America’s Best Climate Prediction Expert Finally Gets Noticed

In Orlando, Florida is a lone climate researcher who, for almost eight years, has been putting the U.S. government’s best scientists and science agencies to shame, when it comes to accurately making major climate predictions. This is especially true when compared to Al Gore-style global warming politicians, government funded university Ph.D. climate scientists and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN-IPCC).

The UN-IPCC is the UN’s climate research arm that historians may someday remember best for unreliable climate models and associated wildly exaggerated, and erroneous temperature and sea level rise predictions. The “climategate’ scandal at the UN will likewise be prominent for the disclosure that its supposed ‘best climate scientists” falsified or manipulated climate data to fit the politically motivated manmade global warming storyline.

In March 2013, while I was the Florida Editor for the online conservative journal, I had the chance to review the track record of this maverick in the field of climatology. When I was done I put my name on a column naming him “America’s best climate prediction expert.” I added to it in April 2014 updating his list of predictions he had made. He is Mr. John L. Casey, a former White House and NASA space program consultant, Space Shuttle engineer, and high tech start-up company executive.

His first important climate research findings were issued in a press release in spring 2007. Later his only, yet seminal, peer reviewed paper with its associated theory on climate change driven by the Sun, was published on line for all to review. It is called the “Relational Cycle Theory.” Despite a sterling background in the space program at the highest levels of the U.S. government, in 2007 and 2008 he was nonetheless without a Ph.D. or any climate research papers. Thus, when he issued his first climate predictions he was immediately labeled by left wing media global warming zealots and even some publicity seeking conservatives as a “scam artist,” “hoaxer,” and a “fraud.” His pronouncements of the end of global warming within a few years and the start of a new cold climate, was a message no one wanted to hear including both Republican and Democrat presidential candidates (McCain and Obama) and Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore, who were all saying manmade global warming was a real threat. The timing on John’s first predictions could not have been worse.

Many would have given up on this financially ruinous and personally punishing quest to tell the truth about the climate. Fortunately for all Americans, John did not. Over the years, John started the Space and Science Research Corporation (SSRC), wrote a leading climate book, and in 2013, began to publish the bi-annual Global Climate Status Report (GCSR). He has made well over one hundred radio and TV interviews and public presentations across the United States. He is now the most referenced climatologist on the internet regarding the next potentially dangerous cold climate.

In September 2013, the CEO of influential Newsmax Media, Chris Ruddy, was captivated by John’s first book “Cold Sun.” He decided to throw all of his rapidly growing media company’s resources behind John’s research. John’s first climate book “Cold Sun” was updated and recast as “Dark Winter.” Under “The Cold Truth Initiative” as Newsmax calls it, “Dark Winter” is now being promoted nationwide.

Three months after publication, and “Dark Winter” has reached number four on Amazon’s 100 “Best Sellers” list of climate books! See the list at by clicking here.

The books ahead of him are the typical manmade global warming books one of which is fictional. That makes John’s “Dark Winter” the number 1 best selling global cooling, and I dare say best selling ‘truthful,’ climate book in the USA. Of the top four, his is the only book written by a proven climatologist.

America’s best climate prediction expert is at last receiving the credit he is due. When will the rest of the media, the scientific establishment, and our leaders in Washington recognize this one man’s courage, skills, and his selfless mission to help our people prepare for the new long cold climate?

Congratulations to John L. Casey, a man who understands climate and climate policy better than anyone, period.

A Name on the Map

Collins Bartholomew, the map-publishing company of world-leading publishers, Harper Collins, removed the name of Israel from its Geography Atlas to accommodate “local preferences.” In other words, in the interest of selling maps to an enemy that hopes to also wipe America off the map, the company was willing to erase Israel, as well as dispense with scruples, integrity, conscience, ethics, and credibility. Let’s take this a step further.

I understand that Muslims cannot abide truth; thus they invented the accusation of Islamophobia – to squelch all things that reveal their essence.  Islam is at war with the world and reality, and has been since the seventh century.  Their culture is a dedication to war and conquest, so that even their people may not grow and prosper. From the moment their children are born, they are robbed of the human spirit – freedom, creativity, imagination – and are twisted into becoming hardhearted “weapons of mass destruction” against their perceived enemies. In the name of their god, they attempt to erase the past by destroying ancient artifacts, refuting history to support their own supersessionist narrative, and call “offensive” all actions that lay bare their true nature, barbarism.

Above all, Islam teaches hatred of Jews, not to mention Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, idol worshipers and animists.  But above all, it is the Jews, because Mohammed could not convert the Jews in Mecca, so he beheaded all the Jewish men.  Yet, Muslims are still tied to Judaism through Abraham – and perhaps resent it.  Muslims also need the Jews to blame for their failures and adversities, and while they also claim Jewish successes and world contributions for their own, it has been said that they also feel the shame of having to do so. Why else would there be a traveling world exhibition called “101 Inventions,” for which they claim scholarship and ingenuity, but whose originality may be traced to Jews and other captives forcibly converted to Islam?   Why else would they begin claiming Moses, Jesus, Christopher Columbus, and Albert Einstein as Palestinian or Muslim, even if there were no Palestinians or Muslims during the times of Moses and Jesus?

Each defeat in wars begun by the Muslims against the Jews was yet another intolerable humiliation, particularly when five Muslim armies (Egypt, Lebanon, Transjordan, Syria, and Iraq) attacked, but were bested by, what they thought would be a defenseless, fledgling, ragtag army of starved, beaten Jewish survivors from Europe. Failing in conventional warfare, they began a psychological war with the help of the uninformed, the envious, the angry, and those who are eternally predisposed to hate for their own reasons. This war includes the influential propaganda that Jewish achievements have actually been at the expense of others and that Jews are therefore the cause of every earthly ill.

Islamists have discovered that what they, themselves, do may readily be blamed on the Jews. Muslims have actually broadcast their plan to create an all-encompassing world Caliphate, but peddle the idea that it is the Jews who rule the world. It suits the Muslims to keep their brethren in a constant refugee status in Gaza and the West Bank in order to garner world sympathy (and cash) and to lay claim to territory illegally occupied by Jordan and Egypt, although the land is both legally and historically Jewish. Through the centuries, Muslims were never interested in working what was then a desolate wasteland, but now insist that flourishing Israel is theirs.

In the surrounding Muslim lands, the majority continues to live in age-old poverty and ignorance under tyrannical regimes; this too is blamed on Israel. If the rainfall is inadequate and unequally distributed through the year in this sub-tropical zone, Israel is liable for not supplying water. If their women and children die as a result of being placed among jihadist rocket launchers, Israel is impugned. They accuse Israel of Palestinian genocide, when, in fact, the Palestinian population has dramatically increased, doubling in size with each new generation; and of apartheid, when the reality is that Muslims have banned Jews from Islamic countries.

The war is also against pluralism, individual rights and freedoms, liberal democracy, and Western ideas of progress, and this has become a collective Islamic obsession.  Yet the horrific crimes that Muslims commit against their fellow Muslims and Christians are swept under the prayer rug, hidden by the media, and not addressed by world leadership.  If the Jews cannot be incriminated for these crimes, then the mere mention of kidnappings, beheadings, honor killings, and other cruelty are forbidden topics.

And this is where our schools and teaching materials fail us. Except for a perfunctory early timeline on which one might find a designation for Ancient Israelites along with Assyrians, Babylonians and other defunct civilizations, world history studies begin with Ancient Rome and Greece, although the Jews have substantially contributed to human development. The framers of our US Constitution derived their morals, ethics and standards of behavior from Cicero and English Common Law, which drew from biblical law given to the Hebrews by God. Exodus reveals that the Hebrews had a representative form of republican government, not unlike the system created in the Constitution.  And while appropriate credit is given other countries, Israel’s contributions in medicine, science and technology to society at large has been overlooked, as is her eternal capital, Jerusalem, which is referenced 823 times in the Hebrew Bible, 161 times in the Christian Bible, and never in the Qur’an.

Many history textbooks devote a disproportionate number of chapters to Islam. Jerusalem is cited as the city where Mohammed ascended to heaven on a winged horse, but rarely as Israel’s capital.  Mohammed has been praised for “impressive leadership skills” but not for his methods of rapine, brutality, and slaughter. There is never mention of Islam’s butchery of 80 million Hindus in India, their skulls piled to mountainous dimensions and their cities burned to the ground; of the all-but-complete annihilation of Iran’s Zoroastrians; or of the trickery used to enslave Iran’s Sogdiana, take healthy men to replenish their Arab army, and annihilate the masses.  Neither is there word about Muslims’ killing perhaps as many as 400 million “infidels” over 14 centuries.

If today’s publishers have made a small correction on a map or two when it was called to their attention, is that sufficient?  Have they reviewed all their products (textbooks and maps) for accuracy?  No.  Absolutely not – not until they are called to task by parents and school boards, and not until the books and maps are thoroughly reviewed by trusted people, rewritten, and distributed anew. It takes the indoctrination of only one generation to completely change the nature of our country. Adding Israel and her name to a map alone, which can then be defaced by the “offended” students, will not bring enlightenment to a world that is plummeting into darkness.

Our Political Class: 114th Congress

I have a theory that ties in with John Boehner’s third election as Speaker of the House on Tuesday.

Could it be that the newly elected congressmen and women are greeted by one of the members who has been there long enough to be the chairperson of one of the many committees of the House and quickly informed that they now belong to a very exclusive group in which they can, with relative safety, ignore the voters who just elected them?

In the House there were 58 freshman members and in the Senate, there were 13, some of whom were formerly members of the House. In total, the opening session of Congress welcomed 246 Republicans and 188 Democrats.

Those contesting for the job of Speaker in addition to Boehner were Reps. Ted Yoho and Daniel Webster of Florida and Louie Gohmert of Texas. The Democrats nominated Rep. Nancy Pelosi. Four Democrats did not vote for her. Meanwhile Webster received 12 votes, Gohmert earned three, and Yoho won 2. Of the 408 votes cast, Boehner won 216.

My other theory is that enough members of the House had concluded that Boehner had done as good a job as possible under the circumstances and saw no reason to turn the job of Speaker over to someone who might rock the boat. His opposition came mostly from the strongly conservative bloc in the House.

What we likely have in the 114th Congress is a very pragmatic leadership who are not likely to do anything dramatic regarding immigration, energy, or any of the other issues about which conservatives want action. In both the House and the Senate, they know what they are up against. They will put forward legislation, but all it will do is demonstrate what we already know about Obama.

In his first speech on the floor of the Senate, Mitch McConnell (KY-R), the Majority Leader, said “Bipartisan compromise may not come easily for the President. The President’s supporters are pressing for militancy these days, not compromise.” Those supporters are the Far Left. I doubt that he or John Boehner met with the President that much over the past six years.

The Founding Fathers created a republic in which the business of legislating was intended to move slowly, subject to debate and the need for compromise. Obama has made it clear he has no intention to work with Congress, especially now that it is controlled by the GOP. So gridlock will continue and conservatives will stay angry.

Regarding my theory that our political class doesn’t really worry that much about what the voters want, do you recall the omnibus budget that was passed in the last hours of the previous Congress? That was 2,000-plus pages crammed full of things we are not likely to ever learn about until well after the money is spent. Does that suggest that the members of Congress think it wiser to keep us in the dark? Yes.

AA - Boehner and ObamaThink of it another way, Over the course of the last six years with Obama as President, the House passed some fifty resolutions calling for the repeal of ObamaCare. Were we supposed to take that seriously? Are we going to see legislation repealing, for instance, Obamacare’s medical device tax? Maybe. I will be very interested to see any legislation aimed at undermining ObamaCare because I believe the 114th Congress would prefer to wait for the courts to do that for them.

Boehner knew early on that Obama was a President who had little regard for Congress or, for that matter, the Constitution.

Despite a major rejection of the Democratic Party and Obama’s policies in the 2013 midterm elections, Obama has been acting as if the Party won those elections and they had confirmed his agenda. He has let it be known he has no intention of negotiating, preferring to use his veto power, unilateral executive orders, and to get what he wants via various federal agency regulations.

One of the most important functions of the 114th Congress will be oversight of departments and agencies. Has anyone heard from the Justice Department’s Lois Lerner lately? Any word about the Benghazi tragedy?

Little wonder that, after being elected to his third term as Speaker, Boehner said “All I ask is that we disagree without being disagreeable.” There are 435 members in the House of Representatives and Boehner is responsible primarily for its Republican members. If there are Democrats who are willing to cross the aisle, he will welcome their votes. As in the Senate, they will be needed on occasion.

Regarding the passage of legislation, Boehner said “It’s the real work. It’s a grind. The battle of ideas never ends and frankly never should. We Americans never quit,” adding “Let’s once and for all prove the skeptics wrong.”

It is worth keeping in mind, as Karl Rove reminded us in a Jan 7 commentary, “Every Republican senator and virtually every congressman challenged as insufficiently conservative won their primaries.” The voters have spoken.

As unhappy as many conservatives are with Boehner and those they call RINOs (Republicans in Name Only), Boehner did not sound like a man expressing great joy at having been reelected to what appears to be a very difficult job. That this is his third term suggests that his colleagues in the House have a measure of respect for him that his critics do not.

The House and Senate used to be exclusively an old white man’s club. Now the Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader are looking at an extraordinarily diverse membership.

The same day Boehner was reelected Speaker the Congressional Black Caucus hosted a swearing-in ceremony to welcome new and returning members of the House and Senate. There were 46 of them.

Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah) will make history as the first black Republican woman in Congress. She and the others represent the largest Black Republican class in Congress since the Reconstruction era. Makes you wonder what those blacks rioting in the streets are so angry about? More than 125 blacks have been elected to Congress over the past forty years, including of course, Barack Obama.

The 114th Congress has been hailed by The Hill as the “Most diverse Congress in history to take power.” There are a record number of female lawmakers at 104, alongside 420 men. Hispanic lawmakers will number 33 with 30 in the House and Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) in the Senate. There are 12 Asian-Americans and Oklahoma has contributed two Native-Americans.

The Hill reports that “A vast majority of lawmakers identify as Christian, either Protestant or Catholic, along with 16 Mormons.” There are 28 Jews, two Buddhists, two Muslims, and one Hindu.

Think you’d like to have John Boehner’s job or Mitch McConnell’s? To all that diversity add political points of view that range from Far Left to Far Right.

