Grassroots Movements And Speaking Up Do Make A Difference

Posted in Democrat Freedom of Speech Political Cartoon Tea Parties with No Comments

More:

Obama’s Priorities Are Disordered

Obama is clearly bothered by the Supreme Court’s abrogation of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Legislation. He has attacked the decision with vehemence numerous times including during this State of the Union address with the Supreme Court Justices sitting right in front of him. Is he that afraid of allowing unfettered free speech in our democracy? Absolutely!

Too bad he has not displayed such vigor and attention to the real important issues facing the American people like jobs, the economy, and terrorism.

Is Freedom Of Speech Really An Emergency?
By Thomas McArdle       Investors Business Daily   01/26/2010

A full year into his presidency we suddenly discover what it takes to get Barack Obama all worked up.

Not terrorism.

In the president's estimation, a near repeat of the Lockerbie bombing Christmas Day wasn't worth remarking on until three days later.

Not the risk of a fiscal doomsday.

Only after 12 months of joint one-party rule to secure his place as the biggest-spending president in history does he call for a bipartisan spending-restraint commission and a spending freeze. Both the commission and the freeze don't come along until the fall at the earliest, if they materialize at all.

But when the Supreme Court nullifies congressional incumbents' legislative attempts to suppress the threat of political speech via modern means of communication, he runs to the microphone as if it were a national emergency.
"With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special-interest money in our politics," he declared, promising swift action. "We are going to talk with bipartisan congressional leaders to develop a forceful response to this decision."

Millions of Americans are suffering from double-digit unemployment. And now the nation has been assessed by the congressionally mandated Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation as being unprepared for a biological terrorist attack. The panel slapped the Obama administration with a failing grade on its readiness and response plans to combat the use of deadly viruses or bacteria by an enemy.

Yet what does the president devote his radio address to last Saturday? Accusing the high court of the land of issuing a ruling that "strikes at our democracy itself."

Most Americans may be under the misapprehension that terrorists such as underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab are the people to keep from striking at our democracy. Uh-uh. According to the president's priorities, the real threat to our democracy comes from Justice Anthony Kennedy and his warped view that American citizens should be able to use "their financial clout to directly interfere with elections by running advertisements for or against candidates in the crucial closing weeks."

The president says, "I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest" — not $12 trillion in federal debt; not an abysmal 26% of teens working (a record low since statistics began being kept in 1948, according to a report by Northeastern University); not the terrorist state of Iran on track to building nuclear bombs.
Let's look at that Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, which our chief executive considers a calamity of such historic proportions that "When this ruling came down, I instructed my administration to get to work immediately with members of Congress willing to fight for the American people to develop a forceful, bipartisan response to this decision."

Kennedy is viewed by liberal Democrats as the most reasonable of the five conservative justices; he was co-author with former Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and David Souter in their joint Casey opinion reaffirming the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion.

Kennedy's 5-4 decision abrogating McCain-Feingold pointed out that under that law, "skits on YouTube.com" satirizing politicians too close to Election Day are a felony "solely because a corporation, other than an exempt media corporation, has made the 'purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value' in order to engage in political speech."

Before posting that YouTube video with corporate funding, of course, McCain-Feingold lets you ask Uncle Sam's (specifically the Federal Election Commission) permission.

As Justice Kennedy's ruling notes: "If parties want to avoid litigation and the possibility of civil and criminal penalties, they must either refrain from speaking or ask the FEC to issue an advisory opinion approving of the political speech in question."

Then, "government officials pore over each word of a text to see if, in their judgment, it accords with the 11-factor test they have promulgated."

As he and the four justices joining him recognize, "This is an unprecedented governmental intervention into the realm of speech."

Yet it is this victory for free speech last week that requires, according to Obama, "a forceful, bipartisan response" — not the whole myriad of more pressing challenges facing our country, ranging from the fiscal time bomb of out-of-control entitlement programs to our dangerously porous borders.

Blasting the Citizens United ruling may set the stage for another successful Supreme Court nomination for the Obama administration. But it won't restore the public confidence a president needs at a time of serious economic troubles and a continuing global war on terror.

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=519165

Posted in Freedom of Speech Ideology Obama Supreme Court with No Comments

More:

The Supreme Court’s Overturning Of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law Is A Victory For Free Speech

The Supreme Court on January 21st ruled that the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law was unconstitutional and overturned it. Though intentions were ostensibly good in its passage, what it ended up doing was restricting the rights of free speech and created asymmetries in political information delivery. To wit: most of the liberal news media foisting their political biases unfettered on the public both by commission and omission yet they were not regulated by this legislation.

The ruling is a victory for free speech and the First Amendment and freedom from government intrusion and restraint on our rights.

The Gag Is Removed
Investors Business Daily    01/21/2010

Campaign Finance: Five justices ruled Thursday that corporations and labor unions can donate directly to political activities. At least someone in Washington is trying to protect free speech.

Lawmakers have been strangling constitutionally secured political speech for years. In 1990, the Supreme Court upheld a Michigan law that barred corporate political contributions. Twelve years later, Congress passed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

Among other restrictions, it banned for 30 days before a presidential primary and 60 days before the general election any "electioneering communications" that would be broadcast over television airways or transmitted via cable or satellite.

The encroachments were too much for the Roberts Supreme Court, which on Thursday invalidated 5-4 the McCain-Feingold blackout period and overturned the 1990 high court ruling in its Citizens United v. the Federal Elections Commission decision.

In 2008, Citizens United produced "Hillary: The Movie." The documentary, aimed at derailing Hillary Clinton's presidential bid, was political in nature. The FEC shut down pay-per-view broadcasts of "Hillary," saying that it was a political ad and therefore violated federal election law.

