GBTV - Where the Truth Lives

Election Season 2014

And it has brought us to this trainwreck called ObamaCare and we have bankrupted our kids and grandkids!

We are now headed into the 2014 Election Season and common sense and conservatism are on the rise. Please stand-up and be counted!

Reading Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election is a great place to start!

The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).

The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....

T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE

Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

SIGN THE PETITION TODAY...

Friday, March 9, 2012

She·PAC Calls on Bill Burton and the Obama Super PAC to Denounce Misogynist Bill Maher

MEDIA ADVISORY  -  March 7, 2012

As recently as March 1st Bill Burton, co-founder of Priorities USA Action SuperPAC, was promoting the views of a donor who referred to women in violent, hateful and derogatory ways. Today, we call on Mr. Burton to follow President Obama's lead and reject this language and messenger. Please see full text of the letter below.

Also, please help us spread the word about Obama’s million-dollar misogynist donor and share will all your friends:

Video:  Bill Maher: Obama's Million Dollar Man

Dear Mr. Burton:

Having watched President Obama’s press conference yesterday afternoon we find ourselves in agreement with him regarding the inflammatory issues that have arisen in the media. We are sure we can all agree we have arrived at what the President might call a "teachable moment".

We were pleased to see Rush Limbaugh apologize for his incredibly unkind and insensitive remarks towards women during his recent radio broadcast. These types of remarks towards women have no place in public discourse – they are wrong, and offensive.

It was an important gesture that President Obama approved the time in his schedule to place a call to the woman to whom the offensive remarks were directed. As parents of daughters ourselves, we were proud when we heard him say he took a personal stand on this issue with the hopes of always allowing his daughters the ability to have their own beliefs in the future. President Obama said, "One of the things I want them to do as they get older is to engage in issues they care about, even ones I may not agree with them on."

President Obama has categorically condemned this sort of language against any woman. We are calling on you today to put the President's words to action by condemning the equally egregious and despicable behavior of HBO talk show host Bill Maher. Mr. Maher has a history of attacking women and recently attacked a host of women including a specifically violent attack at one woman who regularly, as the President says, “engages in the issues she cares about” and is a mother of three daughters and grandmother.

Mr. Maher, who disagrees with Sarah Palin's politics, has called her a litany of adjectives inappropriate to repeat in any setting and are of the most derogatory of terms reserved for only violent verbal hate crimes against women. We understand that he has donated $1 million dollars of his personal money paid to him through various businesses that thrive on the ratings of his hate speech to your Priorities USA Action to aid in your efforts to re-elect President Obama.

President Obama eloquently stated today in his press conference that, "all decent folks can agree that the remarks that were made don't have any place in the public discourse.”

We are certain you agree with him, as do we that these types of remarks have no place in our society and the people that unapologetically make them must not be allowed to purchase a seat at the table of public discourse. Therefore, we are calling on Priorities USA Action and you to live up to the standard set by President Obama and take Mr. Maher’s million dollars and pay it forward.

Prove to American’s that your group is run by “decent folks” that President Obama speaks of. Donate this money to a charity of your choosing that focuses on supporting abused women and children.

We look forward to your action and joining with the President in ending hate speech against women.

Respectfully,

Teri Christoph, Co-Chair of ShePAC
Suzanne Haik Terrell, Co-Chair of ShePAC
Tim Crawford, Treasurer of ShePAC

We know conservative women will fight to change America.

She-PAC is here to fight for them.

Join us in that fight.

donate

Go to SHE-pac:  http://shepac.com/

Related:

Malkin: New video - ShePAC strikes back at misogynist Bill Maher

Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist

Fluke Spin

Who Is Derrick Bell? Why Did Team Obama Try to Hide Him?

The Racist Ravings of Derrick Bell

By now, you may already have seen the 1991 video footage of Barack Obama, who was then a 30-year-old student at Harvard Law School, speaking in glowing terms about Harvard professor Derrick Bell, whom Obama described as a man known for “speaking the truth” and for an “excellence of … scholarship” that had not only “opened up new vistas and new horizons,” but had “changed the standards [of what] legal writing is about.” “Open up your hearts and your minds to the words of Professor Derrick Bell,” Obama urged the sizable crowd which had gathered to show their support for Professor Bell that day.

Since the release of the video, Obama’s backers have been quick to dismiss it as nothing more than a young scholar’s affectionate tribute to a liberal academic icon who not only made major intellectual contributions to his profession, but who also was a leading champion of racial “diversity” in higher education. For instance, CNN host Soledad O’Brien, when interviewing Breitbart.com’s editor-in-chief Joel Pollak yesterday about the significance of the video, described Bell benignly as “the first tenured African American professor of law at Harvard University,” and characterized the gathering merely as “a rally in support of racial equality among the faculty at Harvard Law School.” O’Brien then asked her guest, with apparent bewilderment, “What part of that was the bombshell? Because I missed it. I don’t get it. What was a bombshell?”

