Archive | Stupid Liberal Tricks RSS feed for this section

Michelle Obama: “Let’s Lie” and Other Smart Parenting Techniques from the Left

Progressives using deceit and misinformation to manipulate people to achieve their intended goal is not new. It’s standard operating procedure. With the election of Barack Obama came the most radical administration in the history of the United States bringing lies, threats, and backroom deals to the forefront of American politics. 60’s radicals seized their opportunity to enact their leftist agenda, attacking any opponent who dared to speak out against their plans. But the American people held strong to their convictions and the left was forced to move toward soft tyranny, the slow nudge of leftist ideology insinuating itself into our lives. Through all of this the one thing we thought America would never see would be the day that its First Lady would advance an agenda that encourages parents to lie and trick their children.

As part of Let’s Move, Michelle Obama’s nationwide crusade to reduce obesity, the First Lady sponsored a multitude of efforts that violate personal liberties, eliminate free choice and personal responsibility, and enable the federal government to intrude into the lives of private citizens. She campaigned to eliminate food desserts, to enact legislation to give the federal government the power to collect the BMI (body mass index) of children ages 2 – 18 and provide counseling to those that are overweight, to place salad bars in elementary school lunch rooms, and to “transform the marketplace” by removing items containing trans fat from available choices to purchase in the nation’s largest grocery retailer.

Let’s Move is one of many means to an end; a fragment to achieving the progressive strategy laid out in the book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein. Sunstein is the current White House Czar for Information and Regulatory Affairs who believes the First Amendment should be reformulated, pets should be granted legal standing to sue their owners and who professes, “There is no liberty without dependency.” In that one word, dependency, is found the psychology behind the Obama adminstration. The Obama regime seeks to replace independence with reliance on government. And if Americans won’t willingly accept their ideological agenda they’re establishing a foundation which will “nudge” you into compliance by removing your options. In Nudge, Thaler and Sunstein assert,

“Individuals make pretty bad decisions—decisions they would not have made if they had paid full attention and possessed complete information, unlimited cognitive abilities, and complete self-control.”

In other words, the average American doesn’t pay attention, is uninformed, has limited reasoning and intellectual capacity, and lacks self-control. Uninformed people are incapable of making the right decisions in their life but the elistists know what the people need and must, therefore, prod or nudge them into making the correct choices. Thayer and Sunstein state,

“It would be quite fantastic to suggest that everyone is choosing the right diet, or a diet that is preferable to what might be produced with a few nudges.

“The false assumption is that almost all people, almost all of the time, make choices that are in their best interest or at the very least are better than the choices that would be made by someone else.

“It seems reasonable to say that people make good choices in contexts in which they have experience, good information, and prompt feedback—say, choosing among ice cream flavors. People know whether they like chocolate, vanilla, coffee, licorice, or something else. They do less well in contexts in which they are inexperienced and poorly informed . . . say, in choosing between fruit and ice cream . . . or in choosing among medical treatments or investment options.” Continue reading

Grandma Got Molested At The Airport

As humorous as some may find the above video, it is prophetic of how the TSA chose to handle American travellers during the Christmas season. Who should be the focus of the TSA’s security efforts? A ape victim with a pacemaker travelling to visit friends for the holidays? Or those who fit the profile of the radical terrorists who desire to destroy the “Great Satan?” As Jim Bergamo of KVUE News in Austin, TX reports,

Early Wednesday morning, a computer glitch shut down a security checkpoint for a couple of hours at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport.  The line snaked out the door as many travelers waited for more than an hour and some missed their flights.  One of the first people in line after that shutdown never made it through. She was arrested and banned from the airport.

Claire Hirschkind, 56, who says she is a rape victim and who has a pacemaker-type device implanted in her chest, says her constitutional rights were violated.  She says she never broke any laws.  But the Transportation Security Administration disagrees. 

Hirschkind was hoping to spend Christmas with friends in California, but she never made it past the security checkpoint.

“I can’t go through because I have the equivalent of a pacemaker in me,” she said.

Hirschkind said because of the device in her body, she was led to a female TSA employee and three Austin police officers.  She says she was told she was going to be patted down.

“I turned to the police officer and said, ‘I have given no due cause to give up my constitutional rights.  You can wand me,'” and they said, ‘No, you have to do this,'” she said.

Hirschkind agreed to the pat down, but on one condition.

“I told them, ‘No, I’m not going to have my breasts felt,’ and she said, ‘Yes, you are,'” said Hirschkind.

When Hirschkind refused, she says that “the police actually pushed me to the floor, (and) handcuffed me.  I was crying by then.  They drug me 25 yards across the floor in front of the whole security.”

The TSA needs to wake up and admit that profiling is the only way to protect the American people without violating their civil liberties and constitutional rights, unless their actions conform to their intent and political purpose.

Meet Obama’s Civilian Army: The New Black Panther Party Threatens To “Deal With All These Right-Wingers”

Malik Zulu Shabazz, chairman of the New Black Panther Party, is leading the fight for Barack Obama against the Tea Party. In a July 8th interview on Russian English-language news channel RT, Shabazz comes out after Fox News, Glenn Beck and Tea Partiers. Asserting the Fox News audience is made up of mainly whites, Republicans, some independents, Confederates, hard right-wingers and racist organizations, Shabazz supported President Obama’s “post-racial” attitude pronouncing,

“It’s really the dissatisfied whites in America that are saying they want to take their country back. We interpret that as meaning take our country back from this black man who happens to be the president.”

“Post-racial” my ass. You can no longer disagree with a man on principle and ideology without being called a racist. This is the Left’s new cry as they endeavor to silence citizens by playing on white guilt. But Barack Obama’s new civilian army not only hopes to intensify racial divisions in America, they’ve declared war on the Tea Party. Remember those folks, the grandmothers, the grandfathers, the citizens who disagree with mammouth government spending, Democrat slushfunds at taxpayer expense, and direct violations of Constitutional law? Shabazz is now threatening,

“We’ll see Glenn Beck on the National Monument. The New Black Panther Party will see him there since he’s attacking us nightly, and he won’t talk to us. We’ll see him on the National Monument, on the National Mall.

“We’ll deal with all of these Right-Wingers. Smith, Wolf, Adams, the Tea Party, Michael Steele. Any and all of them.

“The New Black Panther Party is ready for you. We’re out here in America, and throughout the world. We’re ready to roll.”

This civilian army has announced their intent to come after those who disagree with Barack Obama. Citizens attending the August 28th rally on the National Mall in DC should bring video cameras, cell phones with video, etc. Any actions on the part of the New Black Panther Party need to be captured on film and uploaded to the web. Barack Obama’s new civilian army will not deter our free speech.

The Path To Defeating The Cloward-Piven Strategy

“If America does not get welfare reform under control, it will bankrupt America.”

The Heritage Foundation posted a great video and paper highlighting a five-step plan to reform welfare, the taproot of the Cloward-Piven Strategy and the Left’s primary method to bankrupt America by creating a nation dependent on government.

11 Reasons To Vote Democrat This November

From Viral Footage, a collection of reasons to vote for Democrats this November. REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER!

What Took So Long? RNC Grows Balls While Obama Continues To Stall

President Obama is using the oil crisis to promote his radical political agenda to eliminate carbon-based fuels, a.k.a. cap-and-trade, and to accelerate the downturn of the American economy. The Republican National Committee (RNC) posted a video this week in response to the Partier-In-Chief’s  lack of direction on the BP oil spill. As we can see, the President knows his priorities.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Politicians: High Crimes and Misdemeanors at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (Part 2: The Inconsistencies)

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsRealBlog

In Part 1 of this three part series I discussed the Obama administration’slatest scandal, Sestak-gate, a classic quid pro quo for political advantage and its subsequent cover-up.

In summary, the scandal ignited after an interview 3 1/2 months ago when Congressman Joe Sestak explicitly reaffirmed he was offered a “high ranking position” by “someone in the White House” if he would drop out of the primary race against Arlen Specter, the former-Republican Senator whose switch in party affiliation last year presented Democrats with a 60-vote majority and the power to advance the Obama administration’s agenda undeterred.

After Specter’s conversion his popularity among constituents “nose-dived,” endangering both his seat and the Obama administration’s filibuster-proof majority. Without the guarantee of a Senate majority after the November elections, the Obama administration faces Congressional gridlock and an inability to continue their “fundamental transformation” of America. As a result, the White House conspired to ensure Specter retained his seat by offering Congressman Joe Sestak an offer they assumed he couldn’t/wouldn’t refuse. Using the Chicago pay-for-play tactics they attempted to bribe Sestack to drop his bid for the Senate seat in Pennsylvania so Specter would, by default, be the Democrat candidate on the ticket.

After multiple denials of a job offer(s) to Sestak, the Obama administration released a public response to the scandal over Memorial Day weekend in an effort to obfusacte the truth. In their rush they overlooked a mountain of inconsistencies and their legal ramifications, throwing sunlight onto the seamy underbelly of Chicago-style politics and opening the door to calls for a Special Prosecutor.

Click here for print and video support of the summary.

The Inconsistencies

The inconsistencies between the White House and Congressman Sestack’s statements lead to more questions than their “coordinated” statements answer.

The Obama administration is adamant that “White House staff did not discuss these options with Congressman Sestak.” Really? Sestak claims the offer originated from “someone in the White House,” but former President Bill Clinton is not part of the Obama White House. And Sestak has repeated this claim on numerous occasions. (Hattip: The NRSC)

On March 10, 2010, Fox News’ Bret Baier pointedly asked Sestak: “Did the White House offer you a job to not get in the primary?” Sestak answered: “And I answered that yes, and I answered it honestly.”

Again, on March 20, 2010 to Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.

In order to get you out of the Senate race the White House offered you a job. Is that true?” Sestak responded: “I got asked that question as you know a few weeks ago, of something that happened last summer, a direct question. I answered it honestly, and I said yes.

And, again, on April 22, 2010, to NBC’s Savannah Guthrie,

 “Were you offered a job in the administration not to run?” Sestak responded: “The answer, as I was asked this for the first time a month ago even though it happened last July, and I never brought it forward. I answered it honestly, and I’ll do it again. Yes.

And again, May 23, 2010 on Meet The Press.

“I was asked a question about something that happened months earlier and I felt I should answer it honestly. And that’s all I had to say about it. I was offered a job, and I answered that.” You said, ‘No you won’t take the job.’ Sestack responded, “By then I also said, Look I’m getting into this….” Was it the Secretary of the Navy job?Sestak replied, “Anything that goes beyond that is for others to talk about.”

And again, on May 24, 2010 to CNN’s John King.

You said some time ago that when Arlen Specter was still in the race, early in the primary somebody at the White House came to you and said I will offer you a job, will give you some kind of a job if you would get out.” Sestak responded: “Well I was actually asked by a reporter something that a few months ago that had happened almost eight months earlier…  And I answered it honestly… I said – and I did answer it honestly and said yes…”

The White House admits multiple “efforts” were made in “June and July” for “options for Executive Branch service.” When asked how many times the offer was discussed, Sestack claims one 60-second conversation occurred in July.

“No, no just that one phone call.”

So who is telling the truth? How many job offers were made? And how frequently did the Obama administration attempt to subvert a primary election constitutionally determined by the People’s vote and not the Executive branch?

The White House denies the offer was for the position of Secretary Of Navy, attesting that the offer was for an “uncompensated position.” This doesn’t pass the smell test. An unpaid advisory position would not be a “high ranking federal job.” Sestak’s statement does not exclude the possibility that someone in the White House subsequently sweetened the deal with either the Secretary of the Navy job offer. What was the “high ranking federal job” and who would have the power to offer it?

But the White House’s position is, again, in direct conflict with Sestak who, when queried about the Secretary of Navy position on MSNBC’s Morning Joe show, responded thus.

http://www.mrctv.org/public/eyeblast.swf?v=XdqG6U2G2G

The White House claims the offer was as a seat on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, which would “allow him to retain his seat in the House,” yet Byron York reported Friday,

Sestak was not eligible for a place on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, the job he was reportedly offered by former President Bill Clinton. And indeed a look at the Board’s website reveals this restriction:

“The Board consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government. Members are distinguished citizens selected from the national security, political, academic, and private sectors.”

As a sitting member of Congress, Sestak was not eligible for the job. And since the White House intended for Sestak to remain in his House seat, he would not have been eligible for the board after this November’s elections, provided he was re-elected to the House.

So let’s get this straight…Sestak was being asked to give up his $217,000 per year job, to serve on a board whose members are unpaid and on which he could not legally serve, in order to drop his primary bid against the incumbent Senator who switched parties to deliver Obama passage of his health care legislation and a filibuster-proof majority? It sounds like pay for play, the Chicago Way.

How far will Obama and the Chicago Machine at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue go to maintain complete power? Have they committed high crimes and misdemeanors? Part 3 extensively covers the list of potential crimes commited by the Obama administration that establish their pattern of bribery, corruption, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to corrupt the American electoral process while reigning at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Click here for Part 3: The Crimes

Lies, Damn Lies, and Politicians: High Crimes and Misdemeanors at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (Part 1)

 

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsRealBlog

The Chicago Machine moved to Washington and a disturbing pattern of bribery, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to corrupt the American electoral process is now synonymous with 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The latest incident is a classic quid pro quo for political advantage and subsequent coordinated cover-up to mitigate collateral damage and obstruct the truth. In this three part series, I will delve into the scandal, the blatant inconsistencies between the “coordinated” statements of involved parties, and the potential crimes commited by the Obama administration in this, and other, pay-for-play schemes.

The Scandal

Set in a motion by a February 18th interview with Philadelphia news anchor Larry Kane, Congressman Joe Sestak’s allegation ignited a political firestorm.

“Were you ever offered a job to get out of this race?” Kane was referring to the Democratic Senate primary against Arlen Specter.
“Yes,” Sestak answered.
“Was it Navy Secretary?”
“No comment,” said Sestak.
According to Kane, Sestak talked about staying in the race but added that he “was called many times” to pull out. Later, Kane asked: “So you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”
Yes.”

After disavowing the offer’s existence for three months, President Obama was forced to publicly comment on the Sestak scandal Thursday, but only after meeting privately with former President Bill Clinton, the sacrificial lamb upon whom the blame would be laid the following day. (How bad can the truth be when the sitting President has to bring in a proven perjurer to be his alibi?)  Mimicking press secretary Robert Gibbs, the Obfuscator-In-Chief blathered to reporters at the White House…

“I can assure the public that nothing improper took place.”

In other words, he did not have employment relations with that Congressman.

As with Van Jonesresignation in the middle of the night on Labor Day weekend, the Obama administration used the Friday news dump on Memorial Weekend to finally respond to questions about the Sestack deal. White House Attorney Robert Bauer formally issued a legal memorandum stating, in part:

We have concluded that allegations of improper conduct rest on factual errors and lack a basis in the law.

“Secretary of the Navy. It has been suggested that the Administration may have offered Congressman Sestak the position of Secretary of the Navy in the hope that he would accept the offer and abandon a Senate candidacy. This is false….At no time was Congressman Sestak offered, nor did he seek, the position of Secretary of the Navy.

“Uncompensated Advisory Board Options. We found that, as the Congressman has publicly and accurately stated, options for Executive Branch service were raised with him. Efforts were made in June and July of 2009 to determine whether Congressman Sestak would be interested in service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, which would avoid a divisive Senate primary, allow him to retain his seat in the House, and provide him with an opportunity for additional service to the public in a high-level advisory capacity for which he was highly qualified. The advisory positions discussed with Congressman Sestak, while important to the work of the Administration, would have been uncompensated.

White House staff did not discuss these options with Congressman Sestak. The White House Chief of Staff enlisted the support of former President Clinton who agreed to raise with Congressman Sestak options of service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board. Congressman Sestak Declined the suggested alternatives, remaining committed to his Senate candidacy.”

Hmmm, that’s in direct contradiction to Sestak’s original statements. Is it any surprise Sestak clammed up and refused to identify any other details until “the White House released its report on the matter?” Sestak’s silence provided ample room for the White House to manuever multiple alibi scenarios. (How long does it take to compose an alibi?)

This is Sestak’s latest version:

“Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background. He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives.

I said no. I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer. The former President said he knew I’d say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects.”

Although intimately coordinated with the White House’s formal statement, Sestak is a prime candidate to become the Obama administration’s Deep Throat. Like Obama’s private meeting with Clinton, the clandestine meeting between the Sestak camp and the White House Wednesday was never meant to reach the airwaves. But silence is not Sestak’s finest quality. Whether intentional or not, he has much more to say about the coordinated affair. The Washington Post reports Sestak stated last week,

“They (the White House) got hold of my brother on his cellphone, and he spoke to the White House… about what’s going to occur,” said Sestak, who said he expects the White House will release its information Friday. He declined to elaborate on his discussions with his brother.”

Shades of a Watergate-esque cover-up continue as the complicit media lay the groundwork for plausible deniability. Tweeting a White House source told him Obama was kept in the dark about the bribe attempt, CNN’s John King reports (Hattip: Freeper Kristin)

The Obama administration’s institutionalized corruption led them to first deny, then  ”coordinate” a statement in hopes of whitewashing their latest quid pro quo scandal over a holiday weekend. In their rush they overlooked several contradictions in their “story” and the subsequent legal ramifications.

Tune in tomorrow for Part 2 on the inconsistencies created by the White House’s effort to obfuscate the truth, and further details on the pattern of bribery, corruption, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy by those working at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Click here for Part 2: The Inconsistencies

New Civilian Army Hidden Within The Healthcare Bill?

Remember this from the campaign trail?

How many of you are aware that the healthcare bill created another army?

Knowledge is power, and Kelly Wolf’s recent editorial at Right Side News deserves review by American citizens. Although Wolf couches the editorial as speculation and conjecture, it looks as if the “progressive” Left may have established a variation of Barack Obama’s private army. It all depends on how nefarious their intent is. On page 1,311 of the healthcare legislation passed last Sunday and signed into law by President Obama a new army, a Commissioned Corps and Ready Reserve Corps, is created. Wolf contends,

“The bill contains all the elements to allow this hostile administration all the power it needs to completely control and eventually destroy every freedom and liberty of Americans.  It gives the government total power over the health and well-being of each citizen, making us supplicants to their throne of Government controlled HealthCare.”

The rest of Wolf’s editorial can be read here and I recommend reading both it and the healthcare bill.

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsReal Blog

Bart Stupak’s Cheap Date

Bart Stupak has been proven to be a liar when it comes to healthcare. But he’s also a cheap date! Two days ago this little announcement quietly appeared on his House page with no media fanfare. Hey, Bart! At least Senator Landrieu sold herself for millions.

U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) announced three airports in northern Michigan have received grants totaling $726,409 for airport maintenance and improvements.  The funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration.

“This federal funding will help these airports better provide critical services to communities in northern Michigan,” Stupak said.  “I am pleased the FAA has made this investment in our local airports and the individuals and businesses they serve.”

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsReal Blog

Video: Stupak Has Lied About Healthcare Vote All Along

It looks like pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak has lied to Americans in opposition to the current health care bill. He never intended to vote against the legislation when it came down to final vote. Listen to this video of  Bart Stupak recorded last year, when he was unaware he was being recorded.

Hat Tip to Stand In The Gap and Gateway Pundit

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsReal Blog

How To Pass Bills In Congress Without Voting On Them

In case you missed it last week, Congressional Democrats have devised a plan to pass healthcare reform without House members actually voting on the bills passage. I’ve written about it here and you can listen to David Axelrod explain why Democrats shouldn’t follow Constitutional laws here. But I ran across a great little video that easily explains the Slaughter Solution, or how to pass bills in Congress without voting on them.

Crossposted at David Horowitz’s NewsReal Blog

Axelrod: Americans Are Too Stupid To Care About Congressional Procedures

The audacity and arrogance of the Obama administration was once again on full display this week when Senior White House Adviser David Axelrod appeared on NBC’s Meet The Press responding to questions surrounding Congressional use of the “Slaughter Solution” to pass healthcare reform. Explaining why Democrats shouldn’t follow Constitutional laws Axelrod justified their actions,

“The one thing I am sure of is that the American people don’t know or care much about the sequencing of parliamentary procedures.”

Axelrod is far from the first administration official to share his elitist attitude over the American people, but he is the latest to demonstrate the precise level of ignorance the administration feels American citizens hold. In the eyes of the Obama administration, they’re passing legislation you need but don’t understand because you lack the education or ability to comprehend it. Their arrogance blinds them from seeing that the American people do understand. That’s why we’re against their agenda!

Watch the video at David Horowitz’s NewsReal

The Slaughter Solution: The Metamorphosis of The American Republic Into Government By Fiat


fiat [ˈfaɪət -æt], n., a legally binding command or decision; an arbitrary order or decree

A very dangerous act is being attempted by the Left to secure their rule over the American people and transform the legislative process from a Constitutional Republic to a government by fiat. Today on Fox News Sunday, Democratic leader Rep. Chris Van Hollen admitted Democrats intend to use the unconstitutional “Slaughter Rule” as a solution to ram nationalized health care through Congress without majority vote and in defiance to the will of the American people.

The Slaughter rule would declare that the House of Representatives “deems” the Senate health care bill “passed” by the House. House members would have to vote on whether to accept the rule, but would then be able to claim they only voted for a rule, not for the bill itself. In other words, Democrats will avoid a direct vote on the health care bill while allowing it to become law! They will take over one-sixth of the US economy without voting on it in direct violation to the legislative process defined by the U.S Constitution.  Article I, Section VII, Clause II specifically states,

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.

Constitutional Attorney Mark R. Levin described the severity of this action on our Republic,

“Here we have the President of the United States and Congressional leaders actually talking about the possibility of a brazen and open violation of one of the most fundamental aspects of our Constitution and Republic! How we actually make laws!

Let me be as clear as I know how. If this is done, this will create the greatest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War. It would be 100 times worse than Watergate.

…It would be government by fiat… meaning there would be no law… the mere discussion by officials in this government is such a grotesque violation of the actual legislative function of Congress [that it] puts us… at the brink. At the brink.

This is why we conservatives revere the Constitution. This is why we stress the Constitution’s words have meaning and historical context and must be complied with. Because otherwise we have anarchy, which leads to tyranny.

This is a crucial lesson for those of you who… aren’t sure what your beliefs are, or if you have any beliefs. Or aren’t sure if you even care. We have an effort underway by the one of the most powerful chairmen in Congress, the woman who heads the Rules Committee, …openly discussing gutting Congress. Gutting Congress.”

Our Founding Fathers intentionally designed the government of the United States as a Republic, a political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who vote for representatives responsible to them. If successful in using the “Slaughter Solution” to pass healthcare, precedence will be set for Democrats to disregard Constitutional law and the citizens they represent from this point forward. “Progressive” transformation of the American government and way of life will no longer be an issue. The “Slaughter Solution” will be their justification to ram every leftist policy they choose into law. The government of the United States will cease to be a Republic. It will be ruled by their fiat. The people must speak up now or 234 years of freedom and liberty will be lost to tyrannical rule.

Hat Tip to Michelle Malkin and Gateway Pundit.

 

Crossposted  at David Horowitz’s NewsReal

WTF? Vegans Get Religious Protection

I just had my WTF moment for the week. While catching up on world news I see this headline: “Don’t mock my lentils: vegans to get discrimination rights.” The Times Online article leads with,

“VEGANS and teetotallers are to be given the same protection against discrimination as religious groups.

“A person who is a vegan chooses not to use or consume animal products of any kind. That person eschews the exploitation of animals for food, clothing, accessories or any other purpose and does so out of an ethical commitment to animal welfare.””

So now ethical commitment mandates religious protection? What happened to equal rights not special rights?

Read more at David Horowitz’s NewsReal

%d bloggers like this: