The empty promises of liberalism

Very good essay from a blog called “The Hispanic Conservative”:

[…] The liberals will court you by feigning empathy. Their hearts will apparently bleed for you. They will tell you that the lot of Hispanics is unfair and that you and they share a common threat- conservatives.  They will say that they care so much about you, that if you give them your votes, they will selflessly work in your interest. All the while they will be selling you the philosophy of liberalism in tiny pieces.

They will promise not to judge you, no matter how high your teenage dropout rate is or how high the illegitimacy or illiteracy rates get; they will tell you it’s not your fault, it’s because of white racism.  They will not judge you because staying on your good side is in their self-interest, not because it is in your best interest.

They will say that you don’t have the right to discipline your children as you see fit, they will say that neither do the schools because your children have rights. This will result in unruly children and later unruly young adults which will result in unruly neighborhoods. People and businesses who can afford to will leave.

Like a Casanova who can never live up to his heat of the moment promises of love and fidelity, it is not in the nature of liberalism to deliver on its promises. The pillars of liberalism- collectivism, relativism, socialism, humanism, and class envy, unavoidably lead to the same end: crime, poverty, over-reaching government, weak families, substandard schools, and suppressed commerce.

If you doubt me look at the Black community. Liberals have been smooth talking us for decades, and we’ve been handing them election victories like clockwork. They promise the moon every election cycle, but look at what it’s gotten us. They have not delivered on a single promise they made to us; we’re worse off by the year.

They will do the same to Hispanics. […]

And Now Your Children … Hand Them Over, Please

George Will has written a scathing column on the nation’s failed public schools that from K-12, and into “higher learning”, have become factories of propaganda. Sounds like someplace else we are very familiar with, no?

The real vocation of some people entrusted with delivering primary and secondary education is to validate this proposition: The three R’s — formerly reading, ’riting and ’rithmetic — now are racism, reproduction and recycling. Especially racism. Consider Wisconsin’s Department of Public Instruction. It evidently considers “instruction” synonymous with “propaganda,” which in the patois of progressivism is called “consciousness-raising.”

[…]

And Americans wonder why their generous K-12 financing (higher per pupil than all but three of the 34 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations) has done so little to improve reading, math and science scores. Read in full

MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry is becoming increasingly infamous for referring to unborn babies as “things” to be disposed of.

Now, in a network promo touting the Maoist mentality of Lean “Forward”, Mz. Harris-Perry insists children/kids (they are only given personhood when the left needs them to be more than “things” in their heart-tugging “It’s for the children” propaganda) belong to the community, and not so much to their parents and family.

Given MSNBC’s proclivity for deeming any-given word as a racist dog-whistle, I contend “community” = “collective” = “State” … and I am not the only one reading such propaganda into this.

From what I can see on her Wiki page she has atleast one child (daughter). I’m sure Mz. Harris-Perry would be perfectly willing and welcoming to give up her parental rights and just allow the “community” (see: ‘state’) assume total control and dictates over her child.

And ‘word’ to Mz. H-P … We have (and continue to) spent billions and billions and billions on public ‘education’, and much, if not ALL, has been unchecked for legitimacy and efficiency. The public education system in this nation is far, far more “broken” than our healthcare system, financial system, and election system. We have a certain percentage of “teachers” that are from the dumbed-down public education system generation now teaching yet another generation of children who, in some cases, have been relinquished from their parents’ responsibility and involvement, and the “communities” where they roam free are irresponsible and failed as well. See Chicago and Detroit, or any inner city where democrat “progressive” leadership has been deeply rooted for generations, and where federal taxpayer dollars have been endlessly dumped. And as with the “collective” mentality, the whole is judged on the few failures, and action taken accordingly on everyone.

“The personal life is dead … The private life is dead…”

Of interest: “Federal judge rules morning-after pill must be available for women of all ages”

What could go wrong?

This is why Hollywood is held in such contempt by conservatives

In October of 2008 I posted links to the YouTube videos of the documentary about the Weather Underground. It is a damning documentary that exposes these radical fro what they are. Today, from Michelle Malkin, we learn that a movie — a hagiography — is being released about these murderers and terrorists. Is it any wonder why conservatives hold Hollywood in such contempt?

Bleeding-heart liberal Robert Redford is already the subject of early Oscar buzz. His much-hyped new film glamorizing the lives of Weather Underground domestic terrorists, “The Company You Keep,” will be released in the U.S. next week. But peace-loving moviegoers should save their money and take a stand.

Hollywood’s romanticizing of murderous radicals is an affront to decency. Redford and Company’s rose-colored hagiography of bloodstained killers defiles the memory of all those victimized by leftwing militants on American soil.

Tinseltown cheerleaders can’t stop gushing about Redford’s paean to gun-toting progressives, of course. Variety called the flick an “unabashedly heartfelt but competent tribute to 1960s idealism.” The entertainment daily effused: “There is something undeniably compelling, perhaps even romantic, about America’s ’60s radicals and the compromises they did or didn’t make.” One of the film executives promoting the Weather Underground movie slavered: “This is an edge-of-your-seat thriller about real Americans who stood for their beliefs, thinking they were patriots and defending their country’s ideals against their government.”

Compelling? Romantic? Real Americans? Patriots? The movie plot centers on a 1970s Michigan bank robbery perpetrated by fictional Weather Underground members Sharon Solarz (portrayed by bigwig Democratic activist Susan Sarandon) and Jim Grant (played by Redford). The group shoots and kills one off-duty police officer working as a bank security guard. Grant goes on the lam and assumes a fake identity; decades later, a reporter launches an investigation into his role in the crime. The movie drums up “unabashedly heartfelt” sympathy for Grant as he works to exonerate himself. […]

A paean to communist murderers.

And how many more like her are there?

Folks, I think you all know that on this blog we call it like we see it. I have felt for the longest time that we have to stop sugar-coating who these liberals and progressives are and call them what they are: marxists, socialists, and crypto-communists. Here is a case in point, via Trevor Loudon’s New Zeal Blog that talks about a California socialist who wants to take our guns. There is no gray area here. This is their agenda. This is who they are.

Yes America, your socialists do want to take your guns, and your land, and herd you into little beehive like urban communities, so they can make you happy forever more.

All over America, communists, socialists and Marxists have been leading the charge for “gun control”

A case in point occurred in Harlem, March 21, where “more than 2,000 predominantly Black and Latino working people gathered on on Adam Clayton Powell Blvd … in a militant protest against gun violence”.

Organizer of that event was Leslie Cagan, a life long pro-Cuban communist, and leading “peace” activist.

Another Marxist leading the charge to destroy American liberty, is Democrat member of the California State Legislature, representing, the 14th assembly district, (which includes Berkeley), Nancy Skinner.

In January, Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner unveiled her bill to crack down on guns or ammunition.

Assembly Bill 48, would require sellers of ammunition to be licensed and for purchasers to show identification. All sales would be reported to the Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice would be required under AB 48 to notify local law enforcement of large-quantity purchases over a five-day period by an individual who is not a peace officer.

AB 48 also would ban the manufacture, sale or import of any device that enables a gun to fire more than 10 rounds at one time.

While nominally a Democrat, Nancy Skinner has also been a member of the US’s largest Marxist organization, the pro-Gramsci communists of Democratic Socialists of America.

Skinner is a veteran of an ’80s trip to Marxist-Leninist Nicaragua. She has also worked for pro-communist California congresswoman Barbara Lee.

But Skinner has mainly used environmentalism to push her socialism.

A “nationally renowned leader in the fight against global warming,” Nancy Skinner founded ICLEI -Local Governments for Sustainability, an organization “dedicated to helping local governments around the world become environmental leaders.” As Executive Director of ICLEI’s US office, Skinner launched the Cities for Climate Protection program —the “US movement of Mayors and cities working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that now involves over 500 US cities and counties.”

ICLEI of course is the main promoter of “Agenda 21,” the United Nations (read Russian), plan to de-industrialize America, and drive the vast bulk of your rural  population into easily manged urban population centers.

As US Director of The Climate Group, a London based organization, Nancy Skinner worked with Fortune 500 companies, clean tech industries and state and national leaders to pass groundbreaking legislation such as California’s global warming bill AB 32.

She also organized the July 2006 Climate & Energy Roundtable with Governor Schwarzenegger, Prime Minister Tony Blair, and fellow radical former california Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez & 15 Fortune 500 CEOs, that paved the way for Governor Schwarzenegger’s signing of AB 32.

In 2004 Nancy Skinner brought global warming to the attention of the National Association of State Insurance Commissioners and was instrumental in NAIC’s establishment of an Executive Task Force on Insurance and Climate Change. Last year the NAIC Task Force released a white paper on the Potential Impact of Climate Change on Insurance Regulation and is currently undertaking a Climate Risk Disclosure Survey for insurance firms operating in the US.

Nancy Skinner also served on the California Energy Commission’s Climate Change Advisory Committee and then San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s Clean Technology Task Force.

So why does Nancy Skinner want to take your guns? A misguided attempt to save you from criminals?

Or is it just a another logical step on the socialist road?

If you have guns, you’re hard to control. People like Nancy Skinner don’t like people who do not like to  be controlled.

Way too messy.

Nancy Skinner and her thousands of comrades, have a plan for your life. To get you where you’re too stupid enough to see where you need to go, they’re going to have to take your guns. They cannot leave you with the ability to resist their enlightened plans. This is for your own good.

People control. That’s what this is all about. Nothing more, nothing less.

Hopeful Trees

Some years back I wrote a piece titled “Tirando Piedras” – Skipping Stones – about a young Cuban-American father’s conflict with burdening his young Americanito son with all that is Cuba. I think about that story all the time. Grapple with it.

While the handing down of our passions and memories about the real Cuba is something to be proud of, something that as a free Cuban one may feel duty bound to do, as parents, do we really want to place that onus on our progeny? Will instilling those intangible concepts of what the real Cuba was on our children be a hindrance to them somehow? Do we do them a disservice to inject that sorrow, that nostalgia, that seemingly overwhelming helplessness into their young souls? Children, after all, should be free of those responsibilities and worries.

And yet we do it. We pass along the baton of the past forward with one part patriotism, one part perseverance and two parts hope, never knowing whether our decision to sacrifice a little piece of our children’s souls will serve a greater and noble purpose. We live with that doubt of fruitless labor.

My doubts, however, have been alleviated today. The seeds my parents planted in me and which in turn I have tended to and watered and fertilized and fretted over all these years like a reluctant farmer have, indeed, begun to bear fruit.

I don’t see eye to eye with Yoani Sanchez on everything, but today she held my hand as we walked through the forest of fruit filled trees:

I’ve found a Cuba outside of Cuba, I told a friend a few days ago. He laughed at my play on words, thinking I was trying to create literature. But no. In Brazil, a septuagenarian excitedly gave me a medal of the Virgin of Charity of Cobre. “I have not been back since I left in 1964,” she confirmed as she handed me this little gem that had belonged to her mother. During my stay in Prague, a group of compatriots living there seemed to be more aware of what was happening in our country than many who vegetate, inside it, in apathy. Amid the tall buildings of New York a family invited me to their house and their grandmother made a “coconut flan” in the style of our traditional cuisine, so damaged on the island by the shortages and scarcities.

Our diaspora, our exile, is conserving Cuba outside of Cuba. Along with their suitcases and the pain of distance, they have preserved pieces of our national history that were deleted from the textbooks with which several generations have been educated or rather, raised to be mediocre. I’m rediscovering my own country in each of these Cubans dispersed around the world. When I confirm what they have really accomplished, the contrast with what official propaganda tells me about them leaves me with an enormous sadness for my country. For all this human wealth that we have lost, for all this talent that has had to wash up outside our borders and for all the seeds that have germinated in other lands. How did we allow one ideology, one party, one man, to have felt the “divine” power to decide who could or could not carry the adjective “Cuban”?

Now I have proof that they lied to me, they lied to us. Nobody has had to tell me, I can grasp it for myself on seeing all this Cuba that is outside of Cuba, an immense country that they have been safeguarding for us.

The Absurdity of the “Gun Control” Language and The Assault on Our Intelligence

Obama repeated the gun-control meme about his intended gun control laws once again yesterday while flanked by the families of gun violence victims (and with bobble-head “Shotgun Joe Biden” by his side), “If it saves just one life…” … One? Just “one life?

How incredibly absurd that reasoning is. Honestly, are thinking people in this country listening to this juvenile narrative? Are they hearing it, taking it all in and realizing the other side’s logic and reasoning on pushing for more gun control is asinine at best? After yesterday’s hissy-fit and shaming of the American people who value their Constitutional Second Amendment rights, Obama is using his “executive powers”, yet again, to bypass Congress and the people to get what he wants while his White House flunkies carry the lies as political extortion by top level donors is used on squeamish democrats, and Obama has the nanny troll’s $12 million dollars working his PR for him. Sen. Rand Paul was on FOX last night and he posed the challenge to Obama to point out to him exactly which, if any, of the new proposed gun control legislation would have saved just one life in the Sandy Hook elementary school, anymore than the existing gun laws did (or didn’t). It’s a fair and logical proposition, I say.

Another filibuster is coming alright, and I suspect it will be bigger, longer and louder than the last filibuster. The TEA Party groups and NRA members, and any law-abiding gun owner that can make it to Washington D.C., should gather and rally outside the U.S. Capitol during that filibuster when it happens. A stack of new laws (in the face of thousands of existing laws already being broken) imposed on law-abiding, gun-owning American citizens, just to save one life? I think that unrealistic premise has got to be right up at the top of “Most Idiotic Statements Obama Has Ever Made”. The twisted logic and reasoning is bad enough, but the fact that the man feels comfortable saying it, more than once, to the American public is just astonishing. But then, he is the one who five years ago insisted his daughters would never be punished with a baby”. And yet, mouth-watering dolts, like those over at MSNBC for example, swear this man, Barack Hussein Obama, is the most eloquent communicator ever to walk in unison with Earth’s gravity.

Dana Loesch BOLDLY stood up and stood her ground last night on CNN against foreign, interloping, bastion of objectivity Piers Morgan and avowed communist Van Jones about the left’s/liberal narrative and premise on gun control that is currently being shoved down the throats of the American people. Listen to the tail end of this CNN debate. If Piers Morgan is on Obama’s side in demanding even more gun control laws he must be in agreement with Obama’s idea of trying to save “just one life” out of the dozens lost at Sandy Hook school.

Oh, and “assault” is an action a PERSON does, not an object. “Assault” is usually accompanied by “battery”. Shoving somebody down to the ground. Punching/Slapping somebody. YES, a stabbing committed with a spoon or an ice pick or a 12 inch ruler or a Lincoln Log, or smothering with a pillow, or wrapping a child’s jump rope around somebody’s neck and trying to strangle them, or a cream pie to the face (ask Ann Coulter) IS “ASSAULT” … and battery!!! Whether it is a one-shot front-loading musket circa the American Revolution or a fully automatic military rifle (“machine gun”) it is an inanimate and unthinking object until a person intentionally takes it in hand and operates it. Be it hunting, target-shooting, or murder, the “assault” responsibility is solely on the person who picks up the gun … or the spoon or the Lincoln Log or the pie, and not on the gun. The willful and intentional infliction of ignorance on the American people by those in the government and the American people is nauseating.

For good-measure: A local 72-year-old invalid woman, all alone, was EMPOWERED with her gun against an intruder into her home.

“That Would Infringe” – UPDATED: Sen. Rubio Signs Filibuster Pledge

UPDATE: Rubio signs onto letter promising filibuster on gun control legislation

Below is an image copy of the letter Senators Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio wrote and sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid regarding their strong defense of the Second Amendment…

letter

More at Sen. Marco Rubio’s site here.

Recently the U.S. Senate voted down the United Nation’s Arms Trade Treaty. Oddly, the Obama/Holder deadly “Fast and Furious” gunwalker operation would have been a violation of that treaty … as would be the gunwalking the administration has been doing to Jihadist rebels in Syria.

Sen. Rand Paul, who just a few weeks ago gained public notice during his filibuster of Obama’s and the DOJ’s domestic drone program, is warning of strong opposition to the democrats’ and administration’s plans for new gun control legislation when the Congress returns to Washington D.C. next month. It’s quite possible we may see Sen. Paul and his fellow GOPers back on the floor of the Senate into the wee hours of the night.

Previous: “The war on gun owners”

Footnote: Another idiotic move by the media, this time at the Des Moines Register, where they published an interactive map of which Iowa public schools do and/or do not have security at their campuses. The paper’s editor, Rick Green, says he had not seen the graphic prior to publishing, and explains how he “pulled it down and revised it upon seeing it”. What happened to the days when the draft ot the newspaper’s next addition crossed the editor’s desk for tweaking before being told “go to print”?

AR equal

“The Constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty…”

jefferson

The longer this lopsided debate (I say ‘lopsided’ because those who can immediately, wrongly and unconstitutionally end it with one executive order are in near total power) the more the pro-Constitution voices state perfectly and eloquently the truth that keeps us free in the face of those voices that intend to make us less free and less safe. This Connecticut man is the latest to make complete sense as he addresses Connecticut lawmakers on their gun control intentions…

Meet Robert Steed, a resident of Vernon, Conn. who took three days straight off work to attend several gun control hearings in Connecticut. On March 14, Steed was more “aggravated” than usual with lawmakers and he let them know it in his fiery testimony, telling them that they were “coloring outside the lines of constitutional parameters.”

“This is the third day I’ve taken off of work to come here to, like so many of the rest of us, to plead with you for us to keep our guns because of some wing-nut in Newtown, Connecticut,” he said. “If that isn’t inherently wrong, I don’t know what is. That these bills are even in proposed form is scary enough. That any of you could possibly be undecided is scary enough. What are you looking at?”

He went on: “I can’t for the life of me understand how this state can have as many gun laws on the books as it does and have members of its Legislature need to take firearms 101. And as far as what I felt were potshots taken at the NRA, they’ve done more for gun safety– they’ll do more for gun safety this weekend than this committee will do in your careers.”

[…]

Last week, Steed told lawmakers who believe legislation will prevent tragedies that “evil exists” and “sometimes things are beyond your control.”

“Adam Lanza commits a crime, and I’m here to gr0vel and plead for my rights and explain to you that my firearms are kept safely?” he asked rhetorically. “I keep hearing the word “solution”… you’re not going to find a solution, it doesn’t exist. You can’t find a broad brush solution to evil.”

This is the cold hard truth and reality the knee-jerk lawmakers on state and federal levels refuse to see and understand. And when it is blindingly pointed out to them, they become condescending and patronizing … to their employers who are pointing out these arrogant employees are failing at their (sworn oath) jobs…

Connecticut state Rep. Steve Mikutel (D) refuted Steed and said lawmakers can craft a solution to gun violence. “We can solve this,” he said.

Mikutel admitted that “we live in an open free democratic society,” therefore lawmakers won’t be able to address all violence in society. If the U.S. was a “dictatorship” Congress would have a better chance of dealing with violence, but that’s not the way they want to go, the Democrat added.

“You’ll get a better handle on it maybe in a dictatorship where they just go in and take all your guns and lock-down, and they’ve got big brother watching all over you everywhere, they’ve got cameras on every corner, cameras in every neighborhood,” the Democrat continued.

Mikutel explained that Connecticut doesn’t want to go down that route and so it makes lawmakers’ job more “difficult.”

(emphisis mine)

Yes, the democrat lawmaker went there, obviously ignorant, in total denial or lying about the privacy invasive situation(s) we currently live under in the United States, with more to follow. My question to Rep. Steve Mikutel is, “Was that a threat or a promise?” Listen to the whole exchange here (George posted it earlier), then make this video and story go viral. By the way, something else you will not hear in the MSM: “Connecticut wooed gunmaker Bushmaster’s parent company days before Sandy Hook massacre – Freedom Group was offered a low-interest, $1 million loan for a Stamford headquarters, but after the Bushmaster AR-15 was used in Newtown, the proposal was canceled.” … Connecticut poll: “Most oppose more gun control measures”

Meanwhile, New York Gov. Cuomo shows us a prime example of what governing and legislating from “feelings”, instead of from the guidelines outlined within the U.S. Constitution, looks like…

Read more

Repeat after me… (UPDATED)

I couldn’t resist…

big-fat-d
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

***

This is just another example, among many others, of why the GOP is dead.

Hey, remember that awesome CPAC speech by Mitch McConnell?

The one where Mitch McConnell said — and I quote — “Obamacare should be repealed root and branch. And we’re not backing down from this fight.”

And the same speech where Mitch McConnell also said, “This law is a disaster, and anybody who thinks we’ve moved beyond it is dead wrong.”

Well, as I told you, Mitch McConnell excels at saying one thing and doing another. Yesterday, Mitch McConnell voted to fund Obamacare.

Hey Utah, he joined Orrin Hatch in doing so. Remember, just last year on the campaign trail Orrin Hatch told you all how he was going to absolutely fight to rid us of Obamacare at all costs. And he got a large portion of the conservative movement to cheer him on as a result.

Yeah, that Orrin Hatch voted to fund Obamacare too.

And now for the punchline — the majority of the Republicans in the Senate voted against funding Obamacare. McConnell and Hatch were in the minority of Republicans who chose to side with the Democrats and fund Obamacare.

Here is the full list of the Republicans who voted for the Ted Cruz amendment to defund Obamacare, but then flipped their votes to actually vote to fund Obamacare:

  • Alexander (R-TN) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Barrasso (R-WY) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Blunt (R-MO) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Boozman (R-AR) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Chambliss (R-GA) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Coats (R-IN) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Cochran (R-MS) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Collins (R-ME) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Corker (R-TN) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Cornyn (R-TX) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Hatch (R-UT) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Hoeven (R-ND) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Isakson (R-GA) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Johanns (R-NE) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • McConnell (R-KY) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Murkowski (R-AK) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Sessions (R-AL) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Shelby (R-AL) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Thune (R-SD) – [NO balls. NO principles.]
  • Wicker (R-MS) – [NO balls. NO principles.]

The individual and the collective: ‘the difference’

The always great Baldilocks has written a short but incisive essay about the importance of the individual in families. Read “The Difference.”

[…] But what made a Ben Carson or a Steve Jobs different from the children in the second video? What makes the children who grew up in the early 60s and prior without one or more parents different from the menaces to society we’ve seen all too often in the past four decades?

It’s this: individuals–individuals who step into the breach that mother and/or father vacate voluntarily or involuntarily. Grandparents, aunts and uncles, stepparents, adoptive parents. And the individual biological parents, like Sonya Carson, who step up to the task appointed to them. People like her shape a Dr. Ben Carson, neurosurgeon and leader of the surgical team who first successfully separated conjoined twins. People like the tasered woman–and the man–shape drug-dealers, gang members, welfare mothers and prisoners.

Such people like the latter know nothing of hard work, true education, order, responsibility. The reason this is so? Because neither they nor the other parent(s) of their offspring care about their children being better than they are. They don’t have to care about this because they know that the government will subsidize all of their “needs” and the “needs” of their offspring.

When individuals are the parents, the child will most likely do well. When government is the parent, the child will most likely do poorly and become dependent on government as well–either taking on government as one parent (illegitimate children) or both parents (going to prison). This isn’t rocket science or neurosurgery. From time immemorial, children, with some exceptions, follow in the footsteps of their parents. […]

Cruz Control and Powerless DiFi

Have you heard about how that horribly ignorant, misogynist upstart freshman Sen. Ted Cruz made veteran Sen. Dianne Feinstein feel patronized during their exchange yesterday in the Senate on her current attempt to take away our right to own guns by picking, choosing, and chipping away at the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution…

Allahpundit at HotAir points out the video viral exchange between the two senators is only a small part of what went on, and that there is far more to this story than the “rude” Ted Cruz, ‘who knows not of the cited Heller case‘, the liberal MSM (MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough in this instance) is now trying to project … and here it is:

KrisAnne Hall is an attorney and former prosecutor. The following video excerpts (below) are from a recent townhall meeting on future gun control held in Pensacola. Here she addresses the pure and clear meaning of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and the now unbalanced thinking of the federal government on their balance of power vs. the U.S. Constitution. She points out the US Supreme Court does not have the power to grant power to the federal government outside the Constitution. THAT, according to Jay Norlander of NRO, is exactly how Sen. Dianne Feinstein (the White House and the democrats in the Congress) is operating on this matter…

In the matter of Ted Cruz versus Dianne Feinstein, I’d like to make one point … I believe that Feinstein believes what a lot of people believe, in error: Congress and the president can do basically whatever they want. And if it’s unconstitutional, well, the Supreme Court will say so, and all will be well. That’s what a system of checks and balances is all about.

Here is DiFi: “Congress is in the business of making the law. The Supreme Court interprets the law. If they strike down the law, they strike down the law.”

We can go wild and crazy, here in Congress, and if we overstep constitutional boundaries, the Supreme Court can strike us down. We’ll go whatever speed we want on the highway, and if a copper should happen to catch us, so be it.

Thing is, congressmen and the president swear an oath to the Constitution too. The justices of the Supreme Court are not the only arbiters of the Constitution. They might be the ultimate arbiters, but others have a responsibility too. Members of the legislative and executive branches have a custodial role. A black robe does not confer a unique constitutional burden on you, and the absence of such a robe does not exempt you from a burden, or a responsibility.

This should be elementary. In my observation, however, it is the erroneous view that is widespread, and well entrenched…

Get it? The thinking of DiFi and the democrats is, We’ll just pass the law, they can see what’s in it, and then take it to court. Dr. Ben Carson is correct. We need far fewer lawyers in the U.S. Congress.

Here KrisAnne backs up her government overreach warning regarding disarming the American people with the recent example of the Obama administration’s usurping of powers in their DOJ “white paper” admission of assumed power and ability to use drones to kill American citizens anywhere on the globe, including in the USA, without due process…

So, if the White House and the DOJ believe they can do that without cause or court, what is to stop them from banning citizens from owning guns? Perhaps Sen. Feinstein isn’t smarter than a sixth grader after all.

BTW, I too am growing quite fond of fearless GOP freshmen such as Sen. Ted Cruz.

You can find more videos of this townhall and hear more of what this woman has to say, especially in the face of the liberal lawyer on the panel.

‘Stand on Principle’

Isn’t it refreshing to hear a Republican — a Senator, no less! — echoing my mantra of “balls and principles” to a receptive audience? If conservatism is to survive, we need the cloning machines to start working right now: Rubio, Cruz, Rand. We need thirty three clones of each…

On Wednesday night, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) electrified the crowd at the Coalitions for America’s Weyrich Awards Dinner, named after founder Paul Weyrich. He led off his speech with a dismissive reference to Senator John McCain’s characterization of him as a “wacko bird.” Looking at the crowd, Cruz said, “Birds of a feather flock together.”

Cruz led off with a full-on critique of the President’s public relations blitz over sequestration. “2.4 percent cuts were made from your meals,” he joked. He referenced the “emaciated face” of conservative megadonor Foster Friess. Thanks to the dinner sequester, said Cruz, Friess looked like “Anne Hathaway in Les Miserables.”

Walking back and forth across the stage in his patented style, Cruz delivered body blows to both establishment Republicans and to the Obama administration. Urging conservatives to “stand for principle,” he said, “I think 2014 has the potential to be a very, very good year, but the number one way we can screw it up is if we fail to stand on principle.”

As an example of standing on principle, he mentioned Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) filibustering over President Obama’s drone policy. “We have an administration that seems to recognize no limits on its power,” said Cruz. Paul pointed that out with his filibuster – and more than that, Cruz pointed out, he made the constitution the issue. Holder, Cruz continued, seemed confused by all the talk about constitutionalism versus what was “appropriate” when it came to drone use, as though he expected Americans to simply trust the administration without reference to the appropriate scope of presidential power. But, said Cruz, “the entire premise of the US constitution is that we don’t trust you.”

It wasn’t just the Obama administration that opposed the filibuster, Cruz continued. “There were more than a few Republicans who didn’t show up, who held their manhoods accursed and cheapened,” Cruz said, paraphrasing Henry V.

Cruz saved heavy criticism for the media as well. Laughing at MSNBC’s attempt to offer advice to Republicans, Cruz said, “MSNBC on how to save the Republican Party is like Typhoid Mary giving the keys to good health.”

Most of Cruz’s speech was directed at the Obama administration’s regulatory and fiscal policy. Regulators and administrators, he said, were multiplying and occupying America like locusts. After seeing a picture of locusts descending on Egypt on the Drudge Report, he said, “I thought we’d sent the EPA.”

The biggest surprise about the US Senate, Cruz explained, was the “widespread sense of defeatism … It’s maddening.” But he said that he and his Tea Party colleagues “ain’t gonna stop … A lot of good things happen when you stand for principle.”

March 8, 1983

The “evil empire” is still with us to this day…

More from Paul Kengor at American Spectator:

Today, Ronald Reagan’s Evil Empire speech turns 30 years old. It stands as one of the most memorable orations of the last three decades. It coined a phrase, a tag, a label — one that utterly fit. If the shoe fits, wear it. Well, this jackboot fit the Soviet ogre’s foot.

It was a searing speech, not merely because it was so provocative, which it was, or incendiary or controversial, which it also was, but because it was such an obvious truth that so desperately needed to be said by someone at the presidential level. Ronald Reagan cut through the clutter, and the moral equivalency and accommodation, and spoke loudly and boldly, with the uncompromising courage and confidence that was so uniquely Ronald Reagan.

Why did Reagan say what he said? Here’s his later explanation: “Although a lot of liberal pundits jumped on my speech … and said it showed I was a rhetorical hip-shooter who was recklessly and unconsciously provoking the Soviets into war, I made the ‘Evil Empire’ speech and others like it with malice aforethought.”

What malice aforethought?

The speech must be viewed from two crucial perspectives: 1) Reagan’s personal/spiritual motivation; and 2) his larger international/geo-strategic motivation. Both of these two contexts came together as part of a broader Reagan intention to try to undermine atheistic Soviet communism and peacefully win and end the Cold War. […]

Black Flag

For Andrew

I have writer’s block.

It’s not that I can’t find stuff to write about, but rather that everything that I write ends up in the recycle bin when I proof it. It ends up there not because it lacks substance or the delivery is less than what I set up as a standard for myself, but because I read it and realize that it is a meaningless exercise.

My blog, Boiling Frogs, is the space where I organize my thoughts, where I put down ideas (some complex, many rather simple) in as intelligent a fashion as I can.

Idea … supporting argument/facts … conclusion.

Simple enough.

Right?

That format isn’t working any more.

Sure enough, I can dutifully follow it and an entry appears, but then I proof it, and “delete” just follows naturally. I delete it at that point in the proof reading process where having stopped trying to identify all my spelling and grammatical errors, I read my work and ask myself “does it matter that you wrote this?”

The response these last few weeks has come back “not in the slightest,” ten times out of ten.

I’ve lost my mojo.

Here’s the next thing that has me out of sorts: I don’t read anything that remotely resembles news or political commentary. I don’t watch TV news any longer, and my satellite radio has been pretty solidly stuck on “The Pulse,” with occasional excursions into “Little Steven’s Underground Garage,” “Siriously Sinatra”, “BB King’s Bluesville,” and when the day calls for it, “Lithium.”

I just want to shut everything out.

I am so absolutely disgusted with the current state of affairs in this nation, and in the world at large, that I want to stay as far away from both as I possibly can, and when they simply refuse to stay away, I have SiriusXM, one Hell of an audio system in my car, and “Lithium.”

Hello, hello, hello, how low?
Hello, hello, hello, how low?
Hello, hello, hello, how low?
Hello, hello, hello!

With the lights out, it’s less dangerous
Here we are now, entertain us
I feel stupid and contagious
Here we are now, entertain us!

That song’s opening line is the best…

Load up on guns and bring your friends
It’s fun to lose and to pretend…

I don’t want to fucking pretend.

THAT is probably the root of my writer’s block … I no longer want to fucking pretend that intelligent debate, logical arguments and opinions grounded on facts and history have any meaning at all.

They don’t, or at least not to people who lack both intelligence and the ability to grasp logic, and who couldn’t give less of a shit about facts and history.

Those people don’t read my blog because reading it probably gives them a headache.

Now, I know that there are a few people out there who do read my blog and Babalu, and I must apologize to you. I appreciate your support and your loyalty, but you need to understand what I’ve come to understand.

We are a small echo chamber of logic and substance trapped inside an insane massive bell tower cacophony of fucking stupid, and the stupid is growing by the day.

Listen, I know what’s supposed to be going on right now: Bloggers and the alternative media are supposed to be leading the fight against stupid, we are supposed to take up the forgotten standard of unbiased journalism, wipe the shit off the canton of intelligent reporting, and lead America back to a place where sanity reigns and “good night and good luck” meant that you had just been enlightened about the world around you, not indoctrinated.

But I don’t think that’s going to happen. It may happen some day in the future, but not right now.

Not the way things stand.

Today we live in a nation divided. A three way split of the entitled, the disinterested and the chattel that pay for it all

We live in a nation where condoms to be used for premarital sex are an entitlement, and should you forget to use them, abortion on demand is a right, but the exercise of our unalienable rights protected by the Second Amendment are subject to the approval of people far too stupid to understand that you cannot possibly be safer by giving up the most effective way to defend yourself from someone who doesn’t give a shit about laws to begin with.

For the record, I would be willing to personally pay for a college to menopause supply of condoms for Sandra Fluke, if that was a guarantee that doing so would mean that she wouldn’t bear children and add to the legions of stupid that we are being overrun by.

We live in a nation where a growing segment of the population wants to label health care and a college education as “rights” to be made available to all for free. Not being able to think sufficiently clear to figure out that the most basic definition of slavery is one person claiming a right to the fruit of another person’s labor, they demand as a right the fruit of the labor of those who must bear the cost of that which they wish to receive for free.

We are a nation divided, shouting at each other from behind our respective barricades, not hearing a thing the other one is saying, and to be fair, not giving any more of a shit about their opinions than they do about ours.

The time for dialogue is over. It’s time for something else.

I remember the day, many years ago, when I had the first of my many political epiphanies. The day when I ran across something so elemental, so damned politically organic and centered that it moved me off the shifting ideological hill where I stood with uncertain footing, and transported me to this mountain of hard-as-granite, indisputable political logic where I still stand today.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man’s age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, ‘The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.’

Shuttered windows clouding my vision flew open, preconceived notions lay shattered and scattered across the landscape of my juvenile perception of the role of government in the lives of citizens, and understanding assaulted my eyes with the brightness of a midday sun.

It was my time for choosing, and choose I did.

They say the world has become too complex for simple answers. They are wrong. There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right. Winston Churchill said that ‘the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits-not animals.’ And he said, ‘There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.’

“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.

***

That was then, but this is now. We’ve taken more than just the first step into the darkness, and I don’t want to pretend that there is choosing left to be done by anyone

The time for choosing is done.

Look around you, everything is politicized.

I don’t listen to music I used to love to listen to because the musicians I used to follow are mostly leftist assholes.

I don’t watch movies because so are most actors and directors.

I don’t speak to a significant number of people who I used to be “friendly” with, because they are fucking blind leftists who look at me with their fucking condescension-filled eyes, as if I were some sort of fucking monkey boy just rescued from the deep jungles of Borneo that needs to be taught how to act around civilized people, when we discuss politics.

The time for choosing is done… it’s time for something else now.

I have absolutely nothing in common with the morons who seem to think that they are in charge in this nation at this time, so I choose whatever side it is that they are not on.

H. L. Mencken once said that “every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.”

I don’t know about the throat slitting part of that, but I am all about hoisting the black flag. I am all about spitting on my hands and getting to it with these fucking morons.

The time for intelligent debate is no more. I don’t give any more of a shit about what they think, than they do about what I think.

We’ve chosen, sides. There are very, very few undecided, and they have labeled themselves insignificant via their indecisiveness.

It’s time to get to it. Time to hoist the black flag, fling the grappling hooks and board their ship.

The time for choosing is done.

The time for “fuck you” has begun.

tattered CJ.1

Andrew Breitbart
February 1, 1969 – March 1, 2012