DOUGLAS V. GIBBS <---------->RADIO <---------->BOOKS <---------->CONSTITUTION <---------->CONTACT/FOLLOW <---------->DONATE

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

The Wall, Deportations, and if Mexico will pay for it

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Overall, since the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United States, illegal immigration has decreased about 70%.  The Wall, while not built yet, is already having an impact on the illegal alien problem in the United States.

My wife was born in Mexico, and immigrated here legally.  She naturalized in 2007.  When Donald Trump emerged on the scene, and he said he wanted to build a wall, she said, "That's my guy."  She supported Trump from the very beginning.

I was a Scott Walker supporter, myself.

When Arizona passed their immigration law a few years ago, the border crossings into Arizona decreased, and many illegal aliens in that State self-deported.  In short, in addition to putting up a barrier between the U.S. and Mexico, if we were to enforce the laws on the books, and stop giving the illegals free stuff, a large segment of the illegal alien population would self-deport.

As for the border wall, the reality is that near the border towns in the United States a fence or barrier already exists because those cities want to curb the illegal influx into their towns.  The real need for the wall is along the areas where there is no population, and where the fence along the American-Mexican border either does not exist, or it is a three or four wire barbed-wire fence that can be easily navigated.

Ranchers John Ladd and Fred Davis agree that the mere presence of a President in the White House willing to execute the immigration laws of the United States is a great deterrent when it comes to illegal migration into this country. In fact, they invited House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to see the southern border from their property, but she never responded.

Instead, the left-wing Democrat San Francisco member of the House of Representatives claims the border wall is “immoral, expensive, unwise.”

On Fox & Friends Ladd said border crossings by illegal aliens across his property has decreased 90% to 95% since Donald Trump took office.

That's a nice decrease when Ladd's research using Border Patrol data has determined approximately 500,000 illegal aliens have crossed his property in the 30 years he’s owned it.

Davis said the wall, which he said is one tool, is necessary to stop drug cartels and other criminals from entering the U.S.

“You’ve got to put boots on the ground to make it effective, and that’s been part of the problem on what places they have a wall now,” he said.

Funding for the wall has been pretty rough, however.  Congress is not real eager to include a down payment for a wall spanning the entire southern border in the upcoming spending bill.

The GOP says that first the immigration laws must be enforced, the wall can come later.  Democrats say they will reject the funding bill if the wall is included, which the Democrats believe their refusal to play along would be enough to shut down the government. Trump told a group of reporters he invited to the White House on Monday that he was open to getting funding for the wall in September when Congress debates the 2018 budget.

Note: The concept that not passing a funding bill or resolution will shut down the government is a misnomer.  Most mechanisms are funded automatically, regardless of a budget bill, or resolution.  While there would be some budget restrictions in some portions of the federal government should the bill not be made law in time, for the most part the overall functioning of the federal government would remain unaffected.  Besides, most of the funding the Democrats cry would not be covered are unconstitutional in the first place, anyway.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Corona Constitution Class: First Amendment Rights

Tuesday Night, 6:00 pm
AllStar Collision
522 Railroad St.
Corona, CA  92882
Constitution Class Handout
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs

Lesson 13
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,
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:
Thomas Jefferson, The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom,
Copyright 2015 Douglas V. Gibbs

Banning Beaumont Cherry Valley Tea Party Patriots Breakfast Meeting

Tea Party breakfast, April 25 - 8:00 am at the Farm House Restaurant, 6261 Joshua Palmer Way in Banning. Come join other like minded conservatives to discuss issues of today.  Our next monthly meeting will be May 11.  Our Speaker at that event will be Sherry "Ms. Ashley" Gilliam to discuss black history and the Democrat Party.
Click here to hear last Saturdays KMET-1490 AM Conservative Voice Radio broadcast hosted by Douglas V. Gibbs and local Tea Party members. 

Monday, April 24, 2017

U.N. Makes Saudi Arabia member of Women's Rights Council

The best tool for Women's Rights
By Douglas V. Gibbs

We, the United States, need to depart from the United Nations, like, yesterday.  The internationalist organization that thinks it rules the world was created based on communist principles by communists like Alger Hiss and literally does the opposite of common sense. . . constantly.

For example, the Human Rights council is packed with Muslim Countries.

That's like having a panel loaded with foxes and wolves to work on the rights of sheep and chickens.

Now, in an even more egregious move, Saudi Arabia, "the world's most misogynistic regime", according to the Geneva-based human rights group "U.N. Watch," has just been elected to a 2018-2022 term on its Commission on the Status of Women, the U.N. agency “exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women.”

Side Note: Gender Equality is code for Gender Neutrality.  Women and men are different for a reason, and when we eliminate those differences, and we become a collective of mindless automatons in a homogeneous society, we lose our individuality. . . and eventually our freedom.

With Saudi Arabia on the commission designed for promoting women's rights, you might as well have a panel of rapists gather together to write up the protocols for handling rape cases.

“Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of U.N. Watch. “It’s absurd — and morally reprehensible.”

“This is a black day for women’s rights, and for all human rights,” said Neuer.

“Saudi discrimination against women is gross and systematic in law and in practice. Every Saudi woman,” said Neuer, “must have a male guardian who makes all critical decisions on her behalf, controlling a woman’s life from her birth until death. Saudi Arabia bans women from driving cars. Why did the U.N. choose the world’s leading promoter of gender inequality to sit on its gender equality commission?”

Saudi women feel betrayed by the UN. “I wish I could find the words to express how I feel right know. I’m ‘saudi’ and this feels like betrayal,”tweeted a self-described Saudi woman pursuing a doctorate in international human rights law in Australia.”

“Today the UN sent a message that women’s rights can be sold out for petro-dollars and politics,” said Neuer, “and it let down millions of female victims worldwide who look to the world body for protection.”

How does Saudi Arabia win seats on U.N. human rights bodies?

Saudi Arabia, where Islam might let a woman outside in public if she's with her husband, and never mind driving to the store on her own (and where women are the guilty party in rape cases), joins 44 other countries to now play an instrumental role in “promoting women’s rights, documenting the reality of women’s lives throughout the world, and shaping global standards on gender equality and the empowerment of women.”

Saudi Arabia was elected by a secret ballot last week of the U.N.’s 54-nation Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Usually ECOSOC rubber-stamps nominations arranged behind closed doors by regional groups, however this time the U.S. forced an election, to China’s chagrin.

U.N. Watch points out that now that Saudi Arabia has also been re-elected to the U.N. Human Rights Council where it enjoys the right to vote on, influence and oversee numerous mechanisms, resolutions and initiatives affecting the rights of women worldwide, and are also a part of the women's rights council, they will be able to be involved in voting on things like:

Elimination of discrimination against women
Equal participation [of women] in political and public affairs
Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice
Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
Accelerating efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women
The right to a nationality: women’s equal nationality rights in law and in practice
Addressing the impact of multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination and violence in the context of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance on the full enjoyment of all human rights by women and girls
Annual full day debate on women’s rights
Annual half-day panel on the integration of a gender perspective

I wonder if this same U.N. would have voted Hitler onto the "rights of Jews council?"

The latest ECOSOC vote was reported in a U.N. press release:

"Commission on the Status of Women: The Council elected by secret ballot 13 members to four-year terms, beginning at the first meeting of the Commission’s sixty-third session in 2018 and expiring at the close of the sixty-sixth session in 2022: Algeria, Comoros, Congo, Ghana and Kenya (African States); Iraq, Japan, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia and Turkmenistan (Asia-Pacific States); and Ecuador, Haiti and Nicaragua (Latin American and Caribbean States)."

U.N. Watch says The only good news: thanks to the U.S. calling a vote — breaking with the Obama Administration policy which in 2014 allowed Iran to be elected by acclamation — Saudi Arabia was not elected by acclamation, but instead received the least votes of any other country: 47 out of 54 votes cast, even though there was no competition given that there was an equal amount of competitors for available seats.

China and Uganda were upset, preferring the usual practice of rubber stamping clean slates.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

The Next Page. . .

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Another year of life has passed.

A new page has turned.

The horizon is bright, but distant.

But, a storm haunts the edges burned.

The show must go on.

The battle must be fought.

Through history we've seen the truth.

It is through the past the truth is sought.

If not I, then who?

If not now, then when?

How can we know where to go,

If we don't know where we've been?

The pendulum swings.

The chapters have gone.

Now the question remains. . . 

Is it dusk, or is it dawn?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

From O'Reilly to Tucker Carlson

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

I don't watch a lot of television. I mainly have a TV because I am an avid sports fan.  While I am not a regular viewer of the news networks, that does not mean I never watch them.  I am familiar with the various television personalities, and while I was not a huge fan of Bill O'Reilly, from my little perch I am convinced he was targeted for termination by the leftist establishment.

A number of women came forth, all at once (what a ka-wink-a-dink) to accuse O'Reilly of various charges of sexual misconduct.  O'Reilly may, or may not be, guilty of the various allegations of sexual improprieties, but it seems fascinating to me that the attacks were timed the way they were.  It almost seems like a coordinated attack.  Could it be that O'Reilly was beginning to touch too many chords, and dig in just a little too deep into what may be the truth, and the leftist establishment finally decided it was time to take him out?

That's what they did with Trump, isn't it?  Using sexual harassment as a way of trying to knock the man off of his perch?

When it came to Trump, I found it fascinating that the rich guy who could use his money to have any woman he wanted, and who owned a beauty pageant, and hung out with people close to magazines like Playboy, was never considered a sexist, and never had an accusation of sexual impropriety against him, until he decided to take on Hillary Clinton.

The leftist political establishment has no qualms about lying, and making up stories that were obviously birthed in a great big pile of cow dung.  The truth doesn't matter when it comes to character assassination, only the size of the allegation does.

I am a firm believer O'Reilly was set up.  But, for fear of losing viewers, or not holding up their values, O'Reilly is gone from Fox News, and Tucker Carlson has stepped into O'Reilly's slot.

To be honest with you, I like Tucker.  In many ways, the strategy to take down Fox News has turned against the liberal left Democrats.  Tucker Carlson is a much more potent host in the prime time slot on Fox News.

Next on the chopping block is probably Sean Hannity.  They tried to attack Rush Limbaugh (radio giant, not a Fox News guy) a few times, but he keeps coming out of it unscathed, so I think they learned their lesson with El Rushbo.  Glenn Beck didn't need to be attacked.  He went loony-tunes on his own, without any help.  While Beck still garners a sizable following, he's a shell of what he once was.  The attacks against people like Michael Savage are ongoing, and keeps people like him off-balance and fairly ineffective.  They want to be giant killers. They want to disrupt this whole thing they are convinced was a part of the reason Donald Trump got into the White House.  Hannity, therefore, one might reason, would then be the next target.

Hannity is huge on Fox News, and second only to Rush in the radio world (in terms of number of listeners) . . . and he was, and is, a big Trump supporter (which has the liberal left beside themselves).

I remember when the liberal left hammered Vice President Mike Pence for indicating he won't go to dinner with a woman without his wife present.  Watching what the leftists just did to O'Reilly, I think Pence's rule about not being around other women without his wife present is a smart one.  While the leftists were claiming Pence's rule was because he felt he couldn't control himself around women (in the liberal left's minds, all men are pigs, and potential rapists or molesters), or because he's trying to hold women back professionally (how dare the sexist pigs not allow women to use their wiles against them to move up the corporate ladder!), the reality is that his rule makes sense primarily because it is the best way to protect oneself against an assault like what O'Reilly was recently a victim of.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Multiple Blue Cities Suffer Power Outages

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Multiple cities have been hit with power outages.  One wonders what the cause may be.  The outages occurred around the same time, leaving many to speculate that foul-play may be playing a part in the multi-city blackouts.  Officials consider the power outages a coincidence, but have yet to offer an explanation for them.

In San Francisco, a fire at a substation is being blamed.  The causes in Seattle, Los Angeles, and New York have yet to be determined.  New York was the first of the string of power outages.

The loss of electricity for a matter of hours was an inconvenience.  A disruptive moment in an otherwise busy day.  But, what if those outages were to last for days.  Weeks.  Months.

We have 21st Century technology sitting on 19th Century electricity grid technology.  The ease in which our electrical grids can be taken down is frightening.  The Mexican Drug Cartels have taken down complete regions in Mexico, so what would stop them, or Islamic terrorists, from doing the same in the United States?

While I am not suggesting the recent outages were some kind of terrorist attack, or dry run for one, we must ask, "Are we sure that it wasn't?"

Our entire lives depend upon the electricity we take for granted.  Our devices, our communication, and our jobs all depend on the wonder of technology, and the electricity that runs it.  A loss of electricity for an extended period of time would be devastating, and likely cause more trouble than a direct attack on our shores by military vessels, because it wouldn't take long before the squabbles among ourselves, and then the desperation to feed ourselves as refrigerated foods go sour, turns our civilized social order into chaos and violence, and ultimately, internal collapse.

I wonder how many people are truly prepared for such an event.  Here in California, we live in earthquake country, and it should be something everyone is prepared for. . . but sadly, few are.

Of course, after watching the Oroville Dam nearly flood a town because the Democrats in this State pumped money into benefits for illegal aliens, a bullet train, and paying for the high wages and pensions of government employees as demanded for by the public unions, rather than into repairs for the most critical parts of our infrastructure, one wonders if the power outages are just another symptom, and consequence, of failed liberal left Democrat Party policies in the big cities affected by the blackouts.

"Besides," one liberal left-winger told me recently, "why would California pump money into a dam to protect against spillage when we know that California is in a 50-year drought?  Scientific consensus says so."

Then how, pray tell, do they explain the rain we got here in California over the few months covering late fall, and through winter?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Congress of Racial Equality Expansion, and Constitution Classes

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

The countdown to launch is in motion.

The Congress of Racial Equality emerged in 1942, established by black and white students in Chicago.  The organization served as one of the big four civil rights organizations through the civil rights era.

During CORE's heyday, the members of the organization participated in lunch counter sit-ins, Freedom Rides, and marches with Martin Luther King, Jr.  However, during that time period, a very liberal and militant reputation began to rise up.  Then, in 1968, things changed for the Congress of Racial Equality.

CORE's new National Chairman in 1968 became Roy Innis.  Mr. Innis did not agree with the liberal left direction the civil rights movement had been heading.  He rejected the Great Society, and believed the way to go for the black community was not through the path being created by the Democrats, but through self-reliance, personal responsibility, and an embrace of the system of American Liberty.

Roy Innis, and CORE, became a target of black leaders.  The NAACP, and people like Al Sharpton, became very critical of CORE.  In 1987, in fact, on the Morton Downey Jr. program, during a heated debate, Roy Innis knocked Al Sharpton to the deck. . .

During the nineties and the first decade of the new millennium, CORE played a minor role and reduced in size greatly.  But, during the Obama administration, as racial division became a major issue, and then exploded with the arrival of Black Lives Matter, CORE's role as the conservative alternative to the NAACP became very important.

The Congress of Racial Equality has been working on expanding their reach, once again.  As Roy Innis continued to be the National Chairman of the organization, his son Niger Innis became the National Spokesman.  In May of 2016, a plan was hatched to work on opening new chapters in California, with classes regarding American Liberty, and the Principles of the U.S. Constitution (based on the concept of a biblical foundation) attached to each chapter.

I was approached shortly after that, and while the plans are in the earliest stages, I have been working with CORE to establish classes regarding the promise of liberty at each of the chapter offices as they are opened.

More news coming as this effort grows...

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Thank you. . . from Constitution Radio

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

A few weeks ago Constitution Radio lost a couple advertisers, and the battle to fund the program began.  The listener response has been amazing. We have raised over $1,000 to almost finish funding the second hour of the program.  Thank you.

While technically we are still $200 away from fully funding the program, that is something we will likely be able to raise through other means.  Fact is, that second hour was paid for by the listeners. . . which means it is now commercial free.

Thanks.  See ya Saturday on Constitution Radio - - - all two hours of it.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sunday, April 23, 2017

France's Voters Reject Establishment in Election

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

In the United States, Donald J. Trump upended the political establishment, throwing out the professional politicians from the Republican side of the race during the 2016 Primary, and the Clinton Machine from the Democrat side of the race during the November Election for President of the United States.  As an outsider, he was seen by the establishment as a dangerous populist, and the knives have been out ever since.  Those outside of the establishment have been making ground in Europe, as well.  In Britain, the Brexit vote told the establishment that the U.K. voters no longer wanted to be handcuffed to the rest of Europe through the European Union.  In France, with the added issue of Muslim refugees and the coinciding rise of Islamic terrorism in the country, outsiders Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen won a victory in France's first of two elections for the country's presidency.  Marine Le Pen, coined by many as being France's version of Trump, is calling for France to exit the E.U., and be more strict on their immigration rules in order to protect France from a steady increase of Muslim migrants.  Independent centrist Emmanuel Macron may not be a hardcore socialist like the rest of France's political establishment, but he does believe the relationship with the European Union needs to be tighter, not severed.

This is the first time in 60 years none of France's mainstream parties have entered the second round of the election.  While Emmanuel Macron won first place ahead of National Front leader Marine Le Pen, the next round at the ballot box may be anybody's game.  With many other candidates in this latest round of votes, Macron achieved 23.8 per cent of the votes, followed by Le Pen with 21.5 per cent.  In the next round, it will be a one on one battle on May 7.

Le Pen did not mince words regarding her opinion of the establishment.

She said, "It is time to liberate the French people from the arrogant [political] elite."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Constitution Association Annual Dinner Speakers Confirmed: Tim Donnelly and Niger Innis

Constitution Association July 15 Annual Anniversary Dinner

The Constitution Association celebrates its anniversary each year in July.  This year's event will be held in Wildomar, with an expectation of somewhere between 150 and 200 people.  Last year's event was tremendous (see images here), and this year's event is shaping up to be even more incredible.  So far, we have two confirmed speakers, and they are two of the most exciting movers and shakers in the California war for sanity.  Tickets for this year's event will go on sale April 30th for $30 (early bird special).  In May the price goes up to $35.  June 15th the price will go to $40.  So, be ready to grab that early bird sale!

Niger Innis

Niger Roy Innis is a Tea Party activist and politician and the National Chairman for the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE).  He formerly was the executive director of

Innis is active in community and social organizations, including Co-Chairman of the Affordable Power Alliance (APA), a coalition of Latino and African American ministerial organizations; Senior Citizen Advocates, which fights against public policies that raise energy costs; Advisory Committee Project 21 for the National Center for Public Policy Research; consultant to, Empowerment and Excellence Cable channel; NRA Membership Committee and NRA Lifetime member.
Innis is political and social commentator for various cable news networks, most commonly on Fox News. His father, Roy Innis, was National Director of CORE from 1968 until his death January 8, 2017.

Innis was a Republican candidate for the United States House of Representatives in Nevada's 4th congressional district during the 2014 elections. He lost the primary to Cresent Hardy, who went on to defeat incumbent Democrat Steven Horsford.

Tim Donnelly

Timothy Michael "Tim" Donnelly is an American politician who was a Republican member of the California State Assembly, representing the 59th and 33rd districts. Before his election to the Assembly in November 2010, Donnelly was a small businessman. On January 22, 2013, Donnelly announced his intention to seek the Republican nomination for Governor of California in the 2014 election. He placed third in the open primary, behind Jerry Brown and Neel Kashkari, who contested the election in November 2014.

In 2005, Donnelly became involved with the Minuteman movement, and founded the Minuteman Party in California. He stepped down from the Minutemen to return to private life in 2006.

Tim Donnelly is among the possible candidates being discussed by voters for the next California gubernatorial election.

He is currently touring the State to promote his book, "Patriot Not Politician."

  • Both speakers have confirmed for the July 15 event.

Holocaust March of Remembrance, 2017; Murrieta, California

Murrieta / Temecula, California

Please join us as we remember the Holocaust and stand against anti-Semitism.

Isaiah 54:10 Though the mountains be shaken and the hills be
removed, yet my unfailing love for you will not be
shaken and the hills be removed, says the Lord, who
has compassion on you.

Date: Sunday April 23, 2017 Time: 1:15- 5 pm

Location: Murrieta City Center

1 Town Square Murrieta 92562
1:15-2:00 Worship and prayer 2:00-2:45 March

3:00-5:00 Memorial Service and dedication
of permanent Holocaust Memorial

Organizers: Jack & Jan Flournoy

All events are held at Murrieta City

Center- Refreshments before Service

American Detained in North Korea

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

Americans are not in North Korea often, but when they are, they are at risk of being detained.  One could say the same about the Middle East.  I have a friend who visits Iran twice per year.  His family still lives there.  He has to be careful, however.  He can't be completely truthful while there, even to family members.

The detention was confirmed by Martina Aberg, deputy chief of mission at the Swedish Embassy in Pyongyang. The embassy represents US interests in North Korea, since Washington and Pyongyang do not have direct diplomatic relations.

"He was prevented from getting on the flight out of Pyongyang," Aberg told CNN. "We don't comment further than this."

The US State Department on Sunday said it was working on the case.
"We are aware of reports that a US citizen was detained in North Korea," said a department official. "The protection of US citizens is one of the Department's highest priorities."
The detained American is a professor, according to South Korea's Yonhap News Agency.
At least two other US citizens are known to be currently in North Korean custody.
Otto Warmbier, 21, a student at the University of Virginia, was detained at Pyongyang airport on January 2 last year after visiting the country with a tour group. He has since been sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for allegedly removing a political sign from a hotel wall.
Kim Dong Chul, a naturalized US citizen of Korean origin, was arrested on October 2015. Last year, North Korea sentenced him to 10 years of hard labor on espionage charges.

Since 2013, at least two other US citizens and a British journalist have also been detained for shorter periods and then released.
All of them were grabbed by North Korean security forces as they attempted to fly out of Pyongyang airport.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Master of Ceremonies Conquered

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

The event?  An Evening Under The Stars by Birth Choice Temecula.  It is the annual gala, the largest fundraising event of the year for the pro-life pregnancy crisis center. Last year they paid for a professional emcee and a professional auctioneer.  This year I offered my services as emcee at no cost, and my friend, an amateur auctioneer, offered his services for the price of his tux rental.  After it was all over, we had comment after comment by attendees that we were a better team than the paid professionals from years before.

"In other words," my wife said later on last night, "you've discovered something else you are good at."

"Everybody knows," my daughter in law said, "that you're a good public speaker."

That was the hoped for reaction after I told my family about how well the event went where I had been tagged to be the Master of Ceremonies.

While I've been a public speaker for about a decade, a radio host for slightly longer, and an instructor for nearly as long, emcee is a new experience.  I decided to open up with my "God voice," low and commanding, and it worked well.

What made the evening go so well?

For one, I only referred to my script once, and when I did so, it wasn't while I was on stage.

I wrote out eight note cards with what I wanted to say, practiced with them a couple times before my radio program began (from which I had to flee quickly after it was over to get to the event on time), did not memorize them, but remembered essentially what I wanted to say, and then never looked at them again (except the one time, because I wanted to tell the funny I had come up with about half way through the event).

The funny?

"Show of hands, how many of you in the audience are not from the Temecula Valley?"

About a dozen and a half hands went up.

"How many of you are from outside the Inland Empire?"

Five, all at the same table.

"How many are still here from last year's event, but have been stuck here in traffic?"

An few hands went up, with chuckles.

On the spot funnies were also inserted.  One auction item was offered by a local police department, and after providing the description and the winning paddle was determined, I said, "Good for you.  We need all of the shooting practice we can get, because when seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

A former city council member friend of mine commented later, "That was great, you poked the police in the ribs, but everyone was laughing about it."

What resulted was a natural, spontaneous delivery throughout the night.  Fortunately, I am one that knows how to read a crowd, and ad lib as necessary.  And, it was tons of fun.

The live auctioneer is a friend of mine.  He's an amateur auctioneer who delivered a professional performance.  We had never worked together before, but with me reading the descriptions of the items up for bid, and adding my own comments about the items, and playing off the crowd as he was doing his thing ("Really?  You are going to let that guy outbid you?"), it went over well.

In short, I had fun, and was happy with the result.

Thank you, Birth Choice Temecula, for giving me the opportunity.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Saturday, April 22, 2017

Marine Le Pen: On the Rise

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
Donald Trump has said the Paris terrorist attack would boost Marine Le Pen's presidential chances after a last-minute poll gave her a modest increase in support.
The US president said the shooting would "probably help" Ms Le Pen in Sunday's election, because she is "strongest on borders, and she's the strongest on what's been going on in France."
"Whoever is the toughest on radical Islamic terrorism, and whoever is the toughest at the borders, will do well in the election," he said.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

An Evening Under the Stars: Pro-Life Gala

I am excited.  Now that the Radio Program for today is over, I am off to Temeku Hills to be the emcee for tonight's huge Birth Choice Temecula event.  Among the auction items is a couple of my books with a certificate for the highest bidder to spend time on my radio program with me.

It's too late to buy tickets, but I'd love to see you at next year's event.

This is my second year to be a member of the board of directors for Birth Choice Temecula.  I am the Secretary, and I appreciate all that this organization does to save the lives of babies, and be a voice of love for those women who are in pain because of their decision to abort.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Constitution Radio: Illegal Taxes, Terror, War and Hope

Saturdays at 1:00 pm Pacific, Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, KMET 1490-AM   We want you to call in and join the conversation: 
Catch the program online at KMET 1490-AM, or the podcast later on Sound Cloud.

Here's today's AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week:

  • Republican Party of Riverside County Finds New Home Office in Temecula

  • Fresno Islamic Terror Labeled Not Islamic Terror
  • Today's Christian Complacency is Tomorrow's Captivity