Amnesty for Illegals Cannot be Defended

I am totally perplexed by Republicans who advocate amnesty for those who entered the U.S. illegally. We Republicans are supposed to be the party of law and order, a party that stands on clearly defined principles. Let’s cut through the pompous rhetoric: The issue of amnesty is only about cheap labor. All the other arguments are merely background noise. With the national unemployment rate just under 8 percent, how can you argue that illegals are doing jobs that Americans refuse to do?

With all the unemployed engineers (partly because of the shutdown of NASA’s Space Shuttle program), how do you justify increasing the number of H-1B visas? The special visa allows companies to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations for up to six years. How can six years still be considered temporary?

How do you explain to a kid in Virginia that he or she has to pay out-of-state tuition to attend the University of Maryland while but a student in the country illegally is allowed to pay in-state tuition? Why should someone in the country illegally be able to obtain a benefit that even an American citizen can’t have? Aren’t these Republicans supporting discrimination against American citizens in their lust of the Hispanic voter?
Linking amnesty to winning the Hispanic vote is not a winning or sensible strategy. One has nothing to do with the other. There is no unanimity within the Hispanic community on the issue of amnesty, therefore why are some operatives linking this issue to the future of the Republican Party? One can be against amnesty without being mean and nasty. But to equate supporting amnesty as a prerequisite to proving that you are not mean and hateful is an insult to our intelligence. As if this weren’t bad enough, can someone please explain to me the logic of any Black person supporting amnesty when the Black unemployment rate is in double digits?

We can have honest disagreements on the issue of amnesty; but please don’t give me the perverted reasoning supporters of amnesty have been using: “it’s an act of love,” “they are only looking for a better life,” “it’s not their fault.”

But these same proponents who want to justify ignoring the law based on some irrational, emotional tick refuse to apply the same empathy towards “Pookie” and “LaQueesha,” who represent inner city America.

When “Pookie” gets arrested for carrying a recreational amount of crack and get sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 20 years for a first time, non-violent offense, where are these Republican thespians advocating for an empathetic approach to law enforcement? When a Black woman in Florida fires a warning shot in the air to stop an abusive former husband from beating her and gets 20 years mandatory minimum, where are the Republican voices of empathy?

If we are going to claim to be a nation of laws, then we can’t allow emotion to cause the unequal distribution of justice to continue. If your basis for giving amnesty to illegals is “their intent”—they only want to make a better life; then how can you not apply the same logic to “Pookie” and “LaQueesha?” Can you not make the same argument that they only want to make a better life for themselves and their families?

Pro-amnesty Republicans sound like a bunch of liberals when they refuse to advocate for the enforcement of current immigration law because they claim to know the “intent” of the law breaker. These same pro amnesty members of the House and Senate have been relentless in accusing President Obama for not being trustworthy on health care (“you can keep your own doctor”), but are willing to work with and trust him on the enforcement side of the immigration debate.

If you can’t trust Obama on healthcare, how can you trust him on immigration?

RELATED STORY: Illegal Aliens, Non-Citizens Caught Voting In Florida In Vast Numbers

The Snowden and Putin Show

When Edward Snowden’s leaks about alleged NSA and GCHQ were first released, the rogue contractor found a wide range of defenders.  From sections of the left and right, the revelations were seized upon as a demonstration that security surveillance had become a dark force of oppression.  ‘The national security apparatus is a cover for reading our private emails’, ran the general line.

Yet, like Julian Assange before him, as time has gone on and as Snowden’s supporters have learnt more about him, some of that initial support has begun to slip away.  His strange migration from Hong Kong to Moscow airport, and then to temporary asylum in Russia, certainly caused some questions to surface.  Meanwhile, some of us continued to maintain that whatever the occasional overreaches of the various intelligence agencies, and doubtless though it was that there are aspects of every government department that could do with reform, the answer to the challenges was never full-scale sabotage of the UK-US worldwide lead in communications intelligence.  Snowden set back the US-UK advantage, and massively enabled challengers of the West in one fell hack.

And now Snowden himself has cropped up again.  The timing could hardly be worse for him, or better for his new protectors, for Vladimir Putin’s hunger for further portions of other peoples’ territory continues apace.  Not content with Crimea, there is now a potentially catastrophic stand-off occurring as Russian troops amass and skirmish on Ukraine’s borders.  With the world starting to realise what type of man Vladimir Putin is, what a strange time for Edward Snowden to crop back up and offer the President support via a soft underarm lob.

Earlier this week on the Kremlin’s worldwide propaganda channel, Russia Today, Putin performed a Questions and Answers session.  And one of the questioners, by video-link, was from none other than Edward Snowden.  “Does Russia intercept, store, or analyze in any way the communications of millions of individuals?” Snowden asked his protector, “and do you believe that simply increasing the effectiveness of intelligence or law enforcement investigations can justify placing societies, rather than subjects, under surveillance?”

This question was handled deftly by Mr. Putin; “Mr. Snowden, you are a former agent, a spy, I used to be working for an intelligence service; we are going to talk one professional language”, Putin replied through a translator, to laughter and clapping from his live audience. “Our intelligence efforts are strictly regulated by our law. You have to get court permission to stalk a particular person. We don’t have mass system of such interception. And according to our law it cannot exist… Our special services, thank God, are strictly controlled by the society and the law, and are regulated by the law.”  And so he went, on and on.

Although plenty of people in the West seem not to realise this, we are in an information war and a values war at the moment – one in which Crimea and Ukraine are, simply, one front.  Showing a continual ability to shoot ourselves in the foot, it is a war in which the Putins of this era might yet win.  Ordinarily you would have thought that in a battle between the democracies and the KGB thug, the latter would never stand a chance in the court of public opinion.  Wrong.  Assisted by the latest manifestation of the useful idiot, and with the public unaware of who protects their way of life or why, totalitarians like Putin probably have a better shot at a decent hearing today than at any time in decades.


Putin’s Empire of the Mind: How Russia’s president morphed from realist to ideologue — and what he’ll do next.
Biden’s solution for Ukraine: American taxpayer money
Is Vladimir Putin the New Reagan?

The Book of Daniel: The Russian Bear taking Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus foretold?

In the only book recommended by Christ when asked about the end of the world, we see nations represented by fierce beasts of prey. There is a double application for Daniel; once in history and again in the end-time. The lion with eagle’s wings fits the emblems of the UK/US; the bear fits Russia; the leopard with four heads could be China, Japan, Korea, and Thailand and the dragon with 10 horns can again represent the European nations (EU).

The book of Daniel begins with Daniel in captivity. Could this mean martial law is impending?

Was Sarah Palin reading Daniel when she predicted Russia would invade the Ukraine?

In Daniel 2, the king had a dream. He was impressed with its importance, but he couldn’t remember it. He was about to execute his wisemen who claimed to know the gods, because they couldn’t tell him the dream. Daniel was included, but appealed for time because he said the God of heaven (Creator) could make known the dream and its meaning.

God revealed to Daniel the dream of the king of Babylon and its meaning that’s expanded in Daniel 7 where four kingdoms are represented by a lion, bear, leopard and dragon. Daniel’s dream near the end of Babylon’s supremacy (606-538 BC).

The instruction given to Daniel was, “These great beasts which are four, are four kings [kingdoms] which shall arise out of the earth.” Daniel 7:17 is in the context of the end-time judgment, verses 9-18. At the time of Daniel’s dream, Babylon was declining, so the vision of “four kings [kingdoms] which shall arise” again supports an end-time application.

The bear had three ribs in it’s mouth. Could they be the Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus? “Arise and devour much flesh” seems ominous. Arise, because Russia has been down, but clearly a world power.

In the historical application, the four beasts represented Babylon, Medo-Persia, Grecia and Rome. Out of the fourth beast grew a little horn that became great, spoke words of blasphemy against God, persecuted the saints and changed times and laws.

The Protestant Reformers were united in their belief that the imagery fit the papacy which grew out of the Roman Empire like the little horn grew out of the beast. They considered one of the pope’s titles, “Lord God the Pope” to be blasphemous. Conservative historians says 50-100 million Christians died in protest during those “Dark Ages,” and there is no denying the change in times (Gregorian Calendar) and laws (catechism deletes the 2nd Commandment against image worship and divides the 10th to maintain ten.) Daniel 7:25.

It’s in the context of the little horn’s great words that the judgment begins and the kingdom is given to “the Son of man,” verses 9-14. This article is an appeal to consider Christ’s words that could refer to martial law when He said, “when you see an abomination standing where it ought not, flee…Let him that reads [Daniel] understand…” Mark 13:14.

I wrote, “Not one in a hundred ministers sees America in prophecy, yet once understood, we can appreciate that God “declares the end from the beginning.” I offer a dozen reasons why Christians who count on a rapture should consider a better alternative.

Christianity in Troubled Times

The vast ignorance of American history by far too many Americans is perhaps demonstrated in the failure to understand that it was the free practice of their interpretation of Christianity by the pilgrims that led to the creation of America. Plymouth colony, established in 1620, put the Atlantic Ocean between them and hostilities they had encountered in England.

To understand the role of religion in America, the First Amendment begins with a prohibition that the states shall make no law “respecting an establishment of religion…” The Founders wanted to make sure that neither the federal, nor state governments designated a particular religion as the only one. We can thank James Madison for that and the other enumerated freedoms.

Religious tolerance, which took some time to become fully established in the colonies and the new nation, has been a significant part of life in America—a nation that has always been predominantly Christian. Easter should remind us of that.

As 2012 came to a close, the Pew Research Religion and Public Life Project offered the following numbers regarding the global population of Christians. They were determined to be approximately 2.2 billion worldwide. That’s about one-in-three (32%).

About half of all Christians are Catholic (50%) while an estimated 37% belong to the Protestant tradition. The Orthodox Communion, including the Greek and Russian Orthodox, make up 12% of Christians while those who belong to other branches such as Mormons, Christian Scientists, and Jehovah Witnesses, make up about 1% of the global population.

Though Christianity took root in the Middle East, less than 1% of Christians are found these days either there or in North Africa. The largest concentration is in Europe (26%), followed closely by Latin American and the Caribbean (24%), and sub-Saharan Africa (24%). Most Christians (87%) live in countries where Christians are in the majority. Of the 232 countries and territories in the Pew study, 157 had majorities, but most had relatively small populations.

What surely has to be a cause for concern in America are the results of a Harris poll released in December 2013. While a strong majority (74%) of U.S. adults said they believe in God, the figure was down from 82% in earlier years. Belief in miracles, heaven, and other religious teachings were all in decline.

For Christians, 68% expressed a belief that Jesus is God or the Son of God, down from 72%. Belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (65%) was down from 72% ten years earlier.

Ranging across various faith groups and other demographics, absolute certainty that there is a God was expressed by 54%, a decline from 66%.

Only 19% described themselves as “very” religious, while 40% described themselves as “somewhat” religious, a decline from 49% in 2007. Nearly one-fourth of Americans (23%) said they were “not at all” religious, a figure that has nearly doubled since 2007 when it was only 12%.

A campaign against the free practice of religion and respect for individual religious values has been in place since the election of President Obama in 2008. It has been particularly evident in the U.S. military, affecting its chaplains and those to whom they minister. There are nearly a hundred cases in U.S. courts resisting the demands of Obamacare and other actions by the administration and those in various states and cities that affect religious beliefs and values.

The introduction and support of same-sex marriage in the United States is a direct attack on a tradition that pre-dates Christianity, Judaism and other faiths. It is fundamentally anti-religious.

Beyond our shores the slaughter of Christians by Muslims in Middle Eastern and nations like Nigeria continues to pose a threat to them and those of other faiths. Islam is the greatest threat to civilization that has existed since its rise began in 632 A.D.

All Americans owe a debt of gratitude to those early pilgrims and to the Founders who understood the value of religion and its free expression. Those who demand that crosses be removed from public lands or that Christmas carols not be sung in our schools do not understand what America is all about. Christians, in particular, must vocally resist such demands and should be joined by those of other faiths.

© Alan Caruba, 2014


Obama’s call to close Vatican embassy is ‘slap in the face’ to Roman Catholics – Washington Times
China on course to become ‘world’s most Christian nation’ within 15 years – Telegraph

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo was taken by Andrew A. Shenouda from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

Gloria Steinem’s successful war against women and the traditional family

President Barack Obama and feminist Gloria Steinem before Steinem received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2013. Photo: Paul Hennessy/Polaris/Newscom

There is a pattern of thinking that goes something like this: I demand equality for some at the expense of the many. I grew up during the “feminist movement” in America led by Gloria Steinem. The worthy goal was equal rights for women but it came at the expense of the traditional family. I did not see the eventual outcomes of Steinem and her efforts upon that most important institution – the traditional family, which is the building block of all societies and civilization itself.

Steinem remains committed to destroying women, motherhood and thereby the traditional family. Steinem has succeeded beyond even her own expectations.

Twelve years ago Jacqueline Kirby, M.S. in Single-parent Families in Poverty wrote:

One of the most striking changes in family structure over the last twenty years has been the increase in single-parent families. In 1970, the number of single-parent families with children under the age of 18 was 3.8 million. By 1990, the number had more than doubled to 9.7 million. For the first time in history, children are more likely to reside in a single-parent family for reasons other than the death of a parent. One in four children are born to an unmarried mother, many of whom are teenagers. Another 40 percent of children under 18 will experience parental breakup.

Ninety percent of single-parent families are headed by females. Not surprisingly, single mothers with dependent children have the highest rate of poverty across all demographic groups (Olson & Banyard, 1993). Approximately 60 percent of U.S. children living in mother-only families are impoverished, compared with only 11 percent of two-parent families. The rate of poverty is even higher in African-American single-parent families, in which two out of every three children are poor.

On March 25th, 2014, Steinem’s 80th birthday,  wrote, “The liberal sisterhood railed against a society they said encouraged women to stay at home and raise children. They demanded the marketplace open up more opportunities for women and pay them the same as men. Fine. But what about women who choose differently? Today’s young women are empowered to choose career, family, and all sorts of combinations of both. But the words of Steinem and other liberal feminists revealed what they believed about American women.”

Wood provided the following quotes:

Steinem: “[Housewives] are dependent creatures who are still children…parasites.”

Simone de Beauvoir: “No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”

Betty Friedan: “[Housewives] are mindless and thing-hungry…not people. [Housework] is peculiarly suited to the capacities of feeble-minded girls. [It] arrests their development at an infantile level, short of personal identity with an inevitably weak core of self…. [Housewives] are in as much danger as the millions who walked to their own death in the concentration camps. [The] conditions which destroyed the human identity of so many prisoners were not the torture and brutality, but conditions similar to those which destroy the identity of the American housewife.”

Wood notes that Steinem has never been a fan of women who didn’t think like her or buy in to her radical feminist political agenda. “Having someone who looks like us but thinks like them (meaning men) is worse than having no one at all.”

“So much for tolerance—and the belief that women are individuals who should be free to think and make choices for themselves,” concludes Wood.

Dr. Larry Reed, President of FEE wrote, “Free people are not equal, and equal people are not free.” American women today are less free because of Steinem. Traditional families are increasingly becoming the exception rather than the rule.

Illiberal Arts: Cataloguing systematic suppression of speech on campus by ALLEN MENDENHALL

A diversity of thought and a variety of perspectives are necessary to facilitate competition among ideas. Such competition selectively eliminates the bad from the good, the true from the false, and the practical from the impractical. Opposing viewpoints must enter into this more constructive contest so that the struggle does not move into the arena of physical violence. Thus, toleration of dissenting and controversial opinions is fundamental to peaceful discourse, intellectual progress, and human liberty.

These ideas about freedom of speech and expression have been passed down in different forms from Milton to Mill to Locke and made their way into the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. They are now under threat in the most unlikely of places: university campuses.

First published in 2012 by Encounter Books, Unlearning Liberty was re-released this year in a paperback version with a new afterword by Greg Lukianoff. Lukianoff opens his book with the curious case of Ronald Zaccari, the former president of Valdosta State University who single-handedly facilitated the “administrative withdrawal” of a student who publicly challenged the university’s plans to construct two parking garages on campus. Lukianoff suggests that this case may seem extreme, “but it isn’t all that exceptional.”

Each chapter documents several strange and excessive punitive measures implemented by universities. For instance, the disciplining of a Jewish student for using a benign Hebrew colloquialism to tell another group of students to pipe down while he tried to study; the student found guilty of “racial harassment” for reading a history book criticizing the Klan, while passersby saw only the cover of the book that displayed a photograph of a Klan rally; the student newspaper threatened with penalties for poking fun at the administration of a prominent business school.

Lukianoff’s long, big-picture catalogue of university abuses might seem like an absurd or purely fictional parade of horribles, but every alarming incident detailed here is all too real. Unlearning Liberty is more surprising than enjoyable to read because its message is so disconcerting: In Lukianoff’s words, “the world of higher education today is harming American discourse and increasing polarization.”

This book should leave you outraged and indignant at the illiberal, systemic, systematic, and bewildering suppressions of speech and association taking place on campuses across America. But its target is broader than that. It also criticizes the astronomical costs of higher education, the inflated salaries of university presidents and administrators, the bloated education bureaucracy, and the flagrant disregard by universities for legal processes and protocols that have developed out of centuries of trial-and-error: due process, fair hearings, trial by jury, and the opportunity of the accused to confront his accusers.

Lukianoff is a self-proclaimed Democrat, environmentalist, atheist, activist, lawyer, and the president of the nonprofit Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). His work cuts across simple labels like “conservative” or “liberal” as he champions freedom of speech, individual rights, religious liberty, freedom of conscience, and equal protection under the law. Lukianoff himself is a trailblazing defender of the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights against universities that seek to train students and faculty into silent acceptance of bad policies, frightened acquiescence to abuses of authority, and docile submission to rampant corruption and discrimination. He and FIRE are famous—and, in some circles, infamous—for drawing attention to the arbitrary, selective enforcement of administrative policies against particular groups or individuals for political or retaliatory purposes.

I personally have fought against concerted attempts by faculty and administrators to silence criticisms of bad university policies. As one example, when a certain university ordered one of its students to remove a Ron Paul banner from his dorm room window, although other dorm room windows displayed an array of banners, I wrote an op-ed for the local newspaper challenging the university’s selective enforcement of its policy. As a doctoral candidate at the university, where I had a long family history, I was concerned as much for the university as I was for the student. In response, one renowned faculty member with an endowed chair dashed off the following email to me:

I saw your letter in the Montgomery paper, and it sounds as if you are unaware of the contribution to the deaths and injuries of students because of banners and posters over windows at the university in New Jersey a few years back. As I learned in my own youth, “Ready, Fire, Aim” is not a good mode of conduct, and you are now in a program that, we hope, produces research-oriented people.

The irony here is the implication that I had failed to do my research while this professor had not failed to do hers: I wasn’t criticizing the university policy per se, but the application of the policy to only one student, apparently for his political beliefs. As someone who had earned two law degrees and was currently practicing law (even though I was also a doctoral student in her program), I was not demonstrating a “Ready, Fire, Aim” mode of conduct, but she was. Reading Unlearning Liberty reminds me that I was never alone.

Universities ought to place a premium on free inquiry and the kind of unfettered intellectual exchange promoted and represented by the republicanism of America’s Founders. Instead, universities have begun to discourage healthy disagreement and have become echo chambers in which certain members seek to enforce a rigid orthodoxy and to promote complacent groupthink. Even worse is the bullying “political correctness” that crushes ideological diversity and the discursive competition necessary for intellectual progress.

Speech codes are a form of censorship. Rather than accomplishing their stated goal of reducing offensive language and behavior, they more often protect the power of administrators and prevent the exposure of embarrassing but true facts about university blunders and the application of stringent legalisms. As universities have brazenly abdicated their traditional role as guardians of communicative liberties and civilized debate, no new institutions have filled the void.

Without some special differentiation among rivaling opinions that are articulated freely within a community of thinkers, ideas and the society based on them cannot advance. It’s time for universities to expand rather than compress the range of discursive options, and to multiply rather than decrease the chances for open dialogue. Doing so would aid in restoring universities to their proper role: searching for knowledge. Lukianoff’s excellent book compiles a list of abuses. Now it’s time for us to do something about them.


Allen Mendenhall is the author of Literature and Liberty: Essays in Libertarian Literary Criticism(Rowman & Littlefield / Lexington Books, 2014). Visit his website at

RELATED STORY: Democratic Party always finds a way to stifle speech – Honolulu Star Advertiser.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of FEE and Shutterstock.

Florida high school teacher fakes orgasm in class — and keeps her job by Allen West

Parents today have so many factors and variables working against them when it comes to a quality education for their children. As we all know, America has unfortunately fallen behind other countries in the world when it comes to academic achievement.

As a result, my wife Angela and I decided to invest in our daughters’ future by sending them to private parochial schooling. Aubrey graduated from a Catholic high school and Austen attends a Christian high school — not only is a quality education important but a moral one as well.

Hence the backdrop for another sad story coming out of Florida. Hat tip to LTC (Ret.) Dr. Rich Swier who reports that a language arts teacher at a Miami-Dade public high school actually simulated an orgasm in front of her students.

According to a recent Education Practices Commission of the State of Florida report, Christine Kirchner, who teaches at Coral Reef Senior High, regularly discussed sex, virginity and masturbation, simulated orgasm and gave massages to students in her language arts class during the 2012-13 school year.

Kirchner is no weird outlier. In 2008 she was appointed by the Miami-Dade School Board to the Lesson Plan Development Task Group. Kirchner was elected Vice President At-Large and sits on the Executive Board of the United Teachers of Dade (UTD).

For her actions, Kirchner was found guilty of “gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude” and in violation of “the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession.” Gee, ya think?

Her punishment? The Florida Department of Education accepted a “Settlement Agreement” which consists of a letter of reprimand and placing Kirchner on two years probation. Kirchner accepted the Settlement Agreement and will return to her classroom at Coral Reef High School and retain her position on the Executive Board of the UTD.

I’m quite sure the teacher’s union had a play in this case. Now, you can understand why parents are seeking out charter schools and homeschooling is on the rise. As well, you can understand why our public schools are failing our children and not preparing them with quality instruction promoting critical thinking skills.

So what’s your assessment? Should Ms. Kirchner return to the classroom, and is this just another case of dismissing and rewarding abhorrent behavior?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on

Whitewashing Republican Support of Civil Rights

One of the best kept secrets over the past 50 years is that, proportionately, Republicans in Congress supported passage of the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act by a much wider margin than Democrats.

As reported, “The Guardian’s Harry J. Enten broke down the vote, showing that more than 80% of Republicans in both houses voted in favor of the bill, compared with more than 60% of Democrats. When you account for geography, according to Enten’s article, 90% of lawmakers from states that were in the union during the Civil War supported the bill compared with less than 10% of lawmakers from states that were in the Confederacy.”

This is from a report from CNN, not FOX, the network despised by liberals.

There was another interesting tidbit in the CNN report:

“Ohio’s Republican Rep. William McCulloch had a conservative track record – he opposed foreign and federal education aid and supported gun rights and school prayer. His district (the same one now represented by House Speaker John Boehner) had a small African-American population. So he had little to gain politically by supporting the Civil Rights Act.”

“Yet he became a critical leader in getting the bill passed.

“His ancestors opposed slavery even before the Civil War, and he’d made a deal with President Kennedy to see the bill through to passage.”
The article noted, “’The Constitution doesn’t say that whites alone shall have our most basic rights, but that we all shall have them,’ McCulloch would say to fellow legislators.”

But you would not know any of this if you relied on the official ceremonies at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library last week marking the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights. The three-day summit at the University of Texas featured President Obama and former presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Other speakers included Black Democrats such as Julian Bond, the former NAACP chairman; Congressman John Lewis of Atlanta, and former UN Ambassador Andy Young, among others. (To see a full list of speakers, go to:

How can you have a discussion of Civil Rights and not have one Black Republican? How could you not have Robert J. Brown, top aide to President Nixon and one of Dr. King’s closest confidants?

What about former Eighth District Court of Appeals Judge Sara J. Harper? Last year, she was inducted into the Ohio Civil Rights Hall of Fame. She was also the first Black to graduate from Case Western Reserve University’s Law School. Is it really that easy to overlook the first Black National Security Adviser and Secretary of State, Colin Powell? Really?

They even had my good friend, former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour as one of their speakers (a White southern male). So, they had White Republicans, but no Black Republicans. WOW!

As George Orwell wrote his book, 1984, “He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”

If the summit were your sole source of information, you would think no Black Republicans were involved in the Civil Rights Movement. Arthur Fletcher is known as “the father of affirmative action.” Though he is deceased, his work lives on – and should have been recognized.

Former Secretary of Transportation Bill Coleman was a proud Black Republican but just as proud of his support for civil rights. And so was former Senator Ed Brooke of Massachusetts. The list goes on and on – except at the LBJ ceremonies in Austin.

Am I the only one that noticed this intentional rewriting of history?

As usual, the media has been woefully and willfully negligent in not covering this angle. These supposedly bastions of journalistic integrity such as The Root and The Grio have caught a bad case of laryngitis. Melissa Perry and Joy Reid on MSNBC have suddenly forgotten how to speak English.

The LBJ library and Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for prostituting the real bi-partisan history of the Civil Rights Movement. This should have been one event that was truly reflective of the real history of America – the good and the bad.

Slavery and racism are still the biggest blemishes on American history; but because we are Americans and showed resolve, we also have one helluva story of redemption to tell. We have come a long way from the days of slavery and Jim Crow. We have Blacks making millions of dollars in sports, music, business, science, and education. Blacks have been to the moon and back. We even have a Black president.

In the very moment when we should have been celebrating the journey America has taken, we have been forced to reflect upon the willful deceit propagated upon the true history of our nation.

What’s the Meaning of the “Blood Moon”? Do We Sigh a Relief, or Are “End-times” Impending?

The “Blood Moons” could be a sign of “end-times.” There are other signs that we should expect like an earthquake to initiate “the day of the Lord.” This article offers a “heads up” for May.

The answer to these questions depends on our frame of reference. If we look to the all-time bestseller, the Bible, we should see that on the first page, God puts lights in the sky for signs and seasons, Genesis 1:14-16. The sun was to rule the day, the moon by night.

We recognize the sun as the source of light, heat and energy for our planet or everything would freeze. Perhaps we could consider that the sun represents a similar spiritual truth that the Son, (referenced in Psalm 2:7, Proverb 30:4 and John 3:16) is also the source of life, even beyond our world as we know it.

An eclipse of the moon occurs when the earth is between the moon and the sun. The moon is the largest body in our solar system to reflect light from the sun, and it can also represent the church as a body of believers who also reflect the light of the Son.

In the spiritual dimension, for the moon to be eclipsed, it means that things of this world come between the church and the Son, just as the True Witness tells the last of seven churches that they think they are rich and increased with goods, [focused on materialism] Revelation 3:17.

A “blood moon” does not occur unless there is a full eclipse of the moon and it could suggest that the churches are, in a general sense, eclipsed by the things of this world so the Son does not shine on them.

The uniqueness of this blood moon was its timing as the first of four that fall on Jewish festivals—the Passover and Feast of Tabernacles this year and next year! Could this portend serious events, even the “end-times”?

It depends who we talk to if we want to stretch “could” to “would,” but with so many crises developing around the world at almost every level, why not consider the possibility? After all, the Bible says “the shall be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the “day of the Lord,” Joel 2:31.

Many think “the day of the Lord” is the coming of Christ, but Joel 2:10,11 support an earthquake as initiating the “day of the Lord” as a period of time, probably the 7 last years expected by Evangelicals.

Just as our days dawn gradually and we can wake up as our room gets gradually lighter, maybe God is giving us a gentle wake up with warning signs for “the day of the Lord” prior to the earthquake that may comes with “sudden destruction” as Paul said in 1 Thessalonians 5:2,3.

Christians defer to Jews with a focus on Passover, but they should have “heads up” a month from now when the timing of Christ’s clues come into focus. “As in the days of Noah” and “like a man traveling to a far country,” both point to Numbers 9:10,11 for Passover, a time of judgment, in the 2nd spring month (May), even as Christ’s reference to the fig tree “when summer is nigh” could be pointing to May .

EDITORS NOTE: The features photo of the Blood Moon is by Peter Gaylard from Australia. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license.

The War Within the GOP

I started out a Democrat because my parents were Democrats. When I was old enough to conclude that the Democratic Party was so socialist I could not remain one, I became a Republican. In her nineties, even my Mother registered as a Republican. Times change and people change. Now I am considering registering as an independent. I am waiting for the outcome of the November midterm elections.

My decision will depend on how many Tea Party movement candidates are elected and my hope is that it will be a wave election that rejects so many Democratic candidates that power in the Congress–particularly the Senate–returns to the GOP. Then I will watch to see how much action they take to reverse the damage of Obamacare and other programs in much need of reform, replacement and rejection.

Tea Party Movement (1)According to Gallup, currently an estimated 42 percent of voters today self-identify as independents. Those who identify themselves as Republicans fell to 25 percent. In 2013 Gallup reported that 41 percent regarded themselves to be conservative or very conservative, but that was the lowest since Obama took office in 2009.

A recent Rasmussen poll found that 59% of GOP voters say that Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the Party’s base. I suspect that’s because the base is more conservative than its elected representatives. Conversely, Democrats are quite happy with theirs.

The emergence of the Tea Party movement has dramatically demonstrated the unhappiness of voters with the direction the nation has taken since Obama was elected in 2008. At the heart of their displeasure are the dreadful state of the economy and the growing fear of a Big Government that extends more and more control over all aspects of their lives.

The internal debate within the GOP is showing up in commentaries among its pundits. It reflects to some degree the fears of its establishment elites who have managed to serve up John McCain and Mitt Romney, both of whom lost because they waged campaigns devoid of any serious criticism or confrontation with liberalism. The Party has lost the popular vote in five of the last six presidential elections.

They suffered as well from an incessant Democratic Party campaign to define Republicans as indifferent to the poor, aligned with large corporations, and hostile to illegal immigrants, homosexuals and women.

With the help of the mainstream media, these themes are constantly repeated. Meanwhile, cities and states run by Democrats are going bankrupt thanks to their devotion to spending and alliance with public service unions. You could line up the agendas of the Democratic Party and the Communist Party USA side by side and find very little difference.

Unfortunately, there are voices in the GOP that sound more like Democrats than Republicans. The most visible to emerge is Jeb Bush, a former Florida Governor, whose informal recent remarks sound like Democrat-light. He could have better articulated the need for immigration reform, but he did not. This is a common problem among too many Republicans in office or running for one, no matter what the issue may be.

Jeb Bush favors Common Core, a federal program of education standards that represent why education in America is failing and has been for a very long time. Regrettably, his brother, George W. Bush advocated “Leave No Child Behind” with its comparable standards. Parents today are clamoring for charter schools to save their children from the indoctrination imposed by teachers unions since the 1960s. Democrat demands for pre-kindergarten programs are just a further intrusion into their lives.

In a Wall Street Journal commentary, former Florida Governor, William W. Galston, characterizes the war within the GOP as being between “the social conservatives and defense hawks that Ronald Reagan created in the late 1970s” and the current GOP leadership who think those values should be abandoned to entice youth, women, and homosexuals. He expressed the war as a generational one between younger and older Republicans.

“The tea party offers nothing except nostalgia for a demography that is in retreat and a Constitution that never was,” said Galston. “By contrast Mr. Bush wants to run as a conservative unafraid of the future.” His wish for a campaign that avoids mud-slinging betrays a timidity that could cost the GOP another loss if he were to become its presidential candidate. My view is that Republicans, as per the Rasmussen poll, want a candidate and a Party that would more boldly fight Democratic Party and liberal lies.

In a March commentary by Karl Rove, the former deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, had nice things to say about the party’s reformers such as Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, and governors such as Bobby Jindal, Rick Snyder, Scott Walker, and John Kasich. He cited their efforts to help the poor, but left unsaid was that they are poor because they are either a permanent class of the poor or the result of Obama’s failure to turn the economy around.

Rove could well have mentioned Tea Party favorites such as Senators Cruz, Lee, and Paul who are reinvigorating Republican principles and giving voice to them.

The GOP is not about the poor. It is about the middle class and too many are sinking into poverty thanks to Democratic programs emphasizing spending, borrowing, and expanding programs such as food stamps, unemployment payments, and an increase in the minimum wage. All of Obama’s blather about income inequality is aimed at those who think such programs will help the economy, but all they do is undermine it.

“Conservative reformers seek to broaden opportunity, increase prosperity for every American, restore the value of work, and strengthen markets, competition and choice,” said Rove. “If successful, their efforts would help the GOP among middle class voters.” That could have been written by a member of the Tea Party movement.

“It is hard to overstate how much the Republican Party is hurt by the persistent belief of many voters that its candidates are out of touch and do not care about people like them,” said Rove. That’s the message of the Democratic Party and always has been. It is a message that mainstream media repeats.

The Tea Party movement, however, is overcoming that message and the success of Republican governors and the popularity of its candidates suggests that many Americans see the movement as the salvation of the nation. The Republican Party too often looks pale by comparison and that must change.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

The real meaning of Soviet agitprop in Jay Carney’s kitchen

As soon as the photograph of Soviet propaganda posters in Jay Carney’s kitchen hit the Internet, right-wing pundits began to draw conclusions about White House Press Secretary’s ideology, morals, and political leanings. It was as if things that a man merely places on his walls and looks at day after day can be any indication of his life choices.

If that were so, the meals in Carney’s kitchen would also probably match the menu of the place and time of the posters. His family would be living on a diet of beets, gruel, occasional rat, and thinly sliced boiled jackboots, which is what many Soviets ate at the time these posters were produced.

One poster was made in 1918, calling men to join the Red Army in the civil war against the anti-communist opposition, while the country lay in ruins due to the economic mismanagement as much as due to intense fighting. The other poster was made during WWII, calling women to replace men at the factories, as the country lay in ruins, once again, due to intense fighting as much as due to the economic mismanagement.

The diet of the Carney family, however, does not include any of the food that the impoverished and starving Soviet people ate during the above wars. They eat more like the members of the Soviet Politburo and even better than that. They feast on fresh organic produce, succulent meat, delicious seafood, and tropical fruit delivered to the United States from all over the world. And as they enjoy the abundance of the American way of life in their kitchen, the Carneys like to stare at the two propaganda posters made for starving people. It never fails to improve their feeling of self-worth and digestion.

It is beyond imagination that anyone could misconstrue the Soviet agitprop in Jay Carney’s kitchen as an indication that White House Press Secretary Jay Carney and his wife somehow share the same ideas as the perpetrators of a brutal regime that starved its own citizens while the political elites lived in luxury, abused power, prosecuted the opposition, and ruled the country by means of executive orders.

Next, they would claim that that a neat stack of Chairman Mao’s Little Red Books in Valery Jarrett’s bathroom is not there merely to serve as an elegant accent to complement the shower curtains; or that the Black Panther Party insignia on Michelle Obama’s pajamas isn’t merely a bold decorative pattern; or that the black flag of holy Jihad in Huma Abedin’s bedroom is somehow indicative of her sympathies towards the Muslim Brotherhood.

Following such flawed right-wing logic, one might even speculate that Saul Alinsky’s books in Hillary Clinton’s living room mean anything other than an effort to disguise an obscure dried spot that had mysteriously appeared on the coffee table in the last year of her husband’s presidency.

We invite our readers to take virtual tours of America’s other prominent political and cultural leaders and see what potentially “compromising” items they may have in their houses, so that we can pre-emptively debunk any accusations and witch hunts, such as the one to which the unfortunate White House Press Secretary is exposed today.

Starting Holy Week with Murders

There’s something very sad about the murders in Kansas City that began the holy week for Jews—Passover—and the forthcoming Easter for Christians. The two events are closely linked biblically and historically. The murders are a rebuke to both faiths.

There is irony and tragedy in the murder of William Lewis Corporon and his grandson, Reat Griffin Underwood. Both were Christian. As of this writing, the third victim, a woman, is identified as a Jew. The first two were visiting a Jewish community center to participate in a music contest. The other victim was killed at a Jewish retirement community.

The alleged perpetrator is Frazier Glenn Cross who was identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as having been involved in the white supremacist movement for most of his life. Fox News reported that he “founded the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and was its “grand dragon” in the 1980s before the Center sued him for operating an illegal paramilitary organization and using intimidation tactics against blacks.”

I cannot even imagine what it must be like to devote one’s entire life to hating blacks and Jews. Hatred is a corrosive emotion and the complete opposite of the values that both Judaism and Christianity embrace.

Michael Siegal, chairman of the Jewish Federations of North America, said “no community should have to face a moment such as this one. Today, on the eve of Pesach, we are left to contemplate how we must continue our work building a world in which all people are free to live their lives without the threat of terror.”

The key element in his statement is “all people.”

Around the world today terror is the primary weapon of those who would impose Islam on everyone while killing thousands of their own believers and, in the case of Israel, threatening death to an entire nation of Jews. It must be noted that thousands of Arabs are Israeli citizens as well.

It reminds one that the Nazi death camps and deliberate killing of others in the last century not only killed Jews, but millions of Christians as well. According to Wikipedia:

“In addition to Jews, the targeted groups included Poles (of whom 2.5 million gentile Poles were killed) and some other Slavic peoplesSoviets (particularly prisoners of war);Romanies (also known as Gypsies) and others who did not belong to the Aryan Herrenvolk “Aryan master race”; the mentally ill, the deaf, the physically disabled and mentally retardedhomosexual and transsexual people; political opponents such as communistssocial democrats and socialists; and religious dissidents, i.e. members of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Taking into account all of the victims of Nazi persecution, they systematically killed an estimated six million Jews and mass murdered an additional eleven million people during the war. Donald Niewyk suggests that the broadest definition, including Soviet civilian deaths would produce a death toll of 17 million.”

One can only conclude that humans are a very dangerous specie, inclined to kill its own for reasons that focus on religion, politics, and other factors.

By contrast, Passover and Easter focus on survival and sacrifice in the face of evil. Both acknowledge and celebrate the role of our Creator. Holy week for both Jews and Christians is a good one to concentrate on the values that they both teach and uphold. It is also a week (among all the others) to dedicate ourselves to opposing those for whom hate is their only reason to exist.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Fany1988. This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Rotten to the Common Core

The term “Common Core” might not be familiar to many of you.  If you have children, plan on having children, have grandchildren, hope to have grandchildren or just care about the future of the country, you need to pay attention.  Common Core is the latest of the federal government takeovers, this one targeting education.

Over the past few years we’ve seen what happens when the government takes over an industry, with thousands of pages of new rules, regulations and bureaucracies.  With health care, we were told we needed to pass it before we could see what was in it.  We were told it would expand services and lower costs for everyone.  The truth of the matter is quite the opposite.

Now, the federal government is promising better test scores through higher standards and a more comprehensively-planned curriculum for your child.  Those behind Common Core can make these claims because the curriculum has been thoroughly tested….nowhere.  This is correct; those pushing the implementation of Common Core nationwide have never tested this new curriculum, at least not outside the minds of well-heeled lobbyists pushing for Common Core on behalf of those positioned to make lots of money from it.  In fact, they were getting States to sign on to Common Core before the standards and curriculum was even written.  Have our elected officials learned nothing from the debacle that the Affordable Care Act has become?

Do we not owe it to our children to fully understand what is in and behind Common Core first, before adopting it?  Shouldn’t this new curriculum be fully vetted before subjecting a generation of children to it?  More importantly, why are we abdicating the responsibility of educating our children to the Federal Government, when we already have education departments at the State level, and locally-elected School Boards?  Education is not and never should be one-size-fits-all.  Education is most effective when there is involvement by the parents in their local schools.  Accepting Common Core is tantamount to accepting education without any kind of representation on behalf of parents, teachers, and your local community.

Ask any teacher passionate about their profession, and they will tell you that no curriculum can take the place of one individual inspiring another.  Most teachers will also tell you that after reviewing the Common Core curriculum and required material, they have serious concerns with it.  They see it as too restrictive, as micro-managing their classroom.  Teachers will be turned into facilitators, lessening their ability to reach the underachiever and inspire the overachiever.

This is not a partisan issue, as those trumpeting Common Core would like the general public to believe. You can easily dismiss the notion that there are only a few small groups of Tea Partiers, or the extreme right wing of the Republican Party that are against Common Core, then you read that the entire Board of the New York State United Teachers (NYSUT)  has withdrawn its support for Common Core.  “We’ll have to be the first to say it’s failed,” said Richard Iannuzzi, president of the NYSUT, an organization of 600,000 teachers, retired teachers and school professionals.  Trust that the NYSUT will never be confused with the Tea Party.

This is not an isolated incident.  This is happening all over the country, as teachers and parents join forces against this issue.  State after State are opting-out of Common Core, and I believe Florida should follow suit.  We hear about setting our own standards and taking out the data mining of our students that is currently a part of Common Core.  If we do this, then why bother staying in Common Core at all? Once Common Core is fully-implemented, I believe that Federal Law will trump State Law and we will be mandated to comply with all of the law, as well as cover all the unfunded mandates that come with it. As always with the Federal Government, if you take their dime, they get to control your dollar.

It’s time to act to protect our children, because their future is our future.  It’s time to listen to the People, and not the lobbyists and special interests.  It is time for the State of Florida to opt-out of Common Core.

Florida: Providing in-state tuition to illegals is why politicians are held in such low esteem

Every session examples pop up so let’s examine what the Florida Legislature is on the verge of doing this session which clearly illustrates a disconnect between them and their citizen constituents.

The Speaker of the House started the session supporting In-State Tuition for illegal aliens. In short order HB 851 sailed through the House and was overwhelmingly approved with strong Republican support and unanimous Democrat votes. This is legislation that was defeated numerous times going back to 2003 when Marco Rubio co-sponsored a similar bill.

In the Florida senate SB 1400 has passed three of four committees with the strong help of Republicans who control the senate as well. Many of the same Republicans who voted in previous committees with unanimous Democrat support are on the Judiciary committee, so passage is imminent.

This is a perfect example of the point I want to make. There is absolutely no way the voters of Florida who are forced to educate, medicate and incarcerate illegal at a cost of $5.2 Billion annually would vote for another tax imposed on them to further educate children who cost taxpayers substantially more to educate than our own children. There is not one state poll that would show any meaningful support rather overwhelming opposition to the idea. I would be willing to wager a bet there is not one Republican that has voted for in-state tuition for illegal aliens when running for election said they would vote to do it. Not one!

It is pretty certain the bill will be passed and sent to the governor for his signature who has said he supports it. Remember him, he is the guy that got elected because he said he wanted to pass a bill like AZ 1070 promising mandatory e-verify for all business owners while after four years in office he has done nothing and we have 600,000 illegal aliens employed in the state.

Two Faced Politicians cannot be trusted to fulfill their promises to support what the majority wants that voted them in office. They deserve to be held in low esteem since they basically say the voters opinions don’t count.

We will see what happen on November 4th, 2014. When they go against the wishes of Floridians who elected them, they deserve to be sent back to the private sector. They are not worthy of the public’s trust.

RELATED STORY: Continued High Legal Immigration Steadily Erodes GOP Prospects

The Beat Goes On: Opposing Obama is Racist

Alas, another reporter asked me the same question I have been repeatedly asked for the past five years. “As an African American, why are you a member of the Tea Party?” It dawned on me to ask the reporter, “If you are a thinking patriotic American, why are you NOT a member of the Tea Party?”

It is stunning that reporters can not see the absurdity and racism against white voters in their assumption that Tea Party membership (push back against Obama’s agenda) equals racism.

For the first time in U.S. history are Americans required to submit to their president’s agenda or suffer the mainstream media and Democratic party branding an “R” on their forehead for racist? Does our president’s skin color repeal our right to disagree with government?

The MSM and Democratic party declaring all opposition to Obama’s agenda racist is a despicable divisive tactic. They are exploiting Obama’s skin-color to further their socialist/progressive agenda (full court press hostile government takeover of our lives).

Another question repeatedly asked by reporters is, “If the Tea Party is not racist, why are its members mostly white?” I reply, “Could it be that a majority of black voters are ill-informed, clueless and/or racist? Why are you making the Tea Party responsible for blacks not showing up?”

In 2008, when I heard presidential candidate Barack Obama tell Joe-the-Plumber that he wanted to spread the wealth around, I knew Obama was a socialist and the wrong man to lead my country.

To my utter amazement, who Obama is as a human being and his plan for America was totally irrelevant to my family, friends and 96% of black voters including some black conservatives and Republicans. It was a black code thing. Support the brother no matter what.

My decision to campaign and vote against Obama due to his far left radical associations, pro infanticide voting record and socialistic vision for my country made me an outcast and a traitor to my race. Is there a monolithic “racist” black vote? You bet there is. Black racism is as evil and unacceptable as white racism.

White liberals were equally outraged that I dared to judge Obama by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin. White liberal paragons of fairness, tolerance and self-proclaimed champions of minorities called me a “stupid self loathing n*****” for not voting for Obama.

Along with millions of white Obama voters shocked and outraged over his unprecedented takeover of the auto industry, banks and repeated ignoring of the Constitution, I joined the Tea Party.

The MSM and Democratic party are insisting that we surrender our will and our country. They demand that we act like brain dead obedient supplicants of King Obama, less we risk public humiliation charged with racism. Heaven forbid.

Hall of Fame baseball player Hank Aaron is the latest black celeb to call opposing Obama equal to being a member of the KKK. Hank, I love you bro. But your accusation is racist, evil and beneath you.

How are you, Mr Aaron, suddenly able to read the hearts, minds and intentions of the entire GOP and millions of Americans in the Tea Party? Can you not see how insidiously evil, intellectually vacant and tyrannical it is to brand all opposition to the president’s agenda racist?

And yet, to silence the GOP and conservatives, the mainstream media and Democratic party continues to promote the ridiculous narrative that “opposing Obama is racist”. This tactic has successfully rendered most of the GOP impotent, cowering in their boots, fearful of that hot “R” brand on their foreheads. Many well-intentioned Americans have been silenced.

I submit that we conservatives and Republicans rip the racism branding iron from the hands of the MSM and Democratic party and point it in their direction. They are the true racists.

White America, when the left calls you a racist for pushing back against socialism, let it roll off your back like water off a duck. America is far too precious to allow it to be destroyed (fundamentally transformed) by the MSM and Democratic party’s use of racial intimidation, race baiting and race exploitation. We can not allow ourselves to be silenced.

The MSM and Democratic party have no problem with setting back national race relations, polarizing Americans along racial lines to implement their mission of government controlling every aspect of our lives.

To defeat the MSM and Democratic party, you must support and vote for conservatives beginning with the 2014 elections.

We can and we must take back America.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of