The Obama Presidency Implodes

The first time I heard the term “military advisors” it was being used by John F. Kennedy and they were being sent to South Vietnam. A strong anti-communist, in 1961 Kennedy approved financing an increase in the size of the South Vietnamese army from 150,000 to 170,000 along with sending a thousand U.S. military advisors to help train them. We all know how the Vietnam War ended.

Earlier, the North Korean attack on the South had ended in a stalemate. Technically a state of war still exists. Since 1953, the U.S. has maintained a military force in South Korea. In the wake of World War II, we still have a military presence in Europe and Japan to aid in their defense.

Obama’s announcement that 300 military advisors are being sent to Iraq is too little, too late.

As of this writing Americans are witnessing what happened when Obama withdrew from Iraq and are anticipating the same result when we withdraw from Afghanistan. Yes, we were and are war-weary, but we do not like what we’re seeing in Iraq and the President’s foreign policy failures are compounding by the day.

We are weary, too, after six and a half years of the presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. It has taken this long for all the predictions regarding his lack of experience and competence to come true.

The polls taken during the past week provide evidence of this. Gallup’s job approval poll of June 9-15 showed that 42% of “national adults” approved. Over at Rasmussen Reports, Obama’s job approval on June 21 was 48%. Asked by Rasmussen if the nation is headed in the right direction or not, 67% of likely voters said it was not. Reacting to the immigration invasion crisis a Gallup found that 69% thought he was doing a poor job.

Depending on events, polls rise and fall, but the numbers indicate a growing loss of confidence in Obama’s decisions and actions to date. I suspect that what they do not show is a growing sense of the man as utterly untrustworthy and increasingly distant from the demands of the office.

We are witnessing the implosion of the Obama presidency.

All presidencies have a scandal or two, usually relatively minor in the grand scheme of national management. Watergate was considered minor initially and took two years to materialize into the scandal that forced Nixon to resign. Obama, however, has generated directly and indirectly enough scandals for their combined weight to begin being noticed even by those who pay little attention to Washington, D.C.

The worst of the latests has been the revelation of how the Internal Revenue Service was politicized to attack organizations that were deemed to be affiliated with the Tea Party movement and patriotic objectives. The “loss” of Lois Lerner’s emails and others smells of the destruction of evidence Congress has demanded. The one element of the government that virtually all Americans interact with is the IRS.

Other scandals like Solyndra, representing the waste of billions on wind and solar companies, many of which went bankrupt after receiving all manner of grants and loans, did not registered in a similar fashion. The wiretapping of Associated Press reporters’ phone calls likewise did not evoke widespread concern. The failure of the “stimulus” that spent billions without producing an uptick in the economy was seen as just another way the government wastes our money. Even “Fast and Furious” in which thousands of weapons were purchased and transferred to Mexican drug cartels did not evoke more than a short expression of dismay.

Benghazi, however, in which a U.S. ambassador died along with three others, remains an unresolved scandal as much for the lies about a video as its cause as for the tragedy of the abandonment of those killed. The release of five leaders of the Taliban from Guantanamo without letting Congress know has piled on the previous scandals to a point where serious concerns about both Obama’s judgment have arisen.

What remains now is a combination of the President’s increasing use of Executive Orders to create as much mischief as possible along with the perception that he simply does not care what Americans in general and Congress in particular thinks about what he is doing. There is talk in the House of bringing a legal suit against the President regarding his heavy use of Executive Orders to bypass Congress while initiating policies that require congressional inclusion and oversight.

Those of us who pay close attention to what the President is doing know that the ultimate aim of his actions in office has been to harm the nation in a variety of ways from reducing our military to pre-World War Two levels to destroying a large element of the nation’s electrical energy supply by forcing coal-fired plants out of business.

Ultimately, the implosion of the Obama presidency has been the realization that he has put the nation at risk of the world’s bad actors by causing America’s global leadership position to erode. Americans have been accustomed to being a leading military and economic power since the end of World War Two and he has been undermining that in every way possible.

Voter payback is likely to see a major shift of political power in Congress away from the Democratic Party in the forthcoming midterm elections and would enable Republicans to slow or stop further damage to the nation. Failing that, the fate of the nation will be a great risk.

© Alan Caruba, 2014


SCALIA: Powers risk becoming ‘a weapon’… 
Obama Suffers 12th Defeat…
UPDATE: Boehner readies House lawsuit over executive orders…

Fort Lauderdale TEA Party Leaders attacked for supporting the Republican Party Platform

Preserving and Protecting Traditional Marriage is a plank of Republican Party Platform. The What We Believe 2012 Republican Party Platform states, “The institution of marriage is the foundation of civil society. Its success as an institution will determine our success as a nation. It has been proven by both experience and endless social studies that traditional marriage is best for children.”

Fort Lauderdale TEA Party member Danita Kilcullen sent out an email which pointed out that Republican Broward County Commissioner Chip LaMarca and Republican school board candidate Heather Brinkworth (pictured above), who Governor Rick Scott recently appointed to the Broward County School Board, marched in the gay pride parade in Wilton Manors on June 21, 2014.

Kilcullen noted in her email, “You [Brinkworth] have clearly violated the policies stated quite plainly in the Platform of The Republican Party of Florida. This behavior proves to me that your words mean nothing and your loyalties are not with Traditional American Family Values as articulated by [the] RPOF, but to which ever way the political winds are blowing. Because of your betrayal and the overtly unethical standards inherent therein, I cannot support your election to The Broward School Board and shall actively work against your campaign.”

For pointing out the obvious Kilcullen and others from TEA Party Fort Lauderdale are now under attack.


Sun Sentinel Columnist Michael Mayo. Photo: Jim Rassol, Sun Sentinel.

Michael Mayo, Sun Sentinel Columnist in an oped titled “Tea Party sinks to new low with attacks on gay pride attendees” seems to miss the point of Kilcullen’s email. Mayo writes, “Some of the Tea Party’s recent repugnant homophobic behavior is no joke. These self-proclaimed watchdogs of true conservatism criticized two local Republicans for appearing at the annual Stonewall Anniversary/Gay Pride parade in Wilton Manors. As my colleague Anthony Man reported, an attack flier against Broward County Commissioner Chip LaMarca and Broward School Board member Heather Brinkworth was distributed at a monthly Republican meeting. Local Tea Party leader Danita Kilcullen said she wasn’t responsible for the flier, but she sent out an email version with the same photos that began, ‘Whores chasing whores, if you will.'”

A question for Mr. Mayo: Why is supporting traditional families and not supporting homosexual behaviors “repugnant homophobic behavior”? Gee, isn’t name calling bullying? Is Mayo all up in arms because he is a homosexual, anti-traditional marriage or just a Saul Alinsky useful idiot? Has Mayo got his panties all twisted because someone wants to tell the truth about homosexuality and hold Republicans to the highest standards of political behavior, like following their own party’s platform?

May I humbly suggest that the flyer passed out at the Broward County Republican meeting was both fitting and proper. The flyer asked, “Is it worth selling your soul to the devil to get maybe 10 percent of a 1 percent homosexual voting block?” That is the point. Are Republicans going to stand by their own party’s platform, as they are sworn to do, or are they, like LaMarca and Brinkworth, simply pimping themselves for votes rather than standing on principles?

Mayo seems to be more worried by obesity and heart disease and  forgets that the cause of both is bad personal decisions. Homosexuality is also a bad personal decision. Mr. Mayo, why not condemn all bad behaviors that negatively impact the individual and society? Are you truthophobic or just a shill for Democrats and homosexuals. Aren’t you supposed to be “a watchdog” and expose bad behaviors, bad public policy and bad politicians?

TEA Party member Jack Gillies, got it right when he condemned same-sex marriage and cited a Bible passage from Leviticus calling homosexuality “an abomination.” But perhaps the greater abomination is when people like Mayo support it.

As Lutheran Minister Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was executed by Adolf Hitler, wrote, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” I commend Kilcullen and Gillies for speaking and acting like civil human beings.

If Mayo ever loses his job as a Sun Sentinel “columnist” I am sure that there is a recently opened position for him at the Internal Revenue Service looking into the activities of the non-profit statues of organizations like TEA Party Fort Lauderdale. Talk about sinking to a new low.


IRS Admits Wrongdoing, Settles Suit with National Marriage Group
Broward County, FL: Twenty-Two Hour Festival “Glorifying Sodomy and Debauchery”
Florida Attorney General Files Motions to Intervene in Homosexual so-called “Marriage” Lawsuits!
Boston “Gay Pride Week”: What the media won’t tell you about the homosexual movement
Ugly “Homo-Mafia” Is Coming
Will There Be a Consequence?
Rush Limbaugh Explodes on ‘Corrupt’ GOP for Employing ‘Reprehensible’ Tactic Against Tea Party (+video)
Florida Middle School students reading child pornography – WatchdogWire – Florida
Marriage Should Not Be Redefined Under the 14th Amendment

EDITORS NOTE: The featured picture of Heather Brinkworth is courtesy of the Sun Sentinel.

Trevor Loudon: The Communists Among U.S.

Trevor Loudon spoke at the Wetumpka TEA Party recently. Listen to his remarks and learn about the Communists among U.S.

Trevor says, “I’m a libertarian activist and political researcher from Christchurch New Zealand. I believe in freedom with responsibility, not freedom from responsibility. My ideal society is one in which government is confined to protecting its citizens from criminals and external enemies. I believe in working with all those who are moving in broadly the same direction. The views expressed in this Blog are strictly my own.”

Trevor is also the founder and editor of, a rapidly growing website with the goal of unlocking the covert side of U.S. and Global politics.


EYE-OPENING:Trevor Loudon exposes the Communists/Marxists currently serving in our US Congress Part I from Wetumpka Tea Party on Vimeo.


EYE-OPENING:Trevor Loudon exposes the Communists/Marxists currently serving in our US Congress Part II from Wetumpka Tea Party on Vimeo.

The Veterans Administration has never been run right

The massively expensive Veterans Administration (VA) is a perfect example of how the government is not able to efficiently perform private sector functions. The union based operations are and should be an embarrassment for anyone associated with them.

Senator Coburn yesterday released a report showing over 1,000 veterans died over a ten year period waiting for appointments and the VA paid out nearly a billion dollars in malpractice suits. Coburn also stated doctors at the VA hospitals only handle 1/6th the number of patients a private hospital does showing the union mentality is spread throughout the corrupt organization.

images-8There should be calls to disband the terrible government waste, fraud and abuse prevalent at the hospitals but Socialist Bernie Sanders says we need to increase the number of hospitals (another example of insanity by doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result) as if throwing more taxpayer money at a failed system will fix it.

The scary part is this is the service Obama and the other “progressives” (communists if you will) want eventually to force on all of us when Obamacare fails as is inevitable.

RELATED ARTICLE: Honolulu VA Still Worst in Nation–Wait Time 130 days

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo of Senator Coburn is courtesy of the Associated Press.

CNN’S Reliable Sources Not So Reliable

Since 1984, I’ve been covering the Middle East, terrorism, and the intersection with America’s foreign policy.

Over the course of my career, I have spent countless hours in television studios under glaring lights and in front of cameras, both as a professional news anchor for World News at Middle East Television and as the President of ACT! for America warning Americans about the threat from Jihad.

I’m not “just” a survivor. I went to work to understand the world around me. I am proud of my Lebanese roots, but as a Christian targeted for my faith, and a woman, subjugation was a virtual guarantee. I immigrated to the United States. That’s where freedom is. It’s in our founding documents; it’s in our blood.

I always welcome the opportunity to appear on television to discuss what I consider to be the most important topic facing America today: the threat to our national security posed by Jihadists around the globe.

I was pleased to accept an invitation to appear on CNN’s Reliable Sources, on Sundaymorning to discuss the issue of so-called “Islamophobia.”

Unfortunately, what transpired in the production and editing process at CNN was one of the most egregious examples of biased journalism that I have ever come across.

Some background is in order here.

First of all, the whole issue of “Islamophobia” is a bogus one. The term was created from whole cloth by the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in an effort to suppress free speech and stifle justifiable criticism of Islamic regimes.

Headquartered in Saudi Arabia, the 57-member nation OIC is the largest international organization in the world outside of the United Nations. The OIC is absolutely dominated by its host nation, Saudi Arabia, which is ruled by one of the most barbaric Shariah regimes on the planet.

The term “Islamophobia” first appeared in Western media in the 1980s when it was used to lay proverbial siege to British author and Muslim apostate Salman Rushdie for his book The Satanic Verses, which was viewed by many Muslims as insulting the Prophet Muhammed. (Readers may recall that the leader of OIC member nation Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, issued a fatwa calling on Muslims to kill Rushdie.)

Essentially, the OIC works to outlaw any and all criticism of Islamic leaders, customs, legal codes and regimes. The OIC considers virtually any negative portrayal (whether genuine, professed or supposed) of Islam to be “Islamophobia.”

So, the entire Reliable Sources segment was to be framed around a term that is essentially a product of Islamist propaganda. Note that despite the fact that host Brian Stelter parrots OIC propaganda on “Islamophobia” right from the opening of the show, he fraudulently portrays his program as “objective” between the Right and the Left, the Red and the Blue.

As I learned all-too well, Reliable Sources is anything BUT unbiased.

The original taping of the segment was about 30 minutes long, but just over 13 minutes made it on air. The editing was sloppy and disjointed, leaving out important parts of the dialogue.

Brian Stelter started right in by mocking Fox News’ Sean Hannity for his reference to worldwide Jihad. Later he said that the terrorist threat was “not there.” How can Stelterpossibly deny that Jihad is in fact a global threat? Just look at this list of Jihadist terrorist organizations that have launched attacks around the world in just the past month:

• Abu Sayyaf
• Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb
• Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula
• Hezbollah
• Boko Haram
• Al Shabaab
• Lashkar e Taiba
• Jemaah Islamiyah
And ironically, CNN itself reported on the arrests just a week ago of two men in Texas on terrorism charges.

My appearance on Reliable Sources was opposite Linda Sarsour of the Arab American Association of New York.

Again, some background is in order here. Sarsour has a lengthy history of denying the threat from terrorism and attacking the NYPD and FBI for their counterterror efforts, just as she did on Reliable Sources on Sunday. Some of her denials can only be categorized in the “crackpot” classification.

For instance, when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was arrested for trying to blow up an airliner over Detroit on Christmas Day in 2009 and subsequently convicted and sentenced to life in prison in 2012, Sarsour claimed that the plot was not the work of Al Qaeda, but was a CIA plot.

Sarsour has cited the cases of Fahad Hashmi, Aafia Siddiqui and Siraj Matin as proof of US government abuses of Muslim civil rights by the FBI and NYPD. Hashmi pleaded guilty to providing material support for Al Qaeda. Siddiqui was found guilty of the attempted murder of a US Army captain and sentenced to 86 years in prison. Matin pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 30 years for plotting to explode bombs in the New York subway system.

During the part of the segment that actually made it on the air, Sarsour ridiculously equated isolated incidents of violence involving non-Muslims with Jihad. Sarsour even had the gall to cite the Boston Marathon bombings as an example of media “Islamophobia,” ignoring the fact that the perpetrators were in fact Islamic jihadists.

The reality is that the numbers don’t lie. The overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks in the world today are in fact acts of Islamic jihad. That is an inconvenient truth that Ms. Sarsour evidently wants the rest of America to live with. But don’t depend on CNN and its producers to tell the truth about that.

Deconstructing same-sex “marriage”

The same sex marriage issue can be viewed from a Judeo-Christian viewpoint and from a secular viewpoint. If you are a Christian, then the first part of this discussion below is especially for you. If you are an Orthodox Jew or other non-Christian, or if you want to learn how to debate from the secular standpoint, the second part applies.

1. Christian response to the same-sex marriage issue:

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA has just given its blessing to “pastors” who perform same sex marriage.

Here is the part that Christians must focus on:

According to the denomination’s statement, on Thursday, June 19, “the 221st General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) approved a recommendation from its Civil Union and Marriage Issues Committee allowing for pastoral discretion to perform ‘any such marriage they believe the Holy Spirit calls then to perform,’ where legal by state law.” [my highlighting]

Jesus said that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the unpardonable sin.

“I promise you that any of the sinful things you say or do can be forgiven, no matter how terrible those things are. But if you speak against the Holy Spirit, you can never be forgiven. That sin will be held against you forever.” — Mark 3:28-29 (CEV)

Jesus was addressing a crowd containing some Pharisees, who had attributed his healing powers to Satan, when in fact the Holy Spirit had performed the miracles.

Now, if a Presbyterian “pastor” performs a “gay” wedding, then under the above-cited rule, he is tacitly averring that the Holy Spirit called him to perform it. Since the definition of marriage throughout the Bible refers only to a union between a man and a woman, this pastor is actually averring that the Holy Spirit called him to perform a “marriage” that is counter to Biblical principles. This can clearly be construed as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

I have heard pastors saying “the Holy Spirit told me…” [to do this or that] when it would appear this was highly questionable. There are famous TV preachers who make predictions and claim that these are revelations from the Holy Spirit. Some are foolish enough to name a date, so confident are they of the anticipated outcome. But that date comes and the prediction fails to materialize. Any Christian who feels he was called to so something by the Holy Spirit would best not mention this to anyone except their spouse. To attribute anything to the Holy Spirit is to step into a booby trap.

