Saturday, February 28, 2015

Constitution Radio Welcomes Michael Loftus of The Flipside

Join the Conversation by Calling into the program LIVE at 888-909-1050

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs is the flagship broadcast for the 3-hour Saturday Extravaganza. Listen Live at 2:00 pm:, or on our "Call to Listen" feature at 832-999-1050, or locally on KCAA 1050AM and 106.3FM.  Podcasts can also be listened to directly after the program airs.  On Constitution Radio this week our guest is Michael Loftus of The Flipside, a program that takes a comedic look at the world of politics, and the biggest news stories.

After the interview we will discuss the Book of the Week, Constitution Quest Question of the Week, and the top stories of the AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week.

Constitution Corner:

Patricia Arquette: Constitution Not Intended for Women

Catch Stories 5-19 on American Daily Review

AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week on Constitution Radio:

4. Keystone XL Veto

3. DHS Bill Under the Stroke of Midnight

2. Killing National Defense

1. FCC Takeover of the Internet

McCain: Time to 'Move On' From Homeland Funding Fight

by JASmius

For those gullible House conservatives who piled in to pass the Senate's one-week extension of "clean" DHS funding last night thinking that they were gaining seven more days to persuade their weak-kneed Senate counterparts to join what was originally advertised as the Republican stand for the Constitution and the rule of law against Barack Obama's unlawful executive amnesty decree, behold the harbinger of your final, crushing defeat from the sneering lips of the GOP king of amnesty himself:

The ongoing House battle over funding the Department of Homeland Security is angering Republican senators, who say it's time to move on to other issues on the legislative calendar.

"I just think we ought to move on to other things," said Arizona Republican Senator John McCain, according to the Hill. "I'm not sure how it helps for the American people to have the perception that Republicans in the Senate and Republicans in the House are at odds with each other. We have a lot of initiatives I think we could show the American people we can work together on."

Senators are pointing out that it's time to move away from the battle and focus on other vital issues, including trade legislation, regulatory and tax reform, and the budget.

However, the ongoing fight, being waged in an effort to block President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration, has brought the other issues to a virtual halt, with the threat of the Homeland Security department facing a shutdown pushing back on other GOP agenda items.

Exactly the sort of condescending Maverick crap that we've grown accustomed to over the years, as though the Senate is where the "adults" reside and the House is littered, cluttered, and overrun with unruly "children".  "Children" who are "obsessed" with this quaint, outmoded notion that preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution of the United States - an oath they have all taken, including Darth Queeg - against the rampaging dictator in the White House who continues to systematically tear the Founding Document limb from figurative limb is just an irrelevant afterthought.  As though beating back a quite literal presidential tyranny just doesn't matter nearly as much as "trade legislation, regulatory and tax reform, and the budget" - none of which will mean a damn thing in any legislative context if Barack Obama can just ignore Congress and decree what he wants on all of those issues as well.

In case you were wondering, two other of the four GOP faces of "comprehensive immigration reform" from the 2013 "Gang of Eight" mini-me'd themselves right into line behind Sailor:

"Why don’t we just look at the court decision in Texas, declare victory and move on?" said Arizona GOP Senator Jeff Flake.

And Senator Lindsey Graham, R-SC, agreed that "when the judge ruled, that was the way I wanted to end it."

Oh, you mean the "court decision in Texas" that the White House is already flagrantly and completely ignoring as they bulldoze ahead with Obamnesty implementation?  This is the same dubious excuse-mongering that gave us the 2012 SCOTUS upholding of ObamaCare and the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (one of the authors of which was, appropriately enough, John McCain).  It can be summed up, Jeopardy!-like, in the form of a question: What makes you people think that federal judges at any level are going to be any less susceptible to outside political pressures - especially from this viciously lawless Regime - than are you yourselves?  Besides which is that, constitutionally speaking, it isn't the federal courts' job to stop a despotic chief executive - that responsibility was placed by the Founders on Congress, as the preeminent branch of the federal government.

And the Senate, last I checked, was part of Congress.

And then there's this additional dollop of arrogant condescension:

"What's frustrating is that the House guys think any of the Democrats over here are under pressure to vote or cloture. They're in their own little bubble, it's myopic," said a Senate Republican, who spoke to the Hill permitted on condition of anonymity.

Well, of course Senate Donks aren't going to feel any pressure to vote for cloture on the House DHS bill defunding Obamnesty - if you people won't apply any.  Good Lord, Charles Krauthammer - again, not exactly a Tea Partier fire-eater - urged Senate GOPers to abolish the filibuster in its entirety to get these things done, because otherwise Democrats will still be running the upper chamber from the minority - which is clearly the case, judging by the depressing events this week.

But this Vichy mentality is pervasively impregnable, alas.  They've just been marinating in that Beltway "We've gotta have the Hispanic vote, and they all monolithically want amnesty!" pulp fiction too long, and have been brainwashed into believing that they'll all lose their re-election bids if they don't demonstrate their "ability to govern," defined as serving as Barack Obama's collective rubber stamp.

Illinois's Mark Kirk (who'll almost certainly lose his seat in 2016 anyway) summed it up:

"I think the feeling of most people is this is the fight that we should have not fought," said vulnerable Republican Illinois Senator Mark Kirk. "We really, as a governing party, we've got to fund DHS and say to the House, 'Here’s a straw so you can suck it up.'"

Yeah, and I'm sure they'll tell you to suck on something as well, Senator.

Exit question: Second look at a Democrat Senate restoration?  It's likely only twenty-two months away.

American Daily Review: Braver than McConnell and Boehner

Once again JASmius and Douglas V. Gibbs are poised to tackle the big stories of the week. . .

Listen live at Noon Pacific on American Daily Review, or catch the archive later.

ADR Radio is the first two hours of a three-hour radio extravaganza that culminates with the blistering hour of AM Radio on KCAA from 2-3 pm Pacific on Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs

And now for the AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week, February 28, 2015
- Constitution Corner (both shows):

20. Patricia Arquette: Constitution Not Intended for Women

- Big Stories ADR:

19. The Passing of a Star Trek Icon, Leonard Nimoy

18. American Sniper Snubbed at Oscars

17. American Sniper Murder Verdict

16. The Next Real Estate/Mortgage Crisis

15. Global Warming: Ice and Witch Hunts

14. The Obama Youth

13. The Question About Smart Meters

12. When Guns are Confiscated

11. As the Democrats have done to Israel

10. The Enemy in Obama’s America

9. Man Kills Families in the Homes in Missouri on Shooting Rampage

8. Assassination of Russian Opposition Leader

7. Obama Administration’s Handling of Islamic Terrorism Threat

6. Scott Walker Tackles Right to Work

5. Obama Targets Ammunition

- Big Stories Constitution Radio:

4. Keystone XL Veto

3. DHS Bill Under the Stroke of Midnight

2. Killing National Defense

1. FCC Takeover of the Internet

Today's Conservative and Constitutional Radio Schedule

Host Douglas V. Gibbs will be on the radio three times today:

*all times Pacific

8:00 am, Conservative Voice Radio, KMET 1490AM

12:00 pm, American Daily Review, BlogTalkRadio

2:00 pm, Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, KCAA 1050AM

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Homeland Security Funded for One Week

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Democrat Representative Nancy Pelosi accused the Republicans of creating a mess, but in reality it is President Barack Obama that has created the mess, by unlawfully demanding amnesty by executive decree, and expecting his changes to immigration policy to be funded not by an individual bill specifically for his Executive Amnesty, but in a Department of Homeland Security bill that normally includes border patrol funding.  As midnight approached, and the question of whether or not DHS would even be funded, after the Senate refused to approve a bill rejecting amnesty funding, a quick one week funding bill was approved by both Houses, and signed by Obama, to give the debate one more week of life.

The final vote by both Houses of Congress was rapid, and Obama's signature occurred literally a few minutes before the clock tolled midnight.

In response to Pelosi's accusation of creating a mess against the GOP, Representative Peter King of New York tweeted,  "There are terrorist attacks all over world and we're talking about closing down Homeland Security. This is like living in world of crazy people."

The conservatives of the Republican Party, a group that dominates the House of Representatives, have been challenging the largely "establishment" Republicans of the Senate to refuse to include Obama's immigration policy by executive fiat because the President's actions without approval through a legislative process is unconstitutional.  The question over funding is a matter of whether or not they should be condoning lawlessness.  Fully funding Obama's immigration action would be to allow an expansion of executive power into the realm of legislative powers, enabling the President to act as king and decree law at his leisure, without the benefit of the representation of the people.

After the Senate refused the House's original version of the bill 57-42 (three short of the 60 required), of which the "Nuclear Option" in the U.S. Senate would have allowed the original 57-42 vote to pass the bill in the Senate with a simple majority, McConnell's "clean" DHS bill was rejected by the House, and then a three-week funding measure was voted down 224-203, so the Senate presented a one-week alternative, which slid under the wire just before midnight.  The potential of an ugly showdown remains.  Realizing that in the past failing to fund something normally gets dragged through the mud as being the GOP's fault by the media, the Senate figured out the one-week partial save, to keep the agency open for now.  Duties of the Department of Homeland Security includes facing off with terrorism, as well as border security.

While the conservatives of Congress sees the passage of the bill a gift of one week to debate and gain support for their refusal to okay Obama's unconstitutional immigration action by executive fiat, the Democrats believe next week, because of the pressure to fund DHS, this will lead to passage next week of a bill to fund the agency through the September 30, the end of the budget year, with an inclusion of funding for Obamamnesty.

"It does not make any difference whether the funding is for three weeks, three months or a full fiscal year. If it's illegal, it's illegal," said Representative Mo Brooks, R-Alabama, referring to Obama's unconstitutional executive orders demanding allowing illegal aliens to remain in the country without fear of deportation.

The opposition to the one week bill included conservatives like Representative Brooks that were standing behind their belief that Obama's executive amnesty was unconstitutional, and Democrats that preferred to hold out for a bill that funds DHS through September.  The threat against not funding DHS came in the form of furloughs, a claim by Homeland Security officials that said they would have to send 30,000 employees home without pay if some kind of funding did not pass.

The bill the conservatives of Congress are seeking, one that would reject Obama's unlawful changes to immigration policy, is becoming something of a difficult sell, since we've seen with this week's battle that the Senate Democrats have shown they have the ability to block any challenges to Obama's immigration policies, and Obama, with that kind of support from his fellow Democrats, has no problem vetoing any bill that appears on his desk that is not fully to his liking.

When called to compromise, Democrats have shown that even when they are in the congressional minority, they are unwilling to flinch, and are truly the party of "No."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Conservative Voice Radio: Rome, Islam, Amnesty, FCC, DHS, and American Sniper

Conservative Voice Radio with your host Douglas V. Gibbs is a round table discussion with members of the Banning-Beaumont-Cherry Valley Tea Party.  The program airs on KMET 1490AM at  8:00 am Pacific.  Listen live at


Obama and the Expansion of ISIS.

Rudy Guiliani says Obama doesn't love America.

Obamacare: IRS sends wrong tax information/Federal Government using Taxation to Control Economy.

Immigration Threat Assessment: ICE Unable to keep track of Illegals.

FCC Control of the Internet.

McConnell's fear to stand up against Democrats.

American Sniper Snubbed at Oscars.

FCC's Ajit Pai: Even Dems Admit Obama Owns Net Neutrality

by JASmius

Prior to Thursday, O's Internet crackdown was compulsorily clandestine; now that the techno trachea tourniquet is in place, even Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is taking swooning victory laps around her party's golden calf:

FCC commissioner Ajit Pai says the barrage of criticism he's received for labeling "net neutrality" as President Barack Obama's plan is bogus — because the Democratic National Committee agrees with him.

And Pai also told Newsmax TV's The Steve Malzberg Show on Friday that Obama embraced the plan to regulate the Internet as a utility because he needed a "political issue" to push during his second term.

What, ObamaCare "tweaking" and Obamnesty weren't sufficient?  No!  They!  Weren't!

"If you look at some of the reports, it's pretty clear the White House was casting about for a political issue after the November election and they settled on net neutrality," said Pai, who was appointed by Obama and opposed the plan.

What, Obamnesty wasn't suff....oh, never mind.

"I've gotten a decent amount of criticism for calling it President Obama's plan, but today, if you look at the Democratic National Committee website, they brag about the fact that 'the FCC just approved President Obama's plan for Internet regulation.' "

"Well, when the political party that inspired it is taking credit for it, we have to call it what it is … a presidential plan to regulate the Internet."

Oh, I don't know, Commissioner Pai, we called it that three and a half months ago.  Nor do I think that The One moved to seize the Internet because he "needed a political issue" any more than he issued the Immigration Proclamation because he thought Obamerikastan had a dearth of Mexican restaurants.  Barack Obama sent "his" FCC after the 'Net like a lion after a lame wildebeest because it was the last remaining outpost of unfettered free market capitalism and the one and only remaining outlet for untrammeled mass free speech.  Something that he, as an orthodox Marxist-Alinskyist, could not tolerate, and was freed by the fall of the Democrat Senate to, as "the president he always wanted to be," ruthlessly terminate by slow, regulatory strangulation.

Or just flipping the off-switch, if the random whim suits him.  I'm sure that feature is in that 332-page vise somewhere.

Which sets the stage nicely for the 2016 presidential election that is increasingly looking like it may never take place.

Friday, February 27, 2015

Weekend Conservative Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs

4 Radio Broadcasts

4 Different Platforms



12:00 pm: American Daily Review, BlogTalkRadio

2:00 pm: Constitution Radio, KCAA 1050AM


9:00 am: Constitution Study Radio, BlogTalkRadio

Conservative Voice Radio with your host Douglas V. Gibbs is a round table discussion with members of the Banning-Beaumont-Cherry Valley Tea Party. The program airs on KMET 1490AM at 8:00 am Pacific. Listen live at

Today's Topics:

Obama and the Expansion of ISIS.

Rudy Guiliani says Obama doesn't love America.

Obamacare: IRS sends wrong tax information/Federal Government using Taxation to Control Economy.

Immigration Threat Assessment: ICE Unable to keep track of Illegals.

FCC Control of the Internet.

McConnell's fear to stand up against Democrats.

American Sniper Snubbed at Oscars.

American Daily Review is the pre-game show for Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs. During this program Doug and JASmius tackle the issues and stories of the week that did not make the final list to air on program on KCAA. ADR is two hours of hard hitting conservative commentary, through the lens of the United States Constitution. 

The flagship broadcast for the 3-hour Saturday Extravaganza. On Constitution Radio this week our guest is Michael Loftus of The Flipside, program that takes a comedic look at the world of politics, and the biggest news stories.

After the interview we will discuss the Book of the Week,Constitution Quest Question of the Week, and the top stories of the AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week.

Learn more about the program at
Constitution Study Radio

After the massive dose of commentary on Saturday, join Doug's online Constitution Classroom at Constitution Study Radio. Live at 9:00 am Pacific, with podcasts of all past shows available at one convenient location.


Scott Walker Tackles Right to Work

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker is waiting for the Right to Work bill, which has already been approved by the State Senate, to work its way through the State Assembly.  He has indicated he will sign the legislation to make Wisconsin a "Right to Work" state, prohibiting employees from being forced to join a union against their will. As we've seen in countless other States that have adopted the "Right to Work" philosophy, it's the right thing to do for job creators and employees alike.

The liberal left progressives are accusing Walker of reversing his stance on Right to Work legislation, but that is not necessarily true.  He did not pursue the legislation before not because he did not believe in it, but because the timing was not yet right.  First, he wanted to reform the unions, and do away with collective bargaining with public unions in the State of Wisconsin.

Walker has shown he supports the idea of "Right to Work" as far back as 1993.

"I've never said that I didn't think it was a good idea," Walker told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "I've just questioned the timing in the past and whether it was right at that time."

When Governor Walker signs the legislation, it will make Wisconsin the 25th Right to Work State, a move that has been instrumental in encouraging job growth, and economic prosperity in the States it is enacted.

Liberal Left media outlets have suggested he is tackling the unions once again to help fuel his run for President in 2016.  Walker has shown to have courage made of steel, having stood up to the unions before, and surviving a massive attack from the liberal left that led to a recall effort a couple years ago.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Scott Walker and Right to Work - Wall Street Journal

Obama Administration's Empowerment of Islam

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Numerous conversations I have with folks have shown me that there are a number of people out there that not only believe that President Obama is an anti-American President, but that he is a Muslim.  In the end, it is all speculation, for Barack Obama has never given anyone indisputable evidence regarding his faith, which is why Scott Walker accurately indicated he had no idea what Obama's faith is.  However, regardless of if you believe that Obama owns a Muslim prayer rug, or if you think he's a Christian with a "Reverend Jeremiah Wright" G-Damn America splash of crazy in his religious thinking, or if you support the idea that Obama is a Godless Communist that rejects faith but appeases Islam because it serves his purpose, his actions and words tell a very interesting story that suggests he personally feels hostility towards Christianity, and is sympathetic to the followers of the false prophet Muhammad.

In a recent speech, after slamming Christianity with his Crusades remark, saying that "terrible deeds also committed in the name of Christ" during a National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama also went so far as to say, "Here in America, Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding."

The statement was delivered during one of his speeches at the White House's Extremism Summit, suggesting that not only were Muslims not enemies of America, and are not terrorists, but that they played a crucial role in America’s founding.

Either, the President doesn't understand history, he subscribes to a version that is not true, or he has gotten so arrogant about his lies that he doesn't care how obvious the untruth that spills from his mouth is.

The Crusades, after all, were a response to hundreds of years of Muslim attacks and expansionism in the Holy Land, and Europe; and after the founding of the United States, our first two international wars were against Islam, in the Barbary Wars waged during the Thomas Jefferson and James Madison presidencies.

One group of people that did play a crucial role in America's founding were the Jews.  7,000 Jews were present in the United States, and almost all of them supported the drive for independence.  And when the Revolutionary War effort was suffering financially, Haym Salomon, a Jewish banker in New York, borrowed money on his credit to help to continue to finance the effort for independence.

President Obama's "Crusades" and "Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country" statements are not the first time he has patted Islam on the back for something the ideology has never done, and attacked Christianity in America.  In April 2009 he said, “Although, as I mentioned, we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values. I think modern Turkey was founded with a similar set of principles.”

Referencing his remarks regarding Muslim influence on the founding of America, taking historical accuracy into account, Muslims did not begin to immigrate into the United States in significant numbers until after the American War Between the States.  The first mosque did not appear until 1915.  Islam had zero impact on America's founding, aside from declaring war against the new country before the country had even convened its Constitutional Convention in 1787.

It is true that Thomas Jefferson owned a Koran.  He believed it to be important to understand the enemy.  Jefferson also hosted a dinner meeting at the White House with an emissary from the Barbary States, but it was not a social visit, but an attempt to position the Iftar into submission after the USS Constitution captured ships from the bey of Tunis during the first war with the Barbary Pirates. Jefferson's knowledge of Islam, to that point, was primarily from 1786, after Barbary pirates attempted to blackmail America into monetary tribute. At that time, the Barbary emissary justified piracy with reference to the Koran, according to a report from Jefferson:

"The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners."

John Quincy Adams, writing of these negotiations, stated:

"The precept of the Koran is perpetual war against all who deny that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force."

Quincy Adams would later lament, “Such is the spirit, which governs the hearts of men, to whom treachery and violence are taught as principles of religion.”

The negative views of Islam were not restricted to only those early Americans.  Montesquieu wrote that the Turks were despotic. William Blackstone wrote that religion could be used for despotism, as shown by “terrible ravages committed by the Saracens in the east, to propagate the religion of Mahomet.” Thomas Paine wrote of Islam in Common Sense, but only as a reference point for despotic attempts to stifle liberty: he said that divine right of kings was a “superstitious tale, conveniently timed, Mahomet like, to cram hereditary right down the throats of the vulgar.”

The discovery of the New World by Columbus was largely because a land route was impossible pursue to the Far East, for the Muslim countries that blocked the way demanded tribute to cross their lands, and were viciously murdering travelers that refused to pay, and sometimes even murdering those that did pay.

Which means either Obama does not understand history, or he is a liar - and in either case, his actions show that he is doing what he can to be sympathetic towards Islam in today's global arena.

Other actions by the President show that he may have even deeper connections to Islam. Obama, for example, in the presence of dozens of Islamic African delegates, gave the one-finger affirmation of Islamic faith, at last August’s U.S.-African Leaders’ Summit in Washington D.C. (pictured at the beginning of this article).  

When Coptic Christian women and children were kidnapped and slaughtered in Egypt, and when Christians were lined up on a Libyan beach and beheaded, the Obama administration was willing to call the action "evil," but stopped short of calling the action "Islamic."  In the case of the Coptic Christians, the White House refused to label the Christian victims as anything other than "Egyptian."  The same narrative was used with 150 Christians kidnapped from a string of villages in Syria.  "Evil" was used to describe what happened, but it was not an action the minions of Obama even considered to be connected to Islam.

Specifically regarding the Islamic State's raid of Christian women and children in Syria, U.S. Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that the Islamic State's “latest targeting of a religious minority is only further testament to its brutal and inhumane treatment of all those who disagree with its divisive goals and toxic beliefs."  She then went on to declare, "ISIL continues to exact its evil upon innocents of all faiths and the majority of its victims have been Muslims."

She stated that as if the fact that some of their victims are Muslim somehow means they are not acting in the name of Islam.  Could it be those Muslims that she claims were killed were terminated not because they were Muslim, but because they refused to join the group?  However, because ISIS is acting in the name of Islam, the Christians are indeed being targeted specifically because they are Christians.

Ms. Psaki also said that the United States was fully committed “to leading the international coalition to degrade and defeat ISIL and to working towards a negotiated political solution that stops the bloodshed and secures a future of freedom, justice and dignity for all Syrians.”

But the problem is not just ISIS.  The problem is Islam, and jihad is being waged by many more groups other than the Islamic State.

How can you fight a war against an enemy if you are not even willing to admit who the enemy is, or from where their motives originate?


The Obama administration does not see Islam as an enemy.  Remember, the administration has declared that the hoax of man-made global warming is a greater danger to worldwide safety than terrorism, and have shown time and time again that they believe the greater threat to America is Christianity, conservatives, and gun owners, rather than the Islamic Jihad.

While groups like the Islamic State has been slaughtering Christians because they are Christians, be it on a beach in Libya or a town in Nigeria or the CAR, Chad, Niger, Iraq, the Philippines, Thailand — following their religious imperative to “Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Quran 2:191), the Obama administration refuses to call them what they are. . . but don't be fooled.  The stance of the White House is not driven by political correctness, or an attempt to be sensitive to those they believe to be peaceful Muslims (as they are telling us).  By his actions, Obama is using the language he uses, and is taking the actions he is taking, in order to empower Islam, to support the jihad, and side with them in their slaughter of non-Muslims.

George W. Bush fell into the trap of being careful with calling the attacks "Muslim" because he was a fool on that particular issue.  Obama is careful about using the Islamic label because he wishes to either appease them, or support them, in their bloody endeavors.

And as all of this happens, not one reporter has challenged the White House on this.  Online bloggers are willing to, but not the media. . . which is a part of the reason why Obama's FCC decided to seize control over the internet.

Russian Opposition Leader Assassinated as Russia Moves Forward in Ukraine

By Douglas V. Gibbs

An outspoken critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a leading opposition politician, and former deputy prime minister, Boris Nemtsov, has been assassinated.  He was shot dead near the Kremlin in Central Moscow.  The 55 year old was shot four times in the back, as he walked on a bridge over the Moskva River with a Ukrainian woman.

Putin's regime has taken the investigation of the killing under presidential command, placing the investigation in the hands of government security agencies.  Mikhail Kasyanov, a fellow opposition leader, told reporters, "That a leader of the opposition could be shot beside the walls of the Kremlin is beyond imagination. There can be only one version: that he was shot for telling the truth."

Nemtsov has said in the past that he believed Putin might have him killed regarding his opposition to Russian involvement in the conflict in Ukraine. An opposition march was planned for Sunday, intended as a protest against the war in east Ukraine, where pro-Russian rebels have seized a swathe of territory.

Another opposition figure, Ksenia Sobchak, said Nemtsov was preparing a report that would reveal the presence of Russian troops in Ukraine, an allegation Putin's government in Moscow denies.

Nemtsov's assassination follows a continuation of Russian presence in Ukraine, dismantling Ukraine, and seizing portions of the country for Russian occupation (in the name of pro-Russian rebels/separatists).

Experts suggest that Putin's goal is to take control of Ukraine along the Russian border down to Crimea, land-locking Ukraine, and providing a warm-water port along the Black Sea for Russia.

Meanwhile, though U.S. military vehicles have been paraded in Estonia near the Russian border, American forces are being held back, and the White House seems to be unwilling to do anything to stop Putin's invasion, and land grab, in Ukraine.

Russia has also been strengthening ties with eastern European countries, as seen with their recent energy deal with Hungary, creating a stronger presence in Europe, and showing how far Putin believes he can push without any concern over Western disagreements over his actions.

Russia's Geo-Political Positioning - Political Pistachio

Amnesty In"JUNK"tion

By Douglas V. Gibbs

As the United States Senate cowardly refuses to accept the House of Representative's DHS bill, and sends back a "clean" DHS bill to the House with funding in it for Obama's unconstitutional amnesty by executive fiat, the courts have also jumped into the mess and has blocked implementation of President Obama's executive amnesty for illegal aliens.  The Department of Justice, arguing on behalf of the White House, proclaimed that the ability to protect national security would be "irreparably harmed" if the injunction is not lifted.

United States District Court Judge Andrew Hanen's injunction against Obama's Deferred Action for Parental Accountability program were filed with Hanen who, experts say, is unlikely to issue a stay of his own injunction.  Hanen's decision could be appealed to the 5th Circuit Court.

When asked how the government would suffer irreparable harm from a stay blocking Obama's amnesty program, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, "To put it bluntly, the Department of Homeland Security was ready last week to begin taking the steps that would bring millions of people out of the shadows. These are individuals who have been in this country for a substantial period of time and have family connections inside the country. These are individuals who would begin paying taxes. These are individuals who would submit to a background check. So every day that goes by we have individuals who will continue to be in the shadows, who will continue to not pay taxes, and who will continue to not have undergone a background check which means that they could pose a threat to public safety."

The sudden national security threat posed by illegals hiding from law enforcement is a surprising change of development.  We have been told these people came to the country seeking a better life, and pose no threat, yet now not doing a background check on them poses a big threat.  Should we then ask, "If they are such a national security threat, why did we let them in the country in the first place?"

What about the ones that won't "come out of the shadows" for a background check?  Will they suddenly not be a threat?

As for the taxes, the need for their "revenue" wouldn't be a concern if our government did not waste billions of dollars on unconstitutional spending.

The Department of Justice has filed a parallel motion with the 5th Circuit Court to appeal Hanen's injunction, of which surprises me, since President Obama believes he is above the law, and does not need to lower himself to following any of the processes in our system demanded by the rule of law.

House Conservatives Stop Obamnesty Funding For Now

by JASmius

But it came at a steep cost in terms of issue and political clarity:

The Republican-controlled House unexpectedly rejected short-term funding for the Department of Homeland Security on Friday, increasing the prospect of a partial shutdown at midnight of an agency with significant anti-terrorism responsibilities.

None of which will be affected by the "shutdown," because those are deemed "essential" functions.  But far be it from me to spoil the AP's drama-mongering.

The vote was 224-203 against the measure, as more than four dozen Republicans defected on the leadership-backed legislation.

In other words, all the spine their Senate counterparts lacked.

A combination of conservative, tea party-backed Republicans on one side of the political aisle and Democrats on the other opposed the bill. The first group was upset because the legislation had been stripped of changes to President Barack Obama's immigration policy, and the second because it lacked full-year funding for the sprawling department.

I.e. "You can't please everybody," especially in as polarized a political climate, and on such an incendiary issue, as this one.  If all Boehner had wanted was to have a chance to pass something, anything, to be seen as being "able to govern," (aka being Harry Reid's bitch), he should have followed Mitch McConnell's horrible example.

I love these two 'graphs in particular because they are so illustrative:

With less than seven hours remaining before the midnight deadline, it was unclear what Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders would next propose.

Democrats led by Representative Nancy Pelosi of California urged them in advance to allow a vote on a bill to keep the department in funds through the September 30th end of the budget year — a step the GOP high command had previously refused to take.

And which Boehner doesn't dare take if he wants to avoid a full-scale caucus rebellion.  At this point the only DHS bill that will pass the House is the one they already passed a month ago that defunds Obamnesty.  As such, that should have determined Boehner's response to McConnell's capitulation.  In essence, "Sorry, Senate, we're not going to negotiate against ourselves.  If you're not going to pass our bill, then DHS is going to (15%) shut down.  Ball's in your court".  Instead, Boehner wound up in the same position, except he gratuitous pissed off his own base (again) on the way there.  And, of course, per (G)Reid's warning from Wednesday, since Boehner couldn't deliver the House's white flag, he will now order his minions to filibuster even the total capitulation McConnell gifted him.

Thus has a DHS shutdown showdown that had crystal clarity - "Republican Congress defunds Obamnesty, Obama vetoes 'vital national security funding' on behalf of a lawless policy three quarters of the voting public vehemently opposes" - been utterly charlie-foxtroted into "Republican incompetence, racism, and softness on 'violent extremism' has 'shut down our security'".

And so many of us say Obama is "in over his head".  The GOP now looks spineless AND stupid.

And yet it isn't a problem that some courage of the ol' convictions wouldn't have solved.

But now?  Who knows, gentlebeings, who knows?

UPDATE: This horizon is hurtling closer at a dizzying pace:

The U.S. Senate, without any debate, late on Friday passed a one-week funding extension for the Department of Homeland Security, a last ditch move aimed at averting a partial shutdown of the agency at midnight.

Is this Senator McConnell, with Senator (G)Reid's arm up his ass, apologizing to Speaker Boehner for not giving him enough time to strong-arm enough of his own GOP caucus ram through the "clean" Democrat DHS appropriation?  I certainly can't see any other purpose for a seven day extension.  I also don't see why the same conservative defectors who voted down the three-week extension this afternoon wouldn't vote down this even more fun-sized gambit as well.  The principle and the dynamic are not only precisely the same, but they're all the more transparent the closer that funding horizon is dragged to the present.

And if this one-weeker is shot down, what'll be next?  Twenty-four hours?  Will it get down to minutes?  Seconds?  The blink of an eye?

FINAL UPDATE: Guess we know who blinked:

The U.S. House of Representatives gave final approval on Friday to a one-week stopgap spending bill for the domestic security agency, averting a partial shutdown with just hours to spare before a midnight deadline.

After a chaotic day that featured an embarrassing rebuke to House Speaker John Boehner from angry conservatives, the House voted 357-60 to keep the lights on at the Department of Homeland Security for at least one more week....

Democrats said they were optimistic a bill with nearly $40 billion in funding for the full fiscal year for the department, already passed by the Senate, would advance in the House next week.

And with a full week for the media, Democrats, and the leadership to bludgeon House conservatives into submission, they're probably right.  And thus will the GOP become complicit in Barack Obama's dictatorship, the further evisceration of the Constitution and the rule of law, and their own eventual electoral extinction.

Quite a day's work, I'd say.

Murderous Rampage in Missouri

By Douglas V. Gibbs

A man in the small town of Tyrone, Missouri, an unincorporated area in Texas County, just north of the Arkansas State Line in the Ozarks, has killed seven people, all adults.  Before he was stopped, the shooter also took his own life, his lifeless body located in a vehicle in a neighboring county.  An eighth victim as been wounded.  Four of the victims were related to the gunman, identified as 36-year-old Joseph Jesse Aldridge.

The killings were accomplished in a string of homes.  The shooter's mother, 74-year-old Alice Aldridge, was also found dead inside her residence, but it's believed she died of natural causes.  Authorities are assuming it to be a possibility that the shooting spree was an emotional response to the death of the killer's mother.

A teenage girl called the police about the shootings after her parents had been killed, and then she fled the scene in only a night gown.

The deaths have been horrifying in a rural county that normally experiences perhaps one homicide per year.  The deaths from the shooting spanned for miles.

The event will not doubt be used for political purposes once again by those that are courting the demand for gun control in the United States, when in the end the only consideration we should be offering is simply prayer, and sadness, for the senseless killings.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

"Vandals" Shut Down Internet & Phone Service Across Arizona

by JASmius

Kind of like "do-it-yourself" Net Neutrality:

Cellphone, Internet, and telephone services across half of Arizona went dark on Wednesday after vandals sliced a sensitive fiber optic cable, according to those familiar with the situation. The incident is raising concerns about the safety of U.S. infrastructure.

The outage shut down critical services across large parts of the state, preventing individuals from using their phones, bank and ATM cards, and the Internet. Critical services, such as police and state government databases, as well as banks and hospitals, also were affected as a result of the vandalism.

The services first went dead around noon MST on Wednesday, causing complete service interruptions across half the state, from Phoenix to such northern cities as Sedona, Prescott, and Cotton Wood, according to an official from CenturyLink, the Louisiana-based communications company that owns the severed line.

Or, in other words, "vandals" did in a matter of minutes what took the FCC almost four months.  Which illustrates anew what we've always known: The private sector is orders of magnitude more efficient than the public sector.

But then there's the question of just exactly who these "entrepreneurs" were:

The line, which is composed of extremely thick cable, appeared to have been cut with a hacksaw, according to Juarez. Phoenix police are currently investigating the incident and say they have yet to determine a motivation for the crime.

“We’re not sure what the intent was, but they were able to cut the fiber optic cable, possibly using a hacksaw,” Juarez explained. “It looks like a pretty straight cut.”

Well, Mr. Juarez, it seems to me that if it wasn't an FCC agent who'd recently visited a Grand Canyon area Lowe's, the intent just might have been to demonstrate exactly how easy it was to sabotage the communications infrastructure of northern Arizona.

This theory is reinforced by the location where the fiber optic cable was severed:

The cable is located in a desert area north of Phoenix, meaning it is not a site routinely accessed by passersby.

“It’s a desert area, so it’s very remote, extremely remote,” Juarez said.

And thus even more vulnerable than if the "vandals" had chosen to cut the line in downtown Phoenix.

And wait - isn't Arizona a border State?  You know, the border Barack Obama refuses to control?  Across which "one in three [illegal] border-crossers are of Middle Eastern descent"?  There couldn't be any, oh, I don't know, dots to connect here, could there?

Nah, that's just my paranoid runaway imagination getting the best of me again, right?

Hard Starboard Radio: Is Liberalism Exhausted?

GOP surrender on Obama’s lawless amnesty for illegal aliens would be a profound betrayal of the States; Anti-Boehner coup sentiment grows in House; Obama defying anti-Obamnesty court injunction; The addition of a sunset clause to Obama's Iranian nuclear surrender has made an already bad deal much, much worse; There’s nothing unpatriotic about challenging Obama on Iran - or anything else; Far from being dead, leftism looks mighty, indeed; and Dr. Ben Carson agrees with me.

The Age of Obama is just beginning on Open Thighs Friday at 6PM Eastern/3PM Pacific.

TSA Warns Of Next Catastrophic Threat To Airliners

by JASmius

Ladies and gentlemen, say hello to Thermite:

According to the Intercept, which obtained both the FBI assessment and subsequent TSA advisory, thermite is a mixture of rust and aluminum powder that can elude bomb detectors, and when ignited, will “produce toxic gases, which can act as nerve poison, as well as a thick black smoke that will significantly inhibit any potential for in-flight safety officers to address the burn.”

Worse, standard fire extinguishers would only exacerbate the thermite’s danger, creating toxic fumes. The results could be “catastrophic” and result “in the death of every person on board,” according to the TSA advisory. According to the FBI report, thermite devices “spew molten metal and hot gases” that can potentially “burn through steel and other material” on an aircraft. The report called thermite “the greatest potential incendiary threat to aviation.”

Neither the FBI nor TSA said there was a specific threat by terrorists involving thermite, and a source “with knowledge of current threats” overseas told the Intercept that [Muslim]s are currently interested in other incendiary devices that do not involve the deadly chemical combo.

And, of course, jihadists always honestly and candidly brief the FBI and TSA in advance on the weapons they're going to use in their next round of attacks, don't they?

Thermite appears to be very easy to make with ingredients you can find at any hardware store.

It's easy to conceal, current security procedures can't detect it - heck, if the jihadists could rig a delayed trigger, they could stick it in baggage and might not even have to commit suicide themselves to carry out the attack.  Jetliners would just start disintegrating in flames and vapor in midair "mysteriously," one after another, and ISIS or al Qaeda could announce that "Allah himself" has begun waging jihad against the infidels, and/or make demands, or just gleefully sit back and watch the panic and chaos, tall frosty glass of infidel blood in hand.  The latter would, admittedly, not be exactly in character for them, but "your mileage may vary," and all that.

But here's the punchline: Not only can current federal security procedures not detect Thermite, but nobody in the TSA or FBI even know what to look for, and their superiors are making no effort to provide them with this information:

One TSA agent that spoke with the Intercept about the threat went as far as to state “We’re supposed to brief our [federal air marshals] to identify a thermite ignition — but they tell us nothing… So our guys are Googling, ‘What does thermite look like? How do you extinguish thermite fires?’ This is not at all helpful.” This is a truly telling statement about just how little the TSA agents in charge of our safety really know about the threat.

A federal air marshal that was willing to speak under anonymity stated “They say to identify something we don’t know how to identify and say there is nothing we can do… So basically, we hope it’s placed somewhere it does minimal damage, but basically we’re [screwed].” [emphasis added]

The Obama Regime keeps insisting that "We're safer than we've ever been" at the same time that they seem bent on doing everything in their power to ensure more and greater jihadist attacks against the homeland.  Clearly both cannot be correct.

But you know the old adage: "Actions speak louder than words".  Which is why the skies look to be getting dramatically less friendly in the very near future.

Obama's True Enemy

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Republicans, and conservatives that file into Tea Party meetings and rallies, Constitution Classes, and Libertarian gatherings, say time and time again that they are so tired of having to battle the failures of President Barack Obama.  His failed policies are nearly more than they can digest.  He fails to understand economics, his failed Obamacare program is destroying health care in America, he fails to understand the underlying reasons behind why the government shutdowns occurred, he has failed in the Middle Class and he has failed to bring anybody out of poverty.  Failure after failure after failure after failure.  He even fails to stand against an enemy determined to destroy us, fails to connect jihadism to Islam, and has failed to properly apply America's might against an enemy he is unwilling to admit.

I am here to tell you that President Barack Obama has failed at nothing.  From his point of view, he is a total success.  He is, however, as accused, failing to name the enemy, as so many folks on the right-of-center accuses him of when it comes to the worldwide battle we see emerging around the globe.  However, who we see to be the enemy, and who he views to be the enemy, are two different things.

The GOP is upset because Obama refuses to connect terrorism to Islam, shielding the Muslim community from the wrath of those that are angry about the murderous exploits of ISIS, al-Qaeda, Iran, and so forth.  The Obama administration refuses to admit that it is Islam's hatred of Christianity behind the constant slaughter of Christians around the world, avoiding even using the term "terrorism" in connection with Islam, and as in the recent case of the murdered Coptic Christians in Egypt, calling them "Egyptians," rather than members of the Christian faith that follows Jesus Christ.

"How can Obama be so blind?" I constantly hear conservatives cry out.

Obama is not blind.  He knows exactly what is going on.  He is waging an all-out war against the enemy.  Obama is not being forgiving against the enemy that he wishes to destroy.  He is not being reluctant to recognize the enemy.  President Obama is all too aware of who his enemy is, but in his mind, that enemy is not Islam, not terrorism, not Russia, not North Korea, not Iran, and not China.

Those that support the hard left progressive ideas of the newest version of the Democrat Party, and President Obama himself, recognizes that there is a war raging.  President Obama believes there is someone out there trying to destroy him, and all of the successes he believes he has accomplished.  Some leftists have come right out and said it, even politicians of the Democrat Party political stripe have said it, but President Obama won't.  They believe the Republican Party is trying to destroy Obama, and his minions, but Obama goes beyond that.  He believes he can infiltrate (and the left already has to a point) the GOP.  In his mind, the Republicans are not actually the enemy.  The true enemy, those he is waging war against, in a fashion some wish he would unleash on Islamic terrorism, are members of a much more broader group than the Republican Party.  Obama's true enemy is anyone who dares to oppose him.

The Department of Homeland Security, or should I say "Insecurity," has dubbed these enemies as domestic terrorists.  They are the Republicans that cling bitterly to their guns and religion and still maintain some home that the GOP Establishment will return to the party's platform.  The enemy to Obama is those Tea Party people who dare to rally in opposition to his policies, military veterans that fought in the name of patriotism and love of country, and the constitutionalists that accuse Barack Obama of acting as if he believes he is above the rule of law.  The enemy is any number of conservatives that question his actions, demand that he act through Congress rather than unilaterally through Executive Orders and Executive Actions, and anyone that dares to question any of his schemes.  The enemy is anyone who dares to recognize that the Democrat Party should change their name to the Socialist Party, that the members of that party are attempting to destroy the system in place as designed by the framers of the United States Constitution, anyone who supports the right to bear arms, anyone who believes in free speech, and anyone who dares to complain in public beyond the four walls of their own home against the policies of the Obama administration and the Democrat Party narrative.

In the Legislative Branch, the Republican Party now holds a majority in both Houses of Congress, but President Obama has shown no sign of moving towards the middle like most Democrat Party Presidents of the United States have in the past, when they realize the opposition party has gained ground.  Instead, Obama has dug his feet deeper into the trenches, and is acting unilaterally in a greater fashion across the board.  The FCC, defiant to both Congress, and a judicial ruling against it, has taken control of the internet.  The Pentagon is slashing the military, while recruiters actively seek gay recruits that will assuredly transform the military into a fighting force incapable of protecting a system that ensures a sovereign America.  The Affordable Care Act, despite failures online, and the IRS sending out the wrong paperwork, is full steam ahead, destroying the private health care system, and its own integrity as a system, in order to usher in socialized medicine under complete control of the federal government.  President Obama mouths the word "bipartisan," but has concluded any semblance of assistance from the legislative branch has vanished, and to him Congress is even less than a consultative assembly, much less the voice of the peasants at his feet.  The courts are still assisting him in unconstitutionally striking down State laws on State issues, like abortion and marriage, but eventually even the courts will begin to turn on him, so he is prepared, as he has through the FCC vote, to defy even the normally compliant and complicit court system.  In Obama's mind, he has two years to complete the process of fundamentally changing America into a system the Founding Fathers would never have approved of, and as far as he's concerned, he now will have to do it himself through unilateral executive actions, with the support of a complicit media, and the willingness of his regulatory agencies to modify the law in his favor at his beckoning call.

The Republican Party has responded, for the most part, in a manner some may call "defiance."  How dare any of those "party of no" Republicans stand against the wonderful things the all-powerful Obama is trying to implement.  The Republicans, however, are divided into three parts.  One part is secretly in favor of Obama's doings, happy to gain more governmental power, which equates to more authoritarian control for those that stand with the ruling elite.  Another part of the GOP is disgusted by what is happening, but have bought into the narrative that there is nothing they can do about it, that the Executive Branch has become too powerful, so they will say a few words of derision every once in a while, but for the most part will go along to get along.  Then, there is the minority of the Republican Party politicians, the conservatives, the ones that hold to the idea that only the American System that made this nation prosperous for over 200 years must be the vehicle we use to move forward.  They believe in a virtuous nation that uses a free market to encourage innovation, and support the concept that only local government should be involved in local issues.  They, however, are populated by an army of a few, and as the primary target of the Obama administration, will be worn down, and reduced in number, if they don't quickly realize the true power they wield, and the fact that, though silent, the majority of this country is in their corner.

Barack Obama has no worries about that opposition.  After all, he has admitted he has no more campaigns to run.  He has told Congress, with a spiteful wink, “I know, ’cause I won both of them.”

Obama has no intention to make this country stronger, though he may utter those words.  His goal is to knock America down a few notches, to reduce her strength to a level where she is dependent on the rest of the world, and is forced to join a global network of co-dependency.  The middle class is being destroyed, so that there will only be two classes; the political class, and the poor, dumb, ill-informed, ineffective peasant class.  Health care is being destroyed, so that a national health care system can be established to infiltrate everyone's personal lives and possessions.  Gun Control is being implemented incrementally, including an assault on ammunition, so that the few remaining citizens that believe they have a chance to stand against the onslaught of Unitarian control can be disarmed, and made harmless to the rulers.  The economy is being brought down by devaluing the American Dollar, through the insertion of fiat money into our economic system, and with any remainder of potential prosperity being slashed by a massive national debt and heavy regulation against independent business that refuses to play the corporatism game with government.  Education is being transformed into a "national standard" called Common Core so that the children can be more thoroughly indoctrinated, though the younger generation we are now seeing reaching voting age has already been well trained in leftist ideals, and stands in the new camp with Obama.  The elimination of homeschooling and private schools may be on the future leftist agenda in the near future.  Homosexuals have become mindless pawns of the hard-left Democrats, being used to finish off the removal of God from our society.  The Gay Rights Movement is being fashioned after past Civil Rights movements in order to silence the opposition, and give the government the excuse to pass laws criminalizing dissent against the gay agenda, and dictating to pastors how to conduct their sermons, and mandate how Christians will run their private places of business (such as bakeries).  The final bastion of pure free speech, the internet, has been handed over to Obama's minions, now in the hands of the federal government through Wednesday's FCC vote in favor of Net Neutrality, and the slow transformation of the internet into a controlled medium, where opposition to the agendas supported by the handcuffs of political correctness, will be strictly monitored and shut down if necessary.  Peace, Obama and the Democrats believe, will be achieved by 2016, because all opposition will be silenced, or eliminated.

"Elections mean something," they tell us. . . unless the conservatives pull of a win during mid-term elections.  All Barack Obama cares about, and gloats about, is his wins in the last two presidential elections.  As he keeps reminding us, "I know, ’cause I won both of them."

President Barack Obama, with his smug narcissism, never viewed the Republican Party, or the conservative wing of society, to be a viable threat.  His mockery of any opposition to him reveals exactly what he believes.  Full steam ahead, the agenda of changing America in the way he hoped he could is proceeded on schedule, and the true enemy is nearly disarmed and on the run.  The protests of "informed" Americans do not represent a set-back to him, and the election that led to a Republican majority in both Houses do not make him a lame-duck President.  On the contrary.  The opposition becoming louder, and more recognizable, simply fills him with stern determination, while also allowing his regime to better identify those that must be silenced.  Today the internet, tomorrow radio and television with the Fairness Doctrine.  Today Obamacare, tomorrow a global system of Universal Medicine.  Today protests and derision from the GOP, tomorrow an end to the saboteurs from the right side of the aisle.  No more free market, no more free speech, and no more opposition to hard left policies will be tolerated.

A person said to me the other day, "I believe history will label Obama as the worst president in American History."

"Perhaps," I said.

Success for Obama, in his eyes, will be if history looks back on him as the guy that got the process of destroying the American System started, the President that finally turned the United States to face leftward politically, the Commander in Chief that destroyed America's "Super Power Status," and the resident of the White House that finally did away with the "racist" and "unfair" system created by the United States Constitution, and set America on the path toward full-blown socialism, government control over everything, and a utopia envisioned by people like Karl Marx.

Obama, and his supporters, believe that Barack Obama is the ONLY adult in the room.  He's the only intelligent one, and the only one that recognizes the true vision America must follow.  Republicans refuse to support his brilliance, and refuse to take responsibility for any failures.  They call Obama a liar, and an anti-American President.  The Republicans say that the President favors an Islamic enemy over his own country, and his "Crusades" remark was yet another clue about what he thinks of the Christian founding of this country, and the Christian majority that inhabits this great land.

Guilty, on all counts, but in his eyes, that is success.  In Obama's eyes, he has fooled enough people to get elected, and to move forward, and those that stand against him are now fearfully trying to figure out a way not to look racist by disagreeing with him.  The opposition is fearful, and tyrants love fear.

The real extremists, according to the liberal left progressives, are those religious people other than Muslims, and political groups that dare to stand for limited government and against President Obama's policies.  The radicals of the rightwing conspiracy, as far as Democrats are concerned, foment sectarianism, and favor the division of tribalism.  They are lucky that Obama is a merciful ruler, and that he is silencing them in an incremental manner, rather than striking them down as they stand.

Every tyranny has weaknesses, and every resistance movement has its strengths.  The American Revolutionaries fought off the largest military force in the history of the world up to that point, gaining independency from the British Empire with less than 3% of the population fighting during the War for Independence.  Only a third of the people in the English Colonies even supported the idea of independence, with the remaining population being either loyal to the British Crown, uncaring who won the rebellion, or simply wanting to appeal to Britain as Englishmen and asking that they simply be treated fairly.

In July of 2014, in the City of Murrieta, California, a small minority of the city's population stood against the federal importation of illegal aliens into their community, turning around busloads full of diseased border-crossers, trying to protect their city from the potentially dangerous onslaught of disease, criminals, and the terrorist element as a result of the Obama administration's policies refusing to execute immigration laws to properly screen incoming immigrants into this country.  The buses were turned around, and immigration became a national debate as a result . . . and the whole affair began with three women talking about taking action, six members of the community handing out 500 flyers at the Murrieta Birthday Bash, and a dozen patriots at the first protest near "The Pond" in neighboring Temecula on the same day those local residents were passing out the flyers in Murrieta.  What resulted was a couple hundred people rallying against federal tyranny at the Border Patrol Station on Madison Avenue in Murrieta.  Buses full of illegals were turned around, the national media was broadcasting from the site, and a nation was mesmerized by the gall of the citizens of Murrieta to stand against Obama's policies. . . all because three ladies had a discussion that concluded with, "We need to do something about this."

As people who believe in the principles and philosophies of the United States Constitution, we number in the majority.  As folks that dare to consider standing against the tyranny being perpetrated by the Obama administration, we are in the majority across this great country.  But the clock is ticking.  Will we continue to entertain the idea that sitting on the couch complaining as we watch the news on television is an effective strategy, or are we ready to take action, and do more than rally at Tea Party events, or occasionally write an email to our representatives?  Are we ready to do more than complain?  Are we willing to, as the signers of the Declaration of Independence stated in the last sentence of the document, put on the line our "Lives, Fortunes, and sacred Honor?"

In the Preamble of the Constitution you will notice that it says, ". . . and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."  Capitalization was used as a form of emphasis, like we use italics today.  In the Preamble, "ourselves" is not capitalized, and "Posterity" is.  That means the Founding Fathers of this great country did what they did for their own liberty, but even more so for ours.  Their "Posterity," their children, and grandchildren, and you and I, was the main reason they fought for Liberty as they did.  It was all for you.  They did what they did for you, even more than they did it for themselves and their generation.  Are you willing to continue the fight for freedom for our Posterity?  Is your posterity important enough to you for you to take a stand against tyranny, and fight the good fight to restore our Republic?

Thomas Jefferson said, "We in America do not have government by the majority -- we have government by the majority who participate."

Benjamin Franklin said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom."

James Madison said, "A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary