So Sayeth The King

In response to the latest mass shooting during his presidency, President Obama is seriously considering circumventing Congress with his executive authority and imposing new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers.

Which means he has already done so, he’s just waiting for the idle crisis tailwind to spring on you.

HE IS KING AFTER ALL IS HE NOT!

Under the proposed rule change, dealers who exceed a certain number of sales each year would be required to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and perform background checks on potential buyers.

As the president heads to Roseburg, Ore., on Friday to comfort the survivors and families of those killed in last week’s mass shooting at Umpqua Community College, the political calculus around his most vexing domestic policy issue is shifting once again.

After the Dec. 14, 2012, shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., claimed the lives of 20 students and six staff members, Obama asked Vice President Biden to devise a list of policy proposals in response, and on Jan. 26, 2013, the president announced 23 executive actions ranging from restarting federal research into the causes of gun violence to providing parity for mental health coverage under private insurance plans. He pushed for legislation mandating universal background checks on gun sales, an effort that failed in the Senate in April 2013. In August that year, Obama closed two gun-sale loopholes through executive authority, subjecting gun purchases by corporations and trusts to background checks and banning almost all re-imports of military surplus firearms to private entities.

In the wake of last week’s tragedy, Obama said he had asked his team “to scrub what kinds of authorities do we have to enforce the laws that we have in place more effectively to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.”

“We are hopeful we can find a way to do this,” said one senior administration official, who noted that lawyers were still working through details to ensure that the rule could pass legal muster. “It’s a lot more clear today than it was a year ago how to work this out.”

NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE

Nine days before a shooter opened fire on the Umpqua Community College campus, former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband, Mark Kelly, were at the White House to reiterate a long-standing request that those private dealers who sell a sizable number of guns conduct background checks on buyers. The proposed rule change would clarify what it means to be “engaged in the business” of selling firearms.

In a meeting with Obama’s senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, Giffords and Kelly, who became gun-control activists after Giffords was seriously wounded in a mass shooting in 2011, were pushing for a regulatory change that administration officials considered — but then shelved — nearly two years ago.

The proposed executive action aims to impose background checks on individuals who buy from dealers who sell a significant number of guns each year. The current federal statute dictates that those who are “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms need to obtain a federal license — and, therefore, conduct background checks — but exempts anyone “who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.”

White House officials drafted the proposal in late 2013 to apply to those dealers who sell at least 50 guns annually, after Congress had rejected legislation that would have expanded background checks more broadly to private sellers. While the White House Office of Legal Counsel and then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. initially concluded the regulation was legally defensible, according to several individuals involved in the discussions, some federal lawyers remained concerned that setting an arbitrary numerical threshold could leave the rule vulnerable to a challenge.

ATF officials, moreover, objected that it would be hard to enforce and that it was unclear how many sellers would be affected by the change. “Everyone realized it would be hugely politically controversial,” said one individual, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private discussions.

On Monday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton listed the idea of changing the definition of who qualifies as a gun dealer as one of her top proposals to address gun violence.

The aides to Biden who worked most intently on the background-checks proposal in 2013 have since left the administration, but it has resurfaced periodically: Obama discussed the idea with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch during a July 9 Oval Office meeting, aides said, three weeks after nine African American parishioners were gunned down in Charleston, S.C. Now, according to administration officials, a group of West Wing staffers are working in concert on this and other possible executive actions.

Pia Carusone, a senior adviser at Americans for Responsible Solutions, the group Giffords and Kelly founded, declined to discuss details surrounding private White House meetings.

“Over the last few years, Gabby, Mark and ARS staff have met with various administration officials to discuss how we can work together to address America’s gun violence problem,” Carusone said by e-mail. “Many potential solutions have been discussed in conversations that have included the president, vice president and their teams.”

Arkadi Gerney, senior vice president at the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, said tightening the definition of who is “engaged in the business” of selling guns “is a meaningful but modest step towards the goal of ensuring that all gun sales involve a background check.”

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Jennifer Baker, by contrast, said any change was unnecessary and could “ensnare” people not intended to be covered by the law, such as a widow selling off her late husband’s gun collection. “People who repeatedly sell large volumes of firearms are already covered in the current statute because they are already defined as ‘engaged in the business,’ ” she said.

Some activists, including those from the faith and community organizing group Metro Industrial Areas Foundation say Obama could be much bolder with his executive authority. On Thursday, the group, which is pushing the president to leverage the federal government’s purchasing power with gun manufacturers, held a rally in Lafayette Square to demand Obama call in industry leaders and insist that they develop safer technology and crack down on the stores that sell a disproportionate number of guns used in crimes.

“We have traveled here from across the nation to challenge you to stop whining about the power you don’t have, and start acting with the power you do have,” said Bishop Douglas Miles, who is on the group’s leadership team and serves as pastor of Koinonia Baptist Church in Baltimore.

Last week, Obama said that “this is something we should politicize” and that every American had “to for a while, be a single-issue voter” when it came to tightening the nation’s gun laws.

Gun-control activists have made significant political headway on the state level since the Newtown shooting. In the past year, they prevailed on background check fights in Washington state and Oregon; laws to carry concealed weapons without a permit were enacted in three states but defeated in 15. According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 55 percent of gun laws enacted so far this year loosened restrictions rather than tightened them, and many were quite minor. In 2012, by contrast, 72 percent of all enacted gun laws loosened restrictions.

“The gun lobby has done a very good job of tying up Washington, D.C.,” said John Feinblatt, president of the advocacy group Everytown. “It can’t tie up the people, and cannot, in fact, tie up state legislatures.”

While polling shows between 85 and 92 percent of Americans support expanding background checks, the broader issue of gun rights remains fraught. In Roseburg, where many have chafed at the administration’s gun policies, opinion remains sharply divided over whether Obama should even come to offer his condolences to victims’ families.

“Half the people in Roseburg say it’s wonderful, the other half say he shouldn’t show up,” said Earl Skonberg, a local gun owner who engages in sport shooting. (WP)

A Fool and his Freedom are soon Parted

Don’t fall for the ‘marriage equality’ sales pitch. It’s a deception.

Same-sex marriage is a notion that contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction. I doubt many have thought this through, with the ironic exception of the elites who have been pushing the agenda the hardest.

Most people are weary of it all and going along to get along, especially since dissent has become such a socially expensive proposition, almost overnight. That in itself should deeply concern anyone who values freedom of expression.

Sure, true believers scattered across the land really do think the entire project ends with allowing same-sex couples to marry. Most persist in the blind faith that a federal ban on the standard definition of marriage will have no negative effect on family autonomy and privacy. That’s a pipe dream.

The same-sex marriage agenda is more like a magic bullet with a trajectory that will abolish civil marriage for everyone, and in doing so, will embed central planning into American life. And that, my friends, is the whole point of it. Along with Obamacare, net neutrality, and Common Core, genderless marriage is a blueprint for regulating life, particularly family life.

The Rainbow’s Arc

Unintended consequences usually come about when we are ignorant or maybe lazy about a course of action. But we usually crash land after following an arc of logic, which in this case has gone largely undiscerned and unaddressed in the public square.

Americans are in a fog about how marriage equality will lead to more central planning and thought policing. This is partly because the media and Hollywood only provide slogans to regurgitate while academics and judges push politically correct speech codes to obey.

Let’s explore the fallout of that arc of faulty logic. Included below are some 15 of the gaping holes in the “marriage equality” reasoning that Americans have not thought through.

1. The Kids Are Not Alright

In March, six adult children from LGBT households filed amicus briefs opposing genderless marriage: see here, here, and here. You can read testimonials of many such children in a newly released anthology by Robert Oscar Lopez and Rivka Edelman, “Jephthah’s Daughters: Innocent Casualties in the War for Family ‘Equality.’”

Whenever a parent is missing—for whatever reason—a child feels a primal wound. In this respect, parents belong to their children more than children belong to their parents. We ought to recognize that privileges of civil marriage should ultimately exist for children, not for adults. Children have the right to know their origins and not to be treated as commodities. Same-sex parenting—which increasingly involves human trafficking, particularly with artificial reproductive technologies (see number eight)—deliberately deprives a child of a mother and/or a father. The “marriage equality” agenda requires that such children bear that burden alone and repress their primal wound in silence.

2. Love’s Got Nothing to Do with State Interest in Marriage

“Love is love” is an empty slogan when it comes to state interest in marriage. How two people feel about one another is none of the state’s business. The state’s interest is limited to the heterosexual union because that’s the only union that produces the state’s citizenry.

And it still is, whether the union happens traditionally or in a petri dish. Each and every one of us—equally and without exception—only exists through the heterosexual union. In any free and functioning society, there is a state interest in encouraging as much as possible those who sire and bear us to be responsible for raising us.

3. The Infertility Canard

Just as the state has no litmus test for feelings or motives, it has no litmus test for any heterosexual couple who do not produce children because of intent, infertility, or age. Conflating same-sex couples with childless or elderly heterosexual couples seems to be the fallacy of composition: claiming something must be true of the whole because it’s true of some part of the whole.

Sorry, but the heterosexual union, no matter how it takes place, is the only way any citizen exists, including intersex and transgender citizens. So recognizing that union without prejudice remains the only reason for state interest in marriage.

4. Same-Sex Marriage Will Settle Nothing

It’s only the starting point for a glut of philosophically related demands for state recognition and approval of many other types of relationships, including polygamy and incest. This will mark the sudden beginning of an even more sudden end for same-sex marriage, not so much because those other types of relationships prove immoral, but because they serve as exhibits for the argument that all civil marriage—including same-sex marriage—is unsustainable and discriminatory.

5. ‘Marriage Equality’ Opens the Path for ‘Unmarried Equality’

There’s a movement waiting in the wings called “unmarried equality,” which argues that all civil marriage should be abolished because it privileges married people over singles. If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, it will set the precedent for abolishing marriage. Far from getting the state out of the marriage business, it will invite the state to regulate all familial relationships, particularly those with children. Once the state doesn’t have to recognize your marriage, it is freer to treat your spouse and children as strangers to you.

6. Transgenderism Is a Big Part of This Package

Americans have not thought through the implications of same-sex marriage and how it is logically a big step to erasing all sex distinctions in law. If we become legally sexless, the implications are vast when it comes to how or whether the state will recognize family relationships such as mother, father, son, or daughter. There’s already a push to eliminate sex identification at birth, which could mean removing sex distinctions on birth certificates. This will seem logical because all gender identity non-discrimination laws already presume that everybody’s sex is something arbitrarily “assigned” to them at birth.

7. It’s an Open Invitation for State Licensing of Parents

If we allow the abolition of sex distinctions and civil marriage—both of which are written into the social DNA of same-sex marriage—we logically allow the state to gain greater control over deciding familial relationships. Civil marriage so far has presumed that a child born into a heterosexual union has the default right to be raised by his biological parents together. How can the presumption of maternity or paternity survive in a legal system that recognizes neither sex distinctions nor a marriage relationship?

The bellwethers are out there. MSNBC anchor Melissa Harris-Perry did a “Forward” spot for the Obama administration in which she stated that all children “belong” to communities, not families. Another friend of the Obama administration, gender legal theorist Martha Fineman, calls for state-subsidized care-giving units to replace marriage and the family.

8. Same-Sex Marriage Commodifies Children

You may think artificial reproductive technologies (ART) are fine as an avenue to obtain children for those unable to conceive. But in the context of genderless marriage, ART ramps up the potential for human trafficking. Check anonymousus.com to read testimonies of grief and loss felt by children who were conceived in this manner. Check the movies “Eggsploitation” and “Breeders” by the Center for Bioethics and Culture to hear stories of the exploitation of women in the industry. There is definitely an element of human bondage in all of this, particularly because human beings are being deliberately separated from their mothers and fathers, in a way that echoes the wounds of slavery’s separations and the search for one’s roots.

9. It Sets a Head-On Collision Course with Freedom of Religion

The handwriting is on the wall. You need only reflect on how a screaming mob managed to conjure up total surrender from Indiana Gov. Mike Pence so he would reject that state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Catholic Charities is closing its adoption services where same-sex marriage laws pressure them to reject their church’s teachings about marriage and family. Owners of businesses that serve the wedding industry are being forced to either scrap their consciences or shut their doors. Anti-discrimination lawsuits against churches that don’t perform same-sex marriages will undoubtedly increase.

10. It Sets a Collision Course for Freedom of Speech and Press

Campus speech codes. Social punishment. Firing Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla for discovering his thought crime of privately believing in marriage six years prior. The utter compliance of virtually every big business in America, every media outlet, every pundit who is permitted to have a voice in the public square.

11. It’s Especially On a Collision Course with Freedom of Association

I already mentioned that abolishing civil marriage, along with legal sex distinctions, puts the government in a better position to regulate familial relationships, and probably to license parents. If we think deeply about these things, it’s hard to avoid the fact that freedom of association begins with family autonomy, a place where the state is supposed to leave you alone in your most intimate relationships. It’s hard to see how freedom of association is not affected, especially when PC speech codes have everyone constantly checking their chit chat with neighbors, co-workers, and classmates. At Marquette University, staff were told that any conversation or remarks construed to be against same-sex marriage were to be reported to Human Resources, even if just inadvertently overheard.

12. Same-Sex Kills Privacy by Growing Bureaucracy

With the erosion of family autonomy practically guaranteed by the rainbow arc of same-sex marriage, private life will tend to evaporate, just as it always does in centrally planned societies. Distrust grows because people fear punishment for expressing dissenting views. The emphasis on political correctness in the name of equality, coupled with an ever-growing bureaucracy, is a perfect environment in which to percolate a surveillance society.

13. It’s Meant to Be a Global Agenda

The United States is already punishing countries and threatening to cut off aid if they don’t accept the LGBT agenda. This is especially true of developing countries, in which the whole idea is foreign to over 95 percent of the population. According to a report by Rep. Steve Stockman, corroborated by a Pentagon official, the administration held back critical intelligence from Nigeria which would have aided in locating girls kidnapped by Boko Haram. The new National Security Strategy recently released by the White House makes clear that the LGBT agenda is a global agenda. And it looks a lot like cultural imperialism of the worst kind.

14. It Promises a Monolithic Society of Conformity

In the past year or two, everyone with something to lose by opposing same-sex marriage—with the honorable exception of Eich—seems to have scuttled their principles. Five years ago, the American Psychological Association voted 157-0—that’s right, ZERO—to support genderless marriage. For an excellent assessment of what this sort of conformity means for a free society, read Brendan O’Neill’s article in Spiked, entitled “Gay Marriage: A Case Study in Conformism.” The agenda was imposed by elites, entirely due to a methodical blitzkrieg of programs and enforcement dictated from above. Same-sex marriage simply could not come about without suppressing dissent in all of our institutions.

15. Expect More Severe Punishment for Dissent

If you think the bullying of businesses, churches, and individuals who don’t get with the LGBT program now is bad, it promises to get much worse once codified. Is this really the sort of society you wish to live in? Where expressing an opinion from your heart on faith, family, marriage, relationships, love, or the very nature of reality—is routinely attacked as hate speech? Because that is exactly what you need to expect.

Justice Anthony Kennedy made it very clear in his words of the Windsor decision that any dissent on same-sex marriage was tantamount to animus. It is but a short step from presuming animus to punishing dissent.

So perhaps the biggest question hanging in the air is this: What will the authorities decide to do to dissenters?

Dear Everyone

Dear Everyone,

I say this in the most sincere way possible: Get over yourselves.

Not everything is about everything, or everyone. In fact, most things are about the very few people involved in them and no one else.

From the tragic to the political, we saw a wave of people inserting their pet projects and profitmaking grievances into the events of the week like the opportunists those people are. But that’s all they are.

It started with the awful terrorist attack by a monster in South Carolina who murdered nine innocent people because he “wanted to start a race war.” He should be held in a cell used for extension cord storage with exposed pipes on the ceiling. His career of wasting oxygen can’t be ended fast enough.

But the Left needs him for their Agenda. As for “starting” a race war, hasn’t the Left and especially Obama,Holder, Shapton, et al already been doing that for many years?

But too many, unsurprisingly, are using this creature’s disgusting act of evil for their own purposes.

President Obama used it to advance gun control, something the American people routinely and roundly reject. Hillary Clinton did it to advance her relevance and to distract from her own failings. If you believe either of these people—or any of the other politicians and pundits weighing in from afar—give an honest damn about the events in South Carolina beyond how they can use it; you’re fooling yourself.

If they cared, they would show up, without announcing it, without fanfare, without cameras, and pay their respects to the families and community. Instead, the president went fundraising on the west coast and Hillary did whatever it was she was scripted to do beforehand.

Politicians aside, the clown car of media and pundits couldn’t get enough of this story. Hosts were dispatched, race-baiting pundits were released from their hermetically sealed pods and activists booked flights faster than a Kardashian can cash a check.

All had their own agenda; none really cared.

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, in a panic to get enough ratings to keep his job, made his cause the Confederate flag. He obsessed over something that is known as the paint job on the roof of the car in the Dukes of Hazzard as a contributing factor in this evil.

That flag had nothing to do with this, and Chris isn’t dumb enough to believe it did. But it’s a cause people who would be inclined to watch his show could get behind, so he went all in with it. No lives were saved, no pain was alleviated. Chris Hayes has no connection to Charleston, had no reason to be there, brought nothing of value in that community’s time of need. But there he was …, yelling about a piece of cloth, feeling important.

Is it important? Of course not. I don’t get the concept of “southern pride” to the point you’d embrace something under which so much evil was perpetrated, nor do I understand why anyone would let a dead symbol have that much power over them. I don’t associate with people who get worked up over inanimate objects or those who would wrap themselves in something so intertwined with this nation’s greatest cruelty.

While the political class was finding new and creative ways to exploit tragedy and dishonor murder victims, including a discussion of the Voting Rights Act and voter ID (see how Michael Moore did it here), Pope Francis called for a “bold cultural revolution” to combat climate change. (Read about it here.)

With all due respect to the Pope, who cares? That the head of one of the richest organizations on the planet wants to push socialism to help the poor and “save the planet” isn’t a surprise. The Catholic Church has a long history of obtuse self-observation. But that left-wingers would rally to his call is the ultimate in hypocrisy.

Hillary Clinton personally sent tweets of praise for the Pope’s encyclical just 2 ½ hours after she had praised an Iowa court decision that favored abortion. (Take a look; it’s beyond irony.)

Clinton could be somewhat forgiven for her ignorance because she’s not Catholic, but Martin O’Malley is. The also-ran Democrat from Maryland penned an op-ed praising the Pope’s call to action even though he is one of the most pro-abortion politicians in the country. The “devout Catholic” O’Malley counts on people not knowing his or the Pope’s stance on the issue or hopes people think Catholicism is a buffet from which you can pick and choose which parts you like.

At least atheist Bernie Sanders is intellectually consistent – government is his God, and his will is his government.

These are but a few examples of the media, political and pundit class who saw opportunities to advance their agendas in the face of tragedy or reality. The country would be better off if we’d let a community come together and its people grieve, rather than try to gain relevancy through the misery of others. It’d also be better off if politicians and the media had a modicum of intellectual consistency; if the “party of science” either left science to scientists or at least answered for its embrace of religious doctrine only when it is convenient.

They won’t because they don’t have to. There is no price to be paid for exploitation or hypocrisy, politically or personally, if you are of the left. The right is little better, but this was the left’s week.

We’d all be better served if those in power, those who’d like to be, and those who think they are would all step back and, for once, put the interests of others before themselves. Imagine if that happened. Imagine if these camera whores actually got over themselves for one full week. Just think of what we could accomplish if they did. (Derek Hunter)

 The mind boogleth at the possibilities but narcissism is the scourge of this age.

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

You Knew it

ferguson americaLast week local black activists held a sit-in protest at the office of MORE (Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment) in St. Louis to press their claim that groups led by whites have collected tens of thousands of dollars in donations off of the Black Lives Matter movement without paying the Black participants their fair share.

MORE is the successor group to the now-bankrupt St. Louis branch of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now).

So these ACORNs have not fallen far from the Liberal Agenda Tree.
cut the check

During the sit-in, one of the Black activists threatened the white representative for MORE, saying, “We gon’, we gonna just **** you up.” (Expletive deleted.)
Apparently much of the money raised by MORE didn’t reach the local protesters.

In response to this protest MORE released a list of names and amounts paid out to protesters and protest groups who agitated and harassed police night-after-night in Ferguson last fall and winter climaxing in the torching and looting of dozens of local Ferguson businesses.

The list of over 80 groups and individuals was posted on Twitter by an irate protester.
Via Weasel Zippers:
more payout 1

more payout 2Note: This is just the list that we know about… What else are they hiding? And which groups, individuals are linked to Democratic politicians?

MORE (Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment) and OBS (Organization for Black Struggle) advertised for paid protesters in Ferguson.

more payoutLast weekend it was revealed that Ferguson protest leaders were being paid $5,000 a month to disrupt communities and inflame racial hate.

Shaun King was also in Cleveland:

King, who writes for Daily Kos, lied claiming the 12 year old boy, Tamir Rice, who had been shot by police after brandishing a toy gun, claimed that the police charged Rice with a crime after they killed him. Obviously, the point was to inflame, because it had nothing to do with the truth.
Screen Shot 2015-05-24 at 3.44.56 PM

Deray was there a special friend, he was there with Dorian Johnson, whose lying in Ferguson spread the ‘Hands up, don’t shoot” myth.

Akiba Solomon of Colorlines stated, “More than 500 of us have traveled from Boston, Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Nashville, Portland, Tucson, Washington, D.C., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and other cities to support the people of Ferguson and help turn a local moment into a national movement,” the Times noted.

“There’s absolutely no doubt that part of the reason that Ferguson flared up was because protesters were being paid to be there. That makes you wonder how many are being paid in Baltimore? How many more will be paid in the future?” The Right Scoop asked.

Protesters directed much of their anger against MORE director Jeff Ordower, former Missouri head of ACORN and ACORN’s Midwest operations, FrontPage Mag reports.

“The unpaid rent-a-mob operatives complain that MORE stiffed them the same way ACORN did to hired protesters throughout its 40 years of radical left-wing rabble-rousing,” FrontPage Mag reports.
The Kansas City Star estimates that the Ferguson riots, characterized as a spontaneous eruption of anger over the shooting of unarmed black criminal Michael Brown by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, cost the county $4.2 million.

Pledge

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Progressive Liberalism, and to the Dictatorship for which it stands, one Nation under Government, divisible, with  liberty and social justice for the faithful only.”

Oh, am I going to get labelled a homophobe and a “hater” again for this one. 🙂
Oh well. They’d do it anyways. Reality doesn’t matter, the Narrative does.
But the Liberal’s favorite cudgel of social and legal enforcement was used again this week when the Federal Government overturned a voter approved State Constitutional Amendment on gay marriage.
The Court of Social Justice & Liberalism has struck again.
I wonder if this applies to all the Illegal Aliens the Feds say we aren’t allowed to catch also? 🙂
Am I against gay marriage? Nope.
Am I against liberals “supremacy” clause and their need to destroy you in court if you cross them, HELL YEAH!
But since the Leftist  Gay Narrative is that they are next great Civil Right struggle and they are the oppressed and their cause is righteous and “moral”, rational thought is not possible. So you’re a “hater” if you disagree with, period.
So will Wedding venues that refuse to hold a Gay Wedding be subjected to the Gay Mafia Hammer?
Businesses already have to watch out for the  Gay Thought Police prowling around to destroy them if they do or say the wrong thing.
That’s my objection.
But I’m evil automatically in Big Gay Brother’s eyes, so don’t bother listening to me. 🙂
A little history, that an irrational gay pride activist will not even comprehend in their haze of righteousness, so here goes.
Back in the early 1980’s when I was a freshmen in college I encountered my first gay people ever and you know what I thought– So what, I don’t care. They were good people and that matters more than their sexual proclivities. 
I truly didn’t care.
Actually, they were more accepting and better people than a lot of heterosexuals were back in the day to be honest.
My college roommates for a time consisted of a Gay Man, a Witch, and a Satanist, all under one roof. All friends. No political agenda AT ALL!
And well before it was “fashionable”.
Hell, it was considered I must be gay because I keep hanging around with gays.
So you see, I am not a “hater”. (I can here the leftist snark “Oh, he had a few gay friends…”)
But to the modern gay rights activist I must be a “hater” because I disagree with their need to FORCE their life style and your acceptance of it at the point of a Law Book and destroy good and decent people for the simple fact that they don’t want to kow-tow to them. Those filthy peasants!
After all, THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA!
I think they were winning in general without being so heavy-handed and impatient. Their indoctrination techniques over the last generation or so were having the desired effect. But their secular hatred for the “Christian Right” and their own self-aggrandized Sanctimony gets the better of them.
They’d been working on it for decades, just like Obamacare took 90 years, many were patient.
But the squeaky activist gets the law greased.
So I can accept gay marriage because I always have, BUT the activist, no, sorry, you’re just another bunch of totalitarian social justice liberals who want what they want, when they want it, because they want it, and if you object you must therefore, by default be EVIL.
The oppressed become the oppressor, but because of righteous blindness can’t and won’t see it that way.
They are the triumphant aggrieved sackers of Christian Right “extremism”, after all.
Arizona’s governor, Jan Brewer, who has clashed with President Barack Obama over immigration and border security, said in a statement that federal courts have gone against the will of voters and eroded the state’s power. “Simply put, courts should not be in the business of making and changing laws based on their personal agendas,” Brewer said. (AP)
But personal agendas is the only thing The Left understands. They want it, you’re evil, you must be crushed! Period.
The federal court decision bars Arizona officials from enforcing a 1996 state law and a 2008 voter-approved constitutional amendment that outlawed gay marriage.
The Feds are The Supreme Law of The Land and you peasant will do as you are told or else!
So who’s next on their target list. Who do they want to crush next in their crusade to FORCE you do things their way or else??
Among the couples there were Bailey and Majors (outside the courthouse). Though marriage never seemed possible to them in their youth, they began to get hope in recent years as the nation started to debate the legality of same-sex unions.

Despite all the joy they felt Friday, Bailey said it was still hard to express her feelings about such a sweeping social turn-around that she witnessed in her lifetime.

There was no sweeping “social change”. There was a LEGAL hammer slammed into the State’s nuts and then they were cut off. That is not “social change” that is Legal ENFORCEMENT of one’s agenda regardless of any “social” feelings to the contrary.

It’s a LEGAL victory, not a “social” victory.

As The Doctor in “Doctor Who” last week said:

People with guns to their heads cannot mourn”

Big Gay Brother is watching you citizen, and you better not step out of line or else the Thought Police will come down on you…
Next up, Polyamory!!! 🙂
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

May Day Call

Michelle Malkin: On May 1, left-wing vigilantes will target companies across the country that have committed a mortal sin: sending donations to GOP Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin. Rest assured, such intolerable acts of political free speech will not go unpunished by tolerant Big Labor activists. They’re calling for both a national boycott of Walker’s corporate donors and a coordinated sticker vandalism campaign on GOP-tainted products.

The Wisconsin Grocers Association is bracing for the anti-Walker witch hunt. Anonymous operatives have circulated sabotage stickers on the Internet and around Wisconsin that single out Angel Soft tissue paper (“Wiping your (expletive) on Wisconsin workers”), Johnsonville Sausage (“These Brats Bust Unions”) and Coors (“Labor Rights Flow Away Like A Mountain Stream”). Earlier this week, a “Stick It To Walker” website boasted photos of vandalized Angel Soft tissue packages at a Super Foodtown grocery store in Brooklyn, N.Y.

This destruction of private property is illegal. Not that it matters to anti-Walker protest mobsters, who trampled Wisconsin’s Capitol at an estimated $5 million in security, repair and cleaning costs to taxpayers. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “The identity of the backers of the sticker effort is unknown, although many assume it is being orchestrated by public employee unions. This latest effort follows boycotts organized by members of the Wisconsin State Employees Union AFSCME 24.”

AFSCME 24 is the same union affiliate that recently disseminated intimidation letters throughout southeast Wisconsin, demanding that local businesses support unions by putting up signs in their windows. The letter threatened not just Walker supporters, but any and all businesses that have chosen to sit on the sidelines and stay out of politics altogether: “Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means ‘no’ to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members.” Others on Big Labor’s hit list: Kwik Trip, Sargento Foods Inc. and M&I Bank.

Walker, of course, has been at the forefront of government pension and budget reforms. Similar measures are being advanced by Democratic governors and Democrat-run legislatures from Massachusetts to New York to California. But union bosses have yet to sic their goons on individual and corporate donors to Democratic politicians imposing long-overdue benefit and collective bargaining limits for public employee unions.

How convenient, yes? Just as they secured a big fat waiver from the federal health care mandate and tax scheme they lobbied to impose on the rest of America, Big Labor is giving Democratic legislative water-carriers who have been forced to adopt cuts and cost controls a big fat waiver from their organized wrath and vandalism.

Now, a few hundred or thousand ruined grocery store items may not seem to matter much to the average reader, but this little property destruction campaign spotlights a nasty tactic increasingly employed by the left: campaign finance disclosure as a speech-squelching weapon.

We saw it last fall when Democratic operatives targeted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for donating to Obamacare opposition ads.

We saw it in 2008 when a top MoveOn.org alumnus launched attacks on Republican donors with the express purpose of “hoping to create a chilling effect that will dry up contributions.”

We saw it when Obama campaign committee lawyers lobbied the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute a GOP donor for funding campaign ads exposing Obama’s ties to Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers.

We saw it during the Proposition 8 traditional marriage battle in California, where gay rights avengers compiled black lists, harassment lists and Google target maps of citizens who contributed to the ballot measure.

We saw it when “progressive” zealots smeared Target Corporation and Chick-fil-A for daring to associate with social conservatives.

And we’re seeing it again this month as the Obama White House readies an executive order that would force federal contractors to disclose all political donations to candidates and independent groups in excess of $5,000 made not just by a corporate entity, but by all of its individual executives, directors and officers.

Former Federal Election Commission official Hans von Spakovsky obtained the sweeping draft executive order, which — surprise, surprise — exempts unions and predominantly left-wing federal grant recipients from the mandate. On Wednesday, GOP senators spelled out the bullying agenda in an open letter objecting to the Obama order: “Political activity would obviously be chilled if prospective contractors have to fear that their livelihood could be threatened if the causes they support are disfavored by the administration.” Join the club.

When disclosure’s a bludgeon, all but Obama’s cronies are nails.

As I have said many times before, the Democrats only have 3 plays in their playbook: Class Ware, fear, and Intimidation.

That’s all folks.

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Weiss Ratings downgraded U.S. debt this week.

Yes, the superman of all debts, public and private, got it some kryptonite.    

“We believe that the AAA/Aaa assigned to U.S. sovereign debt by Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch is unfair to investors and savers, who are undercompensated for the risks they are taking,” Weiss Ratings President Martin D. Weiss said according to the South Florida Business Journal.

Weiss rated the U.S. a “C” credit risk, behind even Mexico.

The U.S. isn’t just a banana republic under Obama, it’s close to a failed state; at least in its ability to pay the bills.

To make matters worse, Weiss made the announcement after Federal Reserve “superman” Ben Bernanke admitted in a press conference that his policy of printing money has resulted in higher inflation and no jobs.

The announcement by Weiss may not be unrelated to the Bernanke press conference.

As Forbes observed this week, the Fed under Bernanke may not have the ability to judge anything anymore.

Just last month, the web site reminded us, the Fed assured everyone that “The economic recovery is on firmer footing, and overall conditions in the labor market appear to be improving gradually.”

On Wednesday the Fed told us “The economic recovery is proceeding at a moderate pace and overall conditions in the labor market are improving gradually.”

On cue, right after the Bernanke press conference, the estimates for GDP by the Fed were then slashed to 1.8 percent after posting 3.7 percent in the first quarter. Think that Ben didn’t know about those new numbers at his all-is-well press conference?

The revised estimates confirmed what we already knew; that the Fed policy was igniting inflation that would eventually hurt economic growth by spiking prices for things like gas, food, common stocks.

1.8 percent growth is hardly enough growth to ensure that jobless claims don’t start going up again.

Then on Friday, the Fed chief told an audience that he wants more sub-prime lending.

We’re getting into the area where we just can’t make this stuff up.

Yes, Ben Bernanke is calling on lenders to give more money to people who can’t afford mortgages.

Really.

“Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday called for more lending to people and small businesses in lower-income neighborhoods,” reports the AP “saying they’ve been disproportionately hurt by the recession.”

Does Bernanke think he’s running for re-election? What’s worse is that our chief banking officer doesn’t seem to understand how the country got where we are fiscally.     

And things have just become too complicated- and political- and dangerous for Bernanke to remain the front man for U.S. economic policy.

Instead Ben should do the decent thing:

Take off that silly cape.

It looks ridlculous. (John Ransom)

But don’t worry, everything’s fine, we aren’t broke.

We just need more investments in infrastructure and higher taxes on “rich” people to solve all our woes! 😦

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Astroturf & Notes From The Left

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Doctors in white coats are standing outside the Wisconsin capitol in Madison, giving away fake doctor’s notes the way shirts are given out at basketball games. They’re a disgrace to our profession.

The news not only offends my professional pride and code of ethics, it also strikes me as a violation of their license to practice medicine.

The Wisconsin State Medical Examining Board of the Department of Regulation and Licensing should suspend these doctors for violating their Hippocratic Oath as well as their professional responsibility.

The 12.6 percent share of health-insurance costs that the new Wisconsin bill asks for from public employees is paltry by comparison to the 50 percent or more that many private employers now ask.

But if the doctors at the University of Wisconsin and the Medical College of Wisconsin who are writing these notes are so concerned about teachers and other employees being able to afford their health care, I’d suggest that these doctors (if they really are so altruistic) provide care to these public servants for free.

Are these disgraces to the profession unaware that the state of Wisconsin (as well as other states) is going bankrupt — even before ObamaCare forces huge new Medicaid costs on them?

The Wisconsin fake-note writers might also note that federal anti-trust law forbids physicians from engaging in collective bargaining or work stoppages. This law serves a purpose — it protects the American public from greed. The health of our patients would be threatened if we could go on strike, just as the education of the students of these protesting teachers is at stake here.

These doctors should value their medical degree more, before they lose the chance to use it to see actual patients.

Dr. Marc K. Siegel is a practicing internist in New York and a Fox News medical contributor. (NY Post)

Liberals don’t care. The law doesn’t apply to them.

But you know the Left is worried because now THEY HAVE A POLL to use as a Talking Point!!

It was conducted by the AFL-CIO, a Union. Guess what it said?

The Voters are with the protesters and hate Gov. Walker!!

I know, you’re shocked that a leftist poll done by a Union would side with the Union. It’s just so amazingly coincidental.

BTW:Average Salary In Wisconsin: $46,390
Salary raise last year: 4.7%
Salary raise over 10 years: 21.5%

The Daily Caller has broken out the salaries and benefits of teachers who have publicly entered the debate by commenting to the press.

Wisconsin’s 2010 Teacher of the Year, Leah Lechleiter-Luke of Mauston High School, told CNN the budget changes would force her to look for additional part-time work.

“When people say that public sector employees live high off the hog, I’d like to share that for 13 of my 19-year teaching career I have held a part-time job either in the summer or teaching night class at the local technical college,” Lechleiter-Luke told CNN. “In addition to tightening the belt even more and crossing our fingers that nothing breaks, I will need to find part-time work again.”

Lechleiter-Luke makes $54,928 in base salary and $32,213 in “fringe benefits,” which include health insurance, life insurance and retirement pay. (which she currently doesn’t pay for at all!)

Brad Lutes and his wife, Heather Lutes, told MSNBC’s Ed Schultz that Walker’s budget would hit them twice as hard.

“Having to explain to an 8- and 10-year old that the governor of your state basically wants to take money away from dad and mom? It’s just really, really frustrating,” Brad Lutes told Schultz.

He makes $49,412 in base salary with $27,987 in fringe benefits and his wife makes $50,240 with $9,413 in benefits. That’s $137,052 annually between the two of them.

ASTROTURF SALES SKYROCKET IN MADISON

The Community Agitater-In-Chief, Barack Obama, has sent his minions onto the battlefield to crush the State of Wisconsin’s government with his own apparatchiks and his narcissistic Union thugs.

All in the name of the children, and freedom of speech, of course. 🙂

So the teachers get fake doctor’s notes so they don’t have to show up and do their job and mobs of the Agitators minions shout down anyone who disagrees with them.

They have hateful, uncivil discourse and immature signs but don’t you dare call it hateful, uncivil, and immature because liberals are never hateful,uncivil or immature. 🙂  Just ask them.

And of course, they are geniuses and superior to everyone, especially YOU.

“The unions are the people who brought us a weekend. If we don’t do this now, our children will not have a weekend!” —One Protestor yelled out!

So the 88% of you who aren’t in a Union, you need bow down and kiss the ass of every Union member because they have brought you weekends!! Hallelujah!!

So why does anyone work on “the weekend” because the Unions brought it to you? Must be greedy capitalist pigs!

“We need to make sure that as loud as the voices are in the capital, we don’t let them overpower the voices of the tax payers I was elected to represent. We are willing to take this as long as it takes, because in the end, we are doing the right thing, and for us, we have to do this.”

There is so much wrong with how liberals go about attempting to exercise power. Teachers leave their work to hang out at the capitol to try to harangue the duly elected government? The schools they are supposed to be working in are closed down, the kids no longer having a place to go and their parents now responsible to stay home with them or find some other arrangement?

The Democrats that are supposed to be a functioning part of the government decided to leave the state they are supposed to be helping to govern and hid in Illinois to prevent the government from being able to move forward legislatively, making themselves a tyranny of the minority. In addition, the ‘protesters’ are now going to the home of the governor and scaring his family. These are the same tactics the union thugs did with the AIG execs.

A CNN reporter asked one of the protesters:

“You talk about coming to the table.. the governor coming to the table. Do you think it was the right tactic for the Democratic senators not to come to the table.”

At which point the CNN reporter was shouted down with

“United we stand. UNITED WE STAND. UNITED WE STAND…”

Nice answer. And these folks are teaching our kids? These people are an embarressment. The people of Wisconsin are being threatened by a thuggish political state.  (WThe)

Funny, That was the slogan of Ross Perot in the 1990’s, but that was evil. 🙂

American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees: $43,337,565 in political contributions in the last 12 years 98% Democrat.

National Education Assn: $32,021,910 93% Democrat.

American Federation of Teachers:  $28,731,591 98%-Democrat

Over a $100 million in 12 years!!

That’s a lot of dues. AFSCME was founded in Wisconsin.

So is it any wonder that the Community Agitator-in Chief would be very swift and decisive to save his own apparatchiks but dither like a person with Alzheimer’s on the Middle East?

No. But the left will use it for their own spin…

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: All right, one quick last question. When you make the reference to Egypt, you aren’t saying that the conditions that the Wisconsin teachers are teaching under with this new — new bill or without it is remotely like Egypt, or are you?

STATE SEN. LENA TAYLOR, D-WIS: No, what I’m saying in particular, Greta, is that in Egypt, if you look, after they overthrew their ruler, they had some specific rallies and protests, and one of the ones that they had was on workers’ rights. How ironic is that, right?

Sen. Taylor also said: I have to do what I have to do so that the people of Wisconsin can have an opportunity to be heard and that this bill is not rammed so rapidly that they have no idea what’s going on.

My immediate reaction to this was then Speaker Queen Pelosi’s: As the business community and more public polling shows opposition to ObamaCare, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) tells us, “[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”

But the Senate Democrats in Wisconsin are hiding out in Illinois (undoubtedly being paid by the Unions, George Soros, or the DNC) because they haven’t got the balls to face the democratic process when they aren’t the majority.

So enter the Astroturf:

We now know that Organizing for America (O.F.A) (Obama’s 2008 election campaign tactical team) and the Democrat Party have been hard at work supporting this protest. Ben Smith wrote this on February 17:

O.f.A Wisconsin’s field efforts include filling buses and building turnout for the rallies this week in Madison, organizing 15 rapid response phone banks urging supporters to call their state legislators, and working on planning and producing rallies, a Democratic Party official in Washington said.

And so I ask, who are the “Astroturf activists” now? Those people on the streets are not there as citizens, but as members of a powerful interest group, gathered to petition government for special treatment, with the DNC and Organizing for America coordinating the events on the ground from their offices in Washington DC.

The Astroturf activists on the streets of Madison may think they are helping their cause, but the American people are watching. And they are judging–judging them and those officials we elected to serve taxpayer rather than union interests.

America’s Organizer in Chief, President Obama, weighed in on the issue last week, calling Governor Walker’s actions an “assault on the unions.” You bet they are. And if the Democrats get this issue wrong like they got ObamaCare wrong, they’ll be hearing from the American people once again in 2012.

And this time, it just might cost them the U.S. Senate and the White House. (DC)

Michelle Malkin: Welcome to the reckoning. We have met the fiscal apocalypse, and it is smack dab in the middle of the heartland.

As Wisconsin goes, so goes the nation. Let us pray it does not go the way of the decrepit welfare states of the European Union.

The lowdown: State government workers in the Badger State pay piddling amounts for generous taxpayer-subsidized health benefits.

Faced with a $3.6 billion budget hole and a state constitutional ban on running a deficit, new GOP Gov. Scott Walker wants public unions to pony up a little more.

He has proposed raising the public employee share of health insurance premiums from less than 5% to 12.4%. He is also pushing for state workers to cover half of their pension contributions.

To spare taxpayers the soaring costs of byzantine union-negotiated work rules, he would rein in Big Labor’s collective bargaining power to cover only wages unless approved at the ballot box.

As the free-market MacIver Institute in Wisconsin points out, the benefits concessions Walker is asking public union workers to make would still maintain their health insurance contribution rates at the second-lowest among Midwest states for family coverage.

Moreover, a new analysis by benefits think tank HCTrends shows that the new rate “would also be less than the employee contributions required at 85 percent of large Milwaukee-area employers.”

Obama Speaks Up

This modest call for shared sacrifice has triggered the wrath of the White House-Big Labor-Michael Moore axis. On Thursday, President Obama lamented the “assault on unions.”

AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union bosses dubbed Walker the “Mubarak of the Midwest,” while their minions toted posters of Walker’s face superimposed on Hitler’s.

Moore goaded thousands of striking union protesters to “shut down” the “new Cairo” while the state’s Democratic legislators bailed on floor debate over the union reform package.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan spurned the opportunity to condemn thousands of Wisconsin public school teachers for lying about being “sick” and shutting down at least eight school districts across the state to attend Capitol protests (many of whom dragged their students on a social justice field trip with them).

Instead, Duncan defended teachers for “doing probably the most important work in society.” Only striking government teachers could win federal praise for not doing their jobs.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that bringing American union workers into the 21st century in line with the rest of the work force is tantamount to dictatorship.

Yes, the so-called progressives truly believe that by walking off their jobs and out of their classrooms, they are “putting children first.”

If ever there was proof that public unions no longer work in the public interest, this is it.

Big Labor dragoons workers into exclusive representation agreements, forces them to pay compulsory dues that fatten Democratic political coffers and then has the chutzpah to cast itself as an Egyptian-style “freedom” and “human rights” movement.

Meanwhile, union leaders elsewhere are quietly forcing their low-wage members to share the sacrifice in order to preserve teetering health funds.

In New York state, Skidmore College campus janitors, dining service workers and other maintenance employees received late notice from the SEIU that 4.15% of their gross earnings will now be deducted from their paychecks to cover the cost of the health plan provided through the behemoth 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund. (If the name sounds familiar, it’s because this is one of several privileged SEIU affiliates that has received an ObamaCare waiver.)

These workers are forced to join the union in order to preserve their jobs, and unlike non-union workers, they are locked into a single health plan.

The SEIU has now decreed that they must pay new fees to include spouses on their plans and has hiked employee co-pays for doctor visits and prescription drugs.

What’s necessary for New York union workers is necessary for Wisconsin union workers — and for the rest of the protected union-worker class in bankrupt and near-bankrupt states across America.

The “persuasion of power” so ruthlessly and recklessly exercised by the SEIU and its thuggish allies must be broken by the moral courage of fiscal discipline.

It’s now or never.

The Top Ten ways to know if you’re in a Public Sector Union By Rod Pennington

10.) You take a week off to protest in Wisconsin and your office runs better.

9.) On a snow day when they say “non-essential” people should stay home you know who they mean.

8.) You get paid twice as much as a private sector person doing the same job but make up the difference by doing half as much work.

7.) It takes longer to fire you than the average killer spends on death row.

6.) The worse you do your job, the more your boss avoids you. (and the more raises you get)

5.) You think the French are working themselves to death.

4.) You know by having a copy of the Holy Koran on your desk your job is 100% safe.

3.) You spend more time at protest marches than at church.

2.) You have a Democratic congressman’s lips permanently attached to your butt.

1.) You pay more in union dues than you do for your healthcare insurance.

“The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.” — John Maynard Keynes

The particular defunct economist who most dominates the minds of the Obama administration and the Democratic Party is Keynes himself.

But…shhhh..that’s a secret….so pass a note to the one next to you.

Don’t worry, the teacher will not catch you, she is too busy protesting to keep her greed to actually be in the classroom teaching.

MORE “CIVIL” DISCOURSE From Wisconsin Union Protesters:

Doubtful that any of the left-wing media is covering much of this.

One of many profane protest signs at the Madison, WI ‘sick out’ protest… great education for the students who were brought by their teachers.

And we end as it began, with Astroturf:

This sign cracks me up — it was obviously not grass-roots but professionally mass-produced, likely by the DNC or the unions: “Fox News will lie about this.”

Gee, I think we know who needs that new Center for Civility in Public Discourse that The University of Arizona just opened.

Or would that end up being an episode of A&E’s “Intervention”? 🙂