In a similar spirit of willful blindness, Media Matters describes Derrick Bell as “a respected academic” and “an influential figure in the Civil Rights movement.” This portrayal is reminiscent of Barack Obama’s pathetic characterization, a few years back, of Bill Ayers as “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” But just as the reality of Bill Ayers was far more interesting than Obama indicated at that time, the truth about Derrick Bell is likewise far more compelling than the pablum the left has provided in the wake of this latest video. For you see, by the time Barack Obama was delivering his glowing remarks about Derrick Bell in 1991, the professor had already established—and would continue to cultivate for another two decades—a reputation as someone who thoroughly, resolutely detested the United States and who viewed the nation’s institutions and its people as irremediably racist. In short, until his death last October at the age of 80, Bell was secular academia’s version of Jeremiah Wright—a raging, fulminating racist without the clergyman’s robe. And something about his philosophy resonated strongly with Barack Obama.

Derrick Bell is best known as the founding father of Critical Race Theory, an academic discipline which maintains that society is divided along racial lines into (white) oppressors and (black) victims, similar to the way Marxism frames the oppressor/victim dichotomy along class lines. Critical Race Theory contends that America is permanently racist to its core, and that consequently its legal structures are, by definition, racist and invalid. A logical derivative of this premise, according to Critical Race Theory, is that the members of “oppressed” racial groups are entitled—in fact obligated—to determine for themselves which laws and traditions have merit and are worth observing. Such a perspective’s implications for the ability of civil society to function at all, are nothing short of monumental.

Read  more HERE on Derrick Bell: Barack Obama’s First Jeremiah Wright

Below Bell  is saying that our society may not be able to exist without racism and that white people feel entitled because they are white.  Obama got the academic version of Jeremiah Wright before he was fed the theological version.

Obama’s Derrick Bell Believes White People Have A Sense Of Entitlement (Video)

Video: Thomas Sowell on Derrick Bell

Derrick A. Bell Visited the White House Twice in 2010

by: Lachlan Markay

Visitor logs show that Derrick A. Bell visited the White House twice since President Obama took office. The logs show two visits by an individual of that name on January 29 and 31, 2010.

Derrick Albert Bell, the late Harvard professor and controversial scholar in the field of Critical Race Theory has been thrust into national headlines after conservative bloggers at Breitbart.com posted video of Obama lauding his work at a 1991 rally at Harvard.

Read more at Heritage.org

White House: No Comment on Derrick A. Bell's 2010 Visits

by Dan Riehl – Breitbart.com

Via Lachlan Markay at Heritage, we learn a Derrick A. Bell visited the Obama White House twice in 2010. The White House did not return a request for comment. The visits were on 1/29/2010, a Friday and 1/31/2010, a Sunday. For now, a web search of news reports did not turn up why Bell may have been in Washington that particular weekend.

Heritage could not independently confirm that the Derrick A. Bell listed is the same individual who spoke at the rally. The White House did not return a request for comment.

In the video, Obama tells the crowd to “Open your hearts and open your minds to the words of professor Derrick Bell.” Those words tended to be quite controversial. Bell is widely credited with pioneering the field of Critical Race Theory, a radical school of legal thought that holds that the American legal and political systems are inherently racist.

OBAMA: “Open up your hearts and your minds” to racialist prof…

But remember the beer summit and another professor… Professor and Historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr.?

Gates says Obama’s racism and radicalism just might not be Professor Bell’s fault, but rather the fault of Obama’s anti-colonialist father Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. I would say that it is a combination… Obama’s radical progressive views, his internal rage as well as his racism come from a combination of his father, Obama Sr.; his grandparents, who attended the Little Red Church where they also took Obama’s mother, were Communists; his youthful mentor Frank Marshall Davis; his college professors including Professor Bell and his pastor of 20-years Jeremiah Wright… plus everyone they connected him to. Take that cast of characters and add the indoctrination of Saul Alinsky (the Alinsky Method) and Cloward and Piven plus the puppet-master George Soros and his The Shadow Party allies and you can ask yourself, “How could Obama not be The Manchurian President?”… chosen, programmed and placed into the most powerful office in the world for just this moment in time (when America had fallen asleep, the media was controlled so no longer connected the dots and the globalists, with their tentacles in groups like the CFR were ready to make their move), still surrounded by all the same radicals or their children which includes Timothy Geithner and the ever elusive Valerie Jarrett (both have parental and childhood ties to Obama and his family and people now in Obama’s inner circle in the White House). And then there are all the unknowns.

But hold unto your hats… just when you think it can’t become anymore incestuous…

Derrick Bell article edited by Elena Kagan in college says the U.S. Constitution is the “original sin”

elena-kagan-scotus_0So not only is Elena Kagan a conflict of interest in the ObamaCARE SCOTUS case, because she was Solicitor General for Obama while the bill was being past, but she also edited an article by Derrick Bell while at Harvard that makes clear that Critical Race Theory sees the U.S. Constitution as a form of “original sin.” So not only is Kagan a conflict of interest in maybe the most important case ever to hit the Supreme Court, she is also anti-constitution that she is supposed to uphold and defend as SCOTUS judge. Great. From Breitbart:

In November 1985, the Harvard Law Review published an article by Derrick Bell that was a “classic” in the development of Critical Race Theory. The article was edited by then-student Elena Kagan, and was cited by Prof. Charles Ogletree in support of her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in 2010. The article makes clear that Critical Race Theory sees the U.S. Constitution as a form of “original sin”–a view later embraced by Obama as a state legislator, and reflected in his actions and appointments. The following is an excerpt from the non-fiction portion of the article; much of what follows is a fictional story that Bell intended as a parable of racial “fantasy.” (99 Harv. L. Rev. 4) - fireandreamitchell ^

h/t to MJ and AJ

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist

Van Susteren Blasts President for Keeping $1 Million From ‘Serial Pig’ Bill Maher: ‘Is That the Obama Price Tag for Decency?’

Van Susteren Blasts President for Keeping $1 Million From ‘Serial Pig’ Bill Maher: ‘Is That the Obama Price Tag for Decency?’
Do you wonder if the Obama campaign is laughing with Bill Maher? Or worse…laughing at Americans?

Outspoken On The Record host Greta Van Susteren blasted President Obama, along with his senior campaign strategist David Axelrod, for what she sees as the clear double standard relating to Bill Maher‘s history of misogynistic comments and Rush Limbaugh’s remarks about Georgetown agitator Sandra Fluke.

On her blog Thursday, Greta lampooned the president for “looking the other way” and keeping Maher’s $1 million contribution to the Obama Super PAC. She asked if that was the president’s “price tag for decency.”

She also tore into Axelrod’s slated appearance on Bill Maher’s Real Time – directly after he criticized Mitt Romney for not condemning (to his degree of satisfaction) Limbaugh.

From Greta Wire:

Is everyone for sale? At least Ed Schultz and Rush Limbaugh apologized (which I think appropriate) for their boorish behavior and their boorish behavior is nothing like Bill Maher! Maher is a serial pig. And Maher, to get cover for continuous vile behavior, gives a million dollars to the Obama super Pac so that the President looks the other way and the President does. Go figure! Is that the Obama price tag for decency? Give a million and you can be as nasty to women as you want? How does President Obama – who dragged his daughters into this, I did not – handle this with his daughters when Maher is the quintessential woman degrader? The C word to women – Maher’s apparent favorite – is as vile as it gets. Do you wonder if the Obama campaign is laughing with Bill Maher? Or worse…laughing at Americans?

Greta adds a “PS” in which she says Maher “can’t hide behind, ‘I am comedian.’”

“Being a comedian is not license to be a bigot or degrade women. Seinfeld is more successful and never degrading,” she concluded.

Needless to say, many will cheer Greta’s candor in exposing the hypocrisy of the left, and in this particular instance, the administration.

(h/t Mediaite)

Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist

Rush Limbaugh apologized on Saturday for calling a Georgetown Law student a slut for testifying about contraception and starting a firestorm of outrage. Kirsten Powers says the liberals who led the charge need to start holding their own side accountable.

Did you know there is a war on women?

Kirsten-Powers-270x173Yes, it’s true. Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Matt Taibbi, and Ed Schultz have been waging it for years with their misogynist outbursts. There have been boycotts by people on the left who are outraged that these guys still have jobs. Oh, wait. Sorry, that never happened.

Boycotts are reserved for people on the right like Rush Limbaugh, who finally apologized Saturday for calling a 30-year-old Georgetown Law student, Sandra Fluke, a “slut” after she testified before congress about contraception. Limbaugh’s apology was likely extracted to stop the departure of any more advertisers, who were rightly under pressure from liberal groups outraged by the comments.

Let it be shouted from the rooftops that Rush Limbaugh should not have called Ms. Fluke a slut or, as he added later, a “prostitute” who should post her sex tapes. It’s unlikely that his apology will assuage the people on a warpath for his scalp, and after all, why should it? He spent days attacking a woman as a slut and prostitute and refused to relent. Now because he doesn’t want to lose advertisers, he apologizes. What’s in order is something more like groveling—and of course a phone call to Ms. Fluke—if you ask me.

But if Limbaugh’s actions demand a boycott—and they do—then what about the army of swine on the left?

During the 2008 election Ed Schultz said on his radio show that Sarah Palin set off a “bimbo alert.” He called Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.” (He later apologized.) He once even took to his blog to call yours truly a “bimbo” for the offense of quoting him accurately in a New York Post column.

Keith Olbermann has said that conservative commentator S.E. Cupp should have been aborted by her parents, apparently because he finds her having opinions offensive. He called Michelle Malkin a “mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick.” He found it newsworthy to discuss Carrie Prejean’s breasts on his MSNBC show. His solution for dealing with Hillary Clinton, who he thought should drop out of the presidential race, was to find “somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.” Olbermann now works for über-leftist and former Democratic vice president Al Gore at Current TV.

The grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher.

Left-wing darling Matt Taibbi wrote on his blog in 2009, “When I read [Malkin’s] stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of balls in her mouth.” In a Rolling Stone article about Secretary of State Clinton, he referred to her “flabby arms.” When feminist writer Erica Jong criticized him for it, he responded by referring to Jong as an “800-year old sex novelist.” (Jong is almost 70, which apparently makes her an irrelevant human being.) In Taibbi’s profile of Congresswoman and presidential candidate Michele Bachmann he labeled her “batshit crazy.” (Oh, those “crazy” women with their hormones and all.)

Interactive: 150 Fearless Women

witw-1200-800-tease

Chris Matthews’s sickening misogyny was made famous in 2008, when he obsessively tore down Hillary Clinton for standing between Barack Obama and the presidency, something that Matthews could not abide. Over the years he has referred to the former first lady, senator and presidential candidate and current secretary of state as a “she-devil,” “Nurse Ratched,” and “Madame Defarge.” Matthews has also also called Clinton  “witchy,” “anti-male,” and “uppity” and once claimed she won her Senate seat only because her “husband messed around.” He asked a guest if “being surrounded by women” makes “a case for commander in chief—or does it make a case against it?” At some point Matthews was shamed into sort of half apologizing to Clinton, but then just picked up again with his sexist ramblings.

Matthews has wondered aloud whether Sarah Palin is even “capable of thinking” and has called Bachmann a “balloon head” and said she was “lucky we still don’t have literacy tests out there.” Democratic strategist Jehmu Greene, who is the former president of the Women’s Media Center, told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly in 2011 that Matthews “is a bully, and his favorite target is women.” So why does he still have a show? What if his favorite target was Jews? Or African-Americans?

But the grand pooh-bah of media misogyny is without a doubt Bill Maher—who also happens to be a favorite of liberals—who has given $1 million to President Obama’s super PAC. Maher has called Palin a “dumb twat” and dropped the C-word in describing the former Alaska governor. He called Palin and Congresswoman Bachmann “boobs” and “two bimbos.” He said of the former vice-presidential candidate, “She is not a mean girl. She is a crazy girl with mean ideas.” He recently made a joke about Rick Santorum’s wife using a vibrator. Imagine now the same joke during the 2008 primary with Michelle Obama’s name in it, and tell me that he would still have a job. Maher said of a woman who was harassed while breast-feeding at an Applebee’s, “Don't show me your tits!” as though a woman feeding her child is trying to flash Maher. (Here’s a way to solve his problem: don’t stare at a strangers’ breasts). Then, his coup de grâce: “And by the way, there is a place where breasts and food do go together. It’s called Hooters!”

Liberals—you know, the people who say they “fight for women”—comprise Maher’s audience, and a parade of high-profile liberals make up his guest list. Yet have any of them confronted him? Nope. That was left to Ann Coulter, who actually called Maher a misogynist to his face, an opportunity that feminist icon Gloria Steinem failed to take when she appeared on his show in 2011.

This is not to suggest that liberals—or feminists—never complain about misogyny. Many feminist blogs now document attacks on women on the left and the right, including Jezebel, Shakesville, and the Women’s Media Center (which was cofounded by Steinem). But when it comes to high-profile campaigns to hold these men accountable—such as that waged against Limbaugh—the real fury seems reserved only for conservatives, while the men on the left get a wink and a nod as long as they are carrying water for the liberal cause.

After all, if Limbaugh’s outburst is part of the “war on women,” then what is the routine misogyny of liberal media men?

It’s time for some equal-opportunity accountability. Without it, the fight against media misogyny will continue to be perceived as a proxy war for the Democratic Party, not a fight for fair treatment of women in the public square.

by Kirsten Powers – Originally Posted: Mar 4, 2012 10:00 AM EST – The Daily Beast

Read Power’s full piece:  Kirsten Powers Tells Megyn Kelly ‘Liberal Men Are Allowed to Be Misogynist, Apparently’

And to make this all ever more unbelievable is that has come to light that Sandra Fluke was absolutely a plant by the left with connections and direction from as high as the White House… through former WH Marxist operative Anita Dunn.

Related:  Fluke Spin

Panetta: ‘International Permission’ Trumps Congressional Permission For Military Actions

Frightening… Secretary of Defense  Leon Panetta tells Congress that they will get International, UN and global permission to defend the nation and its allies… and then will go to Congress and ‘tell them’ what they are doing… Hello?!? 100% unconstitutional and anti-American.  Wake-up people… they are telling you that they are moving us toward and Global New World Order and away from sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution.

If you understand what this means and love your country and your freedom… you must vote in November 2012 and you must vote against the present administration or our life as we know will perish… and that is not an exaggeration!

Panetta: ‘International Permission’ Trumps Congressional Permission For Military

Video: Obama Admin Cites 'Int'l Permission,' Not Congress, As 'Legal Basis' For Action In Syria

Related:

He said what?!? Panetta & international permission

Sovereignty, schmovereignty! Defense Secretary Leon Panetta showed just how ridiculous the foreign policy of this administration is. He admitted he will seek international permission before congressional approval on matters of foreign military affairs. Fits right in with Barack’s lean-forward foreign policy. Glenn Beck had the audio and reaction on radio yesterday.

Breitbart TV Video: Panetta: 'International Permission’ Trumps Congressional Permission For Military Actions

Watcher’s Council Nominations – Stained With Sadness Edition

This video is a chronicle of other mysterious deaths. Worth a watch!!

Video: Andrew Breitbart Just Another Weird Death

This week’s Watcher’s Council nominations:

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere, and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council.Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday.

This week’s contest is dedicated to Andrew Breitbart. And for those of you so inclined, IOwnTheWorld has the tee shirts as pictured above for sale, with all profits going to Andrew’s widow Susie and their four young children.  Also be sure to check out Andrew’s final book: Righteous Indignation

Council News:

This week, The Grouch, Right Truth, and Capitalist Preservation took advantage of my generous offer of link whorage and earned honorable mention status.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

Simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address ( which won’t be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category, and return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week.

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members. while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let’s see what we have this week….

Council Submissions
Honorable Mentions
Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don’t forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that!

JoshuaPundit on Mar 07 2012

Breitbart Lore, Speculation and Tributes

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

A Tale of Two Republican Parties

There are two Republican parties. One is fairly liberal, it is hostile to the left but it also believes in stealing their thunder by adopting moderate versions of their policies.

This Republican Party is strongly pro-business, but it believes that to succeed in a global economy the government must provide subsidies to businesses and individuals. It believes that immigration reform is needed, though its chosen candidates know to avoid using the word amnesty. It believes that national health care is inevitable and that the only way to avoid a government solution is through the individual mandate.

It is loosely conservative, but disinterested in social issues. It thinks that the left has gone too far in upending traditional values, but has no interested in combating it and finds those who do embarrassing . It adapts to changing mores with an uneasy smile and tries to pretend that it was with it all along. It has no strong religious feelings and it believes that all religions, including Islam, are basically the same.

It is strong on national defense spending, but mainly to maintain stability and national influence, not because it believes that we face any real threats. It believes that America has a responsibility to the rest of the world and that we are obligated to give back through the United Nations and other international organizations allowing us to spread our values of free enterprise and democracy to everyone.

It is a big believer in the American Dream of economic opportunity, but is unable to think of any other national virtues beyond that. It maintains a strongly Federalist legacy and while it agrees that the Federal government has overreached itself in interfering with the business of states, it has no real interest in rolling back its powers, only in making certain that they are used “wisely”.

The only area where it actively rolls back the left’s program is its deregulation of businesses, but even this is limited to spheres that are objectionable to specific industries which lobby for deregulation. Small businesses can expect much less help, unless they band together and forcefully make something into an issue.

It has no passion for anything beyond deregulating a few specific industries. It supports the right to bear arms, not because it passionately believes in it, but because the political costs of not doing so are too high. It opposes abortion for the same reason, though its opposition is mainly a formality. It believes that gay marriage is inevitable, but isn’t willing to pick a fight with its base over it.

Its leaders and members consider themselves rationalists and believe in Global Warming because “the science says so.” They sneer at those Republicans who deny what they think is the obvious. While they are skeptical of government solutions to Global Warming, they are prepared to accept an approach that does not cause too much harm to business and is routed through private companies.

It views what the Republican Party has become as an embarrassment and while it doles out red meat to the base when it has to, it despises them and constantly dreams of ways of getting rid of them. In its fondest daydreams, a graduated amnesty program for Mexican immigrants by a Republican president turns them all into legal citizens and Republican voters, allowing them to tell their guns n bibles base to kiss off.

It does not believe that Obama is bad, only inexperienced and misguided, but basically well-meaning and its lack of support for him is not due to a firm belief that his agenda is destructive, but to political calculations and the need to appease their base.

This Party is not particularly worried about the future of the United States except as a place to do business. And even then it will easily move operations offshore to Dubai or Singapore. Overall it is optimistic that things will go on as they have, with a gradual process of reform advanced by the left and moderated by the right in the political process resulting in a workable center.

Then there’s the other Republican Party. This party is deeply worried about the future of the country, and not just as a place to do business. It is socially conservative, strong on national defense because it believes that we do face real threats and enemies, it is opposed to amnesty and very skeptical of Federal power.

This party is more new than it is old, it’s a party that evolved in response to the transformation of the Democratic Party at the hands of the left. It is the base from which the Republican Party draws much of its support, particularly away from the Northeast, and it is struggling to force the party to match its deeds to its words.

It does not believe that most of the national debates are a tempest in a teacup that can be settled amicably behind closed doors. It is uninterested in bipartisan great compromisers, it seeks fighters who will stand up for its agenda. It is not interested in the progressive voyage to the national future that has been taken up by both parties, what it would like is independence from their reign of policy terror. It would like to roll back the progressive policymaking of both parties.

It is concerned for its ability to earn a living, for the values of its children and the basic freedoms that it can see being lost every day. It remembers a time when people had more freedom and less rules hanging over their heads. The tide of paperwork, the omnipresent regulatory state infuriate it and lead it to vote for people who claim to want Washington off their backs. But next year there are even more regulations and paperwork to deal with.

It is deeply worried about the Bill of Rights, its right to bear arms, its right to speak freely and to practice its beliefs without interference from the government. It is worried about them because it has already witnessed the dramatic erosion of its freedoms and it expects the process to continue.

It is unenthusiastic about deploying troops to maintain global hegemony or aid other nations, it is however vigorous about defending the country from enemy attack. Its members often have a tradition of military service and a skeptical view of how the politicians have used and abused the military for their own purposes.

Its skepticism of authority transcends government and extends to elites in science, academia and the entertainment industry. It recognizes the major gap between its values and theirs, and accordingly distrusts them. It is much less subject to being cowed by absolute truths presented by the elites and often seeks out alternative opinions.

What it wants most is independence from outside regulations that impinge on its way of life. It has little interest in positive rights and a defense of its rights by the government, what it would like is the ability to defend its own rights, to maintain a separation from the elites and its own property and family.

These two Republican parties have been on a collision course for some time now. The collision repeats itself in every election as it has throughout the 20th century. The Republican establishment has never really come to terms with its new core constituencies, the people resistant to the New Deal who were then joined by the people resistant to every other liberal big government innovation that came down the pike.

Between an establishment committed to moderate progressivism and a base that is unwilling to accept less freedoms and more regulation for their own good, is a massive divide. It is a cultural, economic, social and regional divide that needs to be talked about.

Too many establishment candidates have cakewalked into office by paying lip service to the concerns of the base without believing a word of it. Each time the process repeats itself, the collision becomes more explosive until something has to give.

Either the Republican establishment needs to step up to the plate and honestly repudiate its base or it needs to step aside and decide which it cares about more, deregulation or its version of the progressive agenda, because it cannot continue as a contradiction in terms without a meltdown. The current ugliness is a manifestation of that yawning gap between the two parties that cannot be bridged without an honest dialogue about the different values of those at the top and those at the bottom.

Daniel Greenfield by Daniel Greenfield on February 6th, 2012  -  This is article 39 of 42 in the topic Republican Party

Related:

Is It Time for Conservatives, Moderates, Independents and the GOP to Come Together?  Especially After Super Tuesday?

Media Blackout On Bill AB 2109 Threatening Vaccine Rights

On Feb. 23rd, 2012, an assembly bill (AB 2109) was submitted to the California Legislature by state assemblyman and pediatrician, Dr. Richard Pan (D-Sacramento), which will make it harder for parents to refuse to vaccinate their children.

The bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association (CMA), the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the California Immunization Coalition.

Right now in California if a child is enrolled in school their parents are legally required to have them vaccinated.

However, exemptions may be obtained by parents who object for religious or philosophical reasons if they sign the portion of the immunization record that says immunizations are contrary to their beliefs and that they understand that in the case of an outbreak of a ‘vaccine-preventable’ disease the child may be temporarily excluded from attending school/child care institutions “for his/her protection.”

If Bill AB 2109 passes, by July 1st, 2013,  parents who wish to opt out will be required to bring with them on the day of enrollment a written statement from a medical doctor or conventional “health care practitioner” that states they have been informed of the benefits and risks of vaccines and the communicable disease they are said to prevent.

The parent would also be required to submit a written statement that indicates that he or she received the information from the health care practitioner.

As first reported by Dr. Tim O’ Shea in the Feb. 23rd  Doctor Within Newsletter:

This bill, if passed, would require parents to obtain the signature of a  ”health care practitioner”  for a personal beliefs/religious exemption.  MDs, nurse practitioners, and physician’s assistants can sign.  Naturopaths and chiropractors cannot.  The signature will need to be obtained on a separate form provided by the Department of Public Health which states that the health care practitioner has provided risk and benefit information to the parent.

Thus far, there has been virtually no mainstream media coverage of Bill AB2109.

This is a curious fact, considering that if it passes it will be illegal not to submit your children to a medical procedure without the explicit permission of the conventional medical system.

Is this not the very antithesis of the meaning of health freedom, in a country that prides itself on its freedom-loving, Constitutionally underwritten principles? As Dr. Tim O’ Shea explains:

Let's remove the word vaccination from the whole discussion for a minute here. Let's pretend this whole issue isn't about vaccines at all, but rather about any other medical procedure. Got that picture?

OK so then tell me, what kind of political system, or medical system anywhere on earth would presume to make it a law for you to obtain permission to opt out of any medical procedure, which decisions are completely your choice in the first place? Permission not to get medicine? See what I'm getting at here?

If Dr. Tim O’ Shea’s predictions are correct and California falls, like Washington state recently did with the loss of their philosophical exemptions, the rest of the domino states are likely to follow suit in the next 2 years.

In other words, this stealthily submitted and barely noticed bill is setting a dangerous precedent and may represent the beginning of the end for philosophical and religious vaccine exemptions in the United States -- with mandatory vaccinations likely following close behind. Now that children, according to the CDC immunization guidelines, are required to have an increasingly suspect 60 vaccines by age 6 (with dozens of additional vaccines in the developmental pipeline) how can we stand by idly while their health and health rights, and those of all future generations, are being serious jeopardized and legislated away into oblivion?

Please help to spread the word about Bill AB 2109 now, before it is too late.

SOURCES:
ASSEMBLY BILL 2109 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_2101-2150/ab_2109_bill_20120223_introduced.pdf
Dr. Tim O’ Shea’s Feb. 23rd Newsletter
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/end-vaccine-exemptions-california

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Related:

Vaccination Rights Attorney Patricia Finn Threatened with Criminal Charges; New York State Demands She Surrender Names of All Clients

Popping the Vaccine Bubble  -  Many related links in this article

More Doctors ‘Fire’ Vaccine Refusers

Removing the Shackles… the Blindfolds and the Tape Before You Can’t… Or Welcome to Year Five In The Crazy House

I want to explain to everyone what is going on right now all across our planet. This is not going to be an easy task, as much of what I have to say is going to shatter beliefs and the preconceived notions of how our world works, on all levels, and the shock of it might be so profound that many will refuse to believe it. Before I start I want to say something to you all. I am putting this out here for you to read because it's my job to do so. It is the job of everyone who knows what is really going on around us, even if you know only small piece of the puzzle, to tell others and help them take their off their blindfolds. We have a responsibility to our friends and family and neighbors and even the grocer down the street, to help them understand. Even if they don't believe you, you've planted the seed in their minds, and when the massive changes happen, they will be better prepared to understand.

I've been posting articles daily to my friends about the arrests that are taking place and about the massive Banker resignations that are sweeping the world right now. I've been posting these things to sort of warm people up to the truth that's about to be disclosed to the world- a warm up so that when the announcements start to happen , people might not be quite so shocked by it all. As of yesterday there have been 116 banker resignations that we know of and about 90% of them have happened in the last two weeks. And believe me: none of these bankers have suddenly resigned because they have decided to find another job! This is one of the first major signs of what's about to happen.

The absolute first thing that I want to make clear to you is about the media. This is a vital point to understand because it's the basis of most of the problems that are going on right now. Our Mainstream Media (MSM) is NOT telling you the truth. About anything. For many years now, all the MSM has been bought up by 5 people- yes, almost 90% of the global mainstream media is owned by 5 people, (go ahead, look it up!), and they didn't buy it all up just as an investment. The MSM is tightly controlled and they report on only those stories that are allowed, and everything their controllers don't want the public to know is completely blacked out. The media is used to control us, to tell us what to think, to tell us how to feel, and most importantly to manipulate the population into doing what they want. The second most important thing to know is that the MSM is used for "debunking" any truths that do get out and to deny and make fun of any "conspiracy theories" when the truth does get out. When pieces of real facts and truths slip out into the public they immediately do everything in their power to make sure people don't believe it. This is a major propaganda campaign that has been running for decades. Pretty much every single major event in the last 50 years has been spun to make people believe the "official" story. The assignations of JFK and Martin Luther king, the wars in Viet Nam, the Gulf war(s), the cold war, .... there is not enough room here to give a complete list. Suffice to say, if it's labeled a "Conspiracy Theory" it's almost guaranteed to be true. (in future posts I will talk about several of these and explain the how and why).

The biggest "conspiracy theory" out there, one that they go to huge lengths to make fun of and to desperately try to debunk is the New World Order/Illuminatti/black hats/dark cabal theories. This is NOT a "theory". It is an absolute truth. Sadly people have been so brainwashed by the MSM that even when these powerful men (and women) openly talk about their "New World Order" people refuse to believe it is real. The media likes to scoff at people like Alex Jones (of infowars.com) and claim that these people are crack pots and delusional, what they don't tell you is that many of these groups have made more predictions that have come true, broken more major news stories, and dug up more information than any other "news" group on the planet. I'm not saying that they are all 100% correct- I don't completely agree with everything that Alex Jones says for example, but groups like his are reporting far more of the truth than anything in the MSM.

continue article at RemovingTheShackes.com:

clip_image002

2. Welcome to Year Five In The Crazy House - See Above

By Charles Hugh Smith

clip_image003

Excerpts:

Welcome to the Crazy House, a rotting McMansion ruled by power-drunk megalomaniacs suffering from delusions of invulnerability and god-like powers. Why are we here, you ask? Because the drunks who run the household make it so darned easy: just keep quiet, listen politely to their ravings, and you get subsidized meals, free rent, a houseful of techno-gadgetry and nonstop entertainment--and that's not even counting the amusement value of their delusional, sloppy-drunk ramblings out by the rust-stained pool.

It takes a while to habituate to the Crazy House; at first, all the artifice, illusions, delusions and lies are disorienting. The dysfunctional "family" that runs the place acts like the money is endless, as if borrowing money was the same as actually producing something of value.

Meanwhile, you hear whispers that everything's paid with credit, and some of the vendors are threatening to cut the mansion's credit. That would be curtains for the whole charade, of course, but the "leaders" pontificate about the magnificence of the rotting mansion as if still having credit was the same as having productive wealth.

Will we ever get sick enough of the lies to leave the security offered by the Crazy House? Probably not, because it's too easy to stay: the food is greasy and sugary but tasty, the rent is basically free, and there's plenty of meds, booze and drugs to fix whatever "healthcare" issues you might have. Of course none of the meds actually restores your health; they only treat the symptoms of ill-health and ruin.

The sad thing about living in the Crazy House for four years is how living a life of illusory security saps the will and perhaps even the ability to function in the real world. The grease-soaked sugar bomb food they serve has left everyone obese and malnourished, and all the electronic toys and entertainment has rendered them mentally and physically unfit and terminally distracted.

They know the reassurances of the "leaders" are false, and that beneath the surface, everything in the mansion is either squalid and falling apart or ripe with the rot of corruption and lies. But leaving opens a Pandora's Box of uncertainty and sacrifice; it's easier to stay and listen to the absurd claims of godhood and endless wealth, and phony exhortations of the mansion's mythical "can-do" spirit.

As long as the vendors keep letting the mansion's delusional megalomaniacs run up their credit tab, then it's easier to passively stay put than to face the challenges of truth and reality outside the rotting palace of illusion and lies.

clip_image004


clip_image002

3. The US Is Living On Borrowed Time

Dave Cohen


clip_image003[4]

4. Japan Is Now Another Spinning Plate In The Global Economy Circus

Chris Martenson


clip_image004[5]

5. “I’m Mad As Hell And I’m Not Going To Take This Anymore!”

D. Sherman Okst


clip_image005

6. Cause, Effect & The Fallacy Of A Return To Normalcy

Jim Quinn


clip_image009

7. European Banks Now Face Huge Margin Calls As ECB Collateral Crumbles

ZeroHedge


clip_image010

8. Atlas Doesn’t Shrug; Atlas Shrinks

Monty Pelerin


clip_image011

9. Fed Flying Blind

Axel G. Merk


clip_image012

10. Is China Just Another Debt Addict?

The Automatic Earth


clip_image013

11. The Mainstream Media Still Doesn’t Get The ECB Greek Debt Swap

Graham Summers


clip_image014

12. 'I Have Very Grave Reservations': Reader Response To US Situation’

Monty Pelerin


clip_image015

13. Greed & Corruption On Pennsylvania Avenue

Charles Kadlec


clip_image016

14. 9 Republican AG's Allege Obama Administration Violates Law 21 Times

Newsmax


clip_image017

15. Obama Mulls Giving Moscow Data On Missile Defense

Reuters


clip_image018

16. Governments Acting As Venture Capitalists

James Hall


clip_image019

17. The Pain Is Coming

Monty Pelerin


clip_image020

18. Stock Market No Place For Pros

Monty  Pelerin


Fair Use Notice: This email report  contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ROLLS REPORT clip_image001

Source:  Before It Is News – h/t to John Rolls

Breitbart Obama Video Set For Release on Hannity

FOXNEWS 'HANNITY' PLANS FULL AIRING OF TAPE: TONIGHT 9 PM ET...


BREITBART OBAMA VIDEO SET IS FOR RELEASE TONIGHT AT 9PM ET

Go to Drudge Report:  drudgereport.com/

THE VETTING: Ben Smith Releases ‘Selectively Edited’ Obama Race Video

Earlier today, Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith announced on Twitter that video researcher Andrew Kaczynski had released “the mysterious Harvard/Obama/race video that the Breitbart folks have been talking about.”

The video, which Kaczynski says was “licensed from a Boston television station,” shows a young Barack Obama leading a protest at Harvard Law School on behalf of Prof. Derrick Bell, a radical academic tied to Jeremiah Wright--about whom we will be releasing significant information in the coming hours.

However, the video has been selectively edited--either by the Boston television station or by Buzzfeed itself. Over the course of the day, Breitbart.com will be releasing additional footage that has been hidden by Obama's allies in the mainstream media and academia.

Breitbart.com Editor-in-Chief Joel Pollak and Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro will appear on The Sean Hannity Show to discuss the tape. The full tape will be released tonight on Fox News' Hannity.

ON –> BREITBART TV

Video:  The Vetting: Obama Embraces Racialist Harvard Prof

Related:

Breitbart's mystery tapes on Obama released

Video: Obama Protesting at Harvard in 1991 – Selectively Edited

Obama Ally Won’t Release Alinsky Tape

The Vetting, Part I: Barack’s Love Song To Alinsky

Breitbart’s Final Message to the Left

Dennis Miller on Breitbart: A Righteous… Consequential Man

Breitbart Lore, Speculation and Tributes

One Falls Along the Way… Goodbye Andrew Breitbart

Andrew Breitbart Just Another Weird Death

Andrew Breitbart Death Sparks Conspiracy Theories

GB: Obama’s Harvard Tapes – Sneak Peek

NOTE: In case you missed the news conference of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse,” you can view it here. Shocking Video: Andrew Breitbart’s Last Interview Was With Sheriff Joe Arpaio About Obama Eligibility, who gave a seminar about his probe of Obama’s birth certificate the same day Breitbart died.

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Obama Ally Won't Release Alinsky Tape

Sources inform Breitbart.com today that Pam Dickler, director of the 1998 production of The Love Song of Saul Alinsky in Chicago that included a panel discussion featuring then-State Sen. Barack Obama, has a video tape of the play.

And she won’t release it. 

Interesting in the light of Michael Savage’s encouragement in his article of a week ago: Was Breitbart Assassinated?, to get the tapes… any and all that Breitbart and his colleagues had or had access to out now. 

“I’ve got videos – this election we’re going to vet him,” Breitbart said at CPAC, promising they would show how “racial division and class warfare are central” to the “hope and change” that Obama”sold in 2008.”

“He threatened the president at CPAC with video that could derail the president’s campaign,” Savage said.

Savage said that if Breitbart’s colleagues have the videos, they should post them as soon as possible and make them viral “or they’ll never see the light of day.”

“There is only one archive tape of the play and I have it,” Dickler informed our source. “It is not in Chicago.”

Dickler told our source that she doesn’t believe she’s ever watched the tape, and she doesn’t know if it “can be viewed.” But she added: “No one is going to see the tape.”

She said she felt “very protective over it … due to all of the interest from conservatives recently.” She also told our source that the poster for the play was never supposed to be distributed.

Dickler added that there were no transcripts of the panel discussion.

“They didn’t know he was going to go on to become the president,” she said. “If they had known that, they would have of course kept any transcripts, but there were never any taken.”

Mainstream journalists have attempted to dismiss yesterday's column by Andrew Breitbart about the play by claiming that Obama had merely attended the production--a defense hinted at by Chicago Reader columnist Michael Miner's initial column.

However--as even Miner noted--Obama did not merely attend the play; he was featured on the poster and in the panel discussion that followed.

So, if the play’s so harmless, why are Obama’s allies hiding it? Why not release the video tape?

By Ben Shapiro

Related:

The Vetting, Part I: Barack’s Love Song To Alinsky

Breitbart’s Final Message to the Left

Dennis Miller on Breitbart:  A Righteous… Consequential Man

Breitbart Lore, Speculation and Tributes

One Falls Along the Way… Goodbye Andrew Breitbart

Andrew Breitbart Just Another Weird Death

Andrew Breitbart Death Sparks Conspiracy Theories