How many ways can you spell Soros?

White House Teams Up With Soros for Disturbing 2016 Plan

Ben Marquis April 24, 2015 | Western Journalism

Last year, as part of his Imperial decree of amnesty for illegal immigrants, President Barack Obama created the White House Task Force on New Americans, whose goal is to vastly increase the numbers and rates at which immigrants were naturalized and granted citizenship.

This Task Force works hand-in-hand with the George Soros-funded, open borders-promoting Migration Policy Institute, as well as the openly racist group La Raza, a Mexican nationalist organization that has called for the mass murder of white Americans and a return of the western states to Mexico.

The Task Force is headed up by one Cecilia Munoz, Obama’s Domestic Policy Advisor, who also used to serve as Vice President of La Raza (which translates to “The Race” in English)–a group that receives millions in taxpayer funding, by the way.

Although the Obama administration has claimed that they don’t have enough money to deport illegal immigrants, they apparently found enough money to fund a marketing campaign targeting specific cities in specific “swing states,” aimed at encouraging swift naturalization and citizenship for immigrants.

One can’t help but notice the timing of this plan of action by the Task Force, right ahead of the 2016 election, as they push to create as many new voters as possible–the majority of whom will undoubtedly be swayed to vote for whoever the Democrat nominee is.

According to The Daily Caller, this is actually nothing new, but rather is remarkably similar to a project launched in 1995 during the Clinton administration called Citizenship USA–which was run by then-White House Director of Special Projects Rahm Emanuel.

The CUSA’s main goal, in Emanuel’s own words, was to “produce 1-million new citizens before Election Day,” by relaxing the rules, regulations, and fees surrounding the naturalization and citizenship process.

Although there was an incredibly damning Inspectors General report after the fact, nothing much was ever done about it; and evidence of voter fraud in the 1996 and 2000 elections was covered up and ignored.

Essentially, the same thing is happening yet again, as the Obama team is seeking to flood the country with new Democrat voters, diluting the voter pool and more or less disenfranchising conservative voters by cancelling their votes with those of illegally naturalized immigrants.

The goal of progressives is to create as many new voters for their party as possible–new voters dependent upon the government who will vote for the Democrat Party which helped them stay in the country and draw benefits when they should have been deported.

These people are criminals and are actively working to weaken and destroy the country, in any possible way that they can.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/alert-white-house-teams-up-with-soros-for-disturbing-2016-plan-spread-this-everywhere/

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter if you aren’t surprised at all that the Obama administration is trying to create new voters out of illegal immigrants to bolster the Democrat Party with more dependents.

This article first appeared at Conservative Tribune. Like their Facebook page.

Live from DC …. it’s press briefing!

Now for a Ha ha — Hilarious moment:

The White House was asked Thursday how it feels about the uranium story and Clinton’s approval of the deal.

According to Washington Times, Josh Earnest responded (apparently with a straight face)

“At this point, there has not been any evidence presented that would prompt the president or anybody at the White House to be unsettled by Secretary Clinton’s conduct as secretary of state,” said Mr. Earnest. “In fact, everyone here at the White House, including the president, continues to be very proud of her service to this country.” (More)

No problem! Now that I have my laugh for today, we’ll see if this love affair lasts. Josh said his lines just as well as John Podesta, or any of the other Clintonites said them. Excellent delivery, Earnest. Of course the evidence along with Clinton’s server are probably somewhere in the Mariana Trench.

What’s their definition of “service to this country”?
Is that anything like Bergdahl serving “with honor and distinction”?

Sudden change of Iranian plans

Fleet of Iranian ships heading to Yemen turns around after being tracked by US warships

By Lucas Tomlinson – Published April 23, 2015 | FoxNews.com

A nine-ship Iranian convoy believed to be laden with weapons bound for rebels in Yemen turned around Thursday after being followed by U.S. warships stationed in the area to prevent arms shipments, multiple sources in the Pentagon told Fox News.

The sources said the nine-ship convoy is south of Salalah, Oman, and now headed northeast in the Arabian Sea in the direction of home. The ships, which include seven freighters and two frigates, had sailed southwest along the coast of Yemen heading in the direction of Aden and the entrance to the Red Sea. The two Iranian warships escorting the convoy are Thondor Type 021-class missile boats and the other ships in the convoy are a mix of commercial vessels with some carrying shipping containers.

More at Fox: http://linkis.com/allenwestrepublic.com/ysvxg

H/T Allen West

I thought Iranians may think we were there to help them offload their cargo. I guess not.

The Left having their way

I didn’t want to start a long rant over the sentiments in that last article about Israel. I almost did but then what’s the use? It is nothing new under the sun.

But if I would have, I almost said something like I hope by next year you find something positive to be cheerful about to appreciate Israel’s Independence Day. Almost. But if you consider what would make some on the Left happy and encouraged by Israel, that was probably not a good idea.

In other words, had Netanyahu lost then probably a lot of that negativity would have been washed away. If his opponents and Obama-bots had their way, it would be another story. They would be dancing in the streets Sort of like here when Obama won. They would be shouting victory, maybe naively. Anyway it provided a good comparison and reminder to the state of America as well as the state of Israel — and current world conditions.

I find it amusing sometimes how the leftist mind works or doesn’t. The old saying about be careful what you wish for rings true. The same applies to the progressive Left here. They don’t read the word caution on a sign, they react by going full speed ahead.

Anyway, not to rant here, but when I consider what the Leftists want it makes me realize why we cannot appease them. It is not a pretty world when the progressives get exactly what they want. That does not stop their overreaching either. It could be a horrible thing to think about the Left getting its way entirely. You can say “but they are,” though they haven’t got to their utopia yet. That’s the difference. There is a whole lot they still want. And besides, I don’t think there is a finality to their utopian model, it keeps on going. So if they were all happy campers, then I think we’d be in even worse shape – imagine.

I heard someone ask a minister about all the places he had spoke asking, ‘if you were invited to speak at a Hillary Clinton rally, would you?’ But I think I know that answer, the person said. The minister explained, I can speak most anywhere except where I have to water down or change my message. So the point was if they gave him unconstrained ability to say what he would, then he could do it. But that is not the Left of today.That is not going to happen because it would not be in the Left’s interests. Hillary or the Left will have certified fellow-travelers speak because they can control the message. And truth is really not on topic. There are a few parallels to both of these.

Actually if it was up to the Left, they would run Elizabeth Warren if she could win hands down. But even Warren is not left enough for them. (I’m not sure socialist Bernie Sanders is either) You can probably find the same thing in Israel’s Left.

It is sort of like wondering what it would have taken to make Ted Kennedy happy? We saw how far he was willing to go to get what he wanted, volunteering our media to Soviets. Kennedy would supply them press access to speak directly to the  American people, with the objective of defeating Reagan — but he offered access. So you see there are no lines or limits with the Left. Just like with Clintons, whatever their objectives are; or like Obama’s “ends justifies the means” philosophy. It’s something akin to wishing the Islamic State happiness, while knowing what makes them happy.

PS: I forgot the obvious, who puts political agenda above their national holiday?

No cause for Israel celebration

With a little sadness, but knowing and seeing how the left thinks, I ask any pro-Israel people to take a look at this article and read it. Well, the anti-Israel haters can read it too, though their sentiments are close to what’s reflected in it.

Why I won’t be celebrating Israel’s independence this year” | Haaretz news

Doesn’t it sound eerily familiar, like some of our liberals here? Talk about a pessimistic view. All about politics and negativity because Netanyahu won et al. Note the channeled voice of speaking for masses and the dripping intellectual elitist views. Well, it probably went over real well in some circles.(if that was the plan) Sad it comes to this.

The audacity of money

We could be reaching a whole new saturation level in politics today, especially concerning America’s favorite beyotch, HRC.

Well, if the speaking fees (and amenities to match) were not enough to draw even the ire of MSM, then it has gotten worse since. But it is still all about money, surprise. That’s what Clintons are about, after all, and lots of it.

Last year at this time, MSNBC even got into the outrage that HRC was getting 275,000 for an hour-long speech at SUNY Buffalo. Then MSM dared to ask the question of all questions: why did Hillary take the money? Why couldn’t she wave the fee or just do it for free? That would never cross Hillanista’s mind. And she also could not forgo the rich amenities she demands with it either. Like a crook leaving some cash behind, she could not do that. The money is the whole point. How much are her words worth?

Now we have the uncovering of the Clinton cash component entangled with her corrupt State Department term. Then we have Hillary’s pronouncement of her 2.5 billion dollar campaign plan for 2016. Maybe that kind of cash was meant to scare Republicans. Alright, can you imagine Rand Paul raising and waging 2.5 billion dollars? I don’t think that’s going to happen. What about any other contender? Not likely but a 5 billion-dollar election for president? What does that say about America? Jeb, are you up for that?The whole point is what does it say about the Clintons? By the next election, how about a quarter of a trillion? Trying to ante up in this high-stakes game makes it extremely difficult.

So are Clintons out to buy our process? We already know they are globalists with their eyes set on the world. Is this their means? They can claim, while doing it, that they are doing a lot of good. The moral to the story, from progressives’ perspective, is what does it matter how many millions they are raking in if they are doing some good? (how much does mosquito netting cost these days?) The Clinton Global Initiative is really the Clinton Initiative — by Clintons for Clintons.

Contrast that with Hillary’s campaign. It seems oddly ironic to run a campaign theme of fight for the little guy, her anti-one-percenter theme. The Clintons entire objective is to raise money — and there are no glass ceilings. But they think they can get away with it because, after all, they are the Clintons. Who can deny the Clintons what they want?

So will America empty its pockets into the coffers of Clintons to get another Clinton elected? Isn’t it time America puts the Clinton Clowns out to political pasture? If not now when? We cannot separate them from their cashola but we can say enough public offices on our dime. They prove how effective they can be without political power — shadow government and all — so why give that to them, too? (be glad to get rid of them)

Their collective political bios should already be written and finished. What more do Clintons need or want to get from our government? Because we know it is about what America will do for them, not what they would ever do for America.

Plus, we will have another guy leaving the White House to suck oxygen out of the universe. That is bad enough on the face, so why put another Occupier into the Oval Office again on top of it? Hillary shows how lucrative the speaker circuit is for her. Same for Bill. And Obama is bound to enrich his wealth on the same and he’ll have his ___ organization. This stuff just keeps going on and on and on, and it seems nothing is going to stop it.

Hillary’s shattered armor

I am kicking around the old notion that “you get the government you deserve”. And if that is true — it seems to have some merit — then suppose that a Party also gets the candidate it deserves. Obviously just a theory. But if so, my working theory is Democrats are getting the candidate they deserve with Hillary.

Everything they said about Romney in their pack of lies they have in spades now with Hillary.But for real not an illusion. They got a rich, fat-cat politico that is so out of touch with regular people that she can hardly hide it. Someone who puts political ambitions above concerns for the people. Someone who very much plays the influence, pay-to-play game. Someone obsessed with and addicted to power. Someone involved in crony capitalism who takes money from the shadiest players. Someone who operates as above the law unaccountable for her actions.

Remember the big story was how Romney’s were buying a new house with an elevator. Using it as a metaphor, all the Clintons’ elevators only go in one direction, up. Hillary really does not care about average people.(that’s how she got where she got) It’s quite the show she puts on but everyone knows her only real, first concern is Hillary. She has all she can do to defend herself from the truth — a full time job. Like Obama, truth is her enemy. Who just makes speeches for a 7 figure income?

In New Hampshire, Hillary was asked about the allegations coming in a new book about money and influence surrounding her tenure as Secretary of State, she said:

“Well, we’re back into the political season and therefore we will be subjected to all kinds of distractions and attacks and I’m ready for that. I know that that comes unfortunately with the territory,”

“It is, I think, worth noting, the Republicans seem to be talking only about me. I don’t know what they’d talk about if I wasn’t in the race. But I am in the race and hopefully we’ll get on to the issues and I look forward to that.”

Worth noting is it? “Distractions and attacks and I’m ready for that.” So if she’s ready for that then why can’t she answer the question? Doesn’t she have an answer ready, or does she think she doesn’t have to answer questions?

“Ready for Hillary,” who is not ready for questions.

Does she take everyone for dummies? It’s a central issue in her campaign, whether she likes it or not. She can go on ignoring it as if it doesn’t matter but it maters to the people. Especially since folks are jaded about political influence peddlers, and after 2012 when that is all Democrats talked about. So now tell us none of it matters. She can talk about what she wants till she’s as blue as Monica’s dress, but it won’t make information on her record go away. And what was the big topic in her first run? It was Hillary Clinton’s records. Axelrod and Obama wrote the screenplay.

All she wants to talk about is her Scooby Van and her script. She can’t talk about her record as Secretary of State because that is relegated to ancient history now, buried in the deep with her personal server she used. All they want to talk about is me, she said. What does she think we will talk about, she does not have a primary challenge. She said she is the most transparent person out there. Wherever did I hear that before?

But as busy as Hillary has been in the influence racket, she is whistling past her leftist base. For fifteen years they’ve been making the charge about big money and influence in the administration or the White House. It goes back to Dick Cheney and Halliburton. Of course, you remember because we still hear about it. That is a favorite whipping post of the left. Then along came Romney who they painted into a poster boy for big money and influence. It still goes on in the left. Ironically, liberals don’t move on quickly.

Now here is Hillary Clinton, who if not for big money would have a giant identity crisis. Her and Bill in their private jet-setting lifestyle passed the tradition along to Chelsea. But of course Hilary thought she was entitled to her own personal server, why not? Raising millions from the same people she was dealing with at the State Department? Whatever could be wrong with that? In fact, isn’t that expected? The hypocritical left goes right along with it and the corruption she exudes. Yes, they got the candidate they deserve. They would be disappointed if she was not that way.

You heard of the military industrial complex but this is the political industrial complex. The thought that she stands a good chance of wining only adds to that. Consider if she even gets close, let alone wins, what it says about Democrats. It means even knowing how corrupt she is, they will elect her anyway — knowing full well the person Hillary is. It will mean not only don’t they care but expect it in their nominee.

Sloganeering the times

I thought of a couple new slogans or lines to describe the situation.

For Jeb Bush it is renaming him Jeb “Rockefeller” Bush. I think that’s self explanatory.

For Hillary, I thought her campaign slogan should be “every which way but lose” that more than defines her strategy. And she will do any_thing, Republicans beware. Sure, while she is a laugh line and her favorabilities are in decline right now, she’s a political creature with means and motivation. Who cares about favorability when you have the means? Let’s see when she turns on the tears for wanting to help Americans?

Another is “Viva la pig farmers.” In some areas people have taken to putting bacon around mosques. This has sparked outrage from CAIR who calls it a hate crime. Can you smell what they’re cooking? So this brings me to appreciation for hog farmers. I think we need a national recognition day, since they’ve been hurt by “wasteful pork spending”.

On Debbie Wasserman Schultz refusing to answer when life begins, basically allowing an open end to abortion, I say: “It’s always nice when evil can have a spokesperson.

On Benghazi, it is more evident than ever that Hillary’s message to the Benghazi 4 was “don’t call us, we’ll call you.” And in a sane and logical world, the right response to Hillary’s bid for the White House should be don’t call us, we’ll call you. We won’t forget.

Then there is this post from Political Commentator that will just blow you away on a Holocaust denier. You know who those people are, whatever their reasons or motives are. It was a social media reply. It is a must read. “A comment for the ages.” I’d like to think of a three or four word response for that but I’m still aghast.

On a positive note, I came across this on the philosophical side:

“Even Kings and emperors with heaps of wealth and vast dominion cannot compare with an ant filled with the love of God.” – Guru Nanak

I believe we should probably do more sloganeering because, face it, many people just don’t have time or room for much more than squeezing in an occasional thought now and then. So I decided we need more not less sloganeering.

See ya in the funnies, Marco

Brietbart:

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, said he believes that President Barack Obama’s first executive amnesty for so-called DREAMers—the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)—is “important” and he won’t reverse it himself if elected president. He delivered these remarks in a Spanish-language interview he gave to Univision’s Jorge Ramos.

MORE: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/17/marco-rubio-in-spanish-obamas-first-executive-amnesty-important-people-benefitting-from-it/

Nice speech though Marco, really good. I particularly liked that “yesterday” line. Who knew your candidacy had such a short shelf life?

Hillary Road Tour Roundup

Surprise, surprise, Hillary has a staged and choreographed meeting with Iowans. Problem is they passed it off as meeting with average, everyday Americans.

Only in a world where “everyday Americans” are all Democrat organizers or activists. Yea, that’s the ticket. That could happen, sure.

A Democrat operative and a Planned Parenthood official sit down for a cozy chat, after being summoned, as just ordinary Americans. What’s another staged event between Democrats? The Left asks what’s the matter with that? How about everything.

Then once again, we have to read it from British news because media here dare not report the obvious truth. That would be traitorous. That is not the worst of it. Just look at Hillary’s statements vs. reality. She’s almost as good at escaping reality as Obama.

Statements that all her grandparents immigrated here. Well, not really. But her campaign explanation is that Hillary always thought of it that way. (and she always thought of herself as being president, too, so that means…) Yes, the explanation is as bad as her lie.

“All my grandparents, you know, came over here,” she said. A spokesperson said her “grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants.”

Just like she ran for cover in Bosnia under sniper fire, when there really was no sniper fire. Oops. So reality is only a figment of our imagination. About that misspeak, she said, “I say a lot of things — millions of words a day — so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement.”

“We’ve got to figure out in our country how to get back on the right track.”

That’s as rich as it gets. She was part of Obama’s administration and admits we are not on the right track. Of course, polls reveal people do not believe we’re on the right track. (29.6 – right vs. 60.5 – wrong, after Obamacare) But sooner or later she will have to state where all she agrees with the administration and that she will continue those plans. Well, maybe a different day. Now she’ll say we need to get our country back on the right track. If we were serious about doing that, she is the last person the people should elect. Then she aimed at our broken political system.

“We have to start breaking down the divisions that have paralyzed our politics.”

Right, and who is that directed at? She’s been one of the most divisive persons in Washington, next to Obama. Hillary talked about getting dark money out of politics.

“We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment.”

But while she is raising 2.5 billion dollars, she will spend as much money as needed to win. Then we can talk about limiting money. Now, she will talk about it while doing the opposite. Hillary is almost as big of Hypocrite as Obama. If she was not a hypocrite she couldn’t run. That’s a pregnant thought. There is no way she could run if she was honest. Start there.

At an Iowa event she said, lecturing about those at the top:

“The deck is still staked in favor of those already at the top. There’s something wrong when the CEOs make 300 times the typical worker. I want to stand up and fight for people…so that they can get ahead and they can stay ahead.” -[…stacked deck?]

“I’ve been fighting for children and families my entire adult life. I was thinking about the lessons I learned from my church. You are supposed to give back, you are supposed to do what you can to help others.”

That is, unless those others happen to be in a consulate in Benghazi asking for luxuries like more security, then she has to draw the line there. Once attacked, she has to lie about what happened for the good of those she is helping.

