Democrats, though, promised a fight in the courts.
"There will be a lawsuit. I promise you," Dallas Sen. Royce West said
on the Senate floor, raising his right hand as if taking an oath. Bailey Comment: When ever the Democrats lose on a issue, the only thing they want to do is ether riot or sue or both. This is their answer to everything.
Conservative Blogger
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Friday, July 12, 2013
Fact check rips Pelosi claim that ObamaCare mandate 'not delayed' What a Idiot!
The big news on ObamaCare these past two weeks has been the
administration's announcement that it will delay by one year the
requirement on businesses to provide health insurance.
Nancy Pelosi, though, had a curious take on the whole thing. Actually, she instructed reporters, "The mandate was not delayed."
The House Democratic leader used some creative reasoning to make her case -- she claimed the administration really only delayed the requirement on businesses to report insurance coverage details.
But The Washington Post fact-checker on Friday shut it down
, effectively ruling that Pelosi is trying to "deny reality."
"Yes, reporting requirements were delayed. But there also was a one-year delay of the actual employer mandate. It's right there in the announcement," the Post wrote.
Here's what Pelosi said during a press conference on Thursday:
"The point is, is that the mandate was not delayed. Certain reporting by businesses that could be perceived as onerous, that reporting requirement was delayed, and partially to review how it would work and how it could be better. It was not a delay of the mandate for the businesses."
Pelosi was correct in the first part of that statement. In an announcement last week on the Treasury Department blog, Mark J. Mazur. assistant secretary for Tax Policy at Treasury, said the requirement to report details on insurance coverage would be delayed by a year.
However, that decision meant everything else would be delayed too. Mazur said the penalties on employers would be pushed off until 2015, meaning the requirement itself would be pushed off -- though the administration would still "strongly encourage" employers to offer coverage during that time.
But, as the Post noted, "encouraging employers to provide health insurance is not the same thing as mandating it."
Pelosi tried to deny the existence of a delay as her Republican colleagues use the announcement as an opening to attempt to stall other parts of the law.
Republicans are already teeing up votes on delaying what is known as the "individual mandate" -- the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance, which the administration so far has kept on schedule.
The Post wrote: "We understand Pelosi's desire to minimize the impact of the decision -- and supporters of the law may have a strong case that the employer mandate is not as central to the law as the individual mandate to buy insurance -- but that's not an excuse to deny reality."
Nancy Pelosi, though, had a curious take on the whole thing. Actually, she instructed reporters, "The mandate was not delayed."
The House Democratic leader used some creative reasoning to make her case -- she claimed the administration really only delayed the requirement on businesses to report insurance coverage details.
But The Washington Post fact-checker on Friday shut it down
, effectively ruling that Pelosi is trying to "deny reality.""Yes, reporting requirements were delayed. But there also was a one-year delay of the actual employer mandate. It's right there in the announcement," the Post wrote.
'The point is, is that the mandate was not delayed.'- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi
"The point is, is that the mandate was not delayed. Certain reporting by businesses that could be perceived as onerous, that reporting requirement was delayed, and partially to review how it would work and how it could be better. It was not a delay of the mandate for the businesses."
Pelosi was correct in the first part of that statement. In an announcement last week on the Treasury Department blog, Mark J. Mazur. assistant secretary for Tax Policy at Treasury, said the requirement to report details on insurance coverage would be delayed by a year.
However, that decision meant everything else would be delayed too. Mazur said the penalties on employers would be pushed off until 2015, meaning the requirement itself would be pushed off -- though the administration would still "strongly encourage" employers to offer coverage during that time.
But, as the Post noted, "encouraging employers to provide health insurance is not the same thing as mandating it."
Pelosi tried to deny the existence of a delay as her Republican colleagues use the announcement as an opening to attempt to stall other parts of the law.
Republicans are already teeing up votes on delaying what is known as the "individual mandate" -- the requirement on individuals to buy health insurance, which the administration so far has kept on schedule.
The Post wrote: "We understand Pelosi's desire to minimize the impact of the decision -- and supporters of the law may have a strong case that the employer mandate is not as central to the law as the individual mandate to buy insurance -- but that's not an excuse to deny reality."
Thursday, July 11, 2013
Airman Punished for Objecting to Gay Marriage in Military Chapel
A 27-year veteran of the Utah Air National Guard said he was
reprimanded after he wrote a letter objecting to a gay wedding in the
West Point chapel and was later told to prepare for retirement because
his personal beliefs about homosexuality were not compatible with the
military’s policies.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!
“The military is trying to make examples of people who have religious beliefs that homosexual conduct in the military is wrong,” said John Wells, an attorney representing TSgt. Layne Wilson. “The end game is to force conservative Christians out of the military.”
Last December Wilson wrote a letter to a person believed to be a chaplain at West Point. He stated his displeasure at news of a same-sex ceremony held in the Cadet Chapel.
“This is wrong on so many levels,” Wilson wrote. “If they wanted to get married in a hotel that is one thing. Our base chapels are a place of worship and this is a mockery to God and our military core values. I have proudly served 27 years and this is a slap in the face to us who have put our lives on the line for this country. I hope sir that you will take appropriate action so this does not happen again.”
Instead of responding to the private email, the Commandant of Cadets notified the Utah Air National Guard – leading to an accusation that he had brought disgrace and discredit upon the Air National Guard and his conduct was inconsistent with the United States Air Force.
“You are hereby reprimanded,” read a letter from Lt. Col. Kevin Tobias. “As a noncommissioned officer you are expected to maintain a standard of professional and personal behavior that is above reproach. You have failed!”
A public affairs officer with the Utah Air National Guard told Fox News they could not comment on pending litigation.
Ironically, Wells pointed out, the Defense of Marriage Act was still the law of the land and TSgt. Layne was simply reporting “what he believed was a violation of the law.”
In addition to his reprimand, the Air National Guard terminated a six-year reenlistment contract. Instead, they gave Layne a one-year extension.
“Due to the fact that I expressed my views on homosexuality in uniform; Lt. Col. Tobias stated that I was no longer compatible with further military service,” Wilson wrote in a letter detailing the discrimination allegations.
Tobias confirmed Wilson’s allegation in a memorandum dated June 19, 2013 and obtained by Fox News.
“We talked about his feelings about DADT and how he doesn’t agree with it,” Tobias wrote. “I then told him that maybe this is a good time for him to move on because we’ve been ordered to not have an opinion about Gays in the military and we need to treat them as we would treat anyone else in the service of our country.”
“I also reiterated that I respect his feelings but I’m not comfortable reenlisting him with his strong feelings about this matter,” he additionally wrote.
Col. Ronald Blunck concurred with Tobias – noting that “Your right to practice your religious beliefs does not excuse you from complying with directives, instructions and lawful orders.”
“Lt. Col. Tobias is correct in demanding that TSgt. Wilson refrain from expressing opinions contrary to Air Force guidance while in uniform,” Blunck wrote. “The Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was directed by law.”
Wilson also discussed concerns he had about a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” repeal briefing in 2011. He told his superior officers he found the briefing to be “very disturbing” and “conflicting with my moral rights of conscience.”
“My issue is so much about homosexuals serving in the military, but rather that it is being forced upon as an acceptable lifestyle abandoning our traditional values,” he wrote.
He said the military has created an atmosphere where those who do not approve of homosexual conduct “must remain disapprovingly silent or face reprisal to our careers.”
“It is evident those who refuse to affirm homosexuality and openly oppose it are being severely punished,” he wrote.
Attorney Wells told Fox News he wants the military to rescind the reprimand and reinstate the original six-year reenlistment contract.
“This was an executed contract,” he said. “But they just went in, tore it up and issued a new one.”
Wells said his client’s only “crime” was registering his opinion that a gay marriage in a military chapel was a violation of the law that existed at that time.
“His actions were proper within the scope of the Uniform Code and the Manual for Courts-Martial,” Wells said. “While his interpretation of the law may or may not have been correct, his actions should not have given rise to the firestorm of reprisals that he has suffered.”
Wells said he believes the military is trying to send a message to other troops- and incidents like this are just the “tip of the iceberg.”
“They’re trying to make examples of people early on who have religious beliefs that homosexual conduct in the military is wrong,” he said. “When these people assert their First Amendment rights, they are getting slapped down and slapped down hard.”
Wells isn’t alone in his fears.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said there is a clear and present danger to religious liberty within the military.
“Christians who choose to live out their faith find themselves incompatible with the secular view of this administration,” said Perkins. “We’re establishing a beach head for religious liberty and the evidence points to a very deliberate attack.”
Representatives of 14 groups concerned about religious liberty joined Reps. John Fleming R-La., Jim Bridenstine R-Okla., and Louie Gohmert R-Tex. on Capitol Hill to urge support for Fleming’s military religious freedom amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.
The amendment protects the rights of servicemembers to not only hold religious beliefs but to act on them and speak about them. Fleming’s amendment has bipartisan support but the Obama Administration issued a statement “strongly objecting” to the legislation.
The amendment comes as more than 170,000 Americans signed petitions calling for Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to protect the religious liberties of military personnel through policies that guarantee those liberties.
“We want to make this the first key battle to restore religious liberty back to the American people,” Fleming told Fox News. “It sets the tone for a broader war to fight back against this government that is infringing on our religious liberty.”
Perkins and Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, the FRC’s executive vice president, released a nine-page document detailing anti-religious behavior in the military.
“Unfortunately, pressures to impose a secular, anti-religious culture on our nation’s military services have intensified tremendously during the Obama Administration,” the FRC report states.
“We will stand with servicemembers who wish to exercise their First Amendment rights of religious liberty,” Boykin said. ‘We must do all we can to ensure that our servicemembers have the right to practice the very freedoms that they risk their lives to defend.”
Bailey Comment: The majority of Americans are really getting tire of being demonized for standing up against a few sick people that want to make all of the weird stupid stuff they do be OK. Well it's not OK and no matter how they try to make it seem like it's natural, only they really believe in the crap they're trying to shove down our throats.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!
“The military is trying to make examples of people who have religious beliefs that homosexual conduct in the military is wrong,” said John Wells, an attorney representing TSgt. Layne Wilson. “The end game is to force conservative Christians out of the military.”
Last December Wilson wrote a letter to a person believed to be a chaplain at West Point. He stated his displeasure at news of a same-sex ceremony held in the Cadet Chapel.
“This is wrong on so many levels,” Wilson wrote. “If they wanted to get married in a hotel that is one thing. Our base chapels are a place of worship and this is a mockery to God and our military core values. I have proudly served 27 years and this is a slap in the face to us who have put our lives on the line for this country. I hope sir that you will take appropriate action so this does not happen again.”
Instead of responding to the private email, the Commandant of Cadets notified the Utah Air National Guard – leading to an accusation that he had brought disgrace and discredit upon the Air National Guard and his conduct was inconsistent with the United States Air Force.
- ON FIRE! ARMY REPRIMANDS SOLDIERS FOR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS
- OUTRAGEOUS! CONGRESSMAN SAYS CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS BEING SINGLED OUT
- IS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IMPOSING ANTI-RELIGIOUS CULTURE IN MILITARY?
“You are hereby reprimanded,” read a letter from Lt. Col. Kevin Tobias. “As a noncommissioned officer you are expected to maintain a standard of professional and personal behavior that is above reproach. You have failed!”
A public affairs officer with the Utah Air National Guard told Fox News they could not comment on pending litigation.
Ironically, Wells pointed out, the Defense of Marriage Act was still the law of the land and TSgt. Layne was simply reporting “what he believed was a violation of the law.”
In addition to his reprimand, the Air National Guard terminated a six-year reenlistment contract. Instead, they gave Layne a one-year extension.
“Due to the fact that I expressed my views on homosexuality in uniform; Lt. Col. Tobias stated that I was no longer compatible with further military service,” Wilson wrote in a letter detailing the discrimination allegations.
Tobias confirmed Wilson’s allegation in a memorandum dated June 19, 2013 and obtained by Fox News.
“We talked about his feelings about DADT and how he doesn’t agree with it,” Tobias wrote. “I then told him that maybe this is a good time for him to move on because we’ve been ordered to not have an opinion about Gays in the military and we need to treat them as we would treat anyone else in the service of our country.”
“I also reiterated that I respect his feelings but I’m not comfortable reenlisting him with his strong feelings about this matter,” he additionally wrote.
Col. Ronald Blunck concurred with Tobias – noting that “Your right to practice your religious beliefs does not excuse you from complying with directives, instructions and lawful orders.”
“Lt. Col. Tobias is correct in demanding that TSgt. Wilson refrain from expressing opinions contrary to Air Force guidance while in uniform,” Blunck wrote. “The Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was directed by law.”
Wilson also discussed concerns he had about a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” repeal briefing in 2011. He told his superior officers he found the briefing to be “very disturbing” and “conflicting with my moral rights of conscience.”
“My issue is so much about homosexuals serving in the military, but rather that it is being forced upon as an acceptable lifestyle abandoning our traditional values,” he wrote.
He said the military has created an atmosphere where those who do not approve of homosexual conduct “must remain disapprovingly silent or face reprisal to our careers.”
“It is evident those who refuse to affirm homosexuality and openly oppose it are being severely punished,” he wrote.
Attorney Wells told Fox News he wants the military to rescind the reprimand and reinstate the original six-year reenlistment contract.
“This was an executed contract,” he said. “But they just went in, tore it up and issued a new one.”
Wells said his client’s only “crime” was registering his opinion that a gay marriage in a military chapel was a violation of the law that existed at that time.
“His actions were proper within the scope of the Uniform Code and the Manual for Courts-Martial,” Wells said. “While his interpretation of the law may or may not have been correct, his actions should not have given rise to the firestorm of reprisals that he has suffered.”
Wells said he believes the military is trying to send a message to other troops- and incidents like this are just the “tip of the iceberg.”
“They’re trying to make examples of people early on who have religious beliefs that homosexual conduct in the military is wrong,” he said. “When these people assert their First Amendment rights, they are getting slapped down and slapped down hard.”
Wells isn’t alone in his fears.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said there is a clear and present danger to religious liberty within the military.
“Christians who choose to live out their faith find themselves incompatible with the secular view of this administration,” said Perkins. “We’re establishing a beach head for religious liberty and the evidence points to a very deliberate attack.”
Representatives of 14 groups concerned about religious liberty joined Reps. John Fleming R-La., Jim Bridenstine R-Okla., and Louie Gohmert R-Tex. on Capitol Hill to urge support for Fleming’s military religious freedom amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.
The amendment protects the rights of servicemembers to not only hold religious beliefs but to act on them and speak about them. Fleming’s amendment has bipartisan support but the Obama Administration issued a statement “strongly objecting” to the legislation.
The amendment comes as more than 170,000 Americans signed petitions calling for Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to protect the religious liberties of military personnel through policies that guarantee those liberties.
“We want to make this the first key battle to restore religious liberty back to the American people,” Fleming told Fox News. “It sets the tone for a broader war to fight back against this government that is infringing on our religious liberty.”
Perkins and Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Jerry Boykin, the FRC’s executive vice president, released a nine-page document detailing anti-religious behavior in the military.
“Unfortunately, pressures to impose a secular, anti-religious culture on our nation’s military services have intensified tremendously during the Obama Administration,” the FRC report states.
“We will stand with servicemembers who wish to exercise their First Amendment rights of religious liberty,” Boykin said. ‘We must do all we can to ensure that our servicemembers have the right to practice the very freedoms that they risk their lives to defend.”
Bailey Comment: The majority of Americans are really getting tire of being demonized for standing up against a few sick people that want to make all of the weird stupid stuff they do be OK. Well it's not OK and no matter how they try to make it seem like it's natural, only they really believe in the crap they're trying to shove down our throats.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
When a car is broken and can't be fixed, you get another one. Get rid of the IRS.
Group: IRS mistakenly posted thousands of Social Security number on website
The IRS mistakenly posted the Social Security numbers of tens of
thousands of Americans on a government website, the agency confirmed
Monday night. One estimate put the figure as high as 100,000 names.
The numbers were posted to an IRS database for tax-exempt political groups known as 527s and first discovered by the group Public.Resource.org.
The California-based group said it learned of the "privacy breach" Tuesday while working on an unrelated audit of an “improperly vetted shipment” of IRS data on DVDs and promptly informed the agency, which shut down the site the next day.
An IRS spokesman told FoxNews.com on Monday the agency was alerted about a "substantial number" of Social Security numbers posted on the site and removed web access to the information "out of an abundance of caution." The spokesman also said the IRS is now "assessing the situation and exploring available options."
A message on the agency’s 527 homepage asks visitors to check back Monday, but the site was still down Monday evening.
Public.Resource.org. founder Carl Malamud.told FoxNews.com on Monday night that roughly 100,000 Social Security numbers were exposed.
Malamud said in a statement on the group's website that it hopes the Obama administration will act to restore access to the agency's nonprofit database and resolve its concerns over what it described as a "serious violation of federal law."
"It is time now for the administration to send a tiger team over to the [IRS] to help fix their information management practices," Malamud said.
The numbers were posted to an IRS database for tax-exempt political groups known as 527s and first discovered by the group Public.Resource.org.
The California-based group said it learned of the "privacy breach" Tuesday while working on an unrelated audit of an “improperly vetted shipment” of IRS data on DVDs and promptly informed the agency, which shut down the site the next day.
An IRS spokesman told FoxNews.com on Monday the agency was alerted about a "substantial number" of Social Security numbers posted on the site and removed web access to the information "out of an abundance of caution." The spokesman also said the IRS is now "assessing the situation and exploring available options."
A message on the agency’s 527 homepage asks visitors to check back Monday, but the site was still down Monday evening.
Public.Resource.org. founder Carl Malamud.told FoxNews.com on Monday night that roughly 100,000 Social Security numbers were exposed.
Malamud said in a statement on the group's website that it hopes the Obama administration will act to restore access to the agency's nonprofit database and resolve its concerns over what it described as a "serious violation of federal law."
"It is time now for the administration to send a tiger team over to the [IRS] to help fix their information management practices," Malamud said.
Since when did everything wrong become right?
Preacher Arrested for Calling Homosexuality a Sin
By Todd StarnesAn American evangelist said he was arrested and interrogated about his Christian faith after he was caught on a London sidewalk preaching that homosexuality is a sin.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!
Tony Miano, a retired deputy sheriff and former chaplain with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept., was charged with “using homophobic speech that could cause people anxiety, distress, alarm or insult.”
Miano had been preaching on a London street corner during the Wimbledon Tennis Championships with a ministry group called Sports Fan Outreach International.
British police prepare to arrest American Evangelist Tony Miano.
“I never used any gay slurs,” he said. “You would never hear me using slang or discriminatory language against homosexuals or any other group. That would be contrary to my faith.”
At some point, the evangelist quoted I Thessalonians 4:1-2 – a passage of scripture that mentions sexual immorality.
“I talked about women addicted to romance novels, men addicted to pornography, people with lustful thoughts, heterosexual fornication and homosexuality,” Miano told Fox News. “When I mentioned that the Bible was clear that homosexuality is a sin, a lady walked by and she glared at me and hurled the f-bomb.”
Miano said the woman came back a short time later and began to videotape his sidewalk sermon. Then, she called the police.
“They were concerned about homophobic speech,” he said. “But I told them I don’t fear homosexuals. The language I used was not homophobic, as I was not promoting fear or hatred of homosexuals.”
Miano said he did not limit his remarks to homosexual acts.
“I did not speak solely about homosexuality as a form of sexual immorality but also about any kind of sex outside marriage between one man and one woman, as well as lustful thoughts,” he said. “All of these are considered mainstream Christian positions and have been taught and believed by Christians for thousands of years.”
Police took the retired deputy sheriff to a nearby jail where he was fingerprinted. Officers also took a sample of his DNA and then he was interrogated.
“It was very distressing to be arrested and interrogated for openly expressing my deeply held Christian beliefs,” he said.
According to a transcript of the interrogation provided to Fox News, the officers asked if he really believed homosexuality is a sin. He was also asked whether he would help a homosexual who requested a favor.
“I was made to feel that my thoughts could be held against me,” he said. “The detective also asked me if I thought I was 100 percent right in what I had done. I said yes.”
Miano said he would gladly offer assistance to a homosexual.
“The Christian faith is dictated by the two greatest commandments – to love the Lord your God and to love your neighbor,” he said. “As such, I am compelled to love all people. Had a gay come up and asked me for something to eat, I would have fed him.”
But what troubled Miano is the idea that a hypothetical situation could have been used against him in court.
“I was actually going to be tried for how I thought,” he said.
In an ironic twist, the officers made arrangements to provide the evangelist with a Bible to read in jail – the same book that led to his arrest.
“The same book I read from in public which resulted in my arrest, was now the same book the police were giving to provide me comfort,” he said.
Miano, who is a member of the Evangelical Free Church, has been open-air preaching for eight years. He said this is the first time he’s been arrested.
“It was a rather surreal experience,” the retired deputy sheriff said. “I’ve conducted many interrogations but I’ve never been the subject of one.”
Miano spent about seven hours in jail before he was released without explanation and without an apology.
Now back home in Southern California, Miano said he fears that what happened in Great Britain could soon happen in the United States.
“I believe that’s what our government is going to eventually do here,” he said. “I believe homosexuals or others who are sensitive to their point of view will be visiting churches to listen to what preachers say from the pulpit. And I believe that pastors will be arrested in their pulpits for teaching what the Bible says about homosexuality and other sins.”
Andrea Williams, the chief executive of the British Christian Legal Centre echoed those concerns.
“It’s clear that there is already a clamp down on freedom of speech where people publicly express mainstream Christian views on sexual ethics,” he said.
Watch the sermon that got the evangelist arrested. Police arrive at approximately the 25:40 mark:
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Obamacare Rule to Verify Income Levels Is Scrapped
The Obama administration has scaled back another of its key healthcare
rules, delaying a requirement that verifies the income levels of those
seeking taxpayer subsidies until after the 2014 midterm elections.Instead, the new insurance marketplaces operated by states and the District of Columbia will take the consumer's word that they qualify for the subsidies, The Washington Post reported.
Editor's Note: Should ObamaCare Be Repealed? Vote in Urgent National Poll
The announcement came on Friday without fanfare with the Department of Health and Human Services publishing the notification in the Federal Register.
Verification plans for the taxpayer subsidies won't go into effect until 2015 for those earning about $45,000 to purchase health insurance, or earning $15,000 to qualify for Medicaid in the District and 23 participating states.
The move comes days after another Obamacare snag was announced on Wednesday when the administration delayed until 2015 the employer mandate that required businesses with more than 50 full-time workers to pay stiff fines for failing to providing insurance.
"As crunch time is coming, they're just muddling through and figuring out short cuts," said Ian Spatz, a senior adviser at Manatt Health Solutions, told The Post. "It might not be elegant, but this is how they're trying to make the law work."
Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Va., and a consumer advocate, said it's not unprecedented for the government to use the honor system, and compared it to reporting cash tips to the Internal Revenue Service.
"An awful lot of the economy is a cash economy,” Jost said. "If we had to verify every statement that was made to the IRS, our economy would collapse."
The announcement on Friday -- at the end of the Fourth of July holiday – is a recurring tactic for the Obama administration to deliver information likely to be criticized by Republicans or the media.
Friday nights often became the preferred timeline for massive document dumps when Congress was investigating the Justice Department for the "Fast and Furious" scandal, Politico reported.
Editor's Note: Should ObamaCare Be Repealed? Vote in Urgent National Poll
Thursday, July 4, 2013
A letter to America. We will never neglect you again.
My Dearest America,
I write to you today with great remorse but also unrelenting pride. Remorse, because of what we have allowed to befall you. Pride, because I know we as proud citizens will correct that which has allowed this.
Your magnificent splendor has awed us as no other nation in the world. From your snow-capped mountains to your fertile plains, you have been unselfish in giving of your bounty. From one grand ocean to another your beauty has been captivating and inspiring. Your unassuming nature has been humbling.
On that fateful fourth day of July 237 years ago, you were born under the proud and watchful gaze of 56 men who put Country before self. With their signatures they bestowed upon not only us, but the entire world, one of the most beautiful documents ever written on a single parchment. The Declaration of Independence stands alone as the direction of the free world.
From your infancy you struggled. As you grew you carried the burden of that freedom on your shoulders as no nation before or since, yet you never faltered or complained. A little more than 8 years later your burden was eased when 55 men once again joined to create the most revered Constitution in history. On a mere four pages they created the Supreme Law under which we have lived freely since.
A list of Rights was subsequently added and accepted not from men or Kings, but from our Creator. Embracing freedom you have proudly declared, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”, to any and all people of the world.
Your Founding Fathers were common men of simple and honorable means. Their purpose was not fame or notoriety, they knew not what the future held for you, rather it was to forge the direction so needed back then. They did not wish you to be an egalitarian state nor did they want an all powerful government from which they initially fled. They were reverent yet not assuming, they were humble yet confident, they were the truest of Patriots.
They opposed, with dedication and strength, the pretended authority of intrusive government and accepted with trust the Creators guidance. All the while they defined and affirmed the legal basis of State Sovereignty.
These men bravely and honorably accepted their challenge and many made ultimate sacrifices during wars and revolution in order to preserve their beliefs for your legality.
Created as a Federal Constitutional Republic did not, however, prevent many from conspiring tyranny against you. Against many odds and obstacles you have survived. We now find ourselves at the doorstep of a “fundamental transformation” of your sovereignty. An attempt at socializing your justice and dissecting your individualism into a collective that breeches your very foundation is being deviously attempted.
We The People have neglected our responsibility to preserve your unselfishness of Liberty, Justice and Freedom. We held these truths to be self evident yet we allowed them to be corrupted by the very people we honored with our most powerful weapon, our vote.
We have shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right ourselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. This is our tragedy and our shame. We have, over the course of many decades, allowed ourselves to become preoccupied with our own needs rather than preserving yours. We have become selfish, as you stood proudly against Despotism for centuries, and have allowed your freedom to be challenged. For this we beg your and God’s forgiveness.
We have realized the error of our ways. We realize now that those that we favored with preserving our Rights have been deviant in their intentions and advantageous in their benefit against our wishes. Our preoccupation of attaining your greatest gift to us, the ”American Dream”, has created a horrible disconnect with our true duty, the securing of your most important merits of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
We now prostrate ourselves before you and humbly deliver that we will never allow ourselves to neglect our solemn duty to you again. We have declared a movement, a revolution if you would, to once again restore you to your rightful and proper place as “The Shining City On The Hill”. A Nation that is not to be envied, but rather to be looked upon and replicated on other lands. Replicated because we have accepted it as the way every man, woman and child was intended to live, as free people, as directed by our Creator, not men.
We solemnly offer that we will return to the intended regard of social, moral and spiritual beliefs that created your magnificence. We will wrap these beliefs around our core values of Constitutionally limited government, fiscal responsibility and free market principles.
We understand these were, are and will be guaranteed not just to us but to our progeny as our Founders and ancestors demanded. We accept that many have suffered the ultimate sacrifice to maintain your freedom, we shall never allow that to be dismissed from your history and legacy. We promise to never again assume the power of our vote, but rather to cherish it as our Patriotic duty to restore our government to its intended purpose.
America, we will never neglect you again. Your exceptional place in the world must be maintained and we humbly submit our dedication to that cause.
We will not disappoint.
We will not falter.
You will survive.
God Bless You and all that you stand for.
Patriotically Yours,
We The People of the United States of America
I write to you today with great remorse but also unrelenting pride. Remorse, because of what we have allowed to befall you. Pride, because I know we as proud citizens will correct that which has allowed this.
Your magnificent splendor has awed us as no other nation in the world. From your snow-capped mountains to your fertile plains, you have been unselfish in giving of your bounty. From one grand ocean to another your beauty has been captivating and inspiring. Your unassuming nature has been humbling.
On that fateful fourth day of July 237 years ago, you were born under the proud and watchful gaze of 56 men who put Country before self. With their signatures they bestowed upon not only us, but the entire world, one of the most beautiful documents ever written on a single parchment. The Declaration of Independence stands alone as the direction of the free world.
From your infancy you struggled. As you grew you carried the burden of that freedom on your shoulders as no nation before or since, yet you never faltered or complained. A little more than 8 years later your burden was eased when 55 men once again joined to create the most revered Constitution in history. On a mere four pages they created the Supreme Law under which we have lived freely since.
A list of Rights was subsequently added and accepted not from men or Kings, but from our Creator. Embracing freedom you have proudly declared, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”, to any and all people of the world.
Your Founding Fathers were common men of simple and honorable means. Their purpose was not fame or notoriety, they knew not what the future held for you, rather it was to forge the direction so needed back then. They did not wish you to be an egalitarian state nor did they want an all powerful government from which they initially fled. They were reverent yet not assuming, they were humble yet confident, they were the truest of Patriots.
They opposed, with dedication and strength, the pretended authority of intrusive government and accepted with trust the Creators guidance. All the while they defined and affirmed the legal basis of State Sovereignty.
These men bravely and honorably accepted their challenge and many made ultimate sacrifices during wars and revolution in order to preserve their beliefs for your legality.
Created as a Federal Constitutional Republic did not, however, prevent many from conspiring tyranny against you. Against many odds and obstacles you have survived. We now find ourselves at the doorstep of a “fundamental transformation” of your sovereignty. An attempt at socializing your justice and dissecting your individualism into a collective that breeches your very foundation is being deviously attempted.
We The People have neglected our responsibility to preserve your unselfishness of Liberty, Justice and Freedom. We held these truths to be self evident yet we allowed them to be corrupted by the very people we honored with our most powerful weapon, our vote.
We have shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right ourselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. This is our tragedy and our shame. We have, over the course of many decades, allowed ourselves to become preoccupied with our own needs rather than preserving yours. We have become selfish, as you stood proudly against Despotism for centuries, and have allowed your freedom to be challenged. For this we beg your and God’s forgiveness.
We have realized the error of our ways. We realize now that those that we favored with preserving our Rights have been deviant in their intentions and advantageous in their benefit against our wishes. Our preoccupation of attaining your greatest gift to us, the ”American Dream”, has created a horrible disconnect with our true duty, the securing of your most important merits of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
We now prostrate ourselves before you and humbly deliver that we will never allow ourselves to neglect our solemn duty to you again. We have declared a movement, a revolution if you would, to once again restore you to your rightful and proper place as “The Shining City On The Hill”. A Nation that is not to be envied, but rather to be looked upon and replicated on other lands. Replicated because we have accepted it as the way every man, woman and child was intended to live, as free people, as directed by our Creator, not men.
We solemnly offer that we will return to the intended regard of social, moral and spiritual beliefs that created your magnificence. We will wrap these beliefs around our core values of Constitutionally limited government, fiscal responsibility and free market principles.
We understand these were, are and will be guaranteed not just to us but to our progeny as our Founders and ancestors demanded. We accept that many have suffered the ultimate sacrifice to maintain your freedom, we shall never allow that to be dismissed from your history and legacy. We promise to never again assume the power of our vote, but rather to cherish it as our Patriotic duty to restore our government to its intended purpose.
America, we will never neglect you again. Your exceptional place in the world must be maintained and we humbly submit our dedication to that cause.
We will not disappoint.
We will not falter.
You will survive.
God Bless You and all that you stand for.
Patriotically Yours,
We The People of the United States of America
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Key Obamacare Mandate Delayed; GOP Renews Call for Repeal
The Obama administration’s move to delay until 2015 a requirement that
employers offer health insurance or else face stiff penalties is yet
another indication that the embattled law is a failure and should be
repealed, Republicans and conservatives said on Tuesday.
"The president's healthcare law is already raising costs and costing jobs,” House Speaker John Boehner said. “This announcement means even the Obama administration knows the ‘train wreck’ will only get worse.
Obamacare: Massive New Rules Revealed for 2013
“I hope the administration recognizes the need to release American families from the mandates of this law as well,” the Ohio Republican said. “This is a clear acknowledgment that the law is unworkable, and it underscores the need to repeal the law and replace it with effective, patient-centered reforms."
“Obamacare costs too much and it isn't working the way the administration promised,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. “The White House seems to slowly be admitting what Americans already know: Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced with common-sense reforms that actually lowers costs for Americans."
And Barney Keller, spokesman for the Club for Growth, called the delay “a transparently political ploy to help the Democrats who voted for it avoid the consequences at the ballot box in 2014. This just helps make the case that Obamacare should be completely repealed — period, exclamation point.”
On Tuesday, the White House made its most significant concession on the healthcare law since President Barack Obama signed it in 2010, delaying the requirement that medium and large companies provide coverage for their workers or face heavy fines.
The law requires companies with 50 or more workers to provide affordable coverage to their full-time employees or risk escalating tax penalties if just one worker ends up getting government-subsidized insurance.
Companies would have had to pay the Internal Revenue Service $2,000 for each full-time employee who did not get health coverage, beginning Jan. 1, when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was scheduled to take full effect.
Business groups have complained that the provision was too complicated.
"We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively," Treasury Assistant Secretary Mark Mazur said in a blog post. "We have listened to your feedback and we are taking action."
Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett cast the decision as part of an effort to simplify Obamacare’s data-reporting requirements.
Since enforcing the coverage mandate is dependent on businesses reporting about their workers' access to insurance, the administration moved to postpone the reporting requirement, and with it, the mandate to provide coverage, Jarrett said.
More broadly, however, the decision undercuts Republican efforts to make Obamacare and its costs a major issue in the 2014 congressional races.
Democrats are defending 21 Senate seats to the Republicans’ 14, and the GOP had already started to excoriate Senate Democrats who had voted for the health law.
“A delay — conveniently past the 2014 election — only adds to the uncertainty these job-creators face because of Obamacare," said Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. “The only reasonable recourse is to fully repeal this law.”
Tuesday’s decision underscores yet another problem facing the troubled healthcare law.
Obamacare: Massive New Rules Revealed for 2013
Just last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that religious-affiliated, nonprofit institutions must provide insurance coverage for their employees for birth control under Obamacare. The decision ensured more legal challenges to the rule in the future.
In fact, Sebelius herself has been under fire for soliciting donations on behalf of Enroll America, the group made up of Obama campaign loyalists seeking to promote the healthcare law.
Related: NFL Contradicts Sebelius on Help to Promote Obamacare
The IRS, which is charged with implementing Obamacare, remains under fire for widespread mismanagement and for the targeting of tea party, conservative, and religious groups in evaluating their applications for tax-exempt status.
And the American Action Forum, a Washington advocacy group, said that Obamacare had so far cost a total of $30.8 billion and 111.4 million hours for completing paperwork alone.
The group said 55,742 employees — working 2,000 hours per year — would be needed to process all the red tape associated with Obamacare.
While the employer mandate was delayed with Tuesday’s announcement, the individual mandate — which requires individuals to obtain health insurance — presumably remains on schedule for 2014.
The individual mandate was challenged — and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that the healthcare law was constitutional since the penalty would be collected by the IRS and amounted to a tax.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration also still plans to open up a new marketplace for government-regulated insurance plans on Oct. 1, to take effect on Jan. 1. And a sprawling set of subsidies would also remain in place.
The delay of the employer mandate, though, raises questions about whether more elements of the law might be delayed in the coming months.
Even though Tuesday’s announcement came at the beginning of the Fourth of July week when Congress was on vacation, GOP legislators and conservative groups responded strongly to the decision.
“Obamacare's expense is killing jobs and is too great for businesses to handle,” said Rep. Bill Cassidy, who is a physician in Louisiana. “This delay in implementing the employer mandate acknowledges this while encouraging employers to drop insurance coverage for their employees. Taxpayers will pay more and deficits will increase.
“We must replace Obamacare with patient-centered reforms that expand healthcare access without destroying jobs,” Cassidy said.
Another physician, Georgia Rep. Tom Price, called Obamacare “too overreaching, too intrusive, too unworkable and too destructive to the American people.
“If they can't manage to enforce their own law after three years of preparation, what does this say about their ability to actually deliver health care?” Price asked.
“The employer mandate will destroy jobs, regardless of when it's implemented,” said Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. “If anything, this decision exacerbates the confusion and uncertainty employers face.
“Jobs are already being lost and workers' hours slashed because of the president's healthcare law,” Kline added. “No amount of bureaucratic tinkering can ease the pain Obamacare is inflicting on our nation's workplaces.
“America's workers, families, and job-creators deserve permanent relief from Obamacare — not a one-year reprieve.”
And Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, told Newsmax: “It is increasingly obvious that the Obama Administration is nowhere near ready to deal with the countless negative consequences their own law creates.
“The delay amounts to an admission that forcing small businesses to comply with more onerous regulations only hurts jobs and slows the economy.”
"The president's healthcare law is already raising costs and costing jobs,” House Speaker John Boehner said. “This announcement means even the Obama administration knows the ‘train wreck’ will only get worse.
Obamacare: Massive New Rules Revealed for 2013
“I hope the administration recognizes the need to release American families from the mandates of this law as well,” the Ohio Republican said. “This is a clear acknowledgment that the law is unworkable, and it underscores the need to repeal the law and replace it with effective, patient-centered reforms."
“Obamacare costs too much and it isn't working the way the administration promised,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. “The White House seems to slowly be admitting what Americans already know: Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced with common-sense reforms that actually lowers costs for Americans."
And Barney Keller, spokesman for the Club for Growth, called the delay “a transparently political ploy to help the Democrats who voted for it avoid the consequences at the ballot box in 2014. This just helps make the case that Obamacare should be completely repealed — period, exclamation point.”
On Tuesday, the White House made its most significant concession on the healthcare law since President Barack Obama signed it in 2010, delaying the requirement that medium and large companies provide coverage for their workers or face heavy fines.
The law requires companies with 50 or more workers to provide affordable coverage to their full-time employees or risk escalating tax penalties if just one worker ends up getting government-subsidized insurance.
Companies would have had to pay the Internal Revenue Service $2,000 for each full-time employee who did not get health coverage, beginning Jan. 1, when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was scheduled to take full effect.
Business groups have complained that the provision was too complicated.
"We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively," Treasury Assistant Secretary Mark Mazur said in a blog post. "We have listened to your feedback and we are taking action."
Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett cast the decision as part of an effort to simplify Obamacare’s data-reporting requirements.
Since enforcing the coverage mandate is dependent on businesses reporting about their workers' access to insurance, the administration moved to postpone the reporting requirement, and with it, the mandate to provide coverage, Jarrett said.
More broadly, however, the decision undercuts Republican efforts to make Obamacare and its costs a major issue in the 2014 congressional races.
Democrats are defending 21 Senate seats to the Republicans’ 14, and the GOP had already started to excoriate Senate Democrats who had voted for the health law.
“A delay — conveniently past the 2014 election — only adds to the uncertainty these job-creators face because of Obamacare," said Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. “The only reasonable recourse is to fully repeal this law.”
Tuesday’s decision underscores yet another problem facing the troubled healthcare law.
Obamacare: Massive New Rules Revealed for 2013
Just last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that religious-affiliated, nonprofit institutions must provide insurance coverage for their employees for birth control under Obamacare. The decision ensured more legal challenges to the rule in the future.
In fact, Sebelius herself has been under fire for soliciting donations on behalf of Enroll America, the group made up of Obama campaign loyalists seeking to promote the healthcare law.
Related: NFL Contradicts Sebelius on Help to Promote Obamacare
The IRS, which is charged with implementing Obamacare, remains under fire for widespread mismanagement and for the targeting of tea party, conservative, and religious groups in evaluating their applications for tax-exempt status.
And the American Action Forum, a Washington advocacy group, said that Obamacare had so far cost a total of $30.8 billion and 111.4 million hours for completing paperwork alone.
The group said 55,742 employees — working 2,000 hours per year — would be needed to process all the red tape associated with Obamacare.
While the employer mandate was delayed with Tuesday’s announcement, the individual mandate — which requires individuals to obtain health insurance — presumably remains on schedule for 2014.
The individual mandate was challenged — and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that the healthcare law was constitutional since the penalty would be collected by the IRS and amounted to a tax.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration also still plans to open up a new marketplace for government-regulated insurance plans on Oct. 1, to take effect on Jan. 1. And a sprawling set of subsidies would also remain in place.
The delay of the employer mandate, though, raises questions about whether more elements of the law might be delayed in the coming months.
Even though Tuesday’s announcement came at the beginning of the Fourth of July week when Congress was on vacation, GOP legislators and conservative groups responded strongly to the decision.
“Obamacare's expense is killing jobs and is too great for businesses to handle,” said Rep. Bill Cassidy, who is a physician in Louisiana. “This delay in implementing the employer mandate acknowledges this while encouraging employers to drop insurance coverage for their employees. Taxpayers will pay more and deficits will increase.
“We must replace Obamacare with patient-centered reforms that expand healthcare access without destroying jobs,” Cassidy said.
Another physician, Georgia Rep. Tom Price, called Obamacare “too overreaching, too intrusive, too unworkable and too destructive to the American people.
“If they can't manage to enforce their own law after three years of preparation, what does this say about their ability to actually deliver health care?” Price asked.
“The employer mandate will destroy jobs, regardless of when it's implemented,” said Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. “If anything, this decision exacerbates the confusion and uncertainty employers face.
“Jobs are already being lost and workers' hours slashed because of the president's healthcare law,” Kline added. “No amount of bureaucratic tinkering can ease the pain Obamacare is inflicting on our nation's workplaces.
“America's workers, families, and job-creators deserve permanent relief from Obamacare — not a one-year reprieve.”
And Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, told Newsmax: “It is increasingly obvious that the Obama Administration is nowhere near ready to deal with the countless negative consequences their own law creates.
“The delay amounts to an admission that forcing small businesses to comply with more onerous regulations only hurts jobs and slows the economy.”
Monday, July 1, 2013
Devouring Paula Deen
Timothy Birdnow
The big "people" story of the news cycle is the firing of Paula "hiw wife could eat no lean" Deen, former doyen of the Food Network. Deen was fired ostensibly for making racial slurs in the past. I think the Paula Deen, the queen of non-lean, was really sacked because of racial profiling and her steadfast refusal to promote the modern Progressive diet.
First let us look at Deen herself (I might add I have never seen her except in the few photographs the media has run in response to this controversy, and I have never seen her show.) An old white woman from the deep South, Deen is known as a devout Baptist - something guaranteed to raise liberal hackles. She is also unapologetic about her Georgian roots. To liberals, that means she is de-facto a foul person.
And she cooks with salt, sugar, and fat, lots of it, in the old Southern tradition.
This caused a major controversy when she admitted she was a diabetic.
Deen then monetized her diabetes, becoming a paid spokeswoman for Novo Nordisk, a Danish pharmaceutical firm that makes diabetes medicine. Deen continued to make her signiature dishes, which enraged the food Nazis.
Michelle Obama has made changing the American diet her signature issue, but this sort of thing has been going on for a long time. The Left has always hated the American diet because it illustrates our wealth and privilege, and because they want an international diet that all people will be forced to consume. See, what the Left is trying to do is weaken sectional cultures - particularly America's - and create a new world culture to bond the public to a sense of world citizenship. That is part of why they are so vigorous in promoting amnesty for illegal aliens; they want an internationalizing of America's culture. A big part of culture is cuisine.
I wrote about this a number of years ago at American Thinker. http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/wheres_the_beef.html
The venom against Mrs. Deen by the Left is proof-positive she is upsetting their carefully laid plans; when they all jump on board with a hate campaign against someone it is because that person is a threat to them. Paula Deen probably can't understand this; she doesn't know what she has done wrong. But it is because Mooch Obama has been moving ahead with plans to restrict America's diet (as Nanny Bloomberg has already done in New York City) and Deen's popularity and antiquated cooking style pose a direct challenge to their plans.
But they couldn't bring her down over the diabetes, nor over her success at making money off of it, so they had to find a plan B.
Now, Paula Deen is from the old South, where the N word was not abbreviated nor was it necessarily considered a pejorative. (In point of fact, blacks today call themselves that, and if anyone remembers Trayvon Martin called himself the "no limits N***er"). Had Deen NOT used that word on occasion she would have been quite odd, just as someone who calls doesn't call them "illegal immigrants" but invaders is odd today. After all, the word means dark, hardly a pejorative. It has become taboo as a direct result of the labors of the Progressives during the '70's. That she should slip up and use such a word is not surprising given her early life.
But you cannot violate a liberal taboo. The Left has made the foulest of sexual language acceptable up to and including calling someone a female parent copulator, and the most vile of profanity is considered merely colorful invective.
Change the language and you change the culture. The Left has successfully done just that. What was a racial description that some found offensive is now taboo, while what were taboo words reserved for sailors and prostitutes is now mainstream. Please notice; the coarsening of sexual language fits with the liberal free love/sexual revolution movement. To get people to accept any and all sex, public and private, they have removed the taboo of sexual language. But they have added a taboo; terms such as "queer" or "faggot" have now become taboo (unless you are Alec Baldwin).
The liberal sense of freedom is reserved for what they themselves seek to promote.
And so this older white woman handed them the tool to promote her destruction.
But why should that be? What she has done is certainly far less egregious than, say, the anal raping of a little girl, yet many on the Left pushed for amnesty for Roman Polanski, who did precisely that. So it is o.k. to rape a little girl but not say "n***er"? They offer forgiveness for a degenerate like Polanski but not for a God-fearing woman?
This goes back to Saul Alinski rule number 4 "make your enemies live up to their own rulebook". Paul Deen didn't KNOW she was their enemy, but she has been mugged just the same, because she is a professing christian who may have fallen short. Not Polanski short, but short enough that the Left could crush her.
Consider the foul things that so many liberals have done and the Progressives have excused. Bill Clinton has been credibly accused of rape, and certainly used his authority to compel women to sexual favors. He also committed perjury and obstructed justice. No big deal! Nothing to see here! Consider Anthony Weiner, who is running for elective office in New York yet again and will probably win. Consider Barney Frank's live-in lover was running a house of ill-repute out of his home; no big deal! Consider Al Sharpton, who has done all manner of evil things including his promotion of the Tawana Brawley lie and his part in numerous shakedowns and in stirring up violence in the black community; he is rewarded with his own television show. The list goes on and on.
Yet Paula Deen must be destroyed.
It’s all about Barack Obama’s promise of fundamental change; what we eat, how we live, who we idolize, how we speak, how we think - all must be fundamentally altered if we are to create the New Man, one fit for our socialist utopia.
The double standard is stark. When Barack Obama needs to get out the black vote his people find an obscure non-case involving a "white hispanic" shooting a "no limits N***er" after nearly getting his hand smashed in, and they run the poor man through a farcical trial. George Zimmerman will never be free of this incident, yet he clearly was the victim here, the victim of a thug who hated white people and enjoyed fighting "MMA style". But Zimmerman had a political role to play, and so was sacrificed on the alter of Obama. The same is true of Paula Deen, who stands in the way of Mrs. Obama's personal deification.
This is indicative of the Progressive mindset. They do not believe in God, or at least not in a God as we have traditionally understood Him. People are widgets, like the part of a car, and if they are inconvenient or defective they are simply tossed aside. It is a particularly materialistic view of individuals. Leftism begets the worst sort of Macchiavellianism, because ends justify means. Paula Deen unwittingly stepped into the lion's den, and is now being devoured.
That is our future, folks, should we not stop the relentless advance of the Left.
Read more from Tim and friends at www.tbirdnow.mee.nu
The big "people" story of the news cycle is the firing of Paula "hiw wife could eat no lean" Deen, former doyen of the Food Network. Deen was fired ostensibly for making racial slurs in the past. I think the Paula Deen, the queen of non-lean, was really sacked because of racial profiling and her steadfast refusal to promote the modern Progressive diet.
First let us look at Deen herself (I might add I have never seen her except in the few photographs the media has run in response to this controversy, and I have never seen her show.) An old white woman from the deep South, Deen is known as a devout Baptist - something guaranteed to raise liberal hackles. She is also unapologetic about her Georgian roots. To liberals, that means she is de-facto a foul person.
And she cooks with salt, sugar, and fat, lots of it, in the old Southern tradition.
This caused a major controversy when she admitted she was a diabetic.
Deen then monetized her diabetes, becoming a paid spokeswoman for Novo Nordisk, a Danish pharmaceutical firm that makes diabetes medicine. Deen continued to make her signiature dishes, which enraged the food Nazis.
Michelle Obama has made changing the American diet her signature issue, but this sort of thing has been going on for a long time. The Left has always hated the American diet because it illustrates our wealth and privilege, and because they want an international diet that all people will be forced to consume. See, what the Left is trying to do is weaken sectional cultures - particularly America's - and create a new world culture to bond the public to a sense of world citizenship. That is part of why they are so vigorous in promoting amnesty for illegal aliens; they want an internationalizing of America's culture. A big part of culture is cuisine.
I wrote about this a number of years ago at American Thinker. http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/01/wheres_the_beef.html
The venom against Mrs. Deen by the Left is proof-positive she is upsetting their carefully laid plans; when they all jump on board with a hate campaign against someone it is because that person is a threat to them. Paula Deen probably can't understand this; she doesn't know what she has done wrong. But it is because Mooch Obama has been moving ahead with plans to restrict America's diet (as Nanny Bloomberg has already done in New York City) and Deen's popularity and antiquated cooking style pose a direct challenge to their plans.
But they couldn't bring her down over the diabetes, nor over her success at making money off of it, so they had to find a plan B.
Now, Paula Deen is from the old South, where the N word was not abbreviated nor was it necessarily considered a pejorative. (In point of fact, blacks today call themselves that, and if anyone remembers Trayvon Martin called himself the "no limits N***er"). Had Deen NOT used that word on occasion she would have been quite odd, just as someone who calls doesn't call them "illegal immigrants" but invaders is odd today. After all, the word means dark, hardly a pejorative. It has become taboo as a direct result of the labors of the Progressives during the '70's. That she should slip up and use such a word is not surprising given her early life.
But you cannot violate a liberal taboo. The Left has made the foulest of sexual language acceptable up to and including calling someone a female parent copulator, and the most vile of profanity is considered merely colorful invective.
Change the language and you change the culture. The Left has successfully done just that. What was a racial description that some found offensive is now taboo, while what were taboo words reserved for sailors and prostitutes is now mainstream. Please notice; the coarsening of sexual language fits with the liberal free love/sexual revolution movement. To get people to accept any and all sex, public and private, they have removed the taboo of sexual language. But they have added a taboo; terms such as "queer" or "faggot" have now become taboo (unless you are Alec Baldwin).
The liberal sense of freedom is reserved for what they themselves seek to promote.
And so this older white woman handed them the tool to promote her destruction.
But why should that be? What she has done is certainly far less egregious than, say, the anal raping of a little girl, yet many on the Left pushed for amnesty for Roman Polanski, who did precisely that. So it is o.k. to rape a little girl but not say "n***er"? They offer forgiveness for a degenerate like Polanski but not for a God-fearing woman?
This goes back to Saul Alinski rule number 4 "make your enemies live up to their own rulebook". Paul Deen didn't KNOW she was their enemy, but she has been mugged just the same, because she is a professing christian who may have fallen short. Not Polanski short, but short enough that the Left could crush her.
Consider the foul things that so many liberals have done and the Progressives have excused. Bill Clinton has been credibly accused of rape, and certainly used his authority to compel women to sexual favors. He also committed perjury and obstructed justice. No big deal! Nothing to see here! Consider Anthony Weiner, who is running for elective office in New York yet again and will probably win. Consider Barney Frank's live-in lover was running a house of ill-repute out of his home; no big deal! Consider Al Sharpton, who has done all manner of evil things including his promotion of the Tawana Brawley lie and his part in numerous shakedowns and in stirring up violence in the black community; he is rewarded with his own television show. The list goes on and on.
Yet Paula Deen must be destroyed.
It’s all about Barack Obama’s promise of fundamental change; what we eat, how we live, who we idolize, how we speak, how we think - all must be fundamentally altered if we are to create the New Man, one fit for our socialist utopia.
The double standard is stark. When Barack Obama needs to get out the black vote his people find an obscure non-case involving a "white hispanic" shooting a "no limits N***er" after nearly getting his hand smashed in, and they run the poor man through a farcical trial. George Zimmerman will never be free of this incident, yet he clearly was the victim here, the victim of a thug who hated white people and enjoyed fighting "MMA style". But Zimmerman had a political role to play, and so was sacrificed on the alter of Obama. The same is true of Paula Deen, who stands in the way of Mrs. Obama's personal deification.
This is indicative of the Progressive mindset. They do not believe in God, or at least not in a God as we have traditionally understood Him. People are widgets, like the part of a car, and if they are inconvenient or defective they are simply tossed aside. It is a particularly materialistic view of individuals. Leftism begets the worst sort of Macchiavellianism, because ends justify means. Paula Deen unwittingly stepped into the lion's den, and is now being devoured.
That is our future, folks, should we not stop the relentless advance of the Left.
Read more from Tim and friends at www.tbirdnow.mee.nu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Tit for Tat ? ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — A statue of abolitionist Frederick Douglass was ripped from its base in Rochester on the an...
-
NEW YORK (AP) — As New York City faced one of its darkest days with the death toll from the coronavirus surging past 4,000 — more th...
