Monday, December 31, 2018

Sunday, December 30, 2018

FED ED: Constitution Association Monthly Meeting

Coming up this Saturday, we will be meeting in Temecula to discuss the monetary system and the Federal Reserve.

Screaming Tolerance

page from a tract I have had since the 1970s about the end-times called
"Gay Blade"
By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

I have always found it fascinating that the so-called tolerant ones have always been the least tolerant.  When we "tolerate," it means that we "recognize and respect" the item being tolerated.  We may not necessarily agree with the thing we are tolerating, but we put up with it because that's a part of living in a free society.

Tolerance does not mean what it used to mean in today's society.

Now, we are witnessing a vast cultural change that says to tolerate is to accept, embrace, and normalize.  Otherwise, you are a "hater," or a "phobic."  If one is not considered "tolerant," they are met with hostility, and ultimately oppression and persecution.

While a people who is virtuous and follows a strict moral code or standard recognizes absolute right and wrongs, the new tolerance states there is no absolute right or wrong.  Faith is to be abandoned.  Humanity's evolution requires us to shed such notions of fantasy and the supernatural.  Either, you are willing to discard any ideas about the wrongness of sin, or you are a bigot who will be left behind as society charts a new course through unknown waters into a brave new world.

The new world has established that truth is relative to the culture one lives in.  Truth can even be based upon whatever the ramblings are inside one's head.  There are many truths.  Good is not absolute in the brave new world of postmodern tolerance.

It is the new religion.  The anti-religion religion.  And the faithful have been so indoctrinated in the new worldly religion, and so taken by the humanistic belief system, that it angers them if someone dares to disagree.  In fact, opposing views are not only not tolerated, but it is reasonable to the pawns of the new faith of new tolerance to lash out in anger if anyone dares to even slip up in how they address the new warriors of the new faith of new tolerance.

A transgender went nuts in a store because an employee “misgendered” him by calling the biological man “sir” in a confrontation that was caught on video.

[A video] clip shows the transgender demanding his “f***ing money back” before a woman off camera refers to the individual as a “young man”.

“Excuse me, it’s ma’am, it is ma’am,” barks the transgender before the woman threatens to call the police.

The transgender then accuses the store clerk of calling him “sir,” despite this not being heard on the video until the clerk does subsequently refer to the biological male as “sir”.

He then becomes increasingly irate before yelling, “motherf***er – take it outside – you wanna call me sir again, I will show you a fucking sir!”

“Motherf***er!” shouts the transgender before kicking over a display stand and walking towards the exit.

However, despite the clerk repeatedly apologizing, the transgender returns to continue the argument, demanding the company’s corporate phone number to complain about how he’s been “misgendered several times in this store”.

“I’m gonna ask you for a fifth time to stop calling me a man, because quite literally I am not,” the transgender asserts.

The clerk then again refers to the individual as “sir,” probably on purpose, which causes him to become even more angry.

As the individual leaves, he accuses the clerk of “disrespecting trans people in this store….which I plan on telling the entire LGBTQ community.”

“You’re going to lose money over this,” the transgender states before leaving the store.
I don't remember a time in history that cross-dressers got so irate about anything, unless it had something to do with their drug supply.

We live in a world where what is right is whatever an individual believes or says is right.  Everyone is right, and their argument and beliefs are equal, whether you like it or not, even if they have to pound it into your skull with violence.

Well, that is unless your belief is not equal, because it's on the list of unacceptable beliefs, such as Christianity.

If there is no ethical standard of right and wrong, and if what has always been historically right is now being considered as the only wrong, how long can our culture stand before it falters under the weight of its own intolerance?

For some reason it reminds me of the iconic line from George Orwell's book, Animal Farm. "Some animals are more equal than others."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Saturday, December 29, 2018

Rise of Magog

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

End-times prophecy has always been an interest of mine.  I realize that in the end, none of us really know what is going to happen, or when it is going to happen.  As the Book of Matthew states, only the Father in Heaven truly knows.

That said, when I was reading the Hal Lindsey books, and the other books about prophecy, in the 1970s, I always found two things to be strange to me.  While the prophecy scholars were claiming the antichrist would rise out of Europe (largely due to the Bible's "New Roman Empire" reference), I believed the end-times dictator to likely be from the Middle East (or at least Muslim).  First of all, I had to ask why a European leader would choose New Babylon (which I have always assumed it to be Baghdad in Iraq based on historical references) as the location for his throne?  Second, I have always been one to consider outside prophetic sources like Nostradamus as also having some validity in the prophecy game, and his quatrains state that the next global dictator will wear a blue turban.