Let me return to my original theory. In the House, though they must face election every two years, I suspect they quickly conclude that there is no satisfying the voters so they might as well vote as they wish. In the Senate where they face election every six years, that goes double or triple.

These are professional politicians. Of the new Congress, ten have been governors, 32 were mayors, and 251 served in state legislatures. It’s a job they have chosen and, frankly, I am glad it is them, not me.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

In Veto Threat, President Claims 6 Years Isn’t Enough Time to Study Keystone Pipeline

On the first day of taking control of the U.S. Senate, Republicans ran into some trouble:

Democrats managed to put the kibosh on a planned Energy and Natural Resources [ENR] Committee hearing today on Keystone XL, forcing Republicans to cancel the event. Sen. Dick Durbin, on behalf of Barbara Boxer, objected to a GOP floor move seeking unanimous consent to appoint Lisa Murkowski and Maria Cantwell as the leaders of ENR. The appointment was necessary for the move to take place because Democrats do no formally organize until today. Objecting to the UC request prevented the committee from being able to organize in time for today’s hearing, which was then scrapped.

While a minor setback, it typifies the many delays and obstacles put in front of the Keystone XL pipeline since permits applications were filed in 2008.

However, as soon as the bill to approve the job-creating, energy infrastructure project was filed in the Senate, theWhite House threatened to veto it.

The Statement of Administration Policy on the bill states the bill “seeks to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether cross-border pipelines serve the national interest” and “prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues.”

In other words, the President wants you to believe that there hasn’t been enough time to study the pipeline.

That’s absurd.

The Keystone XL pipeline has been studied for over six years. Five times, the State Department has issued reports that the project would have minimal impact on the environment.

Oil Sands Fact Check Keystone XL timeline.

For a larger view click on the chart.

In the time it’s been studied you could have built one Golden Gate Bridge (with time to spare), built three Pentagons, or watched all six Star Wars movies 3,917 times.

The most recent State Department analysis found that along with little environmental impact, the Keystone XL pipeline will create 42,000 jobs, generate $3.4 billion in economic activity, and generate $55.6 million in local property taxes once it’s operating.

Estimated local property taxes from the Keystone XL pipeline. Source: Tax Foundation.

 Reaction to the President’s veto threat was greeted with bipartisan disappointment. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY):

I assure you, threatening to veto a jobs and infrastructure bill within minutes of a new Congress taking the oath of office — a bill with strong bipartisan support — is anything but productive.

Bill co-sponsor, Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV):

His decision to veto such a commonsense bill prior to the unfolding of regular congressional order and the offering of amendments appears premature and does little to mitigate the congressional gridlock. It is time that we address the critical issues of moving America toward energy independence and fostering job growth and economic prosperity.

By working at a snail’s pace, the administration has turned this project into a mobilization tool for anti-energy activists. It has allowed special interest demagoguery to trump sober policy analysis and made the Keystone XL pipeline a symbol of a dysfunctional federal permitting process.  People in Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, and the rest of America have waited long enough.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board advised Congress to vote to approve the pipeline anyway [subscription required]:

Members of both parties should move ahead despite the veto threat and call his bluff. At least the country will see who is the real obstacle to faster growth and job creation.

Agree. Tell Congress to support the Keystone XL pipeline.

Businesses, investors, and entrepreneurs wondering if it’s still possible to build big things in America are watching,labor unions that support the pipeline are watching, and a majority of the public who supports the pipeline is watching.

Pew Research Poll on the Keystone XL pipeline.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of pipe to be used for the Keystone XL pipeline in a field in Gascoyne, ND. Photo credit: Sean Hackbarth.

Head-on Collision at Charlie Hebdo

charlie hebdo cover

Translation: “100 Lashes if you don’t die of laughter” from Sharia Hebdo edition 2011.

Clash of civilizations, star wars, the big bang, a certain idea of France was murdered in cold blood on January 7th. An allahu akhbar commando stormed into the offices of Charlie Hebdo, executed twelve people, wounded another twenty; four of them critically. It is painfully difficult to sort out nuggets of accurate information from the sound and fury that fills the airwaves and the streets of Paris. [12 noon, one minute of silence has been decreed by the government, outside my window I hear car horns furious at someone blocking the street, rumbling machines working on a nearby building, almost drowning out the dirge sounded by the church bell on the corner, icy rain pelts on hurried passersby…].

An infinitesimal minority of the 5 or 6 million Muslims living in France–two brothers identified as Sherif  and Said Kouachi—wiped out the staff of an in your face magazine that has been offending everyone for 45 years. A mixture of pornography and scatology was served up weekly in a hallmark sloppy cartoon style with brief texts that lashed out like a not yet emancipated adolescent at chosen targets. The sweet smiling faces of yesterday’s victims—Charb, Cabu, Tignous, Wolinski, Honoré, Maris—convey the abiding innocence that was brutally assassinated. They made good-natured grotesque fun of everyone including themselves…in a heretofore protected world.

In 2005, Charlie published the Mohamed cartoons with the same insolence as it habitually employed on priests, rabbis and other benighted believers. Courageous, yes…but also blinded by their own enlightened tolerance. On this and subsequent occasions the Charlies reiterated their faith in humanity, Muslims included. Mocking fanatics was a gesture of affection for fellow citizens of the Muslim faith. The mockery was inclusive, not aggressive. It was a way of saying “you belong to our wonderful culture.”

Today, Phlippe Valls, director of the magazine when the Mohamed cartoons were published, cannot hold back his tears. “I’ve lost all my friends.” Valls gives credit to French governments Left and Right that protected him and his staff since that fateful day. “Without police protection we would not have been able to carry on.” Though Charlie Hebdo was acquitted of defamation in 2006, the court established de facto anti-blasphemy by granting the magazine a limited right to offend Islam in the context of the worldwide controversy surrounding the Mohamed cartoons. Dalil Boubaker, rector of the Central Mosque of Paris, one of the plaintiffs in that case, was represented by Francis Szpiner, who also represented France 2 in the case against Philippe Karsenty and, subsequently, the family of Ilan Halimi against the Gang of Barbarians.

At the time, Boubaker voiced disapproval of the violence ripping through the Muslim world over the cartoons, while pleading for respect for Islam and the prophet. Yesterday he rushed to the site of the killings and voiced his disapproval of an act that sullies Islam and betrays its sacred respect for human life. If the Charlie Hebdo massacre is France’s 9/11 as many suggest, the religion of peace message that so quickly replaced don’t tread on me in the US is even more insistent here in France.

The usual array of experts, specialists, authors, former secret service agents and well-trained journalists is making the distinction between Islam and these allahu akhbar fanatics. The bodies of the victims were still lying in pools of blood in their boardroom while the concern had already shifted to the innocent Muslims who might be fingered because of this aberrant misuse of their beautiful religion.

Spontaneous demonstrations formed all over France, 100,000 in all, with 35,000 at Place de la République. The Je suis Charlie [I am Charlie] slogan caught on instantly worldwide. Sincerely moved, often to tears, honest citizens stood in the frosty cold, holding up pencils as a sign of résistance. We Are Not Afraid they declared in a little light show Place de la République. Memorial candle burners occupied the field conquered last summer by flag burners, the black mournful mockup of a Charlie Hebdo front page replaced the black flag of jihad flown last August, a tribute was made to two policemen killed in the line of duty yesterday, there where the caliphators had attacked police with rocks and bags of broken glass.

[2:30 PM—it is reported that the two suspects robbed a gas station, abandoned the car they hijacked on the run yesterday, and are somewhere in a zone between Villers-Cotterêts and Crépy-en-Valois. Commandos in Puma helicopters are circling over the area, under the watchful eye of TV cameras. The bucolic place names have all the perfumes of an eternal France that is slashed today by the intrusion of another world it still refuses to see.]

In 2008 a different sort of scandal targeted Charlie Hebdo: editorial director Philippe Valls was accused in some quarters of “censorship” for kicking out the unashamed anti-Semite Siné.  In my coverage of that story– Tempest in a Trashcan — I noticed an element that had escaped other commentators: an article by Charb making fun of those who claim the al Dura video is a hoax, and relaying the bit about Israelis killing Palestinian children wholesale.

The firebombing of Charlie’s offices in 2011 raised a first ripple of public indignation. Defiant, the staff brought out a CHARIA HEBDO issue, under the direction of editor in chief Mohammed. On the next to the last page of that issue, chock full of scandalous acts, positions, and nudity on the theme of sharia, a full-page interview with David Chemla, president of the French branch of Peace Now and European secretary of the J Street lookalike JCall. The release of 1,000 prisoners in exchange for Gilad Shalit, including 280 responsible for the death of 600 civilians shows, says Chemla, that Israel can erase its red lines for a good cause. They will have to do some more erasing, he advises, in order to make peace with the Palestinians. [My coverage: Auto da fe in Paris]

In a video filmed before a mountain of charred documents, Charb admitted that he might need police protection from now on. But he said he had more chance of getting run over by a Vel-lib (municipal rental bike) than to be killed by an Islamist… “there are so few in France.”

The November 9th issue featured on its cover a cute little Charlie kid receiving a drooling kiss from a sweet bearded guy in Salafist dress. “Love is stronger than hatred,”  proclaims the cover. The issue is filled with testimonials from all over the world, and strong with a spirit of we will not be cowed. In his personal account of the aftermath of the fire, Charb has “a thought for the Muslims who are the first victims of this fire.” It’s going to be exploited by the Far Right to discredit all Muslims. In fact, wrote Charb, we can’t be sure the attack did come from Islamists. Maybe it was fascist provocateurs! Anyway, the hacking and death threats come from foreign Islamists.

But the Kouachi brothers, of Algerian origin, were born in Paris!

In January 2013 Charlie Hebdo brought out the first volume of an irreverent apologetic Life of Mohammed comic book [LaVie de Mahomet] illustrated by Charb. The prophet is portrayed with comical awkwardness but his message and life story are told with orthodox respect.

The philo-Muslim theme is endlessly repeated over the past 24 hours. Imams that swear allegiance to the values of the Republic are featured on TV. Those who preach jihad are not mentioned even in a whisper. The Muslim in the street is spotlighted, a caring citizen like any other. A woman in hijab places flowers on the altar in front of the Charlie Hebdo offices. In reply to a journalist who asks “Are you concerned?” she offers a little homily: “The prophet never attacked unless he was attacked. Then he responded with kind words and only if they were ignored did he fight. When he fought, he really fought!”

The younger brother, Sherif Kouachi, was briefly imprisoned for his activity in the 19th arrondissement terror cell that recruited jihadis for Iraq. At the time, journalist Mohamed Sifaoui, himself a refugee from the Algerian terror wave, declared that it was the American invasion of Iraq, not Islam that provoked the Buttes Chaumont terror cell. Today Sifaoui claims that rising xenophobia in France fuels Islamic radicalization, and we have to deal with both. The BBC outdid everyone, bringing in the sly wily Muslim Brotherhood Tarrq Ramadan to tell us infidels how we should behave to avoid this kind of attack.

I24 news commentator Ali Waked candidly admitted that he had been in the midst of a “group” not far from the station’s Jaffa studios Monday night: “The majority said Charlie Hebdo had insulted the prophet and got what was coming to them.”

Worldwide media are showing an unprecedented mobilization in France. Undeniably, a nerve has been hit. There has been nothing like it since the first Islamic attacks going back to the 80s and increasing exponentially since October 2000. There was no public outcry last month when the I Télé channel dropped the popular debater Eric Zemmour, after publication of Le Suicide Français, in which he expands on the Islamic problem facing France.

Of course the issue of press freedom takes on immense significance when the staff of a magazine is decimated by two men with Kalashnikovs. The reaction to the Charlie Hebdo massacre is neither artificial nor hypocritical. But the question of Islam is an abyss. Unless it is faced honestly, fearlessly, without false reassurance, the masses of enlightened citizens standing up for their freedom today will slide into that chasm.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is by Dylan Ross, CNN Report.

Obama’s Daughter Promotes Anti-Cop “Nigga” Spewing Rap Group

Great catch by my amigo Jim on his Gateway Pundit website. Jim posted this story with a picture of Michelle Obama’s “mini-me” Malia, promoting a rap groups tour, whose frontman was arrested for assaulting a security guard.


Malia Obama wearing Pro Era shirt. Photo courtesy of Instagram. For a larger view click on the image.

Here is what Jim wrote:

Today she’s wearing a T-shirt [right] supporting an anti-cop gangster rap group. Tomorrow she’ll be attending Socialist meetings at Columbia College. And, before you know it she’ll be dining with Al Sharpton.

On Monday a grainy photo of a 16-year-old wearing a hip-hop group’s tour T-shirt was posted on said group’s official Instagram account.

One of the members of the collective, which consists of rappers, producers, and non-musical members, such as photographers and publicists, told Gawker that Mr. Bada$$ had allegedly been sent the snapshot by “a mutual friend of Malia’s and the pro era member.”

Here are a few lyrics from Extortion by Pro Era.

VIDEO: “Extortion” by Pro Era.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Shark Tank.

Islam Kills Again

The news from Paris about the killing of twelve journalists highlights Islam’s war on the West that represents a fundamental truth about this cult of Mohammad.

Most are familiar with the Islamic schism between the majority Sunnis and the minority Shiites. It dates back to the very earliest days of Islam when the two groups disagreed over who should be the successor to Mohammad.

There is a new schism in Islam these days and it is between a moderate interpretation of Islam and fundamentalism. We have all seen what fundamentalism produces.

The past year had dramatic and tragic slaughters by the Islamic State (ISIS) in the Syrian-Iraqi area they control, the murder of more than 140 school children in Pakistan by the Taliban, and the kidnapping of 276 girls by Boko Haram in Nigeria. These acts represent a strict interpretation of Shia law based on the Koran.

That is why an address by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, on New Year’s Day, to clerics at Al-Azhar and the Awqaf Ministry is particularly significant. As reported by Raymond Ibrahim of the Middle East Forum, Sisi “a vocal supporter for a renewed vision of Islam, made what must be his most forceful and impassioned plea to date.”

His speech was a warning that “the corpus of (Islamic) texts and ideas that we have made sacred over the years” are “antagonizing the entire world.”

Referring to the 1.6 billion Muslims, Sisi said it is not possible that they “should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live.” Islam, said Sisi “is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.”

I cannot recall any other Islamic leader saying anything this bold and this true. Directly addressing the clerics, Sisi said “It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma (Islamic world) to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.” That is, of course, exactly what has been occurring.

Sisi called for “a religious revolution”, what Christians would call a reformation. “You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world is waiting for your next move…”

Islam - Obama's Muslim QuoteBased on negotiations led by the U.S., the world is waiting to see what Iran, the home of the Islamic Revolution—the name given to the ayatollah’s movement that overthrew the Shah in 1979—will do in the face of demands that it cease its quest to produce its own nuclear weapons.

You don’t have to be a U.S. diplomat to know the answer to that. As Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies recently wrote, for decades the Iranian leadership has referred to “American Islam”, a term that describes what Iran “perceives to be a depoliticized perversion of the true faith, devoid of the revolutionary sentiment that guides the Islamic Republic.” Calling it “American” demonstrates their contempt for everything American.

The Iranians even apply the term to Muslim nations “deemed pliant before the will of superpowers like the United States.” In their view, they are the champions of “the pure Islam of Mohammad.” The Iranians are Shiites. As such, they are a minority sect within Islam, though a large one by any standard.

Those U.S. diplomats negotiating to get Iran to agree to cease pursuing the ability to construct their own nuclear weapons should read the memoirs of Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister and lead nuclear negotiator. As Taleblu notes, Zarif has a PhD from an American university, but he still wrote “We have a fundamental problem with the West and especially with America. This is because we are claimants of a mission, which has a global dimension.”

That mission is to impose Islam—their fundamental brand of it—on the entire world. That would get easier if they can threaten the world with nuclear weapons. Iran has been the leading sponsor of Islamic terror since its revolution in 1979.

The gap between Egyptian President Sisi’s concerns about the state of Islam today and the intention of fundamentalists like Zarif are a capsule version of what is occurring among Muslims throughout the world.

Islam is not inclined toward any form of modernity and most certainly not toward any form of personal freedom so the world has to remain watchful and, at this point, far less inclined to give its terrorists a pass with the claim they do not represent Islam.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

RELATED ARTICLE: Terrorists in Paris were Asking for Specific People during the Shooting

EDITORS NOTE: U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement regarding the deadly terrorist attack in Paris earlier today:

“I was saddened to learn of the terrorist attack that claimed 12 lives at the offices of Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris earlier today. These journalists and satirists were apparently killed by Islamic extremists for exercising the fundamental human right of free speech and expression. These terrorists don’t hate cartoons, they hate freedom. They’re willing to target anyone and destroy anything in the name of intimidating free people and spreading their cruel and hateful dogmas. It is important for the United States – and free nations everywhere – to oppose these forces with strength and vigilance. Today, the United States must stand unequivocally with the people of France in their time of need and mourning. We must assist them to bring the perpetrators and sponsors of this act to justice.”

Challenging Obama’s Alleged Powers

The good news as 2015 debuts is that President Obama has managed to very nearly decimate the Democratic Party, leaving it weaker in Congress and throughout the nation than it has been in memory. The bad news is that he has weakened the nation in the eyes of the world. He is not trusted by world leaders and his next two years in office will only encourage our enemies.

“Checking Obama’s misuse of his foreign-affairs powers should be a top priority for the new Republican majorities in Congress,” urged John R. Bolton and John Yoo in the final issue of the National Review for 2014. Together they authored “Advice on ‘Advice and Consent.’” Bolton is a former U.S. ambassador and Yoo a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Both are affiliated with the American Enterprise Institute.

At home Obama’s popularity, generally remaining between 45% and 50%, has got to be one of the great polling mysteries, but in all polls 30% of those responding are unregenerate liberals so the reality of his job approval ratings is likely far lower than reported. At the same time, though, Congress has even lower approval ratings and the huge shift in power that occurred in the midterm elections suggests that the voters want to see some real action taken to curb Obama.

As Bolton and Yoo point out “These assertions of unilateral executive power raise constitutional conflicts of the first order. Congress must first ask whether any of Obama’s agreements include obligations sufficiently grave to amount to a treaty under the Constitution—or, alternatively, whether these potential deals flow from the President’s legitimate constitutional authority in foreign affairs, and thus need not be embodied in treaties.’

This is not the kind of thing the average person thinks about, let alone has the knowledge of Constitutional issues to understand. What we do know, however, is that Obama has little regard for the Congress and even less for the Constitution. That’s why the issues Bolton and Yoo address are important.

For example, “there are some reports…the administration has pledged not to use military force against Iran in exchange for a halt to its nuclear-weapons program.” The negotiations with Iran have met with such resistance from Iran that the U.S. and others participating in them have twice agreed to extend them. Iran has never demonstrated any other objective than to have its own nuclear weapons.

Bolton and Yoo say “Republicans and Democrats should agree on one thing when it comes to military force: An international agreement’s renunciation of the use of American force manifestly limits U.S. sovereignty, with enormous effects on national security. Obama’s move on Iran may well violate Article II of the Constitution.” Senate approval by a two-thirds supermajority would be needed for any such agreement with Iran. “White House claims that an Iran deal does not amount to a treaty ring false.”

The claims by the White House are universally false. That is something that Americans have learned the hard way over the past six years. While Presidents have long made ‘sole executive agreements’, treaties require the Senate’s advice and consent and Obama knows he’s not likely to get that.

It’s one thing for Obama to make a “climate change” deal with China—and a bad one at that—agreeing to cut U.S. “greenhouse gas” emissions, the fact remains that “The President cannot commit the nation to environmental standards on his own, because only Congress has the constitutional power to control interstate and international commerce (under which heading the federal government regulations the environment.)”

The new Congress is not going to go along with Obama’s deal with China because Obama lacks the authority to enact it. “At the very least”, say Bolton and Yoo, “the China climate deal should be approved by majorities in both houses of Congress, if not by two-thirds of the Senate.”

“Congress should use the tools that the Constitution provides to protect its political influence in foreign affairs,” say Bolton and Yoo, adding that “Congress can make clear that any agreement made by Obama alone binds only him.”

Other than his power as President to veto legislation sent to him, Obama lacks any real power to effect his foreign affairs initiatives and, domestically, he is not going to achieve anything other than by mean of executive orders and the use of federal government agencies to produce regulations. Congress has oversight and it can restrain and overturn the actions of agencies if they are particularly egregious and it is beginning at least to use it more frequently.

We are hoping that the new Congress is going to act on the voter’s expectation that it will restrain Obama’s efforts to push through programs that harm the best interests of the nation. In the long history of the nation, Congress has never encountered a President whose agenda is to do as much harm as possible.

The next two years will likely see many Democratic members of Congress voting with Republicans. They will do so because Obama has wreaked so much damage to the Party and because they are looking at the national elections coming in 2016 and positioning themselves for them if they must run for office.

Obama is not just the enemy of the Democrats and Republicans in Congress. He is the enemy of the people.

© Alan Caruba 2015

9 Reasons Libertarians Should Love Switzerland

The Swiss are rich, happy, gun-owning, peace-loving people by Corey Iacono:

  1. Switzerland has the fourth-freest economy in the entire world and is only surpassed by Hong Kong, Singapore, and New Zealand.
  2. Considering that Switzerland has one of the most free-market economies on the planet, it’s no wonder the country has the ninth-highest per capita income in the world. Indeedresearch suggests that the freer a market economy is, the faster it grows.
  3. The Swiss have the third-highest median household income in the world, which means the median Swiss household is slightly richer than the median American household.
  4. Switzerland has the fourth-lowest level of government spending as a share of the economy among the 34 OECD countries. (OECD refers to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a group of developed countries.)
  5. The Swiss have genuine federalism and decentralized government. Their central government is responsible for around 15 percent of total government spending, which is lower than that of any other OECD country.
  6. The Swiss have a long history of armed neutrality and haven’t been involved in war since 1815. Switzerland is like a porcupine: it won’t bother you, but it would be a huge mistake to mess with it.
  7. Switzerland has the fourth-highest gun ownership rate in the world. It also has the 11th-lowest homicide rate in the world (out of 195 countries).
  8. Marijuana is decriminalized.
  9. Switzerland is the third-happiest country in the world.

The Swiss are rich, happy, gun-owning, peace-loving people. The country has one of the freest market economies in the world and a relatively small and very decentralized government that hasn’t waged war since the early 19th century. Switzerland just might be one of the most libertarian countries in the world.

An earlier version of this article appeared on


Corey Iacono is a student at the University of Rhode Island majoring in pharmaceutical science and minoring in economics.

Eating Right: Your freedom to choose your food is sacred by Wendy McElroy

Food has always been political. Throughout history, armies have razed crops and demographics have shifted in response to hunger. Political correctness now drives the civics of food with bountiful nations attempting to dictate what people can eat and how much. Why? For their own good.

The public debate revolves around whether a particular food choice is healthy or not. The real debate is, “Who should choose: you or someone else?” The defense of food freedom needs to turn on the right of people to express themselves through dietary choices that reflect not only their preferences but also their judgment. Food is self-expression as much as music or literature is. If the government can control the flavors of life you choose to swallow, then it can control everything else.

Poe’s law comes alive

Poe’s law is an Internet adage. It says that without knowing the intent of an online poster, it is impossible to distinguish someone who is expressing an extreme position from someone else who is satirizing that extreme position. A recent news story blurs the line between parody and reality.

The parody goes by various names, including “Ordering a Pizza from Big Brother” and “Ordering a Pizza in 2015.” The gist: a pizza parlor with access to all of your personal information refuses to accept an order that is contraindicated by your finances, medical condition, or some other characteristic. The reality is expressed by a December 8 headline in the Telegraph that read, “The vending machine of the future is here, and it knows who you are.”

The Luce X2 Touch TV is the first commercial vending machine to use facial recognition technology to store data and interact with customers. The vending machines offer advantages to both buyers and sellers. A buyer could voluntarily store his preferences, and the machine could regularly restock those items. A seller could replace expensive employees and stores with machines. But the Telegraph points to possible disadvantages. Luce X2 “could refuse to vend a certain product based on a shopper’s age, medical record or dietary requirements.” Candy might be refused to the obese, sodas to schoolchildren. Since Luce X2 uses data-sharing cloud technology, going to another machine might not provide the anonymity that allows access.

The prospect of social control via vending machine sounds paranoid to some. But food regulations have become so intrusive and unreasonable as to become self-parodies. Michelle Obama’s unpopular school-lunch program has children across America tossing trays full of untouched food into extremely well-nourished wastebaskets. Recent menu-labeling laws require food vendors — from restaurants to theater popcorn stands — to provide information on calorie contents that next to no one will read. But the requirement does make fast food more expensive and so discourages its consumption, which may be the laws’ real purpose.

Even as food regulation verges on the absurd, many acquiesce on health grounds. Framing the issue as medical gives the government a strong advantage.

Food is much more than a health matter

The State uses two basic arguments to justify the micromanagement of what people eat. First, laws are necessary to force people to make healthy choices. This argument assumes that politically motivated bureaucrats know what is best for people better than they do themselves. Second, people’s unhealthy choices make them tax burdens on the socialized medical system. Having “relieved” or deprived people of the responsibility for their own medical maintenance, the State uses their dependence as an excuse to impose social control. It is important to counter both arguments, but doing so often ignores an equally essential point.

Food is not merely a matter of health or sustaining life. It is one of the main ways people express themselves in terms of culture, ethnicity, religion, psychology, family history, and pure preference. Food choices are personal; they define our identity as surely as choices in attire or music do.

Food is an integral aspect of transmitting culture and ethnicity. From Hungarian goulash to Italian sausage, from Indian curries to falafels, food expresses a family’s rich heritage. Recipes and cooking techniques are passed down from one generation to the next in an act that preserves the family bond; it preserves the culture itself.

Food is also a cultural ambassador through which diverse groups appreciate each other’s ethnicity. People who would never listen to Chinese music are able to mention dozens of their favorite Chinese dishes. A man who would never learn Spanish might cook pescado a la talla with the same ingredients a woman is using in Acapulco. A couple will return from visiting Germany and rave about its spaetzle and knackwurst. This cultural appreciation occurs naturally, without tax funding or government-mandated tolerance. Indeed, laws interrupt people’s appreciation of other cuisines.

Food can be a moral choice, as vegetarians and vegans know. It can be a part of religious doctrine, as any Orthodox Jew will tell you. It is a matter of ritual, as those who carve a turkey each Christmas or children who gather Halloween candy will gladly acknowledge. Food can even be a political statement, as those who prefer raw milk will attest.

As a psychological matter, food has been called “love.” A mother makes her son’s favorite meal or a cake to celebrate his birthday. A lover proposes marriage over a romantic dinner and a good wine. Women recover from a broken heart by emptying containers of ice cream. When a neighbor expresses sympathy for a death in someone’s family, she brings over a homemade casserole. At the funeral, there is a spread of food. At festivals, it is featured; for the Super Bowl, it is strategically placed between the couch and the TV.


The diversity of plentiful food that every grocery store boasts should be a cause of pride, because it demonstrates not only financial prosperity, but also cultural richness. It showcases the range of choices in our affluent society.

Never mind that subsidies, taxes, and regulations already distort what we find at the supermarket and how much we pay for it. When government tries to dictate what we may eat or the manner in which we eat, it is tampering with our heritage, our ethnicity, our psychology, and our religious or political choices. The ability to control the food you put in your mouth is as fundamental a right as to control the words that come out of it.

The government’s increasing interference in food choice is often viewed as benevolent, because it is discussed in terms of health benefits. Food regulation is anything but benevolent. The government is not only trying to define who and what you are; it is, at the same time, trying to convince you that the denial of freedom is “for your own good.” If you are what you eat, then food laws are an attempt to control your identity.


Contributing editor Wendy McElroy ( is an author, editor of, and Research Fellow at The Independent Institute (

The Presidential Horse Pucky Dance

The election of a new President is coming up in 2016. I think America is ready for a different kind of candidate.

List of 25 heroes who sided with the Constitution and voted against Boehner for speaker

jeff miller

Jeff Miller, R-Florida Distinct 1.

Below is a list of American representative’s who fearlessly sided with our Founding Fathers. They did so under the rule of Constitutional governance in a historic rebuke of John Boehner for his prior capitulation President Obama.

I did not see my representative Congressman Jeff Millers’ name on this list. Apparently Congressman Miller supports John Boehner’s agenda also by voting for another 2 years of Boehner as Speaker.

Miller was an executive assistant to Democratic state Agriculture Commissioner Doyle Conner from 1984 to 1988. He was a life long Democrat until he switched parties in 1997. Jeff Miller is no longer my representative, he is a guy collecting a paycheck from my district. I will not now, nor in the future vote for him, give him monetary support or emotional support. I will bash him on radio shows in his district. I will eviscerate him in newspaper articles in his district and in emails across the nation which reach 256,000 people. This career politician also voted to dismember the retirement checks of military personnel but still the sheeple voted for him. In 2016 I will send a mass mail out to all his constituents reminding them of this fact.

As the Washington Post noted this is the “biggest defection from an incumbent speaker in at least 100 years“, with 25 House Republicans voted for someone other than John Boehner to serve as speaker in the 114th Congress. God Bless these great Americans. Ensure they are given donations and receive ample moral and financial support in the future. Invite them to speak at TEA Party and 9-12 meetings. As for those who voted in support of Boehner rebuke and ostracize them. They are cowards.

Here’s the full list, in order:

  1. Rep. Justin Amash (MI) – @RepJustinAmash
  2. Rep. Brian Babin (TX) – @Babin4Congress
  3. Rep. Rod Blum (IA) – @BlumforCongress
  4. Rep. Dave Brat (VA) – @DaveBratVA7th
  5. Rep. Jim Bridenstine (OK) – @RepJBridenstine
  6. Rep. Curt Clawson (FL) – @RepCurtClawson
  7. Rep. Scott DesJarlais (TN) – @DesJarlaisTN04
  8. Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC) – @RepJeffDuncan
  9. Rep. Scott Garrett (NJ) – @RepGarrett
  10. Rep. Chris Gibson (NY) – @RepChrisGibson
  11. Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ) – @RepGosar
  12. Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX) – @RepLouieGohmert
  13. Rep. Tim Huelskamp (KS) – @CongHuelskamp
  14. Rep. Walter Jones (NC) – @RepWalterJones
  15. Rep. Steve King (IA) – @SteveKingIA
  16. Rep. Tom Massie (KY) – @RepThomasMassie
  17. Rep. Mark Meadows (NC) – @RepMarkMeadows
  18. Rep. Rich Nugent (FL) – @RepRichNugent
  19. Rep. Gary Palmer (AL) – @Palmer4Alabama
  20. Rep. Bill Posey (FL) – @CongBillPosey
  21. Rep. Scott Rigell (VA) – @RepScottRigell
  22. Rep. Marlin Stutzman (IN) – @RepStutzman
  23. Rep. Randy Weber (TX) – @TXRandy14
  24. Rep. Daniel Webster (FL) – @RepWebster
  25. Rep. Ted Yoho (FL) – @RepTedYoho

RELATED ARTICLE: Why So Many Republicans Wouldn’t Vote for Boehner as Speaker

A Dark Day for America

Today we analyze the details that made this a very dark day for America.

Up first is the absurd re-election of John Boehner as Speaker of the House of Representatives. Instead of a conservative juggernaut to stop and defeat the neo-Marxist and culturally destructive policies of President Obama the 114th Congress chose the failed and pseudo-conservative John Boehner, Congressman from Ohio to his third term as Speaker. This sets a terrible precedent as we race into the Presidential election of 2016, 671 days from today. Not only will the Constitutional Conservative viewpoint be suppressed but Boehner will continue with his “K” Street tactics and cut deals with Obama that increase the size of our national debt, allow illegal aliens to walk through our borders and enable the Muslim Brotherhood to have more detrimental impact to our national security.

This is not good.

Neither is it good that today, the Judges of Florida legalized gay marriage in spite of a constitutional amendment that has been in place since 2008. This is wrong on two levels both legally and culturally. Notwithstanding all the politically-correct emotion connected to “same-sex” marriage the data and common sense affirm the Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage, a union between a man and a woman is essential to a morally sound civilization.

Check out the show and see why we say, this is a “Dark Day For America.”

The Nightmare of our Lifetime: Gay Marriage is now LEGAL in Florida

Hope all is well on this “Week of Infamy” – as our beloved state of Florida – the one that we all love so dearly – is the latest to fall to the “depths of the demons”. Yes, just picture two men in full beards at some church (other than a Catholic Church) saying “I do” and the gutless presider saying “You can now kiss the bride”…Think about that for a minute. Let it sink in…and then, try to explain it to your 7 year-old son who confusingly asks: “Daddy, aren’t those two men up at the altar? Is that his best man?” “No, son, that is his husband – those two men are actually getting married to one another”…

Friends: If you are not sick to your stomach – disgusted to the nth degree about what is going on in our beloved United States of America with this “Same Sex Marriage Crap” – you need to check your pulse! If today’s front page in every single newspaper in the state of Florida did not make you want to throw up your breakfast – I don’t know what to tell you. I could not even read the front page of the Palm Beach Post this morning! I could not watch the News on TV. The way those anchors so enthusiastically shared this disgusting news with their viewers – as if they were all for it. Sickening. Appalling. Immoral. UnGodly. Sad state of affairs – all 36 of them…soon to be all 50…

When the “Dysfunctional Closet Emperor” took office 6 years ago, only 4 states legalized Gay Marriage. Today, it is 36…and counting. You can blame the liberal socialist in our White House for these shenanigans as that was a huge priority in his platform – Legalize Gay Marriage. And, he’s got 727 days left as a “dead duck” – I mean – “lame duck” – and GOD knows what else this Pro-abortion impostor has up his rolled up sleeves…

And, like I have said time and again – you want to be gay and jovial – that’s fine. I will never attack or condemn a person for his or her choice of sexual preference. I don’t agree with it, I know that it is immoral and unGodly – but, I will not attack them or judge them. I refuse to waste my time with that when I have so much to do. No, I am not “homo-phobic” – I just happen to be a devout follower of Jesus Christ. I know plenty of gay people. A couple of them re-did my closet…

You can say that you are in love with your same sex partner and want to have a marriage, a civil union, a relationship…that’s fine. But, when you tell me that you are getting married – and you refer to this Gay Marriage as a Holy Matrimony – one of our Blessed Sacraments – then, you will have to hold me back…You do NOT mess with Holy Matrimony when it comes to Same Sex Marriage because it CANNOT be a Holy Sacrament in the eyes of GOD…Holy Matrimony is the civil union between One Man and One Woman. Period. End of story…

That has been my stand on this fiasco that people refer to as Gay Marriage from Day I. Again, it cannot be a Holy Sacrament and the term Holy Matrimony cannot be in the same vocabulary. You want to get married for health benefits, to save money, to beat the system, to be flamboyant & rebellious and smear it in everybody’s face – that’s fine with me. Just do not come anywhere close to any of our “53” Catholic Churches in our Diocese to even think of getting married at one of our ever-sacred altars…That is Holy Ground…That is Jesus’ sacred territory…

Friends: I have already expressed my thoughts and stance on this Gay Marriage issue to Bishop Barbarito over a year ago when I met with him. And, like our beloved Bishop, everybody knows that if, indeed, I find out that one of our priests in our Catholic Diocese is going to be presiding in a Gay Marriage in any one of our churches – you are going to have to put me behind bars. As GOD as my witness, I will do everything in my power and spiritual being to NOT allow any same sex marriage happen in any of our Catholic churches! Not over my dead body…And, I pray to GOD that everybody who is reading this e-mail, is with me on this and has my back on this commitment. Let us Pray…

For the life of me, I still cannot comprehend how Gay Marriage has been legalized in “36” states in our beloved country. Like I have written time and again – only a mere “2%” of this country considers themselves Gay. Not 92%! That’s 2% of 318 million American citizens or 6,360,000 homosexuals living in the U.S. Then there is the 98% who are “straight” or 311,640,000. Isn’t that the majority? Doesn’t the majority in this Free Country rule? Let’s see: 2% of 50 states = 1 state. I can see how maybe one state – the state of California may have allowed Gay Marriages out of the 50 states – but, to have “36” states allowing this debacle to take place in this country…come on now – that is almost 75% of our states allowing Gay Marriages – clearly telling us that the mere 2% of this country calls the shots!! Gays Rule!!

Did we not have elections in 2008, 2012 and just recently in the mid-terms on November 4th, where the “majority” voted AGAINST Gay Marriage? I know for a fact, that we did in Florida. How can “5 liberal attorneys in black robes” (including Judge Hinkle), dictate what we can or cannot do in the state of Florida, when it comes to Gay Marriage? How can 5 liberals over-rule the Majority who voted AGAINST Gay Marriage in the state of Florida, after it was clearly declared that Florida does NOT recognize Gay Marriage? Will these same 5 liberal judges over-rule the majority who voted against Medical Marijuana this past November 4th election and legalize it next year? Where does one draw the line? Why in the hell are we voting???

Since 1973, the good, wholesome citizens in this country have been totally disrespected and not given a fair shake in trying to abide by our Constitution and in a “culture of life”. Thus, we have the atrocity of Abortion; the Curse of Common Core; the Fiasco of Obamacare; and now, queers getting married in our beloved Sunshine State…Queers…what a strange word…I thought that term went out in the 60’s. Now, it’s back to haunt us and it is beyond appalling…

Pam Bondi – Thank you for your relentless efforts! Our courageous, petite Attorney General fought this immoral non-sense tooth and nail to the end. I am not sure where everybody else was at. Where were the rest of our state leaders at – beginning with Governor Rick Scott? As governor of Florida, do you have any say in this matter? How can you possibly allow this to happen before your very own eyes when you know the way that voters voted against this fiasco? If the past 3 elections clearly showed that “we do not approve of Gay Marriage in Florida”, how come 5 liberal judges have the power to tell us straight people to take a hike? How can this happen in the United States of America? Where are the American citizen’s rights? Why is this corrupt system giving those “legal rights” to 2% of our country’s population while the majority of the other 98% have to suffer? How come we did not have a say in this matter, while it was just over-turned, and presto – Gay Marriage in Florida! Are you all with me? Am I missing something?

In closing, all I can say is that I feel for the generations to come. I feel for our beloved children. That is who I live for. Explaining abortion and Common Core to them has been a huge challenge. It is tough for a 10 year-old kid to comprehend that there are doctors (OBGYNs) in this world who can deliver a perfectly healthy baby on a Monday and say “It’s a boy”. And, then, have that same doctor (an abortionist), kill a perfectly healthy baby on Tuesday and say “It’s a job”…Now, try to explain to that same 10 year-old kid that it’s ok that those two men at the check-out counter in Publix are “normal” because they are affectionately kissing each other. “Yes, Johnny, those two men are legally married to one another. I know that it is an abomination in the eyes of GOD, but, it is perfectly normal in the eyes of those 5 liberal judges and a handful of liberal politicians who just ruined the state of Florida at midnight last night. That is why you are Catholic and you must continue to pray, be bold for your Faith and fight against the intrinsic evils of this society with all that you’ve got. In the end, good will prevail over evil – GOD over the devil…Let us Pray.

fl catholic bishops

TALLAHASSEE, FL (January 5, 2015) – The Catholic Bishops of Florida have issued a statement addressing the redefinition of marriage in Florida to accommodate couples of the same sex.

The full statement follows:

Tomorrow, with the expiration of a stay on a U.S. District Court ruling, marriage licenses for same sex couples are being issued for the first time in our state. The Catholic bishops of Florida are deeply disappointed by Judge Hinkle’s ruling, as well as refusals by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States to stay the decision while appeals pend.

The conjugal nature of a marriage between a man and a woman has provided for millennia the basis for norms of marital exclusivity and permanence that made possible stable families necessary for human flourishing. In redefining marriage to include same sex couples, the judge has in effect overturned a state constitutional amendment approved by nearly 62% of the electorate in a 2008 ballot initiative.

How society understands marriage has great public significance. Because of this, redefining civil “marriage” to include two persons of the same sex will have far-reaching consequences in society. Such a change advances the notion that marriage is only about the affective gratification of consenting adults. Such a redefinition of marriage does nothing to safeguard a child’s right to a mother and father and to be raised in a stable family where his or her development and well-being is served to the greatest extent possible.

Redefinition of marriage will have implications not yet fully understood. The term “marriage” can be found in family law, employment law, trusts and estates, healthcare law, tax law, property law, and many others. These laws also affect and pervasively regulate public and private institutions including religious institutions, such as churches, schools, and hospitals. Besides the predictably disruptive effects, imposing this redefinition of marriage threatens both religious liberty and the freedom of individuals to conscientiously object as already seen in those states that have redefined marriage to accommodate same sex couples.

Marriage based on the complementarity of the sexes is the lifeblood of family, and family is the foundation of our society. The crisis that sadly the family is experiencing today will only be aggravated by imposing this redefinition of marriage. Society must rediscover the irreplaceable roles of both mother and father who bring unique gifts to the education and rearing of children.

For the benefit of society and the common good, the conjugal understanding of marriage between a husband and a wife and complementarity of a father and mother must be preserved so that the family can be a school of love, justice, compassion, forgiveness, mutual respect, patience and humility in the midst of a world darkened by selfishness and conflict.

Our parishes, family life offices and other ministries are available to assist those seeking to understand the truth and beauty of marriage and to assist husbands and wives to strengthen their bonds. Additional resources can be found at and /

We look forward to the first visit of Pope Francis to the United States, where he will lead the World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia, from September 22-27, 2015. For each of us, our true glory is in our capacity to love as God loves; and no better means exists to teach the meaning of love than the family. May we speak the truth in love, and may family life led by father and mother flourish again in our state, nation and throughout the world.

The statement can be found online at:


The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops is an agency of the Catholic Bishops of Florida. It speaks for the Church in matters of public policy and serves as liaison to the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. The archbishop and bishops of the seven (arch)dioceses in Florida constitute its board of directors.

RUN LOUIE WIN! – Congressman Gohmert for Speaker

On Sunday morning January 4, Congressman Louis Gohmert announced on Fox News that he is running against John Boehner for Speaker of the House of Representatives. THIS IS GREAT NEWS FOR ALL REAL CONSERVATIVES!

Through the years, Judge Gohmert has proven himself as a Constitutional Conservative from issues of taxes, culture and national security. In fact Congressman Gohmert is one of the few elected officials to deeply research and fight the Obama Administration on the still unresolved tragedy of SEAL Team SIX shoot down of their helicopter, call sign: EXTORTION 17.

This video was taped off a TV as the network footage has not yet been released. Join, Tom Trento and The United West team for our Monday Jan 5, show (4pm eastern) entitled: “Who is Louie Gohmert and Why He Should be Speaker!”

Our special guests are Billy and Karen Vaughn who have worked very closely with Congressman Gohmert for several years on national security issues.

To learn more go to