2. Secular response to the same sex marriage issue:

We constantly hear the mantra “Homosexuals must be given an equal right to marry.”

This is America, and that statement is technically correct. However, no one has the right to change the definition of words at their whims. There are over 600 languages and dialects in the world, and none of these has an equivalent for our word marriage that can apply to both same sex and heterosexual unions.

The advocates of same sex marriage always pretend that same sex marriage meets the definition of marriage. This is the sticking point (the “equal rights” point is a red herring). Obviously, this is not true. The first step anyone would have to take is to prove that the term marriage can apply to same-sex couples. However, everyone with a pulse knows what marriage really means, and instead of using legal channels to change that definition, they slyly pretend the word “marriage” always, since time immemorial, has applied both to same-sex couples and to heterosexual couples.

The only reason people bend over and grab their ankles for these activists is fear. They use raw power of intimidation to force the legal system to apply a definition that does not exist. So-called same sex “marriage” has been legally accepted in several countries and states and yet, the main requisite for this change in law was never met, namely, a legal change in the definition of marriage. And changing this definition after millennia is like saying a dog is a cat. Homosexual activists can – and do – force the hands of crooked judges and lawyers and politicians all they want to go along with this pretense that marriage has always applied to both heterosexual and homosexual unions.

However, deep down inside people resent being told that, for example, a cat is a dog. Deep down they’d be saying “if it barks it’s not a damn cat!” And they’d be mad, rightfully so! And let’s stop pretending this is only about religion. For Christians and Orthodox Jews (and also for Muslims), it may be mostly about religion. But for everyone, religious or not, it is about language: words and their definitions. The only way you could legitimately change the definition of marriage so as to include same sex unions would be to prove that human physiology changed recently to something that it never was in those thousands of years when only people of opposite sexes could marry each other. But you can’t prove that because nothing like that happened. Granted, there were crazies like Roman Emperor Elagabulus, who are said to have “married” another man, but their actions of this kind were condemned by the grassroots. In Elagabulus’ case, he was eventually assassinated. The people’s will was done.

Thus, human nature did not change to usher in the “gay” marriage craze. Something else changed, and that is, a revolution that overturned all traditions and common sense through social engineering. And this brings us to the issue of sovereignty. A sovereign country has a right to defend its traditions and be what it always has been. In this point, Russia is actually superior to the West. Westerners have let down their guard, allowing the far left, posing in civil rights garb, to sell out our culture. We pretend it is an individual rights issue but it is a sovereignty issue. By inventing a right to “marry” someone of the same sex we have allowed our culture and hence our sovereignty to be destroyed. And yet sovereignty is in many ways more important than individual rights, because nowadays, rights are faddish and redefined regularly by activists antagonistic to culture, so they can no longer be defined. Yet sovereignty is something we all sense, as in my analogy with the cat-dog confusion.

We sense it inherently but are afraid to say so. This is social Marxism and we are slaves to it in the US.

Isn’t it time to throw off the chains? It’s all up to the people. We define – and redefine – words through the way we use them. Language is power. We must stop giving away our power.

EDITORS NOTE: The below poster was added to a Facebook comment about homosexual marriage. It seems to say what the author is saying. A picture is worth a thousand words.


Why Benghazi Matters

Please watch and listen to a video that will provide you with specific details about the intentional abandonment of four Americans by the Obama administration during the Battle of Benghazi, it is worth every minute:

Now please read the below listed article that provides previously un-revealed details about how a conversation between Obama and Hillary Clinton at 10:00 p.m. EST, on September 11, 2012, during the night 125-150 Al Qaeda linked terrorists, launched a pre- planned and well-coordinated commando operation, to attack the US Mission and the CIA Annex in Benghazi, Libya, and how that conversation sealed the fate of 4 Americans killed in The Battle of Benghazi.

The below listed article prints excepts from a newly published book “Blood Feud” written by Ed Klein that every American should read.  It explains why Obama, coordinating with Hillary Clinton, intentional abandoned Americans being attacked in Benghazi.   A military rescue mission could not be launched, that would have saved the lives of 2 Navy SEALs who were killed 8 hours after the attack was launched, because Obama refused to execute “Cross Border Authority” that was required before the military could launch a rescue mission.

Clinton bristled at Benghazi deception

image003Edward Klein explains what happened the night of the Benghazi attack — and Hillary Clinton’s reaction.

In his new book, “Blood Feud,” journalist Edward Klein gets inside the dysfunctional, jealous relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack and Michelle Obama. Here, he explains what happened the night of the Benghazi attack.

By 10 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2012, when Hillary Clinton received a call from President Obama, she was one of the most thoroughly briefed officials in Washington on the unfolding disaster in Benghazi, Libya.

She knew that Ambassador Christopher Stevens and a communications operator were dead, and that the attackers had launched a well-coordinated mortar assault on the CIA annex, which would cost the lives of two more Americans.

She had no doubt that a terrorist attack had been launched against America on the anniversary of 9/11. However, when Hillary picked up the phone and heard Obama’s voice, she learned the president had other ideas in mind. With less than two months before Election Day, he was still boasting that he had al Qaeda on the run.

If the truth about Benghazi became known, it would blow that argument out of the water.

“Hillary was stunned when she heard the president talk about the Benghazi attack,” one of her top legal advisers said in an interview. “Obama wanted her to say that the attack had been a spontaneous demonstration triggered by an obscure video on the Internet that demeaned the Prophet Mohammed.”

A protester exults as the US Consulate in Benghazi burns during a protest by an armed group in September 2012 that killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others.Photo: Reuters

This adviser continued: “Hillary told Obama, ‘Mr. President, that story isn’t credible. Among other things, it ignores the fact that the attack occurred on 9/11.’ But the president was adamant. He said, ‘Hillary, I need you to put out a State Department release as soon as possible.’”

After her conversation with the president, Hillary called Bill Clinton, who was at his penthouse apartment in the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, and told him what Obama wanted her to do.

“I’m sick about it,” she said, according to the legal adviser, who was filled in on the conversation.

“That story won’t hold up,” Bill said. “I know,” Hillary said. “I told the president that.” “It’s an impossible story,” Bill said. “I can’t believe the president is claiming it wasn’t terrorism. Then again, maybe I can. It looks like Obama isn’t going to allow anyone to say that terrorism has occurred on his watch.”

Hillary’s legal adviser provided further detail: “During their phone call, Bill started playing with various doomsday scenarios, up to and including the idea that Hillary consider resigning as secretary of state over the issue. But both he and Hillary quickly agreed that resigning wasn’t a realistic option.

If her resignation hurt Obama’s chances of winning re-election, her fellow Democrats would never forgive her. Hillary was already thinking of running for president in 2016, and her political future, as well as Obama’s, hung in the balance.”

Obama had put Hillary in a corner, and she and Bill didn’t see a way out. And so, shortly after 10 o’clock on the night of September 11, she released an official statement that blamed the Benghazi attack on an “inflammatory (video) posted on the Internet.”

The Benghazi Deception was in full swing.

“Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. the Obamas” by Edward Klein is out this week from Regnery Publishing.


Price to Avoid Another Benghazi? House Leaders Question $461M Training Center
Three Frightening Facts About Iraq
Megyn Kelly Takes Down State Department Spokeswoman on Obama’s Iraq Rhetoric

RELATED VIDEO: Benghazi Coalition Full Conference


Our Guy Lost, But the Battle is Not Over

I was alone in a Biloxi Mississippi hotel room when a TV reporter named Cochran the winner over Tea Party candidate Chris McDaniel in the extremely close GOP runoff election. Losing is always heartbreaking. And yet, I strangely felt a peace about the situation.

Chris McDaniel was an excellent candidate; good looking, bright, articulate and a bold, strong, rock-solid advocate for conservatism. He has also been blessed with that certain “it factor” which all born leaders possess. McDaniel is only in his early forties. In the words of Arnold Schwarzenegger, he’ll be back! Next time, Chris McDaniel will win!

Patriots, thanks to your support, financial and otherwise, McDaniel had a real shot at winning. The combo of the Tea Party and McDaniel scared the heck out of the GOP which is why they poured tons of money and organizational resources into the race.

After the Dave Brat remarkable upset victory over Majority Leader Eric Cantor, the closeness of this runoff sent a powerful message to the GOP establishment. They MUST deal with us in the Tea Party.

I think one reason for my peace about the situation is knowing that my Conservative Campaign Committee team and I did everything we could possibly do; leaving no cards unturned. We traveled to Biloxi from our various homes across America and set up our war room. We rallied for McDaniel. We produced and ran ads and organized a small army of volunteers to make get-out-the-vote phone calls.

We endured the Mississippi humidity waving McDaniel signs on a street corner. My wife Mary was bitten several times on her feet by ants. So folks, like all of you, we did our part. Beyond that, everything else is in God’s hands.

Cochran and his GOP deep-pocket power brokers won this round. Doing a despicable dance with the devil to win the runoff, Cochran even reached out to Democrat voters. But, the battle to send conservatives to DC is far from over.

Mary and I will drive home to Florida; pet Sammy our greyhound and maybe spend a day at our favorite beach. Then, we will focus on helping Tea Party candidate Joe Carr for U.S. Senate Tennessee. I hope we visit Nashville!

Fifty Years Later, Being Black in America

Fifty years ago, 1964, the civil rights movement that had begun in the 1950s achieved its goal with the Civil Rights Act and a year later with the Voting Rights Act.

A remarkable book, “Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed”, by Jason L. Riley, a member of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board who is black, should be must-reading by Afro-Americans and white Americans to understand that, while there has been progress for those blacks who achieved an education and moved into the middle and upper classes of America, far too many blacks have embraced a culture that has doomed them to poverty, prison, and a sense of victimization.

Having lived through the civil rights movement, observing it from the vantage point of having seen the segregation and prejudice that had afflicted blacks prior to it, I was not surprised by the evidence put forth in Riley’s book of self-inflicted failure to embrace the opportunities as other groups have done.

On June 16 Riley wrote an opinion article, “How Not to Help Black Americans”, saying that “The Obama presidency is evidence that blacks have progressed politically. But if the rise of other racial and ethnic groups is any indication, black social and economic problems are less about politics than about culture. The persistently high black jobless rate is more a consequence of unemployability than of discrimination in hiring.”

Statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau in 2012 are testimony to the progress black Americans have made since 1964. Out of 313 million Americans, blacks constitute 44.5 million and 83.2% of blacks age 25 and older had a high school diploma while 18.7% had a bachelor’s degree or higher; 1.6 million had an advanced degree. Blacks can take pride in their 2.4 military veterans.

However, the median income of black households in 2012 was $33,321, compared with the rest of the nation at $51,017 and the poverty rate was 27.2% while nationally it was 15%.

Referring to the vast welfare state in America, Riley said “One reason that Uncle Sam’s altruism has not been successful is because the government is attempting to do for blacks what blacks can only do for themselves.”

The most depressing statistic, however, is the 40% of some 2.1 million male inmates in jails and prisons in America who are black. Statistically, blacks are far more likely to be the victims of crimes by other blacks than by non-blacks. In his book, Riley says “Black cultural attitudes toward work, authority, dress, sex, and violence have also proven counterproductive, inhibiting the development of the kind of human capital that has led to socioeconomic advancement for other groups.”

One black who has succeeded is Barack Hussein Obama, twice elected President of the United States of America. He is likely he will be the last black American to hold that office for a generation or more to come because he has done more harm to the nation in six and a half years than any previous President. The only part of the population that does not seem to grasp this has been black Americans.

Ironically, the results of a survey by Rasmussen Reports released in July 2013 found that “Americans consider blacks more likely to be racist than whites and Hispanics. Thirty-seven percent (37%) of American adults thought most black Americans are racist while just 15% considered most white Americans racist. Just 30% of all Americans thought that race relations in America were good or excellent. Race in America has been a contentious issue from the days of the founders and earlier.

The black community in America has some truly outstanding leaders these days such as former Representative Allen West and Dr.  Ben Carson, and there has been a generation of blacks who have risen to success in the corporate world or as entrepreneurs and professionals.

America’s first black President has done little to improve the lives of black Americans, resisting charter schools and vouchers to free them from failed public schools, and embracing the same tried-and-failed liberal social programs that continue to keep too many in poverty or in jail. Obama’s two terms in office will be remembered for their scandals and for their attacks on the liberty and freedom that all Americans value.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Muslim Brother promotes Grover Norquist at CPAC

Hey America, as promised in Episode 8, we tracked down Mr. Sami Al-Arian-owitz and interviewed him at the 2014 CPAC event in the Washington DC area.  Yes, The United West has figured out how to travel back in time but the important point is that this Muslim Brotherhood Imam is Grover Norquist’s number one supporter.

So as we continue on with our hard-hitting investigative series, The Wizard of “K” Street, exposing Grover Norquist as an ideological enemy of the state we add to our in-depth research a little bit of our classic, “edutainment.”

Of course we want you be persuaded by the evidence against Grover, proving that he is NOT the super-conservative he makes himself out to be, but we also want you smile a little bit at the absurdity of how far the Wizard of “K” Street’s spell is cast over so many Congress members.

Folks, it’s time to give Grover his retirement gold watch and let him finally make his long desired Hajj.

As we move through this micro-series you will see how Norquist’s nefarious work impacts YOU on a daily basis in the areas of: IMMIGRATION, ISLAM, ISRAEL, IRAN




Florida Attorney General Files Motions to Intervene in Homosexual so-called “Marriage” Lawsuits!

MIAMI, FL – After months of hard work, the Christian Family Coalition Florida (CFCF) announced today a stunning turn of events as Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi filed motions to intervene in two seditious state lawsuits that are trying to overthrow Florida’s voter-approved constitution which respects marriage as the union of one man, one woman.

As other attorneys general, most recently in Oregon and Pennsylvania, are abandoning their states voters by refusing to intervene, such as in Oregon, or appeal decisions against voter-approved state constitutional amendments, such as in Pennsylvania; General Bondi is on the right side of history and the law by faithfully upholding her sworn duty to uphold the laws of the land.

As she recently stated in a piece written for the Gainesville Sun, “Defending the wishes of the voters who enacted Florida’s marriage amendment necessarily requires me to make good faith legal arguments. Anything less than the best defense of our voters’ policy preferences would disenfranchise the electorate, and undermine the judicial process, this court should ‘exercise great caution when asked to take sides in an ongoing public policy debate’ and leave Florida’s important policy determinations to Florida’s citizens.”

In 2008, approximately 5 million Florida voters approved our state’s constitution respecting marriage as the union of one man, one woman, by a whopping 62% – 38% margin. Approval numbers among Hispanic and African-American voters were even higher, 62% and 71% respectively!

Christian Family Coalition Florida (CFCF) issued the following statement:

“We commend Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi for her courageous decision to uphold her oath of office and protect Florida voters right to amend their own state constitution respecting marriage as the union of one man, one woman. As the U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled in Windsor, this is a question of public policy, not the constitution, as homosexual extremists who are trying to overthrow the will of the people falsely claim.”

About the Christian Family Coalition (CFC)

The Christian Family Coalition (CFC) is a widely acclaimed human rights and social justice advocacy organization serving Florida’s children and families for over 10 years. Through its daily community outreach, political education programs, and voter registration, CFC effectively mobilizes thousands of fair-minded voters across the state and actively works with municipal, county, state, and federal elected officials to advance common sense, family-friendly, non-discriminatory values and public policies. The CFC is highly respected for its sought-after, educational voter guides consulted by thousands of houses of worship and their voters all across Florida.

Boston “Gay Pride Week”: What the media won’t tell you about the homosexual movement

Most people only see the filtered version of “gayness” that the mainstream media presents, which portrays it as wholesome, joyous, and even healthy. But the public spectacle of a “Gay Pride Week” (June 6-14) in a major city like Boston reveals a great deal about the pathologies, addictions, perversions, and general dysfunction surrounding homosexual behavior that is generally kept hidden.

The “New England Leather Alliance [pictured above],” a sado-masochist group, had a prominent presence in Boston Gay Pride. Note the logo on their banner includes a whip. Their flag is a black-and-blue version of the US Flag. [All photos from MassResistance]

Make no mistake: “Gay Pride” is vastly different than the South Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade, or the Puerto Rican Parade — or anything else you’ll see in the public streets. It’s not really about “fun” or even politics. It’s more like a display of pathological issues.

It was not full of public sex acts like the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco or some events in New York. But the “collateral damage” of LGBT behavior was very much in view.

For example, if you spent much time at the major “Pride Week” events you also saw examples of and references to:

  • Sado-masochism
  • Profanity and vulgarity, much of it in an angry tone
  • Homosexual sex; condoms and anal lubricant given out almost everywhere
  • Horrible “gay” diseases and psychological problems
  • The problem of “gay” domestic violence
  • Hatred of traditional religion, particularly Catholicism
  • Perversions such as cross-dressing and transsexual body mutilation
  • An obsession with children and teenagers

One couldn’t miss the many very troubled and disturbed people marching and participating, and many others who were there to show what good open-minded “progressives” they are. It was an eerie feeling.

At a Gay Pride Week event in Boston. The homosexual movement considers this fairly normal.

Equally disturbing was the huge support for “Gay Pride Week” from major US corporations, (Google, Microsoft, Bank of America, etc.), large hospitals, politicians, schools, and national radical organizations.

MassResistance will be posting a multi-part series documenting this further.(We will also continue our series documenting the GLSEN LGBT teachers’ conference, and the recent state-supported Youth Pride Day in Boston.)

The centerpiece: An enormous parade and “festival”

The “Gay Pride Parade” itself (June 13) was enormous in scope. According to the organizers, it was the biggest ever in Boston. There were over 200 groups and at least 10,000 marchers. There were more corporations and health-related organizations than we’d ever seen before, many with contingents of over 100 people. Even though the Mass. Democrat State Convention was taking place on the same day in Worcester, many politicians still marched in the parade and others had supporters marching. (We did not see any Republicans in the parade this year. GOP gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker was listed as a marcher, but did not show up.)

Liberty Mutual Insurance had over a hundred people marching. Each one was wearing a special “Pride@Liberty” shirt.

At the end of the parade route at City Hall Plaza was a large “festival” with dozens of booths by corporations, radical groups, health organizations, and others. Most of these also had contingents marching in the parade.

MassResistance campaign to pressure companies not to march

Prior the Gay Pride Parade, MassResistance posted an article about the virulent anti-Catholic group “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” which had been named as a Grand Marshall. This was clearly a move to underscore the homosexual movement’s obsessive hatred of the Church. We got a LOT of feedback about that post, much of it thanking us for exposing this outrage.

The “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” were actually men (some with beards) mocking the Catholic Church.

In that same article, we encouraged everyone to contact the corporations and politicians scheduled to march in the parade and demand that they NOT participate in such a hate-filled anti-Catholic event. We included a page with names and contact numbers for people to call. It was fairly last-minute, but we thought it was important to do.

Unfortunately, it didn’t work. Every one of those politicians and corporations was in the parade.

Frankly, we were disappointed that there wasn’t more spontaneous action on this from the thousands of people who get our emails, and more who read our website. One would have thought that such a disgusting thing would fire up pro-family people, whether Catholic or not.

Judging from feedback we got, most of the calling from our side came from outside of Massachusetts — places like Florida and California. We’ve often observed that a lot of people here Massachusetts get very angry but are too timid (or too busy) to pick up a telephone or send a confrontational email. Instead, they’ll give “moral support.” So nothing happens.

As we have observed before, it seems that the homosexuals, even though they’re few in number, are far more passionate and obsessive about pushing their agenda than our people are about stopping it. That must change.

MassResistance protests at Gay Pride Parade

It seems that every time there’s a big public pro-marriage event, there are homosexual activists there with signs to protest it. So we decided it’s about time we did that, too.

The difference, of course, is that at our events the pro-family people always react very civilly and calmly. However, when the tables are turned, homosexual activists tend react with vitriol, profanity, and threats. But our people didn’t back down at all, which made it even more effective.

One of our activists had signs with five messages made up especially for the Boston Gay Pride Parade.

The marchers and their supporters really don’t like being challenged. A fair number of middle fingers, f-bombs, and other crude behaviors were directed at our people. But they remained calm and even tried to engage them in discussion!

The best way to answer an obscene gesture is to just wave back.
This lesbian tried to block the signs. When that didn’t work, she started passionately kissing her girlfriend right in front of them. (We’ll spare you the photo of that!)

The verdict: The homosexual movement can dish it out but they don’t take it very well. Maybe we need to do this more often.

Where was the Archdiocese of Boston in all this?

Many people have asked us what Cardinal Sean O’Malley and the Archdiocese of Boston were doing about the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence” being honored, and obscene anti-Catholic bigotry that this represents.

It was actually even worse than that. Boston’s St. Anthony’s Shrine — administered by Franciscan Friars, members of the same religious family as Cardinal O’Malley — had announced they would have a pro-LGBT booth at the Gay Pride Festival.

The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts informed the Archdiocese of everything and organized a campaign to urge the Cardinal to act. Unfortunately, according to the League, the Archdiocese did its best to dodge the issue completely. St. Anthony’s was even allowed to have its “gay” booth.

Friars from Boston’s St. Anthony’s Shrine pose for MassResistance as they put up the banner for their booth at the Boston Gay Pride Festival.

Many religious Catholics were very upset. Here is the write-up (scroll down) on the Catholic Action League website by Executive Director C.J. Doyle.

COMING UP: Much more on Boston “Gay Pride Week” 2014 — that you won’t read anywhere else!

The United Way Now Promotes the Common Core

United Way Worldwide offers the following as its mission statement:

United Way envisions a world where all individuals and families achieve their human potential through education, income stability and healthy lives.

Our mission: To improve lives by mobilizing the caring power of communities around the world to advance the common good.

The goal of the United Way is to “advance the common good.”

As of June 2014, it is an organization that is “advancing” a new “common”:

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

Yep. That’s right.

And one guess who forked over $1.2 million to make that happen.

Bill Gates.

Straight from the Gates Grants search engine:

Date: June 2014
Purpose: to build support for the Common Core State Standards by engaging stakeholders and community leaders nationally and locally
Amount: $1,212,571

In a March 2014 interview,  Lyndsey Layton of the Washington Post questioned Gates’ motives in financing CCSS. After some tense interaction, here is his response:

I’m saying, and I’ve, I hope I can make this clear, I believe in the Common Core because of its substance and what it will do to improve education, and that’s the only reason I believe in the Common Core. And I have no, you know, this is giving money away. This is philanthropy. This is trying to make sure students have the kind of opportunity had. [Emphasis added.]

Gates had an education that defies the agenda he promotes for public education.

Both he and his children attended a private school in Seattle, Lakeside School.

Read here to see the utter absence of anything resembling CCSS at Lakeside.

And yet, Gates continues to enlist major organizations to “build support” for that which he and his children will never know firsthand.


Common Core Memorandum of Understanding Not Just for “Development”
Transcript of Gates’ March 2014 Washington Post Interview


Like my writing? Read my newly-released ed “reform” whistle blower, A Chronicle of Echoes: Who’s Who in the Implosion of American Public Education.


A License to Offend

I have a license to offend. It’s called citizenship and we should be using it as often as needed to push back against the offensiveness of the left. Enough of the “Politically Correct Crap” (PCC)!  Its time to start offending some liberals.


Liberty: Come Play on the Lawn by Steven Horwitz

We all have to be good stewards of liberty’s intellectual commons.

The directions in which young libertarians are taking the movement seem to have caused a backlash among some of the libertarians of my generation, threatening to turn us into the old guys telling the kids to get off our lawn.

The problem is that it’s not our lawn. It never was.

It wasn’t our predecessors’ lawn when we overran it either. It belongs to hundreds of years of the classical liberal tradition. The libertarian movement has seen significant changes in the last few years, and I believe that those changes have broadened and diversified libertarianism in ways that are the inevitable and desirable products of our growth.

The success of organizations like Students for Liberty and Young Americans for Liberty in bringing more young people into the movement has meant that the issues they are interested in are the ones that are getting increasing attention. Gender, race, and sexuality are part of that, but so are peace and privacy. That this generation of young libertarians wants to talk about all of those things is good, even though I might not personally think that everything they have to say about them is good. For example, I don’t want a libertarianism full of either incessant calls to check my privilege, nor little boy brutalism.

But thinking in terms of what I want, or what any other person wants, is exactly the problem: Those of us in our 40s and 50s (and beyond) simply have to realize that we don’t own the movement and that we can’t centrally plan it. The liberty movement has always been a spontaneous order that has grown and evolved in uncontrollable and unpredictable ways. We all have our views of what that direction should be, and because spontaneous orders emerge from the various intentional actions of those who constitute them, we are perfectly free to keep arguing for our own visions of where we should go. However, we must also simultaneously recognize that we are but one voice in a growing multitude and that our control is limited, despite any leadership roles we might play.

We should also think about the ways in which the growth of the liberty movement affects the production of good and bad work and our perceptions of it. By analogy, consider how the proliferation of new TV networks and falling costs of production have meant there’s just more “stuff” on TV than ever before. Thanks to HBO and Netflix and others, one result is that there’s never been more great TV than there is right now, but Orange is the New Black is competing with tons of terrible reality shows and all the rest. TV’s signal-to-noise ratio might be lower than in the past, but the absolute amount of high-quality programming has never been higher.

I would argue the same is true of libertarianism. As we’ve grown, there’s just a lot more libertarian “stuff” out there, including a lot more nonsense. Our signal-to-noise ratio is lower than when we older folks were young. But there’s also never been more good stuff. Libertarian ideas are being taken seriously in academia, public intellectual circles, and the media because we’ve done good work. And even when our ideas aren’t treated well, it remains true that a lot of smart people seem to think they have to respond to libertarian arguments. That’s a huge sign of growth and of increasing quality.

That increased public presence means that we need to be our own harshest critics. As Bastiat said, there is nothing worse than a good cause ineptly defended. For starters, we should feel no obligation to support, rather than criticize, other libertarian writers because they are libertarians (or because they are women, or gay, or anything else for that matter). We should be seeking out the best work and promoting it from the rooftops. And we should be merciless in our blunt, though civil, criticism of inferior work—including that from our friends.

Young libertarians who write for social media have to realize that they are putting their ideas into the broader public discourse on those topics, and this means they have to do real research and hone their arguments carefully because they will be held accountable for lousy work. They are not helping the cause of liberty by defending it ineptly. You cannot go from an undergraduate degree to serious libertarian pundit without actually knowing something about the history of classical liberal thought and the major contemporary work about which you’re writing. We elders who have a significant public intellectual presence got there because we did the hard work of reading lots of old books as well as plenty of new research. There’s no shortcut from the “collect underpants” of a BA to the “profits” of being taken seriously as a public intellectual.

Young libertarians also need to get used to serious criticism if they wish to compete in the arena of ideas. Whining that you’re being treated unfairly, especially because of gender, age, race, sexuality, or other trait, will simply not cut it. It’s your arguments and evidence that matter. Stop complaining. Revise your work. And try again.

That young libertarians want to talk about issues that previous generations didn’t, or make up lists of the top 20 hottest libertarian women and men, doesn’t mean that the barbarians are at the gate. Focusing on the increasing quantity of weak libertarian writing out there can easily lead us to ignore the unseen: the simultaneous increase in high-quality work. Rather than complaining about silly lists on social media and telling the kids to get off our lawn, we old folks should let the kids do what kids have always done—push the boundaries set by the previous generation. We should, however, also be holding them to the highest standards of argumentation and evidence.

Come play on the lawn, kids. Bring your new ideas and modes of expression. That lawn belongs to all of us, and it’s yours to help the rest of us landscape as you see fit. We old folks will just keep reminding you how precious an asset it is and that it takes hard work, dedication to quality, and deep knowledge of the fundamental  ideas to keep liberty’s lawn fertilized, beautiful, and productive. That’s how our elders treated us, and it’s the least we can do for the generation in whose hands the future of the liberty movement will soon rest.


Steven Horwitz is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Economics at St. Lawrence University and the author of Microfoundations and Macroeconomics: An Austrian Perspective, now in paperback.