The other thing that always bugged me was the belief that Magog is Russia (and more specifically, Moscow).  The prophecy-pushers believed that to be the truth because they were basing their findings on current geopolitical standings.  "But, what if Europe as a European empire, and the Soviet Union as a communist might, are not exactly what they are today during that future time period approaching the Tribulation and Armageddon?" I asked myself in the 1970s.

Since then the Berlin Wall has fallen, the Soviet Union has collapsed, and Europe's might as a European empire (European Common Market) is beginning to look like less of a reality, as Islam works to overrun the continent, and pull it into their next Ottoman Empire caliphate.

As time passed, I kept revisiting my thoughts.  With the advent of the Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979, and the growing Islamic threat since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, it has become more and more likely that Islam is a more major player in the end-times scenario than Europeans or Russians.

Which brings me back to Magog.

Based on historical maps, I've always believed that the prophetic biblical end-times giant, Magog, is not Russia, but Turkey.  The old tribes of Magog occupied what is today Turkey, and the former southern Soviet republics (which are all now Muslim-majority countries).  They never really reached as far north as Moscow.

Could it be that Magog, the scourge from the north that brings its might down against Israel in the Book of Revelation, the Book of Ezekiel, and other prophetic passages in the Old Testament is not Russia after all, but a new head of the Muslim caliphate who had suffered what was thought to be a fatal wound to the head of the Ottoman Empire back during World War I?  And, rather than a new Roman Empire made up of European might, could it be that the new Roman Empire is simply the resurrection of the Ottoman Empire, with perhaps an even greater Muslim caliphate than we saw before that includes new additions in much of Europe, as the force that is truly to be reckoned with in the end-times scenario?

It is interesting that in the Ezekiel passages that discuss the military movement against Israel all of the countries listed as being involved are currently Islamic, except Gog if you are to believe the descendants of the tribes are Russian, rather than Turkish.

This is not to say that Russia is not a player at all.  The territories of "Rosh", from which the prince of Rosh (Gog) may come from, includes much of greater Russia and Moscow.  But is it possible that chief prince is Turkish, rather than a resident of Moscow?

We have to ask, where do these names (Gog, Magog, Gomer, Meshech and Tubal (etc.) come from?
These are the names of the tribes of people who settled the surrounding areas near the Middle East shortly after Noah's flood from the Book of Genesis.

Gen 10:1-3 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras. 3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.

Could it be that rather than some communist from Moscow, the chief prince in Ezekiel is in fact someone like the Prime Minister of Turkey Erdoğan? Perhaps one of his descendants?

Eze 38:1-3 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, 2 Son of man, set thy face against Gog, the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal, and prophesy against him, 3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal.

It's beginning to look that way.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Additional Reading (of which I wrote in 2009): 

Middle East Dominoes Falling For Islamic Jihad, And A Worldwide Caliphate From A Biblical Worldview

And the recent headline:

Constitution Radio: 2019's Silver Linings

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs: Final 2018 Episode!

○ First Hour: Doug, Alex, and Dennis discuss issues through the lens of the U.S. Constitution

○ Second Hour: Doug, Glenn, Jan, and Diane discuss the issues from a Tea Party perspective

For both hours your primary host will be Douglas V. Gibbs, KMET 1490-AM

1-3 pm on Saturday Afternoon

archived podcast at


◉ First Hour: Constitution Radio CARSTAR/AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week:

🚩 A Virtuous Society

🚩 What the Democrats Really Believe

◉ Second Hour: Conservative Voice Radio

🚩 A New European Empire . . . through Germany?

🚩 Border Wall, Border Security, and the Criminals Involved

🚩 Technocracy

🚩 California's Defiance leading to death by illegal alien (Tulare killing spree suspect likely illegal alien) (California moving primary to March 3)

🚩 Orwellian

🚩 Is leaving Syria the right choice?

Friday, December 28, 2018

Gosnell: Pre-order on DVD

News from the folks who brought you "Gosnell: The Trial of America's Biggest Serial Killer"
GOSNELL is now available to pre-order on DVD
The film hits Video On Demand January 22nd and DVD February 5th. Gosnell was one of the top ten movies in the United States during opening week and was the number one independent film in America. 
Despite numerous attempts from the Hollywood left and the mainstream media to shut it down, GOSNELL made waves across the country. It even changed hearts and minds on the issue of abortion – Student Kathy Zhu proclaimed on Twitter that the film had changed her “from pro-choice to pro-life” saying she “finally understood” the horrors of abortion after seeing the film.
We encourage you to pre-order GOSNELL and share it with your family and friends. We were overwhelmed by your support of the film when it was in theaters, but the movement doesn’t end here. We know a lot of you missed the film because it was playing too far from where you live or theaters yanked it from the schedules too soon (Hollywood really doesn't want the truth to get out). But now you can pre-order your copy today and share it with your friends, family, churches, community groups, etc. 
Please consider purchasing multiple copies and hand them out to people you believe need to hear the truth about abortion. And don’t worry about it being graphic - the film is PG-13. We heard from people all over the country who took their teenage children to see GOSNELL and were grateful.
Don’t just take our word for it. Check out what others have to say about the film:
Rush Limbaugh said the GOSNELL Movie was “exceptionally well done for the subject matter......If you don’t know about Kermit Gosnell, if you’ve not heard the name, if it doesn’t ring a bell, you by all means should see this. If you do know who Gosnell is…you should see this.”
Other commentators agreed:
“Apart from what [GOSNELL] says about the culture of abortion, it’s an engrossing courtroom drama, complete with last-minute evidence that turns the tide of the case.” -Fox News host Brit Hume.  
“Wow. Without showing anything graphic, Nick Searcy, Phelim McAleer, Ann McElhinney & Andrew Klavean really do justice to the horror that was allowed to flourish unchecked for years.” -Actress Patricia Heaton (Everybody Loves RaymondThe Middle).
“Whatever your position on abortion, this brave, independent film is an eye-opener that will change hearts and minds.” -Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin.
GOSNELL is EXCELLENT. So well directed. Well cast, pitch perfect screenplay, particularly considering the difficult material. Go see it now.” -The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway.
Stay in touch with us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Thank you for your support on this important project-let’s keep the momentum going! Hollywood and the mainstream media want this film to fail. The media tried to cover-up the trial by refusing to report on it. They tried to stop this movie. FacebookNPRand The New York Times all refused to run ads. Almost no mainstream media outlets reviewed GOSNELL despite the fact that it did so well at the box office.
That’s why we need to have lots of pre-orders for the DVD before it launches. More pre-orders on Amazon mean shops will stock larger amounts and promote it more. We need to show Hollywood that there is a hunger for the truth. So please pre-order the DVD here and with your help we can beat this coverup and get the truth out.
Thank you,

Thursday, December 27, 2018

Battle for the Border Wall

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

Walls work.  The Democrats wouldn't have walls around their homes if they didn't.  In truth, the Democrats are not against the border wall because they truly believe it won't work, but because they fear it will.

“This isn’t about the Wall,” Trump tweeted, “everybody knows that a Wall will work perfectly (In Israel the Wall works 99.9%).”

President Donald Trump, and his media allies, have vocalized that they believe the opposition to the wall by Democrats is not about the wall, it's about the Democrats doing whatever they can to obstruct Trump and the Republicans.

That's a part of it.  But we must ask "why?" they are so adamant about it.  Why has the wall become such a divisive issue?

Bills have been put forth for funding the wall.  The House of Representatives even passed a government funding bill that would have allocated $5.7 billion to building the border wall.  The bill stalled in the Senate, where it needs 60 votes to achieve cloture, and the Democrats stood firm in their opposition to anything and everything the GOP puts on the table.

U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) swore that Trump will “never” get money for the wall.

House Democrats have also dug in their heels.  Nancy Pelosi (D-California), who it is believed is going to be (the nightmare returns) Speaker of the House on January 3, has repeatedly called the wall “immoral, ineffective and expensive.”

Now, we are in the midst of a government shut-down, and while the mainstream media aligned with the Democrats are blaming the shutdown on Trump, the reality is that the blood of those killed by illegal aliens, and everything associated with not having a wall, is (and will be) on the hands of the Democrats.

Wayne Allyn Root writes, "If Democrats actually loved America and cared about the safety of our children, it could get done. But it's clear they don't."

That's because there are two things the Democrats love much more than America, or the safety of any American (much less any of our children).  Power and money.

It is very curious to me that the Democrat politicians become among the wealthiest people in America on a salary of less than $200,000 per year.

Some of that wealth our politicians accumulate comes from investments, partly based on insider information they are privy to while holding a seat in the U.S. Government (a kind of shared information network you and I would be arrested for participating in).

They also do other things.  Underhanded things.  Illegal things.

For those of you doubting that the Democrats are willing to sell out their alleged values for power and riches, let's not forget California State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco), one of California's strongest advocates for gun control, who was arrested in 2014 for scheming to defraud citizens of honest services and conspiracy to illegally traffic firearms.

On the national front, the economy is booming.  The dictators of the world are retreating from their aggressive policies which were emerging right and left (mostly left) during the Obama administration as a result of President Trump's firm hand when it comes to foreign policy.  American consumers are buying like crazy.  Retail sales are soaring in the middle of a stock market bubble of trouble (of which I believe is being orchestrated by those hoping to hurt Trump's economy so as to help the Democrats in 2020).

As America moves in the right direction, the people opposed to Trump and his GOP allies are becoming more and more bitter, angry, hateful and negative toward our president.  Is it because they are jealous?  Do they fear he is hurting them politically?


They are angry because Trump's policies, including a border wall, hurts them in the pocketbook.

If government is running right, and transparency is reigning supreme, the Democrats can't do their backroom deals, and they can't perform their underhanded, behind the scenes (and often illegal) dealings which probably includes foreign money, drug money, and hidden servers in high ranking political bathrooms.

And let's not just blame the Democrats.  There are an awful lot of Republicans doing similar things.

Why did we go into Afghanistan, and stay forever?  Why not go in, blast the bad guys, and leave?  Could it have been so that we could keep an eye on the poppy fields?

A border wall not only will stem the flow of illegal aliens, but also the flow of drugs into the country, and I think there is a long list of American politicians benefiting monetarily off of the drugs coming across the border who fear the wall because that means less money in their pockets.  While a wall won't completely stop that flow of drugs across the border from Mexico, it would make it a lot more difficult, and expensive, to import illegal drugs.

And, I think the political establishment would stand to lose a lot of money if that were to happen . . . and that's enough to royally tick them off and make them fighting mad.

Meanwhile, their B.S. arguments about illegal aliens are taking off wonderfully among their brethren who are ignorant about what the opposition to the wall is really all about.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the young socialist who just got elected in New York to the House of Representatives, actually compared illegal aliens who are invading our country en masse to baby Jesus.

Trump campaigned on building the wall in order to secure the southern border.  I am glad he is holding firm.  If he does not, and gives in, it would be his own "read my lips, no new taxes" moment, like the one that ruined George H.W. Bush's chances for reelection in 1992.

The invasion from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala through a longer caravan route than necessary up the central gut of Mexico is just a part of the international desperate attempt to stop the wall, and I have no doubt these obstacles to border security are being organized and funded by various leftist characters not only from the United States, but those dependent upon the power and money they receive from a porous border worldwide, as well.

Israel constructed a wall along their border with Egypt between 2010 and 2013, consisting of both a wall and a fence, to stem the flow of asylum-seekers from Africa. The number of illegal crossings dropped from 9,570 in early 2012 to just 16 in 2016.  Street-level terrorism along that area has also been reduced.

The evidence shows that a wall is what we need, but in truth, the Democrats fear it, because they know it would be effective, and such effectiveness is not good for their flow of money, and their grip on political power.

Well, there's that, and all of the potential Democrat voters flowing over the border, which the liberal left progressive commies believe would enable them to remain in power in perpetuity.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Wednesday, December 26, 2018

Their Money? Dems Seek Nullification of SALT cap

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

Wealth is created.  However, the liberal left hates wealth (unless it's theirs) and so they want you to believe wealth is finite.  Therefore, if you do well, someone else must suffer.  You know the old saying . . . the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.

Besides, according to them, it's not your money, anyway.  The government is letting you use it, but it's really theirs, and they will tax it away from you any way they can to make sure they are able to retrieve their monetary property.

Then again, it's not even theirs, either, for they borrowed it from the Federal Reserve, after all.

The problem with that whole scenario is that is not supposed to be their money.  It's yours.  And, when you get to keep more of what you've worked for, it's good for the economy . . . which is, in the eyes of the left, bad, because if the economy is good, you don't depend upon them, and you are more than happy to flex your muscles of individuality and self-reliance.

How can equality (equally miserable, anyway) be achieved if you are doing well and keeping more of the money you have earned?

The problem is, the President of the United States, and his Republican Congress, cut taxes across the board a year ago.  That means the rich got to keep more of what they earn, too.  That's enough to tick off just about all of the socialists in the Democrat Party.  But, the liberal left Democrats in Democrat-majority States have decided they should be able to nullify the federal tax cut.

The 2017 law capped state and local tax deduction, which basically made it so that low state tax States would essentially be subsidizing high tax States assault on wage earners.

With Democrats in the majority in the House next year, the Democrats are ready to reverse the rules. The States, with their own laws, are also working to play games so as to keep more taxes.  After all, why would they want to let you keep more of your own money?

Oh, yeah, that's right.  They think it's their money.

Leading the charge on legislation to renew the tax rules Trump's team got rid of is New Jersey Rep. Bill Pascrell, a senior Democrat on the powerful Ways and Means tax writing committee. “We’re working on it now,” said Pascrell, adding that the move is “a priority” for the committee.

“We’re going to have hearings on it,” said Democratic Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, another senior Ways and Means member. “We’re going to look into the whole tax code and see what we need to do” to adjust the Republican-backed law.

Either they change it now, work for both Houses of Congress to work on it later, or they can wait until the "cap" provision expires in 2025.

According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, just six states – California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania – claimed more than half of the value of all of the said deductions nationwide. California alone was responsible for nearly 21 percent of all of those kinds of deductions.

The politicians call it the "SALT cap" and the "SALT deduction".

New York and New Jersey Republicans vehemently opposed the cap and voted against the 2017 tax overhaul as a result. Most California Republicans, however, voted for the legislation.

A lot of those suburban Republicans were swept out in the November election (regardless of whether they voted for or against the law).

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

California Politicians: Pay for your own prosecution

Posted by Douglas V. Gibbs

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Tuesday, December 25, 2018

Christmas Past and Inner Peace

By Allan McNew

On the Friday morning before Christmas of 2018, I had just speared a chunk of potato with my fork in a Banning restaurant when I noticed that Stephanie, a waitress in that establishment, was festooned with Christmas ornamentation. As she was passing my table I said “You’re looking mighty festive”. She stopped and bent towards me, looked straight into my eyes with her face radiating wide eyed conviction, and with full emphasis half whispered “I love Christmas.” Stephanie then told me about playing Christmas music and how her house and yard was decorated, it sounded like a lot of work. So I asked “Who puts all that stuff out?” Without hesitation she replied “My husband.” That transported me back more than twenty years ago to another holiday season.

“Dan” was an iron willed manager at a company where I once worked. I never worked under his direction nor even met him during that time, but his reputation spanned the miles to the districts where I had worked for that company. The tales intimated an iron willed tyrant, a veritable roughshod scourge of perceived slackers, shirkers and the not fully compliant. I didn’t meet him until after he retired and I left that company for a multi-state work odyssey. Upon returning to California I met his daughter and she and I began living together.

It was with amazement and much concealed amusement that I observed the dynamics between “Catherine’s” father and mother. Catherine’s tiny mother would bark at the large framed old man and his head would figuratively ricochet off the ceiling as he practically leaped from his chair to do her bidding. It was so different from what I had heard about him in the work place.

It was Saturday on the weekend of Thanksgiving when Catherine and I were visiting and Catherine’s mother said “Dan, it’s time to put out the Christmas decorations.” The old man shot me a hunted look and beckoned me to follow him to the garage. He proceeded with all the enthusiasm of a dead man walking. Upon entering the garage he opened cabinet after cabinet crammed full of Christmas decorations, it was like being shown the contents of a warehouse.

The next time Catherine and I visited, the entire property was packed with manger scenes, Santa and his reindeer, elves, you name it and it was there. Disney couldn’t have outdone that project.

I don’t remember that Christmas itself, but on another visit next spring long after the holiday scenery had been laboriously taken down and put away, Dan took me to the patio, picked up a chair and set it next to another chair in what was obviously a special place located under a hummingbird feeder. We both sat down, and I observed the look of sheer delight and content on Dan’s face as he sat motionless while hummingbirds flitted around him and occasionally landed on him.

Maybe that’s where the old man found his peace.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Monday, December 24, 2018

The Season

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

A person who does not necessarily share my beliefs when it comes to Christmas said to me, "You know, Jesus wasn't born on December 25.  If he existed at all he was likely born sometime in the Spring.  Some scholars have even indicated sometime around September."

He was being a deconstructionist.  Like people who attack the Framing of the U.S. Constitution, he figures if some of the dates or facts surrounding the event can be questioned, and even doubted, then it must make the event itself invalid.

"My greatest concern," I replied to my detractor, "is not when He was born as much as it is why He was born.  He was born to die.  Jesus Christ was God in human form so that he could be born like us, live like us, be tempted like us and communicate directly with us.  He lived a miraculous life, and died an inhuman death so that he could be our Savior.  He was born.  He lived.  He died on a cross.  He was resurrected.  He lives."

Does it really matter if Christmas Trees come from some old non-Christian practice, if the gift giving originated from some non-Christian tradition, or if December 25th is closer to the Winter Solstice than the birth of Jesus Christ?  Does it really matter whether or not the facts around the event are perfect or Christian as long as we have the reason for the season accurate?

John 3:16 King James Version (KJV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Romans 3:23 (KJV) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

Romans 3:10 King James Version (KJV) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Romans 5:12 King James Version (KJV) Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Romans 6:23 King James Version (KJV) For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 5:8 King James Version (KJV) But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Romans 10:13 King James Version (KJV) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Romans 10:9-10 King James Version (KJV) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.  For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

The reason for the manger was the cross.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sunday, December 23, 2018

Corrupt and Vicious

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution were clear about the necessary relationship between virtue and liberty.  Benjamin Franklin said, "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.  As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."

John Adams agreed, providing the following quote, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Samuel Adams: "If we are universally vicious and debauched in our manners, though the form of our Constitution carries the face of the most exalted freedom, we shall in reality be the most abject slaves."

The Father of our Country, George Washington, during his Farewell Address, said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."

As a system based on a foundation of Judeo-Christian values, our adherence to our God-given moral standard is not only important, it is critical if we expect to continue to maintain liberty.

Franklin's reference to "more need of masters" alludes to the reality that when we fail to be virtuous government takes action to force its own warped morality upon us.  Should government demand by force of law that we must be good Samaritans, and do so based upon their definition of what a good Samaritan is?  Must we be forced to play nice, which, according to the liberal left includes making sure that our speech is guarded by government for fear that we may say something that in their eyes is considered "hate speech"?

Have we become the corrupt and vicious society that Benjamin Franklin warned against?

On the back of my book, "Silenced Screams," I wrote, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist.  The second greatest trick Satan ever pulled is convincing an entire population that killing their own children is not evil."

The very fact that we have to fight for the lives of innocent babies from being slaughtered while they journey through the first stage of their personhood is unacceptable.  The idea that the Supreme Court had to even hear a case regarding whether or not government should continue to subsidize the gruesome practice of abortion through various funding mechanisms is appalling (and since the sacrifice of innocent blood has its roots in Pagan religious practices, should not the very idea that Congress is passing laws allowing funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood be seen as a violation of the establishment clause in the First Amendment?)  We have become a corrupt and vicious society.  We kill our babies in the womb, and we champion sexual immorality.  The very idea that Christians will have to serve time in jail for not bending over backwards for homosexuals is incredibly troubling, and would never have been considered only a few decades ago.

In an article by Rachel Ray, the realization is that the sacrifice of our babies to some kind of dark entity even exists in today's society, not to mention the other things going on in society, is not just some slight departure from our moral compass.  It is a coordinated attack against our way of life on a supernatural level.

She writes, "Witchcraft is thriving in the U.S., with an estimated 1.5 million Americans now identifying as witches - more than the total number of Presbyterians. As Christianity declines across the country, paganism has swung to the mainstream, with witchcraft paraphernalia for sale on every high street and practises normalised across popular culture. In the past two years, it has also become darkly politicised." 

Ray then goes on to discuss connections between transgenderism and witchcraft, via the person who placed a ritual hex U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh last October.  The hex was attended by, and championed, by witchcraft's allies, as well, including atheists and humanists.

The article explains that millennials are looking for spiritualism outside traditional religion, just as the hippies were, and just as the progressive liberal commies have ever since.  Socialism, after all, cannot accept the Christian God, or any other non-governmental god, because if one has a belief in potential deliverance by a deity outside the government and human capabilities, then when all is going horribly you will seek out God, rather than government and humanity.

God places in every human the desire to seek Him out.  When we reject Him, we still seek.  We just begin to seek in the wrong direction.  They often reject God because of our natural rebellious nature as humans, and the reasoning that if God is a loving God, how is it possible that the universe can be so full of death, chaos, destruction, and decay?  How can a loving God allow murder, war and molestation?

They don't understand the answer because they have rejected the true meaning of free will, and liberty.  True free will, and liberty, is only possible if we have the choice to also reject it. Their version of morality (acceptance of homosexuality, acceptance of abortion, acceptance of socialism) cannot accept rejection, so they use an authoritarian manner to force it into place.  If someone must be coerced by legislation to not speak out or act out against those issues, is that truly liberty?

As with liberty, free will is God-given, but to be true we must also be given the opportunity to reject God's love, as well as the opportunity to embrace it.  If we are not given both options, then our acceptance of Him would not be true.  Rejection of the One and True God, however, carries with it consequences.  He laid out a moral standard for us to follow, and when we reject Him, we reject His moral standard, and as a result we live in a world full of death, chaos, destruction, and decay . . . not because God caused such things, or wants to allow them to occur, but because they are a direct consequence of our rejection of His Love.

The witch who placed the hex on Judge Kavanaugh admits to the violent nature of her anti-God beliefs.  She stated, according to Rachel Ray's article, that she was "absolutely willing to cause physical harm through a hex.  No issue with that."

She would have been perfectly happy if the Supreme Court Justice died over all of this, because her side believes he is against the death of innocent babies still in the womb.

"His death, resignation or physical disfigurement" was "the main goal of the Kavanaugh hex, and the three hexes on President Donald Trump from Catland Books this summer, was to let them be exposed for who they are - especially as impotent men."

The forces who stand against God, and liberty, mocked the Bible in the process.  The curse began with a recitation of the Biblical scripture Psalm 109:8: "let his days be few, let another take his office."

While the witch behind the hex claims witchcraft and Christianity are mutually exclusive, and that witchcraft "has a ton of roots in Christianity", she also said that witchcraft is an "intersectionality of feminism, sexuality, gender, the fight for freedom [not godly liberty, but do-as-you-want-because-there-is-no-right-or-wrong kind of false freedom], eschewing the patriarchy and having sort of a vitriolic response towards it."

The anti-God socialism that has been emerging, and creating chaos in America has reached even deeper into the heart of humanity on the world stage.  But, one wonders if in the long-run the evil ones even have a leg to stand on.  We saw recently the rejection of many of the left's policies with the yellow-vest protesters in France.  Europeans, and some Americans, are beginning to realize that President Trump is right about Islam, Iran, and the lousy Iran deal.  But the hard left still hates him, and supports anything that stands against them, because after eight years of Barack Obama, they thought that America's journey towards Sodom and Gammorah was nearly complete.  Think about it.  They are calling for moral decay.  They are doing all they can to spit in God's eye.  It's gotten so bad that we even have a cross-dressing transgender Miss Universe Pageant candidate who has declared, "Having a vagina does not make you a woman."

The election of Trump threw a monkey wrench into the whole thing.

It's not that Trump is necessarily an altar-boy.  Hey, he was a billionaire playboy.  As a Christian I am fully aware of who he is, but that doesn't make me not support him is truly exemplary.  Yes, character can be an issue with politicians, but I think Trump's character beyond what the Democrats have been screaming about, and the growth he's experienced as a person over the last few years, out-ranks any of the things the Democrats keep digging up.  Besides, the President realizes who the real domestic enemy is.

It has been because of Trump that the abuse of internal power by the Clintons is being exposed.  It is because of Trump that the reality that the liberal left has been abusing their power through the FBI, and former FBI chief Comey lied about all of it, is coming to light.  Trump is the one who has been pointing out the reality of dangerous individuals being mixed into the illegal alien hordes . . . to the point that even Mexico is starting to crack down on illegal immigration, and the reality of the danger is also being pointed out in California.  The liberal left's abuse of social media is being exposed, and challenged legally, too.

In other words, Trump has tapped into something that no Republican has before.  Trump, whether he knows it or not, has exposed the liberal left for who they really are.  He has found a way to get them to lift the veil and help us realize that what we are in the middle of is not some kind of difference in political opinion when it comes to the liberal, progressive, commie left.

It's spiritual warfare.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Saturday, December 22, 2018

Constitution Radio: Pre-Christmas Tea Party

Constitution Radio, your weekly dose of truth, it changing for the time being. . . 

○ First Hour: Doug, Alex, and Dennis discuss issues through the lens of the U.S. Constitution

○ Second Hour: Doug, Glenn, Jan, and Diane discuss the issues from a Tea Party perspective

For both hours your primary host will be Douglas V. GibbsKMET 1490-AM

1-3 pm on Saturday Afternoon

archived podcast at


◉ First Hour: Constitution Radio CARSTAR/AllStar Collision Big Stories of the Week:
🚩 Freedom of . . .

🚩 The Rise of China ... with guest Siyamak Khorrami of The Epoch Times.

🚩 Embattled President

🚩 Obamacare's Constitutional Quandary

◉ Second Hour: Conservative Voice Radio

🚩 The Wall, and Government Shutdown

🚩 Sins of California

🚩 Stopping Trump through the Economy

🚩 Justice Reform, First Step Act contains many dangers

🚩 State of Conservatism

Nor Prohibit the Free Exercise, Thereof

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

In the First Amendment the first right enumerated is Freedom of Religion.  While the first part of that clause prohibits Congress from making any law establishing a state church (which means they can't make a law requiring you to belong to a certain religion, to attend a certain denomination, nor use tax dollars to subsidize any church), the second part of the clause prohibits Congress from making any law prohibiting the free exercise of one's religion.  For that matter, government should not compel anyone to comply or act in accordance to any belief if they do not agree with it.

In short, while we have the right to be good people, and to say or do the right thing, in order for that to be true liberty we must also have the right to do and say what may be considered unacceptable, too.  That is what true freedom is.  If I have the freedom to be a tolerant and inclusive person, then in a free society I must also have the allowance to be intolerant, racist, unaccepting, or whatever else one can be (as long as it is not breaking laws, such as assault, et cetera).

Milton Friedman, I think, explained it well, arguing that we if we have true freedom, government cannot force us to do what it thinks is moral.

This is why Christians are not (contrary to the arguments of the humanistic atheistic left) using law to try and force folks to be moral and righteous people.  We all fall short of the Glory of God.  We all sin, we all mess up, and laws by men can't change human nature.  As some have said, "You can't legislate morality."

That said, you can legislate morality to a point.  We have legislated into law punishment for murder, lying in certain circumstances (such as while under oath, or in a way that could be considered libelous or slanderous), and we have other laws in place specifically for the purpose of influencing behavior (such as traffic laws).  But, except for those obvious necessities, our moral behavior or beliefs cannot be, and should not be, legislated or be subject to judicial or legislative review.

So, if Christians cannot force their belief on someone else, because it would not, then, be a truly free society (it would be a theocracy, in that case), should other belief systems be able to use the force of law to force those who disagree with them into compliance?  If homosexuals can force Christian bakers to bake cakes with homosexual messages, should they, then, be able to force Muslim bakers to do the same?  Should a Christian be able to force an atheist baker to make a cake with a Christian Cross on it?  Should a White Supremacist be able to use the force of law to compel a black baker to make a cake with racist symbolism on it?

Is not the First Amendment requirement of Congress not being allowed to make a law prohibiting the free exercise of one's religion extend to whether or not a Christian may, by law, be forced to make a cake they religiously disagree with?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Conservative Voice Radio Has Moved

Starting today, December 22, 2018, the Conservative Voice Radio program will temporarily move to the second hour of Constitution Radio on Saturdays.

Old Slot: Saturdays, 8:00 am - 9:00 am.

New Slot: Saturdays, 2:00 pm - 3:00 pm.

Let me explain . . .

For the last four years (since January of 2015) I (Douglas V. Gibbs) have been the host of Conservative Voice Radio on KMET 1490-AM.  The broadcast is the brainchild of Glenn Stull, President of the Banning-Beaumont-Cherry Valley Tea Party, and is co-hosted by Glenn, and two other members of the Tea Party (usually Jan and Diane).  At the time of the launching of the Tea Party Conservative Voice Radio Program we had another co-host, Tom, but he has since passed away, and Diane replaced him so that we may keep the variety of four voices in the mix.

At the time my Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs program was on a different station, KCAA 1050-AM.  Due to programming and contract disputes, I began searching for a new home for the program and KMET was the logical choice.  So, in May of 2015 (four months after the launching of Conservative Voice Radio at 8:00 am on Saturdays) Constitution Radio moved to KMET, and grabbed the 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm slot (we added the second hour about two years ago).

Funding became easier as KMET had more reasonable rates, and programming was better because KMET's primary source of shows are conservative talk radio broadcasts.  Since then, I have hosted two separate programs on KMET.  Conservative Voice Radio at 8:00 am on Saturdays, and Constitution Radio at 1:00 pm on Saturdays.  The morning show has always been funded by the Tea Party, and any advertisers they can rustle up, and Constitution Radio has been funded by advertisers (primarily AllStar Collision and Constitution Quest Game).

When we added the second hour to the afternoon program, Constitution Radio, a couple years ago, for the first six months I had two advertisers/donors who were committed to ensuring that the second hour was always fully funded.  However, after two quarters, both of them faced financial challenges, and dropped their support.  Eager to preserve the second hour I scrambled, and added a couple more advertisers (Constitution Association and Wholesale Capital), and a few more smaller anonymous sponsors.  Since then Wholesale Capital has decided to no longer support the program, and as of today Constitution Quest, who had been advertising since the AM Radio launch of Constitution Radio back on August 6, 2011, no longer contributes to the show.  I also lost two donors (they have moved out of California for greener pastures), placing maintaining the second hour at risk.

Unable to secure new advertising and new sponsors with such a short notice, the Tea Party decided to come to the rescue so that we may hold on to that second hour slot.

The fee for the afternoon slot has increased for them, compared to what it was for the morning, but they are willing to pay the increase to save the slot.  So, here's how programming is going to change.

● Glenn, Jan and Diane (Conservative Voice Radio, and members of the Banning-Beaumont-Cherry Valley Tea Party) will be on with me from 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm (from their previous 8:00 am - 9:00 am slot).

● Alan Meyers, the forensic accountant who comes on the Constitution Radio program each week at the top of the second hour will now move to the first hour after the second commercial break and up to the top of the hour break (about 1:43 pm to 1:59 pm).

● Dennis Jackson and Alex Ferguson, who used to co-host for the entire two hours, will now only be on for the first hour.  Adding them into the mix with Glenn, Jan, and Diane would simply be too many people on the air at the same time.

I will continue to host both hours, and as far as I am concerned, both hours are still Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, but the second hour, until further notice, will be the Conservative Voice Radio portion of the program.

Now, with all of that said, it is my goal to expand Constitution Radio to Monday through Friday, and then let Conservative Voice Radio be my Saturday endeavor.  But, that takes money, which means more sponsors, donors and advertisers.  If you are interested in helping us reach our goals regarding spreading constitutional literacy, contact me, or donate today.

constitutionspeaker at yahoo dot com

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary