Posts Tagged ‘Toadies’

Obama’s Gun Control Philosophy: Arm Al-Qaida And Disarm Americans

by Bob Livingston on Monday, September 23rd, 2013

This is article 618 of 804 in the topic Terrorism
Obama’s Gun Control Philosophy: Arm Al-Qaida And Disarm Americans


Citing his authority under the Arms Export Control Act, President Barack Obama last week waived the prohibition against supplying terrorist groups with arms.

This indicates that Obama knows the so-called Syrian “rebels” are mostly al-Nusra and al-Qaida terrorists, despite the Administration’s repeated lies that it could identify the “moderate” elements of the opposition army.

The façade that the Syrian civil war is simply an extension of the Arab Spring uprising that began almost three years ago has fully fallen away. This is manifested by the opposition to U.S. interference in the Syrian conflict that is expressed by the majority of the American people.

The Syrian civil war is a war manufactured by the United States — as was the Libyan civil war — on behalf of the petrodollar and Saudi Arabia and Israel. Those countries are driving U.S. policy in the region.

That Obama would seek to overtly arm the very terrorist organization that the United States is supposedly at war with in at least four other countries — and that a number of members of the U.S. Congress support such a thing — demonstrates inconclusively America is being governed by psychopaths and controlled by foreigners, banksters and the military-industrial complex.

Only a couple of weeks ago, the United States appeared headed full-throttle toward a military attack on Syria. But the American people in large numbers looked up from their entertainment devices and awakened from their stupor long enough to recognize that the so-called “rebels” were actually terrorists who had battled U.S. troops and were raping, beheading and dismembering Christians; burning churches; beheading men and gunning down women whom they captured and believed supported the Syrian president; and slaughtering captured government soldiers and eating their hearts. They put unprecedented pressure on Congress to stop Obama and his warmongering, neocon toadies in their tracks.

A study by defense consultancy IHS Jane’s revealed that as many as 70 percent of the fighters aligned against Bashar Assad’s regime are terrorists or radical Islamists. Speaking at a discussion hosted by the globalist Council on Foreign Relations, Senator John McCain made the outrageous claim that only 30 percent were actually terrorists. He continues to rely on information provided by disgraced “researcher” Elizabeth O’Bagby.

If the makeup of the Free Syrian Army “rebels” wasn’t troubling enough, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday that an al-Qaida spinoff group called the ISIS is now fighting the so-called “moderate” rebels that Obama, McCain, etc., want to arm.

There is now a three-front war going on in Syria. The Journal reports that ISIS is attracting foreign jihadists who view the Syria war not as a means to overthrow the Assad regime but rather as a battleground for a Sunni holy war. They want to establish an Islamic state in Syria as step toward achieving a global Islamic state. Fully 7,000 to 10,000 members of the FSA are part of ISIS, and their numbers are growing. Also, al-Qaida militants from central command in Pakistan and Pakistani Taliban fighters have set up basis in Syria.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The Great Divide And Chaos Governance

by Bob Livingston on Monday, September 16th, 2013

This is article 371 of 471 in the topic Government Corruption
The Great Divide And Chaos Governance


There is an ever-widening divide between the statist elected class and its enforcers (government) and the mundanes, or hoi polloi.

The general populace would prefer to go about its daily business without interaction with or interference from anyone in or representing government. That is because government on almost all levels is at best oppressive, intrusive, unsympathetic and autonomic.

There is now an awakening and growing recognition that the U.S. government is self-serving, unrepresentative and supererogatory and that it needs to be reined in. The divide and awakening are best demonstrated over the past couple of weeks in the reaction of the people to the possibility of Syrian intervention.

President Barack Obama and his neocon toadies have been desperate to make a case for military intervention in Syria in order to fulfill the will of their globalist masters. I explained why this is so last week.

However, the mundanes recognized the folly and hypocrisy of such an endeavor. The United States has been embroiled in Mideast wars against radical Islamists, jihadists and the CIA-created terror organization al-Qaida for decades.

The people bought into the notion sold by the elites that the wars were necessary to protect American freedoms and export democracy to regions that had known only oppressive theocracy or totalitarianism. They suffered the expenses of nation building under the false notion that the radicals and Islamists might come to either like the U.S. or at least stop hating the U.S. for its “freedoms.”

So when Obama and warmongers like Senator John McCain and his lackey Senator Lindsey Graham embraced al-Qaida-backed “rebels” in Syria — a group of violent and barbarous fanatics who are slaughtering Christians; raping, beheading and dismembering women and children: eating the hearts of vanquished foes; and executing surrendered captives — the slumbering masses looked up from their entertainment devices and began confronting the elected class en masse.

By more than four to one (and, according to some in Congress, 10 to one), the people came out against taking sides in the Syrian conflict and especially against aiding those committing the atrocities. The people recognized that the entire Syria narrative is a lie. They are coming to understand that the lie expands to Libya as well as the reasons given for deposing Moammar Gadhafi and the excuses provided to explain the attack on the Benghazi consulate and the murders of CIA agent Chris Stevens and three others attached to the gun-running operation that was transferring arms to the Syrian rebels.

It is attempts to keep this operation under wraps and out of sight that are behind the Benghazi cover-up and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s screed before Congress that the incident didn’t matter.

The mundanes are finally recognizing that decades of war have led to the expansion of the intrusive spying apparatus and the growth of the surveillance state. Revelations by Edward Snowden that the NSA is collecting and reading all telephone calls, emails, text messages and electronic data from every American served to give pause to even the most ardent support of the big government nanny state.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Don’t Try That In Montana!

by Chuck Baldwin on Thursday, July 26th, 2012

This is article 201 of 603 in the topic Gun Rights

By now, everybody in the country knows about the horrific shootings at a packed theater in the metro Denver area last week. Twelve people were killed and scores were wounded. Predictably, gun-control zealots nationwide are shouting for stricter gun control laws. Not only that, some are even calling for the TSA to set up airport-style screening devices in movie theaters.

So, if the TSA is going to set up screening devices for movie theaters, why not grocery stores, department stores, malls, strip malls, churches, boy scout meetings, girl scout meetings, soccer matches, little league baseball games, concerts, rodeos, etc., etc. Heck, let’s just put TSA screeners at any gathering that attracts more than, say, ten people! What about the cost, you ask? Who cares? It’s all about being safe, right? If big-government toadies have taught us anything over the past several years it is that the American people are a bunch of helpless, defenseless sheep who owe all of their safety and security to the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-caring federal government, right?

Whether the Denver shooter was a plain old wacko or a product of some sort of sophisticated MK Ultra-type assassination program, as some are suggesting, the reason twelve people died and so many were wounded is because the laws of the city and rules of the movie theater demanded that patrons disarm themselves. Had only one or two individuals in that movie theater been armed, the outcome could have been much different. Twelve people are dead, because the movie theater was a gun-free zone! Obviously, bad guys do not pay any attention to gun-free zones, except to note that such zones create a free-killing environment.

Have readers ever noticed that these so-called “madmen” are never crazy enough to try and attack guys at a gun range? Gee! I wonder why not?

One thing the national news media will always ignore is the practice of lawful self-defense. For example, most people are probably not aware of the fact that American citizens use a firearm to defend themselves more than 2.4 million times EVERY YEAR. That is more than 6,500 times EVERY DAY. This means that, each year, firearms are used 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. Furthermore, of the 2.4 million self-defense cases, more than 192,000 are by women defending themselves against sexual assault. And in less than eight percent of those occasions is a shot actually fired. The vast majority of the time (92%), the mere presence of a firearm helps to avert a major crime from occurring. That is what Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) concluded after extensive research. According to Rep. Bartlett, the number of defensive uses is four times the number of crimes reported committed with guns.

John Lott, senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, agrees with Bartlett. His book “More Guns, Less Crime” documents the fact that firearms in the hands of private citizens are actually a major deterrent to crime–instead of being a cause of crime.

One thing America’s founders unanimously agreed on was the necessity of free people to keep and bear arms. In light of the Denver shootings, Thomas Jefferson’s counsel makes even more sense. He said, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . .

1 2 3
Go straight to Post


by Burt Prelutsky on Wednesday, April 25th, 2012

This is article 577 of 1015 in the topic Obama

by BurtPrelutsky

Some people insist that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. It is true that in some basic ways, all politicians are alike. After all, they all want to get re-elected, so they have to spend an inordinate amount of time diving into various pockets seeking campaign contributions. They also have to compromise unless they have overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress, as Obama did from 2009-2011, and even he had to finally use bribery and intimidation in order to get ObamaCare, his signature piece of legislation, passed.

It’s among civilians that one sees the greatest differences between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives, as you’d know if you’ve ever attended a Tea Party gathering, tend to be civil, respectful of opposing points of view, religious and in awe of the Founding Fathers. Liberals, on the other hand, enjoy behaving like barbarians, whether it’s at Wisconsin’s state capitol, on Wall Street or in Watts; do everything they can to deprive conservatives of free speech; oppose all religious symbols and ceremonies, while pretending that’s the intention of the 1st Amendment; and regularly demonstrate their contempt of people like Washington, Madison and Jefferson, whom they dismiss as slave-owning white guys.

Russian Pres. Dimitry Medvedev

When white conservative politicians are disgruntled, they express their grievances to the media. When black liberal politicians are disgruntled, they start shouting during a committee hearing or during a House session, as Sheila Jackson Lee and Bobby Rush have done in recent months. Even when the chairman tries to silence their outbursts by pounding his gavel, they take it as nothing more than a musical accompaniment. And because white congressmen are a spineless bunch of toadies, ever fearful they’ll be branded racists, they never even think of disciplining these obnoxious yahoos.

The good news is that Obama, mainly through his hand puppet, Eric Holder, has displayed his own racism so often that I expect he will experience the appropriate blowback in November. I am convinced that a large number of Independents who voted for him last time because they wanted to feel good about voting for the first black president have experienced a depressing change of heart.

Frankly, even though I have never regarded Obama as particularly bright, his tossing in his two cents during the recent Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman contretemps struck me as being particularly idiotic. After all, he had no more facts at hand than the rest of us, but he couldn’t resist pointing out that if he had a son, he’d look like young Martin. Right, and if he donned a hoodie and a pair of sunglasses the way that Rep. Rush did, he, too, would resemble the young ne’er-do-well. So what? The truth is, if Obama’s dad had been Peruvian instead of Kenyan, it’s George Zimmerman he’d look like.

The political fact of life is that Obama doesn’t have to suck up to blacks. After all, they’re obviously every bit as willing to overlook the fact that he’s half white as he is.

Click to continue reading “THE ELEPHANT AND THE JACKASS”
Go straight to Post

First NDAA; Now Enemy Expatriation Act

by Chuck Baldwin on Thursday, January 12th, 2012

This is article 82 of 135 in the topic US Congress

On the heels of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), otherwise known as the “Indefinite Detention Act,” comes another draconian bill designed to give the federal government the power to turn American citizens into enemies of the state for virtually any reason it deems necessary. Stephen D. Foster, Jr. has the story.

“Congress is considering HR 3166 and S. 1698 also known as the Enemy Expatriation Act, sponsored by Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Charles Dent (R-PA). This bill would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship without being convicted of being ‘hostile’ against the United States. In other words, you can be stripped of your nationality for ‘engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States.’ Legally, the term ‘hostilities’ means any conflict subject to the laws of war but considering the fact that the War on Terror is a little ambiguous and encompassing, any action could be labeled as supporting terrorism.”

Foster goes on to say, “I hope I’m wrong, but it sounds to me like this is a loophole for indefinitely detaining Americans. Once again, you just have to be accused of supporting hostilities which could be defined any way the government sees fit. Then the government can strip your citizenship and apply the indefinite detention section of the NDAA without the benefit of a trial.”

See Foster’s report HERE

Ever since Congress passed the Patriot Act back in 2001, it seems the floodgates have been opened for more and more intrusions and abridgements of those fundamental liberties expressly protected in the Bill of Rights. From the Patriot Act, to the Military Commissions Act, to the NDAA (Indefinite Detention Act), and to now the Enemy Expatriation Act (EEA), these big government toadies in Washington, D.C., are clearly and unmistakingly declaring war on the American people.

I invite readers to see my column on the NDAA HERE

Have we forgotten the MIAC report out of the State of Missouri back in 2009? In that official State report, supporters of Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin were identified as potential dangerous “militia members,” and Missouri State law enforcement officials were notified to be on guard. Beyond that, anyone that identified themselves as being pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, anti-Federal Reserve, Christians who believe in the return of Christ, and even returning Iraq War veterans were likewise targeted as potentially dangerous to Missouri State law enforcement personnel.

After the MIAC report surfaced, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and I sent a letter to the governor of Missouri demanding that the report be removed and that the State of Missouri repudiate the report. After a firestorm of outrage by thousands of Americans all over the country (not just in Missouri) the State of Missouri did indeed remove and repudiate the report.

Totalitarian regimes throughout history have attempted to marginalize those people that the state intended to target for persecution. Once a group or groups of people had been sufficiently marginalized, it wasn’t long before public condemnation and then military retaliation took place.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Why the US Credit Rating Was Downgraded

by Alan Caruba on Monday, August 8th, 2011

This is article 33 of 526 in the topic Government Spending

To begin with, the debt ceiling was lifted in part to hold onto our historic AAA rating of U.S. securities, but that didn’t work. On August 5th, Standard & Poor’s, one of three major rating agencies, downgraded the U.S. to AA+, the first such downgrade in the history of the nation. The liberal media immediately attacked Standard & Poor’s, but odds are they will be joined soon enough by Moody’s and Fitch.

As the air is filled with charges and countercharges as to who is to blame for the downgrade, and blaming George W. Bush has become a joke (yes, he does share some of the blame), the numbers tell the story. As the Washington Times recently noted, “In 2008, the federal budget deficit was around 3 percent of gross domestic product. In 2011, it’s around 11 percent.”

“Total federal debt was $10.7 trillion at the end of 2008 and is currently $14.6 trillion. Debt as a percentage of GDP was a painful 69 percent at the end of the Bush years, but Mr. Obama is pushing it over 100 percent, another disgraceful historic milestone.”

In the week leading up to the last-minute agreement to lift the debt ceiling the Tea Party movement’s members were being called “terrorists”, a notion so idiotic that it defies belief. As the debt ceiling debate wound down, that was all one heard from Democrat politicians and their mainstream media toadies. It is a measure of their desperation.

Neither the President, nor the leadership of the Democratic Party apparently got the message of the 2010 elections that took away the control of the House and gave it to Republicans and new Tea Party caucus members. The initial Democrat response was to call them “extremists” for wanting to get spending under control, but mostly to repeal Obamacare.

The House, in fact, did vote to repeal Obamacare. The Tea Party movement began with its opposition to that legislative monstrosity. On March 9, 2010, Americans filled the streets of Washington, DC, right up to the stairs of the U.S. Capitol Building. David Axelrod, then a White House consigliore to President Obama, dismissed them saying, “They are wrong.”

They were not wrong then and, in many respects, they are not wrong now. They are, however, impatient. That is historically American because we have always been a people in a hurry. The Tea Party movement rose out of widespread opposition to Obamacare.

At some point the nation has to begin the long hard process of reversing a decades-long spending binge by both the government and individual Americans, many of whom turned their homes into ATMs or purchased homes they could not afford.

The housing bubble burst in September 2008 at the end of President Bush’s second term. It’s worth remembering that, when Bush came into office President Clinton had bequeathed him a budget surplus.

Bush expanded Medicare with a prescription benefit. When 9/11 occurred on his watch, it drained a trillion dollars out of the economy. He responded with a war in Afghanistan and then added a war in Iraq for good measure. They seemed like a good idea at the time, less so now. The Bush tax cuts reduced government revenues and were very popular, but bills must be paid. Massive borrowing ensued.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Foggy Bottom Bottoms Out.

by Skip MacLure on Saturday, February 5th, 2011

The state of the State Department can be best described as useless, in any practical sense. ‘Foggy Bottom’ pretty aptly describes the decision making process in our State Department.

I really hope that Hillary keeps to her stated intention not to run for president in 2012. She’d have a pretty rough time defending her performance as Secretary of State. Garbage in… garbage out. But then, Foggy Bottom is a garbage pit.

Its ‘new mission statement’ reeks of weakness and accommodation. It sounds like Obama and his spectacularly inept and naive prosecution of this nation’s foreign interests. Like the government of its leader, our State Department doesn’t work. No surprises there, but it hasn’t been serving the purposes for which it was created and instead has become an instrument for advancing the progressive agenda of its masters.

It’s not that there are not some good people at State, but they are far overshadowed by the politically inspired hacks and toadies.

Democrat administrations have no problem getting the fogs to implement the wishes of their masters. A Republican administration would receive no such dispensation or cooperation from the denizens of murky places. As has been noted by previous Republican administrations, cooperation in the implementation of policy was grudging at best, and if it was something the left was against… good luck at getting anything through.

Our State Department needs a thorough cleaning and examination of its role in the security picture of a nation at war.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2011

Go straight to Post

Middle East Crisis Looms – Obama More Ineffectual Than Ever.

by Skip MacLure on Sunday, January 30th, 2011

This is article 320 of 1260 in the topic International

I’m one of those who sees another Iranian revolution in the events now taking place in Egypt. It’s just too eerily reminiscent of the events leading up to the overthrow of the Shah, after Jimmy Carter refused to support him as an ally of the United States.

The Islamist radicals throughout the the region are licking their slavering chops, hoping that the unrest in Egypt becomes a general conflagration through which they can impose their rigid sixth century ideology on the middle east and establish their worldwide caliphate… if only the pesky United States would get out of the way.

The enemies of this country have had their best chance with Barack Hussein Obama. The hardcore communists in this country, not a few of whom reside in the Democrat side of the aisle, are doing everything in their power to prop up their failed golden boy… along with the ideological toadies in the Lame Stream Press with their slavish devotion to all things Obama, which is to say, all things Marxist.

What is glaringly apparent is that Barack Obama, far from being the mover and shaker his hacks make him out to be, is in fact probably the single biggest laughing stock in the world. We’re living in a world which is on the precipice. The world needs a strong, stable, militarily powerful United States and a stable dollar to bolster economies around the globe.

Barack Obama is as close to a lame duck president as you can get. Let’s just hope, with the new Conservative Republicans in power, that we can politically isolate Obama until he can be voted out of office.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2011

Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin