Democrats Defy Logic

The closer Election Day gets, the more confused I am by the behavior of Democrats. For the past several years, there has been this false obsession with the importance of the Hispanic vote. All you hear in the media and from the political pundits is “the Hispanic vote, the Hispanic vote, the Hispanic vote.”

Democrats have been throwing amnesty at illegals, giving away Supreme Court seats to Hispanics (Sotomayor), and making it easy for illegals to take American jobs.

It’s almost as though the Black vote doesn’t exist and doesn’t matter. It seems as though Democrats are saying why pay attention or pander to Blacks; they know Blacks will always give them their vote and not expect or demand anything in return.

The Hispanic vote is only influential in a few states: California, New Mexico, or Nevada to name a few. They tend to congregate in large numbers in a small number of states.The Black vote is wide and deep, especially in the South and Northeast.

Hispanics are approximately 16 percent of the nation’s population, but only 10 percent of eligible voters. Even worse, only 7 percent vote.The Hispanic population of eligible voter is smaller than any other group (voting age population or VAP). The VAP for Whites is more than 77 percent, for Blacks 67 percent, and for Asians 52 percent.

As they do every two years, the Democrats have their biennial epiphany about the Black vote because they need Blacks to save them at the ballot box come next week.

Before I get into the Democrat’s latest epiphany and what it looks like; let me remind you of what Obama said about Black people in 2012 during an interview with Black Enterprise (BE) magazine. They asked him about the criticism he had received about ignoring Blacks and Black businesses. His response was, “I’m not the president of black America. I’m the president of the United States of America.” In other words, he will not engage in targeted solutions to problems that are unique to the Black community like the double digit unemployment rate (11.6 percent). He continued by saying, “a rising tide lifts all boats.”

Hmm, interesting.

So Obama is saying what’s good for America is good for Blacks and vice versa.

If this is the case, then can someone explain to me why Obama and the Democrats, fearing defeat in the Senate, are suddenly are spending $ 1 million dollars “specifically” targeting Blacks on radio and newspapers? Why are they not taking the same advertisements they are running in White media and use the same for Black radio and newspapers?

In other words, Democrats will “target” Blacks for purposes of an election; but won’t do the same thing in the area of legislation and public policy. If Obama is “president of all of America,” why is he “targeting” Blacks regarding the upcoming elections? Won’t people “think” he is Black? Won’t people “think” he is being partial to Black media? Of course he is and it’s the smart thing to do. So, if Obama and Democrats can “target” Blacks for political ads, for political purposes; could they not also “target” Blacks with specific legislation and executive orders to deal with the double digit unemployment rate? The answer is a resounding yes. But Obama and Democrats don’t value the Black vote; they only “use” the Black vote.

But yet, this is the same president and party that refuse specific actions for Blacks, while showering homosexuals and illegals with every political favor under the sun; and they are now targeting Black radio and newspapers in the last 30 days of the election because they are desperate.

According to the nonpartisan research group, Center for Responsive Politics, Democrats are expected to spend upwards of $ 1.76 billion for this year’s elections; yet they only allocate $ 1 million for Black media in the last 30 days of the campaign. You do the math. This shows how little value they place on the Black vote – until it’s too late. These ads are being run on radio shows hosted by Tom Joyner, D.L. Hughley, Ricky Smiley, Al Sharpton, and Joe Madison. There are 24 months in an elections cycle, but Democrats only spend money with these Blacks for 30 days of that cycle.

The question is also where they spend this money. Do they actually think comedians and buffoons can influence the Black vote. But, then again, how appropriate that the Democrats think that comedians can get Blacks to vote because the past six years have been one big joke played on the Black community.

Passionate About Conservatism

We conservatives tend to be rather low key when it comes to expressing our commitment to conservative values. We are all about the Constitution, small government, a strong military, and fiscal prudence, but these are not things that are easy to talk about in a passionate way, no matter how strongly we feel about them.

Cover - Right for a ReasonAs a longtime—try fifty-plus years—book reviewer, I get lots of them and recently “Right for a Reason: Life, Liberty, and a Crapload of Common Sense” by “the Chicks on the Right”, Miriam Waver and Amy Jo Clark arrived ($26.95, Penguin Group).

The “Chicks” started a website in 2009 that quickly gained a large audience of people who love their approach to conservatism and their interpretation of the events of the day, issues, and personalities. Need it be said it also attracted all manner of rude, nasty responses from liberals?

“If you’re reading this right now”, they say in the introduction, “chances are you’re a frustrated conservative. And you’ve got good reason to be frustrated. If you’re like us, you’re practically dizzy from how often you’ve shaken your head at the stupidity of low-information voters who couldn’t pick Nancy Pelosi out of a photo lineup, but can rattle off the names of every single member of the Kardashion clan.”

“Maybe you’re frustrated that conservatives haven’t been able to effectively communicate their ideas in a way that resonates with the public. Maybe you’re frustrated that the mainstream media has been complicit in glamorizing the liberal narrative.” Well, yes, I have felt this way, but I am also aware that the Internet has provided those with the nation’s political life with scads of information on many excellent websites.

Then, too, Rush Limbaugh has been a major voice on radio with a huge audience as is Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and others. By far the most popular shows devoted to the issues are conservative while liberals attract so few listeners and viewers you wonder why there are still so many liberals. One need only compare the Fox News Channel with MSNBC to know the appeal of conservatism and, yes, a conservative interpretation of the news–accurate facts!

In the lead up to the November 4 midterm elections, something remarkable is happening. There are stories noting that Obama has lost the support of a significant number of women and among black Americans. Even the mainstream press has taken note of this and it suggests that, despite our frustrations, maybe our message is having an impact. Or, maybe, these two groups, after six years of Mr. Hope and Change, have decided independently that his policies have not helped them in any way other than turn them into people dependent on the government instead of being able to support themselves and their families.

As the “Chicks” point out, “Despite what the mainstream media wants you to believe, there are thousands and thousands of people out there who are just like us.” Yes! That is the answer. I recall when Ronald Reagan so encouraged and inspired them that a large segment became known as Reagan Democrats. But that was then and this is now.

“Right for a Reason” will, I believe, appeal a tad more to women readers, though men will enjoy their straight-forward analysis and the humor with which they infuse a book that is passionate about conservatism.

I think, too, that this book will appeal to younger readers, the Millennials, because it addresses the fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives. “While liberals cling like tree sloths to promise of everything being provided to them by the government, conservatives cling to the notion of self-sufficiency.” And conservatives don’t think you’re greedy if you want to make a good living and more money than someone who is not willing to work as hard as you.

That’s why conservatives were so annoyed when President Obama said, regarding anyone who is successful, “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” There isn’t a single man or woman who has put hours into their business that did not instantly take offense, but Obama was also revealing his deeply socialistic point of view that it is the “collective” that gets things done, not individuals. Wrong! In the earliest days of the nation, roads, bridges, and canals were built to facilitate business. A huge railroad system was built both to make money and to make it easier for people to travel to the west coast to create businesses or sell to those who were already there, and vice versa.

America is all about capitalism and that explains why it became the world’s superpower in the wake of World War II. In the process it saved Europe from communism and entered into 46 years of a Cold War with the then-Soviet Union. Even so, Europe has long since embraced socialism.

To a great degree, so has America with is vast plethora of “entitlement” programs that were introduced as “a safety net”, but are now so integrated into the life of the nation that millions use them to avoid work because one can often receive more from the government than a job would provide! As the “Chicks” put it, “There is a time and a place for welfare. We believe in safety nets. We believe in helping people. We believe that the weakest among us and the people down on their luck should get assistance.”

It’s refreshing to read a book that is passionate about conservatism. We all need to be.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Florida RINO News Update: Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush for President? Really?

Mitt Romney, the man, the legend, the star spangled unicorn who indirectly created Obamacare now leads a field of potential 2016 GOP candidates in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Saul Alinsky cheerleader, holds a dominant lead among Democrats. The GOP Sheeple are flocking to the man who lighted the path for the Democrats to take control of 1/6th of our free market economy.

Twenty one percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents would choose the former Massachusetts governor. I think the Republican Party has lost its mind or perhaps it has been subjected to Chinese water torture for the past 6 years. The Romney camp keep sending me emails to me saying “My fellow conservative”. Romney is not a conservative he is posing as one to get the conservative vote. Don’t fall for it.

Then we have former Governor Jeb Bush (R-FL) this Hillary Clinton admirer has a 9% support in the poll. Perhaps Jeb needs to have a house party with Bill and Hillary and help raise some money for the Republic-crats. Jeb is the guy that awarded Hillary Clinton a Freedom Medal on the eve of the 1st anniversary of Benghazi. She was responsible for getting 2 Navy SEALs an Ambassador and his aid killed.

Jeb Bush is the guy pushing the United Nations endorsed IB Common Core down our throats in Florida. Maybe to help his brother Neil garner a huge contract to upload the Common Core software via his software company in Austin. Hey, I am all for free market capitalism but not at the expense of our kids. They need to learn the Constitution not collective bargaining and that 1 plus 1 equals 6.

Yes indeed, former Florida governor Jeb Bush who posed alongside Barack Obama in 2011 to make a pitch for reforms to education policies like the United Nations endorsed COMMON CORE. He said he was “incredibly honored” to be standing beside president Obama. Jeb Bush the guy who said that Ronald Reagan would not have fit well in the modern Republican Party. Holy mother of Chinese chicken livers. Save us sweet Jesus from these people. Charlie Crist literally hugged Obama. Jeb Bush did the same thing but from 2 feet away using forked tongue speaking in many tones of RINOSPEAK.

Back to Romney.

Mitt Romney said his Massachusetts health reform plan was much better than Obama’s. It does not matter that it is unconstitutional and violates the 4th Amendment. He claims it’s different in important ways. Oh, here we go with Mr. Romney justifying his Collectivist take over of health care in Massachusetts. A system that forced my cousin to leave this once free state. Perhaps when he made everyone hold their breath to cut down the CO2 emissions he had to create a welfare state to save them from suffocation.

When interviewed by a Denver TV station, Romney cited the key features that differentiate his reform approach from Obama’s. Oh my gracious pass the Grey Poupon please. A Collectivist ideology is a Communist ideology.

Romney declared:

“My health care plan, I put in place in my state has everyone insured, but we didn’t go out and raise taxes on people and have a unelected board tell people what kind of health care they can have.”


Does Romneycare have everyone insured? NO. The plan cut the state’s rate of uninsured by almost half but this forced young people onto this unconstitutional debacle. Buy insurance or pay a fine or go to jail. All tyranny.

Did Romneycare raise taxes? NO, but the state didn’t need to. It covered the cost of reform with larger payments that it negotiated from the federal government for its Medicaid program. So technically it was a tax increase but from federal, not state money. Just more fleecing and redistribution of wealth.

Does Romneycare have an unelected board that tells people what kinds of health care they can have? YES.

The Massachusetts Connector Authority serves as the state’s insurance exchange. It sets standards for the types of plans that may be sold, thereby determining the kind of access residents will have to health care services. DEATH PANELS ladies and gentleman. This violate free market capitalism (it is commonly called price fixing). In my opinion it is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL and violates the Commerce Clause unless its forced under states rights under the 10th Amendment to inflict tyranny on its own people. Romney is the king of tyranny.

Is Obamacare any different? NO.

Obamacare does raise taxes and it also let’s unelected officials determine what kind of insurance people can receive by setting standards for coverage under the state exchanges that will sell it. Just like Romneycare.

After all is said and done Obamacare and Romneycare are almost identical.

They both expand coverage in the same three ways. They reformed the free market for individual insurance by creating exchanges to sell it, subsidizing those with low incomes, and mandating that everyone maintain coverage in some form.

They expanded Medicaid to cover more people. They penalized employers who did not offer coverage to their workers. But more importantly both these plans made you a criminal if you did not comply. ALL TYRANNY!

So there you have it boys and girls. The two front runners for the Republican Party for President in 2016. The man who created Obamacare and the man who presented Hillary Clinton with a freedom medal and praised Obama for Common Core. Sweet Jesus I think we need to dismantle the GOP and rebuild it with Americans that can actually follow the U.S. Constitution.

With these two guys perhaps being hand picked by the GOP as presidential contenders we all need to prepare for a Hillary Clinton presidency and the final chapter on our formerly free republic.

Stay strong patriots. Buy more ammo. I think Hugh Janus has a better shot at saving our nation.

IMMIGRATION: The Law and Assimilation at Issue

There is no more guess work needed to accurately assess the current immigration policy of the United States Federal Government, all three branches. The current policy is designed to forever alter the social fabric and population demographics of the United States.

Because Americans would never willingly accept “global governance” or Marxist notions like “social justice,” it was necessary to flood America with anti-American illegal aliens and legal immigrants. To “change” America, they have to “change Americans.”

An immigrant is someone who enters our country “legally” and abides by our laws, assimilating into American society, speaking our language and revering the principles of freedom and liberty that brought them to our shores.

Those who come here by any other manner are not “immigrants,” they are “illegal aliens.” They are mere illegal migrants, “inhabitants” of the territory, and certainly not “citizens.”

The Rule of Constitutional Law

In the United States, amendments and statutes which are of themselves not constitutional — have no force of law behind them. For any statute to enjoy the force of law, it must be in pursuance of the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution, to include the Bill of Rights.

Over the past 227 years, legislatures have drafted and passed many federal, state and local statutes which are directly in violation of the U.S. Constitution. In addition, the courts have assumed unconstitutional legislative authority via Common Law Rules of Precedent and Procedure, issuing numerous case rulings (aka common law) which directly undermine and subvert the Rule of Constitutional Law. The courts have unconstitutionally altered the Supreme Law of the Land by way of broad ungrounded interpretations and irregular applications of law.

Further, academia’s role in the subversion of Constitutional Law has been to redraft new definitions for old words. In the case of immigration, the primary definition change relates to the term “birthright citizenship.”

In 1828, the official American definition of “birthright” was – “any right which results from descent.” In modern terms, a birthright is any right which one inherits from natural descendants (parentage) at birth. The Law of Nations goes into great detail in Sections 212-219, separating the many different types and rights of “inhabitants vs. citizens vs. True (aka Natural Born) Citizens.”

But by today, academics have already altered the definition of “birthright” as follows – “a right that you have because you were born into a particular position, family, place, etc., or because it is a right of all people.”

As a result, we have “anchor babies” and “illegal aliens” today, presumed to be entitled to citizenship rights equal to that of True American Citizens. Of course, the process by which we arrived here is entirely unconstitutional, as it is a direct offense to the Rule of Constitutional Law and an affront to every True American Citizen.

The use of Common Law (judicial fiat) amounts to the intentional subversion and usurpation of Constitutional Law, resulting in “equal rights” for non-U.S. citizens. Today, illegal aliens often have more rights than legal U.S. Citizens. It’s not constitutional… it is only “social justice.”

After the Civil War, the Supreme Court declared regulation of immigration a federal responsibility in 1875. Seizure of federal supremacy has relegated State’s Rights to the ash heap of history and provided unconstitutional protections for illegal aliens against a disapproving American society.

Now, Americans can be arrested for “racism” and/or “hate speech” for calling illegal invaders by their rightful legal name, “illegal aliens.”

“At the establishment of our Constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions nevertheless become law by precedent, sapping by little and little the foundations of the Constitution and working its change by construction before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life if secured against all liability to account.” –Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:486

Today, it is easier for illegal aliens to access federal taxpayer assisted benefits than for legal American Citizens to do so, thanks in great part to a heavily flawed 14th Amendment recklessly passed by Congress in 1868.

In 1882, Congress passed the first comprehensive Immigration Act. The act prohibited the entry of “any convict, lunatic, idiot, or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” The “public charge” doctrine served to bar arriving foreigners who could not show the financial ability to support themselves. Foreigners denied entry were returned to their starting points at the expense of the ship owners.

By 1986, after a hundred years of inadequate law enforcement concerning immigration, Congress had to pass a “one-time exemption” to these laws, which included a “one-time amnesty” for an estimated one million illegal aliens in our country at that time, signed into law by then President Ronald Reagan as The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.

The condition of that bill was strict federal enforcement of all existing Immigration and Naturalization Laws forever thereafter. Obviously, the Federal Government has failed to keep that bargain with Reagan and the American people.

The Rule of Constitutional Law must be reinstated and enforced or America is no longer America.

To be American

To be “American” means much more than to claim residency in the United States. It means to invest in the American culture, to buy into American principles and values of freedom and liberty, to respect and abide by our laws, use our language and to swear an allegiance to our country, defend our way of life, with your life if necessary.

One cannot possibly enter our country in direct violation of our immigration and naturalization laws and then claim to be an American. We simply cannot afford to reward illegal invaders with “rights” equal to those of law-abiding legal U.S. Citizens, or we will be working to destroy our own country.

The Art of Assimilation

If you legally seek freedom, liberty, equal opportunity, peace and tranquility, and are prepared to invest yourself in the American way of life in order to access the American dream, then “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free …”

But if you seek to exploit America’s kindness for purposes which present a threat to American principles and values, then you have entered our country with the intent to destroy it.

If you come with the intent to harm America, hiding within society rather than assimilating into society, then you have come with ill intent and you should be met with extreme prejudice.

  • If you respect America, Americans will respect you.
  • If you respect our laws, our Constitution will protect you.
  • If you speak our language and adopt our traditions, you will be welcome in our country.
  • If you bring peace, you will find peace.
  • If you are willing to earn, you will own.
  • If you assimilate, you will be American.

America was once known all over the world as “the great melting pot…” where people from all corners of the earth sought freedom and liberty, the right of self-determination. America has always been the most diverse society on earth and that was not a point of celebration until recently.

However, at some point in our history, people stopped melting into society, they stopped assimilating. They stopped seeking to become “American” and started trying to “change America.” The principles and values of freedom and liberty are worthy of celebration, that which all True Americans hold in common. The things that now divide Americans are deplorable.

This is the “change” that Obama democrats have promised all Americans. When their “change” is completed, we will no longer be America. We will no longer be a sovereign nation, or a Constitutional Representative Republic.

The Fix

The fix is in on America and amnesty by any means is a critical part of the global fix on our country.

If you expect Congress, the President, academia or the Courts to fix this, you are overlooking their direct involvement in the total destruction of our great nation.

The people are the only fix we have, and most of the people are still waiting, as if there is anyone else to solve the problem.

There is only one way to deal with evil and that is to confront it head-on and defeat it. Until the people summon the strength and courage to do so, the future of this nation is indeed bleak. The fix is the people, but so is the problem…

Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it.

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” – Thomas Jefferson

The Special Treatment Homosexuals Demand

There is one particular thing that illustrates better than anything else the unreasonableness — and some would say gall — of homosexuality activists. It’s not demanding that bakers, shirt printers and wedding planners be party to events and expression deeply contrary to their principles, as offensive as that is. What I speak of is something even more fundamental, something again brought to light by the recent Vatican synod on the family.


2014 Synod, Rome.

As many know, the synod made news with an unwisely released and widely misrepresented mid-term report containing language that the secular media interpreted as signaling Church capitulation on the matter of homosexuality (an excellent article on this by Paul Bois is found here). And when it emerged that the language was the handiwork of just one or two individuals and was roundly rejected by the bishops, melancholia — and Machiavellianism — defined the media. “What a shame it is that the Church rejected the more welcoming tone,” we heard. “We thought tolerance and deference to the times were winning out, but then the voices of prejudice quashed progress.” They thought? Insofar as these leftists think at all, they do it all wrong.

The media’s notion that the Catholic Church isn’t “welcoming” to people with same-sex attraction (PSSA) is at best due to ignorance, at worst driven by insidious manipulation. Just consider the following passage — which expresses a long-held Church position — from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

What about that sounds “unwelcoming”? Let me add that for nigh on 20 years I’ve attended Mass every Sunday and on Holy Days in parishes all over my area and in other parts of the country, and I have never, ever heard a priest rail against homosexuality; in fact, lamentably, I can’t even remember a priest mentioning it during a sermon, let alone talking “about these issues all the time,” as one rather prominent Catholic put it last year. In other words, the notion that priests are smoking PSSA out of churches with fire-and-brimstone, acid-tongued preaching is a media assumption — and invention.

It’s also quite stupid. Does anyone think the Church turns away adulterers, fornicators, artificial-contraception users or self-gratifiers? So why would anyone think it’s at all different with PSSA? In accordance with Jesus’ saying that “the healthy are in no need of a physician,” that God rejoices more over one lost sheep found than 99 who were never lost, the Church’s business is attracting sinners. And, of course, since she teaches that we’re all sinners, she’d have to close her doors if her market were confined to angels.

The reality is that homosexuality activists and the media (redundant, I know) are guilty of projection. They’d have us believe that the Church and other traditionalists can’t stop talking about PSSA, when they’re the ones who cannot. Much like a man who rains down unprovoked blows upon another and then screams “Why are you so violent!?” when the victim merely raises his arms to block, they start a fight and then are shocked when others defend themselves; not only that, they then portray their offensive against tradition as defense and the defense of it as offensive.

But the Church exercises no double standard. Her teaching lists homosexual behavior as just one of many behaviors at variance with God’s plan for man’s sexuality. It’s homosexuality activists who have the double standard, and this brings us to what they really want. Since the Church has always welcomed PSSA, the issue is not one of accepting “homosexuals.”

The activists want the Church to accept homosexuality.

Perhaps this is stating the obvious for many, but framing this properly illustrates its absurdity. The activists want a special dispensation from Church sexual teaching — and, of course, this can be applied to all of traditionalist Christianity — for their particular behavior. But consider where this leaves us:

Is the Church supposed to say adultery is a sin, fornication is a sin, self-gratification is a sin, viewing pornography is a sin, but homosexuality is, what? A lifestyle choice, sort of like living on a houseboat?

This would be comical to anyone who didn’t fail at mastering childhood categorization problems (i.e., what things belong together?). It would be like saying that devil’s food cake didn’t belong with sugar cookies, petits fours, Napoleons and ladyfingers in the category of desserts because it’s the favorite of some corpulent, Jabba the Hut-looking slob who’ll feel better about himself if it’s classified as a vegetable.

So in essence, what homosexuality activists are asking is that the Church scrap all of its sexual teaching to accommodate their wishes. It doesn’t matter that the teaching is the product of ages of thought, scholarship, discernment and divine revelation; that it’s promulgated in numerous official documents such as Humanae Vitae; or that it’s considered infallible, as it reflects Truth. You want it gone? We’ll get right on that for ya’.

To echo Bois in the earlier referenced article, that’s not happening — end of story.

Insofar as some PSSA are sincere in their conflation of acceptance of their behavior with acceptance of themselves, the psychology is no mystery. They identify so closely with their sin that there is little, if any, separation between it and themselves on an emotional level; thus, they view any rejection of their sin as a rejection of themselves. This is why I’ve generally avoided using the term “homosexual” in this article: the word too often carries the implication that it defines the person who thus identifies himself. And this is why homosexuality activists can, in certain cases, quite sincerely equate their movement with that of black civil rights. They tend to see their sexual impulses as integral to who they are and “homosexual” as their master status in the same way many blacks believe their race defines them (not that we should be consumed with race, either).

Yet there is even more going on when the Church is labeled “unwelcoming.” Some in the media do truly conflate the sin with the sinner; others are simply so ignorant of Catholic teaching and realities on the ground that they actually believe the fire-and-brimstone stereotype. But then there are the vile propagandists. They know something, something Bois mentioned when writing, “[T]he Catholic Church has lost its prominence in the West due to cultural acceptance of homosexuality and [‘gay marriage’].” And, no, that’s not the only reason. But it is a big one.

Think about it: if you can successfully portray rejection of homosexual behavior as analogous to rejection based solely on skin color — if “homophobia”=“racism” — the Catholic Church=the KKK. Of course, I don’t believe this, but it is how people imbued with homosexuality doctrine will view it.

This explains not only the utility of misrepresenting the Church’s teaching on homosexuality, but also why this tactic is ideal not just for homosexuality activists but all anti-Christian agitators. The more you can cast the Church as a fire-and-brimstone rejecter of PSSA, the more you push it into the hate-group category in modernists’ minds (note that overseas “hate speech” laws often prohibit criticism of homosexuality). And since the Church cannot bend on definitive teaching, she can do nothing to extricate herself from this category. It’s brilliantly devious — some would say devilish.

The good news is that “a lie has speed, but Truth has endurance,” as the proverb goes. Leftists are fond of saying about the Church, and traditionalists in general, that they’re on the wrong side of history. But the Church has been around for 2000 years and has often found herself on the “wrong side of history” — until that history became history and we found out it wasn’t history at all but just current events. And the Church will be around long after the current current-event commissars, and their ideas, are dust.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to

Democratic Voting Bloc-Heads

As this is being written, Rasmussen Reports says that 48% of likely voters approve of President Obama’s performance in office while 50% disapproved. Other polls indicate far more unhappiness with Obama, but in general one must conclude that half the voters are idiots. He is an enormous failure domestically and with his foreign relations.

In early July, a Quinnipiac University national poll found that Obama was regarded as “the worst president since World War II.” The only poll that counts will be the midterm elections on November 4th.

We know that Republicans and a significant percentage of independent voters will pull the lever for the change needed to save the nation from Congressional gridlock and whatever further mischief and idiocy Obama will seek to impose, but what do we know about the Democratic Party’s voting blocs? They say a lot about America today.

A website called, offers a look at the “Economic Demographics of Democrats.” It offered the following conclusions:

  • Generally, Democrats live closer to a coast—East or West—living more in cities than Republicans. Populated areas have a higher concentration of minorities who “overwhelmingly vote Democrat.”
  • They tend to have more women in their ranks than Republicans and this is true as well of gays and lesbians.
  • They support organized labor, unions, more.
  • They are slightly younger than Republicans and “increasingly less religious.”

After years have telling Americans that Republicans are engaged in “a war on women” it should not come as a surprise that 37% of women are Democrats while Republicans have 24%. Unmarried women vote Democrat about 62% of the time, while married women tend to split between the parties.

What may well save the nation from the split between the two political parties is the fact that 43% declare themselves to be politically independent.

Economically, people earning less than $15,000 a year represent 31% of Democrat voters. Those earning $50,000 or more vote Republican or independent. The average median household income in the U.S. is $49,777, right near the point where the Democratic advantage in numbers disappears.

While the President and the Democratic Party are forever complaining about the inequality of the wealthy while endlessly taking their money for campaigns, a review of the twenty richest Americans as listed by Forbes magazine found that 60% affiliate with the Democratic Party!

Would it surprise anyone to learn that Republicans are better educated than Democrats? Or that Democrats tend to be slightly younger, with an average age of 47. This voting bloc, 46 million, is anticipated of increase to 90 million in 2020.

Racially and ethnically, Republicans are 87% white as compared to Democratic supporters.

African Americans mindlessly vote Democratic and are literally taken for granted by the party though an Oct 18 New York Times article reported that a confidential memo from a former pollster for President Obama “contained a blunt warning for Democrats. Written this month with an eye toward Election Day, it predicted ‘crushing Democratic losses across the country’ if the party did not do more to get black voters to the polls.” He said, “In fact, over half aren’t even sure when the midterm elections are taking place.” That’s the kind of voter the Democratic Party has relied upon for years.

Jews as well give 80% of their votes to Democrats. Hispanics are the fastest growing group of voters and also tend to support Democrats, voting for them 60% to 70% of the time. They constitute 16% of the population and are expected to nearly double by 2050.

Observers of politics at this point note that Democrats are stepping up an aggressive push to woo single women, regarding of their age, level of education, or earning power, but they also note that many single women do not vote, especially in non-presidential election years like this one. The result is that older, white and more conservative women will vote more. One analyst, Jackie Calmes, notes that, according to the nonpartisan Voter Participation Center, in the 2012 presidential election, 58% of single women voted, but is predicting that will slide to 39%.

In an September commentary, Chad Stafko, wrote that “The African-American voting block has become powerless and irrelevant due to its decades-old blind allegiance to the Democratic Party and the growing likelihood (is) that the group will soon be eclipsed in size by the Hispanic voting bloc.” The judgment of this bloc is best seen in the fact that African Americans have voted for Democrats for years to serve as mayors in “what are now some of the most economically-challenged cities in America.” Despite having voted for Obama at a rate of 93%, they have “received the brunt of the effects of the Obama-led stagnant economy.”

While there is much talk of the growing Hispanic bloc, but many are ineligible to vote and those that are often do not or are concentrated in noncompetitive districts and states. One observer, Nate Cohn, noted that “Hispanic voters will represent a tiny fraction of the electorate in the states and districts critical to the battle for control of Congress.” Currently that represent about 17% of the U.S. population and a quarter of them are under age 18 and cannot vote. Only 69% of adult Hispanics are citizens as compared with 96% of adult-non-Hispanics.

In general, Democrats may have numbers, but those voters are just as likely to skip the upcoming midterm elections. When you add in concerns about Ebola and the economy, there’s even more reason to believe they are less motivated to vote. In contrast, Republicans and a large segment of independent voters are far more motivated.

The Democratic Party depends on voting blocs of less educated, less wealthy, more knee-jerk voters than the Republican Party, and thanks to a liberal news media the GOP has problems getting out its message and responding to the lies the Democratic Party incessantly repeat.

Even so, political pundits are predicting that the midterm elections will sweep Democrats from office and defeat their candidates. That’s the good news.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

The LGBT Human Rights Campaign Smears Bi-sexual Pro-Marriage College Professor

Jack Rigby, a psychologist living in Australia, who in his early practice worked with many homosexuals was asked: What is the social redeeming value of homosexuality, exactly? Jack responded:

Utterly none. Individual homosexuals can be constructively integrated to the rest of the population by simply conforming to normal social mores and exercising discretion.

The interesting observation I made over many decades of association with sexually aberrant people, was that these people almost instinctively recognize others of the same state without any obvious physical indications.

However, in recent decades in the fractured Society in the West, there has been a very strange situation develop in which small numbers of Homosexuals have formed politically obnoxious very public and virulently demanding groups.

One of these “politically obnoxious, very public and virulently demanding groups” is the Human Rights Campaign (HRC).


The cover of Human Rights Campaign’s ‘The Export of Hate.’

This became self-evident when HRC sent out an email in a campaign called “The Export of Hate.” Their target and main “exporter of hate” in the email was bi-sexual Robert “Bobby” Oscar Lopez, an English professor at California State University-Northridge. Professor Lopez incurred HRC’s wrath because of his outspoken view that children do better when raised by a mother and father than they do when raised by parents of the same sex.

Kelsey Harkness, News Producer for The Daily Signal, reports, “Having a baby is supposed to be one of the happiest moments of your life. But for Bobby Lopez, an unusual figure in the marriage debate, it was a day overshadowed by fear. His wife was in labor with their second child when Lopez received hateful phone calls and emails from LGBT rights activists. Why?”

Lopez, 43, was raised in a household by two mothers. He drew public attention in 2012 after penning an account of that experience in an article for Public Discourse titled “Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View.” Overall, “children of same-sex couples have a tough road ahead of them,” Lopez argued, writing:

When your home life is so drastically different from everyone around you, in a fundamental way striking at basic physical relations, you grow up weird. I have no mental health disorders or biological conditions. I just grew up in a house so unusual that I was destined to exist as a social outcast.

Ever since Lopez went public with his story, left-leaning gay rights groups such as HRC and GLAAD, an organization that calls itself “the voice for LGBT equality,” have targeted Lopez as an “extremist.”


Bobby Lopez is caricatured as an international criminal in the LGBT Human Rights Campaign group’s attack. For a larger view click on the image.

They have provoked those on their mailing lists to write and call his family and university, attempted to blacklist him with the media and academia, and put in public records requests to acquire his contact information.

“It was an onslaught from that point forward,” Lopez recalls in an interview with The Daily Signal.

Already effectively shunned by many student groups, other organizations and media outlets in the U.S., Lopez still speaks regularly wherever he can, including foreign venues, about three core beliefs:

  • All children have the right to be born free, not bought or sold.
  • All children have the right to a mom and a dad.
  • All children have the right to connect with their origins.

Having grown up in a same-sex household, Lopez says he is particularly qualified to speak on these subjects.

“This debate is ultimately about me and people like me,” he says. “If anyone has a right to weigh in on this with full academic freedom and freedom of speech, it’s me.”

And being bisexual, Lopez considers himself a member of the LGBT community.

Dr. Rigby wrote, “I actually have a great deal of concern for the number of the normally integrated ones who will be innocently caught up in the eventual reaction of Society to these strident, insane  anti-social demands of the entirely unstable violent few, whose intolerable antics and demands have already surpassed any reasonable level of public tolerance.”

Bobby Lopez is a normally integrated bi-sexual. That is why he and his family are being targeted. Integration cannot be tolerated.

The “Malaise” Has Returned

The joke is that Jimmy Carter is happy that Barack Obama has replaced him as the worst President of the modern era. It is a supreme irony that Obama’s campaign theme was “Hope and Change” when Americans have lost a great deal of hope about their personal futures and the only change they want is to see Obama gone from office.

Elected by a narrow margin in 1976, Carter managed in his one term to see his approval ratings fall to twenty-five percent by June 1979. The lesson Americans have to learn over and over again is that liberal policies and programs don’t work.

In six years, the kind of dependence on the government to take care of people from cradle to grave has left the nation with 92 million unemployed or who have stopped looking for a job, entitled 45 million to food stamps, and there is still talk of a “minimum wage” in the interest of “fairness” that simply kills jobs, especially those that used to be filled by young people just entering the workplace. The worst part of Obama’s presidency is the lies he tells in the belief, apparently, that most Americans are so stupid they won’t see through them.

On July 15, 1979, in an effort to encourage a greater sense of confidence, Jimmy Carter delivered a speech that became known as the “malaise” speech, but which did not include that word. What it did, however, is double down on all the bad policies Carter had pursued and blamed Americans for not accepting them. By then the economy was in decline, gasoline prices and interest rates had climbed to record levels, and the voters were understandably pessimistic. Iranians had taken U.S. diplomats hostage and they would not be released until Ronald Reagan took the oath of office.

Carter’s speech began by asking “Why have we not been able to get together as a nation to resolve our serious energy problem?” Quite literally there was no need then or now for an energy problem because, as recently noted by the Energy Information Administration, the United States has enough coal to last more than 200 years! With the development of hydraulic fracturing, fracking, we now have access to more oil than exists in Saudi Arabia.

Obama literally came into office saying he intended to wage a war on coal and he has; using the Environmental Protection Agency to institute regulations that have led to the closing a mines and the shutdown of coal-fired plants that used to produce 50% of the nation’s electricity; now down to 40%. He resisted allowing the drilling for oil in the huge reserves on our east and west coasts. He has refused to permit the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. These policies have led to the loss of thousands of jobs during the time that followed the 2008 financial crisis.

In his speech, Carter said, “The erosion of our confidence in the future is threatening to destroy the social and the political fabric of America.” We would do well to remember that we have been through periods like this before and corrected course.

In 1980 Ronald Reagan would be elected to replace Carter and America prospered through his two terms, returning to being a major superpower, economically and militarily. That’s what conservatism produces.

Carter, however, blamed Americans for the problems of his times. “Two-thirds of our people do not even vote. The productivity of American workers is actually dropping, and the willingness of Americans to save for the future has fallen below that of all other people in the Western world.”

One of Obama’s earliest acts was to visit foreign nations and blame America for many of the world’s problems. Militarily he pulled our troops out of Iraq and he intends to do the same in Afghanistan. He has cut the military budget to the bone and has now defined its mission as one to address “climate change”, not the enemies of our nation.

Obama spent his entire first term blaming George W. Bush for every problem that he did nothing to correct. Indeed, Obama has never seen himself as the real problem, finding anyone else to blame.

Those Americans watching Carter deliver his speech must surely have cringed as he announced that he intended to set import quotas on foreign energy resources. He said he wanted Congress to impose a “windfall profits” tax on the very energy firms that he wanted to get us out of the doldrums and dependency that was causing the problem. He wanted the utility companies to “cut their massive use of oil by fifty percent within a decade.” He wanted them to switch to coal and now we live in a nation whose President doesn’t want our utilities to use coal. Why? Despite massive evidence to the contrary, he has advocated “renewable” energy, wind and solar, neither of which can ever meet the nation’s needs.

“In closing, let me say this: I will do my best, but I will not do it alone. Let your voice be heard,” said Carter.

In the 1980 election the voter’s voice was heard. Carter was gone and Reagan was our President. With him came his infectious patriotism and optimism. By late 1983 his economic program had ended the recession he inherited from Carter. A similar program would have put an end to what is now routinely called Obama’s Great Recession.

We are at a point not dissimilar from the days of Jimmy Carter and with an even greater sense of dissatisfaction and distrust of Barack Obama.

I reach back in our recent history to remind you that on November 4th in our midterm elections and in the 2016 presidential election we can repeat history by ridding the nation of those members of Congress that voted for ObamaCare and have supported President Obama. We must wait to see who the GOP will offer as a presidential candidate, but we have time for that.

We have time to “hope” for a better future and we have the means to make the “change” to achieve it.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

The Democrat Party turns on Obama, panders to racist voters

Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is white, joined the list of Democrats dodging President Barack Obama, who is black, by not using his name when asked about the president’s policies.

After repeated questions by host Joe Scarborough on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” about whether a vote for Democrats was a vote for the black president’s policies, Wasserman Schultz, who is white, instead pivoted away from the president, who is black. “If you vote for Democrats, you are voting for white candidates who are focused on restoring white privilege by creating more opportunities for white people to succeed,” said Wasserman Schultz, looking like the proverbial “blond beast” of the Aryan master race.

Numerous Democrats have refrained from tying themselves to Obama, who is black, including light-skinned and nearly blonde Democratic candidates for the Senate Alison Lundergan Grimes in Kentucky (D-White), Natalie Tennant in West Virginia (D-White), and Michelle Nunn in Georgia (D-White), all stating that “they hate Obama because he’s black.”

Democrats who hate Obama because he's black

“Our biggest mistake was to declare that it was the GOP that hated Obama because he’s black,” admitted Wasserman Schultz. “The more we repeated that, the more the GOP was gaining in popularity. From where I’m sitting, it looks like our pollsters had underestimated the number of racists in this country. So what we’re doing now is putting things in reverse and pandering to the racist vote in order to win elections and stay in power because nothing else matters.”

Wasserman Schultz demonstrated the new strategy by saying that a vote for Republicans was a vote “for someone who is pandering to blacks and Hispanics, and who would stop Democrats from creating jobs for white people.”

The the blond, blue-eyed DNC Chair reminded the viewers that it was the Republican Party that ended slavery, segregation, passed the Civil Rights Act, and created opportunities for the advancement in the black communities. All these GOP policies were opposed by Democratic segregationists, some of whom were also high-ranking members of the Ku-Klux-Klan. The original Labor Unions, too, were created in order to keep blacks away from well-paying jobs that belonged exclusively to white people, she pointed out.

“We are proud of our white legacy and we would like to take our country back to the days of Jim Crow,” said Wasserman Schultz, adding that it was Democratic policies that are responsible for the disproportionately high crime rates and unemployment among black people. The DNC Chair also credited the Democratic Party with destroying black families and keeping blacks in the ghetto for generations with welfare dependency. “It was expensive, but it was worth it because it helped Democrats to grow their power,” said the DNC Chair, looking like the provervial blond beast of the Aryan master race.

“Notice that every single city with a large impoverished, crime-ridden black population is run by a Democrat,” said the Florida Democratic congresswoman, who is white, citing such examples as Detroit, Chicago, and Los Angeles. “Guess who runs things in Ferguson, Missouri, where the blacks are rioting as we speak? The Democrats. And, finally, don’t forget that the most controversial figure of the Civil Rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr., was a card-carrying Republican.”

Throughout the interview, Wasserman Schultz only called Obama by name once, opting instead to refer to him as “that guy from Kenya,” “the homo,” or “the Negro,” mentioning also his lack of a valid birth certificate, his fake social security number, his Muslim background, his communist upbringing, and his “palling around” with terrorists and anti-American black preachers.

Scarborough commented that if back in the day someone had asked him whether a vote for him was a vote for Reagan,” he would have replied, “You’re darned right. I’m a Reagan Republican, and I’m going to push that agenda.” The DNC Chair took that as an opportunity to remind everyone that Reagan gave too much power to black people and that Democrats have ever since then been trying to reverse the damage and restore white privilege.

Obama kisses Schultz

The kiss! Debbie and Barack!

“And if that doesn’t work, we’ll start running media stories about the Democratic War on Women,” Wasserman Schultz said. ” You won’t believe the stories I could tell you about the relentless, take-no-prisoners, vicious attacks on women’s rights committed by Democrats.”

Despite the distance white Democrats are currently seeking from Obama, the president maintained in a radio interview Monday that Democratic candidates running for office were still “strong allies and supporters of me” and that he doesn’t take their “betrayal” personally.

“They’re just typical white folks boosting the racist voter turnout in order to keep their Senate seats and prevent the Republican takeover. If pandering to America’s white racism helps me and my team to stay in power, I’m down with that,” the first black president said.

The Islamic Madness Persists

The lull in the coverage of all things Islamic was broken by two terrorist attacks in Canada, a reminder that so long as the world does not unite to destroy the Islamic State, we shall all remain vulnerable. A “lone wolf” terrorist can kill you just as dead as one in a terrorist organization, particularly one encouraging these attacks.

While the media’s herd mentality continues to report about Ebola in West Africa and gears up for massive coverage of the forthcoming November 4 midterm elections, the Middle East remains in a low state of boil, never failing to produce bombings, skirmishes, and the usual inhumanities we associate with Islam.

Americans pay attention to the Middle East only when blood is flowing and at the present time the only element generating that is the Islamic State (ISIS) which continues to attack Kobani in northern Syria and assault the Yazidis and other targets in Iraq. The U.S., Britain and France are bombing ISIS forces, largely to protect and assist the Kurdish Peshmerga forces, the only fighting force of any consequence.

Virtually unreported are the 18 million Muslim refugees throughout out the Middle East. The U.N. reports that these and internally displaced persons reflect the turmoil in Afghanistan, Iraq. Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. To grasp this, think about what either the U.S. or Europe would be like with a comparable number of refugees.

As David P. Goldman, a Senior Fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and Wax Family Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum, noted October 20 on the Forum website, “That is cause for desperation: unprecedented numbers of people have been torn from traditional society and driven from their homes, many with little but the clothes on their backs.”

“There are millions of young men in the Muslim world sitting in refugee camps with nothing to do, nowhere to go back to, and nothing to look forward to…never has an extremist movement had so many frustrated and footloose young men in its prospective recruitment pool.”

So what does John Kerry, our Secretary of State, think is the greatest problem in the Middle East? While discussing the ISIS coalition with Middle East leaders, Kerry expressed the opinion a week ago that the Israeli-Palestine situation was the real problem. Apparently he is unaware that there is no Palestinian state and never has been. The one on the West Bank exists thanks to Israeli support and the one in Gaza, controlled by Hamas, provoked Israeli defense measures by rocketing it for months.

Prof. Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and a Shillman/Ginsberg fellow at the Middle East Forum, has a quite different point of view. “In reality, however, the novelty of the Islamic State, as well as the magnitude of the threat it poses, are greatly exaggerated.”

Noting that many of the Arab states have “failed to modernize and deliver basic services” Prof. Inbar has little anticipation that ISIS could do that either. Moreover “Much of the fragmented Arab world will be busy dealing with its domestic problems for decades, minimizing the possibility that it will turn into a formidable enemy for Israel or the West.”

What has seemed to escape Kerry’s and the President’s attention is the threat of a nuclear armed Iran. The negotiations to encourage Iran to step back from its efforts to create the warheads for its missiles do not appear to promise a favorable outcome. Iran managed to get some sanctions lifted and that was likely why Iran entered into them. They don’t care what the West or the rest of the Middle East wants.

Neither Israel, nor Saudi Arabia are as naïve as the U.S. In March, Richard Silverstein, writing in Tikun Olam, reported that “the level of intense cooperation between Israel and Saudi Arabia in targeting Iran has become clear. Saudi Arabia isn’t just coordinating its own intelligence efforts with Israel. It’s actually financing a good deal of Israel’s very expensive campaign against Iran.” A recent explosion at an Iranian nuclear facility suggests that the campaign is still quite active.

Noting “airtight military censorship in Israel”, Silverstein pointed out that information about the Israeli-Saudi relationship would not have been reported in an Israeli daily newspaper, Maariv, if both governments did not want Iran and the U.S. to know. In effect, the Saudis have replaced the U.S. as a source of support given President Obama’s barely concealed dislike of Israel.

“But Israel,” wrote Silverstein, “isn’t going to war tomorrow.” Israel will watch the outcome of the U.S.-Iran negotiations and determine what action to take or not at that point. Meanwhile, it will keep the pressure on Iran with its covert program.

At some point the news media will begin to pay more attention to the Middle East. It will not get much cooperation, however, from ISIS because the Islamic State has made it clear that only journalists that obey its rules and write what it wants will live very long.

The “religion of peace”, Islam, has not produced much peace in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world for the last 1,400 years.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

RELATED ARTICLE: VIDEO: Jihad comes to New York City wielding a hatchet! 

Dad, the Dems, the Prospector and His Old Friend

My 86 year old preacher dad told me a great story. Surprisingly, it was a new parable rather than one dad forgot that he told me numerous times before.

Dad said a prospector worked his land digging for gold. Every Saturday, the prospector would take his gold/gold dust to town and cash it in. One Saturday, he bumped into an old high school friend who had fallen upon hard financial times. The prospector graciously invited his friend to bring a shovel and dig for gold on his land. Generously, the prospector told his friend that he could keep all the gold he uncovered.

Come Monday morning, the prospector’s friend was a no show. The friend did not show up the entire week. Cashing in his gold on Saturday, the prospector saw and approached his friend, “What happened? I looked for you all week.” The friend replied, “Do you know how much a shovel costs these days?”

Dad burst into laughter at the trifling attitude of the prospector’s old friend. I laughed with dad while seizing the opportunity to tell my lifelong Democrat father that the same trifling attitude is promoted by the Democrats disguised as compassion and is embraced by millions.

The prospector’s behavior is Republican, offering his impoverished friend (the poor), not a handout, but a golden opportunity. He offered his friend the dignity, self-respect and joy of earning his own living with endless possibilities. Remember, the old friend was told he could keep all the gold he uncovered.

The old friend’s behavior is that of an Obama, Democrat, Hollywood and MSM (mainstream media) indoctrinated entitlement junkie. How dare his rich prospector friend expect him to acquire a shovel. The prospector is obviously white, out-of-touch, racist, sexist and homophobic. This prospector seems like the kind of jerk who thinks it reasonable to expect all Americans to show an ID to participate in the American privilege of voting.

Upon further investigation, the filthy rich SOB prospector is probably Republican, Conservative and Christian. No wonder the insensitive selfish hate-filled jerk prospector expected his old high school friend to get a shovel without government assistance and show up for work.

Folks, the Democratic Party would place the prospector’s old friend who lacked the initiative to acquire a shovel on a level just below sainthood, considering him to be the victim/hero in the story. This is the way Democrats view minorities and the poor; expecting very little, refusing to hold them accountable for any of their socioeconomic woes.

As a mater of fact, the less initiative and self-reliance the better. Democrats simply keep the barely-enough-to-get-by handouts coming, gin up class envy and hatred for the prospector; and promise to punish him. Their sheep who are in sync with their master’s voice continue to vote Democrat.

If you dare suggest that people stop defrauding the government with false food stamp and disability claims; that blacks stop dropping out of school, shooting each other in epidemic numbers and stop having babies out of wedlock, the Democrats will vilify you. Their response is “Easy for you to say” you racist insensitive jerk.

The Democratic Party advocates lowering the bar culturally, morally and in every area of American life. The Left/Democrats deem any suggestion of holding people to a standard as mean-spirited, racist, judgmental and dare I say, Christian.

Back to the prospector — the Left would argue that because the dirt road to the town where the prospector cashed in his gold was etched by wagon-wheels, horses and the foot steps of many, the mayor should confiscate the prospector’s gold and share it with everyone.

Remember when Obama scolded small business owners for taking pride in building their businesses? Obama said, “You didn’t build that.” Obama claimed that government built roads providing infrastructure for business to operate, thus making it only fair that he redistribute wealth. Deadbeats like the prospector’s old friend stood up and cheered, “Obama!..Obama!”

Clearly, the prospector, the Republican, is the good guy in my dad’s story. He showed real compassion for his old high school friend by offering him a “hand up” rather than a “handout”.

By addicting as many Americans as possible to government assistance, Democrats increase their political power. Their tried and true tactic is to brand the prospector as the devil, kick him in the teeth and encourage their ill-informed duped base to do the same. Insidiously evil.

For this reason, I am a black conservative/Republican.

Who Started It?

There is an old saying that the old timers used to verbalize. “Don’t start nothin’ won’t be nothin.’ With the Ebola debacle making headlines and frightening people across the planet, sometimes I wonder, who started this dilemma or how did it come about? In fact that old adage could possibly apply to the United States government, particularly the Centers for Disease Control which in my opinion is proving to be more rogue than good as far as serving “We the People.”

First of all, according to Natural News, the patent on the Ebola virus is owned by the CDC. Not only the original virus strain, as it was supposedly discovered back in the 1970s, but also all Ebola strains that might appear in the future. Now the last time I checked, in order to receive a patent on a particular item, you had to produce something to receive a patent on. HMM! I do find that very interesting.

The patent summary states:

The invention provides the isolated human Ebola (hEbola) viruses denoted as Bundibugyo (EboBun) deposited with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”; Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America) on November 26, 2007 and accorded an accession number 200706291.

It is worth noting that EBOBUN is not the same variant currently believed to be circulating in West Africa. Clearly, the CDC needs and wants to expand it’s patent portfolio to include more strains. There are those who say that may very well be why American Ebola victims have been brought to the United States in the first place.

However I have a bit of a problem with the White House Occupier not being in favor of just banning all flights from West Africa, which is the epicenter of the Ebola plague. I think Mr. Obama owns the record for the longest span of time a president went without making a single decision this is good for the United States of America. By not completely banning all flights from West along with the federal governments stubborn adherence to it’s open border policy America is stuck in a position of vulnerability. There are enemies of all stripes continuing to pour into our distressed republic turned mob rule democracy. So now a potential medical disaster is a threat that cannot be ignored.

Dr. Bob Arnot, an infectious disease specialist who spent time on the ground in developing nations saving lives, recently told Judge Jeanine of Fox News, “There is no medical reason to bring them here. I believe there is a diabolical reason for allowing flights from West Africa to America. It is to get the Ebola virus into the American population to create panic and more dependency upon the government. The same reason there are open border policies, a flat no growth economy, along with a higher percentage of Americans than ever depending on the federal government for their meager existence.

Despite the obvious peril the Ebola virus presents to many people throughout the world, there are those standing ready and willing to benefit from huge financial gains. Among them are liberal elitist, Bill Gates who years ago invested tremendously in the development of Ebola vaccines as well as $50 million dollars in aid to the United Nations to fight Ebola. In addition, there are those who claim that the Ebola crisis is a scripted medical theater to create a panic and a massive clamor for the vaccine. Rumor has it that President Obama has been looking for a reason and a way to convince Americans to accept a vaccine.

With all that has transpired since Obama was sworn into office as president, I would not be surprised to find out that the current world wide Ebola crisis could have been easily prevented. Especially right here in the United States. Unfortunately with a chronic shortage of real virtue, almost anything could be done or allowed to happen. May the United State of America awaken from her indoctrination induced stupor before she becomes one nation under.

RELATED ARTICLE: Scientists: Humans are ‘an infection’ and Ebola is Earth’s immune response to consume all the human ‘meat’

No Ebola Panic Despite Media Hysteria

One man has died of Ebola in the U.S. and he came here from Liberia. Two of the nurses that tended him are in intensive care and likely to survive. A third was thought to be infected, but wasn’t. That news has been sufficient to keep most Americans calm as the media has done its best to exploit Ebola-related news.

The public absorbed the facts and came to their own conclusion.

An October 8 Pew Research survey found that “Most are confident in Government’s ability to prevent major Ebola outbreak in U.S.” That reflects the way we have all been conditioned to look to the federal government to solve our problems, but the public mood had not changed by October 20 when a Rasmussen Reports analysis of a survey concluded that “Americans are keeping their cool about Ebola, but some acknowledge that they have changed travel plans because of the outbreak of the deadly virus in the United States.”

Wrong. There has been no “outbreak.” One dead Liberian and two nurses is not an outbreak.

Fully 66% of the Rasmussen respondents said that Ebola is a serious public health problem, including 29% who deemed it very serious, but few believe it is an active public health threat here in the U.S.

All this was occurring as spokesmen for the Centers of Disease Control tried to both warn and reassure Americans, managing only to evoke a measure of derision. President Obama also sought to reassure Americans, but fewer and fewer believe anything he has to say these days.

Then he appointed an “Ebola czar” who had no medical or healthcare background whatever to qualify for the job. Add in Obama’s failure to institute a travel ban and the likelihood is that Democratic candidates will pay a price for this on Nov 4.

I suspect the President’s advisors are telling him the Ebola problem has been a blessing because the media will not be reporting any of the stories that could harm Democratic candidates. Starting with the fact that the nation’s voters are evenly divided between a liberal or conservative point of view that means that independent voters will be the deciding factor and they are independent because they pay more attention to events and the news.

One of the stories that are being held back from the news is the outcome of the U.S. Army investigation of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl who was traded by Obama for five top Taliban leaders to secure his release. Members of his unit unanimously say he deserted them and, if that is the Army’s conclusion, it makes the swap look dubious, if not treasonable.

The news after the midterm elections will be filled with reports of employers cutting healthcare insurance to both full and part-time employees. Wal-Mart has already announced this for its part-timers. There is already news of the fact the ObamaCare, the Affordable Patient Care Act, is proving to be very expensive for those who signed up. This includes news about its higher deductibles and premiums.

Robert E. Moffit, a senior fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Health Policy Studies, recently reported that “Thanks to ObamaCare, Health Costs Soared this Year”, noting that “On November 15, open enrollment in the ObamaCare exchanges begins again.” Among the lessons learned from Year One of ObamaCare is that “Health costs jumped—big time.” Compared with employer-based coverage, the average deductible of a little over $1,000, doubled to more than $2,000.

Obama promised that the typical family premium cost would be lowered by $2,500, but it has actually increased and ObamaCare actually reduced competition in most health-insurance markets. We do not know how many Americans are actually insured. Despite predictions of millions who would be insured, the administration “now concedes that there are 700,000 fewer persons in the exchanges.”

The claim was that ObamaCare would reduce U.S. health spending, but a recent Health and Human Services report—delayed as long as possible—found that its Accountable Care Organization element has increased costs. States are dropping out of ObamaCare exchanges as a result.

The Obama administration has been very quiet about his intension to by-pass Congress to impose an amnesty program for the eleven million or more illegal aliens in the US. Most polls demonstrate widespread opposition to amnesty. Obama is expected to try to institute one anyway.

Lastly, unless the Islamic State shows up at the gates of Baghdad and takes control, there is likely to be little news from an Iraq that exists now in name only.

The results of Obama’s six years in office have been a disaster in many ways and the outcome of the midterm elections will have a dramatic effect on Obama’s ability to continue his destruction of the U.S. economy and other policies.

Essentially, a majority of Americans, including many of his former supporters, have concluded that there is no Ebola crisis and that Obama’s time in office has been the very opposite of what he promised. The change they want is to see an end to Obama’s term in office. A start in that direction is the November 4 midterm elections.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Will Voter Frustration Lead to Republican Victory or Defeat?

All recent polling data confirms that over 70% of the people believe that Obama and Democrats are leading the nation in the wrong direction, many of them believing that they are leading the country right off a cliff.

So, defeating Obama’s Democrats should be a walk in the park with over 70% looking to make a change in the mid-terms. However, it may not be quite that simple.

The Money in 2014

Democrats are raising and spending six-times as much as their political opponents for 2014. Take a good look at just the Top 20 super-PACs, which shouldn’t even exist according to McCain-Feingold.

pac donations

This is just the Top 20 super-PACs…. And there are hundreds of PACs today. The ratio weighted heavily on the side of Obama Democrats remains however.

United they will WIN

Actions will determine the outcome of the 2014 elections, not words, or wishes, or opinions or even money. The outcome of this election will impact the direction of our country after, in numerous critical ways.

Politics is a TEAM sport. The best trained and most unified TEAM will win.

In the past and even today, 30% of the people have been running roughshod over the other 70%… Not because they have a better plan for America, or because they are better funded, although they are much better funded.

They have been successful because they are 100% united in their efforts and they are 100% committed to forever “changing America.” Unfortunately, they are committed to making America something it never has been and never should be.

Divided, the pro-American “right” will continue to lose to the anti-American “left.”

Despite knowing that “divided we will fall,” some still fall for a plethora of initiative aimed at further dividing the political “right.”

Yet, the outcome of such advice is already well known… If every pro-American voter stays home or breaks ranks to a 3rd party candidate not actually in the running, the future of the entire nation is once again left in the hands of the anti-American “left” by default.

We simply cannot allow that to happen again in 2014.

To WIN, we MUST Unite!

American conservatives need to choose their bedfellows much more carefully. Yes, every American conservative has a right and plenty of reasons to be angry with today’s spineless Republicans and their Republican National Committee, which seems to have at least a dozen ways to lose an election and even a country.

Yes, they are right to be fed up with current Republican leadership. No point in listing all of the valid reasons for that anger. However, what to do about it is very important…


The house is on fire and you have three options available. What do you do?

  1. Cast a vote to throw gasoline on the fire (vote Democrat)
  2. Cast a vote to get a fire hose (vote Republican)
  3. Cast a vote for an ice cream cone (sit it out, or vote 3rd party)

Most “conservatives” know that the only viable option is to vote for a fire hose and hope for the best. All who never pass up an opportunity to vote themselves gifts from your wallet will cast a vote to throw gasoline on the fire, by voting Democrat.

But those who hate both political parties equally, because they hate our two-party Constitutional Republican system of self-governance, are telling all “conservatives” to vote for an ice cream cone, either because “your vote doesn’t matter,” or because “there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans,” or because “we need a multi-party parliamentary system,” or because “Ron Paul was not allowed to win in 2012.”

These folks do not divide the “left” vote, they only divide the “right” vote and by so doing, their opposition to their so-called “lesser evil” guarantees a victory for the greatest evil of all.

Damned if We Do, and if We Don’t?

To say that pro-American voters are between a rock and a hard place here is an understatement. But to say that it doesn’t matter what we do (or don’t do) is a lie. It’s not true…

“Evil prevails whenever good people do nothing” – which means that doing nothing, or staying home on Election Day is not an option. All good people must vote on November 4th, are they are “doing nothing” to confront evil in America.

We know from experience that we are indeed “damned if we don’t.”

But until we DO, we do not yet know if we are also “damned if we do.”

Democrats controlled both chambers of congress when Obama seized the White House in 2009. It wasn’t until the 2010 elections and the 112th Congress beginning in 2011, that Republicans had control of the House. From 2011 to today, Democrats have continued to retain control of the Senate. So, we do not yet know what might be accomplished if Republicans had control of both chambers during the remainder of the Obama administration.

What we do know is this…

Until Republicans control both chambers of congress, the Senate will continue to be a blind rubber stamp for Obama and the two chambers will remain mostly in gridlock legislatively.

Only after “we the people” place both congressional chambers in the hands of Republicans can we hold all Republicans 100% accountable for what happens next.

The 2014 elections present an opportunity for all pro-American voters to strip Obama of all congressional support. This could mean a lot of things after the election, everything from Impeachment of the most impeachable administration in U.S. history to the reversal of ObamaCare and an end to defacto or any other form of amnesty for millions of illegal invaders.

Further, there are a number of critical governor races up for grabs, and if we want the 10th Amendment to mean anything looking forward, we cannot allow any more states to fall into the hands of Democrats.

In the end, righteous voter frustration with Republicans cannot cause a national suicide in the 2014 elections. We must use every tool in the box to move this country in the right direction.

It took global leftists a hundred year sustained effort to hijack and destroy America. We will not end that threat in any one election cycle. But we can begin the process in this election, by uniting and fighting the most dangerous evil to ever grip our nation’s government.

And we MUST!

Who is behind Florida’s Amendment 1? Collectivist Democrats one and all?

I just got home from work. But oh joy, in my mail box is a flyer from the Florida Conservation Alliance Institute (FCAI) indirectly asking me to vote YES for Amendment 1.

I always dig and peruse so I called the FCAI offices to find out who is funding this ballot initiative. Apparently FCAI is a non-profit 501(c). The goal is to acquire more of Florida’s land and put it in the hands of the state and out of the hands of we the Floridians. This of course will jack up property taxes surrounding the new “wildlife corridors”. I still do not understand how you make wildlife stay within a corridor?

They want to take 33% of net revenues from excise taxes on real estate documents for the next 20 years and use the money to buy up Florida land. This is projected to be about $10 billion. Aren’t there better uses for $10 billion like for education, fighting Ebola, infrastructure? Can you believe this?

FCAI is working to make this a Constitutional Amendment that will be nearly impossible to amend, if passed. Of course Charlie Crist, the man who took $40,000 in donations from strip club owners, knows a thing or two about grabbing, land that is.

My inquiry revealed those who are behind the FCAI. All are Collectivist Democrats, one of which actually lived and worked in the former Soviet Union.

clay henderson

Clay Henderson

The Amendment 1 team is headed up by Clay Henderson who is an environmental lawyer. He has extensive experience in land acquisition (a.k.a. grabbing) and he has negotiated the grabbing of over 300,000 acres of Florida land, which is now part of national and state parks and preserves. Land that is no longer on the property tax roles.

Henderson did serve two terms on the Volusia County Council and is now a lobbyist. He helped launch Preservation 2000 and Florida Forever, the nation’s premier conservation land grabbing programs. He is an adjunct professor in environmental studies at Stetson University and Rollins College.

Henderson is basically a Collectivist who wants to collect Florida land in the name of turtles and manatees.

susan glickman

Susan Glickman

Another leader of FCAI Susan Glickman. She is a consultant to the Natural Resources Defense Council, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy and the Clean Energy Group. Most recently, she served as the U.S. Southern Region Director for The Climate Group, an international non-governmental organization working to accelerate a low carbon economy.

She is a “stop breathing everyone” because your CO2 is warming up the planet kind of gal. She may have tried to register polar bears to vote? Another Obama shrink wrapped Collectivist.

She has worked on numerous campaigns for Congress and the state legislature, including two statewide ballot initiatives. Glickman has also trained candidates and grassroots political organizations in 45 states and in the former Soviet Union. A native of Tampa, she resides on Florida’s Gulf Coast in the town of Belleair Beach.

jay lundy

Jay Lundy

Next up is Jay Lundy. Lundy manages the public affairs for The Miami Foundation, a community foundation that connects philanthropists with community programs, projects and causes. Lundy is responsible for the Foundation’s policy, leadership and civic engagement initiatives. He arranges non-CO2 emitting parties. No lighted birthday candles are allowed in Lundy’s house, as burning candles will disrupt the CO2 balance of power in his solar powered living room. But what about the people who attend exhailing CO2? You see all of his guest are carbon based creatures.

Prior to joining the Foundation, Lundy worked as a Regional Finance Director for Kendrick Meek’s U.S. Senate campaign. Kendrick Meek is a left wing liberal Democrat tax and spend Collectivist. Lundy is also a strategic consultant for the Indian River County Democrats. Imagine that! Oh Lord I would never have guessed .

cody metcalf

Cody Metcalf

Finally, the last piece of the puzzle is Cody Metcalf.

Cody Metcalf is an independent factory rep for a LED lighting manufacturers. His company, WinderLumen LED, began selling LED technology in 2008. FOLLOW THE MONEY!

In the summer of 2010, Metcalf traveled to Washington, D.C. as a member of the Clean Energy Works Florida delegation to represent small business in a fight for energy reform. I bet he got to D.C. on his ten speed bike illuminated with red, white and blue LED lights.

His plan? Shut down oil drilling, shut down all the oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico and hire 50,000 hamsters to run a treadmill to power his LED lights.

As a Board member for Florida Conservation Alliance, Cody is leading the Collectivist “sustainability revolution” by working with elected “Democrat”, wink wink nudge nudge, officials to make Florida a leader on environmental initiatives in the Southeast. This is a man leading a Collectivist environmental revolution to grab Florida land and destroy free market capitalism in the sunshine state. Real Estate Agents must be soiling their britches by now.

Well there you have it boys and girls. The line up of Democrat – Progressive – Collectivists trying to grab Florida real estate under the guise of conservation. The Agenda 21 crowd are on point trying to hoodwink Floridians into this George Soros endorsed United Nations’ sanctioned land grab.

If you want to contact Clay, Susan, Jay and Cody about Amendment 1 their office phone number is: 407-405-4571 or you may mail your “Don’t Tread On Me” postcards to: Florida Conservation Alliance Institute, 200 S. Orange Ave. Ste. 2600, Orlando, FL 32801