UPDATE:  This bill died in the Senate–thank goodness, but could be snuck in another bill! Congress needs to define these words and if they do not infringe on our un-a LIEN-able God given natural rights I will support it, otherwise, Hell no!  They also need to stop paying themselves so much of our money as well! That crap’s gotta stop! 

Hat Tip Benee

I just got an email from a friend asking me to sign an online petition against HB 1955/S 1959. I never sign these things until I read the actual legislation. In reading Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, I’m concerned because they don’t define what a homegrown terrorist is, and furthermore any idiotic and out of control Johnny Sutton PROSECUTOR can basically charge any person a radical who speaks out against any culture, race, or religion! When Law doesn’t define it’s terms then anyone can define the terms according to their own lust for power. Do we really want more thought crime laws on the books? Do we want government “Center for Excellence” determining what is appropriate speech on the blog-o-sphere and talk radio?

As I read the legislation there was more written on the pay scales and blue ribbon panels and retirement funds then actually being concerned about real live homegrown terrorists plotting to blow up a bus, school or mall. I am disgusted with Congress Critters,  and their ploys to spend more of OUR money on their ridiculous waste and build up of their retirement funds while the average family out there is no longer able to make it from payday to payday!

I fear that this piece of legislation is more to line the pockets of these airhead legislators than it is to protect American Civilians from becoming collateral damage!

Sign the online petition saying NO! To S 1959 until they do more work to define what a homegrown terrorist is instead of potentially labeling any person a radical who speaks out against a race, religion and political ideology!

I really didn’t think this could be real, but there it was on the CIA’s actual website – their brand new counter-terrorist center’s logo!

Remember the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man? Now, replace him with some foreboding all-black Jihadi stickman, hoisting his scary cartoonish AK-47 and what looks like a stumpy left arm – hidden by the international symbol for wiping them out! (did the other arm go gimpy in an unfortunate IED wiring accident, or was he previously warehoused in Abu Ghraib? We may never know…)

Is that some sort of crescent-shaped bayonet hugging the circular logo, reminiscent of a middle-eastern dagger or scimitar? Logos sporting screaming eagles and such must not cut it anymore..

Brilliant – no, Centrally Intelligent.

-ThoughtRogue

Here are two links connecting RG’s connection with the NAU/ NAFTA Super Highway:

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/grassi/070504

http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff149.htm

Currently, there is a crusade going on in the Republican party which I call, F.U.D., Fear, Uncertainty and Disinformation aimed squarely at the Christian Conservatives. The “Leaders” within the Republican party, are concerned that those of us who fall into the Religious Right camp of this party will not vote for the dream boy (girl?) if he is nominated.

Why do these so called Republican leaders even care how us Evangelicals will vote? Most of the time they call us derogatory names e.g. the radical right, homophobes, and bigoted racists, and dismiss us as just the far right loons. So why do they care NOW how we vote? Rudy doesn’t seem to be concerned about Christian Conservatives voting for him and he appears quite confident that he can win without us given his recent statements.

Read the rest of this entry »

Isn’t this so Presidential looking?

Recently, Judy Rudiani stated that he wouldn’t kow-tow to the Religious Right. He seems to not have a problem kow-towing to the Secular Left. It is insanity for any presidential candidate to blow off the Christian voter. Even the Dems pander to the Religious Right because they know the importance of that voting block.

So this is my prediction: If Rudy gets the nomination (Which I think he will) RUDY WILL LOSE AND HILLARY WILL WIN the Presidency because either Rudy is stupid by blowing off the Christian voter or he is a Machiavellian hypocrite, who really believes he will gain more votes from the Hillary camp than he will lose from the Christian camp OR he is both. So logically there is a 2/3rds probability of him being stupid and thus losing.

Read the rest of this entry »

Imagine that you are confronted by a dangerous robber brandishing a gun at you and your family. Do you have a moral obligation to retreat from this mortal threat? In other words, if you can run away from evil, are you morally obligated to do so? (to ensure that “nobody gets hurt” in the confrontation?) Most Leftists insist, “Absolutely.” In fact, they would implore that you have a moral obligation to do everything in your power to avoid conflict – to remain “peaceful” at all times.

Now, let’s say you exercise your sovereign right to stand your ground, not to retreat under duress, to protect yourself and your property from peril. Do you then have a moral obligation to remain passive unless, and until, the robber physically harms you? Almost every good Leftist will insist, “Yes. You absolutely cannot preemptively use force upon someone who has not injured you [yet], who has actually done nothing wrong to you.” Because, up until the point where the criminal plugs you with a bullet, the robber has done absolutely no demonstrable harm to you. (why, he may have no “intention” of pulling the trigger of the gun which is aimed at your family)

Read the rest of this entry »

Hate Crimes Prove Orwell’s Nightmare is Progressive

The path down which the “Hate Crimes” legislation proponents would force-march us leads straight into the jaws of totalitarianism. Simply put, it stands the First Amendment, crown jewel of the Bill of Rights, on its head.

In George Orwell’s novel masterpiece 1984, he illustrates for us a terrifying dystopia – a twisted, man-made societal ‘nirvana’ of conformity enforced by ever-present, over-powering fascism, yet ironically it’s all dressed up wonderfully, by the omniscient forces in power, as a protective state necessary to incubate all that is supposedly righteous. Orwell introduces us to the terminology of “crimethink” leading to the commission of “thought-crimes” which are actions of the proletariat population at large, sprung from the crime of thoughts which go contrary to, and thus threaten, the state’s fascist orthodoxy. Any transgression along these lines, a thought-crime, will be met by severe punishment – nay, painful re-education by a ‘loving’ government.

Read the rest of this entry »

My Turn on Civil Rights

by Andrew Whitehead
Director, Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations (Anti-CAIR)

On January 6, 2004, I was threatened with a lawsuit for defamation by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an Islamic terrorist supporting front group which has received funding from Islamic terrorists. The reason I was sued was because I dared to tell the truth about CAIR, its “leadership” and members.

Read the rest of this entry »

The most controversial component of the Senate’s Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 is Title VI, euphemistically entitled “Nonimmigrants in the United States Previously in Unlawful Status.” It would create a new “Z” visa exclusively for illegal aliens. This title would change the status of those who are here illegally to legal, essentially granting amnesty to those “previously in unlawful status.” This seriously flawed proposal would undermine the rule of law by granting massive benefits to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws, while denying those benefits to those who have played by the rules and sometimes even to U.S. citizens.

  Read the rest of this entry »

SAFARI IN HIS FUTURE

The infamous HB1592 which, in a nutshell, legislates criminal penalties against those who speak out on their personal beliefs against homosexuality of any kind passed the House of Representatives 237-180. Rep. Reichert-R, of the 45th District, voted Yes with such outspoken Socialists like Rep. Jim McDermott of Seattle, and treasonous Rep. Pelosi! What is Reichert thinking? Only 25 Republicans voted Yes on HB1592 and Reichert was one of them! Tsk, Tsk, Tsk. This does not surprise me though.

Reichert has shamed his name and his district in the past by voting against his President and his party many times. This is just another example of why Reichert might want to switch isles. Maybe he will since his district is becoming more liberal as the years go by. It is time for real conservatives to step up and stop supporting RINOs like Reichert once and for all. Make your voices heard on this matter. If you live in his district please email him and let him know he is loosing your support!

If your representative voted yes on this anti-freedom bill please call them and make your voices heard. I have supplied a list for you in the link below.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yesterday, a high school student body assembly with cheer “leaders” trying to rally a defeated team met, disguised as the King County Republican Party Reorganization Meeting. “One team, one mission!” One team, one mission! One team, one mission,” State Chairwoman Diane Tebelius chanted from the podium each time shrieking louder than the last. That was it, that was her motivational speech. She had nothing intellectual to offer to address the defeat, and her efforts at being a motivational speaker rang hollow. Where is the real intellect in the ‘Winning Team of 2006?”

As I entered the auditorium, I saw the sea of blue and white signs of Young and Sotelo advertised as the “Winning Team of 2006!” which consists of the same team that lead to the 2/3rds super majority for the Democrats in Olympia: Diane Tebelius, Michael Young, Lori Sotelo, and closet Anglican Father Joe Fuiten. This same team dared not to help real conservatives during the last election, but in fact preached at the PCOs two years ago about how we would not win any elections if we stayed on the conservative path. “We needed a ‘Big Tent’ to succeed,” they preached.

Read the rest of this entry »