occurred when some of the Arab Americans present at the conference began throwing water bottles and pop cans. Some of the attendees chanted “Allah-U-Akbar,” which translates to “God is the greatest.” The Christians responded with, “Jesus Akbar.” Most of the protesters who engaged in this debate were from an anti-Islam group called “Bible Believers.” 

In the video, above, a man — purportedly part of the group — can be heard yelling, “You’re going to go straight to hell you little dirtbag, wicked heathen.” Then, he continued screaming at the the Arab attendees, claiming that they have “a religion of hate” and that God is going to “melt” them “one day in hell” (at another point he says, “You’re going to melt in the fires of hell forever!”).


While it is routine practice for cops to engrave their initials on seized firearms, they are supposed to do it in accordance with their agency’s policy.


In this case, someone ignored the policy detailed in an internal MPD directive that says evidence should be marked “in a manner that does not deface or alter its appearance.” 


When will Patriots remove Leftists from all positions of authority in the Great Republic?




Monday, June 18, 2012




At the beginning of this year one of the weirdest characters ever to become involved in the present Afghan war died. He was called Jack Idema and he was a brilliant con-man. For a moment, during the early part of the war, Idema persuaded all the major TV networks and scores of journalists that he was some kind of special forces super-hero who was using all kinds of "black ops" to track down and arrest the terrorists.

In reality, before 2001, Idema had been running a hotel for pets in North Carolina called The Ultimate Pet Resort. He had been in prison for fraud, and had tried to con journalists before about being some kind of super-spy. But September 11th gave him his chance ,,,,


A long read here but well worth the effort - It is inevitable that the American military "Counterinsurgency" efforts  to  stop  terrorism evolves rather quickly into terrorism.

The student of history knows that war is a learning experience for both sides who will adopt the best methods to destroy their opposition - So if your enemy becomes a terrorist - you are very tempted to become a counter terrorist.

However, the danger for those who practice counterinsurgency is like Nietzsche said, "Those who hunt monsters beware; if you stare into the abyss long enough, the abyss stares back."

In other words, the honest soldier becomes the enemy they fight - The career of Jack Idema in his private counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan is just another warning sign for those who would do bloody murder and torture for their cause.


Sunday, June 17, 2012


Read this entire “report” at Oregon Live and see if you can figure out what key piece of information is missing:
Portland’s bureaus of Police and Parks will join forces this weekend to increase security in Laurelhurst Park after reports of two large-scale fights there Wednesday and Thursday nights.

According to those who reported the incidents to police, both assaults involved a large group of teenage boys who attacked either an individual or a small group.

Police say they learned of the first incident Wednesday evening when called to the Southeast Portland park about 10:36 p.m. to investigate a report of 150 drunken teens. When they arrived, they told the teens they found to leave. But they were then flagged down by a young woman who told them that a 14-year-old boy had been beaten up and was lying on a picnic table at the west end of the park.

Officers found the boy, who said he’d been with a friend when he was attacked by five to 10 other boys who seemed to be randomly attacking others, including at least one transient. The boy said the group also stole his cell phone, his iPod, his headphones and a hat.

No other victims came forward, however, and police didn’t find other victims. The boy was treated by firefighters and taken to an area hospital for further treatment of minor injuries.

The next night, police were called at 10:26 on a report of another fight, this one involving more than 20 young men. When they arrived, officers didn’t see a fight but found three adult men who said they had been attacked by 20 to 30 teenage boys.

The victims said they had been playing “soccer tennis” at the tennis courts in the southeast corner of the park when some of the teens began throwing bottles onto the court and calling out to them. They said the teens then began fighting with them. They suffered facial injuries but declined medical attention.

In an effort to stem the problem, police and parks workers plan to close the park at 10 p.m. Friday and through the weekend instead of the usual midnight closure. Also, officers will have extra patrols in the park and the surrounding area.

Sgt. Pete Simpson, a spokesman for the Portland Police Bureau, said the incidents do not appear to be gang-related and there is nothing so far indicating bias crimes. He also noted that the incidents took place in two different parts of the park.

“But two incidents warrant extra patrols and extra attention,” he said, which is why the park is being closed earlier than usual and the patrols added. “We just want to make sure this is not repeated.”

Anyone with information about the two assaults is urged to contact
Sounds like roving packs of drunk Amish kids were out causing trouble in Portland. Or maybe they were white Hispanics. Impossible to tell. Because the politically correct Liberals running Oregon Live (and most other news outlets in America) won’t tell you that those roving packs of “young men” and teens are black. And that their victims are white.

But let 10-20 white kids all go out and start randomly attacking, beating, and robbing innocent black kids…and you better not be standing between Rev Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson and a television camera. We’d all know the names, ages, and home addresses of each and every one of those vile white monsters before the evening news was over.

But hey…just another pack of black kids out acting black? No news here to report. Everybody carry on. 


Rodney King
Rodney King, seen here in a booking handout photo provided by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department on July 12, 2011. 

Rodney King, whose videotaped 1991 beating by Los Angeles police officers led to riots, was found dead on Sunday morning local time, sources told TMZ. He was 47.