Sterling Banned? Now Kerry Must Resign

Donald Sterling
in "better days"?

Sterling has been banned from the NBA for his incendiary racist remarks about black people and minorities in general.

He didn't want his girlfriend of mixed heritage taking pictures with black people, or bring them to basketball games.

In the recorded argument with his girlfriend, Sterling kept trying to put aside the issue of race, as though he wasn't really racist, but then he told her not to bring black people to the basketball games.

Does Sterling know that he has players on the Clippers from diverse backgrounds, including African-Americans?

Sterling's comments plunge the depths of folly. Racism is not just morally bankrupt, but intellectually backward. That alone should dissuade individuals from carrying out any actions or behaviors due to prejudice.

The uproar following his recorded private conversation was bad enough.

Will the guy lose everything over such outrageous remarks?

If that is to be the case, this man is going to lose so much over a private conversation between two private persons.

John Kerry:
Israel will turn into
an Apartheid State

Sterling's thoughts about race, minorities, and the proper interactions among all of us are offensive and spiteful.

However, if the media storm has pounded this private, wealthy basketball team owner so heavily, then there must be greater outrage toward Secretary of State John Kerry for his remarks about Israel.

From CNN:

A two-state solution will be underscored as the only real alternative. Because a unitary state winds up either an apartheid state with second-class citizens or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish State.

Kerry shared these comments before the Trilateral Commission. Not exactly a private meeting. As a public official representing this country abroad, the citizens of this country should expect the highest regard for official communiques among leaders.

Israel is not an apartheid state. Period.

Arabs and Muslims enjoy more freedoms and privileges in Israel than they do in Arab states.

For the Secretary of State to use that word in the context of Israel is not just patently offensive, but either unintentionally revealing about the Obama Administration's true intentions about Israel and the Palestinians, or exposes a gross incompetence from this liberal administration's appreciations of Middle-Eastern tensions.

In 2001, the United Nations called Zionism a form of racism. Do we want diplomatic leaders who resurrect such outrageous, offensive, and even dangerous ideas again?

The Guardian was not too kind to Kerry:

Regardless of the apology, Kerry's remarks represent a significant departure, as senior US officials historically have avoided the word "apartheid" relating to Israeli policies. It is believed to be the first time a US official of Kerry's standing has used the contentious term in the context of Israel, even if only as a warning for the future.

The Obama Doctrine has determined not only to diminish American military presence throughout the world, but to weaken military might as well as empower hostile countries to pursue their limited, disastrous, or violent agendas. On its surface, Obama's foreign policy is directed more toward scaling back the US rather than maintaining any sense of peace and security here or abroad.

He directed a no-fly zone over Libya, yet did nothing when Israel-ally Hosni Mubarack was removed from power. His administration killed Osama bin Laden, yet Al-Qaeda satellites are springing up all over the Middle East and North Africa, including Benghazi, where terrorists attacked the American embassy and killed four people, despite repeated please from the staff for more security.

John Kerry, US Senator, Presidential candidate, and now Secretary of State, knows better than to use such language.

Sterling is a racist. Kerry is unfit for Secretary of State. Is he anti-Semitic too?

The Weekly Standard's William Kristol blasted Kerry, whose comments differed with President Obama's at one time:

 "On Friday secretary of state John Kerry raised the spectre of Israel as an 'apartheid state'. Even Barack Obama condemned the use of this term when running for president in 2008. It is no longer enough for the White House to clean up after the messes John Kerry has made. It is time for John Kerry to step down as secretary of state, or for President Obama to fire him."

Ted Cruz

US Senator Ted Cruz took to the Senate floor and demanded that Kerry step down. Because the United States should stand tall with the state of Israel, and because of Kerry's remarks about a potential apartheid state, Cruz condemned the Secretary's reference to a systemically racist regime in South Africa.

 There is no place for this word [apartheid] in the context of the state of Israel.

And there is no place for John Kerry to remain Chief Diplomat of the United States.

Even Democratic US Senator Barbara Boxer punched at the outrageous remark, without directly targeting Kerry:

Sen. Barbara BoxerVerified account‏@SenatorBoxer 21h

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and any linkage between Israel and apartheid is nonsensical and ridiculous.

Charles Krauthammer has also signaled the need for Kerry's resignation:

It's beyond nonsense. It's pernicious, and extremely harmful. What the Secretary of State of the United States has succeeded in doing in what he thought was a private comment is to echo and therefore legitimize the worst of the libelous calumnies against the Jewish State. If there is one minority in the Middle East who enjoys the rule of law and protection and democracy, it is Arabs in Israel. . .this is a resigning-type statement."

So, Sterling's comments exposed him as a racist, and now he will have to sell off the Clippers and go away. At the minimum, John Kerry must step down as Secretary of State.

President Obama has already condemned Sterling's comments about black people, which deserved condemnation

Anything less for Kerry would send a message that anti-Semitic remarks are somehow acceptable (comments with global implications) or that racial slights from basketball owners must command more attention than the devastating remarks issued from a United States diplomat who has inadvertently exposed a latent agenda to delegitimize American-Israeli relations.

Donald Sterling is a Hater -- And So Are You! (Confused?)

Donald Sterling.

I recognize that name. He's the big time philanthropist who advertises big prizes, awards, and giveaways in the LA Times.

He must have a lot of money.

He also owns the LA Clippers

And following the his incendiary, and yes

racist

comments to his girlfriend, tape-recorded and released for the world to hear it may appear that no one will take his money now.

Wow.

Donald Sterling was yelling at his girlfriend, telling her not to take picture of herself on Instagram with other black people. I say "other" because Sterling's girlfriend is half-black and half-Hispanic.

The uproar over his leaked comments hit the press.

The Daily Breeze blasted his face on the front page, next to his girlfriend, then reported on the rising reactions against the man for his comments.

So, rich guy Donald Sterling is racist, or is he a racist, in that he should be defined by the feelings he has about black people?

Or is he a hater?

He dated a woman of mixed minority heritage. But he doesn't like black people.

The guy is racist, and they guy is very mixed up, too.

Better question -- who cares?

The greater blowback, however, flies to hollow nonsense which has dirtied up the Internet. He donated to Democrats, yet he was a registered Republican. Or was he?

And therefore, Sterling is a representative for the Dems, or the GOP?

"I'm a hater, you're a hater. . ."

Give me a break! He also donated to the NAACP. The association has recently given him back all their money. When will the leader of the North Carolina chapter apologize for calling black Republican US Senator Tim Scott " a dummy."

So the NAACP is racist by association, then, too?

When does the hater not-so-merry-go-round end?

I picture Jason Alexander, aka George Costanza taking center stage and singing "I'm a hater, you're a hater. . ."

Diet Dr. Hater, anyone? Do you remember that one Seinfeld episode, where Elaine was dating a guy whom she thought was black? She didn't have the courage to ask if he was black of not, because that would be. . .racist.

Still, Elaine started seeing herself as black by association. When one the servers at the local diner brought her the check, Elaine said "I hear ya, sister!" because the waitress was black.

"But I thought you  were Hispanic!"

Wow! I guess that makes Elaine a hater, too.

At the end of that episode, Elaine's boyfriend finally admits that he thought she was Hispanic. "What? No, I'm not."

 "So, we're just too white people?"

OK. . .

Does that make them racist because they realized that they were not the races that they thought they were?

Maybe Sterling could have learned something more about race relations watching Seinfeld. Then again, he's probably so busy watching all those Clippers games.

But he wants to watch them without black people. . .and his girlfriend was black, right?

And how did this whole tizzy get started, anyway?

Oh, yeah, someone was recording his private conversation. That damned NSA! Speaking of which, would the media not be spending its wasted ink and print exposing the outrageous, shameful, criminal invasions of the federal government into every private person's cellphone, email, and Google searches

"But, but, but Barack Obama is black, and that would make us  . . .racist."

Yawn.

Oh, why are we stopping at Sterling, then? Was it not the LA Times which printed the philanthropist's advertisements weekly, monthly, year in/year out?

So, the LA Times is racist too!

The Daily Breeze gave this racist guy front page prominence.

That is racist! You are all a bunch of haters, Daily Breeze! Should we call them "The Daily Sleaze?"

Yes, except on the days when anything that I have written is printed there, too.

Seriously, though, really. . .

The whole culture of entitled offense is getting really annoying.

Clive Bundy is a hater because he compared slavery to welfare. A stupid analogy? Yes. A racist? No.

The New York Times went out of its way to make him look like one, thought, editing his remarks so much that no one read about his remarks in support of all that Hispanic people are going through in this country, as well as the damaging effects of the welfare state.

So, since the New York Time when out of its way to portray Bundy as a hater, then they must be haters, too!

The real alarming element in all of this, frankly, falls on the failing, flailing Fourth Estate, the Press, which is supposed to be exposing misrule through publicity, but has spent more time printing these limited, incendiary stories about individuals who make off-hand remarks about race, as if they define the current state of race relations.

Yawn. Shrug. Meh.

Donald Sterling is a hater, and so are you!

No, no, no.

Donald Sterling made racist remarks, and has deep prejudices? Yes.

But why were we listening to this private conversation in the first place? And why is this man's inner perversions about other people taking so much press space in the first place in the face of Secretary of State John Kerry's remarks that Israel has created an apartheid state? Such remarks from an international official have timeless and global implications. He also ought to step down.

Kerry the racist! Where's the front page headlines on this guy? He said these awful remarks in front of lots of people and he intended other people to hear them.

"You know, that
Michelle Obama lady. .
She's racist, too!"

Or how about when the former president of Iran Ahmed-nutjob, who "We are going to blow Israel off the face of the earth!" Such comments cannot be ignored, as they represent an immoral, evil leader in a hostile nation suggesting serious, damaging force against another country.

Even lib-comic Bill Maher takes threats against the state of Israel seriously. He also had the savvy to call out Michelle Obama's racist remarks about other blacks, "who are more interested in balling than studying".

The black guest on Bill Maher's show was surprised by that remark, because he was ready to blame a white politician for that remark.

I guess that makes him a hater, too, then, huh?

Or does it?

Confused?

You're racist!

Buying Torrance: What About Alex See?

Looking into Tim Goodrich's campaign donations caused me to wonder:

Torrance Small Businessman
Alex See

To what extent do local candidates take donations from corporations, unions, or individuals?

I looked into another candidate's campaign disclosures: engineer and restaurant owner Alex See.

I am more interested in supporting local business owners because they understand the negative impact of big government better than the average resident, especially when it comes to investing in commerce and increase city revenues.

See's campaign disclosures were distinctly different from Goodrich's.

Granted, he also received a donation from Al Muratsuchi's campaign. Alex had shared with me that he is personal friends of the Assemblyman. On a side note, Republican National Committeeman Shawn Steel is good friends with State senator Ted Lieu. They completely disagree on most issues, yet they retain an amicable friendship.

May the tribe of such friendly foes increase.

Investigating further into Alex's campaign report, I noticed that the vast majority of his donations come from individuals. Administrative assistants, accountants, and local businessmen have contributed to his campaign.

Shouldn't our locally elected leaders be responding to the interests of local people?

I noticed contributions from individuals living in other parts of LA County, as well, which is not necessarily a bad thing, either.

I further recognized that See is not receiving any union or corporate money. Besides individual CEO, including self-employed Heidi Ashcraft, See is relying on individual donations to run for city council.

That record commands more respect with me. I do not trust candidates who are taking large donations from unions. They take the money from employees without their consent and spend them on candidates and causes which the members do not consent to, either.

If Alex See is willing to listen to individuals and has commanded enough of their attention to receive donations from them, then he may have a stronger base of support, a better position to represent the city of Torrance.

A Miller Effect in the 33rd?

Republican Elan Carr, State Senator Ted Lieu, and Progressive Democratic-turned-Independent Marianne Williamson were the outstanding three candidates at the Brentwood forum yesterday, according to the LA Times and Breitbart News.

With eighteen, er. . . now seventeen candidates running for the 33rd Congressional District, the gaggle of politicians had to compete for their ninety seconds of fame.

The crowding on the stage represents the grimy fight awaiting the primary challengers, and the growing likelihood of this seat falling into another party's hands, even though this district has a strong Democratic streak based on its surface registration.

Gary Miller

Is a Miller effect possible in the CA 33rd?

Miller effect? What's that?

Go back to 2012.

Congressman Gary Miller (R-Rancho Cucamonga) was running for reelection in the newly-drawn 31st Congressional District. Not only a new district, but a majority Democratic-registration seat.

Miller decided to run anyway.

He did the right thing.

With four Democrats vying and another Republican running for the seat, guess who made it into the top two or the general election?

The two Republicans.

Gary Miller won his seat back without much fuss. The four Democrats contesting for the seat split their separate supporters so thinly, the two Republicans entered the Top Two.

Of course, after the election, the mainstream media jumped up and down about the 31st district, claiming that the Miller seat was the most vulnerable in the country.

Was it? We will never know, since Miller, who had served in Congress since 1999, who had run unopposed a few times for his seat, decided to retire instead of run again.

While Miller has chosen to move on, his exampled success may return, but to the 33rd Congressional district.

Elan Carr

With seventeen candidates running to replace the retreating Henry Waxman, including ten Democrats, a well-financed and popular liberal-progressive independent, along with a district prosecutor, a Libertarian, a Green, and another Independent (a movie producer), there will be so many candidates vying, crying out for every vote. The majority Democratic registration divided may allow the slightly more unified Republican vote to propel the GOP candidate into the top two.

In effect, can the Miller effect happen in the 33rd?

State senator Ted Lieu has already gotten the Democratic Party endorsement. He will likely draw more South Bay voters (and animal lovers). Former City Controller and Mayoral candidate Wendy Greuel will attract Westside Dems and the union vote (maybe the Jewish vote). With Dems David Kanuth and Kristie Holmes reaching out to anti-1% votes, and with spiritual guru and lecturer Marianne Williamson drawing out the disaffected liberal Dems and progressive independents, Elan Carr could sweep the GOP vote throughout the district, since he is the only Republican who is reaching out through press and TV commercials.

Two Republicans will not get into the top two, but a GOP and an independent just might. For all the Democrats posturing to win this "heavily Democratic" district, the personal hubris and special interest ambitions may end up hurting the Democrats in the long term.

This new top-two jungle primary reform is working out for Republicans and Independents after all!

Marianne Williamson

The LA Times and Breitbart News featured Carr, Lieu, and Williamson in the Brentwood debates. Carr's office has released stats suggesting that Greuel, Lieu, and Carr are running a dead heat. Still, some old-school operatives predict a Lieu-Greuel run-off, which would be cruel for the Dems to begin with, much like the Berman-Sherman take-down in 2012 in the new 30th ("You wana get into this?!")

Other political prognosticators are recognizing the growing likelihood of the Miller effect, with Dems so thinly spreading their support, that Carr will make it to the Top Two, but against whom? Likely Lieu, but if Williamson can summon the same support at the ballot box which greeted her appearance at the Brentwood forum, then expect a Carr-Williamson run-off.

33rd Congressional District

In such a possible outcome, a gang prosecutor vs. a spiritual author, who would have the better shot at commanding a win in November? I don't think it takes a psychic to tell you the outcome.

John Wood on Larry Elder -- Haven't You Heard?

Radio Host Larry Elder

Conservative radio host Larry Elder knows that a young African-American man is running against Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters, a representative who has uttered some of the craziest things.

Did you know about this conservative taking on "Queen Maxine"?

Did you also know that Larry Elder invited Wood to speak on his show last year?

Sadly, I did not know, until now.

John Wood, 26 years old reared in a biracial home, where Dad was the Republican and Mom the Democrat, learned to hear both sides of an argument, and spent much of his time trying to explain one parent to the other.

If he wants to challenge twenty-year veteran Congresswoman Maxine Waters, he better get good at explaining the Republican Party platform to a constituency 58% Democratic, with a small fraction of Independents and Republicans.



John Wood:
Running for the 43rd

Following the 2011 Citizen Redistricting Commission, Torrance, California was divided, with its Eastern and Northern sections connected to Hawthorne, Lawndale, Lomita, as well as Westchester, LAX, West Athens, and South Los Angeles. Most of the new 43rd district, north of Redondo Beach Blvd. belonged to Maxine Waters' former district.

With no idea what district or which challenger (incumbent) she would likely face, Waters hosted a job forum at Inglewood High School, along with fellow Democratic representatives Laura Richardson and Karen Bass.

At that forum, Waters blasted her infamous remark: "The Tea Party can go straight to hell."

43rd Congressional District

One wonders if she was aware that a South LA TEA Party caucus exists, headed by Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson. Why would Waters differ so bluntly with her own constituents?

Following the uproar, she had to scale back her invidious comment, largely because of local and national media which replayed her comments. For the first time in her long career, one filled with statements defined by racial animus as well as roaring invective, the Congresswoman who represented South LA for two decades had to start rethinking the things that she said.

Will she have to rethink her decision to stay in office in 2014?

Campaigning throughout the 43rd in churches and local political clubs, Wood is talking up his campaign, raising his chances as he raises awareness of his Republican bid for federal office.

One of his earlier publicity events, a guest spot on The Larry Elder show, deserves more attention than it has received.

Maxine Waters:
"The TEA Party can go
straight to hell."

Elders started out first by introducing the young politician, then sharing that in spite of his many efforts, Elder could not push a Republican candidate to take down Waters, who won that election 80%-20%

A slaughter? Not even a fight.

"You are headed for a wood-chipper, my friend," Elder declared.

Wood's response? Chipper, to say the least and confident notwithstanding the comments from Republicans as well as Democrats that Wood doesn't have a chance.

Chance doesn't win elections, as far as Wood is concerned, and those naysayers can go straight to . . .well, you get the idea.

Among his comments on the program, Wood offered that members of the black community in the South Los Angeles area are tired of the status quo.

When he talks politics, about Republicans and Democrats, Wood found that prospective voters responded to his campaign in this manner:

"I tend to agree with Republicans on a number of issues. I just don't find that Republicans care for me, for black people in general."

Anyone with a working knowledge of US History will find that from the Civil War until the present day, Republicans were leading the fight on ending slavery and segregation, advancing civil rights, and ensuring a quality education for all Americans, including African-Americans.

Speaking from experience in addition to ideas, Wood has made clear that he is "not running for the sake of the Republican Party, although I am happy to be running as a Republican . . .I want to make life better for all people."

A candidate who identifies with a district and its values has the best chance of winning a seat, regardless of party. So shared California GOP Chairman Jim Brulte, and so does John Wood, who is reaching out to voters to make Washington work for all Americans.

Waters' district turned out heavily in support of Prop 8, and the black community cares about jobs, education (school choice), and with a heavy religious element, a concern for faith and family.

In his interview with Woos, Elder emphasized the importance of the economy and education. Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (as well as Maxine Waters) have criticized the President for the poor economic opportunities facing African-Americans, which has gotten worse under his administration.

Wood acknowledged in the midst of the interview his affiliation with the Democratic Party, including his 2008 support for Obama. The more that he listened to other viewpoints, particularly conservative ones, followed by the fallout of the current administration's policies, Wood became a Republican.

Along with Charles Krauthammer and Democrat-turned-Republican Artur David, Wood joins a growing list of enlightened minds brightened to the truth of conservative, limited government principles above Big Government liberalism. Despite the coarse intent of Democratic President Lyndon Baines Johnson to buy the black vote through Great Society programs ("We'll have those n-ggers voting for us for the next two hundred years"), LBJ's ambition is going DOA a century and a half early, with black voters and lawmakers (even in the South) switching affiliation to the Republican Party in growing numbers following the epic, inescapable failures of the current administration.

Having campaigned now for over a year, the young Republican is attracting local as well as national attention. His latest event, at Harbor College, permitted him the opportunity to share the stage with Republican National Committee member Shawn Steel and explain the principles driving his campaign. Politicians are rallying around the crucial importance of school choice and education opportunity, two values which Democrat politicians have frustrated with their endorsements and their votes. Wood understands the importance of these issues, and this election, and is getting out the word on his run in every way he can.



Wood with younger supporters

Getting people skills and work opportunities, looking past differences to create solutions, Wood is not bristling from the fight or fleeing the fire, but stepping in ready to take over a district entrenched by a  politician for so long dedicated more to partisanship than a better purpose for the district's constituents..

For more information about John Wood and his campaign, please visit his website.

Horror Stories of Obamacare: CA Updates

Covered California
Will Come for Your Assets

I received this comment today:


Located at:
> http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/comments/61752
>
Posted by: Julia C
> Email: j----------------@yahoo.com
> URL:
> Location:
>
> I was really surprised to get the letter and form to register to vote from Calif Covered.

Covered California wants to make every voter a Democrat. Individual recipients were not only receiving voter registration, but the registration box next to "Democrat" was already checked.

Not only that, but the state legislature just killed a bill which would prevent felons from serving as Covered California navigators.

>
> I'm already a registered voter and have been at my current address for 20 years!
>
> I can't believe they hired a "Voter Registration Coordinator" to send out these letters!
>
> Also, check into the notice people are getting about the Medi-Cal Estate Recovery Program!
>
> It says the cost of Medi-cal services including insurance premiums paid and payments made to managed care plans can be recovered by the State. I would like to know if the program is paying for my insurance premiums to HealthNet, since I had them as my insurance a for a few years before I had to drop them because the premiums became unaffordable for me.
Wow!

Now Covered California wants to uncover every nook, cranny, and corner of a person's personal wealth just to pay the bills.

Obamacare is not just unaffordable, not just uncaring, but now patients need protection from the very government which claimed that their legislation would protect them.

As for Covered California, there is so much more which needs to be uncovered. Still.

Race Card Played Out (Carson, Sessions, and Obama)

Source: http://pumabydesign001.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/screenshot-dr-benjamin-carson-john-hopkins-hospital-pediatric-neurosurgery-division-director-national-prayer-breakfast-02072013.png

Despite the full account of his remarks, and the groundswell of grassroots support for the Nevada rancher who took on the federal government and won, The New York Times just could not resist repackaging Clive Bundy as a heinous racist.

The incomprehensible distortions of his comments on race, welfare, and the United States government as they appeared in the liberal shill, compared to the full context of his remarks recorded on You Tube, confirm that if there is any racism going on now, one will find it with the New York Times. The failing periodical insists on maligning conservatives, limited government advocates, and anyone who recognizes the danger of aggressive, metastasizing federal power.

Liberals (and their media acolytes) will never cease contending that the United States is a racist, homophobic country, looking for every faulty or disrespectful comment from isolated individuals  to indict latent strains of bigotry among all white people, rich people, or any other targeted class.

 Now, the latest controversy surrounding the LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling's off-hand remarks to his girlfriend prove that the media is more interested in trashing people for their comments and playing up the conflict.

Instead of discouragement at the declining morale (and impact) of the national press, I consider how far this country has come on the issue of race. From the legislators in our statehouse and the federal government, to the candidates running for local office, to the opportunities of minorities born here or immigrating (legally, and even those brought here against their will illegally) to thrive.

If there is one event which exemplifies how far this country has come on race, consider the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast.

The Keynote Speaker was Dr. Benjamin Carson, the world-renowned African-American neurosurgeon. Born into poverty in Maryland, raised in a single-parent home, he overcame many setbacks because of a strong upbringing from his mother. She made him read, even though she could not.

Despite the prejudices of his time, as well as the poverty he struggled through, Carson rose to great prominence, becoming a world-class medical professional.

At the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast, Carson was introduced to the leading political lights by Alabama's Junior US Senator Jeff Sessions. Can anyone fathom how great a turn-around such an introduction was? Fifty, sixty years ago, Southern US Senators were filibustering the Civil Rights Act. Segregation was the norm not just in the South, but throughout the country, although on a more subtle level. Yet last year, a white elder statesman from Gulf State, Deep South Alabama introduced an African-American neurosurgeon to deliver the Keynote Address for the National Prayer Breakfast.

Not only that, but the President, Barack Obama, of mixed African and American heritage, listened to another African-American in a national forum, who criticized the President's own policies with humor and insight, as opposed to insults and invective. Carson's speech exemplified not just the importance of honoring the opinions of professionals instead of politicians, but the legacy of civil rights in this country, which put aside barriers to African-Americans seeking higher callings such as medicine, or getting elected to federal office. How about becoming President of the United States?

And a white Southern US Senator introduced one of them and honored his presence by sitting down and listening to him. I cannot understand why the media, why politicians, why community activists, if they are well-intentioned, insist on harping about racism as if this dark vein of intolerance still infects our society and inflicts against our capacity to listen to one another and learn.

Beyond the legacies of wealth, academics, and political affiliations evident in that Prayer Breakfast, Dr. Carson had the courage to indict the culture of political correctness which inhibits people from talking to each other. This man, an African-American neurosurgeon from Johns Hopkins, and a conservative, carried the courage and convictions to call out the failed policies of the President, who was seated on the same dais.

The race card is all played out in this country. We have come a long way, indeed, America! Another black may be running for President in 2016, which is another blow to the marginalized Mainstream Media screed which seeks to weed out racism behind every thought and deed.

The United States of America has come a long way on race, and the 2013 National Prayer Breakfast symbolized this blessed transformation gracefully.

Shame on anyone who refuses to accept this victory and insists on fomenting racism as some lingering, intractable evil.  

Boehner Asks About Jobs (Stop Talking About Amnesty!)

Stop whining, forget amnesty
focus on economic growth

Speaker John Boehner's latest address lashes out at the President because of the lack of job growth in the country.


Good morning. I’m speaking to you from the Hartzell Propeller plant here in Piqua, Ohio. This is about 25 miles north of Dayton, Ohio, the birthplace of aviation. Hartzell has come a long way since working with Orville Wright himself. They now maintain 75 percent of the world’s market in propellers. And while they have big plans, Hartzell is like any small business facing an uncertain future. What I heard here – and what I hear everywhere I go – is that we need to get the federal government out of the way. Having run a small business myself, I see where these folks are coming from.   

Boehner worked his way up from poverty to prosperity to Congress.

Why does he want to make t harder for average Americans to do the same by pushing immigration reform at this time?
 I know why Americans are still asking the question ‘where are the jobs?’ For the last five years, we’ve had an administration in Washington that acts as if everything can be done from the top down. From the ‘stimulus’ to ObamaCare, it’s a record littered with promises that never panned out. And pain for people trying to get by and meet a payroll. Republicans, we’ve kept our pledge, we’ve offered a new way forward. Our majority in the House has made your priorities our priorities. And every week, we're focused on passing initiatives that would make it easier to find jobs and create jobs at places just like this.
President Obama has instigated a partial-amnesty by executive order (rather, by executive neglect). Because of the President's lack of integrity to uphold the Constitution, let alone uphold the rule of law even for his own legislation, Congress has no reason to work with this president on comprehensive immigration reform, or any other matter.

The question "where are the jobs" will become a frequent query if amnesty ensues, granting eleven million illegal immigrants automatic citizenship. Despite the fact that this country cannot expel eleven million people, enforcement of the current law (including e-verify), plus an established, adequately staffed border contingency, along with comprehensive welfare reform will bring this fraught immigration debate to a close.

Why won't Boehner talk about getting the government out of the way of the naturalization process, too?

 We’re ready to improve job training programs so workers can acquire the right skills; expand production of American-made energy to lower costs; open new markets for small manufacturers; and repeal and replace ObamaCare. The president said he wanted this to be a year of bipartisan action. Well, it still can be. We just need to get his party’s leaders in the Senate to take up our jobs bills. While Republicans may be the minority party in Washington, with your help, we've made some headway. We’ve banned earmarks and, for the first time since the Korean War, we’ve cut total federal spending for two years running. We’ve protected 99 percent of Americans from permanent tax increases. We’ve taken the politics out of student loans, making it easier to pay for college. And we’ve passed three free trade agreements that are already paying big dividends for our economy. 

Instead of pressing the country on immigration reform, he should talk up these successes, instigated and initiated by conservatives in Congress, not by liberal, Democratic lawmakers.

 So imagine what we could do if the powers-that-be in Washington changed course. Imagine if they stopped treating our economy like a second language and started putting jobs first. Just ask the people here at Hartzell. Last week, I spotted one of their propellers on a military plane over in Afghanistan. I can’t tell you how proud I was of every worker here in Miami County. And how honored I am to be their voice in Washington. Talking with the people here, I realize we are walking towards a great opportunity. Instead of slogging on and settling, we can take the path of freedom and prosperity. It leads to an America where we, the people – not the government – shape our destiny. An America where honesty and initiative are cherished. An America of pride and purpose. I ask you to join us in this pursuit, and I thank you for listening.
The Speaker wants the powers-that-be to change course and focus on policies to increase job growth. However, yesterday Boehner was mocking his Congressional colleagues because they refused to pass immigration reform.

Boehner needs to change course, or rather stay the course with the conservative colleagues whom he had made fun of, and focus on Americans working, not granting a blanket amnesty to illegal immigrants at the expense of the safety and security of citizens born and naturalized.

How can Boehner blast the President for an anemic economic recovery, yet at the same time he insists on pushing amnesty?

Granting automatic citizenship, or even a pathway to citizenship, will create more workers looking for fewer jobs.

Does the Speaker listen to himself while he is speaking?

Or is he convinced that conservatives are not paying attention?

They are now, and Boehner, if he wants to retain any "power-that-be" needs to give up on amnesty and focus on keeping Big Government at bay.

Furey's Flurries of Mailers

The paid mailers are sailing into the mailbox for the 2014 election season.

Aside from the flyers from state senate candidate Amy Howorth (no Republican is running for state senate seat 26, sadly),  as well as Marianne Williamson's cosmic whimsy for the 33rd Congressional district, Torrance City Councilman Pat Furey is sending in a flurry of mailers for his mayoral run.

The same city representative who indicted Torrance residents for pension envy now wants to inspire Torrance residents with professional envy, too.

One mailer details Furey's personal, academic, and professional accomplishments over the past five decades.

Claiming that Furey wants to keep Torrance moving in the right direction, Furey's booklet mailer presents an extended timeline, starting with his military service following high school in a South Philadelphia neighborhood. He worked as a police officer and detective, then moved to Torrance for the safe neighborhood and schools.

Great stuff. The biggest reason why families move to this balanced city.

Furey then charts his training from legal assistant to LA county deputy counsel, along with his many volunteer/leadership roles in his North Torrance Homeowners association, Little League, Boy Scouts, and the Torrance Ed Foundation, as well as the Torrance City Council.

When it comes to elections, voters need to know the candidates' values and what they will vote for, not what they did in their free time as well as in the workplace. Granted, voters want representatives who are engaged and involved in their communities, but politics is all about individual ambition channeled into public service.

Following the extensive timeline of Furey's personal accomplishments, the mailer contains a letter outlining the candidate's "plans" for Torrance:

I am excited about the future of Torrance. While other cities had to make major cuts due to the economic downturn, Torrance has been fiscally responsible -- and we have seen almost no appreciable reductions in public safety and other municipal services.

The streets in Torrance are bumpy and unsettled. I notice the difference particularly when traveling from Lomita back to Torrance every day. How many police and firefighters does the city of Torrance need, anyway? One local landlord shared that a small team of firefighters came to his apartment telling him to install an electronic device for the garage gate. Why so many firefighters in the first place? How many fires has the city had to contend with in the past five or ten years?

I proudly served as a founding member of Frank Scotto's Blue Ribbon Committee on Ethics & Integrity, where we led the charge for political campaign reform and transparency in our local government.

If the city of Torrance has been candid about its finances, then why did the Wall Street Journal report that the city was one of ten cities with the greatest unfunded pension liabilities in the country? How come voters in the city have not learned that over six hundred employees are earning $100k a year, and of that number 200 are taking in $200k? How do Torrance leaders plan on keeping commitments to retired employees with massive cuts to city services or tax increases?

The mailer then lists all the big accomplishments that Furey has in mind for the city, including repair of the city's aging infrastructure as well as balancing the city's budget and strengthening public services.

How does he plan on fulfilling this laundry list of promises?

To accomplish all these things will not be easy. But, with your support and involvement, we can do it!

What support would that be, Mr, Furey? Moret taxes and fees?

The last page of the  mailer signals where Furey is getting his money for the flurry of ads promoting his campaign. From the Torrance Police Officers, to the Torrance Fire Fighters, the Municipal Employees, and even the Torrance Unified Paraeducators have endorsed Furey, along with the El Camino College Associated Student Organization.

Why would the Torrance Paraeducators and El Caminos students support Furey? What difference do their endorsements make?

More importantly, though, Torrance residents need to understand that candidates backed not just by endorsements but donations must accept (and expect) the same to give into the demands of these unions to bolster the pensions and benefits of the public workers, whether the individual taxpayers and private businesses want to pay into those funds or not. With a reported $400 million pension liability already pressing on the city, the new leaders need to take drastic steps to have all public employees contribute more toward their retirement, or press on the individual employees to  shoulder more of the risk for investment.

No matter how bright and nostalgic a picture Furey paints of his past and present service to local initiatives, committee groups, or city agencies, his loyalty to the city's public sector employees should raise substantial alarm for voters, who may find themselves expecting to shore up more of the costs due to the liberal councilmembers direct dedication to the unions.

After all, his mailer clearly states "with your support and involvement, we can do it!"

Wendy Greuel's Wage Gap Gruel

Wendy Greuel (City Council Days)
Source: Jim Winstead

After serving as a city controller and running for mayor, Wendy Greuel should realize that voters expect an experienced politician, city official, and Congressional candidate such as herself to treat them with a modicum of respect.

Instead, she borrows a played out play from the "War on Women" card to suggest that women are getting short-changed by the glass ceiling. The amalgam of emotionalism, gender discrimination, and outright distortions has turned into a tasteless gruel of political cheap shots which no one is eating anymore.

Any economists, statistician, or reader with two eyes in his head and a working knowledge of mathematics can see through the misleading arguments that women are paid less as a matter of discrimination.

On the whole, if women were distinctly and specifically targeted to receive lower wages than men, then businesses would hire only women to begin with.

Still, if we add up as an aggregate whole all the wages that women make and average out the wage, then do the same with every wage earned by men, granted the average  would be greater.

This kind of argument provides a distorted view of the actual case.

Not so much a wage gap as a wisdom gap, one may argue, women tend to take into consideration a number of factors before seeking a different, higher-paying job, or a promotion.

While men will seek more money, even to the detriment of family, health, social life (or at least risk those interests to a greater extent in certain cases), women make decisions to raise a family, for example, and even in the more limited instances, where a woman goes on maternity leave yet returns to the work force, her wages are diminished for the year.

For anyone to argue that a wage gap unfair ensues as a result is not only mislead, but insulting to women as well as businesses.

CBS News exploded the "Gender Gap Myth"

Forbes Magazine did the same thing. Carrie Luka, the Direct of the Independent Women's Forum, wrote this piece.

Caroline Ghosn also exploded the "Gender Gap" gruel with further analysis, including the growing recognition among Millennial women who do not believe in the "equal pay" dogma trotted out by liberal politicians.

When comparing men and women with similar education and professional backgrounds and experience, though, the wages are comparable. The same is true for CEOs and other high performing professionals, too.

Furthermore, in professions like teaching, where rigid pay scales and promotional pay options determine annual salary, the pay is comparable between men and women.

In effect, equal pay for equal work already exists. What differs is the number of women who pursue certain careers in comparison to men.

Other arguments about "equal pay for equal work" will focus on certain states, like Wyoming, where the pretended wage gap is much wider than, say, Washington D.C.

A couple things to keep in mind: Wyoming's economy is heavily based on ranching and farm work, which men predominantly work in. In Washington D.C., there are more men and women engaged in different types of employment, whether services, lobbying, or legal work.

The issue is not about gender per se, but about education, choices, availability.

But if Ms. Greuel wants to wage war on income discrimination, she ought to call out President Obama and his White House staff, which actually have hired fewer women during his second term, and on the whole pay their female employees less than the male counterparts.
'
So, how about that, Wendy? Instead of slamming "the Tea Party" for trying to prevent women from getting proper health care, when are you going to denounce the "wage slavery" of the Obama Administration? Or even LA Mayor Garcetti's? 

Of course, Greuel has played games with wage wars before, citing that if she were elected mayor, she would guarantee a $15 minimum wage. Talk about buying votes (and it didn't work, did it, Mayor Garcetti?)

Instead of the old, cold, sloppy porridge-gender gap arguments, the next Congressman (or woman) to represent the 33rd Congressional should discuss turning back the Democratic War on Women, including repeal of Obamacare, health care reforms which actually drive up access and bring down costs, as well as sensible reforms which salvage entitlement programs losing funds at an alarming rate -- and stop blaming the Tea Party for Washington D.C. woes.

Horror Stories of ObamaCare: More in CA

In the past week, I heard two more horror stories about Obamacare.

Covered California
Not Covering

First, a congressional candidates, Elan Carr, told me that an insured resident had a Covered California plan, which then fell through.

Doctors rejected it, and the patient lost the plan.

Covered California certainly did not cover him.

Today, I spoke with a retired dentist. For fifty years, he worked with all kinds of patients.

For the last thirty years of his practice, he worked with Medi-Cal to treat patients who needed fillings. He also screened patients for who would receive Medi-Cal payments.

In the last three years, however, as Medi-Cal was cut, his practice became unprofitable and he quit.

What's the point of pushing legislation to expand access and grant "affordable care" when the program makes government subsidies harder to find and pushes medical professionals out of their practice in the first place?

No matter kind of spin Washington bureaucrats and national Democrats play to make Obamacare worthwhile, their arguments are not worth the while they spend justifying the government overreach which has done more harm than good.

The Hippocratic Oath in Medicine begings with "First, do no harm."\

The Obamacare Hypocritic Oath has many clauses:

If you like your plan, you can keep it.

If you like your doctor, you can keep him.

It will not cost you one penny more.

It will not raise taxes.

It will increase access.

It will increase affordability.

Bounce Boehner, Period!

Boehner mocked his colleagues.
His Speakership is a mockery

Since the fiscal cliff deal, I have been tolerant of  Spekaer John Boehner, usually.

 

I understand the need to play tactical offense, little wins here and there, because the Republican Party simply cannot govern from the House alone.

He did go along with the Government shutdown, but then he went about-face and blamed everything on the Republicans.

"It was our fault" he declared on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

US Senator Ted Cruz stood on the floor for twenty-two hours to protest a vote for cloture over Obamacare. If all forty-ix senators at that time had stood their ground, the Democratic Party would have caved.

The lack of courage, the lack of coordination, is a big problem among Washington Republicans. Governance cannot be about compromise at this point, especially with the federal government borrowing $.46 of every dollar spent.

This lack of coordination falls on the leadership, particularly in the House of Representatives.

The issue especially falls on Boehner because the American People are concerned about the rising costs of health care, the jobless recovery which has stagnated millions who have been out of work for months, if not years. Americans are also concerned about the surveillance state snooping in on their phone calls or reading their emails and following their Google searches.

But what is Boehner focusing on? Immigration reform.

The reason? Likely because Boehner is looking forward to a lobbyist appointment with a Chamber of Commerce firm. Nothing succeeds in Washington for a long-time politician like a lengthy tenure, followed by an extensive life and career as a lobbyist.

Nothing about balanced budgets, entitlement reform, or push-back against the arrogant, executive imperialism of President Obama. Boehner wants to pass immigration reform.

About the spending spree: the waste of money is immoral, not just unsustainable. What right do Americans today, and their leaders particulary, to the future's potential prosperity? As George Will commented, the federal government is now borrowing from the future, and the young people are left to pay for Mom and Dad's decadent (D)emocratic demands.

Obama won reelection, so he gets another four years to do a bad job, but at least Republicans in the House and Senate can delay the damage or minimize the negative impacts of the President's policies. Immigration reform will not do this.

Still, in spite of the country's frustration with an out-of-control Presidency, Speaker Boehner slammed his colleagues, not exclusively Republicans, about the stalling on immigration legislation:

"The appetite amongst my colleagues for doing this is not real good...here's the attitude: 'Ohhhhh, don't make me do this! Ohhhhhh, this is too hard!' You should hear them. You know, we get elected to make choices."

They won't pass immigration reform!
Waaah!

Legislators  get elected to make choices, and  they are expected to make wise choices.

Boehner has chosen not to do so. He acknowledged that a camera was recording him in a Madison Township meeting in Ohio. He insisted on shaming his legislative fellows for stalling on legislation which the American People do not want passed.

Since Boehner refuses to lead, blames his caucus for their attempts to rein in spending and hold the Democrats in Washington and throughout the country accountable, the Republicans in Washington and throughout the United States should demand his resignation as soon as possible.

If Republicans win more seats in the House as well as take back the US Senate, the groundswell to get rid of Boehner will be strong enough that the Speaker will resign without any fanfare, very likely within weeks after the November elections.

Boehner is not leading. He shames his colleagues. He focuses on unimportant matters which will hurt this country rather than help, all while doing all too little to hold the President and His US Senate caucus accountable/ It's time to bounce Boehner, period!

Bundy, New York Times, and The Truth

Clive Bundy: Racist?
No: Victim of New York Times
Smear and Distortions

The first question which comes to mind:

What is the New York Times?

That's a legitimate question, since the paper which claims to run "All the News that's Fit to Print" has turned into another propaganda machine which puts out "All the News that Fits the Democratic Print".

Case in point, the "racist" Cliven Bundy, who "suggested" that black people would have been better off staying slaves.

At least, the reporter gives that impression from the copy printed on April 23.

Before taking down the aggressive agenda from the foremost liberal mouth-piece in American journalism, here are couple other remarks worth noting:

Mr. Bundy’s standoff with federal rangers — propelled into the national spotlight in part by steady coverage by Fox News — has highlighted sharp divisions over the power of the federal government and the rights of landowners in places like this desert stretch of Nevada, where resentment of Washington and its sprawling ownership of Western land has long run deep.

While the reporter wants to present Fox News as some kind of marginal instigator for this conflict between individual ranchers and the federal government, a better question to ask should be:

Why didn't the New York Times report on the escalating conflicting between the Nevada rancher and the Bureau of Land Management? Too busy playing up Hillary Clinton for 2016? I wonder how much time the New York Times spent praising and unofficially crowning the former Secretary of State for the Presidency, anyway.

The article continues:

“The gather is now over,” said Craig Leff, a deputy assistant director with the Bureau of Land Management. “Our focus is pursuing this matter administratively and judicially.”       

     

But if the federal government has moved on, Mr. Bundy — a father of 14 and a registered Republican — has not. 

 

The biggest news element in that statement should be the fact that a private militia of farmers and ranchers from all over the country rallied next to Bundy and stood up to the federal government, forcing them to back away. Was this a righteous cause? Does Bundy owe taxes? And even if Bundy is in the wrong on a financial matter, did the Bureau of Land Management handle this conflict appropriately? The Times reporter could have recognized the wise discretion of the federal authorities to deescalate a trying, tension situation.

 

Instead, the report tells us that Bundy is a Republican. Seriously? How is the party affiliation relevant? The article never answers those questions, but instead, reports some of the most edited, and thus distorted, remarks yet:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

 

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

 

Wow! Controversial comments, to say the least. No wonder some Republican leaders are backing away from the guy.

 

But should they be so quick to distance themselves from editorialized remarks?

 

Bundy was not talking about all African-Americans.

 

He did point that they did not have much to do.

 

He denounced government subsidy, otherwise known as welfare. An African-American conservative activist, Star Parker, has denounced welfare, too. Is she racist?

 

And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton.

 

The cotton remark was really foolish. But does that make Bundy a racist?

 

Before liberals jump up and downed with feigned outrage, they need to explain this remark plus the Great Society welfare state which accompanied it:

 

"We'll have those n-ggers voting for us for the next two hundred years." -- Lyndon Baines Johnson

 

Now, Bundy said "Negro". Outdated, but racist? Democratic President Johnson said "n-gger", patently offensive.

 

And to this day, the mainstream media refuses to call out the racist undercurrents of the LBJ's Great Society and War on Poverty, both of which turned became the Great Failure and a War on (Minority) Prosperity.

 

When will the New York Times call out the dark vein of intolerance which defines the Democratic Party?

 

Back back to Bundy, and the political correctness mantra of the New York Times. . .

 

Speaking of Political Correctness, was it not the African-American neurosurgeon, Dr. Ben Carson who denounced political correctness as very dangerous, because it prevents people from being able to talk to each other? By the way, Dr. Carson was the keynote speaker at the 2013 National Prayer breakfast, where a white US Senator from Alabama introduced him, and where the President of the United States, a man of mixed African-American heritage who went to Harvard and served as a state senator before becoming a US Senator himself, sat by and heard another African-American, one of the most distinguished neuro-surgeons in the country, if not the world, give a speech criticizing the President.

 

How far we have come in this country!

 

Once again, back to Bundy, the New York Times and the truth.

 

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

 

This statement is inartful, to be kind. Slavery is slavery, and welfare is welfare. We should never confuse the two to make a point. More specifically, the focus needs to be about getting people off of welfare, no matter what color a person may be.

 

But does anyone really believe that Bundy advocates re-enslaving people? Anyone reading such outrageous inferences from that state should consider these remarks, contained in this YouTube clip, which contains the entirely of Bundy's remarks, not just what the New York Times thought was "fit to print":

 

... and so what I've testified to you -- I was in the Watts riot, I seen the beginning fire and I seen that last fire. What I seen is civil disturbance. People are not happy, people are thinking they don't have their freedoms, they didn't have these things, and they didn't have them.

 

For the record, what Bundy saw in 1965, Democratic California Governor Pat Brown only saw parts of (because he had been vacationing in Greece at the time). After Brown tried to quell the riots, he asked some of the black residents: "Don't you have enough welfare?" Really! Talk about the Democratic Party's soft bigotry of low expectations.

 

Then one of the black men the crowd shouted back: "We don't want welfare. We want jobs!"

 

How about that? Democrats were interested in keeping people dependent (Remember LBJ above), but a man, no matter what is color, does not want to be dependent.

 

Bundy's remarks continued:

 

We've progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and we sure don't want to go back. We sure don't want the colored people to go back to that point. We sure don't want these Mexican people to go back to that point. And we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.

The New York Times reporter should have waited around to get the rest of the story, but didn't, since these revelations would have blasted away any hint of racism. "We have progressed" -- one would think that Progressives would esteem these developments, even coming out of the mouth of a white rancher in Nevada.

Here are some more comments from the "racist" Bundy:

Let me tell, talk to you about the Mexicans, and these are just things I know about the negroes. I want to tell you one more thing I know about the negro. When I go, went, go to Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and I would see these little government houses, and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids -- and there's always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch. They didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

Now all the comments make sense, with the full context provided.

Who wrote the slanted column for the New York Times, anyway?

ADAM NAGOURNEY

Perhaps more readers should contact him and ask why he left out all the remarks recognizing the accomplishments of different people in the United States.

 And because they were basically on government subsidy -- so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never, they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered are they were better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things? Or are they better off under government subsidy?

 You know they didn’t get more freedom, they got less freedom -- they got less family life, and their happiness -- you could see it in their faces -- they wasn't happy sitting on that concrete sidewalk. Down there they was probably growing their turnips -- so that’s all government, that’s not freedom.

Then he talked about Mexican-Hispanic people, and his remarks are enlightened, not offensive at all:

 Now, let me talk about the Spanish people. You know, I understand that they come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders. But they’re here and they’re people -- and I’ve worked side by side a lot of them.

Don’t tell me they don’t work, and don’t tell me they don’t pay taxes. And don’t tell me they don’t have better family structures than most of us white people. When you see those Mexican families, they’re together, they picnic together, they’re spending their time together, and I’ll tell you in my way of thinking they’re awful nice people. And we need to have those people join us and be with us not, not come to our party.

Not only is Bundy not racist, but he has called out much of the hollow talking points from the Democratic Party which has used  time and again to discredit anyone who stands up to Big Government.

The New York Times tried to smear a rancher in Nevada with the race card. What the paper has done instead is besmirch its already dirtied reputation as one more news organ trying to carry the Democratic-liberal-agenda to an audience jaded by the left-leaning bias.

Not "All the News that's Fit to Print" But
"Only the Propaganda that Fits a Dem-Lib-Fraud Agenda"

TEA Party's Last Stand: Mississippi?

McDaniel vs. Cochran
thespeechatimeforchoosing.files.wordpress.com

Republican US Senate incumbent Thad Cochran vs. Republican state senator and challenger Chris McDaniel

This is the fight that will determine whether the TEA Party movement is a viable political force, or a monumental outrage which took down the Washington Establishment, both Republican and Democrat, in Washington D.C.

Cochran has served in the US Senate since 1976, served in the House of Representatives since 1972.

Forty-one year Establishment Republican.

That's a long time to be in Washington.

Since his election, the national debt has soured, under Republican as well as Democratic Presidents.

He has voted in line with the same subsidy system which cannot continue.

What steps has Cochran taken to end the entitlement pillage which is borrowing from our future as opposed to shoring up investments to ensure that future generations are not paying for past pleasures and comforts?

Bryan Fischer called Cochran an invisible Senator, who has done almost nothing, who has made no impact on the US Senate or the country.

Indeed, he is one Senator that even the most connected of avid politicos (and political scientists) would neglect to mention. A lot like the thirteenth President of the United States, for example, or who was the Secretary of State for, well, every Administration from John Adams to the Present.

McDaniel admits that he faces an uphill fight challenging Cochran.

Why is he running? On Fox News 13, McDaniel shared:

"First and foremost, we have to balance this budget. We're spending way too much money. We have to gain control over our spending habits if our republic is going to survive. Perhaps more importantly our Constitution has to be restored. We have to defend the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment. We have to make inroads in making sure that individual liberties are protected, and lastly Senator Cochran voted to fund Obamacare. I am not going to fund Obamacare. I'm going to do my best to get rid of Obamacare once and for all.

The TEA Party Patriots, Freedom Works have endorsed McDaniel, as well as Sarah Palin.

Buffering his Reagan credentials, McDaniel is calling for a restoration of bold colors in the Republican Party, not light pastels.

"I believe that Republicans have to learn to fight again. We have to fight with courage. We have to stand for what we believe."

The interview recognized that incumbent Cochran, like all politicians, is beatable.

"I think Senator Cochran is a nice guy. I truly do."

The truth is, however, we do not need nice guys in Washington right now, especially with a Democratic Party which has become radically progressive under a tax-and-spend socialized chief executive who rules by fiat more than full faith and credit in accordance with the United States Constitution.

"His time has past. . .When he went into office in 1973, the country was only roughly $400 billion in debt. This country is now $17.2 trillion in debt, and $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities."

Wow! To get a grasp on the size of these numbers, if a man spent $1 million a day from the moment that Jesus was born until the present day, a person still would not have spent $1 trillion.

"At some point, we have to learn to be responsible again, and that is something that Senator Cochran has been unwilling to do. We need new leadership, and Washington DC, well, they're not listening."

The part about learning to fight again -- that statement needs to be the rallying cry for the TEA Party movement once again. Voters have to understand, however, that just by sending the right people to Washington, that does not mean that our efforts as voters or activists is over.


Refusing to stand with Cruz, Cochran has raised concerns among TEA Party fiscal disciplinarians, who believe that Cochran is too much "get along to go along."

In comes Chris McDaniel.

State senator McDaniel is the TEA Party favorite, but Thad Cochran admitted that he knows nothing about the TEA Party movement. Mississippi voters know the movement very well, if they are not actively involved.

Bryan Fischer is calling the primary for McDaniel. The polling suggests that the gap has hardly narrowed.

The latest setback, seemingly, against McDaniel rests on his conservative radio show in the previous decade. These hacked and spliced recordings do not reveal a ranting radio host whose every statement will invite upsets and needless distractions, necessarily.

This clip, terribly mixed, tries to expose a "Racist Radio Rant", from the gun control laws in Canada, and his disparagements of Hip Hop. Yet in the midst of the recording, he emphasizes that his upset with Hip Hop has nothing to do with race.

He also called out the liberal-progressive lie that poverty causes crime. Criminals cause crime. In a failed attempt to inject some credibility to the anti-McDaniel smear, the video includes a quote from Aristotle, who wrote: "Poverty causes crime."

Aristotle also believed that heavier objects will fall faster than lighter ones (Galileo actually tested that theory, and disproved it." Aristotle also believed that men had more teeth than women (he was wrong), and that a city could never grow  beyond the shout of a city herald. Not just today, where metropolises define urban regions in the United States, but in Aristotle's day, Athens had grown so large, in spite of the weakness of a town herald to announce news.

Summa summarum: who cares what Aristotle things?

The silly clip also slams McDaniel's support for water-boarding (more humane than allowing terrorists to live and say nothing while other terrorist cells continue to plot and kill).

Another audio clip features McDaniel slamming "libertarians", when in fact he was slamming one libertarian candidate, then criticizing specific policies from a more libertarian-leaning society. The state senator provided an extended explanation on Facebook (not that he really needed to).

The fact that the upstart state senate challenger is attracting such animus bodes well for Mr. McDaniel.

Still, incumbent Cochran has not just national but even state establishment backing, including former Governor Haley Barbour (who pushed tort reform while also salvaging his native state through the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina). Cochran and McDaniel have sparred over federal funding related to education (both want the feds out of dictating state education policy, but McDaniel wants fed money out of it, too). On Hurricane Katrina funds, McDaniel sounded unsure whether he would have voted for the package (more likely because the horrendous, wasteful riders attached to such "emergency legislation , i. e. Superstorm Sandy)

These attacks might sway an electorate to remain with the incumbent, as statistics often bear out anyway.

Nevertheless, with a little over a month remaining, McDaniel's momentum may move him up fast enough to take down Cochran in the primary, and chart a way for another TEA Party outsider to shake-up Washington DC status quo complacency anew.