She listed her resume experience, adding, “and then as Secretary of State, standing up for our country.” Oh, is that what she calls it? As we knew then and know now, she was standing up for herself, to protect herself. Which means like setting up her own private server in NY and deleting what she chose from the record. I’d call that standing up for our country, like she did for an ambassador and three American heroes in Benghazi. Then being accountable (lack thereof) in the aftermath.

“So when I look at where we are as a country, I’m just so absolutely convinced that there isn’t anybody anywhere who can out-compete us, who has better values, who can do more to provide more people the chance to live up to their God-given potential. But we can’t take that for granted, and so I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas, four big fights that I think we have to take on because there are those who don’t agree with what I think we should be doing. And they are pretty powerful forces.”

1-We need to build the economy of tomorrow not yesterday.

2-We need to strengthen families and communities because that’s where it all starts.

3-We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a Constitutional amendment.

4-And we need to protect our country from the threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon.

Fights, she calls them. Can you imagine the inner conflict going on in her head? Right, there is none, no conscience. The buzz word is always “fight”. From the woman who could not fight for those in a real fight in Benghazi, with their lives on the line for the country and her policies. But Democrats love to use the word fight all the time.

The only threats she is worried about are those which threaten her or the Clintons, i.e. emanating from the vast right-wing conspiracy — not the country. Iran, ISIS, Islamic terrorism, Boko Haram, or Russia… not so much.

Hillary’s campaign trail of lies, misspeaks, hypocrisy, double speak, double standards, evasion, and staged events. Void of the substance she claims to stand for.

RightRing | Bullright

Colorado Dems Shoot Down Three Gun Control Repeals

by Mississippi Rebel — H/T for the article
Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Democrats in Colorado successfully squashed a repeal of the state’s universal background check law and 15 cartridge magazine cap.

The House Committee on State, Veterans and Military Affairs voted to indefinitely postpone the two bills, which had previously passed the Republican-controlled Senate.

Senate Bill 86 and 175 were passed in the months after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut in 2012. The former bill would have removed expanded background check language applicable to private sales, while the latter would have repealed the state’s prohibition on the sale, transfer and possession of “large-capacity” magazines.

Colorado’s House Committee on State, Veterans and Military Affairs also indefinitely postponed House Bill 1169, which would have eliminated gun free zones around the state’s elementary, middle, junior high and high schools and allowed lawful concealed carry on public school grounds.

Republican Rep. Patrick Neville of Castle Rock, a survivor of the 1999 Columbine shooting, sponsored House Bill 1169.

“I remember fathers coming up to me whose sons I knew well, asking where they were,” Rep. Neville told the Colorado Independent. “People I’d known since elementary school are no longer with us today. I think some of the staff who were heroic in so many ways that day, if they’d had the ability to equip themselves, some of my friends might still be with us.”

H/T to Mississippi Rebel

Exclusive, breaking news…

President Clinton claims innocence

Distances himself from Hillary Clinton’s campaign roll out
April 15, 2015 — Vince McLure | The Raspberry Report [satire]

(New York) Former president Bill Clinton held a news conference in Manhattan on Wednesday. He took a few questions and told a packed room, pointing his finger, “I want you to listen to me,” he said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Hillary Clinton.” He added, “I never told her to lie, not a single time.”

The former, impeached president said this was the only comment he would make on the controversial subject. He cautioned reporters to “just look at the facts” first.

He stopped to respond to questions leaving the hall, “as far as that server thing,” he said, “and I never had anything to do with her… that’s all I know.”

 

Well, if you can’t take a little joke….

Basic concepts are not so basic anymore

You will have to bear with the background that some might find tiresome. But there is a matter of connecting basic ideas to be dealt with. We’ve come so far we sometimes sigh when we read old things or history. We prefer new material and words we can identify with. I can be an eye-roller as well. There is a problem with that thinking.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Stop right there; that’s enough. Everyone would recognize that as the Declaration of Independence. But maybe we need to refamiliarize ourselves with it occasionally. A philosophy based on truth not emotion — as is standard fare today. A good exercise is to repeat those words very slowly. That one line is packed and rich.

That is, of course, if you accept that there is truth, it means something and is relevant. Some people may not. Those important words of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness can be glossed over easily. We on the conservative side understand how important those words are. Not to say the Left doesn’t, but I question their perception and application.

Oh there is such a concept as self-evident, isn’t there? Some things can be reduced only so far. That line is down to almost the basic common denominators.

Now I mention all that to call attention to just one current-event example. Though it helps to see it through this lens. Life means something. Liberty and pursuit of happiness can be qualified by the respect for life.

This philosophy and the ideas were the foundation to the Constitution, yet the DOI also stands alone and did until the Constitution was written.

Now we see the Constitution and bill of rights in that context. Looking at the bill of rights, then, one can see how important those principles are.

Burying the lead

All that may seem like a heck of a wind up. The story is an illustration but any number of stories happening on a weekly basis would fit just as well. Known as hotbeds of activism, a college or University is where students are taking a stand. That alone seems like a noble thing. But what are they taking stands on? Sure campuses are incubators or pools of diverse opinion. Sometimes, but often they seem very monolithic.

Not so? Just look at some of the current trends of protests: BDS, same sex marriage, race activism, minimum wage, “social justice”, sex or abortion rights. And they are reactionary to current events. So that and political correctness, along with the academic and institutionalized hierarchy, is the backdrop. Plug in any number of issues like “controversial” speeches about Islamic terrorism — something which could affect numbers of students by the guns of radicalism aimed at them — or abortion rights they endorse.

What’s in a little harmless vandalism?

It happens again that the radically militant left has descended and stepped on someone’s first amendment speech. Well, I’m sure they don’t see it quite that way.

On a University campus in rural Pennsylvania — not like its Berkeley– students had a demonstration display permitted by the University. They had crosses symbolizing recent abortions.

According to the Students for Life website:

Original Story: (4/13):
For the second time in four years, the Clarion Students for Life Cemetery of the Innocents display, which consists of dozens of white crosses each representing 10 babies who were aborted that day, has been vandalized. Clarion University of Pennsylvania, a public university, is located in Clarion, PA, about an hour and a half from Pittsburgh.
Clarion Students for Life put up the crosses Sunday night around 7pm and by 8am this morning, the club’s leaders were notified that the display had been vandalized – a few crosses were written on, others were broken, and others stuffed into the nearest trashcan.
The vandals wrote on some crosses:
“would you support if this life was gay?”
“would you support if this life were trans?”
“This was a reprehensible act of discrimination against Students for Life,” said senior Todd Garrett, Vice President of Clarion Students for Life. “It was an attack on our freedom of speech. I find it quite ridiculous that this is the second time since 2011 that our crosses have been desecrated.”
[…/]
“Instead of dialogue, abortion supporters have once again taken to bullying to silence those with whom they disagree,” said Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of America. “Perhaps if the vandals had sought this dialogue with Clarion Students for Life they would have learned that pro-life students support the right of every human person to be a person, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation. ”
Read more at: http://studentsforlife.org/clarion-students-for-life-crosses-display-vandalized/

As a matter of fact, the one individual that did confess to it had an explanation:

“She stated that the crosses had been written on before she was there. [That she] was offended by the display and thought that it was most likely from a group not associated with the University. She placed them into trash cans because she thought that she was doing the maintenance people a favor.”

So the diligently conscientious student was doing some house cleaning and helping out the maintenance crew. Along the way she was cleaning up that 1st amendment mess, but just tidying up for the janitor. Yep, sounds innocent enough. Can’t have enough helpful students around the campuses. Someone give her an award. Not making a joke of it, I would not be surprised if she or they were praised for what they did.

The subject of life deserves a closer look. You have the first amendment, in this case expressing support for life, and then you have vandalism and others trying to stifle their speech. So you have battling sides or factions.(pro-life & pro-abortion) Some say that is as it should be. But they vandalized and sought to block or shutdown the students for life.

What is amazing is to look what each side stands for. (if you want to see it in sides) You have students clearly standing on the side of life. Then you have others standing on the side of, well, various interests whether that be gays, anti-religion/ati-Christian, or abortion and what they would term pro-choice.

Consider the philosophy behind those sides. The protection of life has been a fundamental concept. Now the pro-life purposes and motives are pretty clear or “self-evident.”

I’d like to examine the vandals and pro-abortion side. They hold demonstrations and rallies. I understand that. However, look at their driving motive and philosophy. What is self-evident is they stand on the side of abortion, killing babies. Okay, whatever term you want to use it is the same thing. Now a perfectly acceptable, some believe righteous, thing to do is advocate for abortions. They stand up for ending the life of one or the 55 million ended since Roe Wade.

It is now a cause to rally support for abortion rights. And with their advocacy of defending that “right” comes the use of their 1st amendment rights. (their zealous advocacy goes beyond that) So they employ their entire first amendment rights to defend abortion. They vote and petition government the same way in support of abortion.

Is this an issue to spend one’s valuable God-given, not government created, rights on? It is to them. How much satisfaction and value is in abortion rights?

Is that advocacy the exact opposite of the premises in the Declaration? It is also in conflict with the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was itself considered by some to be controversial because they recognized that stating said rights could constitute government restrictions on them. Imagine that? And the Constitution was designed to limit government not its subjects. Some call that the chains of the Constitution.

Then let’s consider the freedom aspect. The freedoms enshrined in our system are now applied to ending innocent life. Yes, exercising one’s freedom in support of anything up to and including late term abortions as a sacred right protected by the Roe decision, as they see it. So we have the rights of freedoms and pursuit of happiness used to end life, or kill babies, not preserve it. Is that a perversion of the very rights they they are exercising?

What if a doctor consistently used his knowledge, ability and freedom to end life not preserve it? Could someone bind that up into a theme called social justice? Is their advocacy for those perversions as strong as for protecting life? Then they endorse that advocacy directly by terminology. They say they are protecting a woman’s right to choose. They call abortion reproductive healthcare. They call it “settled law” or the “law of the land,” or “basic reproductive rights”. What is basic about it?

The next time one of these all too common stories pops up, I hope people see it that way. But I fear the opposite instead. They have trained generations of people to see it in the post Roe light. They tell us you cannot restrict a woman’s right. They made it a part of every nomination for office, “do you accept a woman’s right to choose?” They have made Supreme Court nominees swear on the altar of the Roe decision many believe was wrongly decided. It is not a “law” that they have built this apparatus around.

They made it a religious test that you must leave your conscience at the door. They force people to swear on the altar of protecting abortion “rights”. In so doing, they have built the foundation of said right on the very concept they are attacking.

Humans have evolved so far that they have developed a sacred “right” to kill off their offspring. They have constructed a philosophy that life begins at conception of choice.

RightRing | Bullright

All aboard the Scooby Express

Including and especially the fawning mainstream media.

In NRO, Johnah Goldberg has captured a moment in time, the first day on the campaign trail. (well, I mean the first day on the official campaign trail)

“We’ve never seen [Hillary] get a burrito before,” remarks Mark Halprin.

Nothing surpasses the electric excitement of eating a burrito. Let’s be real, they won’t be so giddy a while after she consumed said burrito. It might bring tears to their eyes.

But this was the patented mentality of the swooning Left in covering Obama, too. Watch him eat an ice cream cone; watch as he assails the bowling alley with a gutter ball. Tune in as Obama visits a sandwich shop. Oh, the memories of which leave me nauseous.

Pay attention as the media does what they do best: weave her into an attractive, likeable, if playful, favorite candidate. Naturally, substance is not even on the menu. It can’t be. It’s all eye candy making a sow into a silk purse. A well-known sow but sow nonetheless.

To borrow the standard phrase of late night TV host Tom Snyder in his program:

“Fire up a colortini, sit back, relax, and watch the pictures, now, as they fly through the air.”

“I’m doing something too… I’m running for president,” says Hillary. And away we go!

See Jonah’s column here.

Mark Levin discussing our current condition

Listen to Mark Levin radio podcast 4/9/15 — click here

We’re witnessing the complete evisceration of American citizenship and the destruction of the American identity through waves of illegal immigration and open borders.

A few highlights:

    A silent coup, Rome is burning. California. A 200 trillion-dollar debt.

    We’re not assimilating people who come to this country… people who come to this country are assimilating us.

    What about Americans?

    Feel the pain of our enemies, treat our allies with contempt.
    It’s not a doctrine, it’s insanity.

Mark Levin Show podcasts.

Along comes Hillary Clinton to tell us “everyday Americans” need a champion. But who are everyday Americans? The slave state needs a champion.

So the little fascist Leftists chant their cute meme, “this is what Democracy looks like!”
But this is what tyranny looks like.

And the Show must go on

Hillary is cranking up the campaign presses but this is her theme in announcing her run.

Hillary campaign

Oh yes, she has decided we need a champion, and she has decided she will be that champion. Oh that smell, I can never get used to it — and hope I don’t.

Americans needed a champion in 2012, to get to the bottom of Benghazi which still hasn’t happened. “Everyday Americans” needed an investigation and explanation of what happened. They got lies about a video and protest in return. Hillary said “what difference at this point does it make anyway?” Champion?

They needed a champion to take on the IRS and the scandal it has become, to stop it from targeting private citizens out of political motives. They needed a champion to stop the usurpation and executive abuse of Obama’s assault on America with his pen and phone. They needed a real Dep of Justice — not a Just-Us department.

They needed a champion to stop the unconstitutional amnesty programs, to force government to enforce the law. They needed a champion to enforce our borders. Anyone? But government told them their perception was the problem.

“We the people” needed a champion to protect us from Obamacare: the creation, the law, the roll out, continued executive fiat, and the damage it is causing. We needed a champion to prevent government abuse of our tax dollars on boondoggles that lost our money.

In short, they need a champion and advocate to protect them from the Federal Leviathan, not someone promising more of the same.

They needed a champion on their side standing up to the tyrant in the White House, and out of control administration with a justice department corrupted from within. They were treated to one scandal after another but told there were no scandals, and that there was not a smidgeon of corruption in the IRS.

What Americans needed and wanted they never got. Americans wanted the ear of their government and got lectures instead. We were told “you didn’t build that”. Obama said we were angry and cling to guns and religion, holding antipathy toward others. We got lectured and called racists. We were told we just didn’t understand Obamacare etc. Middle class Americans and everyone else were lied to, repeatedly. Then they were mocked.

Finally, we got lectured about the Crusades when our national security was threatened, as Americans and Christians were slaughtered in the name of Islamic terrorism. We got an administration refusing to state the objective of Islamic terrorism.

What Americans needed was economic stability but what they got was an assault on the economy and a war on energy, sponsored by their own government.

She tells us what “everyday Americans” really need is a champion. Thanks. Government taking its boot off the throat of the economy and ending its assault on us would help.

So Hillary will stand up for middle-class Americans … from the back of her limousine.

PS: Americans don’t need a champion, they need government to stop its abuse.

Deniers’ delight: a rare inside GW/CC look

From inside the beltway and inside the global warming, climate change movement is a glimpse of the organizers. See Real Science piece here. But here are a couple videos.

Aptly named “Merchants of Smear,” first video here conveys the message:
It really comes down again to the hearts….it comes down to who we think we are.

In part 2 they discuss the movement and target, smear their opposition.

See: “There is a very well funded disinformation campaign”

What a picture of their activism in action. Sometimes these leftists are their worst advertisers. Note the extreme projection and hypocrisy going on there.

“Eventually we’re going to turn the corner,” they say. Turn what corner, total control? Note all the religious overtones. There’s a prime inside look. Being Michael Mann is elevated to sort of a god, I’m surprised he is making any personal appearances.

Big H/T to Steve Goddard for the efforts.

Hillary, despite the truth

A Quinnipiac poll “shows that voters no longer consider her “honest and trustworthy.””

On the face that sounds horrible for the first-Heiress of the White House. However, could they somehow spin that into filet mignon? Not really, but they probably don’t have to.

On the contrary, that is exactly how Democrats like their candidates. In fact, it just qualifies her as the right nominee. That sounds like exactly the reason Democrats will vote for her. It might even guarantee she wins, in their eyes. So it’s terrific news.

Let’s recap the typical Democrat voter, on the major issues — we call them scandals — of the day. They see the news but its how they think that counts.

Benghazi — Dems said that it was a “fabricated scandal” by Republicans. They said voters would not care and, come 2016, it would not make any difference to voters.

Email servergate — they said it was certainly no scandal and that it would not make a bit of difference to Democrat voters, who already like and believe in her.

Hillary’s lack of a record (even the ones she didn’t hide) — they said that would not make any difference to voters.

Clinton Foundation and Hillary — read my lips, everybody now, Democrats will not care about that stuff. It won’t matter to voters.

See a trend yet? To punctuate it, top Clinton operative Paul Begala put it in layman’s terms for us, just in case we missed the drumbeat-message. (enjoy)

“Voters do not give a shit. They do not even give a fart… Find me one persuadable voter who agrees with HRC on the issues but will vote against her because she has a non-archival-compliant email system and I’ll kiss your ass in Macy’s window and say it smells like roses.”

So go suck on an exhaust pipe, she’s a shoe-in. Run her up the flagpole. Voters don’t care.

Now, people don’t think she is trustworthy. So you can correctly assume it will not make a bit of difference to voters. Actually, with Dems a negative is more often a positive.

How many ways can they say “we don’t care,” even if she’s not “honest or trustworthy”?

“Hard Choices”…. I think not.

Boehner is actually surprised

Who’d have thunk…but he shouldn’t be shocked.

To the latest utterance from Boehner that he is surprised by “‘the boldness of the Iranians’ in exerting their influence”, Alan Keyes takes him to task on his ignorance.

Willfully or not, John Boehner studiously ignored the background and implications of Obama’s coherent, consistent “foreign policy”. (I hedge that phrase to suggest its use in a different sense, one that refers to policies dictated by goals and allegiances foreign to America’s principles and hostile to our material and moral good.) Sadly, I am not surprised to find that Mr. Boehner’s belated recognition of “the boldness of the Iranians” is not accompanied by an honest acknowledgment of the boldness of Obama’s treasonous betrayals of the constitutional self-government of the American people. — Dr Alan Keyes

Read more at http://barbwire.com/2015/04/08/1000-boehners-surprise-is-just-incredible/

It is worth a read, though it is no surprise Keyes has been calling for an impeachment-of-last-resort for Obama. Of course the current realities and laws of probability of that happening, or Boehner bringing it up in his quest for normalcy, are at about zero. The main reason being it is not politically palatable. But I wonder how politically palatable it is to be surprised by Iran’s bold actions or statements? (see Casablanca) Is Boehner living in some alternative reality?

In the event of impeachment, all the dastardly deeds of Obama and his administration would spill out and flood the public conscience. Boehner can’t have that. In his brain, it would not be good for politics either. So basically whatever Obama cares to do, and whatever he brings upon the country, he knows he has carte blanche for whatever he wants. The wicked irony is that all options are on the table in Obama’s scheming world. But Boehner must accept some accountability for those results.

Please note: impeachment has been taken off the table due to lack of public demand.