Crazed Libtalker: Glenn Beck Should ‘Fulfill Family Tradition’ And Put Gun To Head

Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit

This is sickening and disgusting and an outright perversion of the truth. This asshat should be ashamed… Just how low can sink Malloy.

Radio Equalizer provides the transcript:

MIKE MALLOY (49:59): Just sitting there, trying to watch this piece of human garbage spew his stuff on FOX, it’s worse than I thought! Please, Glenn, get on to the part where you, you know, fulfill your family tradition… (makes extended gunshot sound)


Documents Prove Leftist Media Hacks Buried Rev. Wright Story During Election

Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit

The blatant irrelevance and manipulation of the press. Propaganda reigns in America and George Soros is the puppet master…

From Gateway Pundit:

Newly discovered documents prove that at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to shield Barack Obama and bury the “G-D America” Jeremiah Wright story.

Leftist journalists from Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic worked to protect Obama from media reports on this vile man, his mentor and father figure, Jeremiah Wright.

There are over 400 names on the list of journalists, politicians and talking heads who covered up to protect Obama during the election. Joseph Georbels would be proud…

The Daily Caller:

It was the moment of greatest peril for then-Sen. Barack Obama’s political career. In the heat of the presidential campaign, videos surfaced of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, angrily denouncing whites, the U.S. government and America itself. Obama had once bragged of his closeness to Wright. Now the black nationalist preacher’s rhetoric was threatening to torpedo Obama’s campaign.

The crisis reached a howling pitch in mid-April, 2008, at an ABC News debate moderated by Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. Gibson asked Obama why it had taken him so long – nearly a year since Wright’s remarks became public – to dissociate himself from them. Stephanopoulos asked, “Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?”

Watching this all at home were members of Journolist, a listserv comprised of several hundred liberal journalists, as well as like-minded professors and activists. The tough questioning from the ABC anchors left many of them outraged. “George [Stephanopoulos],” fumed Richard Kim of the Nation, is “being a disgusting little rat snake.”

Others went further. According to records obtained by The Daily Caller, at several points during the 2008 presidential campaign a group of liberal journalists took radical steps to protect their favored candidate. Employees of news organizations including Time, Politico, the Huffington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Guardian, Salon and the New Republic participated in outpourings of anger over how Obama had been treated in the media, and in some cases plotted to fix the damage.

In one instance, Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent urged his colleagues to deflect attention from Obama’s relationship with Wright by changing the subject. Pick one of Obama’s conservative critics, Ackerman wrote, “Fred Barnes, Karl Rove, who cares — and call them racists.”

Michael Tomasky, a writer for the Guardian, also tried to rally his fellow members of Journolist: “Listen folks–in my opinion, we all have to do what we can to kill ABC and this idiocy in whatever venues we have. This isn’t about defending Obama. This is about how the [mainstream media] kills any chance of discourse that actually serves the people.”


And from Andrew Breitbart:

Journalists love whistleblowers. Just not when the whistle is blown on them.

Journalists love transparency. As long as they’re not the ones being exposed.

No steadfast journalism rule is unbendable when it comes to justifying and protecting the racket that is modern journalism, specifically, political journalism in the United States today. The ends justify the means for the Democrat Media Complex. They lie when they claim to be objective. They lie when they claim to be unbiased, because these so called “truth seekers” are guilty of engaging in open political warfare. And when the whistle is blown, they simply double down. “Journolist” — like Media Matters, but more insidious, if that’s possible — is an attempt to put the genie back in the bottle, technology and “the masses” uncovered the conspiracy…

Grieve for the day that journalism died… Propaganda is alive and well for the new American dictatorship under Obama.

Update: Kim Priestap – Breaking: Documents show liberal journalists collaborated to kill all stories linking Rev. Jeremiah Wright to Barack Obama

Sister Toldjah – Pravda would be proud


You are too white to be American! Says Latino KKK

Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit

ALIPAC1 | July 18, 2010

Illegal immigration supporting Brown Beret protesters harass American patriots in front of Californians rallied in front of Angel Stadium (Anaheim, CA) that are trying to support Arizona’s SB 1070 law on Tuesday July 13, 2010.

Nicknamed the Tan Klan or Latino KKK, the Brown Berets are a paramilitary organization founded in the 1960’s that support illegal immigration as a way to forge a racially pure homeland for Latino’s by overthrowing part or all of the United States. Many of these brown Nazis call their plans for a racist homeland ‘Aztlan’.

While this woman brazenly screams racist comments through a bull horn, she can do so because the Obama administration and most of the major news networks in America have her back.

While many in the media will conceal this incident, coverage of the NAACP’s false claim the Tea Party Movement is racist can be found on all networks.

If America knew the truth about the real violence and racism that is pervasive in the pro illegal alien and pro Comprehensive Immigration Reform AMNESTY movement, then CIR would be destroyed.

America needs to abandon the Obama, McCain, Kennedy, Bush Amnesty agenda for illegal aliens and move to enforce our existing border and immigration laws instead which will slowly push illegal aliens to return to their home.

If we fail to do that, groups like the Brown Berets will gain power and become more of a threat to law abiding Americans.

For more information or to get involved in the American struggle for our existing borders to be enforced, please visit Americans for Legal Immigration PAC aka ALIPAC at…



Obama STARTS to Disarm America

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

Phyllis Schafly on Townhall:

Would you be satisfied if your only access to a computer was to try to boot up one that hadn’t been used or tested since 1992? That’s the predicament of our nuclear deterrent on which we depend for our ultimate physical survival.

On April 8 in Prague, President Obama signed what is called the New START bilateral arms control agreement. It reads like it was written by the Russians and has nothing good in it for the United States.

Obama is demanding a rush to ratification, after which we can then discover the details of what the treaty requires. Does that remind you of the procedure used for Obamacare?

If there ever were a need for the Senate to read the bill and for the Senate to use its “advice” power as well as its “consent” power, this is it, including reading the treaty’s protocols and annexes. Harry Reid’s Senate promptly held one hearing, but heard only from treaty advocates, not from its critics.

In the globalist world that Obama inhabits, he dreams of a nuclear-zero world. But his “world without nuclear weapons” would be a world where the United States is a sitting duck for nukes fired by a rogue nation.

The treaty allows Russia to build new and modern weapons to reach New START limits, whereas the United States is locked into reducing its current number. That means Russia will have new and tested weapons, but the U.S. will be stuck with its current, out-of-date, untested warheads.

We live in a dangerous world in which bad guys respect strength and weapons, and disdain weakness and disarmament. Yet Obama is already presiding over the steady obsolescence of our aging deterrent, a failure to test our weapons and the phasing out of our skilled workforce to sustain them.

The fantasy that our abandonment of nuclear weapons will inspire other nations to follow our example is so foolish that it can only be described as nuts. When the Cold War thawed and the U.S. and the old U.S.S.R. dramatically reduced their nuclear warheads, that encouraged proliferation — with India, Pakistan, North Korea, Syria and Iran trying to join the nuclear club.

New START allows the United States to have only as many nuclear warheads as Russia can afford to build. And Russia gets to set the count of weapons.

Equal ceilings on warheads are ridiculous because, while Russia only has to defend its own people, our allies all over the world count on us for protection. If the treaty prohibits us from having weapons to fulfill those expectations, they will try to build their own.

The treaty does not limit tactical nuclear weapons, leaving Russia with a 10-to-one numeric superiority, which Russia has threatened to use in regional conflicts. We could build more tactical missiles, but there is no chance Obama will do that.

New START gives up the verification, on-site inspections and monitoring of production that were requirements of previous treaties. Whatever happened to Ronald Reagan’s maxim, “Trust, but verify?”

Obama has made it clear that his eagerness for a nuclear-zero world also means a world without any defense against nuclear weapons. He has cut spending for missile defenses and killed or mothballed the few innovative programs we have to knock down incoming rockets in their boost phase.

Ever since President Reagan announced his Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in 1983, the Kremlin has tried to ban all U.S. missile defenses. The Kremlin brags that it achieved this goal in New START.

This treaty gives Russia a veto over all U.S. defenses against incoming missiles. Article V contains a binding clause that we “shall not convert and shall not use ICBM launchers and (submarine-launched ballistic missile) launchers for placement of missile defense interceptors therein.”

Article XIV confirms this prohibition, stating that any party can withdraw from New START if “extraordinary events … have jeopardized its supreme interests.” Russia explained that this means it will stick with New START “only if the (U.S.) refrains from developing its missile defense capabilities quantitatively or qualitatively.”

The wisdom of the Founding Fathers is available to save us from New START folly — i.e., the constitutional provision that ratification requires approval by two-thirds of senators. That’s the provision the globalists hate the most.

The Council on Foreign Relations complained in print on May 1, 2008, that “the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress a critical voice in the ratification of treaties and endorsement of global institutions, complicates U.S. assumptions of new international obligations.”

Our Constitution can save us from New START if 34 senators will stand up for America.

Phyllis Schafly “gets it.”

The real threat of Obamaunism is not economic depression. America can survive that and with sound economic principles return to and far surpass current levels of prosperity.

It is not even loss of liberty. Americans, if they are angry and motivated enough can restore the US Constitution and roll back the Federal Government to pre-Civil War levels.

The real danger is, that if unchecked, Obama will so weaken America’s national defenses that the country itself will either be destroyed by the combined forces of its enemies in Moscow, Beijing, Havana, Caracas, Managua, Pyongyang and Tehran, or forced into some permanent form of supra-national government, under the banner of the United Nations – courtesy of the subversive Council on Foreign Relations

If either of those scenarios come to pass, freedom will be destroyed, the world over, for a very long time.

That is why every free person, every semi-free nation in the world has an interest in overturning Obamunism as soon as humanly possible – before we pass the point of no return.


Do the Republicans Actually Want to Stop Kagan?

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

A good question.

From World Net Daily:

It continues to be possible for Republicans to pull the plug on the nomination of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to the chief of an organization that advocates for families and their interests.

Calling her the “most liberal, unconstitutional nominee we’ve ever seen,” Randy Thomasson of SaveCalifornia.com, says Republican senators have the power, even in the minority, to stop Kagan in committee by objecting to the vote or on the Senate floor by leading a filibuster.

The organization also reported that under Senate rules, specifically Rule IV, there also could be a filibuster in committee.

Further, he said if one minority party member objects, the nomination will not come up for a vote if no Republicans vote to override the objection, and if six of seven Republican senators do not show up for the committee, there’s no quorum…

Thomasson said if Republicans are successful in halting Kagan, they will prevent her influence all across American for the next 30 or 40 years.

Her nomination has not only prompted Thomasson to offer constituents a “take action” option on his SaveCalifornia.com site, it also has sparked the assembly of the “Stop Kagan Campaign.”

“We will continue to put every member on notice – Republicans and Democrats – that a vote for Kagan is a vote against the U.S. military, a vote against the Constitution, a vote against free speech and a vote for ultra-partisan extremism and activism on the bench,” said Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND who is orchestrating the effort that has generated tens of thousands of individual letters to senators.

Why should thousands of people campaign hard for the GOP, when the party seems intent on giving radical Kagan a free pass?