Brown’s Funeral, the Exploiters, and America’s Police

by on August 26th, 2014

Though skillfully orchestrated to transform convenience store robber Michael Brown into a heroic martyr for civil rights, his funeral was hijacked into becoming a platform for the evil and obscene slander of police and America, perpetrated by the usual deplorable suspects: Al Sharpton, Democrats, and the MSM.

Candidly, as a black man, it is easy to feel like the odd man out – consistently finding myself taking the opposite side from a majority of black Americans.  In 2008, over 96% of blacks voted for Obama.  I did not.

While I am familiar with black Republican author, orator, and advisor to U.S. presidents Booker T. Washington, I only recently came across this amazing quote from him, which nailed the Rev. Sharptons and Rev Jacksons of America back in 1911.

There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs – partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.

Wow!  Booker T. Washington had these lowlife scoundrels figured out way back then.  He perfectly described the shameful, despicable exploitation of the goodness of the American people on display at the Michael Brown funeral.

Folks, in a nutshell, the left’s selective outrage over Brown’s death is about getting paid and ginning up rage-based black voter turnout for Democrats in November.  Apparently, the Democrats and MSM consider a young black male’s life of value only when it is taken by a white person.  Epidemic black-on-black shootings get only a yawn from Dems and the MSM while they sip their mocha lattes.

Insidiously, irresponsibly, and strategically, President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder even threw in their two cents, sharing their uncomfortable experiences with police as black males.

Allow me to offer a few of my numerous anecdotal encounters with police.

In the 1970s, my cousin, who lived in a low-income neighborhood in Baltimore, had a nervous breakdown.  He held his two toddler sons hostage in his basement, threatening to kill his kids and himself.  Shortly after I arrived on the scene, two white cops responded to my cousin’s wife’s emergency phone call.

In seconds, the young, slim, fit cop dashed up the ten front steps into the house.  He then waited for his partner’s instructions.  His much older obese partner moved a bit slower.  After negotiating the steps, he waddled to the open basement door.

Upon catching his breath, with wisdom, experience, and compassion, the seasoned police officer talked my cousin out of the basement.  “C’mon son, I know you’re hurtin’.  But you don’t wanna do this.”

Fearful for my cousin’s life, I was extremely relieved.  The incident totally contradicted what my militant black college associates said to expect from white “pigs”: shoot the n***** and ask questions later.

On another occasion, my wife and I were surrounded by police cars at a traffic light and ordered out of our car.  A bank robbery had just taken place.

Click to continue reading “Brown’s Funeral, the Exploiters, and America’s Police”
Go straight to Post

Obama ready to go it alone on UN climate change treaty, ignoring the US Senate and ratification

by on August 26th, 2014

With one title in the New York Times pointing out “Democrats see winning issue in Carbon Plan,” it isn’t too surprised the Obama administration is just going to ignore the Democrat controlled Senate.  Apparently a UN agreement is being planned for next year (a non-election year) from the Obama administration.  From the New York Times:

The Obama administration is working to forge a sweeping international climate change agreement to compel nations to cut their planet-warming fossil fuel emissions, but without ratification from Congress. . . .

To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.

“If you want a deal that includes all the major emitters, including the U.S., you cannot realistically pursue a legally binding treaty at this time,” said Paul Bledsoe, a top climate change official in the Clinton administration who works closely with the Obama White House on international climate change policy. . . .

“Unfortunately, this would be just another of many examples of the Obama administration’s tendency to abide by laws that it likes and to disregard laws it doesn’t like — and to ignore the elected representatives of the people when they don’t agree,” Senator Mitch McConnell . . . .

There is a little irony in the NY Times piece:

The Obama administration’s climate change negotiators are desperate to avoid repeating the failure of Kyoto, the United Nations’ first effort at a legally binding global climate change treaty. Nations around the world signed on to the deal, which would have required the world’s richest economies to cut their carbon emissions, but the Senate refused to ratify the treaty, ensuring that the world’s largest historic carbon polluter was not bound by the agreement. . . .

What isn’t mentioned is that even without the Kyoto agreement the US is one country that has actually seen a significant drop in carbon emissions.

Go straight to Post

Is the tea party dead/ more MSM lies

by on August 26th, 2014

I have been engaged in a series of interviews, radio/TV discussing the topic, “Is The Tea Party Dead?” Because I am black, every interview has begun with me being asked my take on Ferguson before discussing the Tea Party.

Talk about the excrement hitting the fan; liberal interviewers are outraged when I say blacks are not routinely shot by police and that the MSM is promoting a deplorable, divisive and irresponsible false narrative.

One radio interviewer laughed at me saying she was looking at stats on her computer screen which proved otherwise. During another radio interview the host cited stats that say one hundred thousand people are shot by police every year in America. Bill O’Reilly stated the true FBI stats. Out of 12 million arrests only 400 fatal shootings; many justified. http://bit.ly/1v2lRIi

Clearly, the Left is using lies to spread their despicable evil lie that blacks are targeted and murdered by police. I am struck by the liberal interviewer’s passion behind spreading their lie. They act as if their belief is as true as there is a sun in the sky. The liberal media’s attitude is, of course the police murder black males. The media will slap around anyone who states otherwise.

The MSM’s shameful coverage of Ferguson is as criminal as yelling fire in a crowded theater. Remember the outbreak of black flash mob attacks on whites? http://bit.ly/1pW4gOu No one in the MSM is talking about the “Knock Out Game” also known as “polar-bear hunting.” Mostly black youths bet whether or not they can knock out an unsuspecting innocent white person with one powerful punch; women, seniors and more. http://bit.ly/19SKoEv

My God, what is wrong with these people in the MSM? Furthering the socialist/progressive agenda and bolstering Democrat voter registration and turnout has trumped all sense of decency and morality. If dividing Americans along racial lines and selling millions of black youths the lie that whitey (Republicans, Conservatives and police) are out to get them will further the Left’s cause, the Left says so be it. This truly is spiritual wickedness in high places.

After several rounds of verbally beating me up side the head, realizing they can not force me to agree with their claim that cops are shooting blacks at will, the liberal interviewers move on to gleefully proclaiming the death of the Tea Party.

They cite how numerous Tea Party candidates have been defeated in primaries by GOP establishment candidates. As chairman of The Conservative Campaign Committee, my team, my wife and I have been boots on the ground in Mississippi, Tennessee and other Senate races. We are away from home so much that upon our return, Sammy our greyhound only gives me an acknowledging glance and retires to his bed. I think the pet sitter has conspired to steal Sammy’s affection from me. But, that’s another story.

In every Senate race, we (CCC) have witnessed the intense involvement, commitment and enthusiasm of the local Tea Party groups in support of our candidates. Every race has been a David vs Goliath scenario; highly qualified grassroots funded Tea Party conservative candidates vs deep pocketed GOP establishment and big business funded and MSM supported Democrat-Lite GOP primary candidates.

Click to continue reading “Is the tea party dead/ more MSM lies”
Go straight to Post

Common Core Rapidly Losing Support

by on August 26th, 2014

By Alan Caruba

As their children either start or return to school, parents are naturally concerned about the quality of education they receive from kindergarten through twelfth grade. In the past, before the teachers unions gained virtual control of the schools and before the federal government decided it had to impose “national standards”, it was the job of local boards of education to ensure students learned the basics—the three R’s—and, if history is any indicator, they did.
There should be no federal intervention in our school systems, but programs such as 2001’s “No Child Left Behind” and Obama’s “Race to the Top” have conditioned people to accept its role. The most recent example is Common Core, but it is the creation of the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. The support it has received from the White House, the Department of Education, and voices on Capitol Hill has left many with the impression it is a federal program. That doesn’t make it any less awful.
If you want to learn the facts about it, read a brief analysis by Joy Pullman, “Common Core: A Bad Choice for America”, which you can download for free from The Heartland Institute’s website or purchase copies in quantity. Pullman, a research fellow, is the managing editor of Heartland’s “School Reform News”,published ten times per year. For the record,  I am a Heartland advisor.
As Pullman notes in her analysis, “In 2010, every state but Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia adopted Common Core education standards, a set of requirements in each grade in math and English language arts.” As school begins this year, four states, Indiana, Oklahoma, Missouri, and South Carolina have already dropped the program. Watch other states such as Louisiana and Wisconsin do the same.
Here’s why. As Pullman notes in a recent article, for the first time the annual Pi Kappa Delta/Gallup poll revealed that “a majority of Americans—81%–has heard of Common Core. And 60% oppose it.”  As more Americans learn more about Common Core, they too will oppose it, but the most intriguing finding of the poll was that, among teachers, there was a drop of support from 76% last year to 46% this year! The poll demonstrated that “Majorities wanted local school boards to have far more control over what schools teach than state or federal governments.”
Pullman said, “Everyone is for ‘standards’ in the abstract. Everyone is not for ‘standards’ that, like Common Core, coerce teachers and schools, and impose bad education theories on the countries.”
“Nationalizing education, like nationalizing anything,” says Pullman “requires compromise to get enacted. And compromise inevitably sacrifices quality. Quality has to grow from the ground up, through cooperation and competition, or it will never exist.”
What teachers and parents subject to Common Core requirements have learned rather quickly is that the program has a number of serious flaws. It not only slows the process of learning multiplication, it dampens the development of the creative thinking process, and offers a skewed, leftist selection of reading materials about U.S. history.
Pullman says, “The most important thing to understand about education standards is that research has demonstrated they have no effect on student achievement. That’s right: no effect at all.

Click to continue reading “Common Core Rapidly Losing Support”
Go straight to Post

Update on state waiting periods. Judicial decision in California provides a useful summary of waiting period laws.

by on August 25th, 2014

The court’s decision in SILVESTER v. Harris has

ten states and the District of Columbia impose a waiting period between the time of purchase and the time of delivery of a firearm.  Three states and the District of Columbia have waiting period laws for the purchase of all firearms: California (10 days), District of Columbia (10 days), Illinois (3 days for pistols, 1 day for long guns), and Rhode Island (7 days).  Four states have waiting periods for hand guns:  Florida (3 days), Hawaii (14 days), Washington (up to 5 days from the time of purchase for the sheriff to complete a background check), and Wisconsin (2 days). Connecticut has a waiting period for long guns that is tied to an authorization to purchase from the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. Minnesota and Maryland have a waiting period for the purchase of handguns and assault rifles (7 days). There is no federal waiting period law.  See18 U.S.C. § 922(s) (Brady Act‟s 5-day waiting period expired in 1998).

For California, the history of waiting periods is given as such:

In 1923, the California Legislature created awaiting period for handguns,whereby no handgun, pistol, or other concealable firearm could be delivered to its purchaser on the day of purchase. . . .

In 1953, the 1923 handgun waiting-period law was codified into the California Penal Code with no substantive changes. . . .   One California court has cited legislative hearing testimony from 1964 in which witnesses testified that this 1953 law was “originally enacted to cool people off,” but that this law was “not enforced with regard to individual transfers through magazine sales nor at swap meets.”  . . . .

In 1955, the California Legislature extended the handgun waiting period from 1 day to 3 days. . . . No legislative history has been cited that addresses why the waiting period was extended from 1 to 3 days.

In 1965, the California Legislature extended the handgun waiting period from 3 days to 5 days.  . . . The legislative history indicates that the Legislature extended the waiting period from 3 days to 5 days in 1965 because the 3-day waiting period did not provide Cal. DOJ sufficient time to conduct proper background checks on prospective concealable firearms purchasers, before delivery of the firearms to the purchasers.   . . .

Additionally, a report from the 1975-1976 session of the Senate Judiciary Committee indicates that the “purpose of the 5-day provision is to permit the law enforcement authorities to investigate the purchaser’s record, before he actually acquires the firearm, to determine whether he falls within the class of persons prohibited from possessing concealed firearms.”  . . .  No legislative history relating to the 1965 law has been cited that relates to a “cooling off” period.

In 1975, the California Legislature extended the handgun waiting period from 5 days to 15 days. . . .  The legislative history indicates that the California Legislature extended the waiting period from 5 days to 15 days in order to “[g]ive law enforcement authorities sufficient time to investigate the records of purchasers of handguns prior to delivery of the handguns.”

In 1991, the California Legislature expanded the waiting period to cover all firearms. . .

Click to continue reading “Update on state waiting periods. Judicial decision in California provides a useful summary of waiting period laws.”
Go straight to Post

OBAMA: AMNESTY FOR UNDOCUMENTED SHOPPERS?

by on August 25th, 2014

bo

Will President Obama grant amnesty to undocumented shoppers?

looters

“Undocumented Shopper Compelled by Racial Outrage to Loot Beauty Store”

FIX

Radical progressive socialist democrats in the progressive media forgive looting …

WTOP – “My Take with Clinton Yates” — August 21, 2014

CLINTON YATES: I’ve gotten a lot of emails recently regarding my thoughts about the situation in Ferguson, Missouri, many from former or current law enforcement officials, arguing one of two things: either they believe that the social contract that they think grants them near absolute power is something that everybody should buy into, or they can’t understand why anyone would loot in the wake of a controversial death.

On the first point, of course being a police officer is a difficult and risky job. But there’s an argument that if you believe that resorting to trigger-happy overzealousness is the lone way to guarantee your own safety then maybe law enforcement is not what you should be doing. The goal is to help people, and they will then respect the marginal level of authority you’re given over their lives. If they live in fear, that’s what we call a police state.

As for looting, material goods, by definition, are typically replaceable. Of course, the violence associated with the act of vandalism and then theft is not desirable, but think of it this way: In this case, saying that looting is never acceptable is implicitly saying that personal property is worth more than life itself. I’m Clinton Yates and that’s my take.

Of course, progressive socialists democrats often believe that there is no such thing as private property – and everything is owned by the state and subject to distribution on the basis of the Marxist dictum: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Governed by enlightened individuals for the collective good of the people.

Bottom line …

In the Orwellian world of the progressive socialist democrat, good is evil, evil is good, right is wrong, and wrong is right – when a White breaks a window and steals, it’s felony burglary; when a Black breaks a window and steals, it’s an expression of racial outrage.

The truth is simple to see …

OBAMA-N1

– steve

Go straight to Post

Scary: Harvard Prof. Charles Ogletee just makes things up about the Ferguson case

by on August 25th, 2014

Professor Charles Ogletree’s statements about what happened in Ferguson even seems to make Chris Matthews uncomfortable.  The strong certainty by which he claims that Michael Brown was shot in the back and that he had his hands up and was trying to surrender is surprising.  It is concerning that a professor at Harvard Law School

Go straight to Post

The Jihadi Serial Killer No One’s Talking About [plus: read the charging documents]

by on August 24th, 2014

Screen Shot 2014-08-22 at 9.18.25 AMThe Jihadi Serial Killer No One’s Talking About
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2014

For two bloody months, an armed jihadist serial killer ran loose across the country. At least four innocent men died this spring and summer as acts of “vengeance” on behalf of aggrieved Muslims, the self-confessed murderer has now proclaimed. Have you heard about this horror? Probably not.

The usual suspects who decry hate crimes and gun violence haven’t uttered a peep. Why? Like O.J.’s glove: If the narrative don’t fit, you must acquit. The admitted killer will be cast as just another “lone wolf” whose familiar grievances and bloodthirsty Islamic invocations mean nothing.

I say: Enough with the whitewashing. Meet Ali Muhammad Brown. His homicidal Islamic terror spree took him from coast to coast. The 29-year-old career thug admitted to killing Leroy Henderson in Seattle in April; Ahmed Said and Dwone Anderson-Young in Seattle on June 1; and college student Brendan Tevlin, 19, in Essex County, New Jersey, on June 25. Tevlin was gunned down in his family Jeep on his way home from a friend’s house. Ballistics and other evidence linked all the victims to Muhammad Brown. Police apprehended him last month hiding in an encampment near the Watchung Mountains of West Orange, New Jersey.

While he was on the run, he disguised himself in a Muslim keffiyeh. He carried a notebook with jihadist scribblings and advice on evading detection. I obtained the latest charging documents filed in Washington state, which detail the defiant domestic terrorist’s motives.

READ THE CHARGING DOCUMENT HERE: 20140820145129074

Muhammad Brown told investigators that Tevlin’s slaying was a “just kill.” The devout Islamic adherent proclaimed: “My mission is vengeance. For the lives, millions of lives are lost every day.” Echoing jihadist Fort Hood mass killer Nidal Hasan, Muhammad Brown cited Muslim deaths in “Iraq, Syria, (and) Afghanistan” as the catalysts for his one-man Islamic terror campaign. “All these lives are taken every single day by America, by this government. So a life for a life.

When a detective asked him to clarify whether all four murders were “done for vengeance for the actions of the United States in the Middle East,” Muhammad Brown stated unequivocally: “Yes.” He added that he was “just doing (his) small part.”

Seattle’s left-wing mayor, Ed Murray, rushed to issue a statement — which might as well have sported an insipid “Coexist” bumper sticker across the page — asserting that Muhammad Brown’s seething, deadly hatred did “not reflect the values of Muslims.” But the fact is Ali Muhammad Brown has plenty of company. Seattle alone has been a long-festering hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic jihadism.

In 2011, a Muslim terror ring led by Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif and Walli Mujahidh plotted “to kill officers and employees of the Department of Defense who worked at the (Military Entrance Processing Stations) located in the Federal Center South building in Seattle, Washington, and to kill other persons assisting such officers and employees in the performance of their duties” using “fully-automatic weapons pistols, and fragmentation grenades.”

In 2007, Seattle jihadist James Ujaama pleaded guilty to terrorism charges related to his plan to establish a terror-training ground in Bly, Oregon. He had previously pleaded guilty to aiding the Taliban.

Click to continue reading “The Jihadi Serial Killer No One’s Talking About [plus: read the charging documents]“
Go straight to Post

Bergdahl swap: Federal agency says Obama administration are lawbreakers

by on August 24th, 2014

The Obama administration violated U.S. law when it secretly exchanged five Guantanamo Bay imprisoned terrorists for a U.S. Army soldier — who was captured by the Taliban after allegedly deserting his post — and the violation is punishable by jail time, suspension and removal from office, according to a report from an Inside the Beltway watchdog group on Friday.

Judicial Watch obtained a copy of a government investigation summary that reveals the U.S. Department of Defense violated section 8111 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2014 when its officials traded five terrorists being detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the release of a U.S. prisoner of war being held by members of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

According to a Examiner news report on the prisoner swap, the five terrorists were turned over to the nation of Qatar — a nation considered by counterterrorism experts to be highly suspect — without giving notice to members of certain congressional oversight committees. What Section 8111 prohibits is the Defense Department “using appropriated funds to transfer any individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay unless the Secretary of Defense notifies certain congressional committees at least 30 days before the transfer.” Because officials at the DOD used its appropriations to break the law, in addition to violating a provision of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2014, officials also violated the Anti-Deficiency Act.

The investigative arm of the House of Representatives , Government Accountability Office (GAO), accused President Obama, acting in his capacity as Commander in Chief, of breaking a “clear and unambiguous” law when he authorized the swapping of five high-level terrorists for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who is accused of deserting his guard post and going AWOL in Afghanistan in 2009.

According to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the GAO described a violation that is a serious breach of federal law which may have severe consequences for the perpetrator or perpetrators. Penalties may include fines, imprisonment, administrative discipline, suspension from duty without pay or removal from office, the rules specifically state.

“Congress must be notified before acts of this magnitude are committed and the president completely disregarded the legislative branch. In fact the Department of Defense (DOD) failed to notify Congress at least 30 days in advance of the exchange, a flagrant violation of the law, and misused nearly $1 million of a wartime account to make the transfer,” the GAO report says.

“They held positions of great importance within the hard-core anti-American Taliban, including the Chief of Staff of the Taliban Army and the Taliban Deputy Minister of Intelligence. They have American blood on their hands and surely as night follows day they will return to the fight. In effect, we released the ‘Taliban Dream Team.’ The United States is less safe because of these actions,” according to Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Judicial Watch officials stated:.

“In a nutshell, Obama and his appointees flipped the finger at Congress, the American public and the rule of law. We’ve seen this many times during this president’s two terms and will likely see it over and over again before he moves out of the White House.

Click to continue reading “Bergdahl swap: Federal agency says Obama administration are lawbreakers”
Go straight to Post

9/11 Truth Movement making big comeback this year, says media watchdog

by on August 24th, 2014

As the United States government ponders its response to the global jihad, especially with the likes of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) now tearing through Iraq, al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) squeezing the life out of Yemen, Al Shabaab terrorizing both Somalia and Kenya, Boko Haram is Nigeria, Al Nusra Front leading the charge in Syria and other Islamist groups, the news media are focusing attention on what’s commonly referred to as the 9/11 Truth Movement.

During the days following the devastating destruction and death that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, there were a number of Americans who questioned the media’s coverage of what actually happened to the World Trade Center and the U.S. Pentagon.

While in the midst the President George W. Bush administration there were several media outlets that gave credence to the voices from the 9/11 Truth Movement — of Truthers, for short — but when President Barack Obama took office, those same news media voices were no longer interested in pursuing the story and theories put forward by the so-called Truthers.

However, on April 3, 2014 the well-respected and relatively unbiased C-Span cable television show “Washington Journal” invited the usually bombastic Democratic congressman, Representative Jim McDermott who appeared to have opened up the 9/11 controversy once again.

McDermott (D-WA), while a guest on “Washington Journal” took a question via telephone from a member of the television audience about the destruction of New York City’s World Trade Center’s Building 7 on 9/11. The caller addressed the evidence by several architects and structural engineers who believe that explosives of some kind brought it down. The Congressman McDermott surprised many when he said that after seeing videos covering the issue and “the questions surrounding it are legitimate, meriting further investigation.”

“…one day we will have further examination of that issue…I think the sooner the better, but that’s just my personal view.” said McDermott during his C-Span interview.

With that, a few months later, the host of “Washington Journal,” Peter Slen invited the leader of a group of engineers, architects and building construction experts onto his show to discuss the allegations that, in essence, the 9/11 tragedy that destroyed an entire Manhattan building complex and killed close to 3,000 innocent people, was in fact an inside job.

Slen’s guest, Richard Gage, explained that his group of experts, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, believes that the World Trade Center was brought down by explosive demolition on September 11, 2001 and not because of aircraft flying into the Twin Towers. Gage founded his group of highly credentialed experts in 2006 and said its mission was to “expose the official lies and cover-up surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 in a way that inspires the people to overcome denial and understand the truth.” Mr. Gage spoke via video link from San Francisco, California.

According to Gage, AE911Truth has studied the available information regarding the destruction of World Trade Center’s Buildings 1, 2, and 7. He stated that the evidence gathered includes video and audio recordings, photographs, eyewitness accounts, and physical evidence.

Click to continue reading “9/11 Truth Movement making big comeback this year, says media watchdog”
Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin