Donald Sterling Spewing Racist Statements is a Democrat

In an article from The Daily Caller - Donald Sterling was exposed Friday by TMZ making racially charged comments about African Americans to his girlfriend V. Stiviano in an audio recording. Between 1990 and 1992 Donald Sterling made a $2,000 donations to the former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, a $1000 donation to current Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, as well as a $1000 donation to the recalled former governor of California Gray Davis. Despite having a 100% track record of donating to Democrats, Littlesis.org has no records of him donating to either of President Barack Obama’s election campaigns.

 This shows that there is still some racism in the world and contrary to the Democratic narative it is on both sides of the isle! This also includes the Democrats in equal measure have some racism within their ranks. In my humble opinion is that it is only a very small minority of Americans are racist and this behavior can not be tolerated on any level. One also can not lightly accuse anyone of racism with out definitive evidence.

I thought this list was interesting and worth posting.
The United States History of Racism Against Blacks by the Democrats who have ALWAYS been the Party of Slavery and Racism.

1. The Republican Party was formed in 1854 specifically to oppose the Democrats, and for more than 150 years, they have done everything they could to block the Democrat agenda. As you read the following Democratic atrocities that span three centuries, imagine if you will, what a far different nation the United States would be had not the Republicans been around to block the Democrats’ efforts.
2. March 20, 1854 Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party.
3. May 30, 1854 Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party.
4. June 16, 1854 Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party.
5. July 6, 1854 First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies.
6. February 11, 1856 Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in President Lincoln’s Cabinet.
7. February 22, 1856 First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies.
8. March 27, 1856 First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies.
9. May 22, 1856 For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover.
10. March 6, 1857 Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”.
11. June 26, 1857 Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks.
12. October 13, 1858 During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee.
13. October 25, 1858 U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation.
14. June 4, 1860 Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery.
15. April 7, 1862 President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade.
16. April 16, 1862 President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no.
17. July 2, 1862 U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver.
18. July 17, 1862 Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes Confiscation Act stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”.
19. August 19, 1862 Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation.
20. August 25, 1862 President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army.
21. September 22, 1862 Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation.
22. January 1, 1863 Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect.
23. February 9, 1864 Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery.
24. June 15, 1864 Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War.
25. June 28, 1864 Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts.
26. October 29, 1864 African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”.
27. January 31, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition.
28. March 3, 1865 Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves.
29. April 8, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition.
30. June 19, 1865 On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation.
31. November 22, 1865 Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination.
32. December 6, 1865 Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified.
33. February 5, 1866 U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves.
34. April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law.
35. April 19, 1866 Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery.
36. May 10, 1866 U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no.
37. June 8, 1866 U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no.
38. July 16, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman’s Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights.
39. July 28, 1866 Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen.
40. July 30, 1866 Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150.
41. January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.
42. July 19, 1867 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans.
43. March 30, 1868 Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”.
44. May 20, 1868 Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors.
45. September 3, 1868 25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress.
46. September 12, 1868 Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress.
47. September 28, 1868 Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor.
48. October 7, 1868 Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”.
49. October 22, 1868 While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan.
50. November 3, 1868 Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation.
51. December 10, 1869 Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office.
52. February 3, 1870 After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race.
53. May 19, 1870 African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies.
54. May 31, 1870 President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights.
55. June 22, 1870 Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South.
56. September 6, 1870 Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell.
57. February 28, 1871 Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters.
58. March 22, 1871 Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina.
59. April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans.
60. October 10, 1871 Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands.
61. October 18, 1871 After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan.
62. November 18, 1872 Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”.
63. January 17, 1874 Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government.
64. September 14, 1874 Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed.
65. March 1, 1875 Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition.
66. September 20, 1876 Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”.
67. January 10, 1878 U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919.
68. July 14, 1884 Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery.
69. August 30, 1890 Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South.
70. June 7, 1892 In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates.
71. February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote.
72. December 11, 1895 African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans.
73. May 18, 1896 Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”.
74. December 31, 1898 Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools.
75. May 24, 1900 Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans.
76. January 15, 1901 Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans.
77. October 16, 1901 President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country.
78. May 29, 1902 Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%.
79. February 12, 1909 On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP.
80. June 18, 1912 African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions.
81. August 1, 1916 Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice.
82. May 21, 1919 Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no.
83. April 18, 1920 Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus.
84. August 18, 1920 Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures.
85. January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster.
86. June 2, 1924 Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans.
87. October 3, 1924 Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention.
88. December 8, 1924 Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”.
89. June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country.
90. August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation.
91. June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it.
92. October 20, 1942 60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries.
93. April 3, 1944 U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system.
94. August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry Truman’s surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that “[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul.”
95. February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools.
96. July 11, 1952 Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters.
97. September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education.
98. December 8, 1953 Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education.
99. May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education.
100. November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel.
101. March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation.
102. June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law.
103. October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America”.
104. November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President.
105. September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act.
106. September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools.
107. June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights.
108. February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats.
109. May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats.
110. July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform.
111. May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights.
112. June 1, 1963 Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama.
113. September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School.
114. June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate.
115. June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.
116. June 20, 1964 The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act.
117. March 7, 1965 Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL.
118. March 21, 1965 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace.
119. August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose.
120. August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor.
121. July 8, 1970 In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits.
122. September 17, 1971 Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders.
123. February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII.
124. September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs.
125. June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act.
126. August 10, 1988 Republican President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR.
127. November 21, 1991 Republican President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation.
128. August 20, 1996 Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law.
129. April 26, 1999 Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President.
130. January 25, 2001 U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”.
131. March 19, 2003 Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference.
132. May 23, 2003 U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture.
133. February 26, 2004 Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men…you all look alike to me”
134. I should also point out that The Klu Klux Klan was created by the democrats for the express reason of terrorizing blacks and republicans in the south to prevent them from voting, and that every known Klansman that were members of congress have been democrats.

Fascism is a deformity of Socialism, not of Capitalism

Fascism is a deformity of Socialism, not of Capitalism

Someone recently asked what I mean by this so I thought it was worth elaborating. According to Merriam Webster Fascism means -

fas·cism

noun \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\

: a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government

: very harsh control or authority

1

often capitalized :  a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2

:  a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control fascism

and brutality — J. W. Aldridge>

— fas·cist noun or adjective often capitalized

— fas·cis·tic adjective often capitalized

— fas·cis·ti·cal·ly adverb often capitalize

So with that being said with Socialism being a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done. 

As Communism is defined as a :  a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

b :  a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production

c :  a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably

d :  communist systems collectively

Capitalism is defined as an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

My conclusion after studying the above definitions is that the system and/or systems leaders that has evolved into Fascism the most often would almost all have came from some form of Socialist or Communist system. here are some examples 

• The first Fascist leader was Benito Mussolini who started out as member of the Italian Socialist Party. Upon gaining control of Italy by 1935, Mussolini claimed that three-quarters of Italian businesses were under state control. Does this sound like private ownership?
• The Showa Studies Society of Japan was another "think tank" for future leaders of a radical totalitarian Japan, led by Count Yoriyasu Arima. He was a supporter of radical political experiments. He read Karl Marx and Max Stirner, and other radical philosophers. With Fumimaro Konoe and Fusanosuke Kuhara, they created a revolutionary radical-right policy. These revolutionary groups later had the help of several important personages, making reality to some certain ideas of the nationalist-militarist policy with practical work in Manchukuo. They included General Hideki Tōjō, chief of Kempeitai and leader of Kwantung Army; Yosuke Matsuoka, who served as president of the (South Manchuria Railway Company) and Foreign Affairs minister; and Naoki Hoshino, an army ideologist who organized the government and political structure of Manchukuo. Tojo later became War Minister and Prime Minister in the Konoe cabinet, Matsuoka Foreign Minister, and Hoshino chief of Project departments charged with establishing a new economic structure for Japan. Some industrialists representative of this ideological strand were Ichizō Kobayashi, President of Tokio Gasu Denki, setting the structure for the Industry and Commerce ministry, and Shōzō Murata, representing the Sumitomo Group becoming Communication Minister. Other groups created were the Government Imperial Aid Association. Involved in both was Colonel Kingoro Hashimoto, who proposed a Nationalist single party dictatorship, combined with a state-run economy. The militarists had strong support from the wealthy owners of major industries, but there were also certain socialist-nationalist sentiments on the part of radical officers, aware of poor farmers and workers who wanted social justice. The "New Asia Day" celebration was to remember the sacred mission of extending influence to nearby Asian nations. The Japanese government, possibly following the German example of a "Worker's Front" State Syndicate, ultimately organized the Nation Service Society to group all the trades unions in the country. All syndicates of the "Japanese Workers Federation" were integrated into this controlling body. After reading the preceding from Wikipedia's article on Japan one can conclude it was a sort of hybrid of Nationalist Socialism and Capitalism.
• Germany's Adolf Hitler was a Nationalist Socialist before he became a Fascist Dictator. Nazism (Nationalsozialismus, National Socialism) was the ideology and practice of the Nazi Party and of Nazi Germany. They declared support for a nationalist form of socialism that was to provide for the Aryan race and the German nation: economic security, social welfare programs for workers, a just wage, honour for workers' importance to the nation, and protection from capitalist exploitation. Sounds like a twist of Socialism to me and defiantly not based on Capitalism. 
• MaoTse-Tung, Stalin,Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Muammar Gaddafi and Fidal Castro all are closer to Fascism then they were to Capitalism.

Justina Pelletier the Poster Child for Excessive BIG Government Oppression!

Justina Pelletier the Poster Child 

for Excessive BIG Government Oppression!

 What would you do if your child was about to be kidnapped by Boston Children’s Hospital? This is the question that comes to mind as one learns about Justina Pelletier's plight in Boston Massachusetts.

Sign the petition today and let’s return Justina to her family.

  Story Summary

Justina Pelletier Custody Case

FOX CT’s Beau Berman has been following the case of Justina Pelletier, a West Hartford teen who has been held from her parents since they admitted her to Boston Children’s Hospital in February 2013 with flu-like symptoms. Justina had previously been diagnosed with mitochondrial disease at Tufts Medical Center in 2011. Doctors at Boston Children’s questioned the diagnosis and said they believed her symptoms — including weakness, headaches and abdominal pain — were psychologically induced. They diagnosed her with somatoform disorder, a mental disorder. Justina’s parents disagreed with that diagnosis, and have been in a custody dispute with the State of Massachusetts ever since. She remains in Massachusetts custody.

Below is from an article by Ken Klukowski published on 28 Feb 2014 in Breitbart.com/Big-Government

These are the facts as relayed by Staver, parts of which Breitbart News has corroborated with court documents and with a Boston Globe story.
Staver begins:

Prior to her admission to Boston’s Children’s Hospital, Justina was being treated by Dr. Mark Korson associated with Tufts Medical Center, and being treated under a working diagnosis of mitochondrial disease. Korson explained, as does the Mayo Clinic, that your cells are not transmitting enough energy, and the lack of energy impacts different parts of your body in different ways.

Korson referred Lou and Linda to his former colleague, Dr. Alejandro Flores, who had previously worked on Justina’s case and was now at Boston Children’s Hospital. When the parents got there and Justina was admitted, a new doctor took the case before Flores could see Justina.
According to Staver:

Boston Children’s Hospital is a teaching hospital for Harvard. Children who are ‘wards of the state’ are by state law subjects of research for teaching hospitals. So a young doctor and a pediatrician disagree with Justina’s treating physicians and come up with somatoform disorder, which is where a person convinces herself that she’s sick. They change the diagnosis from physical to mental, and suggest it’s all in her head.

Breitbart News was told the first physician is Dr. Jurriaan Peters, a neurologist who had finished his medical training just seven months earlier. Peters brought in Dr. Simona Bujoreanu, a psychologist. Although Tufts had been treating Justina for a physical condition for a year, Peters and Bujoreanu began to believe the problem was mental rather than physical.

 Staver explains that the family is only allowed to see Justina for one hour per week and only under strict supervision. Last week during that one hour, there were four DCF workers and a police officer all present when Linda was with Justina. They are not allowed to take photos or use a cell phone.
Nor are they allowed to go in as a full family. The 92 year-old grandparents have not seen Justina for thirteen months, and one of Justina’s sisters (she’s the youngest of four) has not seen her since May.
Staver adds, “She’s now two full grades behind her class. She has gone from ice-skating competitions to being in a wheelchair.”
The family is Roman Catholic, yet Staver says Justina has not been allowed communion for this entire thirteen-month period.
The Juvenile Court has scheduled a hearing on Justina’s status and care for Mar. 17, though Staver says the family is gravely concerned about her deteriorating health in the meantime. The judge has also scheduled a hearing regarding the gag order for Mar. 24.
Staver argues, “If her condition were not real, if it were mental and not physical, then she should have gotten better; instead she has gotten worse.” He says he asked the parents, “What do you want out of this situation?” He recounts they answered, “We want to take our daughter back to Tufts Medical Center so she can receive the treatment she needs. And we want our daughter to be reunited with the family.”

Emily Gets Her Gun

Emily Gets Her Gun 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2011/oct/5/miller-emily-gets-her-gun/
An Article By Emily Miller - Originally published in the The Washington Times on October 5, 2011, 12:49AM

This is the first of a series of great articles about just how difficult it is to get a handgun in DC.
The article follows Emily Miller as she navigates the government bureaucracy in order to lawfully obtain a gun as is guaranteed in the 2nd amendment to all law abiding American citizens.

I fully endorse a Woman's right to pro-choice of the pistol she desires.

Workers at Tennessee Volkswagen factory reject United Auto Workers union

Workers at a Volkswagen factory in Tennessee have voted against union representation in a devastating defeat for the United Auto Workers union's effort to make inroads in the South.
The 712-626 vote released late Friday was surprising for many labor experts and union supporters who expected a UAW win because Volkswagen tacitly endorsed the union and even allowed organizers into the Chattanooga factory to make sales pitches.
"This is like an alternate universe where everything is turned upside down," Cliff Hammond, a labor lawyer at in Detroit, told The Wall Street Journal, noting that companies usually fight union drives.
"This vote was essentially gift-wrapped for the union by Volkswagen," said Hammond, who previously worked at the Service Employees International Union.
The setback is a major defeat for the UAW's effort to expand in the growing South, where foreign automakers have 14 assembly plants, eight built in the past decade, said Kristin Dziczek, director of the labor and industry group at the Center for Automotive Research, an industry think tank in Michigan.
"If this was going to work anywhere, this is where it was going to work," she said of Chattanooga.
Organizing a Southern plant is so crucial to the union that UAW President Bob King told workers in a speech that the union has no long-term future without it.
"If the union can't win [in Chattanooga], it can't win anywhere," Steve Silvia, a economics and trade professor at American University who has studied labor unions, told the Journal.
But the loss likely means the union will remain quarantined with the Detroit Three, largely in the Midwest and Northeast.
Many viewed VW as the union's only chance to gain a crucial foothold in the South because other automakers have not been as welcoming as Volkswagen. Labor interests make up half of the supervisory board at VW in Germany, and they questioned why the Chattanooga plant is the only one without formal worker representation. VW wanted a German-style "works council" in Chattanooga to give employees a say over working conditions. The company says U.S. law won't allow it without an independent union.
In Chattanooga, the union faced stern opposition from Republican politicians who warned that a UAW victory would chase away other automakers who might come to the region.
Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee was the most vocal opponent, saying that he was told that VW would build a new midsized SUV in Chattanooga if workers rejected the union. That was later denied by a VW executive. Other politicians threatened to cut off state incentives for the plant to expand if the union was approved.
“I’m thrilled for the employees and thrilled for our community,” Corker said in a telephone interview with The Wall Street Journal. “I’m sincerely overwhelmed.”
"The UAW had all the advantages," the Republican senator told the newspaper. "Everybody but the UAW had both hands tied behind their backs. I’m just thankful the employees made the decision they made."
After 53 percent of the workers voted against his union, King said he was outraged at what he called "outside interference" in the election. He wouldn't rule out challenging the outcome with the National Labor Relations Board.  "It's never happened in this country before that the U.S. senator, the governor, the leader of the House, the legislature here, threatened the company with no incentives, threatened workers with a loss of product," King said. "We'll look at all our options in the next few days."
The union could contend that Corker and other local politicians were in collusion with VW and tried to frighten workers into thinking the SUV would be built in Mexico if they voted for the union, said Gary Chaison, a labor relations professor at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.
But Chaison said it will be difficult to tie the politicians to the company, which remained neutral throughout the voting process. "It's the employer that has real power," he said.
The loss put a spotlight on the union's major difficulty in the South: signing up people who have no history with organized labor and are fearful of being the first in the area to join, Chaison said.
Dziczek said the union may have to change its tactics in future organizing efforts, because King's strategy of the union and company working together to help each other did not work.
But she does not expect the well-funded union to give up on organizing Southern factories. "I think they will continue to push everywhere they were pushing and see if they get more traction," she said.
Republican Gov. Bill Haslam said through a spokesman that he was pleased with the vote and "looks forward to working with the company on future growth in Tennessee."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Almost Ten Years Later, Al Qaeda Flags Fly over Fallujah

“At the moment, there is no presence of the Iraqi state in Fallujah,” a local journalist who asked not to be named because he fears for his safety told Sly. “The police and the army have abandoned the city, al-Qaeda has taken down all the Iraqi flags and burned them, and it has raised its own flag on all the buildings.”

The results of the Obama, Clinton, Cary, Pelosi and Reid regimes efforts. Why am I not surprised with this development.

The Affordable Boat Act

The Affordable Boat Act
The U.S. government has just passed a new law entitled “The Affordable Boat Act” declaring that every citizen MUST purchase a new boat by April, 2014. These ‘affordable’ boats will cost an average of $54,000-$155,000 each. This does not include taxes, trailers, towing fees, licensing and registration fees, fuel, docking and storage fees, maintenance, or repair costs.
This law has been passed because, until now, typically only wealthy and financially responsible people have been able to purchase boats. This new law ensures that every American can now have an ‘affordable’ boat of their own, because everyone is ‘entitled’ to a new boat. If you purchase your boat before the end of the year, you will receive four ‘free’ life jackets (does not include monthly usage fees).
In order to make sure everyone purchases an ‘affordable boat,’ the cost of owning a boat will increase on average of 250-400% per year. This way, wealthy people will pay more for something that other people don’t want or can’t afford to maintain. But, to be fair, people who can’t afford to maintain their boat will be regularly fined and children (under the age of 26) can use their parents boat(s) to party on until they turn 27, after which date they must purchase their own boat.
If you already have a boat, you can keep yours (just kidding; no you can’t). If you don’t want or don’t need a boat, you are required to buy one anyhow. If you refuse to buy one or can’t afford one, you will be regularly fined $800 until you purchase one, or face imprisonment. If you cannot (or don’t want to) purchase an ‘affordable boat’ from a private business, you can buy a starter boat from the U. S. government ‘affordable boat exchange.’ Such a boat will have the basic necessities (hull, oars or paddles) and will only cost ‘slightly more’ than a similar boat purchased from a private business. Plus, since your tax dollars will subsidize the purchase of a boat from the U. S. government’s ‘affordable boat exchange,’ it will appear that you are getting a good deal.
Failure to use the boat will also result in fines. People living in the desert, ghettos, inner cities, or areas with no access to lakes are not exempt. Neither age, motion sickness, experience, knowledge, nor lack of desire are acceptable excuses for not using your boat.
A government review board (that doesn’t know the difference between the port side, starboard side, or stern of a boat) will decide everything, including when, where, how often, and for what purposes you can use your boat, along with how many people can ride your boat. The board will also determine if one is too old or healthy enough to be able to use their boat, and will also decide if your boat has out lived its usefulness or if you must purchase specific accessories (like a $500 compass) or a newer and more expensive boat.
Those that can afford yachts will be required to do so … it’s only fair. The government will also decide the name for each boat. Failure to comply with these rules will result in fines and possible imprisonment.
Government officials are exempt from this new law. If they want a boat, they and their families can obtain boats free at the expense of tax payers. Unions, bankers, and mega companies with large political affiliations ($$$) are also exempt.

Obamacare

Some observations on Obamacare also known as the Afordable Care Act.

Chris Wallace pressed Emanuel to defend the growing number of cancellation notices sent to people whose plans changed after the law was implemented, but Emanuel could not.
  James Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, called the grandfather clause in ObamaCare too narrow, adding that “the whole point of the exchanges was to close down the individual insurance market.”
Capretta called out Obama’s pitch to the public about the benefits of the plan and repeated pledges that Americans would be able to keep their current insurance providers if they liked it misleading and says Obama should shoulder the blame.
“There’s no extenuating circumstances,” Capretta said. “It was central to passing the law. He said clearly you can keep your plan. This wasn’t a minor pledge. It was central to the law. He broke that pledge.”
Capretta said the Obama administration “shouldn’t be able to play fast and loose” with people’s medical coverage.

The above information came from  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/11/03/obamacare-architect-defends-plan-insurance-exchanges-on-fox-news-sunday/#

Democrats and racism

I just watched the Movie Lincoln and felt a few facts about the Democratic racists that your Liberal Professor ignores and their deeds of the past were in order.

• African Americans originally came to America unwillingly, having been stolen and sold by Muslim slave-catchers in Africa to Dutch traders journeying to America in 1619.

• The Three-Fifths Clause dealt only with representation and not the worth of any individual.

• In 1857, a Democratically controlled Supreme Court delivered the Dred Scott decision, declaring that blacks were not persons or citizens but instead were property and therefore had no rights.

• The 13th Amendment to abolish slavery was voted for by 100% of the Republicans in congress and by 23% of the Democrats in congress.

• Not one Democrat either in the House or the Senate voted for the 14th amendment declaring that former slaves were full citizens of the state in which they lived and were therefore entitled to all the rights and privileges of any other citizen in that state.

• Not a single one of the 56 Democrats in Congress voted for the 15th amendment that granted explicit voting rights to black Americans.

• In 1866 Democrats formed the Ku Klux Klan to pave the way for Democrats to regain control in the elections.

• George Wallace was a Democrat.

• Bull Connor was a Democrat.

• In the 19th century, Democrats prevented Black Americans from going to public school.

• In the 20th and 21st century Democrats prevented Black Americans trapped in failing schools from choosing a better school. In fact Democrats voted against the bill by 99%.

• Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, grandfather clauses, Literacy tests, white only primaries, and physical violence all came from the Democratic Party.

• Between 1882 and 1964, 4,743 individuals were lynched. 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites. Republicans often led the efforts to pass federal anti-lynching laws and Democrats successfully blocked those bills.

• Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. His father, Daddy King was a Republican.

• Though both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were signed into law under Democrat President, Lyndon Johnson, it was the Republicans in Congress who made it possible in both cases – not to overlook the fact that the heart of both bills came from the work of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

• In the 108th Congress, when Republicans proposed a permanent extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, it was opposed by the Congressional Black Caucus (composed only of Democrats).

• Following the Civil War, Frederick Douglass received Presidential appointments from Republican Presidents Ulysses Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, and James A. Garfield.  Democratic President Grover Cleveland removed Frederick Douglas from office but Republican President Benjamin Harrison reappointed him.

• Very few today know that in 1808 Congress abolished the slave trade. Although slavery still had not been abolished in all the states, things definitely were moving in the right direction.

• By 1820, most of the Founding Fathers were dead and Thomas Jefferson’ party (the Democratic Party) had become the majority party in Congress.

• In 1789, Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance that prohibited slavery in a federal territory.  In 1820, the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise and reversed that earlier policy, permitting slavery in almost half of the federal territories.

• In 1850, Democrats in Congress passed the “Fugitive Slave Law”.  That law required Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or else pay huge fines.

• Because the “Fugitive Slave Law” allowed Free Blacks to be carried into slavery, this law was disastrous for blacks in the North; and as a consequence of the atrocious provisions of this Democratic law, some 20,000 blacks in the North left the United States and fled to Canada.

• The “Underground Railroad” reached the height of its activity during this period, helping thousands of slaves escape from slavery in the South all the way out of the United States and into Canada – simply to escape the reach of the Democrats’ Fugitive Slave Law.

• In 1854, the Democratically controlled Congress passed another law strengthening slavery:  the Kansas-Nebraska Act.  Even though Democrats in Congress had already expanded the federal territories in which slavery was permitted through their passage of the Missouri Compromise, they had retained a ban on slavery in the Kansas-Nebraska territory.  But through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Democrats repealed those earlier restrictions, thus allowing slavery to be introduced into parts of the new territory where it previously had been forbidden.

• Following the passage of these pro-slavery laws in Congress, in May of 1854, a number of the anti-slavery Democrats in Congress – along with some anti-slavery members from other political parties, including the Whigs, Free Soilers, and Emancipationists, formed a new political party to fight slavery and secure equal civil rights for black Americans.  The name of that party?  They called it the Republican Party because they wanted to return to the principles of freedom and equality first set forth in the governing documents of the Republic before pro-slavery members of Congress  had perverted those original principles.

• One of the founders of the Republican was U.S. Senator Charles Sumner.  In 1856, Sumner gave a two day long speech in the U.S. Senate against slavery. Following that speech, Democratic Representative Preston Brooks from South Carolina came from the House, across the Rotunda of the Capitol, and over to the Senate where he literally clubbed down Sumner on the floor of the Senate, knocked him unconscious, and beat him almost to death.  According to the sources of that day, many Democrats thought that Sumner’s clubbing was deserved, and it even amused them.  What happened to Democrat Preston Brooks following his vicious attack on Sumner?  He was proclaimed a southern hero and easily re-elected to Congress.

• In 1856, the Republican Party entered its first Presidential election, running Republican John C. Fremont against Democrat James Buchanan.  In that election, the Republican Party issued its first-ever Party platform.  It was a short document with only nine planks in the platform, but significantly, six of the nine planks set forth bold declarations of equality and civil rights for African Americans based on the principles of the Declaration of Independence.

• In 1856, the Democratic platform took a position strongly defending slavery and warned: “All efforts of the abolitionists… are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences and all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people”.

• It is worth noting that for over a century and a half, Democrats often have taken a position that some human life is disposable – as they did in the Dred  Scott decision.  In that instance, a black individual was not a life, it was property; and an individual could do with his property as he wished.  Today, Democrats have largely taken that same position on unborn human life – that an unborn human is disposable property to do with as one wishes.

• African Americans were the victims of this disposable property ideology a century and a half ago, and still are today.  Consider:  although 12 percent of the current population is African American, almost 35 percent of all abortions are performed on African Americans.  In fact, over the last decade, for every 100 African American live births, there were 53 abortions of African American babies.  Democrats have encouraged this; and although black Americans are solidly pro-life with almost two-thirds opposing abortion on demand, a number of recent votes in Congress reveals that Democrats hold exactly the opposite view, with some 80 percent of congressional Democrats being almost rabidly pro-abortion and consistently voting against protections for innocent unborn human life.

Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican

A statement made by King’s niece, Alveda C. King, a founder of the group King for America: "My uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., during his lifetime, was a Republican." Bergmann also said King "subscribed to Republican values" and that most black voters before 1960 associated themselves with the Grand Old Party -- the Party of Lincoln -- that passed the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution ending slavery and guaranteeing equal rights in the 19th century.

DHS buys 200,000 more hollow-point bullets

The following two articles illustrate perfectly the concerted effort by some of our elected officials to undermine the 2nd Amendment. I suspect that they are looking to capitalize on the recent horrible murders committed by one lone psycho with a stolen gun.

Statistics prove how unlikely anyone is to die in this manner. So why the urgency to disarm law abiding citizens? Their true motive must be for some reason that would be rejected by most Americans. One possibility that comes to mind would be that they anticipate possible resistance to their future unveiled plans. History proves this indeed a possible scenario!

DHS buys 200,000 more hollow-point bullets

As posted in the teaparty.org website on January 4, 2013.

(Info Wars) – While the Obama administration sets out to eviscerate the gun rights of American citizens in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, earlier this week it was announced that the Department of Homeland Security has awarded a company a contract worth over $45,000 dollars to provide the DHS with 200,000 more rounds of bullets.
This new purchase adds to the staggering figure of 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition already secured by the DHS over the last 9 months alone.

A solicitation originally posted on the FedBizOpps.gov website on December 17 on behalf of the DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center advertised the need for 200 cases of 13–40 Cal, 180 Grain, Jacketed Hollow Point bullets, with each case containing 1000 rounds, to be delivered almost immediately as soon as the contract is awarded.
The bullets are to be delivered to a training site in North Charleston, South Carolina, which “specializes in Maritime Law Enforcement and Port Security Training. Basic and advanced training programs are conducted in concert with the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Academy, the U.S. Courts Probation and Pretrial Services Training Academy, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Training Academy, the Customs and Border Protection Field Operations Academy, and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.”
The winner of the contract to provide the DHS with the ammunition, announced on January 2, was Evian Group Inc., an organization that was formed just five days before the announcement of the solicitation.
As James Smith documents, Evian Group seems to be little more than a front organization and doesn’t appear to have any real business assets, a genuine physical address, a website, or even a phone number.
Back in August, the Department of Homeland Security censored information relating to the amount of bullets purchased by the DHS on behalf of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, citing an “unusual and compelling urgency” to acquire the bullets, noting that there is a shortage of bullets which is threatening a situation that could cause “substantial safety issues for the government” should law enforcement officials not be adequately armed.
The information was blacked out despite the fact that documents are only supposed to be redacted if authorized by Congress or for national security reasons.
The contradiction of the Obama administration preaching gun control while simultaneously the federal government arms itself to the teeth with an arsenal that would be enough to wage a full scale 7 year ground war is jaw-dropping.
As Mike Adams highlights, “A citizen is considered to be a stockpiling “terrorist” prepper if they own just 1,000 rounds of ammo. The government, however, can purchase billions and the mainstream media doesn’t even question it.”
“Where is all this ammunition going? It’s being stockpiled by the federal government, awaiting some future event during which it will apparently be “activated.” Why else would you stockpile something if you don’t anticipate needing to use it someday?”
“During all this, Obama and his cohorts in Washington are loudly insisting that American citizens have no right to purchase firearms or ammunition, and that new laws will soon be enacted to make sure you cannot do what the government does: stockpile weapons and ammo.”
Indeed, the double standard is staggering and while Americans are being raided for stockpiling “arsenals” of weapons that subsequently turn out to be no more than a few guns, the federal government is simultaneously building a very real and substantial arsenal while the mainstream media turns a blind eye.

Boston Mayor Menino: Biden ‘Guaranteed’ Massive Gun Control By February

As posted in the breitbart.com  website on January 14, 2013 authored by Ben Shapiro
.
(Breitbart) – Democrat Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston says that Vice President Joe Biden “guaranteed” him that by the end of January, President Obama would put a vast gun control scheme on the table. Said Menino, “He said, ‘Tommy, I guarantee you, we’ll get it done by the end of January.’ They’re going to get it done.”
Menino co-chairs the Mayors Against Illegal Guns group along with nanny state Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York. He says that Obama has “no excuse not to pass strong legislation,” and that the National Rifle Association should be ignored. “It’s time to get this moving and moving quickly.”
Menino’s overbearing big government tendencies have reared their ugly head before. Back in August, Menino tried to bar Chick-Fil-A from Boston after the head of the restaurant chain said that he opposed same-sex marriage.
As per the usual Democratic strategy, Menino has been standing athwart the bodies of the dead children of Sandy Hook to promote his anti-Second Amendment agenda. Back during that tragedy, he said, “There are too many stories of those who have lost loved ones to gun violence – and far too many were added from Newtown just days ago. To honor those we’ve lost, we must continue to demand a plan from lawmakers that will keep gun violence from taking more lives.”
The implication: if you don’t agree with Menino, Obama, Biden, and Bloomberg, you don’t honor those we lost. This sort of emotional blackmail has dominated our politics for far too long. But look for the thuggishness of the left to escalate in Obama’s second term.

I always welcome any input on these matters especially from the Leftists. Just keep it civil, factual and truthful and I will not remove it (I know many of you Liberals struggle with a civil, factual and truthful discussion see
Why Liberals Always Resort To Name-Calling?).

The Truth About Socialism

Irving Kristol once remarked that a neo-conservative is a "liberal who was mugged by reality". So based on that I define a Neo-Marxist as a Socialist who was mugged by reality. What I mean by that is they have been forced to take off their rose colored glasses due to the complete failure of every Marxist based redistributive system since the French Revolution. They are now willing to use some aspects of Capitalism in a futile attempt to fund the Large Government required to administer their unattainable Utopian dream state. This is Crony-Capitalism at its worst and it comes from the Neo-Marxist movement to tax and regulate businesses that they deem inappropriate while at the same time attempting to pick and promote the ones they deem best (like Solyndra GM GE etc. etc). The only thing green about all their pet companies is the tax dollars funneled into them. 

The Neo-Marxists know that there will be trouble in a few years as the tax rates are now being maxed out, the predictable inflation from printing money and when we can not borrow any more money. The only choice left will be to cut entitlements and this will cause rioting. Therefore the populous will have to be disarmed beforehand! Here is a nouvelle idea how about we drastically cut government spending now and avoid the inevitable future result of our current path that we are now on!

I welcome any input on these matters especially from the left. Just keep it civil, factual and truthful and I will post it (I know many of you Liberals struggle a civil, factual and truthful discussion).

Guns are good for the goose but NOT for the gander.

Why are the hypocrites at the Journal News working for Gannet Media hiring armed guards for them selves? Is not 911 good enough to provide for their safety?

Inexplicably angry with law-abiding gun owners after the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting, a New York newspaper decides to print the names and addresses of gun permit holders in two counties. We'd like to return the favor:

Reporter:
Dwight R Worley
230-6 139 Ave
Springfield Gardens, NY 11413
718-527-0832

Journal News President:
Janet Hasson
3 Gate House Lane
Mamaroneck, NY 10534
914-694-5204

Editors:
Cyndee Royle
1133 Westchester Ave. Ste N110
White Plains, NY 10604
914-694-9300

Nancy Cutler
9 Woodwind Ln
Spring Valley, NY 10977
845-354-3485

Parent company of The Journal News (Gannett):
CEO Gracia C Martore
728 Springvale Rd
Great Falls, VA 22066
703-759-595

Here is a Link to the actual Google Map of the Journal News Employees. Please do feel free to pass this useful bit of information on.

I find the following article shows the strength of the silent majority fighting against the Liberal Elite Neo-Marxists attempting to turn the US into a Socialist Utopian dream state.


The Neo-Marxists know that there will be trouble in a few years as the tax rates are maxed out, the predictable inflation from printing money and when we can not borrow any more money. The only choice left will be to cut entitlements and this will cause rioting. Therefore the populous will have to be disarmed beforehand! Here is a novel idea how about we drastically cut government spending now and avoid the inevitable future result of our current path that we are now on!

The Journal News is Armed and Dangerous

BY DYLAN SKRILOFF as published in the ROCKLAND COUNTY TIMES on January 1st, 2013

Guns are good for the goose but NOT for the gander.

A Clarkstown police report issued on December 28, 2012, confirmed that The Journal News has hired armed security guards from New City-based RGA Investigations and that they are manning the newspaper’s Rockland County headquarters at 1 Crosfield Ave., West Nyack, through at least tomorrow, Wednesday, January 2, 2013.

According to police reports on public record, Journal News Rockland Editor Caryn A. McBride was alarmed by the volume of “negative correspondence,” namely an avalanche of phone calls and emails to the Journal News office, following the newspaper’s publishing of a map of all pistol permit holders in Rockland and Westchester.

Due to apparent safety concerns, the newspaper then decided to hire RGA Investigations to provide armed personnel to man the location.

Private investigator Richard Ayoob is the administrator of RGA. He told the Clarkstown Police on Friday, December 28 that there had been no problems on site at the Journal News headquarters despite the massive influx of phone calls and emails.

McBride had filed at least two reports with the Clarkstown Police Department due to perceived threats. However, the police did not find the communications in question actually threatening. Incident-Report 2012-00033099 describes McBride telling police she was worried because an email writer wondered “what McBride would get in her mail now.”

Police said the email “did not constitute an offense” and did not contain an actual threat.

The Journal News caused an international stir when they released an interactive map of pistol permit holders names and addresses in Rockland and Westchester counties last Sunday, December 23. The editors have said they believe knowing where guns are is in the public’s interest. The newspaper has also taken a strident editorial position in favor of strict gun control.

Rather than take the map down following the public uproar, the executive board at the Journal News has decided to “stick to their guns” and double-down on their original decision, as they have said a map listing all pistol permit holders in Putnam County will soon to be posted.

[update---Putnam County officials have since announced their intention to not comply with the Journal News' request for the names and addresses of pistol permit holders]

The controversial use of the Freedom of Information Act to create the interactive map may come back to bite the Journal News and others who would prefer that pistol permits remain public record.

New York State Senator Greg Ball has already introduced state legislation to make such records off-limits to the public and Rockland County legislators led by Frank Sparaco (R) will soon introduce a bipartisan-sponsored resolution with a similar intent.

It is not clear whether the negative reaction has threatened the Journal News’ true popularity as a news source. As an anecdotal piece of evidence, the Rockland County Times confirms receiving an influx of new subscribers who stated they cancelled their subscription to the Journal News due to the gun story.

The Rockland County Times has not investigated whether the Journal News’ Westchester County headquarters in White Plains has beefed up security.

The Genocide Chart

The 2nd amendment is about civilians defending themselves! One must always remember that to control a nation our leaders would have to Distract, Deceive, Divide, Indoctrinate and Disarm! That last one is key to a truly free and independent nation. Our founding fathers understood this well. So thus we in this era must all do everything in our power to protect this most basic premise of self defense.

Below is a story that the Liberal biased reporters continue to ignore!

I've been giving the "gun ban law" some thought, and here it is: this person steals guns, (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), shoots and kills his own mother (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), transports these guns loaded (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), brings guns onto school property (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), breaks into the school (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), discharges the weapons within city limits (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), murders 26 people (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW), and commits suicide (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW).
And there are people in this country that somehow think passing another ANOTHER LAW banning guns would protect us from someone like this. If you haven't noticed, people like this are not concerned about breaking laws - they only care about fulfilling their own twisted agenda. The only people that a gun ban law would impact are the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! Just Saying.

Obama versus Romney what are the differences?

Obama versus Romney what are the differences?

Let us start with their slogans Forward versus Believe in America.

Vorwarts is Forward in German

Forward has a long history of use by Leftists.

Forward was the slogan of the National Socialists Hitler Youth.



Obama's Forward is not a destination. If you'd asked Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot or their supporters if they were taking their nations forward, they'd have undoubtedly said "yes." Mussolini? Forward. Napoleon? Forward. Genghis Khan? Churchill, Thatcher, and Reagan would have said "forward" as well if asked their direction.
The slogan "Forward!" reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

Romney's Believe In America is in reference to his faith in shrinking government and creating an environment that encourages companies to grow and create jobs. To those who understand how the economy works, that makes perfect sense. Instead of taking more money from Americans through taxation, Republicans would let people keep more of their own money so they can build companies and buy goods that lead to more jobs. Mitt Romney has been laying out a vision that would make that growth possible. Romney would stop President Obama’s practice of bashing businesses and Wall Street, cut regulatory burdens that make it difficult for companies to operate, reduce government employment by 10 percent through attrition, approve the Keystone pipeline project, get rid of the crushing burden of Obamacare, and keep tax cuts in place.

Below is from an article by John Hawkins originally  published in TheTownHall.com website

1) Mitt Romney would try to reduce tax rates for the wealthy and corporations to spur economic growth. On the other hand, Barack Obama is likely to try to raise taxes not just on the rich and corporations, but on the middle class. He really wouldn't have much choice. Despite the class warfare rhetoric you're hearing, there is far more money that can be confiscated from the vast middle class than there is to be plundered from the relatively thin ranks of the wealthy. If you believe tax increases are the answer, then you go after the middle class for the same reason Willie Sutton said he robbed banks: "because that's where the money is."

2) Barack Obama has run trillion dollar plus deficits every year he's been in office and given that everything he wants to do comes with a large price tag attached, there's no reason to think the next four years would be any different than the last four years. At a minimum, that would mean further downgrades of our nation's credit rating, but it's possible it could precipitate a full-on Greek style financial crisis if investors conclude their money isn't safe here. On the other hand, Mitt Romney would be under tremendous pressure from his right to reduce the deficit and a further credit downgrade on his watch would be a devastating political blow that he'd be highly motivated to avoid. Romney wouldn't have it easy since Obama would be leaving him a full-on budgetary disaster to deal with, but he'd have little choice other than to make cuts if he wants to be reelected in 2016.

3) Barack Obama has made encouraging dependence part of his electoral strategy. The more Americans that are dependent on the government for unemployment insurance, food stamps, and welfare, the more votes he believes the Democrats will get. In order to swell the welfare rolls, he’s no longer demanding that welfare recipients work for their handout. Mitt Romney opposes that change and would put the work requirements back into welfare.

4) If Barack Obama is reelected, we should expect no serious attempts at entitlement reform in the next four years. That's very problematic because nobody wants to cut a deal that impacts current retirees which means any change will impact people 55 and younger. So every year we wait, we end up with more Americans in an unsustainable system. The longer we go without making a change, the more likely it becomes that we'll be forced, under financial duress of the sort Greece is facing, to dramatically cut benefits for people who already rely on the program. Of course, there are no guarantees Mitt Romney could reach a deal with Democrats in Congress, but he will at least try to make it happen. Barack Obama won’t.

5) The Supreme Court currently has four doctrinaire liberal justices (Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer), three conservative originalist justices (Alito, Thomas, Scalia) and two right leaning moderates (Roberts, Kennedy). Four of the justices, Ginsburg (79), Scalia (76), Kennedy (75), and Breyer (73) are over 70. Given the ideological split of the SCOTUS and the ages of the judges, the next President may have an opportunity to create a historic shift on the Court. Replacing a single justice with an ideological opposite could be a decisive factor on cases from Roe v. Wade to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

6) We currently have a de facto amnesty for illegal aliens who haven't committed a felony in the United States. All they have to do is claim that they went to school here and they're automatically released without verification. If that continues for another four years, millions more illegals will pour into the United States and Obama will encourage them to settle in for the long haul. On the other hand, Mitt Romney would be likely to continue to improve border security and deport illegal aliens who are captured. In fact, his supporters during the primary, like Ann Coulter, were touting him as the toughest GOP candidate on illegal immigration.

7) Obama has taken over the student loan program, frittered away billions in bad loans to companies like Solyndra, and proudly proclaims his partial takeover of GM and Chevrolet to be a success despite the fact the taxpayers lost 25 billion on the deal. If Barack Obama is reelected, expect more government takeovers and bailouts. In fact, Dodd-Frank, which Obama supports and Romney opposes, has bank bailouts built into the law. If Romney can, he will repeal Dodd-Frank, he won't be interested in any more government takeovers of industry, and the Tea Partiers in his base would so adamantly oppose any more bailouts that going down that path would probably make him unelectable.

8) The housing market was terrible when Barack Obama came into office and not only has he done little to improve the situation for people who currently own homes, the root causes of the crash are still in place. The government is still demanding that loans be given to people who can't afford them. Fannie and Freddie are still handling 90% of all new mortgages. Mitt Romney will make it easier for people with good credit to get homes, will stop applying pressure to give loans to poor risks, and will force Freddie and Fannie to slowly and responsibly reduce the number of home mortgages they're covering so that if, God forbid, there's another crash one day, taxpayers don't get stuck with the bill.

9) If Barack Obama is reelected, Obamacare will go into effect in 2014 and many companies will stop offering insurance, it will be harder to find a doctor, the quality of medical care will drop, costs will explode, and death panels, along with the IRS, will become permanently involved in your health care. If Mitt Romney is elected, this won't happen. Romney would also try to push through a replacement plan for Obamacare, but chances are Democrats would block it.

10) At some point, you have to expect that the natural vitality of the economy will reassert itself no matter who's in the White House. However, it is also entirely possible that the hostile, unpredictable business environment created by the Obama Administration could keep the economy just as stagnant for the next four years as it has been for the last four. Romney's pro-business administration along with his attempts to cut taxes and regulations will encourage growth and put Americans back to work. What would we rather have? Four years of hate, demonization, and class warfare aimed at small business owners because they'll never be able to do their "fair share" in Barack Obama's eyes or would we rather have a growing, thriving economy again?