ALERT -- Muslim Brotherhood ties to White House resurface

Recipient of 'smoking gun' Benghazi memo eyed.

Recipient of 'smoking gun' Benghazi memo eyed.

(by Jerome R. Corsi, WND) – The controversy that developed in 2012 when Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and four other GOP members of the House sent letters to the inspector generals at the departments of Homeland Security, Justice and State asking for an investigation of the influence played by the Muslim Brotherhood on U.S. government officials in the Obama administration took on new light last week.

On the distribution list of the “smoking gun” email released in the Benghazi probe last week was a figure with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Medhi Alhassani, who shares a similar background with Huma Abedin, the longtime aide to Hillary Clinton, reported former PLO-member and Arabic-speaking researcher Walid Shoebat.

As WND reported, Abedin had been a particular concern of Bachmann and other GOP congressmen who were calling for further investigation of the Muslim Brotherhood influence on the White House.

The email released last week in a FOIA request by Judicial Watch was from Ben Rhodes, a White House special assistant in the Office of the Chief of Staff of the National Security Council.

“It is obvious that as a Muslim Brotherhood operative, Alhassani wanted to blame the video for the violence that erupted in the Middle East,” Shoebat commented, referring to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. compound at Benghazi.

“This aligned the Muslim fundamentalists with the Obama administration in at least one respect – each had a stake in blaming the video.”

WND has reported that in criminalizing the Muslim Brotherhood and prosecuting key Muslim Brotherhood leaders, Egypt’s military government has sought to embarrass the Obama administration for the support it gave the now-deposed government of Muslim Brotherhood lead Mohamed Morsi.

WND has also reported that Egyptian terrorists with ties to the Morsi government and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were perpetrators in the terrorist Benghazi attack.

Keep reading...

UPDATE: 'Obama's Impeachable Offenses' by Michael Connelly, J.D.

AP

AP

ALERT -- Formal Articles of Impeachment Prepared -- August 29, 2013 -- CLICK HERE to Read

Editor's Note:  Sunday, November 11, 2012. In the 8 months that has passed since the original publication of this op-ed, ask yourself if President Obama's actions have led him more, or less, in the direction of an impeachment and  imprisonment. This op-ed (now with more than 25 million views) has been updated with the most current facts for the case of Obama's Impeachable Offenses. Stay tuned right here at RedFlagNews.com for future updates!


I have repeatedly been asked by a number of different people if I think that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, has committed any offenses that subject him to being impeached by the Congress of the United States. The answer is without a doubt, yes because he has repeatedly breached his oath of office. The oath of office of the President of the United States is simple and concise. It reads:

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Instead of living up to that oath, President Obama has actively attempted to subvert, ignore, and completely destroy large parts of the Constitution. I believe the President of the United States is well aware of what he is doing, and it is completely intentional. Based from my years as a constitutional attorney, listed below are what I believe are impeachable offenses, and the list continues to grow. 

    1. President Obama has appointed numerous people to cabinet level positions without the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate, as is required by the Constitution. These individuals are given extraordinary power and independent funding, and are not under the scrutiny of Congress. The fact that Obama calls them Czars does not make them legal. He has also made illegal recess appointments of other members of his cabinet that required Senate approval. He simply declared that the U.S. Senate was in recess despite the fact that no such declaration had been made by the Senate. The President has no Constitutional authority to do this. 

    2. The push by Pres. Obama to pass healthcare legislation in the Congress of the United States that he was fully aware was unconstitutional. He has continued to use his powers and executive branch of government to implement this legislation despite the fact that a federal judge had declared the entire law unconstitutional, and ordered that it not be implemented. In addition, Obama has directed members of his administration to violate the right to freedom of religion protected by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. 

      Religious institutions such as churches and schools have been ordered to provide contraceptives and abortion inducing morning after pills to employees as part of the health care bill requirements. The fact that this is a direct violation of their religious teaching is of no concern to Obama. 

      3. Despite the fact that the United States Senate refused to pass the Cap and Trade bill, the President has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to use regulations to implement key portions of the bill, including those regulating so-called greenhouse gases. Obama himself has acknowledged that this will force energy prices in this country to skyrocket. He is taking these actions in direct defiance of the will of the people of the United States, the will of Congress, and the Constitution. The actions of the EPA include regulations that will force many coal burning power plants to close. 

      4. Through the Department of the Interior (DOI) Obama has placed a moratorium on offshore oil drilling or exploration off both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States and in parts of the Gulf of Mexico. He has also prohibited new drilling exploration on federal land in any states in the United States. These actions by the DOI have continued in direct defiance of several court orders issued by Federal Judge Martin Feldman in New Orleans, Louisiana declaring that the department had no authority to issue such a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf. In fact, the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI) has been held in contempt by the same judge. The administration has claimed to be complying, but has tied up the drilling permits in so much red tape that the effect is the same. 

      5. Instead of allowing American companies to drill for oil domestically, Obama has betrayed the American people and authorized loans of billions of dollars to countries like Brazil and Mexico so that they can drill for oil, and then sell that oil to the United States. This will dramatically increase our dependence on foreign nations including Venezuela, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and even Libya that do not serve the interest of America or the American people. 

      Obama has also refused to approve the keystone pipeline from Canada to the United States that would not only lessen our dependence on oil from countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia, but create thousands of new jobs in the United States. The decision on the pipeline is one that belongs in the hands of the members of Congress, not the President.  

      6. President Obama has abdicated his responsibility to enforce the laws of the United States against illegal immigration. He has virtually declared our southern border an open border by declaring certain areas of federal land in states like Arizona as off-limits to federal, state, and local authorities. This is despite the fact that these areas are being used to bring in thousands of illegal immigrants, massive amounts of drugs, and also being used by foreign terrorists to infiltrate the United States. He has also ordered the border patrol not to arrest most illegal immigrants entering the country, and has stopped deportation proceedings against thousands of people in this country illegally. He is in effect instituting the so-called “dream act” bypassing the Congress of the United States which has sole authority over immigration matters. 

      7. The President and his Attorney General Eric Holder have clearly violated their oath of office by joining with foreign countries such as Mexico, Bolivia, and Columbia, in lawsuits against the sovereign states of Arizona, Georgia, and Alabama to stop them from enforcing the federal immigration laws. 

      8. President Obama has ordered the Federal Communications Commission to adopt regulations giving the federal government control of the Internet and its contents, including providing Obama with a kill switch that gives him authority to shut down the Internet if he sees fit. This is in direct violation of a decision by the United States Supreme Court that the FCC has no Constitutional authority to control the Internet. 

      There were two bills pending in Congress to effectively give Obama the kill switch he wants over the Internet. When these two proposals, the Stop Internet Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) were withdrawn amid public outcry Obama announced he will sign an international treaty that purports to give him the same authority. He has signaled his intention to do this as an “Executive Act” and not bring the treaty to the Senate for ratification as required by Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. I believe he intends to take the same action in regard to the United Nations Small arms treaty and the UN Law of the Sea treaty that are both unlikely to get Senate approval. 

      9. One of the paramount responsibilities of the President of the United States and his executive branch of government is to enforce and defend laws adopted by Congress unless they are declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. Obama has decided that he should ignore this Constitutional mandate, and that as President he is more powerful than either the Congress of the United States or the Supreme Court. He has unilaterally declared that the Defense of Marriage Act passed by the Congress is unconstitutional, and further declared that he will not have the Justice Department defend it against lawsuits. 

      His administration has also refused to enforce laws against voter intimidation and federal law that requires states to purge their voter registration lists of deceased individuals and those that are registered illegally. In addition, the Justice Department is refusing to allow states to enforce laws requiring proof of identity by voters at the polls. Obama has essentially said that he is the supreme ruler of the United States, and that the Congress and the Federal Judiciary are irrelevant. 

      10. It has been widely reported that acting through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms the Obama administration was involved for months in getting legitimate and law-abiding gun store owners along our southern border to supply weapons to straw buyers who the government knew would deliver them to the drug cartels in Mexico. This was billed as a sting operation against the cartels when in fact it was designed to produce fraudulent data showing that large numbers of weapons were going from the United States to the Mexican drug dealers. 

      This data was then to be used, and is being used, to try to justify new gun control regulations to limit the rights of American citizens to keep and bear arms. It has nothing to do with arresting members of the drug operations. The administration has, in effect, armed our enemies, and one border patrol agent has already been killed by one of these weapons. Now, Obama continues to impose gun control laws by Executive order so he will not have to deal with Congress. The administration is also refusing to cooperate with the committees in the House of Representatives that are investigating the entire operation. It is even defying Congressional subpoenas. 

      11. The President of the United States is not authorized by the Constitution to take our nation to war without the consent of the Congress of the United States. The only exception to this is the authority granted to the President by Congress under the War Powers Act. This law allows the President to take immediate action without the consent of Congress if there is an imminent threat to the security of the United States, or its citizens. Although there was clearly no such imminent threat caused by the Civil War in Libya, the President committed members of the United States military to combat missions in a foreign country without the consent of Congress. He based his authority on a United Nations resolution, and a resolution by the Arab League. 

      Now, the President has carried it one step further. During testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 7, 2012, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told Senators that the President has authority to take our country to war without the Congressional approval required by Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution. The administration is taking the position that it can ignore Congress as long as it has United Nations approval or NATO approval. 

      However, these actions may be the least of the worries facing the American people. The White House insisted that language be included in the recently passed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that gives the President sole authority to order the military to arrest and indefinite detain American citizens on U.S. soil if the President suspects them of terrorist ties. This was amazingly passed overwhelmingly by Congress. It appears to be another situation where few members read the bill before voting on it. 

      This was almost immediately followed by another unconstitutional executive order titled the National Defense Resources Preparation order. It is similar to orders signed by past Presidents, but this one includes language that appears to give Obama the authority to declare martial law in peacetime, and take over the allocation of everything from food and fuel to transportation and health care. This violates the Constitution in a number of different ways. 

      12. Last but not the least of my dirty dozen of impeachable offenses, is the fact that since taking office the President has used executive orders, laws pushed through Congress in the dark of night, and administrative actions by his departments to nationalize and control automobile manufacturers, banks, insurance companies, and portions of the healthcare industry. This is designed to take our country from a free enterprise economy to a socialist economy. There is absolutely no authority in the Constitution of the United States that allows the President to do this.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution provides as follows:

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

I contend that among those high crimes and misdemeanors is the intentional violation of the oath of office administered to the President and all other federal officials. In fact, federal law at 5 U.S.C. 7311 specifically provides that violation of the oath of office includes advocating the overthrowing of our constitutional form of government. This is specifically declared a criminal offense in 18 U.S.C. 1918 and is punishable by both a fine and imprisonment.

In the 12 areas I mentioned in the paragraphs above I firmly believe that Obama, Eric Holder, and numerous other members of his administration have gone beyond just advocating the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. They are actually engaged in making it happen, and as a result should be impeached and convicted. There are also the emerging issues of corruption such as the Solyndra scandal caused by Obama using stimulus money to pay off campaign contributors.  

Will there be an impeachment and conviction in the current Congress? Probably not, since it takes a two thirds vote in the House of Representatives to impeach, and a two thirds vote in the Senate to convict. With Harry Reid and the progressives still in control of the Senate, and many of them guilty of some of the same impeachable offenses, they will resist it.

However, we are the American people and we still have a right to control our government, and the people elected to represent us. Therefore, I am personally calling on the conservative members the House of Representatives to bring this action based on the grounds I have enumerated so that the American people can understand what is really at stake here. Then “we the people,” can make our voices heard.

-- Michael Connelly, retired constitutional lawyer

Check out Michael Connelly's new radio talk show that airs every Wednesday at 4:00 PM Eastern on America's Web Radio. Be sure to visit his non-profit organization Constitutional Law Alliance (CLA) where he has written a booklet on the U.S. Constitution that every patriotic American should own and distribute to friends and relatives.

Michael Connelly teaches constitutional law through Education to Go, an online company that provides courses to numerous universities. He is a retired attorney, the author of four books, publisher of a website, and U.S. Army veteran.

OPINION: Calls for More Gun Control Only Feed the ‘Gun Culture’ That Liberals Fear | by Charlie Spiering

w620-c49321413d03bc4b9c2893007dd6c5a51.png

“Bill and Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno are the finest gun salesmen in history,” Jim Hullinger of a gun store in Plano, Texas told the USA Today in 1994 as Clinton’s signature assault weapon ban passed both the House and the Senate.

“Gun makers stand to make a bundle,” the story reported, especially through sales of large magazines and ammo.

“I’m selling high-capacity magazines as fast as I can get them, and people are buying ammunition not by the box but three and four cases at a time,” a gun store owner told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette in 1994. The price of an AR-15 tripled as so-called “assault rifles” were about to be banned.

As pundits, politicians, and anti-gun activists hype more gun-control measures, it usually has the opposite effect. American citizens react by stocking up on weapons and ammo.

It’s a common American reaction. When Twinkies threaten to vanish forever, Americans rushed to stock up on the largely insignificant sponge cake. In the light of a perceived government incandescent light-bulb ban, Americans began stockpiling boxes of treasured 60 watt bulbs.

Since 1994 gun owners have reacted the same way. After all, once the government successfully starts banning the sale of certain weapons and ammunition clips, it doesn’t take much to convince a gun enthusiast that it will happen again.

Gun control activists note with horror that gun sales go up each time there is a high-profile mass shooting. High-volume ammo clips and cases of ammo sell faster than any item in the stores.

Politicians and members of the media roundly criticized Jared Loughner’s Glock handgun with an expanded clip, after he shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and eighteen other people in a grocery store parking lot.

Read more via The Washington Examiner...

OPINION: Why Can’t America Care For The Mentally ill? | by Dr. Keith Ablow

Shooting%20CT%2013.jpeg

Adam Lanza, 20, who killed 20 children and 6 adults on Friday, has brought incalculable grief to dozens of families and stunned our nation.  

Now, the debate begins about what to do in the wake of his carnage in Newtown, Connecticut and the multiple murders in Aurora, Colorado and at Columbine High School, the Red Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota and the West Nickel Mines School in Pennsylvania, Virginia Tech and Chardon High School in Ohio.  

Some will say that gun control is the answer, but that ignores the obvious:  Too many guns isn’t the issue; too little mental health care is.  

Focusing on gun control does more than squander the time and effort of our public officials and state resources and town police forces, it distracts us dangerously from the real work that must be done.  

America’s mental health care system is shattered and on its knees.  

After decades of deconstructing our inpatient psychiatric hospitals and community mental health centers and after decades of insurance companies demanding that they pay only for  social workers and nurses to treat even the most extremely mentally ill and potentially violent individuals (rather than including psychologists and psychiatrists) we now have a mental health care system that simply ignores those among us who suffer with incapacitating symptoms of psychiatric illness and whose suffering can—only in a very, very small percentage of cases, thankfully—lead to terrible violence.

What is wrong, exactly?  

Read more via FOX News...

So-called "news" media gun stories are not news, they are propaganda...

110728_norway_ammo_reuters_628.jpeg

Dear Editor,

120325_k_street_westcott.jpeg

A gun lobbyist, traumatized by the evil in Newton, Conn., under pressure by reporters for an interview, asked me desperately for help. What is he supposed to say? How can he respond to such slaughter, how can he defend guns in the light of this massacre? He is at his wit's end, ready to give up, throw in the towel. Help me please, he implores. What can he say in the face of such an abomination? There are no words. And there aren't any.

Why does the media only cover guns in the face of such tragedy? Why don't they discuss it when we can examine the subject coolly and rationally, and maybe get somewhere?

Because then we might learn something. Because then the public could become educated, and the media does not really want this to happen. Because then you might learn that guns have social utility, and are indispensable -- that guns serve good purposes -- instead of being pounded with the hopelessly false idea that arms are bad.

If the media covered guns without tragedy as a background, you would learn that guns save lives, which is why we want our police heavily armed, with high-capacity magazines, and high-powered rifles, and all the ammunition they can carry. You would learn that you need guns and ammo and full-capacity magazines -- for the exact same reason.

You would learn that your need is even greater, because YOU are the first responders, and police are always second. You face the criminals first, in every event. Police, with all their deadly bullets only show up later. Police are the second responders. Media stories are always wrong about that. That's what you say.

People would learn that guns are for stopping crime. Guns protect you. Guns are good. Guns keep you safe, and help you sleep quietly at night. Guns are why America is still free. And the media doesn't want that message to get out. That's why they only haul out the subject with horror as a backdrop. That's what you say.

Thirteen scholarly studies show that guns are used to prevent crimes and save lives between 700,000 and 2.5 million times each year (depending on study size, time frame and other factors). You could get the book entitled "Armed," by Kleck and Kates, and read the studies yourself. Why doesn't the media ferret out those stories and put them on the front page? That's what you say.

Even the FBI says justifiable homicide happens every day, and they're only counting the cases that go all the way through court. Most armed self defense is so clean it never even makes it to court -- or the gun isn't even fired. Why isn't that in the national news every day?

2012_12_14_pictures23_605.jpeg

Because you, Mr. and Ms. Reporter, don't want the public educated about guns. Because you want the public ignorant, misinformed and terrified of guns, just like you are. Because you are pushing an agenda to vilify and ban fundamental rights we hold dear, that have helped make America great. Because you want people to have a lopsided unbalanced distorted view, and you're doing a great job of that.

That's what you say. And let them try to deny it.

Because so-called "news" media gun stories are not news, they are propaganda. Showing the image of a mass murderer 100 times a day isn't news, it is propaganda. Because staying on the same single event for a week or more isn't news -- even reporters would call it old news, or yesterday's news, or yellow journalism, if they were being honest -- a trait many have long since lost the ability to exercise. It is propaganda by every definition of that term.

It is designed to disgust, and cause revulsion, and motivate mob mentality. It serves no news purpose other than to induce fear and cause terror. In five minutes you have told the story, nothing new is added, yet it rolls on with images on endless loop. It promotes evil, encourages copycats,  with zero redeeming news value. It violates every rule of ethical news behavior there is. That's what you say. 

Showing the grief and tears day after day as you are doing, dear reporter, is not news, it is manipulation of we the people. It is an effort to turn people against something you as a reporter personally detest, because you are as poorly educated on the subject as many of your viewers and readers. You are so poorly informed on this subject you need counseling.

That's what you say. Tell reporters they are acting like hoplophobes. Let them look it up.

When eighty people died that day, with their bloodied bodies strewn all over the place, they didn't care. When children were torn from their parents, and parents never came home, they didn't care. When people left home and said, "See you later honey," and were never heard from again, they didn't care, and I didn't care, and they never even mentioned it, because those people died in their cars.

2012-12-14T173712Z_1364288230_GM1E8CF04D901_RTRMADP_3_USA-SHOOTING-CONNECTICUT.jpeg

Eighty people. Entire families. Moms and dads, infants, teenagers, all across this great land, not just in one town. That grief was every bit as tragic. And eighty more the next day. And today. And reporters didn't even mention it. Because reporters don't care about human tragedy. They just want to use their favorite tragedy, a maniac's evil, now [five] days old, to promote a terrible agenda they and their bosses and their political puppet masters want them to promote. And that's the abomination. They should be ashamed of themselves. They are a disgrace. That's what you say.

Even though cars are involved in virtually the same number of deaths as firearms, and typically used by all the murderers, we don't call for their elimination, because cars serve a purpose greater than the harm they cause. Doctors kill between ten- and one-hundred-thousand people every year through "medical misadventures," a sugarcoated term for mistakes (the actual number is hotly disputed). We don't call for doctors' elimination, because doctors serve a greater purpose than the harm they cause too.

Guns are precisely the same, but you wouldn't know it watching the so-called "news." Think of all the lives guns save and crimes they prevent. We should call for education and training -- and the pro-rights side does, constantly, to the media's deaf ears. Right now, schools and the media are a black hole of ignorance on the subject. Half of all American homes have guns -- how is it possible to get a high-school diploma without one-credit in gun safety and marksmanship? How can you honestly argue for ignorance instead of education and live with yourself? That's what you say.

The greater part of this great nation is on to you. We hold our rights dear. We hold the Bill of Rights in highest regard, while you spit on it with your unethical and vile effort to destroy it from your high and mighty seat. You believe you are protected by the very thing you would use to demolish it. Your use of propaganda, every time a tragedy occurs, to deny us our rights is the highest form of treason, a fifth-column effort, an enemy both foreign and domestic of which we are keenly aware. You will reap what you sow. That's what you say.

The media says it wants more laws but we already know that everything about every one of these tragedies is already a gross violation of every law on the books, many times over. You media types would outlaw all guns, as many of you are calling for. We all know it would be as effective as the cocaine ban -- a product many of you enjoy in the privacy of... Hollywood and Wall Street and Occupy rallies and your upscale parties and across America. And if you like the war on some drugs, you're going to love the war on guns. That's what you say.

And if you think the rule of law is the solution -- like for people on Prozac and Ritalin suddenly going berserk -- remember that, at least for tomorrow, if the man next to you is going to suddenly crack, you really do need a gun.

Ask yourself why people in greater numbers are suddenly cracking up and taking up the devil's cause, to speak metaphorically. So many reporters have obviously given up on religion and the morality it used to exert, the binding social effect it had on people. Are you a religious person? Ask them. People typically never ask the reporters questions. Reporters don't know how to handle that. Try it. That's what you say.

Do films like American Psycho, where scriptwriters invent characters who enjoy killing and go around gleefully murdering people, and financiers who put millions behind such projects, and which the entertainment industry put in our faces on a constant basis -- does that have any effect? Would you argue it has no effect? Hundreds of films like that, filling our TV's daily -- doesn't that do something to people? Dexter, a mass murderer disguised as a cop who is the hero of the series, does that shift people's thinking, their sense of balance? How do you justify supporting such things instead of shunning and casting such perverts and miscreants from the industry? That's what you say.

But here's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. Here's the Pulitzer Prize, waiting for you if you want one. Should people who put scores of guns into the hands of drug lords get one-month sentences -- like we saw the very day before this massacre -- is that right? If you get the laws you're shouting for, would it matter if that's what the Justice Dept. does with them?

Why isn't THAT discussed? How did you let that skate by? Don't tell me you covered that story, if you simply reported the government handout, that Fast and Furious smugglers Avila and Carillo were sentenced. That's not reporting, that's reading.

120612_eric_holder_westcott_605.jpeg

That's the ugly underbelly of this "gun problem" we have. There are the laws for real crimes, and the feckless government role, letting slaughter continue unabated, even abetted. There's the solution you say you seek, squandered.

Were the hundreds murdered that way less important? Is it a racist thing -- because they were brown-skinned Mexicans and not little White children, is that it? How could Eric Holder's Justice Dept. -- and you -- let those perps off so easy? Why isn't that the headline? It was the biggest gun scandal in U.S. history -- your own words. One-month sentences? Not even a trial? And you bought into this? That's what you say.

The ring leaders in the biggest gun-running death-dealing high-powered so-called "assault-weapon" scandal in U.S. history were caught red-handed giving guns to murderers, but they got a plea deal from the administration, not even a trial, and the media had nothing to say.

The media that has so much to say about guns -- or so they would have us falsely believe -- are shills for the Justice Dept. that perpetrated this travesty, and now would use their bully pulpit to attack our rights, in the name of little children, day after day. Journalists have become a travesty, that's what you say.

More than 90 of these fearsome guns were delivered by our very government to the worst murderers on the planet. And now, thanks to double-jeopardy protection, we won't have a trial so we can't even find out who in our government gave the orders. And now we have nothing to say.

The event in a small Connecticut town has opened the gun issue again.

And that's what you say.

Alan Korwin, Publisher, Bloomfield Press

The Uninvited Ombudsman

GunLaws.com

Obama's America will become Detroit | by Terence P. Jeffrey

21q.jpg

President Barack Obama travelled to Michigan this week and made his case for class war in defense of the welfare state.

We need to take more money from the rich, he said, or schools will not be able to afford books, students will not be able to afford college, and disabled children will not get health care.

"Our economic success has never come from the top down," said Obama. "It comes from the middle out. It comes from the bottom up."

Obama spoke these words a few miles from Detroit — the reductio ad absurdum of his argument.

If America continues down the road to Obama's America — a road that began when President Franklin Roosevelt started building a welfare state here — our entire nation will become Detroit.

Obama's economic and moral vision has played out in that city. What he seeks has been achieved there.

Last week, as reported by the Detroit Free Press, Michigan's state treasurer told Detroit's mayor and city council that the state may soon appoint an emergency financial manager for the city. Under Michigan law, the paper said, only such a manager can initiate the steps leading to a bankruptcy filing for the city.

By current calculations, Detroit faces obligations over the next six months that exceed its revenues by $47 million. The city, the Free Press reported, now pays $1.08 in benefits to municipal workers and retirees for every $1.00 it pays in salary.

What happened to Detroit? It is achieving socialism in one city.

Read more via CNS News...

'There Will Be Blood': Union Violence in the Age of Obama | by Michelle Malkin

AP

AP

Not so many moons ago, President Obama urged us all to "make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds." He Who Heals advocated "a more civil and honest public discourse" in the wake of the January 2011 Tucson massacre. As usual, though, the White House has granted Big Labor bullies a permanent waiver from the lofty edicts it issues to everyone else.

This week, menacing union goons unleashed threats, profanity and punches in Michigan, which is now poised to become a "right-to-work" state. Obama met the initial outbreak of violence with the same response he's given to every other union outbreak of violence under his reign: dead silence.

On the floor of the Michigan legislature on Tuesday, Democratic state Rep. Douglas Geiss thundered: "We're going to pass something that will undo 100 years of labor relations, and there will be blood. There will be repercussions!" Geiss referenced the Battle of the Overpass, a violent 1937 incident between the United Auto Workers and corporate security officers for the Ford Motor Company. Dozens of union activists were beaten.

But Geiss wasn't crying victim. This was clearly a signal to the brass-knuckled Big Labor bosses, whom Obama egged on during his Monday visit to the state. Obama inveighed against right to work with his usual class warfare dog-whistle. The thugs heard it loud and clear.

As the Michigan House voted inside to approve right-to-work legislation allowing workers to choose whether or not to join/fund unions as a condition of employment, protesters outside the state Capitol ambushed a tented information booth sponsored by the pro-right-to-work state chapter of Americans for Prosperity. Angry union mobsters were filmed cursing and screaming just before the attack.

One hurled an unidentified object at police officers. Another screamed at a citizen journalist filming the chaos: "Freedom of speech this, you f'n fascist a**hole!" Several peaceful AFP members and supporters were stomped on and punched while trapped under the tent as the labor operatives chanted: "This is what democracy looks like." Young Michigan conservative activist and YouTube entrepreneur Steven Crowder was beaten by at least two union assailants while trying to protect the tent and those inside.

Read more via Town Hall...

Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood Top Aides Boast Of Morsi's Close Friendship With Obama…

telegraph-co-uk11.jpg

How did Washington become the best friend of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, even as President Mohamed Morsi was asserting dictatorial powers and his followers were beating up secular liberals in the streets of Cairo? It’s a question many Arabs ask these days, and it deserves an answer.

Morsi and his Brotherhood followers are on a power trip after decades of isolation and persecution. You could see that newfound status when Morsi visited the United Nations in September and even more so during the diplomacy that led to last month’s cease-fire in Gaza, brokered by Morsi and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The Brotherhood leaders had gone from outcasts to superstars, and they were basking in the attention.

And let’s be honest: The Obama administration has been Morsi’s main enabler. U.S. officials have worked closely with him on economic development and regional diplomacy. Visiting Washington last week, Morsi’s top aides were touting their boss’s close contacts with President Obama and describing phone calls between the two leaders that led to the Gaza cease-fire.

Read more by David Ignatius at The Washington Post...

Opinion: GOP Must Fix Nomination Process Or Forget White House | by J.D. Gordon

iowa_supporterssplit.jpg

Now that one month has past since the GOP’s lopsided loss -- in what should have been an easy White House victory given America’s disastrous economic times and fading influence abroad -- Republicans must come up with an action plan to fix what went wrong. And it must be done fast.

As a career military veteran, a key phrase I heard in leadership schools was “you can’t expect good people to succeed in a lousy organization.”  When I became part of a presidential campaign this year, I experienced a nomination process that is “a lousy organization.” Getting that piece right is essential if the GOP wants to win the White House in 2016 and beyond.

Though most pundits rightly identified key factors in Gov. Mitt Romney’s 332-206 electoral defeat -- overly harsh positions on immigration reform which alienated Hispanic voters, and guilt-by-association for inexcusable remarks made by Senate candidates Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock on rape and abortion, there has been virtually no discussion on specific steps prevent a repeat in 2016.

So here are three recommendations to consider today:

First, the GOP must take on the “elephant in the room,” and that’s the Iowa Caucus.

Read more via FOX News...

Op-ed: An American Manifesto | by Michael Connelly, retired constitutional lawyer

7-16-Flag.jpeg

The English version of the Russian newspaper Pravda, that once was the voice of the Soviet Communist Party, has run an editorial saying essentially that the in reelecting Obama, America has put someone back in office who is pushing the Communist Manifesto on us without calling it what it is.

I offer an alternative. Thirty seven years ago I was a young attorney and National Secretary of a Conservative organization called Young Americans for Freedom.  In 1975 I was asked to write something relating to the upcoming Bicentennial to present to the YAF convention in Chicago. When I read what I wrote to the convention it was greeted with a prolonged standing ovation and adopted by YAF as the official Bicentennial statement of the organization.

I present it here exactly as I wrote it and as it was printed by YAF in pamphlet form. I still believe everything in it and I believe there are many Americans who will agree with it. I offer it as an American Manifesto:

 “On this, the eve of the 200th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the birth of the United States of America, we, the members of the Young Americans for Freedom, as citizens of this great nation, do hereby reaffirm and pledge ourselves to the following:

          We reaffirm our belief in the inalienable and divine rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

          We reaffirm our belief in the free enterprise system of economics as the only system compatible with human freedom.

          We reaffirm our belief in the right of all men to own individual property and use it as they see fit.

          We reaffirm our belief that a government is only legitimate as long as it serves its citizens and becomes illegitimate when it compels its citizens to serve the government.

          We reaffirm our belief that the Constitution of the United States and its original Bill of Rights establish the best form of government for the preservation of freedom.

          We reaffirm our belief in the rights of men to control their own individual destinies without interference by other men or by government.

          We reaffirm our own moral obligation to fulfill those responsibilities incumbent upon the exercise of our rights by never intentionally violating the sacred rights of others.

          We reaffirm our belief that the power to tax is the power to control and that such power should be restricted to the one purpose of national security.

          We reaffirm our belief that the United States of America is not just territory, that it is a way of life and a state of mind. It will live as long as there is one man who still believes in human freedom, and as long as that one man lives, the spirit of the United States will never be conquered.

          Along with our reaffirmation of these basic beliefs of free Americans, we pledge the following:

          We pledge that we will never submit to tyranny in any form and we issue the following warnings:

          To those in other lands who would destroy our freedom, be forewarned that there are still millions of us who believe that liberty is worth fighting and dying for. Do not naively believe that you can win just by forcing our government to surrender. If you plan to occupy this nation come prepared to fight for every acre of ground, for every building and for every hill and valley.

          To our own government we say this: Do not forget that you are only a government which exists at the pleasure of the American people. We will not allow tyranny to be established from within any more than we will allow it to invade from without. Only the republican institutions created by our Constitution are sacred to us; the people who occupy them are not.

          We pledge never to surrender the sacred rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

          We pledge, on behalf of generations yet, unborn, to continue the struggle begun by our forefathers over two hundred years ago to secure and maintain liberty and to defend that liberty against all enemies domestic and foreign.

          And, following their example, to that end, the preservation of liberty, we pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

-- Michael Connelly, retired constitutional lawyer


Check out Michael Connelly's new radio talk show that airs every Wednesday at 4:00 PM Eastern on America's Web Radio. Be sure to visit his non-profit organization Constitutional Law Alliance (CLA) where he has written a booklet on the U.S. Constitution that every patriotic American should own and distribute to friends and relatives.

Michael Connelly teaches constitutional law through Education to Go, an online company that provides courses to numerous universities. He is a retired attorney, the author of four books, publisher of a website, and U.S. Army veteran.

MUST READ Op-ed: The Republicans Have a Lot of Leverage | by Keith Koffler

AP

AP

I don’t think President Obama wants to go down as the worst president in history, do you?

Well, that’s what going over the fiscal cliff will make him. And that’s why the Republicans have a lot a leverage.

The massive spending cuts and tax increases set to kick in January 2 will cause a second recession, from which we may not emerge for many months. The economy may not really get going for years. Obama will have presided over two terms of economic disaster. It will ruin his legacy, and sow the seeds for a major Republican revival.

Republican revival? But the Republicans are going to get blamed, you say.

Me? Worst president ever?
Photo by Keith Koffler

They will, in the short run. But in the end, it will be the president who failed to somehow make a deal. Presidents are ultimately responsible for their presidencies. The good ones tame their enemies, pick off some of them and make them allies, and get a good result. The bad ones go over fiscal cliffs.

The history books will say that Obama had to deal with a recalcitrant Congress. That will be the second thing school kids learn. But the first thing they will learn is that Obama sucked.

I still believe, despite the results of the 2012 election, that voters in the end blame those in power for wielding power ineffectively. Get out the vote operations and a charismatic candidate can only buy you so much time against reality.

The massive spending cuts will also eviscerate the U.S. military, resulting in bolder actions by our enemies that will make Obama seem weak and pitiful. Not only will the president’s economic record implode, but his foreign policy will be hamstrung. After all, we get stuff done in the world, ultimately, because people are afraid of us. Or they respect us, which is the same thing.

Read more by Keith Koffler at White House Dossier...

Disastrous 2008 Proposed Gun Ban List Is Being Floated Again... (Final List Will Be Worse)

holder-obama.jpg
You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
Rahm Emanuel

UPDATED: December 20, 2012 

Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. Obama shared his administration plans just five days after the school shooting that killed 26 children and adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Now Congress and the White House have the framework for legislation from 2008 (see below), a serious tragedy, and a corrupt mainstream media like never before...  They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family.

Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.

Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.

###


"The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse)" by Alan Korwin, Author, Gun Laws of America

Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly.

I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals.

Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment.


Rifles (or copies or duplicates):

M1 Car

bine

Sturm Ruger Mini-14

AR-15

Bushmaster XM15

Armalite M15

AR-10

Thompson 1927

Thompson M1

AK

AKM

AKS

AK-47

AK-74

ARM

MAK90

NHM 90

NHM 91

SA 85

SA 93

VEPR

Olympic Arms PCR

AR70

Calico Liberty

Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or DragunovSVU

Fabrique National FN/FAL

FN/LAR, or FNC

Hi-Point20Carbine

HK-91, HK-93

HK-94

HK-PSG-1

Thompson 1927 Commando

Kel-Tec Sub Rifle

Saiga

SAR-8

SAR-4800

SKS with detachable magazine

SLG 95

SLR 95 or 96

Steyr AU

Tavor

Uzi

Galil and Uzi Sporter

Galil Sporter or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz)


Pistols (or copies or duplicates):

Calico M-110

MAC-10

MAC-11

MPA3

Olympic Arms OA

TEC-9,

TEC-DC9,

TEC-22 Scorpion or AB-10

Uzi


Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):

Armscor 30 BG

SPAS 12 or LAW 12

Striker 12

Streetsweeper


Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):

A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock,

(ii) a threaded barrel,

(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below),

(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.

Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than

10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).

A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has:

(i) a second pistol grip,

(ii) a threaded barrel,

(iii) a barrel shroud or

(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and

(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

A semiautomatic shotgun with:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock,

(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),

(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and

(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.

Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America 

http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm


Forward or send to every gun owner you know…

Watch This, If You Want More Proof:
YouTube – CNN- Obama To BAN Guns SPREAD THIS FOLKS, PLZ!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv3p2lLmjGk


A partial list of gun rights groups:

Gun Owners of America
http://gunowners.org/

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership http://www.jpfo.org/

FREEDOM=GUNS
http://www.tcsn.net/doncicci/freedom.htm

National Rifle Association
http://www.nra.org/

Second Amendment Committee
http://www.libertygunrights.com/

Second Amendment Foundation
http://www.saf.org/

Second Amendment Sisters
http://www.2asisters.org/

Women Against Gun Control
http://www.wagc.com/


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alan Korwin, author of three books and co-author of seven others, is a full-time freelance writer, consultant and businessman with a twenty-five-year track record. He is a founder and two-term past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association, which has presented him with its Visionary Leadership award, named in his honor, the Korwin Award. He has received national awards for his publicity work as a member of the Society for Technical Communication, and is a past board member of the Arizona chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists.

Working with American Express, Mr. Korwin wrote the executive-level strategic plan that defined that firm’s worldwide telecommunications strategy for the 1990s; he wrote the business plan that raised $5 million in venture capital and launched SkyMall; he did the publicity for Pulitzer Prize cartoonist Steve Benson’s fourth book; and he had a hand in developing ASPED, Arizona’s economic strategic plan. Korwin’s writing appears often in a wide spectrum of local and national publications.

Korwin turned his first book, The Arizona Gun Owner’s Guide, into a self-published best-seller, now in its 21st edition. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, which has grown into the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. It is built around six books he has completed on the subject, including the unabridged federal guide Gun Laws of America, and a rapidly growing line of related books and DVDs. Supreme Court Gun Cases is his 10th book and landed him on the cover of the 600,000-circulation magazine America’s First Freedom. Alan is widely recognized as a leading expert on America’s gun laws, and has made hundreds of radio and TV appearances.

Op-ed: Top Five Reasons Republicans Should Take Us Over the Fiscal Cliff | John Nolte

121128_obama_fiscal_cliff_reuters_328.jpeg

As the clock ticks and we watch the various players move their pieces into place, it's becoming increasingly obvious that Republicans are in a no-win situation. They’re ether going to have to cave and agree to a tax increase without meaningful spending cuts or take the blame for going over the fiscal cliff. Here are five reasons why going over the cliff is by far the best option... 

Read more via Breitbart...

Op-ed: Make The Democrats Own The Obama Economy | Ann Coulter

2012-09-05T004049Z_01_DNC751_RTRIDSP_3_USA-CAMPAIGN-1739.jpg

One bright spot of Barack Obama's re-election was knowing that unemployment rates were about to soar for the precise groups that voted for him -- young people, unskilled workers and single women with degrees in gender studies. But now the Democrats are sullying my silver lining by forcing Republicans to block an utterly pointless tax-raising scheme in order to blame the coming economic Armageddon on them.

Democrats are proposing to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for everyone ... except "the rich." (Why do only tax cuts come with an expiration date? Why not tax increases? Why not Obamacare? How about New York City's "temporary" rent control measures intended for veterans returning from World War II?)

Raising taxes only on the top 2 percent of income earners will do nothing to reduce the deficit. There's not enough money there -- even assuming, contrary to all known history, that the top 2 percent won't find ways to reduce their taxable income or that the imaginary increased government revenue would be applied to deficit reduction, anyway.

Read more via AnnCoulter.com

O'Reilly: A Tale of Two Americas...

110124_oreilly_ap_605.jpeg

During tonight’s Talking Points Memo, Bill O’Reilly took a closer look at the “tale of two Americas,” or rather, the differences between Texas and California. O’Reilly visited Texas over the Thanksgiving weekend and will be traveling to California next week. He said these two states signify the clash that is taking place in the United States right now.

Texas voted for Mitt Romney in the election by about 1.3 million votes. Meanwhile, California voted for President Obama by about 2.3 million votes. Both states have more minority voters than white voters, but Texas is predominantly conservative and California is dominated by liberals.

There is no state income tax in Texas and it’s a place where most people want government to stay out of their lives. Debt in the Lone Star state is $40 billion dollars and they have a balanced budget amendment. By contrast, California owes $167 billion dollars and is running an annual deficit of about $9 billion dollars.

Read more via FOX News Insider...

Rahm Emanuel: Rebuild America The Chicago Way...

AP

AP

Too much post-election analysis has focused on voter demographics and campaign mechanics, leaving Democrats in danger of drawing the wrong lessons from our electoral success.

Demographics alone are not destiny. There is nothing in this year’s election returns that guarantees Democrats a permanent majority in the years to come. President Obama and the Democratic Party earned the support of key groups — young people, single women, Latinos, African Americans, auto workers in the Rust Belt and millions of other middle-class Americans — because of our ideas.

But we cannot expect Republicans to cede the economic argument so readily, or to fall so far short on campaign mechanics, the next time around.

So, instead of resting on false assurances of underlying demographic advantages, the Democratic Party must follow through on our No. 1 priority, which the president set when he took office and reemphasized throughout this campaign: It is time to come home and rebuild America.

Read more via The Washington Post...