Citizens United, an advocacy group, rightly responded by asking the courts to protect its right to free speech. The Supreme Court rightly replied by ruling for Citizens United — and for everyone else in the country as well.
Free speech cannot survive in a society when it's for me but not for thee. If the government can take away one person's free speech, it can bar free speech for all. Yet that's the society some want.

Take note of campaign finance law supporters, who suspend belief that money donated to political activity is speech protected by the Constitution. They ignore both the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo Supreme Court ruling, which confirmed that political donations are speech, and their own instincts that tell them financial contributions are indeed expression.

Today they condemn the pro-liberty Citizens United ruling and lament that the Roberts Court is moving hard to the right.
The First Amendment is neither right nor left. It protects all sides of every argument — yes, even the more unsavory speech that hurts feelings and offends our sense of decency. Constitutional expression promotes a vibrant, enlightened and open society. The more information we have, the better off we are.

The Citizens United ruling is an important decision that moves the country closer to the principles of its founding and the vision of its founders.

URL   http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=518759

Posted in Constitution First Amendment Freedom of Speech Supreme Court with No Comments

More:

More Hatred, Intolerance and “Reverse” Racism From High Places On The Left and More Who Also Have Close Associations With Obama

The following investigative article is severely concerning on many different levels including revealing the entrenchment of noxious intolerance of liberals ensconced in powerful and influential places. According to information obtained by Aaron Klein from former radical Harvard race instructor Cornel West, Larry Summers who had been the president of Harvard University and is now the White House economic czar, sought to defame and undermine the credibility of a conservative Harvard professor simply because of his ideology.

There following are several key points and thoughts on the information revealed:

1.) This scheming, intolerant, morally depraved individual Larry Summers was the President of Harvard University which should be a bastion for intellectual discourse and tolerance. Wrong! Furthermore, he was scheming to destroy the reputation of a respected professor simply on ideology alone.

2.) Larry Summers is now the economic czar for the White House. Another arrogant, intolerant individual courted by and surrounding Obama.

3.) On another front, it was this same Larry Summers who opposed strong recommendations for conservative investments of Harvard's endowment funds while he was president and instead invested aggressively. The result: he lost $1.8 billion from the endowment. We guessed that Obama was impressed with this massive loss because he subsequently selected Summers as his economic advisor.

4.) This information was revealed by another professor whose philosophies are on the same side of the aisle though more radical – Cornel West. Even he was offended by such base tactics by Harvard’s president.

5.) Do we really need radical race relations professors like Cornel West who was first at Harvard and is now at Princeton? These individuals, like Obama’s other buddy Henry Jackson of that White House racial beer fest fame, foment more racial hatred and divisiveness than they solve and it is overwhelmingly black on white versus the converse.

6.) Add another radical black nationalist, anti-American to Obama’s circle of close friends. Obama referred to Cornel West as “"not only a genius, a public intellectual, a preacher, an oracle ... he's also a loving person." West is also a personnel friend of Nation of Islam hate monger Louis Farrakhan, an admirer of the Black Panther Party and an adherent of radical black liberation theology – the same destructive ideology that Rev. Wright preaches.

7.) Obama’s associations once again confirm what the preponderance of ever increasing evidence has shown us: he is a vehement racist, radical, anti-American who is consumed by power, narcissism and hateful, destructive ideologies and is intolerant of opposing points of views.

Now for that article...

White House economist: 'F--- up' conservative prof
'I was astounded that the president of Harvard would stoop to such tactics'
By Aaron Klein    WorldNetDaily    December 06, 2009

According to a university colleague, former president of Harvard and current White House economist Larry Summers once asked for help to "f--- up" one of the school's conservative professors.

Summers' colleague, Cornel West, is a radical race relations instructor who is now a professor at Princeton after departing Harvard in the wake of a dispute with Summers. Obama named West, whom he has called a personal friend, to the Black Advisory Council of his presidential campaign. West was a key point man between Obama's campaign and the black community.

In his recently released memoirs, "Brother West: Living and Loving Out Loud," West claims that Summers invited West into his office and asked him to help undermine Harvard government professor Harvey Mansfield, who had professed conservative views.

"Help me f--- him up," Summers reportedly said to West without explaining further.
West writes, "For my part, I was astounded that the President of Harvard would stoop to such tactics."
West further related the details of the alleged encounter in a recent interview with Amy Goodman, host of the far-left Democracy Now Internet television network.

Said West: "And as soon as I walked into the office, [Summers] starts using profanity about Harvey Mansfield. I said, 'No, Harvey Mansfield is conservative, sometimes reactionary, but he's my dear brother.' We had just had debates at Harvard. Twelve hundred people showed up. He was against affirmative action; I was for it. That was fine. Harvey Mansfield and I go off and have a drink after, because we have a respect, but deep, deep philosophical and ideological disagreement. He was using profanity, so I had to defend Harvey Mansfield."

"Wait, so you're saying Lawrence Summers was using profanity?" Goodman asked.
Continued West: "Larry Summers using profanity about, you know, 'help me 'F' so and so up.' No, I don't function like that. Maybe he thought that just as a black man, I like to use profanity. I'm not a puritan. I don't use it myself. I have partners who do."

In response to West's claimed meeting with Summers, Mansfield told WND, "Larry Summers was not out to get me."

"I was not present at the famous interview between him and Cornel West, but in my opinion (Summers) merely used my name in a clumsy attempt to cajole Cornel West into behaving more like a professor, less like a celebrity," said Mansfield.

"Larry Summers was doing many good things at Harvard before his enemies there succeeded in ousting him," Mansfield added.

Neither Summers nor West immediately returned WND e-mail and phone requests for comment.

Mansfield is well-known for his opposition to grade inflation at Harvard, which he has publicly blamed in part on affirmative action. His views led to student protests and a well-attended debate with West.

Mansfield also defended President Bush's use of executive powers and has been criticized by some leading feminists for his views on gender roles. He has made statements that men and women have some different societal roles and wrote a book, "Manliness," in which he bemoaned the loss of the virtue of "manliness" in a "gender neutral" society.

Summers, meanwhile, continues to teach at Harvard but lost his position as president in part after a public feud in which West accused him of racism. Summers serves as director of the White House's National Economic Council.

West served as an adviser on Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March and is a personal friend of Farrakhan. He authored two books on race with Henry Louis Gates Jr., who last summer was at the center of controversy after Obama remarked on the Harvard professor's arrest.

Obama's extremist pal slams racist 'American empire'

It was West who introduced Obama at a 2007 Harlem fundraiser, an event featuring about 1,500 people, which served as Obama's first foray into Harlem since he announced his Democratic presidential candidacy.

WND reported that West introduced Obama on stage at the fundraiser after first railing against the "racist" criminal justice system of the "American empire."

A scan of YouTube clips found West introducing Obama at the fundraiser while stating the "American empire is in such a deep crisis" and slamming the "racist criminal justice system" and "disgraceful schools in our city."
"He is my brother and my companion and comrade," said West of Obama.

WND found a video (link:) that shows Obama taking the stage just after West's introduction, expressing his gratitude to West, calling him "not only a genius, a public intellectual, a preacher, an oracle ... he's also a loving person."

Obama asked the audience for a round of applause for West.

From a young age, West proclaimed he admired "the sincere black militancy of Malcolm X, the defiant rage of the Black Panther Party … and the livid black [liberation] theology of James Cone."

Cone's theology spawned Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's controversial pastor for 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ. West was a strong defender of Wright when the pastor's extreme remarks became national news during last year's campaign season.

In 1995, West signed a letter published as an ad in the New York Times that voiced support for cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther.

In 2002, West further signed a "Statement of Conscience" crafted by Not In Our Name, a project of C. Clark Kissinger's Revolutionary Communist Party. He then endorsed the World Can't Wait campaign, a Revolutionary Communist Party project seeking to organize "people living in the United States to take responsibility to stop the whole disastrous course led by the Bush administration."

After branding the U.S. a "racist patriarchal" nation in his book "Race Matters," West wrote, "White America has been historically weak-willed in ensuring racial justice and has continued to resist fully accepting the humanity of blacks."

Also in that book, West claimed the 9/11 attacks gave white Americans a glimpse of what it means to be a black person in the U.S. – feeling "unsafe, unprotected, subject to random violence and hatred" for who they are.

"Since 9/11," West wrote, "the whole nation has the blues, when before it was just black people."

URL   http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=118187

Obama on Cornel West, 11/29/2007

Posted in Black nationalism Colleges and Universities Communism Freedom of Speech Ideology Intolerance Liberal Obama Racism Reverse Racism Videos with No Comments

More:

Obama Allegedly Warning Democrats Not to Appear on Fox News

In an article in the Los Angeles Times, they noted that: “At least one Democratic political strategist has gotten a blunt warning from the White House to never appear on Fox News Channel, an outlet that presidential aides have depicted as not so much a news-gathering operation as a political opponent bent on damaging the Obama administration.”

According to the report, the strategist stated that he was told by a White House official that “We better not see you on again.”

Although Anita Dunn, the White House Communications Director, denied the allegation, this threat is quite compatible with the modus operandi of the Obama Administration. It is just another in a litany of actions, threats and rhetoric to aggrandize power and silence its critics and opponents by any means necessary. Even more perversely, Obama will "let" you talk with the ruthless dictators Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro or even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - just don't be caught talking with Fox News!

Read: Democratic consultant says he got a warning from White House after appearing on Fox News

Posted in Arrogance Democrat FOX News Freedom of Speech Obama with No Comments

More:

The USSR and the USA: Frightening Parallels

History repeats itself. Those who don’t learn from it are doomed to repeat the same mistakes. In our present situation in America, all the warning signs have been there and couldn’t be any clearer yet many either refuse to believe them or are just plain apathetic, lazy or corrupt.

The following editorial by Svetlana Kunin, a Russian immigrant who happened to live in the communist Soviet Union, starkly and chillingly details the shocking parallels of life, events, rhetoric and attitudes in the USSR of the 1970’s to what is transpiring right now here in America under Obama, Pelosi and Co. (Related posts worth reviewing: 9/11 Tribute to What America Stands For and Why We Need to Keep Fighting To Preserve Our Freedoms and Rights: The Perspective Of A Russian Immigrant which is also written this same person and The Dismantling of America: A Clarion Call To Action)

Service.gov And Its Soviet Similarities

By SVETLANA KUNIN

USSR, 1959: I am a "young pioneer" in school. History classes remind us that there is a higher authority than their parents and teachers: the leaders of the Communist Party.

The story of young pioneer Pavlik Morozov is required reading. Pavlik reported his father to the secret police for disobeying government regulations. His life exemplified the duty of all good Soviet citizens to serve their government.

From the first year in school, all of us are made aware of our ethnicity (ethnic Russian, Jewish, Asian, etc.) and class (proletariat, intelligentsia), around which society is structured. This inherent divisiveness makes it easy for the government to stir ethnic and class tension and in this way distract from economic failure.
Newspapers and TV transmit government-approved news. Any critical voice is immediately suppressed and publicly denounced.
My parents, as all citizens of the USSR, work for state-run companies. All workers are unionized — another way the state controls the citizens. There is no private enterprise in USSR.

Whatever small private farms or shops that existed before 1930 have been taken over by the state. All medical care and schools are state entities. The government regulates what kind of technology, service and compensation are allowed.
From school age through adulthood, citizens are called to public service four to five times a year. Activities such as farming, cleaning places of work, and paper/metal scrap collections are mandatory.

Religious symbols are forbidden in schools or on state property. Most old religious buildings are transformed for secular use.

The Soviet government imposes the Iron Curtain. The state has strict control over our ability to travel abroad. This prevents us from realizing the discrepancy between the media's image of the great socialist country and the reality of our low standard of living.

USA, 2009: "Progressives" control the government. Children in some public schools sing songs about the president and study his directives.

Progressives view people not as unique individuals, but as groups. They play on class envy, or divide people by ethnicity (African-American, white, Hispanic, etc.). From early childhood they remind children of their ethnic identity. The idea of a color-blind society united under the American flag is not politically correct.

The mainstream media are aligned with the government. Those media outlets critical of government policy are publicly criticized by government officials and are in danger of suffering repercussions.

Government seizes a majority stake in two major auto companies and, through TARP money, has control over major banks.
Congress discusses capping salaries in private businesses and is in the process of increasing its control over the health care industry.

Big labor union leadership is fully aligned with the progressives in government. There is strong pressure to eliminate the secret ballot in order to increase union membership.

Cap-and-trade, if passed, will drive a lot of small businesses into bankruptcy and create a fruitful soil for favoritism and government control over private entities.

Sept. 11 is declared a day of national service by the administration. It is no longer a day of remembrance for the horrific attack perpetrated by terrorists.

The American Constitution protects the separation between church and state. Atheist zealots pervert this ideal in order to force out religious symbols and traditions from public space. It is fashionable in progressive circles to ridicule religion and religious people. "Tolerance" is applied only to anti-religious values.

As a former citizen of the USSR, I heard and experienced all of this before. I listen to the speeches by the president asking people to sacrifice and serve. So what are we to sacrifice? For what? And to whom? I think I get it now.
Citizens of America, sacrifice your elders and forget your selfish aspirations of prosperity for yourself and your family! Sign onto Service.gov and serve your government!

• Kunin lived in the Soviet Union until 1980 and now lives in Connecticut.

Posted in Cap and Trade Capitalism Communism Constitution Freedom of Speech Government Control Ideology Indoctrination Intolerance Labor Unions Media - Far Left Obama with 1 Comment

More:

The Dismantling of America: A Clarion Call To Action

The following editorial, written by Thomas Sowell, should serve as a clarion call to all Americans that our country, rights, freedoms and way of life are on the precipice of annihilation due to the inimical ideologies combined with contemptuous, nefarious, imperious politicians who desire unfettered power. In a very comprehensive yet succinct and persuasive manner, he states his case … which we must act on immediately and decisively before the situation becomes even more dire.

Dismantling America — Piece By Piece

By THOMAS SOWELL

Just one year ago, would you have believed that an unelected government official, not even a Cabinet member confirmed by the Senate but simply one of the many "czars" appointed by the president, could arbitrarily cut the pay of executives in private businesses by 50% or 90%?

Did you think that another "czar" would be talking about restricting talk radio? That there would be plans afloat to subsidize newspapers — to create a situation where some papers' survival would depend on the government liking what they publish?

Did you imagine that anyone would even be talking about having a panel of so-called "experts" deciding who could and could not get lifesaving medical treatments?

Scary as that is from a medical standpoint, it is also chilling from the standpoint of freedom. If you have a mother who needs a heart operation or a child with some dire medical condition, how free would you feel to speak out against an administration that has the power to make life-and-death decisions about your loved ones?

Does any of this sound like America?

How about a federal agency giving schoolchildren material to enlist them on the side of the president? Merely being assigned to sing his praises in class is apparently not enough.

How much of America would be left if the federal government continued on this path? President Obama has already floated the idea of a national police force, something we have done without for more than two centuries.
We already have local police forces all across the country and military forces for national defense, as well as the FBI for federal crimes and the National Guard for local emergencies.

What would be the role of a national police force created by Barack Obama, with all its leaders appointed by him? It would seem more like the brownshirts of dictators than like anything American. How far the president will go depends of course on how much resistance he meets. But the direction in which he is trying to go tells us more than all his rhetoric or media spin.

Barack Obama has not only said that he is out to "change the United States of America"; the people he has been associated with for years have expressed in words and deeds their hostility to the values, the principles and the people of this country.

Jeremiah Wright said it with words: "God damn America!" Bill Ayers said it with bombs that he planted. Community activist goons have said it with their contempt for the rights of other people.

Among those appointed as czars by Obama have been people who have praised enemy dictators like Mao, who have seen public schools as places to promote sexual practices contrary to the values of most Americans, to a captive audience of children.

Those who say that the Obama administration should have investigated those people more thoroughly before appointing them are missing the point completely. Why should we assume that Barack Obama didn't know what such people were like, when he has been associating with precisely these kinds of people for decades before he reached the White House?

Nothing is more consistent with his lifelong patterns than putting such people in government — people who reject American values, resent Americans in general and successful Americans in particular, as well as resenting America's influence in the world.

Any miscalculation on his part would be in not thinking that others would discover what these stealth appointees were like. Had it not been for the Fox News Channel, these stealth appointees might have remained unexposed for what they are. Fox News is now high on the administration's enemies list.

Nothing so epitomizes Obama's own contempt for American values and traditions like trying to ram two bills through Congress in his first year — each bill more than a thousand pages long — too fast for either of them to be read, much less discussed.

That he succeeded only the first time says that some people are starting to wake up. Whether enough people will wake up in time to keep America from being dismantled, piece by piece, is another question — and the biggest question for this generation.

Internationally, Obama has made every mistake that was made by the Western democracies in the 1930s, mistakes that put Hitler in a position to start World War II — and come dangerously close to winning it.

At the heart of those mistakes was trying to mollify your enemies by throwing your friends to the wolves. The administration has already done that by reneging on this country's commitment to put a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe and its lackadaisical foot-dragging on doing anything serious to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. That means, for all practical purposes, throwing Israel to the wolves as well.

Countries around the world that have to look out for their own national survival, above all, are not going to ignore how much Obama has downgraded the reliability of America's commitments.

Iraq, for example, knows that Iran is going to be next door forever, while Americans may be gone in a few years. South Korea likewise knows that North Korea is permanently next door, but who knows when the Obama administration will get a bright idea to pull out?

Countries in South America know that Hugo Chavez is allying Venezuela with Iran. Dare they ally themselves with an unreliable U.S.A.? Or should they join our enemies to work against us? This issue is too serious for squeamish silence.

URL :     http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=510870&Ntt=

Posted in Arrogance Black nationalism Cap and Trade Capitalism Communism Constitution Czar FOX News Foreign Policy Freedom of Speech Government Control Healthcare Reform Ideology Indoctrination Liberal Obama with No Comments

More:

Updated “Expression”

Posted in Freedom of Speech Ideology Legal rights Political Cartoon with No Comments

More:

Hypocritical Invertebrate NFL Commissioner Goodell Succumbs to Political Pressure Regarding Rush Limbaugh

Succumbing to predictable political pressure from the far-left including threats from the notorious twin racist demagogues Al Sharpton and Jesse “Hymie Town” Jackson, the weak kneed NFL Commissioner determined that Rush Limbaugh even as a minority owner would not be good for football. Ostensibly, this comment was based on allegations that he has made racist comments more than twenty years ago that no one reputable can verify. For someone so outspoken and who has been on the airwaves for countless years, there should be some recording or verifiable evidence if such comments were spoken. But guess what? They were not and that is why no evidence exists.

The reality is that it is Rush’s conservative political views that these individuals despise so they want to punish him and the race card surely is effective. Realize that if it wasn’t Rush, it could be anyone of us who could be slandered and economically punished because of our political thoughts or positions. It is a vicious, dangerous silencing of dissenting speech that must be countered effectively including legally.

If Roger Goodell were so concerned about the image of the NFL, he shouldn’t have reinstated Michael Vick who brutally tortured and killed dogs bred to fight. Or allowed players who committed numerous major legal infractions or misogynous actions to ever play in the NFL again. But he did and he is a consummate hypocrite!

Write Roger Goodell and give him a piece of your mind. We have to start somewhere. Read the following article for additional outrageous hypocrisy.

Read:  NFL Owners Who Use the N-Word and Wet Their Pants On Stage

Posted in Freedom of Speech Ideology Rush Limbaugh with No Comments

More:

Articles of the Day

Land Of The Fee
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

The chairman of the Senate Finance Committee wants levies on insurers to pay for ObamaCare and fines for families who don't sign up. We can cut costs and expand coverage without sacrificing freedom. Read article

Could The Feds Seize The Internet?
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

A Senate bill lets the president "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "nongovernmental" computer networks and do what's needed to respond to the threat. Didn't they just collect our e-mail addresses?

We wish this was just a piece of the fictional "Dr. Strangelove" that fell to the cutting-room floor, but it's not. It is a real piece of disturbingly vague legislation sponsored by Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and Olympia Snowe, R-Maine. Read article


Bush's Guard Service
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Veteran reporter, author and commentator Bernard Goldberg reports that when CBS News did its fake National Guard story on George W. Bush avoiding service in Vietnam, it knew it was a lie. Read article

Posted in Arrogance First Amendment Freedom of Speech Government Control Healthcare Hollywood conservatives Media - Far Left Obama Socialized Medicine Taxes with No Comments

More:

Film Maker Oliver Stone and Tyrant Hugo Chavez – Soul Mates

The far left film maker Oliver Stone has long expressed anti-American sentiments both in his statements and in movies. His most recent one which is premiering at the Venice Film Festival, called “South of the Border, provides an apparently flattering portrayal of Hugo Chavez, the belligerent dictator of Venezuela. This is the same Chavez who has ruthlessly suppressed the rights and freedoms of the Venezuelan people, is actively engaged in supporting insurgencies to overthrow democracies in surrounding countries, supports totalitarian policies, hobnobs and reveres Fidel Castro, and relentlessly threatens American interests and companies as part of the “Axis of Evil”.

Because Americans still have “some” freedom of speech and rights accorded by our Constitution, Stone is free to express his radical sentiments in support of the tyrant Chavez and opposed to general American interests and views. The same can’t be said of the Venezuelan citizens under Chavez.

Stone’s next reverential work: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran! Can’t wait.

We can effectively express our disdain for Oliver Stone’s radical agenda and his active support and propagandist portrayals of such tyrants by exerting our rights – both verbally and economically. Saveyourrights.com strongly recommends that Americans boycott all films and merchandise that Stone would benefit financially from.

The following editorial more extensively elucidates the dangers that Chavez poses to South America, the United States and the World in general

Read: Chavez's Deadly Star Turn In Venice

Posted in Boycott Far Left Freedom of Speech Ideology with No Comments

More:

9/11 Tribute to What America Stands For and Why We Need to Keep Fighting To Preserve Our Freedoms and Rights: The Perspective Of A Russian Immigrant

The following letter was originally published in IBD on Friday August 21st and has been appeared again in several subsequent editions. We feel the perspective and message is powerful and important enough that it be posted in its entirety this 9/11. Many Americans take for granted the rights and freedoms that we still have and don't realize that we must relentlessly fight to preserve them as they can be legislated or just taken away.

By SVETLANA KUNIN

In the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, I was taught to believe individual pursuits are selfish and sacrificing for the collective good is noble.

In kindergarten we sang songs about Lenin, the leader of the Socialist Revolution. In school we learned about the beautiful socialist system, where everybody is equal and everything is fair; about ugly capitalism, where people are exploited and treat each other like wolves in the wilderness.

Life in the USSR modeled the socialist ideal. God-based religion was suppressed and replaced with cultlike adoration for political figures.

The government-assigned salary of the proletariat (blue-collar worker) was 30%-50% higher then any professional. Without incentive to improve their life, professionals drank themselves to oblivion. They — engineers, lawyers, doctors, teachers — earned a government-determined salary that barely covered the necessities, mainly food.

Raising children was a hardship. It took four to six adults (parents and grandparents) to support a child. The usual size of the postwar family was one or two children. Every woman had the right to have an abortion and most of them did, often without anesthesia.

There is a comparative historical reality that plays out the consequences of two competing ideologies: life in the USSR and in America. When the march to the worker's paradise — the Socialist Revolution — began in 1917, many people emigrated from Russia to the U.S.

In the USSR, economic equality was achieved by redistributing wealth, ensuring that everyone remained poor, with the exception of those doing the redistributing. Only the ruling class of communist leaders had access to special stores, medicine and accommodations that could compare to those in the West.

The rest of the citizenry had to deal with permanent shortages of food and other necessities, and had access to free but inferior, unsanitary and low-tech medical care. The egalitarian utopia of equality, achieved by the sacrifice of individual self-interest for the collective good, led to corruption, black markets, anger and envy.

Government-controlled health care destroyed human dignity.

Chairman Nikita Khrushchev released facts about Stalin and his purges. People learned of the horrific purge of more than 20 million citizens, murdered as enemies of the state.

Those who left Russia found a different set of values in America: freedom of religion, speech, individual pursuits, the right to private property and free enterprise. The majority of those immigrants achieved a better life for themselves and their children in this capitalist land.

These opportunities let the average immigrant live a better life than many elites in the Soviet Communist Party. The freedom to pursue personal self-interest led to prosperity. Prosperity generated charity, benefiting the collective good.

The descendants of those immigrants are now supporting policies that move America away from the values that gave so many immigrants the chance of a better life. Policies such as nationalized medicine, high tax rates and government intrusion into free enterprise are being sold to us under the socialistic motto of collective salvation.

Socialism has bankrupted and failed every society, while capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.

There is no perfect society. There are no perfect people. Critics say that greed is the driving force of capitalism. My answer is that envy is the driving force of socialism. Change to socialism is not an improvement on the imperfections of the current system.

The slogans of "fairness and equality" sound better than the slogans of capitalism. But unlike at the beginning of the 20th century, when these slogans and ideas were yet to be tested, we have accumulated history and reality.

Today we can define the better system not by slogans, but by looking at the accumulated facts. We can compare which ideology leads to the most oppression and which brings the most opportunity.

When I came to America in 1980 and experienced life in this country, I thought it was fortunate that those living in the USSR did not know how unfortunate they were.

Now in 2009, I realize how unfortunate it is that many Americans do not understand how fortunate they are. They vote to give government more and more power without understanding the consequences.

Svetlana Kunin, Stamford, Conn.

Editor's note: Mrs. Kunin, an IBD subscriber, is a retired software developer. In the Soviet Union, she was a civil engineer.

URL:    http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=336952385266203&kw=Russian,Immigrant

Posted in Capitalism Constitution Constitutional Amendments Freedom of Speech Government Control Ideology Legal rights Personal rights Socialism with 1 Comment

More:

Obama’s Diversity Czar at the FCC Is a Severe Threat to Free Speech

There is a wise adage that goes: “Tell me who your friends are and I will know who you are.” Why are we mentioning it? Because before Obama was elected President, we learned of the many radicals, hate mongerers and anti-American individuals that Obama had associations with, some for a very long time - like Reverend Wright, William Ayers, Sheik Khalid, Saul Alinsky and Bernadine Dohrn. Despite his denials of any inimical influences from these individuals and the liberal press’ staunchly defending his claims, the pattern was irrefutable and damning.

Many conservatives in the media relentlessly and emphatically warned us that these were no chance and brief meetings and that Obama’s disaffirmations were overt audacious lies. He was a far left radical with an anti-American and racist agenda trying to pass himself off as a moderate. Unfortunately, a majority of voters seemed to have largely downplayed this – now to the detriment of our country.

We are seeing many of the manifestations of this radicalism now that Obama is President which he artfully tried to disguise previously. Many of the approximately 44 czars that he has appointed are of the same philosophical ilk – far left, radical, anti-American, racist and even avowed communists. Their positions in power and diversity of areas controlled make them a clear and present danger to the freedom and rights of ALL Americans!

We will be exposing several of these individuals in the future. The first is Mark Lloyd, a disciple of Saul Alinsky and an admirer of Hugo Chavez, who was appointed as the chief diversity officer at the FCC. His philosophy is that free speech is an inconvenience that interferes with governance and need to be rigidly controlled. That includes cable news, talk radio and the internet. He praised Hugo Chavez’s revolution in Venezuela when he clamped down on opposition news sources including radio and TV stations.

Mark Lloyd is a dangerous radical in a position to effect severe restraints of our rights of free speech and diversity of information. He must be exposed and stopped!

Read: Diversity Czar Threatens Free Speech

Posted in Constitution Czar Far Left First Amendment Freedom of Speech Government Control Ideology Legal rights Media - Far Left Obama Racism with No Comments

More:

Prominent Physician’s Group Sues the White House Over Free Speech and Intimidation Tactics

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. (AAPS) and the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE) filed a lawsuit on August 27th against the Office of the President and other White House officials charging that the White House has “unlawfully collected information on political speech,” used its position and power to suppress opposition to health care reform. Despite some changes that were made in the White House website designed to serve as a repository of “fishy” comments about Obamanocare sent in by snitching Americans, the Plaintiffs note that there is still this “unlawful pattern and practice to collect and maintain information” on the exercise of free speech, which “continues in violation of the Privacy Act and First Amendment even if the Defendants terminate a particular information-collection component due to negative publicity.”

The following news release briefly enumerates the issues and concerns of the lawsuit. There is also a video of Stuart Varney interviewing Kathryn Serkes of the AAPS.

Read and View: White House Sued Over Free Speech Violations in healthcare battle

Posted in Doctors Freedom of Speech Healthcare Reform Legal rights Obama Socialized Medicine Videos with No Comments

More:

We Are Angry And Don’t Want to Take It Anymore!

Americans are venting their anger and disapproval of Obama’s policies and rhetoric and it is having a significant effect on the political debate, politicians and on other citizens who are beginning to express their concerns. Many voters in the middle of the political spectrum who were not impressed with McCain or were inspired with the aura, vigor and the ostensible freshness of Obama and his promises of “change that you can believe in” and therefore voted for him now feel more than betrayed and duped. Instead of the refreshing, inspired, positive, constructive and “post-racial” President, they now see a narcissistic, condescending, arrogant, hypocritical, elitist and dismissive one who adheres to outdated racial victimization demagoguery, class warfare envy, irresponsible and disingenuous fiscal policies, and immutable radical ideologies.

These inimical personal characteristics and his radical left persuasion should surprise nobody. Despite his outrageous denials of hearing anything offensive in the incendiary, racist, hateful sermons of Reverend Wright, we all know that he heard them and concurred. You don’t attend church weekly for 20 years, have him marry you and your wife, baptize your children, refer to him as an uncle like figure and donate thousands of dollars if you disagreed with his rhetoric. Any person of character and integrity would have picked themselves up and walked right out of that church and never returned after hearing one of those vile sermons . He didn’t! His overtly race based selections (Sotomayor, Eric Holder, Regina Benjamin, czars, etc.) and unwarranted involvement in local “racial” issues (Cambridge police and Afro-American Harvard professor of black studies) patently substantiate his racial bigotry and adherence to such policies.

People are very angry now with what they have seen in less than seven months and feel that it is too important to remain silent. It is imperative that all of us are very vocal in our dissent, using our freedom of free speech to effect the changes that we want, preserve our liberties as well as our hard earned incomes. We must make sure that the government answers to us rather than it impose its will and dictates on us!

Read: Prairie-Fire Anger

Posted in Arrogance Attorney General Eric Holder Czar Financial Freedom of Speech Ideology Obama Racism Reverse Racism Sotomayor Taxes with No Comments

More:

Obama’s Preference is “Silence of the Land”

Posted in Arrogance Freedom of Speech Obama Political Cartoon with No Comments

More:

Obama, Pelosi and Congressional Democrats Try to Marginalize Those That Disagree With Them

Yesterday we examined the condescending and derogatory attacks perpetrated by Obama, Pelosi and many Congressional Democrats on American citizens who were simply exercising their right of free speech and disagreed specifically with the Obamanocare legislation. We also exhorted all Americans to “relentlessly continue to exercise their rights to dissent and free speech and vociferously voice their concerns otherwise we will lose many more of our Rights and Freedoms.”

Today, we present a scathing and insightful commentary written by Rep. Thomas Price (R. – Georgia) of these vitriolic, arrogant, and unwarranted attacks led by Obama and Pelosi. Rep. Price, who is Chairman of the Republican Study Committee as well as a physician, presents a very incisive, informed firsthand account and assessment of the deceptions, lies, corruption and dishonesty perpetrated by Obama, Pelosi and many Congressional Democrats.

Read: Obamacare Meltdown

Posted in Arrogance Congress Democrat Freedom of Speech Government Control Healthcare Reform Intolerance Legal rights Nancy Pelosi Obama Republican Tea Parties with No Comments

More:

The Imperial Obama and Pelosi’s Democrats Bullying the American People

Obama, Pelosi and the Congressional Democrats consistently demonstrate why they are dangerous for America and the rights of the American people. They write legislation like peremptory decrees – impose it on Americans and stifle all discussion. Democracies are based on the free flow of thought and the unimpeded right to dissent and protest. That is not what Obama, Pelosi, et. al have in mind.

During the Bush Administration, Congressional Democrats including Senator Obama, inexorably exercised their rights of free speech and dissent, frequently past the point of proper decorum and often beyond what jeopardized our national security. The media was complicit in this, especially the New York Times. You didn’t hear Bush or Cheney viciously attacking these partisans or worse, the American people.

Obama, Pelosi and several Congressional Democrats are waging blistering, vicious attacks on American citizens simply because they are exercising their Constitutional rights and voicing their concerns and outrage regarding irresponsible legislation, profligate spending, oppressive taxation, unchecked government intrusion in their personal lives, and risks to their rights and freedoms. The Government’s attacks are not just verbal but have also become physical. They are facilitating mob like tactics such as using labor union members (SEIU) as enforcers and protectors of their ideology.

These directives are coming right out of the White House and Congress. The sycophantic news media and the radical anti-American ACLU have not issued condemnations of what is transpiring. As to be expected!

American citizens must relentlessly continue to exercise their rights to dissent and free speech and vociferously voice their concerns otherwise we will lose many more of our Rights and Freedoms.

Read: The Real AstroTurf

Posted in Arrogance Congress Constitution Democrat Freedom of Speech Government Control Ideology Intolerance Labor Unions Legal rights Media - Far Left Nancy Pelosi Obama with No Comments

More:

Is Obama Really Contemplating Imposing Government Censorship of the Internet?

Closely scrutinizing the big picture by assessing Obama’s past, his rhetoric, associations and actions reveals far more nefarious intent than most people realize. In just a short time, he along with an abetting Democrat controlled Congress has turned this country upside down economically, socially and politically. Intentionally irresponsible legislation will bring this country to the brink of bankruptcy and encumber Americans with taxation rates consistent with slavery. It will also insinuate the government in all aspects of our lives so that we will be severely constrained legally in our options and activities of daily living. In the last few months, it has acquired varying levels of control of our banking, insurance, and automobile industry and is intent on taking over the healthcare sector which constitutes around seventeen percent of America’s GDP. The Cap and Trade Bill threatens to massively increase our taxes and the cost of energy including an estimated doubling of the price for electricity as well as even the light bulbs we use. It will also affect the cars we drive and even how much we do drive.
If all this weren’t egregious enough for the American people, there are now some rumors that consideration is being given to some sort of monitoring and policing of the internet by the Federal government. Though not couched in such terms, this is unequivocally censorship which threatens our First Amendment rights and with it, many others. This must not be allowed to come to fruition.

Read: Should President Obama Control The Internet?

Posted in Cap and Trade Congress Constitution Constitutional Amendments Democrat First Amendment Freedom of Speech Government Control Healthcare Reform Legal rights Obama Personal rights with No Comments

More:

Supporters of Sonia Sotomayor Seek to Discredit and Destroy Firefighter Ricci Who Won Reverse Discrimination Case in the Supreme Court

The brutal intolerance and inexorable vicious personal attacks orchestrated by the liberal media and far left zealots against those who hold different opinions has reached a new low in civility. These attacks are ruthless, classless, abhorrent and know no limits and they must be stopped. Wanton vitriolic articles and on-air commentary by news people should be quashed by their superiors but they are not. Why is it not being done? The reason is because this reprehensible attitude pervades virtually all levels of most of the media and the attacks are supported and encouraged.
We are not talking just about relentless ad hominem attacks against public figures like George Bush, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin or even Joe Arpaio (America’s Sheriff). What about the average private citizen like Joe Wurzelbacher (aka Joe the Plumber) who just happened to ask Obama a great and innocuous question during the Presidential campaign that exposed inconsistencies in Obama’s rhetoric? The far left then unleashed vicious personal attacks against him and conducted unwarranted and illegal investigations including on tax and other issues which were then made public. Some of this was perpetrated by government employees who were never charged for their crimes.
Another example is Carrie Prejean, Miss California 2009, who was asked about gay marriage during the Miss America contest by the hateful radical gay activist Perez Hilton. He did not like her answer which happened to be very tolerant and then proceeded to rip her to shreds including on ranting internet posts. Much of the far left piled on as well, trying to discredit her with a relentless smear campaign. By the way, where were the “women’s” groups who claim that they are the defenders of the women’s rights? They only defend women who support far left view points.
Now word is out that the new target is Frank Ricci of Ricci vs. The City of New Haven fame, whose appeal was rejected by Sonia Sotamayor of the 2nd District Court of Appeals whose decision was then overturned by the Supreme Court. These attacks on private American citizens are intolerable and we must unite and fight them aggressively and take action against these groups and individuals which also includes boycotting.

Read: Sotomayor backers urge reporters to probe New Haven firefighter

Posted in Arrogance Boycott Far Left Freedom of Speech Ideology Intolerance Liberal Media - Far Left Racism Reverse Racism Sotomayor Supreme Court Videos with No Comments

More:

Republicans Must Expose Sotamayor as the Racist That She is and Not Just Throw in the Towel

In the recent history of these confirmation hearings, the Democrats have monolithically voted for the appointees if they were liberal and against if they were of conservative ideology – and aggressively and relentlessly challenged them. The Republican Senators have been far too gracious and derelict of their responsibilities, essentially mailing it in and accepting candidates that should have undergone far more rigorous questioning. Unfortunately, it appears that history is repeating itself again. This should rightfully enrage the countless conservatives who are placing their dwindling hopes that Sotomayor can be exposed for the racially divisive jurist that she has so patently demonstrated in the past and have her confirmation blocked. Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama has taken his responsibilities seriously and should be lauded whereas Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina initial comments to her that confirmation was inevitable essentially removed virtually all of the pressure off her.

Read: Sonia’s Senators

The following is Senator Jeff Sessions in Senate Hearings discussing concerns regarding Sotomayor and the issue of  "empathy"

In this video, Senator Sessions discusses his concerns about Sotomayor and the Second Amendment

Posted in Arrogance Conservative Constitution Democrat Diversity policies Freedom of Speech Ideology Intolerance Legal rights Liberal Obama Personal rights Racism Reverse Racism Second Amendment Sotomayor Supreme Court Videos with No Comments

More:

Freedom of Speech on College Campuses is Threatened by Politically Correctness

We have seen myriad examples of political correctness run amok in America. College campuses which should be a bastion of free speech and ideas for all have been notorious offenders and we’re not just talking about small institutions. Names like Columbia, Yale, and Harvard are but just a few. Activities, events, individuals and speeches that don’t toe the liberal philosophy are restricted, prohibited or harassed. Events or activities run by or honoring the military are thwarted and protested but book a terrorist or dignitary from a rogue nation to vilify the United States and voila – we have a well organized, publicized, funded and secure event.
Students are relentlessly indoctrinated both by their liberal professors and the politically correct and historically revised textbooks that they are forced to learn from. Do you want to know how a student who thoroughly researches and writes a brilliant, coherent, well organized and supported paper gets a C or D? He or she displays a conservative point of view!
The following editorial discusses problems of political correctness on campuses.

Read: VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Discussing guns dubbed 'academic misconduct'

Posted in Colleges and Universities Constitutional Amendments Far Left First Amendment Freedom of Speech Ideology Intolerance with No Comments

More:

Sotomayor Vote Against First Amendment Rights in Case is More Than Alarming

President Barack Obama’s nominee to fill a Supreme Court vacancy, Sonia Sotomayor, last year rejected the First Amendment claim of a Burlington, Connecticut student penalized by school administrators for using the words “douche bag” in a blog she wrote at home. Read full story

Posted in Constitution First Amendment Freedom of Speech Obama Personal rights Sotomayor Supreme Court with No Comments

More: