Allen West: What the GOP Should Stand For

We believe in the individual. We believe in the indomitable American spirit. We believe in individualism and entrepreneurship that can cause us to be here together in this great hall, that can allow a young man from the inner city from Georgia to stand before you tonight. That is who we are. – Allen West

This video is courtesy of The Shark Tank:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/LCDGEFn6tzc[/youtube]

Hawaii Governor Poll: Republican Aiona 48% – Democrat Abercrombie 40%

HNN:  Hundreds of registered voters were asked if the election were held for Governor today, who would you vote for in the Democratic primary? 47% said incumbent Neil Abercrombie while 38% chose State Senator David Ige. 14% were undecided with a 4% margin of error….

Hawaii News Now – KGMB and KHNL

However the poll shows Republican Duke Aiona leads Neil Abercrombie in a head-to-head matchup 48 to 40 percent.

“I’m a little shocked, but very encouraged by these numbers” said Aiona. “I think what this is is confirmation that the people of Hawaii are just not happy with the way things are right now.”

45% polled have an unfavorable opinion of Neil Abercrombie. 45% have a favorable view. In this race Duke Aiona has the highest approval rating at 58%. David Ige polled 30% favorable, but 38% have never heard of him….

Aiona enjoys a 51 to 34% edge over David Ige.

A wildcard is Mufi Hannemann. The poll asked  if Hannemann runs for Governor as Independent, are you likely to consider voting for him? 39% answered yes, 57% said no. Hannemann sees the results as a viable indication he could win a three-way race.

Hannemann responded to the poll by phone, saying “the fact that 4 out of 10 would pull a ballot for me in a 3 way race, we get 40 percent of the vote.” ….

(Translation: Mufi can still save Neil by launching a three-way race and splitting the vote.)

SA: Aiona led both Abercrombie and Ige

“To me what it is is a confirmation that the people of Hawaii are just not happy with what’s going on with the administration,” Aiona said.

Aiona discounted the idea that the poll results were merely a protest against Abercrombie.

“I say it’s what you call voter remorse,” he said.

SA: Teachers union backs Ige over Abercrombie for governor

Hawaii Poll Tables: http://hine.ws/2014hipoll1

read … Aiona tops Abercrombie

Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue Regimes

Michael Rubin, former Bush era Pentagon official who is currently a Resident Scholar at the Washington, DC –based American Enterprise Institute(AEI), has been engaged in intense media interviews since the launch of his new book, Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue RegimesDancing with the Devil covers Rubin’s research on fifty years of US and Western experience with rogue regimes and terrorist groups. The Encounter Books release on the publication of Rubin’s book noted:

The American response of first resort is to talk with such rogues, on the theory that, “It never hurts to talk to enemies.” Seldom is conventional wisdom so wrong. It is true that sanctions and military force come at high costs. However, case studies examining the history of American diplomacy with North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, the Taliban’s Afghanistan, and Pakistan demonstrate that problems with both strategies do not make engagement with rogue regimes a cost-free option. Rogue regimes have one thing in common—they pretend to be aggrieved in order to put Western diplomats on the defensive. Whether they are in Pyongyang, Tehran, or Islamabad, rogue leaders understand that the West rewards bluster with incentives. The State Department, the process of holding talks is often deemed more important than results.

We met Rubin in 2005 when he returned to Yale to discuss his experience as a former Pentagon official on Iran and Iraq who also served as a political advisor to  the Provisional Coalition Authority. He spoke  about the emergence of the nuclear Iran threat under the ‘reformist’ regime in Tehran led by Ayatollah Khatami. See Rubin’s background and blog at the AEI website, here and here.

Our interview with Rubin ranged across an array of prevailing issues. Among these are the Iranian nuclear and ICBM threat and Putin’s great game of one sided politics in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. He also addresses Pakistan’s tolerance of terrorism and the  lack of US support for the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria. He criticizes the folly of the Administration’s support of Turkey under Premier Erdogan and the folly of its lead in the Final Status negotiations with the Palestinians imperiling Israel’s security.

Here are some of his observations.

Dr. Michael Rubin

Back in 2000 to 2005 the EU’s pursuit of engagement with Iran under President Khatami enabled the Islamic Republic to devote 70 percent of its hard currency reserves to both ICBM and nuclear weapons development. Moreover Rubin’s research on that period revealed that Iran took the lead from North Korea in its negotiating posture with the West alternating bluster with soothing words about the dialogue of civilizations. That raises the question of whether the present P5+1 negotiations backed by the US Administration with another reformist, President Rouhani, might be what  baseball legend Yogi Berra  called “déjà vu all over again”? Rouhani was Iran’s nuclear negotiator under former President Khatami. On Putin’s great game strategy in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, in the midst of the crisis in the Ukraine, Rubin had the following observations.

The Administration’s current negotiations posture with the Russian President is the equivalent of ”Chamberlain negotiating with Machiavelli, and Machiavelli always wins.” Rubin believes that Putin is “playing a zero sum game” in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Based on recent speeches by an Iranian Revolutionary Guards leader, Iran believes itself the head of the Islamic world.

The Administration’s outreach to Islamist non-state actors like the Muslim Brotherhood he considers a catastrophe reflected in recent conversations with senior leaders in Kuwait and the UAE. Rubin believes that the Administration has made a mistake not supporting secular Kurdish regimes in the Iraqi regional government and the virtual autonomous Kurdish region in the Northeastern province of Hazaka in Syria.  He believes this stems from our support of Turkey under the Erdogan government. Rubin suggests that Turkey’s embattled Premier Erdogan may be creating another rogue regime in Ankara.

We will be publishing both an article based on our interview with Rubin and a review of Dancing with the Devil in the March edition of the New English Review.

Listen to senior editor Jerry Gordon’s interview with Michael Rubin, here.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Pardon My Paranoia

An organization, Patriots for America, is calling for millions of Americans to descend on Washington, D.C on May 16th for Operation American Spring whose purpose is to demand that President Obama and others in his administration be removed from office.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Ddg7fYtdGUY[/youtube]

Among the rules of engagement set forth on their Internet site include (1) no weapons, no ammunition. “The Communist forces that control Washington, D.C. do not recognize the 2nd Amendment and have banned all weapons and ammunition from the district. Do not give them the opportunity to arrest you and prosecute you.” (2) Follow all rules of the road. (3) Comply with all constitutional requests of local authorities. And (4) travel in groups of four or greater.

Geoff Ross is identified as the senior chief of the organization that wants participants to be prepared to stay as long as it takes for Congress to take action. The event suggests that he and many supportive groups think the U.S. is at risk of losing its constitutional government so long as Barack Obama is President.

The worst possible scenario to the event would be if some element of the law enforcement authority is ordered to fire on the gathering, but I recall that in July 2008 presidential candidate Obama said that Americans could no longer “…continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

America does not need a civilian national security force.

We have the military whose job is to protect us against foreign invasion and we have state and local police authorities in our towns and cities to address riots and large protests. The force the President wants would exist solely to intimidate and control Americans who he deems his enemies.

What we do have in the wake of 9/11 is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and it is not intended to be a military force although it does include the Coast Guard. On March 23, 2013, Capt. Terry M. Hestilow, U.S. Army retired, wrote to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) warning that DHS is preparing to go to war with the citizens of the United States.

“It is with gravest concern that I write to you today concerning the recent appropriation of weapons by the DHS that can only be understood as a bold threat of war by that agency, and the Obama administration, against the citizens of the United States of America.” He expressed his concerns over “recent purchases of almost 3,000 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers, 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (with associated weapons), and other weapons systems.”

“One needs only look to the rise of Adolf Hitler,” wrote Capt. Hestilow, “and his associated DHS organizations, the SA and the SS, of 1932-1934, to see the outcome of allowing an agency of government this kind of control over the free citizens of a nation.”

In a February 5, 2014 article on Infowars.com, Kit Daniels reported that “The U.S. Postal Service is currently seeking companies that can provide “assorted small arms ammunition in the new future. The U.S. Postal Service joins the long list of non-military federal agencies purchasing large amounts of ammunition.”

What has a growing number of Americans concerned is this arming of government agencies we do not associate with the need to be heavily armed. “Since 2001, the U.S. Department of Education has been building a massive arsenal through purchases orchestrated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms” reported Daniels. “Back in July, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also purchased 72,000 rounds of 40 Smith and Wesson, following a 2012 purchase for 46,000 rounds of .40 S&W jacketed hollow point by the National Weather Service.”

One might assume that the DHS needs to be armed to some degree, but there is no logical reason for the Post Office, the Department of Education, and NOAA to be heavily armed. Reportedly DHS spent over $58 million to hire security details for just two Social Security offices in Maryland and $80 million for armed guards to protect government buildings in New York and more guards for federal facilities in Wisconsin and Minnesota. “Even the Environmental Protection Agency has its own SWAT teams conducting raids on peaceful Americans,” wrote Daniels.

DHS has been engaged in a program to provide military-style weapons and vehicles to local police forces around the nations.

My most profound fear, my paranoia, concerning the May 16 protest, despite its instructions to participants not be armed, is that some incident would escalate to a point where shots were exchanged. One can conceive of that serving as the reason to initiate an “emergency” proclamation and/or to declare martial law.

One gets the feeling that this government, under the direction of President Obama, is preparing for a national insurrection against his often lawless administration. The May 16 event would provide an excuse to initiate actions that would put us all under the gun.

I no longer believe “it can’t happen here.” We have a President who sees no reason to work with Congress and who recently “joked” that he can do whatever he wants.

I worry that members of our military and others would obey orders to impose governmental control to the extent that we might see widespread resistance by millions of armed Americans. I regard the surge in the purchase of weapons by private citizens during Obama’s terms in office as a reflection of the paranoia that I am feeling these days.

But is it paranoia? Or is it a reasonable assumption that a President who feels free to ignore the Constitution might have plans that do not include peaceful elections or his departure from the office?

© Alan Caruba, 2014

RELATED COLUMNS:

Americans rising up against government – USA Today

Unrest In Venezuela And Ukraine Coming To America?

Victory For Ukrainian Revolution

VIDEO: Yulia: ‘I Am A Ukrainian’

Unrest in Venezuela and Ukraine coming to America?

The prevailing theme for this week is liberty. A lot of attention is being focused towards the events in Ukraine. However, just south of us here in South Florida there is another example, Venezuela.

In Venezuela we see what always happens when socialism takes root, as described so aptly by Margaret Thatcher, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” When Hugo Chavez rose to power in Venezuela, he promised everything for everyone: shared prosperity, fair share, economic equality. He enacted policies that directed the government to nationalize more of the country’s production — especially the lucrative oil industry.

He took over the means of informing the people – hm, I wonder if he started with a “critical information needs” study similar to what the Obama administration’s FCC is seeking to initiate?

What resulted? The same that always happens when you punish, demonize, and denigrate the individual entrepreneurial spirit. The same that always happens when you disincentivize work for a government subsidy check. The same that always happens when there is a promotion of a welfare nanny-state focused on dependency rather than opportunity.

The producers stop producing and flee. We see it right here in South Florida in Broward County in the city of Weston, where the Venezuelan flag flies right along with the American. So as Prime Minister Thatcher poignantly stated, socialism fails because its empty promises are rooted in the legal plunder of others based upon some ill-conceived – I submit, actually demented — sense of benevolence. And then come the riots — because after all, you promised stuff but in the end what do the people gain? Nothing. What do they lose? Liberty.

In the Ukraine the fight for liberty is not against socialism but rather totalitarianism. A quarter of a century ago, Ukraine was given a new lease on life, a chance to determine its own future. It had once been a central part of the Soviet Union but then became an independent state.

However, old desires don’t fade away easily and control is a powerful motivator. Ukraine is caught in the middle of a fight to gain control of its future and it centers around a very important commodity: natural gas. Control of energy resources is a vital aspect of foreign policy and national security strategy — as well as important to the resurgence of Putin’s Russia. Liberty is the result of independence. Subjugation is the result of totalitarianism. Ukrainians seek the former, not the latter, and so they are making a stand.

There are lessons to be learned for us here in America. Venezuelans and many from Eastern Europe have fled to our shores to enjoy liberty and freedom as they escape the ills of their home countries. But if America succumbs to progressive socialism and totalitarian control of our government, where will people go? If America succumbs, who will be the beacon of liberty and freedom? Let me refresh your memory about what’s happening in America. Democrats and the New York Times are advocating for the IRS to eliminate and attack Americans. The FCC is seeking to put monitors into newsrooms. Our president feels he does not need to govern by legislative process but rule by edict — executive order. Elected officials such as Obama and DeBlasio are leading the charge to punish hard-working successful Americans — for what purpose? Redistribute their wealth.

So where do Americans flee? What is actually perplexing is that liberal progressives run away from failing liberal states such as California and New York. Unfortunately, they do not leave behind their damaging political beliefs. Like locusts they migrate to states like Colorado, Montana, and Florida with their cancerous political philosophy and destroy those states — message to Texans: you may want to stop asking Californians to relocate, unless they renounce liberal progressivism!

As we watch unrest in Venezuela and Ukraine unfold, I wonder, will we soon reach a tipping point in America?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

RELATED COLUMN: Americans rising up against government – USA Today

Its R.I.N.O. Season!

Republican campaign poster from 1896 attacking free silver

Tired of Republicans betraying their oath and their constituents? Here is how to solve the problem: time for bold talk. Take away “the lesser of two evils” vote.

Time for a third party?

[youtube]http://youtu.be/uqdGr8p2WmM[/youtube]

Inside Obama’s Head

In the August 18, 2011 edition of The American Thinker, writer Matt Patterson published an article titled, “Obama: The Affirmative Action President.”

Patterson wrote, “Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.  How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?”

He continued, “Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a ‘community organizer;’ a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.  He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a legislator.”

Looking at Obama from a distance, Patterson provides an accurate picture of how any objective observer might see him.  But how does Obama see himself?  Putting ourselves inside his skin and inside his head would be a far more interesting and instructive exercise.

Just imagine a young black man living in a family of all white people… mother, grandfather, and grandmother… after having been deserted by his black father.  Just as welfare recipients come to resent the hand that feeds them, it is easy to see how a young black man growing up in a white family, his skin color a constant reminder that he was “different,” would come to resent his white parent and grandparents… and by extension, all white people.

Obama stressed his struggle with self-identity in his book Dreams from My Father.  Regarding white people, he said, “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.”

In describing the man who gave him the only job he ever held outside the halls of government, his job as a “community organizer” in south Chicago, he said, “There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe.  And white.”

By the time he entered college, Obama was fully committed to the racial divide between blacks and whites.  Of his years as a student at Occidental College, he wrote, “It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names… I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own.  It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.”

We have all been confronted on occasion by challenges for which we felt totally unprepared…  challenges that appeared insurmountable.  That being the case, it is all the more mystifying how a man of Obama’s meager background and experience could believe that he should be seen as a viable candidate for president of the United States.  How could a young man, such as Patterson describes, suddenly see himself in that role, knowing that he has never run so much as a sidewalk lemonade stand, knowing that he has no qualifications whatsoever for the job?

What must it be like to one day look into a mirror and say to the person reflected therin, “You’re a pretty good looking guy.  You were lucky enough to grow up in the tropics, in Hawaii and Indonesia, and even though your parents and grandparents weren’t wealthy, you were lucky enough to go to a private prep school and Ivy League colleges on someone else’s dime.  You spent several years working with black activists on the streets of Chicago and you spent a few years as a back-bencher in the Illinois state senate.  Hey!!  You’re something really special!  You should run for president of the United States.”  What sort of man could have that conversation with himself… and do it with a straight face?

Fortunately for Obama, there was an oversupply of pent-up white guilt within the ranks of the Democrat Party.  And in spite of the fact that party leaders knew him to be not only unqualified, but ineligible as well, he was the sort of “rock star” politician who would appeal to white liberals and young white Democrats.  It mattered little that he would be incapable of governing; all they cared about was that he would look good before the TV cameras and that he could read convincingly from a teleprompter.  They would put the necessary words in his mouth.

But, of all of Obama’s current responsibilities, his relationship with the military is where he appears to be most out of place and ill at ease… a pair of brown shoes at a black tie ball.  In neither of his memoirs does he give the slightest hint that he ever considered enrolling in the ROTC programs at either Occidental College or Columbia University.  Yet, just sixteen years after graduating from Harvard Law School, he stood before the American people and proclaimed that he felt capable of serving as commander in chief of the largest and most powerful military machine in the history of the world.  What sort of outsized ego would that require?

Those of us who’ve placed our lives on the line as members of the uniformed services can’t help but experience a stomach-turning revulsion each time we see Obama bounding down the steps of Marine One on the south lawn of the White House, flashing a sloppy half-salute at the well-turned out young Marine standing at the base of the stairs.  Any normal person of Obama’s background and experience would feel an overwhelming sense of inadequacy.  But what goes though Obama’s mind?  And what goes through the minds of those young Marines?

To serve as a member of the Silent Drill Platoon and Color Guard at the 8th & I Street Barracks in Washington… the Marine contingent responsible for guard and escort duty at the White House… is a much coveted assignment in the Marine Corps.  But it would be interesting to know what went through the minds of all those young Marines when they first learned that Barack Obama,  a man who was too cowardly to wear the uniform of the U.S. military, a usurper who was ineligible to serve in the office, would be occupying the White House for at least the next four years.  How could they bring themselves to salute a man so undeserving of their respect?

Most Marines would rather take their chances on the field of battle in Iraq or Afghanistan than to suffer the embarrassment of standing in the rain next to Obama, dressed in spiffy blue-white dress uniform, holding an umbrella over the usurper’s head while he addressed a small group of fawning sycophants in the White House rose garden.

And while it is easy to understand the revulsion felt by the men and women of the enlisted ranks, what goes through the minds of long-serving generals and admirals, their chests covered with row upon row of medals and service ribbons, evidence of their long service to God and country,  when they are forced to salute him and address him as “sir” or “mister president?”  What sort of colossal ego does it take for such an unremarkable man to expect that kind of treatment from men and women of real accomplishment?

What all of this tells us is that what motivates Barack Obama is far more than a super-inflated ego, far more than pathological narcissism.  He is, as Dr. Samuel Vaknin has described him, a “total incognito with zero accomplishment.”  But even that does not describe how Obama sees himself, what goes on inside his head.  Instead, we can only conclude that Obama’s opinion of himself is simply beyond human comprehension.  Just as the human mind is incapable of comprehending the infinite nature of the universe, neither can the human mind comprehend the boundaries of what Obama appears to see in himself.

When Obama proclaimed in his June 4, 2008 nomination acceptance speech that, “This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal,” most of us laughed because we knew that just the opposite was true.  But there were many who actually believed him and were inspired by his soaring rhetoric.  What those of us who laughed knew, intuitively, is that what appeared to be bravado was actually a cover for nothingness.

What best describes Obama is a brief two sentence quotation from Eric Hoffer, the renowned longshoreman/philosopher, who said, “Our greatest pretenses are built up not to hide the evil and the ugly in us, but our emptiness.  The hardest thing to hide is something that is not there.”

Yes, Barack Obama is an evil man and the political philosophy that guiders his every word and deed are truly ugly.  It is that evil and that ugliness that Obama seeks to hide by his bravado and his pretentiousness; it is the emptiness of his promise of hope and change that is at the heart of his pretentions.

And while a majority of Americans still find Obama to be “likeable,” an even larger majority have come to see that there is no real substance to him.  As Hofer tells us, “The hardest thing to hide is something that is not there.”   Where Barack Obama is concerned, there is no there, there.

How Do We Cut Federal Growth and Spending?

Most Americans agree that the federal government is totally out of control, that it is too large, spends too much money, and should be reduced in size.  In fact, a recent headline for a Rasmussen Poll reported that “73% Think Federal Government Should Cut Spending to Help Economy.”

There are too many government agencies, too many regulations, too many federal employees, and too much waste. As new regulations are created, new employees are hired to enforce the regulations—then those employees expand their area with more regulations, which requires the hiring of even more federal employees—and the government grows and grows.  If we had perpetual motion it would be a government agency.  As Heritage Foundation budget expert, Romina Boccia stated, “you have so much waste in the federal government, it is really outrageous and we need to be cutting the federal budget, not increasing it.”

The Investor’s Business Daily reported:

 “A new study of government data says that since Oct. 1, federal workers, including bureaucrats and members of Congress, have worked less than three-fourths of the time… Compared to civilian workers, federal employees are underworked.  Rather than criticize them for working so little, maybe we should see this as an opportunity. If they can cut back on work with so little impact on the rest of us, why don’t we simply cut government employment by 25%?  If the country can survive the government working 25% fewer hours, doesn’t it make sense to cut an equivalent amount and make those still on board work full-time like the rest of us?”

How do we cut the federal budget?  First, we need to study all government departments/agencies and assure that none of them receive more funding than they received in the last fiscal year. To accomplish this, we must establish a commission similar to the Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC), which has been effectively used throughout the Department of Defense (DOD).

I mention a BRAC-like commission because it could get much more done to trim government than any group within Congress.  Historically, Congressional legislation only adds federal agencies or increases their size.  We need a commission with a mission to review all agencies for current need, consolidation, efficiency, elimination, etc.  Otherwise, we’ll continue to have growing waste in an ever-expanding federal government.

Since BRAC was used successfully in the DOD, which is one of the most important and necessary of the many government agencies, it could be just as useful in other agencies that are less important to our survival as a nation.  Defense is a constitutional requirement, not some questionable freebie program that rewards citizens, and in many cases non-citizens, for not working.  Coming in second in defense of the nation is unacceptable!  And the survival of the nation and our Constitution is, or should be, the most important function of government.

The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is a perfect example of the problem.  The USPS defaulted on its debt last year—after seven straight years of deficits. It’s saddled with billions owed in retiree benefits while its customers are sending less and less mail with each passing year. If it is to survive, the USPS realizes that big reforms are needed, and it has recommended some cost-cutting changes.  But in the omnibus spending bill, Congress blocked two money-savers: discontinuing Saturday delivery and closing some rural post offices.  BRAC would not be saddled with such Congressional politics and would have the authority to solve the problem as needed.

Our second step in cutting federal spending should be a Balanced Budget Amendment.  This would allow us to budget only what is needed and exclude unnecessary functions within the current government structure.

The nation wants to see action, not just rhetoric. In baseball, a base hit excites fans when it happens, but if it doesn’t result in a score, it is just another statistic. Likewise, the taxpayers were happy with all the proposals to reduce the federal budget, but the talk did not materialize into a serious reduction in the budget. The job is not done until we see these major reductions.

Congress must get aggressive in controlling government growth and spending by first establishing BRAC for all areas of the three branches of the federal government (except the DOD where it has already been used), and secondly, by passing a Balanced Budget Amendment. As the Rasmussen Poll shows, the taxpayers want government spending cut.

This is critical, and failure of the Congress to act accordingly is a gross neglect of its responsibilities to the taxpayers.

The Bloody Boomerang of Stalinism

Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin, March 1919

The recent Olympic Games in Russia have opened the country to the world — As if a Pandora Box — the secrets held by the Russian regime for a long time have been discovered, revealing the reality of life in Russia. Reporting on Olympics in Sochi our media, for the first time, was using negative terms and images to depict: the unprecedented corruption, terrorism, yellow water, a disaster, and others. To grasp the reality of life in Russia, we ought to return to the discussion we had in the previous article published on January 27, 2014.

The ideological fireball unleashed by Marxism had a dramatic impact on life in Europe. Aggressive mob leaders fed on the public disorder and violence and their leadership produced the first socialist revolution in France.  This was the period of the “Paris Commune.” The revolution produced enormous casualties and then failed very quickly.  These events were followed by socialist revolt in Hungary and German Bavaria.  Both of those revolts failed, as well.  Western civilization rejected violent and destructive ideology–capitalism continued its development in those countries. I agree with Nietzsche that the envy of the poor is the main impulse to revolution. Furthermore, history shows that the leadership of any political movement plays a crucial role in shaping the outcome of revolt–Lenin is the prime example of that concept and victory of the first Socialist revolt in Russia…

There had been one earlier revolution in Russia in February 1917 (the February Revolution) that enjoyed widespread popular support. That revolution had a platform of fundamental social and constitutional reform that would move Russia toward western-style democracy. The February Revolution took place in St. Petersburg (Petrograd at the time) and led to the abdication of Russian Tsar Nicholas II on his own and his son’s behalf and the establishment of a Provisional Government in Russia.

Delegates_VIII_Congress_of_the_RKP(b)

Group picture of the delegates at the VIII Congress of the RKP. Click on the photo for a larger view.

The first successful socialist revolution took place in Russia in October 1917 (November 7 by the new calendar). Its official name in Russia was the Great October Socialist Revolution. The Bolshevik Party and its leader Vladimir Lenin seized power under the banner of Marxism—“proletariat of the world, unite!” Yet some historians today consider the Great October Socialist Revolution a meticulous and very well organized coup d’etat against a Provisional Government of Russia by the parliamentary manipulations and tricks. By the way, Ayn Rand was agreed with the concept of a coup d’etat. Lenin’s leadership in the revolt is not questionable; however we are currently talking about Soviet Socialism—that entire model of social organization has been created by Stalin and his global design later.

To grasp the perspectives Stalin envisioned for Russia and the world, we have to know the character, personality of the man and the circumstances of his life. Unlike Lenin, Stalin was not a highly educated individual, yet he was smart-street, which was more significant at the time. He was born in 1889 in the Russia’s Christian province Georgia, on the Caucasus, surrounded by the Muslim world. Proximity of the Muslim culture had a strong effect on Stalin’s personality for the rest of his life, his attitude to women testified to that. You can see it throughout his entire reign of power—no women in the government .His personal life and mysterious death of his second wife, a young and active Allelueva, telling us a tragic story…

His real name was Joseph Jugashvili, his nickname he took from Russian word steel–Stalin. If I tell you that Stalin was a bank-robber in his revolutionary career you wouldn’t believe me. Therefore let me give you an opinion of others about Stalin: “He became one of the Bolsheviks chief operatives in the Caucasus, organizing paramilitaries, inciting strikes, spreading propaganda and raising money through bank robberies, ransom, kidnappings, and extortions.” (Wikipedia). I would add: he was imprisoned five times, three of them for bank robberies—violence, lawlessness, and a Muslim Neighborhood  had been his real parents…

Every word, written about Stalin’s characteristic is only a part of the real true character of the man. Today you would call such a man a thug, mobster, or con. He was a brutal, manipulative, and maniacal, deceitful intriguer; he acquired power by moving up on the corps of others. He was an extraordinary liar and hypocrite. Two other features of his character stood out: The first one is that Stalin hated the Russian Orthodox Church and the Christian religion. The second one was his vindictiveness that had no barriers.

Stalin grew up in a shoemaker’s family, his father systematically beat him. His Mother, a devoted Christian, wanted him to be a priest, so she sent him to a church school in Georgia, he learned Russian there. After church school, he was admitted to an Orthodox Seminary, which had widened his horizon: The Orthodox Church had been highly respectable authority in the Russian Empire—the Emperor Nicholas was the “Messenger of God.”  The education there was the best in Europe. When Stalin protested against the imperialist and religious order, he was expelled from the Seminary, yet the knowledge obtained there had tremendously help him to manipulate the West later on…

640px-National-Bolshevik-Party

Bolshevik Party flag.

Shortly after being expelled, he joined a revolutionary movement, became a convert to Marxism. In 1903 his Marxist group had become the Bolshevik Party, and Stalin got an assignment to begin organizing Bolshevik Party in the Caucasus Mountains area that was well known to him. It should be noted that Caucasus Mountains, a location with predominant Muslim culture and many different ethnic groups. Stalin was surrounded by the Muslim world in his entire childhood. He loved and knew the Muslim culture pretty well; his proclivity to lie perhaps came from Koran, which is allowing to lie if it benefits Islam. This rule of Koran is called Tajak (the spelling can be wrong). Stalin learned that Islam was divided on Sunnis and Shiites; he found out how to use both.

While organizing Marxists of the Caucasus, Stalin had the opportunity to go over the border. As a matter of fact, Azerbaijan was divided, one part in Russia and the other in Iran. The language was the same and Stalin could propagate Marxism in both countries. He had maintained his interest in Iran since then… In 1911, by the money obtain through bank robberies, he helped to establish Pravda, later the official daily of the Communist Party of the USSR. Living in St .Petersburg, Stalin played an important secret role in guiding the Bolshevik deputies in the Duma (Russian parliament) and in directing the Bolshevik Party press against the Provisional Government…

Stalin served the Bolshevik and then Communist Party pretty well. The sense of ambition and desire for prestige has always been a driving impulse for Stalin. His first official post in the Soviet government was the People’s Commissar on Nationalities. In 1922 he became the General Secretary of the Communist Party, the post he held to the day of his death in March of 1953. He stigmatized the rich, cultivating the hate and revenge to create an envy and resentment. Under the condition of secrecy, overwhelming fear, and intimidation Stalin had created a centralized system and his ideology that brought an enormous suffering to the people–he killed more people than all Russian Tsars combined.

Unlike Lenin, Stalin had no educational background, but persistently implemented his own vision of the country’s future in building a, so-called, Communist society. Since his childhood, violence formed his personality: and. throughout his entire life, force, violence, and ferocity had prevailed in his behavior. He began building his Communist, or Soviet Socialism, according to the personal features of his character. Only through the prism of his personality you can grasp the entire essence of the Stalinist Soviet Socialism. 

The first thing he did was dispose of any and all opposition. He immediately started building his cult of personality. According to Encyclopedia Britannica Online “[a] cult of personality arises when an individual uses mass media propaganda, or other methods, to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.” Stalin promised “to lead the country out of poverty into a bright communist future.” Instead he dedicated his efforts solely to concentrating ever greater power in his own hands.  The Stalinist cult of personality portrayed him as larger than life itself and endowed him with unrivaled wisdom. . As a result, Stalin became the best writer in the country, the best poet, the best diplomat, the best scientist, and the best military commander, friend and Father of the people.

Stalin used Lenin’s words to boost his cult of personality and to create a political machine within the Communist Party as a collective leader of the country. Lenin’s words were also used to identify the tasks and agenda of the Soviet government — The goal of Socialism is Communism, and Unions are the school of Communism.  In just this way had the Soviet state been created and functioned for seventy years. The Soviet government and all the unions worked together to control and operate the country—Big Government of unprecedented size wielding unassailable power over the population. The industries were field with people loyal to Stalin and he piled them with all special privileges.

Stalin’s personal agenda included, in first order, disposal of his opponents. He started eliminating them by demonizing and smearing their reputations. As a community leader of the Caucasus Mountains knowing the history of sectarian power struggle and the leadership of all ethnic groups, Stalin started a systematic liquidation of the leaders there. Just ask the people of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Chechnya, and others how many their leaders had been shot and how many thousands of people been perished during deportation to Siberia and central Asia … Then, Stalin had begun smearing and building accusations against the country leaders.

The first victim was Leon Trotsky, a hard-line Bolshevik but a very smart man and a respected leader.  He had been exiled and later assassinated by Stalin’s order in Mexico.  The next target was Sergey Kirov, a beloved leader from Leningrad (St, Petersburg) who was murdered by Stalin’s henchmen. The next were the series of purges and Show Trials that Stalin used to remove all the old Bolsheviks from the Communist Party in the 1930s. He chose to replace them with an army of loyal Stalinist yes-men. By the time he completed this first phase, he had attained his goal of absolute power built on a foundation of overwhelming fear. It is helpful to grasp Stalin’s chief motivation and the agenda by knowing the fate and the life of the people there.

Unlike the politically agile Lenin, Stalin was a pedantic and loyal Marxist who believed in world revolution. His ultimate goal was one of titanic agenda: the spread of Socialism throughout the entire world and create a global government under the auspices of the Soviet Union. Stalin’s reign of power started with a global double-game in which Stalin never played by the rules and never lost sight of his global strategy. Stalin deceived and misled the entire world, talking about socialism within one country while spreading his Socialist model throughout the world.  In fact, Stalin unleashed an undeclared war against capitalist western countries through insurrection against western civilization. And again, you can see the fraudulent intentions of the Communist ideology—Stalin has quadrupled it by creating a system of big lies under an Iron Fist to perpetrate a fraud further.

Stalin was dishonest with regard to ideology, because although he preached Marxism-Leninism, he practiced his own religion of Stalinism. Only through the prism of Stalin’s geo-political objectives can we comprehend the world’s predicament in the 21st century. Stalin’s war was real and had multiple fronts and many targets. It was both a domestic war and a war abroad. Only now, after being acquainted with Stalin’s character and personality we can begin understanding of the extent of his war against Western civilization. You can ask how it was possible that one man established a model of social organization, so dangerous for the entire world, yet which survived for two centuries. There is an explanation.

Stalin’s first concern was the constant aggrandizement and preservation of his absolute power, his cult of personality, and the leadership role of the Communist Party which was his personal fiefdom.  A mighty security apparatus was built on the foundation of the first Soviet security agency named the Cheka. During Stalin’s reign the name of the agency has been changed several times to cover up the crime committed. It finally appeared under the title—the KGB, three letters familiar to the people worldwide—the doer of Stalinism. A bloody boomerang of Stalinism, its dreadful ideology has the same form and shape, but different geography: yesterday it was Georgia on the Caucuses and the Middle East, today it is Venezuela and Ukraine. Who is next? To grasp the concept of the Stalin’s security apparatus and his war against humanity, please read What is happening to America? The Hidden Truth of Global Destruction, by Simona Pipko, Xlibris, 2012.

To be continued: www.simonapipko1.com

Victory for Ukrainian Revolution

Ukrainian revolution has won today and it’s very emotional for me, since that is where I was born and raised. eighty-two protesters are dead, the president is running, government thieves are being hunted down and brought to justice, communist party headquarters ransacked, and all remaining statues of Lenin and other communist leaders torn down all over Ukraine.

I spent all day watching live feed from the victory rally on Independence Square, or Maidan (pronounced as My-DONE) in Kiev, wishing I were there. In fact, this is the first time in almost 20 years that I’ve been in the US that I wanted to be back in Ukraine and celebrate. So many memories, so much to say. So excuse me if I don’t write more now. Perhaps, later.

Maidan_Comparison.jpg

Maidan_2.jpg

Maidan_Fists.jpg

Ukraine_Lenin_Statues.jpg

EDITORS NOTE: We stand with the Ukrainian people and salute their victory over a tyrannical socialist regime. Our prayers are with them as they rebuild their great nation into a center of prosperity, beauty and freedom.

Senator Ted Cruz upstaged by young Republican State Committeeman in Sarasota, FL

Christian Ziegler, the Republican Party of Sarasota (RPOS) State Committeeman, fired up the crowd just before Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) took the stage to accept the RPOS  2014 “Statesman of  the Year” award. Christian told me that he was so honored and excited to introduce Senator Cruz. Christian is a young conservative who holds the right values and beliefs. He has worked hard to make the RPOS a must stop for conservative political leaders like Senator Cruz. RPOS Chairman Joe Gruters notes, “Sarasota is the new Iowa.”

Christian’s introduction took the form of a rallying cry for Senator Cruz. Please watch Christian followed by the full remarks of Senator Cruz:

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Glubni4RSvA[/youtube]

During his remarks Senator Cruz asked everyone to take out their cell phones and text the word “Growth” to: 33733. Very clever and savvy method of joining his supporters together and keeping them up-to-date on his political activities.

The event was standing room only. Senator Cruz was repeatedly interrupted with applause and calls of “Run Ted, Run!” As RPOS Chairman Joe Gruters told Breitbart, “We are shocked at the level of interest that we’ve received for doing this rally… We are a center right community. If you look at all of our individuals and officials on a local level, they’re all pretty much just barely center right. The interest and the energy that’s being created as a result of this event is that Cruz—to me, it’s just amazing. From my standpoint, Ted Cruz is a serious political player—and it’s amazing he’s able to attract these large crowds.”

“I’m inspired by the men and women like those here at the Republican Party of Sarasota and across America who are standing up to defend liberty and to defend our Constitution!” – – U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (facebook)

VIDEO – Ted Cruz Thanks Sarasota: “Thank you to the Sarasota Republican Party, we had a FANTASTIC event” –Ted Cruz

Click here to watch – https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151953701443317

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of the RPOS.

The World’s Volcanic Past and Future

While Americans coped with massive snowfalls in the South, Midwest and Northeast, a dramatic volcanic eruption occurred on February 13th in Indonesia when Mount Kelud in the province of East Java erupted so loudly it could be heard 120 miles away.

It is one of 130 volcanos in the world’s fourth most populous nation, located on the “ring of fire” volcanic belt around the shores of the Pacific Ocean. About 200,000 people were affected and more than 76,000 had to be evacuated according to Indonesia’s National Disaster Mitigation Agency. The effect was dramatic, shutting down an airport in Indonesia’s second largest city, Surabaya, a major industrial center, along with those in five other cities as well as a major oil refinery that provides more than a third of Indonesia’s total output of refined products.

Earlier this month, the eruption of Mount Sinabung in the north of the island of Sumatra was credited with the death of eleven people. It had been spewing lava and ash for months and forced thousands to flee the area.

There are about 1,500 active volcanoes worldwide with the majority on the Pacific “ring of fire.” Some fifty of these erupt every year, An estimated 500 million people worldwide live near active volcanoes.

While environmentalists are forever blathering about carbon dioxide (C02) emissions from cars, plants that produce electricity, and all forms of manufacturing, volcanoes produce from 145 million to 255 million short tons of CO2 every year.

Large, explosive eruptions, in addition to CO2, put large amounts of water vapor, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, and ash, pulverized rock and pumice, into the stratosphere to heights of 10 to 20 miles above the Earth’s surface. Sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid condense rapidly in the stratosphere to form fine sulfate aerosols that reflect the Sun’s radiation, cooling the Earth’s lower atmosphere or troposphere while also absorbing heat radiated from the Earth. In the past century, several eruptions during the past century cooled the Earth by up to half a degree Fahrenheit for periods of one to three years.

I cite this to drive home the fundamental scientific fact that, as opposed to all the nonsense about human control or effect on the Earth’s temperatures, volcanoes by comparison render the human component infinitesimal.

Moreover, CO2 plays virtually no role in the Earth’s overall temperature. Shutting down coal-fired electrical plants and preventing the construction of new ones has no basis in science. The outcry against CO2 ignores the fact that all life on Earth depends on it to provide the “food” that all vegetation requires. More Co2, not less, is good for the Earth.

What Americans need to worry about is the eruption of a super volcano with a large caldera such as the Yellowstone Caldera in Yellowstone National Park and the Valles Caldera in New Mexico. Both have been dormant for thousands of years.

The Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years compared to its human component that only began to create what we call modern civilization for about five thousand years. Its volcanos, potential earthquakes, floods, blizzards, and other natural hazards pose some serious threats. Massive eruptions such as those about 250 million years ago are believed to have been the cause of the “Great Dying” that is estimated to have killed 90% of the species existing at the time.

When I read and hear about people speaking about how humans are causing major species declines or industry threatening the climate, I am reminded of how Nature, the action or inaction of the Sun, volcanoes and other natural events dwarf anything that is attributed to human activity.

Thanks to the environmentalists, we are crippling and denying the ability of this nation to construct the pipelines, expand our industrial base, and provide the housing needed for an expanding population.

Look around you. Pretend you’re a dinosaur Then remember they dominated the Earth for thousands of years until Nature eliminated them.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Science Magazine Editor-in-Chief: “Time to Move Forward on the Keystone XL Pipeline”

Construction of the Gulf Coast Project pipeline in Prague, Oklahoma, U.S., in 2013. The Gulf Coast Project is part of the Keystone XL pipeline. Photographer: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg.

Another former Obama administration official has endorsed the Keystone XL pipeline. Marcia McNutt, prominent scientist, former head of the U.S. Geological Survey, and now the editor-in-chief of Science magazine writes in an editorial [subscription required]:

I drive a hybrid car and set my thermostat at 80°F in the Washington, DC, summer. I use public transportation to commute to my office, located in a building given “platinum” design status by the U.S. Green Building Council. The electric meter on my house runs backward most months of the year, thanks to a large installation of solar panels. I am committed to doing my part to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and minimize global warming.At the same time, I believe it is time to move forward on the Keystone XL pipeline to transport crude oil from the tar sands deposits of Alberta, Canada, and from the Williston Basin in Montana and North Dakota to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

In an NPR interview, McNutt said she was initially against the pipeline, but changed her mind. The lack of a pipeline “did not stop the development of the tar sands,” she stated. They’re being moved by other means. The State Department came to a similar conclusion in its environmental analysis of the pipeline.

“But McNutt goes on to say she’s now convinced that building Keystone would not speed up oil sands development, and notes that developer TransCanada changed the initial proposed route to avoid an ecologically sensitive region of Nebraska,” National Journal’s Ben Geman reports.

McNutt joins other former Obama administration officials such as former Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and former National Security Advisor, Tom Donilon in supporting the pipeline.

To borrow McNutt’s words, “it is time to move forward.” The administration should approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

ACTION ITEM: Energy Citizens requests you Tell the State Department that it’s time to build the Keystone XL Pipeline!

Yulia: ‘I Am A Ukrainian’

Michael Kirk from BizPac Review posted a clip is being called “a must-see video of a Ukrainian girl asking the world for help against oppression & corruption.” It has gone viral and left an impression on millions of people.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/Hvds2AIiWLA[/youtube]

A brief description from the Facebook page linked to the YouTube video:

This is Yulia. She is a postgraduate student in literature. After the first people were killed on Hrushevskoho Street she posted about it on Facebook. She felt like screaming about everything that had been happening in the country. Her friend suggested to make the video of the same statement for more people to see and hear her. They made the video on Hrushevskoho next to the destroyed makeshift hospital. It was very cold then and her speech is uneven sometimes. ” I wanted to show that here I am – a person. If you say there are radicals and terrorists in our streets, then I am a terrorist too,” explains Yulia.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of

Who are the top all-time political donors from 1989-2014? You will be surprised!

American voters are increasingly concerned about the growing influence of money in the electoral process. Politicians and candidates are increasingly addicted to raising money, and with it comes political influence from donors. With political influence comes government fraud, waste and abuse. The major political parties have sophisticated systems for raising funds. So who are the top all-time political donors? If you listen to Democrats it is the Koch brothers. Republicans mention George Soros. Neither came close to making the all-time top list.

Opensecrets.org has compiled a list of the top “all-time donors” from 1989 to 2014. The totals include reported contributions from PACs and individuals affiliated with Heavy Hitter organizations, which are defined as the top overall donors to candidates, parties, Leadership PACs and other committees.

Contributions to outside groups like super PACs do not factor into an organization’s designation as a Heavy Hitter, however the totals below do include contributions by Heavy Hitters to such groups, as well as contributions to candidates, parties, Leadership PACs and other committees. Furthermore, the totals do not include contributions to politically active nonprofits, which are not disclosed to the public. For a full list of top top overall donors by cycle, independent of Heavy Hitters status, go here.

LEGEND:   Republican    Democrat    On the fence


 
  
= Between 40% and 59% to both parties
= Leans Dem/Repub (60%-69%)
= Strongly Dem/Repub (70%-89%)
= Solidly Dem/Repub (over 90%)
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% as money can be given to third party
candidates or outside spending groups and PACs not affiliated with either party.
Rank Organization Total ’89-’12 Dem % Repub % Tilt
1 ActBlue $97,192,340 99% 0%     
2 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $60,667,379 81% 1%   
3 AT&T Inc $56,449,317 41% 57%
4 National Education Assn $53,594,488 61% 4%
5 National Assn of Realtors $51,207,902 44% 47%
6 Goldman Sachs $44,847,951 53% 44%
7 Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $44,478,789 92% 1%     
8 United Auto Workers $41,667,858 71% 0%   
9 Carpenters & Joiners Union $39,260,371 74% 9%   
10 Service Employees International Union $38,395,690 84% 2%   
11 Laborers Union $37,494,010 85% 7%   
12 American Federation of Teachers $36,713,325 89% 0%   
13 Communications Workers of America $36,188,135 86% 0%   
14 Teamsters Union $36,123,209 88% 5%   
15 JPMorgan Chase & Co $34,527,277 48% 51%
16 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $33,756,550 86% 0%   
17 United Parcel Service $32,214,128 35% 64%
18 Citigroup Inc $32,198,122 48% 50%
19 National Auto Dealers Assn $31,818,910 31% 68%
20 Machinists & Aerospace Workers Union $31,313,097 98% 1%     
21 EMILY’s List $31,267,654 98% 0%     
22 American Bankers Assn $31,135,202 36% 63%
23 AFL-CIO $30,938,977 61% 3%
24 American Medical Assn $29,990,879 40% 59%
25 Microsoft Corp $29,245,015 55% 43%
26 National Beer Wholesalers Assn $28,976,510 35% 64%
27 Blue Cross/Blue Shield $28,491,678 36% 63%
28 General Electric $27,741,628 47% 51%
29 National Assn of Home Builders $27,509,880 34% 65%
30 Lockheed Martin $27,246,173 42% 57%
31 Bank of America $26,822,749 41% 57%
32 National Assn of Letter Carriers $26,106,359 84% 9%   
33 Morgan Stanley $26,074,770 42% 56%
34 Verizon Communications $25,490,499 40% 59%
35 Deloitte LLP $24,979,333 35% 63%
36 Time Warner $24,463,922 72% 25%   
37 Newsweb Corp $24,387,371 41% 0%
38 Credit Union National Assn $24,056,155 47% 51%
39 Plumbers & Pipefitters Union $23,886,248 85% 4%   
40 Altria Group $23,750,298 28% 70%   
41 Ernst & Young $23,114,243 42% 57%
42 Operating Engineers Union $23,036,848 82% 14%   
43 International Assn of Fire Fighters $22,963,260 79% 16%   
44 American Hospital Assn $22,909,326 52% 46%
45 PricewaterhouseCoopers $22,461,596 35% 64%
46 Sheet Metal Workers Union $22,372,978 95% 2%     
47 American Dental Assn $21,791,508 44% 54%
48 Boeing Co $21,502,737 46% 52%
49 UBS AG $21,354,742 40% 58%
50 Comcast Corp $20,603,390 57% 42%
51 AFLAC Inc $19,822,809 43% 56%
52 National Rifle Assn $19,771,191 17% 82%   
53 Pfizer Inc $19,699,869 35% 64%
54 Northrop Grumman $19,633,964 42% 57%
55 Union Pacific Corp $19,617,968 27% 72%   
56 Air Line Pilots Assn $19,538,047 83% 16%   
57 Honeywell International $19,447,557 44% 54%
58 Natl Assn/Insurance & Financial Advisors $19,305,624 41% 58%
59 Koch Industries $18,083,948 8% 90%     
60 American Postal Workers Union $17,957,308 86% 2%   
61 American Assn for Justice $17,581,358 80% 3%   
62 FedEx Corp $17,506,083 39% 60%
63 Ironworkers Union $17,386,345 92% 6%     
64 Club for Growth $17,271,352 0% 95%     
65 Credit Suisse Group $17,191,340 41% 57%
66 United Transportation Union $17,096,750 87% 11%   
67 New York Life Insurance $16,898,487 49% 50%
68 Raytheon Co $16,864,289 44% 55%
69 National Rural Electric Cooperative Assn $16,552,363 47% 52%
70 General Dynamics $16,549,202 46% 53%
71 Akin, Gump et al $16,463,510 61% 37%
72 United Steelworkers $16,426,444 99% 0%     
73 American Institute of CPAs $15,952,635 41% 58%
74 National Air Traffic Controllers Assn $15,883,050 77% 20%   
75 Chevron $15,826,864 19% 64%
76 Anheuser-Busch $15,612,613 48% 51%
77 Reynolds American $15,574,198 22% 77%   
78 Exxon Mobil $15,220,537 13% 85%   
79 KPMG LLP $15,112,328 34% 65%
80 National Cable & Telecommunications Assn $15,048,560 47% 51%
81 DLA Piper $14,902,117 68% 31%
82 Merrill Lynch $14,865,217 37% 62%
83 Wal-Mart Stores $14,851,004 32% 67%
84 GlaxoSmithKline $14,625,493 30% 69%
85 CSX Corp $14,118,661 34% 65%
86 Walt Disney Co $14,104,107 68% 30%
87 News Corp $13,917,083 58% 41%
88 American Financial Group $13,910,355 15% 73%   
89 Indep Insurance Agents & Brokers/America $13,731,200 34% 64%
90 American Health Care Assn $13,727,858 51% 48%
91 Wells Fargo $13,639,116 36% 61%
92 Associated Builders & Contractors $13,577,082 1% 98%     
93 Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance $13,565,554 38% 60%
94 University of California $13,552,056 89% 9%   
95 American Crystal Sugar $13,309,209 61% 37%
96 WPP Group $13,257,197 53% 45%
97 American Society of Anesthesiologists $13,166,537 41% 58%
98 Prudential Financial $13,051,316 49% 50%
99 Southern Co $12,973,439 29% 70%   
100 National Restaurant Assn $12,605,181 16% 83%   
101 Securities Industry & Financial Mkt Assn $12,438,248 40% 59%
102 Human Rights Campaign $12,148,422 89% 8%   
103 MetLife Inc $12,038,047 51% 47%
104 American Optometric Assn $12,034,433 57% 42%
105 Home Depot $11,900,495 25% 74%   
106 American Academy of Ophthalmology $11,895,708 50% 49%
107 Natl Active & Retired Fed Employees Assn $11,802,200 78% 21%   
108 Saban Capital Group $11,683,172 89% 0%   
109 Eli Lilly & Co $11,651,455 31% 67%
110 United Technologies $11,577,894 45% 52%
111 General Motors $11,281,497 38% 60%
112 Associated General Contractors $11,198,897 14% 85%   
113 Painters & Allied Trades Union $11,081,080 85% 12%   
114 National Assn of Broadcasters $11,051,822 44% 55%
115 American Maritime Officers $11,019,831 46% 53%
116 UST Inc $10,930,093 22% 77%   
117 Ford Motor Co $10,739,089 38% 60%
118 Skadden, Arps et al $10,700,094 77% 22%   
119 BellSouth Corp $10,680,784 43% 56%
120 AIG $10,548,621 49% 50%
121 Seafarers International Union $10,449,415 83% 15%   
122 Exelon Corp $10,448,670 43% 56%
123 National Cmte to Preserve Social Security & Medicare $10,391,306 82% 17%   
124 Independent Community Bankers of America $10,367,285 42% 57%
125 Amway/Alticor Inc $10,312,313 0% 97%     
126 Freddie Mac $10,294,709 43% 56%
127 MBNA Corp $10,282,913 16% 83%   
128 Patton Boggs LLP $10,134,606 71% 27%   
129 American Airlines $10,071,131 43% 55%
130 American Trucking Assns $9,975,648 27% 72%   
131 American Physical Therapy Assn $9,795,983 49% 50%
132 Lehman Brothers $9,729,764 52% 46%
133 Blackstone Group $9,658,975 46% 51%
134 National Fedn of Independent Business $9,616,283 6% 93%     
135 Greenberg Traurig LLP $9,546,903 62% 37%
136 Transport Workers Union $9,531,899 95% 4%     
137 American Council of Life Insurers $9,454,728 38% 61%
138 Amalgamated Transit Union $9,453,918 93% 6%     
139 Harvard University $9,436,590 87% 12%   
140 Archer Daniels Midland $9,394,067 42% 57%
141 Aircraft Owners & Pilots Assn $9,337,413 43% 56%
142 Fannie Mae $9,140,977 53% 46%
143 National Rural Letter Carriers Assn $9,021,100 71% 28%   
144 Wachovia Corp $8,575,944 30% 69%
145 National Cmte for an Effective Congress $8,447,690 99% 0%     
146 Interpublic Group $8,286,183 66% 32%
147 Marine Engineers Beneficial Assn $8,155,379 73% 25%   
148 Bristol-Myers Squibb $7,926,699 23% 76%   
149 MCI Inc $7,659,226 45% 54%
150 Bear Stearns $7,280,973 55% 43%
151 BP $6,843,520 30% 69%
152 Enron Corp $6,544,528 28% 71%   
153 Andersen $6,267,045 37% 62%
154 Vivendi $6,037,717 60% 33%
155 MGM Resorts International $5,831,055 45% 47%
156 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp $5,089,791 39% 60%

Based on data released by the FEC on December 16, 2013.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center. See something wrong or want to suggest an improvement? Contact us.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Svilen.milev. The image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported.