Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Study of Bill of Rights Begins with First Amendment: Corona Constitution Class

Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs

We have arrived.  It is time to begin with the First Amendment.  And. . . my book arrived a week early at my doorstep.  I will have copies of it available to attendees of the class tonight.

Constitution Class Handout – October 21, 2014, 6:00 pm
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs

522 Railroad Street
Corona, CA

Sponsored by TLCC
Truth and Liberty Covenant Coalition
Corona · Norco · Eastvale

Lesson 11
The First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

            Freedom of Religion

The first part of the 1st Amendment addresses religion.  The frame of reference of the Founding Fathers was Europe, and more specifically, England.  In Europe, a movement to reform the Church began in 1517, influenced by Martin Luther’s critiques of the Roman Catholic Church.  The movement led to the Protestant Reformation.  After the Pope denied the King of England the permission to divorce his wife, the English king created the Church of England, and established himself as head of the church, so that he may grant to himself the allowance to seek a divorce.  In England the Church of England greatly influenced the centralized governmental system, and the politicians greatly influenced The Church.  There was no separation between powers of the king and the church, a problem that revealed itself with the 1559 Act of Uniformity.  According to the Act of Uniformity, it was illegal to not attend Church of England services.  A fine was imposed for each missed Sunday and holy day.  Penalties also existed if one decided to have church services not approved by the government, which included arrest, and larger fines.  The problem, the Founding Fathers reasoned, was not faith in God, but the establishment of a State Church.  Therefore, to protect the governmental system from the influence of religion, while also protecting the various religious sects from a government that may give preferential treatment to an established religion, the Founders determined that the federal government must not establish a state religion (Establishment Clause).

The second part of that clause, however, was clearly designed to protect the various religious exercises by Americans from the government by instructing government to not prohibit the free exercise of religion.

Freedom of religion was a big deal with those early Americans.  The importance of religious freedom during that time period is common knowledge.  Even the textbooks in today’s public school system reveals the Pilgrims first came to the New World in search of religious freedom.

Through the passage of time secular forces in our society have worked to undermine the first clause of the 1st Amendment.  Americans have been conditioned to believe in a concept known as the Separation of Church and State.  The concept has determined the church is to have no influence, no matter how subtle, on government for any reason.  Therefore, reason the secularists who support the modern concept of the separation of church and state, any mention of God in the same breath with the federal government is in direct violation of the 1st Amendment.

To understand the error of the concept of Separation of Church and State in today's society, we must go back and discover the origination of the idea.  The truth demands we recognize the language used in the writings of the Founders, as well as grasp the history of the colonies - including a series of letters between the federal government and the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut, culminating in the letters to Thomas Jefferson after he became President of the United States after the Election of 1800.

Each of the colonies began as a collection of like-minded religious folk who wanted freedom for their religion (not necessarily freedom of all religions).  In Jamestown, in 1610, Dales Law mandated the Jamestown colonists to attend Anglican worship.  The law went so far as to have provisions against criticism of the church.  Violation of Dales Law could even lead to death.  The Puritan Colonies to the north had similar laws, even setting up their governments in accordance with Puritan Law.  Connecticut was one of those Puritan Colonies, and in 1639 the colony enacted "The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut."  The law set Connecticut up as a theocracy, disallowing non-Puritans from holding office.  The government was the church, and the church was the government.

The practice of religious preference was not limited to Connecticut.  All of the States enforced established religions, except Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

Though Pennsylvania was largely a Quaker dominated State, William Penn believed that religion should be free from state control, so Pennsylvania did not persecute non-Quakers.  However, in Pennsylvania, in order to hold office, you still had to be a Christian.

Rhode Island, founded in 1636 as a colony, was based on the principle of true religious liberty, and took in folks who were trying to escape the religious persecution of the other colonies.

Connecticut’s Puritan dominated landscape included a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut who were tired of being treated like second class citizens.

Thomas Jefferson drafted the Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia, and with James Madison's assistance, finally got it enacted into law in 1786.  After many letters to President Adams that resulted in no assistance, the Danbury Baptists were excited about Jefferson winning the presidential election in 1800.  Finally, they would have someone in office who would help them in their fight for religious freedoms in Connecticut.

The Danbury Baptists wrote to Jefferson to congratulate him for his win, and to appeal to him for help.  Thomas Jefferson responded with a letter that carries the line, "a wall of separation between church and state," which has become the source from which the infamous concept of Separation of Church and State was eventually derived.

The Founding Fathers desired that Americans be free to worship as they wished, without being compelled by government through an established religion.  The key, however, is that they not only did not want the federal government compelling a person through laws regarding religion, but the government shall not “prohibit the free exercise thereof.”

Thomas Jefferson, as indicated in his letter to the Danbury Baptists, and his other writings, was against the government establishing a “State Church.”  However, he also believed that men should be free to exercise their religion as they deem fit, and not be forced to follow a government mandate that may prohibit religion.

The Danbury Baptists were concerned over local religious freedoms, but Jefferson was clear, the federal government could not mandate anything in regards to religion.  It is a State issue, and the Danbury Baptists needed to address the issue themselves through their State government.  Jefferson’s reference to a wall of separation was an explanation that the federal government cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion for any reason, including on public grounds, but if a State was to prohibit the free exercise of religion, or establish a state church, it was an issue that must be resolved at the State level.

            Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press

The point of including in the Bill of Rights the freedom of speech, and of the press, was specifically designed to protect political speech, though other speech is protected by this clause as well.  The Founding Fathers believed that freedom hinged on the freedoms of political speech and the press.  Benjamin Franklin wrote in the Pennsylvania Gazette, April 8, 1736, regarding the American doctrine behind freedom of speech and of the press:

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.”

James Madison in 1799 wrote, “In every State, probably, in the Union, the press has exerted a freedom in canvassing the merits and measures of public men of every description which has not been confined to the strict limits of the common law.”

            Freedom of the Right of the People To Peaceably Assemble, and to Petition the Government for a Redress of Grievances

The right to peaceably assemble means that citizens may peacefully parade and gather, and demonstrate support or opposition of public policy.  This part of the 1st Amendment is closely tied to Freedom of Speech, guaranteeing one's ability to express one's views by freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble.

The need to protect the right to peaceably assemble was not a new concept during the Constitutional Convention.  Before the Bill of Rights, the Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress declared on October 14, 1774:

The inhabitants of the English colonies in North-America, by the immutable laws of nature, the principals of the English constitution, and the several charters or compacts, have the following rights: They have a right peaceably to assemble, consider their grievances, and petition the king: and that all prosecutions, prohibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same are illegal.

In 1776, Pennsylvania's declaration of rights guaranteed peaceable assembly.  Pennsylvania was the first State to recognize this right.

Originally, the right to assemble was considered less important than the right to petition. Now, many historians consider the two to be equally important, and to actually complement each other.

The Founding Fathers felt that the right to assemble, and petition the government for a redress of grievances, were important keys to protecting States' Rights, and the rights of the people, from the federal government.  The need to assemble, to come together and share common beliefs and act upon those beliefs, is what began the drive for independence, and ultimately what led to the American Revolution.  The right to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances, the Founding Fathers believed, was one of the primary tools available to the citizens in their drive to stop tyrannies before they could take hold.

The right to peaceable assembly provides the opportunity for all citizens to participate in America's political life and in the electoral process.  A recent example of this inalienable right in action is the Tea Party Movement.  The Tea Party rallies are peaceful assemblies.  These rallies are protected by the Constitution when they are for a lawful purpose, are conducted in an orderly manner, and publicize some type of grievance.  Many groups and organizations use assembly as a way to show support for an idea, or dispute, as characterized by the Tea Party.


1559 Act of Uniformity - In Britain it was illegal not to attend Church of England services, with a fine imposed for each missed Sunday and holy day.  Penalties for having unofficial services included arrest and larger fines.

Protestant Reformation - Movement of the Church Reform begun in 1517 that was influenced by Martin Luther’s critiques of the Roman Catholic Church.  The movement led to the formation of the Protestant Christian groups.

Separation of Church and State - Distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state.

Theocracy - Form of government in which a state is as governed by religion, or by clergy who believes they are under immediate divine guidance.

Questions for Discussion:

1.  How does today’s definition of the separation between church and state differ from the attitude towards religion by the Founding Fathers?

2.  Why did the Danbury Baptists appeal to Thomas Jefferson for help?

3.  Why do you think that the Founding Fathers believed that our freedoms hinged on the freedoms of political speech and the press?

4.  What are examples of the people peaceably assembling in protest?


Danbury Baptist Association's letter to Thomas Jefferson, October 7,
1801: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/dba_jefferson.html

Jefferson’s Final Letter to the Danbury Baptists, January 1, 1802:

Joseph Andrews, A Guide for Learning and Teaching The Declaration of
Independence and The U.S. Constitution - Learning from the Original Texts Using Classical Learning Methods of the Founders; San Marcos: The Center for Teaching the Constitution (2010).

Philip B. Kurland and Ralph Lerner, The Founder’s Constitution –
Volume Five - Amendments I-XII; Indianapolis: Liberty Fund (1987).

The Declaration and Resolves of the First Continental Congress declared
on October 14, 1774, U.S. History dot org: http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/related/decres.htm

Thomas Jefferson, The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom,
1786: http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/vaact.html
Copyright 2014 Douglas V. Gibbs

Hard Starboard Radio: Remember ObamaCare?

Are Americans shaken by government’s ability to function tyrannically?  No!  They!  Aren't!  After all, they voted for it - twice; Will the sabotaged ebola response poke a hole in liberals’ theory of infallible government?  Don't be absurd; Obama Regime to impose travel bans…but not the ones you think; Not only are U.S. foodstuffs, medical supplies—even clinics—going to ISIS, American distribution networks are paying ISIS ‘taxes’ and putting ISIS people on their payrolls; John Kerry says "peaceful Muslims" being driven to crazed mass murder by "deprivation" and "climate change"; Small businesses get horrifying snootful of brutal reality as 2015 ObamaCare rates revealed - but not until after Election Day.

It's a race to the bottom at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.

Gohmert Talks On DHS New Ebola Flight Restrictions

by JASmius

Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX01) talked to Neil Cavuto on his Fox News program about how about the new flight restrictions from the Commissariat of Homeland Security regarding the ebola outbreak. He emphasized that the restrictions do not go far enough and said the U.S. needs a flight ban for now until ebola is under control.

That'll be the day, Louie.

But don't worry, those "new flight restrictions" will be lifted after the election.  Count on it.

Monica Lewinsky Blames Humiliation On...Matt Drudge?

by JASmius

Last night, Monica Lewinsky spoke at the Under 30 Summit, a group devoted to ending bullying. Her angle was that Drudge was a bully and exposed her private life for all to see. You have to watch this video and listen her. She is completely deluded.

Oh, I don't know about that, Jimmy Z; I think "that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" simply absorbed more than just Sick Willie's genetic material, but also his solipsistic, Bart Simpson-esque ethos as well.  Unless we're to believe that she had a threesome with Clinton and Drudge and the latter's role was to shove her gullet down on Mr. Bill's willie like the agitator in a washing machine while sitting on her shoulders like the Old Man Of The Sea.

I tend to think that what Monica is truly embarrassed about is that she simply is a mediocre [BLEEP]sucker.  Why else would the Big Me have had to furiously wank himself the rest of the way?  I don't recall Drudge having anything to say about that.

Obama Regime Aiding ISIS

by JASmius

Not really news, since this was primarily what they were doing clandestinely thorough the Benghazi consulate in Libya going back three years ago, but still teeth-gnashing, nonetheless:

While U.S. warplanes strike at the militants of the so-called Islamic State in both Syria and Iraq, truckloads of U.S. and Western aid has been flowing into territory controlled by the jihadists, assisting them to build their terror-inspiring “Caliphate.”

The aid—mainly food and medical equipment—is meant for Syrians displaced from their hometowns, and for hungry civilians. It is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, European donors, and the United Nations. Whether it continues is now the subject of anguished debate among officials in Washington and European. The fear is that stopping aid would hurt innocent civilians and would be used for propaganda purposes by the militants, who would likely blame the West for added hardship.

The Bible says if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him something to drink—doing so will “heap burning coals” of shame on his head. But there is no evidence that the militants of the Islamic State, widely known as ISIS or ISIL, feel any sense of disgrace or indignity (and certainly not gratitude) receiving charity from their foes.

Quite the reverse, the aid convoys have to pay off ISIS emirs (leaders) for the convoys to enter the eastern Syrian extremist strongholds of Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, providing yet another income stream for ISIS militants, who are funding themselves from oil smuggling, extortion and the sale of whatever they can loot, including rare antiquities from museums and archaeological sites.

“The convoys have to be approved by ISIS and you have to pay them: the bribes are disguised and itemized as transportation costs,” says an aid coordinator who spoke to the Daily Beast on the condition he not be identified in this article. The kickbacks are either paid by foreign or local non-governmental organizations tasked with distributing the aid, or by the Turkish or Syrian transportation companies contracted to deliver it.

So our government knows that all this "humanitarian" aid is going to ISIS rather than "innocent Syrians" (if there is such a thing), and they're evidently perfectly okay with that.  At the very least, one would think that if they were truly "anguished" about it, they'd realize that what the jihadists say about us isn't going to be too overly affected by the actual facts on the ground.  But then again, "facts" are whatever Barack Obama says they are, right?  At least "officially".

Which makes this gentlemen's genuine anguish all the more...quaint:

“I am alarmed that we are providing support for ISIS governance,” says Jonathan Schanzer, a Mideast expert with the Washington D.C.-based think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “By doing so we are indemnifying the militants by satisfying the core demands of local people, who could turn on ISIS if they got frustrated.”

Meh.  If they did, ISIS would just massacre them like they do everybody else.  More likely they'd just keep quiet and endure the misery, like good little dhimmis.

Should we be alarmed?  Well, yeah, I guess, but the time for alarm should have been six years ago before Barack Obama was installed in power forever.  It's a more than a little late in the game to suddenly panic about it now; rather like spontaneously hyperventilating about your failure to make that extra trip to the drug store when you see your twenty-one year old slacker son plopped in your recliner playing his PS3 instead of going to college or trying to get a job so you can live off of him for a change.

Walid Shoebat closes the circle:

If you need evidence that simply throwing money at a problem is not only unproductive but counter-productive, just take a look at Syria. Humanitarian aid designated for ISIS victims is actually going to… ISIS instead. While the report from the Daily Beast’s Jamie Dettmer focuses exclusively on ISIS confiscation of non-lethal aid, is it really a leap to see armaments approved by both Houses of the U.S. Congress going the same route?

And that's not counting all the American weaponry that fell into ISIS's hands after the Iraqi army disintegrated this past summer.  And all the U.S. arms they clandestinely received from the Obama Regime going back to 2011.

That "several well-placed neutron warheads" strategy is looking better all the time, mark my words.

The Basic Constitution Now Available On Amazon. . .

The Basic Constitution by Douglas V. Gibbs is on sale on Amazon for $18.99. . . 

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Obama Presidency "Finished"?

by JASmius

One more right-wing pundit who clearly doesn't understand who and what Barack Obama is:

The presidency of President Barack Obama is "finished," even though he can't admit it, which is why the president continues to talk about his policies in light of the fall midterm elections, radio talk show host Laura Ingraham told "Fox & Friends."

"The president really can't get his head wrapped around the fact that he is over. Obama is finished. I'm sorry. But, his policies have failed. The country is weaker," Ingraham said Tuesday.

No, no, no, Laura, Barack Obama is not finished.  He's only just begun.  He's just getting started.  He's got all the power, he's got his pen and his phone, nobody can touch, restrain, or remove him, most especially the Twenty-Second Amendment on January 20th, 2017.  He's successfully destroyed America as a global superpower and reduced it to the level of the rest of the world (aka The Obama Doctrine) as he once promised would be his legacy.  He is the American monarch, the beginning of a Marxist-Alinskyist dynasty without end.

What you and so many other conservatives have to do, Ms. Ingraham, is stop thinking of Barack Obama as an American president.  He is not, nor has he ever been, either one.  He is V.I. Lenin; he is Benito Mussolini; he is Adolph Hitler; he is Mao-Tse Tung; he is Kim Il-Sung; he is Fidel Castro; he is Ho Chi Minh; he is Pol Pot; He is Ruhollah Khomeini; he is Daniel Ortega; he is Hugo Chavez.  What do all these despotic figures have in common?  They seized total power in their countries and "fundamentally transformed" them into monstrous dictatorships.

For all of you who think that could never happen here, here's a news flash: It already has, six years ago.

Ms. Ingraham was right about one thing though:

Ingraham said Obama gave a "gift to the Republican party" during an interview on Rev. Al Sharpton's syndicated radio show, "Keepin' It Real," on Monday when he said that Democrat lawmakers had supported his policies, even though few wanted him to campaign with them.
"The bottom line is, these are all folks who vote with me. They have supported my agenda in Congress," Obama said. "So, this isn't about my feelings being hurt. These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me."

That's his revenge for his party's congressional candidates fleeing him like he was an ebola carrier.

Pity Congress is little more than a gutted, neutered, ceremonial body anymore, or this might actually matter.

"Moderate" Muslims Do Not Exist

by JASmius

A very educational interview with former Iraqi MP Ayad Jamal Al-Din (via MEMRI-TV):

In a recent TV interview, former Iraqi MP Ayad Jamal Al-Din called for the establishment of a civil state in Iraq based on man-made law and equality, rather than on Islamic jurisprudence, as the only way to combat ISIS. He further said that there were thousands of mosques in the U.S. and worldwide that incited and prepared people to join ISIS. "Islam has been politicized and is used as a sword," he said in the Al-Iraqiya TV interview, which aired on October 17th.

You can't "politicize" what's already inherently political, just as you can't "demonize" what is already inherently demonic.

Exit observation: Mr. Al-Din is not a "moderate" Muslim; he's a Muslim apostate and infidel, and after this interview, not long for this world.

[h/t: Larry Wallenmeyer]

Message To Fed: Stay Away From QE4

by JASmius

"Insanity [is] doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

Ergo, "some financial industry participants" are as insane as Janet Yellen is:

While the Federal Reserve is poised to announce an end to its third round of quantitative easing (QE3) later this month, some financial industry participants already are urging the central bank to consider QE4, given global economic weakness and turbulence in financial markets.

Mohamed El-Erian, former CEO of Pimco, doesn't think too highly of the idea. "It is so predictable yet also so unfortunate," he writes in the Financial Times.

"The hurdle for such a policy step is high, and it should be if it is not accompanied by a more comprehensive policy response out of Washington."

Which is to say, dis-incentivizing savings and investment and incentivizing spending and debt have not generated the avalanche of prosperity that the Keynesian socialists guaranteed us it would, but has, instead, deepened and lengthened the Obama economic depression.  The way out of which can only begin with a complete, 180-degree reversal of economic policy "out of Washington" from sclerotic statism and back to pro-capitalist, pro-free market, low tax, anti-inflation, small government, constitutionalist, job-producing, supply-side economics.  Which Barack Obama will never allow, and he's not going anywhere for years and years to come.

Thus, though the plaintive begging for QE4 is madness, there is a method behind it.  Call it "junkie logic".

The problem is that while QE4 would be designed to depress long-term interest rates, they already have dropped to near-record lows, El-Erian says.

The 10-year Treasury yield fell to a 17-month low of 1.86% Wednesday. It stood at 2.2% late Monday.

Who does that really benefit?  Answer: The Obama Regime, both by keeping the price of U.S. government debt grotesquely low compared to the attached risk, and thus protecting the already-hemorrhaging federal budget from a tsunami of debt-servicing costs, and by propping up the bubblesque illusion of an economic "recovery" by fueling an utterly unsupported bull stock market that is running out of steam in any case.

It's a gigantic house of cards erected for public relations purposes.  And if interest rates start acceleratedly trending upwards, it gets tossed to the proverbial four winds, and every economic wall comes, well, "crashing" down - or the scenario high on the list of "fundamental transformation"-clinching "Final Crises" for The One to exploit to finish off America and bring the Obama Doctrine to full fruition.

In a nutshell: There are no viable options and no way out.  Either we collapse sooner or we collapse later, but collapse is inevitable.

I'll ask it again: Still think Barack Obama is "incompetent"?

New York Mayor de Blasio: Ban Anti-Jihadist Ads, But Anti-Semitic Plays Are “Free Speech"

by JASmius

Today's episode of "Compare and Contrast," featuring Gotham City's communist Mayor, Bill de Blasio:

In a statement to the Daily News, de Blasio said the ads had “no place in New York City, or anywhere.”

“These hateful messages [against Islamic mass murder] serve only to divide and stigmatize when we should be coming together as one city [under Sharia law],” de Blasio said.

“While those behind these ads only display their irresponsible intolerance [of Islamic mass murder], the rest of us who may be forced to view them can take comfort in the knowledge that we share a better, loftier and nobler view of humanity [under the Global Caliphate].”

Might as well do the editing that the Mayor will not.

That was a few weeks ago.  Now comes the following:

And what is de Blasio’s “loftier view of humanity”? The Met[ropolitan Opera]’s “The Death of Klinghoffer,” a  vile, anti-Semitic production about the jihad[ist] murder of Leon Klinghoffer. When asked about the glorification of Islamic Jew-hatred at the Met — de Blasio cried, “free speech!” and lashed out at [his heroic predecessor, Rudy] Giuliani.

You can call this "hypocrisy" if you want.  I call it entirely consistent: Liberty and free speech for the Left and Islamic Fundamentalists, oppression and death for any who stand in their extremist, mass-murdering way.  I wouldn't expect anything else from the hateful, divisive, stigmatizing Mayor dhimmi Blasio.

And neither should you.

Oliver North: ISIS Plans Attack On U.S. Baghdad Embassy

by JASmius

Makes sense.  It's the closest American installation, on the closest piece of American territory.  And the chance for the symbolic optics of sending U.S. personnel into pell-mell evacuation aboard helicopters from another embassy roof, a la Saigon in April 1975?


But here's something I didn't know:

The leadership of ISIS inside Iraq is now almost all former senior leaders of Saddam Hussein's elite Republican Guard, North said Monday on Fox News Channel's "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren."

"They know Baghdad. They've lived in Baghdad," North said, adding that they are the ones conducting military preparations for an attack on the largest American Embassy in the world.

Interesting, no?  Time was when Saddam Hussein's "elite" Republican Guard suppressed jihadist maniacs like ISIS, at least inside Iraq, although like any Arab nationalist regime, they supported and used them externally against Israel and the West.  It could be that these ex-Saddamites have converted to Islamic Fundamentalism, or it could be that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has shrewdly enlisted their alliance in overrunning Baghdad and the rest of Iraq because of their can-be-taken-for-granted motivation to avenge the humiliating defeat the U.S. dealt them eleven years ago.  Perhaps both.

But according to Lieutenant Colonel North, pretty much everybody in Baghdad thinks an all-out attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad is inevitable.  Would it succeed?  Why wouldn't it?  We don't have any significant forces in Iraq with which to stop such an attack.  And given what happened in Cairo and Benghazi a couple of years ago, and the fact that our embassy in Tripoli, Libya, fled to Tunisia three months ago, the Obama Regime's track record of diplomatic facility defense isn't all that reassuring.

Ollie sums up why:

Asked what he thinks President Barack Obama believes about the situation, North replied, "I don't think he gives a damn. I think he's hoping that he can hold the lid on this until after this election so it won't be just another disaster for this administration."

On the other hand, given that the past year has been one scandal, outrage, and disaster after another, what would be one more?  That is the "New Normal" that was established over five years ago, after all, and reapproved in 2012.  Remember, public morale is a function of public expectations, and people can be acclimated to just about anything.  Besides, how would yet another embassy falling get through all the ebola panicking?  ISIS would have to string together multiple attacks in rapid succession, including here at home, to get our attention again.

Or have I given away the news of the next month or two?  Sorry, my clairvoyance tends to be a little incontinent.

Monday, October 20, 2014

Murrieta Mayor Resigns, but. . .

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Reading from a prepared statement, today Alan Long resigned as Mayor, and from the City Council, of Murrieta.  The resignation follows his DUI injury accident arrest on October 16, 2014 in the evening when he rear-ended a vehicle with four teenage girls.  One of the passengers remains in the hospital.

Though Alan Long resigned from the City Council, he will continue his campaign for a seat on the city council in the upcoming election that is about two weeks away.

Why would he still run for office, if he resigned?

It has been suggested to me that he either hopes there was enough mail-in ballots with his name on them to enable him to win reelection, or Long is staying in the race to dilute the vote in order to keep unwanted challengers off of the council.

Confident he will be cleared after the investigation, Long says he resigned because the investigation would be a distraction to him trying to fulfill the duties of mayor.

With Long stepping down, Mayor Pro-Tem Harry Ramos will act as mayor, a position he was going to be sworn into in about a month, anyhow.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Mayor Resigns After Arrested - Press Enterprise

Pastor Steven Anderson Rebukes Arizona Sodomites

by JASmius

The Scripture passage that Pastor Steve should have referenced:

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than menThe God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.  And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him.” [emphasis added]

A lot more powerful than "homosexuality is disgusting" (which it is, but isn't the point) and appealing to the opinions of other men (and women), however right they may be (and are).  As we've seen in Idaho, pastors are now open targets for persecution using the police power of the state.  Which was the unspoken reason why no pastor other than Steven Anderson was willing to speak on camera.  He can pretty much count on a sodomite or lesbian "couple" coming to him in the very near future and demanding that he "marry" them upon threat of ruinous fines and effective lifetime incarceration.

We might want to try prayer, brothers and sisters.  'cause politics is no longer baking this cake, and God Himself is the only force in the cosmos more powerful than the Lavender Lobby.

Matthew Alvernaz Clarifies Military History Doubts

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In the Murrieta City Council race, 2014, one of the candidates, Matthew Alvernaz, has been battling uphill, bringing attention to his campaign as best he can with flyers, and attendance at as many forums and debates as possible.  In a recent article I wrote, I expressed doubts regarding some of his claims regarding his personal history, specifically as an Army Ranger.  He has asked that his rebuttal may be made available, and the following are the primary highlights of his request:

I entered in June of 2005 under a "Ranger Contract." I completed my basic and advanced infantry training (ITB) before moving onto Airborne School. Once that 3 week course was completed, I took on the challenge of the Ranger Indoctrination Program (RIP) which was four weeks. The school and training process has since changed names and lengths. I was one of 30 to graduate and one of 8 to get assigned to the 2nd Ranger Battalion in January of 2006. Following my illness, I was offered a medical discharge which I refused. I wanted to finish my contract to my country. I was allowed to leave battalion and briefly work for the Ft. Lewis Post General in 1st Corps as a member of the training cadre. When healthy enough to pass the physical fitness test (PAT) again, I entered the Corporal Recruiting Program and returned home to El Cajon where I finished the remainder of service.

Most Rangers are not NCO's and operate as an elite infantry unit. As cool as it sounds, they are not Special Forces. That title is technically reserved for "Green Berets" only. Rangers are however, under Special Operations Command (SOCOM) as a direct action resource. Just watch "Blackhawk Down" and it should fill in the blanks a bit. Fairly accurate depiction of Rangers and Ranger life. Even when I entered the Army and unit, I never intended to do more than my initial contract. My goal was to become a police officer but I could not get hired without more life experience. I joined the Army with that purpose in mind from the beginning. When I got out I was initially awarded 60% disability which was recently increased to 80% this year. When I applied with the Police Department I passed all of their physical and mental tests. Since there are laws preventing employers from denying applicants a job because they are "disabled" they could not justify not hiring me. Equal Opportunity Employment and all that.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Douglas V. Gibbs, Keynote Speaker, Hemet-San Jacinto Republican Congress October Meeting

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Hard Starboard Radio: Obama - Incompetent Or Malevolent?

From ebola to ISIS to Ukraine to a stock-market wipeout—there’s nowhere to hide from the Obama Doctrine; When it comes to ebola, it’s becoming clear that government “everywhere putting its hands to new undertakings” isn’t working out all that well; New ebola czar Ron Klaine is a long-time lobbyist and Donk capo; The threat of Ebola is real, and the threat of government malevolence is even worse; Americans are shaken by government’s ability to function in ways it should not; and will the sabotaged ebola response poke a hole in liberals’ theory of infallible government?  No!  It!  Won't!

Looking forward to baseball season at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.

Obama Places Order For 34 Million Green Cards For Illegal Illegals Plan

by JASmius

Beats me what La Raza and all the other illegal immigration extremists were freaking out about after O deferred his illegal amnesty decree until after the midterm elections.  "Oh, yea of little faith, why did you doubt?":

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has published a draft solicitation for immigrant ID cards that anticipates a "surge" in immigrants in 2016, Breitbart reports.

The proposal request says a minimum of 4 million cards would need to be produced per year, with the ability to produce 9 million cards "to support possible future immigration reform initiative requirements." One estimate suggests that 34 million cards will be printed in total. [emphasis added]

What's the remaining population of Latin America, again?  Or even just Mexico?  As of last year, the official figure for the latter was 122 million, so thirty-four million would be approximately 28% of that number.  All to be imported, illegally, to Cloward-Pivenize what remains of the U.S. economy and overwhelm still-"red" states with impoverished illegal Democrat voters to entrench Barack Obama and his party in power forever.

Is The One himself ordering this?  Probably.  But then, he doesn't really have to:

A USCIS official told the U.K.'s MailOnline on Monday that a plan was developed "in case the president makes the move we think he will." He added, though, that the agency's Document Management Division (DMD) is not making it official yet by committing to buying the materials.

That was an Obamunist who had a momentary lapse of candor.  The other "official" maintained the party line:

Another official said the plan was just a "contingency" in case immigration reform legislation passes in Congress. This official stressed to the MailOnline that it was not in anticipation of an executive order from Obama.


The order "seems to indicate that the president is contemplating an enormous executive action that is even more expansive than the plan that Congress rejected in the 'Gang of Eight' bill," Jessica Vaughn, an immigration expert at the Center for Immigration Studies, told Breitbart.

Precisely.  Which is why they're ordering the millions of green cards "quietly"; they know they can do so and they're so smart and we're so stupid that we will never notice.  And if we do, they'll demonize us as "racists" and "mass murderers" and the LIVs and NIVs will snarf it right down like barbeque beef brisket.

And they're probably right.  But that doesn't mean it won't still generate them some heartburn, especially if, as is looking increasingly likely, the next Congress is entirely Republican:

On CNN's "Inside Politics" Monday, moderator John King said that the unilateral executive action promised by Obama for after the midterm elections will kick off confrontation, not compromise, from Republicans driven by anger and frustration in their conservative grass-roots voter base.

"Well, if you believed perhaps there would be room and motivation for a deal after the 2014 midterms — think again," King said.

"I was so struck by conversations in Colorado, in Kansas and Iowa — just pure frustration; a belief among conservative Republicans that this problem is getting worse.

"What does that tell you? It tells you there is no prospect for any compromise legislation during the final two years of the Obama presidency," King said.

"If the president uses his executive power as promised, Republicans will be pushing the grass-roots for confrontation, not compromise. An issue we thought after 2014 Republicans would try to deal with, will be with us until 2016 and beyond."

It's really no more complicated than this: legal immigration is an issue that favors Democrats; illegal immigration is an issue that favors Republicans.  Why?  Because the former is about all the things that Dems claim characterize the latter - "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.  Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" - whereas the latter is about law and order, about the U.S. Constitution, and about protecting Americans from passive invasion, per Article IV, Section 4.

I happen to be one of those who believes that we need to cut off all immigration, legal and illegal, for at least a generation so as to get a massive breather to absorb and assimilate the huge influx of the past half-century.  Which, historically speaking, is what we've always done.  But if we can ever get the borders sealed and the passive invasion cut off and the invaders repatriated, I can confidently predict that they'll be little public stomach for slowing down legal immigration short of the sort of cataclysmic event - war or massive terrorist attack - that makes possible that degree of policy change and shift in public attitudes.  But, heck, we'd be so overjoyed just to get that point that most of us would happily settle for rendering illegal immigration a thing of the past.

That, of course, will never happen so long as Barack Obama remains POTUS.  Which he will for a long, long time to come.

But a man can dream, can't he?

Is the Obama Administration Mishandling Ebola Crisis?

Posted By Douglas V. Gibbs


Hospitals set for panic as flu season looms...


Researchers try to quell fears...

US Soldiers WON'T Get Protective Hazmat Suits for Mission in W Africa...

Communities taking dramatic steps to avoid virus...

Wanted: Screeners for $19 an hour...


NOONAN: Administration's Ebola evasions reveal disdain for Americans...

REPORT: Soldiers Get Just 4 Hours of Virus Training...

Non-American victims coming to USA for treatment?


CDC tells NYC to get ready...

Feds ask labs to plan for producing Ebola drug...

Hospital worker in quarantine -- on cruise ship!

Airline now tracking 800 people...

Staff in TX Case Asked to Avoid Public Spaces...

'Prepping' goes mainstream...

New Obama 'Czar' Has No Medical, Health Background...

'Key player' in Solyndra scandal...

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

CNNMoney: Job Numbers "Aren't So Pretty Beneath Surface"

by JASmius

You don't say:

Many financial commentators expressed enthusiasm over the stronger-than-expected September jobs report, but the picture isn't as bright beneath the surface.

Non-farm payrolls rose 248,000 last month, and the ["official"] unemployment rate fell to a six-year low of 5.9%. So what's the problem? CNNMoney cites three of them:
  • "The 'glass is half-empty' workers: part-time jobs remain a big problem. Over seven million Americans want full-time work, but can only find part-time hours."
  • "The 'I'm done' crowd." These are people who have given up seeking a job for at least four weeks. There are approximately 700,000 of them, up almost 100% from 2007 before the recession began.
  • "The 'lost workers.'" These are people out of work for at least six months. They now account for almost one-third of the unemployed, up from 17% in 2007.
"Economists say the job market will continue to improve, but may take years for these economic wounds to fully heal," CNNMoney notes.

"Economists" are evidently incurable optimists when a Marxist-Alinskyist is in unchallengeable power.  But the problems CNN Money references are prima facie evidence that jobs are not being created, the U.S. economy has not "recovered" but is still in the same waste extractor into which the Democrat Financial Logic Bomb discarded it six years ago, and we are in a Second Great Depression being kept unmercifully and resolutely in place by the corrupt, anti-capitalist policies of the Obama Regime.

Larry Kudlow is the most recent observer to point out the key employment statistic:

CNBC commentator Larry Kudlow is quite concerned about the job market. "We still can't seem to stop the hemorrhaging of people dropping out of the labor force," he told "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

He noted that the labor force participation rate fell to a 36-year low of 62.7% in September. [emphasis added]

And strangely enough, that percentage continues to plunge, with no floor in sight.

When I say that the disappearance of the last American job will be marked by Barack Obama striding triumphantly into the Rose Garden, or the East Room, and declaring that, "We have achieved full employment!", I am deadly serious.

And since "economists" will be in the same impoverished boat, I wonder what they'll have to say about this "momentous" occasion?

What to Eat is None of Government's Business

By Douglas V. Gibbs

When Bloomberg was mayor of New York City, he imposed limits on the size of sodas, among other things.  Michelle Obama is also a food-nazi, believing that government should be able to dictate to you, and your children, how you should eat.  In a free country, you have the freedom to be stupid, erroneous, and to eat things that are not good for you.  That is your choice as an individual.  What you eat is none of the government's business.  If they wish to impose upon you how you should eat, that is tyranny, and it can only lead to worse tyranny if allowed.  The term "progressive" is appropriate, because the progression of big government is a part of what those people are all about.

They say that it is for your own good, they are only looking out for you.

That is how tyranny begins.  Darkness never appears as darkness, but as an angel of light, with a promise of a little more security if you would just be willing to let go of a little bit of freedom.

School board slams Michelle O lunch rules...

Pretzels with no salt...

Nacho cheese banned...

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

The Church Besieged

by JASmius

They are "integrated into society," your Popeiness.  That's the crux of the problem.  But they cannot be "integrated" into the Church Universal without repentance and turning away from their sin to Jesus Christ.

Who are you to judge?  Perhaps; but we are all to obey the Scriptures, in the Holy Spirit's enabling power, because make no mistake about it, Francis, God will judge.

But until then, his unholiness sees fit to rule with an iron fist:

Conservative Cardinal Raymond Burke, who has regularly clashed with Pope Francis over his liberal leanings, has confirmed longstanding rumors that he would soon be demoted from his position as head of the Vatican's Supreme Court.

Burke, 66, the former archbishop of St. Louis, told BuzzFeed News that Francis would soon move him to the minor position of patron to the Sovereign Military Order of Malta....

In December, Francis removed Burke from the Vatican’s influential Congregation for Bishops, appointing instead Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington to the 18-member board. He had been appointed to the bishops' group by Pope Benedict XVI in 2009.

Burke has frequently clashed with Pope Francis over a number of issues — and publicly attacked a draft document issued Monday by bishops outlining the Catholic church's position on gays, sex, marriage and divorce.

Cardinal Burke obviously recognizes "the enemy within."  Or, as the Apostle Paul put it, "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision," who, "....are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ."  And like Christ Himself, he has boldly challenged Francis's heresies, and Francis evidently will not abide any dissent from his apostasy.

But Burke's ultimate "sin"?:

Most recently, Burke slammed President Barack Obama for having policies that "have become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization."

"He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life and anti-family policies," he said in a March interview published in LifeSiteNews.com. "Now he wants to restrict the exercise of the freedom of religion to freedom of worship."

The devil's advocate cannot tolerate blasphemy against his golden calf, Cardinal.  But you knew the job was dangerous when you took it, just as you know that that job will only get more dangerous as time "progresses".

Just ask Houston-area Christian pastors, facing their own devil's advocate in the form of Mayor Annise Parker.  To which ex-Arkansas Governor and ordained minister Mike Huckabee has an intriguing proposed response:

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee wants the nation's pastors to send Bibles and copies of all of their sermons to Houston Mayor Annise Parker, who has issued a broad subpoena demanding the city's pastors hand over copies of their sermons and communications concerning the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance.

"I hope she gets thousands and thousands of sermons and Bibles," said Huckabee, who is an ordained Southern Baptist minister, on his Fox News show Saturday.

"It ought to make you mad that the mayor thinks she can turn in her pastors," the Republican said. "And so I got an idea. If she wants a sermon, here is my suggestion. I would like to ask every pastor in America, not only the ones in Houston, to send her your sermons and go ahead. Obviously she could use a few. And everybody watching the show ought to send her a Bible."

Kind of an evangelical jiu-jitsu maneuver.  Or, as the Uhura Protocol states, "Be careful what you wish for, Madame Mayor; you may get it."

But look on the bright side, Annise: with that many Bibles, you can hold a public book-burning for the ages.

C'mon, you know you'll want to.

UPDATE: And now we reach the inevitable terminus of this disgusting trend:

The city of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, is taking a step many opponents of same-sex marriage feared would come – forcing those with religious objections to perform same-sex marriages or risk facing prosecution for violating non-discrimination laws.

Donald and Evelyn Knapp, ordained ministers who oppose gay marriage, own the Hitching Post wedding chapel in Coeur d’Alene. Early in 2014, a federal judge in Idaho ruled that the same-sex marriage ban was unconstitutional, but the ruling was put on hold while the case was appealed. When the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, the ruling stood and went into effect.

The city of Coeur d’Alene has an ordinance that prohibits discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation, in public accommodations. It does have a religious exemption, but the Hitching Post is a for-profit company, not technically a religious organization, in spite of the Knapp’s deeply held personal beliefs.

Back in May, when everything was on hold pending the Supreme Court, Donald told KXLY, “I think the Bible is pretty clear that homosexuality is not his way, and therefore I cannot unite people in a way that I believe would conflict with what the Bible teaches.” The Knapps have said they will close their doors before violating their religious beliefs.

But before that happens, there is another legal battle ahead.

“On Friday, a same-sex couple asked to be married by the Knapps, and the Knapps politely declined. The Knapps now face a 180-day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding.” Note that jail time and the fine is per day, not per offense, The Daily Signal reports. [emphasis added]

It's not enough that the Lavender Lobby destroyed the Knapps' business, like the Kleins who politely declined, as their First Amendment right to religious liberty and freedom of association entitles them, to prepare a "wedding" cake for a homosexual "union" ceremony.  No, they must be punished, they must be incarcerated, their lives must be ruined and destroyed by and in the Crisco Inquisition.  Those that demand "tolerance" for their gross perversion will show zero tolerance for anybody who refuses to embrace it.  Christ must be denied, and fudge-packing hailed as "lord" - or else.

Or, put another way, "We MUST all be gay, now".

In the worst time of persecution of the Church (prior to now), during the heyday of the Roman Empire, there was the "faithful witness" Antipas:

While Antipas was martyred late in the lifetime of the Apostle John, precious little else is factually known about Antipas from respected historical sources.

However, traditions originating within the Eastern Orthodox Christian church, around and after A.D. 1,000, paint a fuller picture....

The traditional Antipas was reputed to be the Bishop of the Christian church at Pergamos, and that he was martyred for his faith because of his consistent faithful witnessing in the face of all the satanic evil present there.

When Antipas was advised: "Antipas, the whole world is against you!", Antipas reputedly replied, "Then I am against the whole world!"

Antipas was roasted alive in a hollow life-size bull, which had a bonfire under its belly, because Antipas refused to renounce his faith in Christ Jesus.

Given that Donald and Evelyn Knapp are being given an effective life sentence for the "crime" of refusing to renounce their faith - a crime against humanity indistinguishable from "blasphemy" prosecutions in Muslim countries - how far is early-21st-century Obamerikastan from their being roasted to death in a hollow life-size bull, or crucified, or buried alive, or beheaded, a la Christians under the rule of the Islamic State?  Isn't that the logical next step, especially if the Lavender Lobby continues to meet resistance from the faithful?

Hong Kong Violence May Lead to Revolution

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Chances are, Communist China will find a way to crack down on the protesters in Hong Kong.  The violence has been escalating with each passing week. China knows that the U.S. President has no interest in standing firm for freedom around the world, when Mr. Obama has taken his own steps to compromise freedom in America, so what does China have to worry about?

Tyranny and Liberty cannot coexist.  When big government tries to impose itself upon a system of freedom, there will be clashes.  Statists believe they can impose their authoritarian politics in a peaceful manner, but there is always a segment of patriots that believe in free market and laissez faire politics that are willing to stand up for what they believe, and eventually the system trying to impose their collective view on individuals decides it must be done by force. . . and when someone has lived in liberty, they don't lay down that easily.

Great Britain found out when they tried to impose their tyranny upon the colonists at Lexington Green.  The Communists discovered there would be opposition with each of their revolutions.  The Chinese are discovering this to be true in Hong Kong.

Tyranny and Liberty cannot coexist, push always comes to shove, and big government always comes to the eventual conclusion it must impose its communitarian views on sovereign individuals by force.  That is a dominant lesson from history.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Both sides in Hong Kong warn of crisis as clashes continue - Los Angeles Times

Sunday, October 19, 2014

Democrats Leave Obama Campaign Appearance Early

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

Obama makes rare campaign trail appearance, people leave early

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama made a rare appearance on the campaign trail on Sunday with a rally to support the Democratic candidate for governor in Maryland, but early departures of crowd members while he spoke underscored his continuing unpopularity.

With approval levels hovering around record lows, Obama has spent most of his campaign-related efforts this year raising money for struggling Democrats, who risk losing control of the U.S. Senate in the Nov. 4 midterm election.

Most candidates from his party have been wary of appearing with him during their election races because of his sagging popularity.

Finish Reading at Reuters

It is indeed interesting, because everything is a contradiction for this President, and the Democrat Party. . .

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary