12/31/15

Lifting the Ban on Gay Blood: Life and Death

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

With the public focused on the holidays, the FDA has lifted the ban on gay blood. Where’s the coverage? What this means is that the five million Americans a year who receive blood transfusions could be exposed to the AIDS virus or other infections in the diseased blood of sexually active homosexuals. Do you or your loved ones want to die in order to advance the gay rights agenda? Watch this show to find out how to protect yourself.

11/2/15

Ted Cruz Breaks With Koch Brothers on Crime Bill

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Before Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) electrified conservatives with his denunciation of liberal media bias at the GOP presidential debate last week, he took a little-noticed position on a major crime bill before the Senate that set him apart from the politically powerful Koch brothers. Taking the side of law-and-order conservatives on an issue that could emerge as a major focus of the 2016 presidential campaign, Cruz came out against the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act (S. 2123) on the grounds that the legislation, which will retroactively reduce the sentences of thousands of federal prison inmates, could lead to the release of violent criminals, some convicted of using weapons while engaged in other crimes. He said the Senate bill would release “illegal aliens with criminal convictions” when a “major crime wave” is already sweeping the nation.

In an extraordinary development, the Koch brothers decided to publicly go after Cruz. Echoing the views of the libertarian billionaires, whose network of conservative advocacy groups was planning to spend $889 million on the 2016 campaign, Mark Holden, Senior Vice President & General Counsel of Koch Industries, Inc., issued a statement denouncing the Texas senator by name. He said, “We are disappointed that some members, including Senator Cruz, who have supported the need for reform and been strong supporters of the Bill of Rights, did not support this bill.”

While Cruz had indicated support back in February for a Senate bill on “sentencing reform,” he voted against the latest version because he said it would lead to more criminals being released from prison and committing crimes against law-abiding citizens and police.

In dramatic testimony, Cruz said that while he had supported the Smarter Sentencing Act, a previous version of the bill, the final version had been changed and had “gone in a direction that is not helpful.” He said it provides “leniency” for “violent criminals who use guns” and gives lighter sentences to criminals already serving time. Cruz said that letting thousands of criminals out of prison at this time makes no sense “when police officers are under assault right now, are being vilified right now, and when we’re seeing violent crime spiking in our major cities across the country…”

Political observers say that the public attack on Cruz from the Koch brothers, who are seeking to influence the selection of a GOP 2016 presidential nominee, could easily backfire and expose the nefarious influence of the libertarian billionaires’ attempt to affect the outcome of the race for president on the Republican side. In addition to the Kochs, libertarian hedge fund operator Paul Singer has entered the Republican contest, endorsing Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and promising him millions of dollars in campaign contributions through his own network of conservative organizations and allies. Singer, whose son is homosexual, wants the GOP to embrace gay rights and gay marriage.

There are very few organizations active in conservative politics that are not financed by either Koch or Singer. Donald Trump, a billionaire in his own right, doesn’t need their support.

Blogger Tina Trent, who writes and lectures about criminal justice issues, hailed Cruz’s decision to come out against the Koch-backed bill, saying the legislation was “a 100 percent giveaway to some of the most radical anti-incarceration activist groups funded by George Soros,” the billionaire hedge fund operator and backer of the Democratic Party. She said, “I’m happy to see Cruz refuse to obey the Kochs on this one vote, but the fact that they came out and chastised him publicly when he did cross them even slightly points to bigger questions—and bigger problems. Will Cruz go further and completely sever ties with the Kochs?”

Libertarians and their Leftist Allies Push Criminal Justice Reform

Though branded by the media as free market conservatives, the Koch brothers are libertarians on social and foreign policy issues and do business with China and Russia. They chose “criminal justice reform” as their latest high-profile cause, even though this has meant collusion with the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations and his grantees.

We noted in a story last March that the Coalition for Public Safety was playing a leading role in this new “bipartisan” campaign for “criminal justice reform,” and has been financed by $5 million from the Koch brothers and other “core supporters,” such as the liberal Ford Foundation. Soros money for this effort has been mostly funneled through the ACLU, a major “partner” in the group, which received $50 million to cut national incarceration rates and release criminals.

The Coalition for Public Safety is run by Christine Leonard, a former Ted Kennedy Senate staffer once affiliated with the left-wing Vera Institute for Justice. We pointed out that the Vera Institute is so extreme that its Project Concern had a National Advisory Board on Adolescent Development, Safety and Justice that included the former communist terrorist Bernardine Dohrn as an adviser from 1998 to 2003.

One Soros-funded group, Critical Resistance, was founded by communist Angela Davis and says it seeks “to end the prison industrial complex (PIC) by challenging the belief that caging and controlling people makes us safe. We believe that basic necessities such as food, shelter, and freedom are what really make our communities secure.” It got $100,000 from the Soros-funded Open Society Foundations.

An all-day “Bipartisan Summit on Criminal Justice Reform” that was sponsored in part by the Coalition for Public Safety featured former Obama official and Marxist Van Jones as a major speaker. Jones appeared at a podium emblazoned with the company name “Koch Industries.” Obama’s then-Attorney General Eric Holder also spoke to the event.

Cruz was joined in his opposition to the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act by Republican Senators Orrin Hatch (UT), David Perdue (GA), Jeff Sessions (AL), and David Vitter (LA). Nevertheless, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin pushed the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act through the Senate Judiciary Committee in a 15-5 vote. A Cruz amendment to fix the bill was voted down.

Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning said that Senate Republicans, “in a quest for bipartisanship,” have passed a bill that will “retroactively reduce more federal prison sentences, resulting in an additional flooding of our cities with thousands more convicted criminals out of penitentiaries.” He asked, “Given the volatile mix of massive increases of Muslim refugees, the influx of Central American gangs and Mexican drug cartel members, and the disarming of our police, what could go wrong with releasing tens of thousands of convicted criminals early into the already violent cities? Why would Republicans vote for that?”

Law Enforcement Groups Weigh in on Pending Crime Legislation

Unwilling to let the Koch brothers and George Soros have their way on the crime legislation, organizations representing law enforcement are making their views known. Groups opposing the bill include the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, National Sheriffs’ Association, National Immigration & Customs Enforcement Council, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, National Narcotic Officers’ Associations’ Coalition, National District Attorneys Association, Major County Sheriffs’ Association, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Agents Association.

Major figures opposing the bill include Ed Meese, Former Attorney General of the United States; Ron Hosko, Former Assistant Director of the FBI; and Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum.

Senator Sessions, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and former federal prosecutor, quoted Steven Cook, the President of the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys, as saying that the bill “threatens to reverse many of the gains we have made by making thousands of convicted and imprisoned armed career criminals, serial violent criminals, and high-level drug traffickers eligible for early release.” Cook added that “it would seriously weaken the very tools that federal prosecutors, working with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, have used to keep our communities safe.”

“In reality,” Tina Trent told Accuracy in Media, “there is no big public groundswell of support for releasing recidivist criminals back onto the streets. The urgency around this issue has been almost entirely manufactured by paid activists in the leftist and libertarian camps—aided by the media, of course. This is why they’re being so intentionally secretive about the process and the people who would be released and how the releases would be implemented. It’s also why they’re not making it easy, or even possible, to see state-by-state information about the specific inmates who would be released, nor can the public view the full criminal arrest and conviction records for these inmates.”

Taking on libertarian rhetoric about alleged “nonviolent” drug offenders supposedly populating the prisons, she noted there are several ways an offender can be classified as “non-violent” even when he or she has a long rap sheet of arrests for violent crimes and even convictions for violent crimes. In such cases, defense lawyers will have their clients plead to a drug charge in exchange for charges of violent crimes being dropped.

The “Ferguson” Effect?

Despite the serious flaws in the bill and questions about the radicals backing it, aCongressional Criminal Justice and Public Safety Caucus has been created to make similar legislation a reality on the House side. Representatives Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Raul Labrador (R-ID), Cedric Richmond (D-LA) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) will serve as co-chairs of this newly-formed body.

Jessica Berry, Deputy Director of the Coalition for Public Safety, thanked Chaffetz and the other Republicans for partnering with Democrats as well as President Obama, for the purpose of “getting criminal justice reform done.”

Berry’s praise for Republicans should give them concern. She is a former top Democratic Party staffer on Capitol Hill, having served as the principal law enforcement and criminal justice advisor to Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and an adviser to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

If the “bipartisan” bill passes Congress, Republicans may eventually be blamed for helping to put more criminals back on the streets, producing more of the “Ferguson effect” that Obama’s FBI director James Comey says has put the lives of police officers and innocent members of the community in greater danger.

The controversy over Comey’s remarks could complicate the President’s push “to loosen the nation’s sentencing laws,” the Hill newspaper reported. Another potential complication is that the outspoken Cruz and others may put pressure on Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) to stop the bill from coming up for a vote so that Republicans don’t further embarrass themselves by partnering with soft-on-crime Democrats in hock to Soros-funded activist groups.

Leftist groups are hoping McConnell will bring the bill to a full Senate vote, in order to demonstrate how Republicans can work with Democrats on an issue dear to the Obama administration.

07/20/15

America, Stop Allowing the Steamrolling.

By: Lloyd Marcus

The gay population is only 2%. http://bit.ly/1faCE6v Rush said despite their 2% number, they are succeeding in everything they want. He said the majority is just sitting idly by letting it happen. Rush asked his audience of millions, why? “Why is there no uprising against it…why is there no uprising in support of these businesses being shut down?”

An evangelical minister called into Rush’s radio program with an answer. He explained that Christians realize they are engaged in a spiritual battle. He said the reason why Rush is not seeing outward protests is because Christians are fighting back by praying about the Left’s attacks, bullying Christians and forcing its agenda on all Americans.

Folks, timely divine interventions have made me a huge believer in the power of prayer, but I believe God expects us to do our part. The Bible says, “Faith without works is dead.”

Imagine praying for God to give you a job. You do not educate yourself, send out resumes or respond to want ads. You just sit there in your room praying, expecting God to send you a job.

Christian bakery owners Aaron and Melissa Klein are being persecuted for standing up for their right of the “free exercise of religion.” Oregon state official Brad Avakian threw the Kleins Constitutional rights out the window.

Avakian decreed that the Kleins can publicly speak about the case, but he implemented a gag order preventing the Kleins from publicly expressing their view of marriage.

Can you believe that folks? What country does this guy think we live in? Aaron Klein disobeyed Avakian’s outrageous unconstitutional decree. Aaron said publicly that he believes marriage is between one man and one woman. http://bit.ly/1K9kxZv

Allow me to clarify an important point. It is being spun that the Kleins refuse to serve homosexuals. Not true. The lesbian plaintiff is a longtime customer of the Klein’s bakery. When asked to bake a cake for her wedding to a woman, the Klein’s had to decline to remain true to their religious conscience.

Brad Avakian is Oregon’s Bureau of Labor & Industries Commissioner who has decreed that for not betraying their Christian faith, Aaron and Melisa Klein must pay a lesbian couple $135k in damages. Folks, check out this kangaroo court list of alleged damages – “acute loss of confidence,” “high blood pressure,” “migraine headaches,” “pale and sick at home after work,” “resumption of smoke habit,” “weight gain,” and “worry.” No folks, this is not the script of a SNL or Comedy Central skit. This absurd list of alleged damages is real. http://fxn.ws/1D1r17x

Though the minister reported that Christians are praying about the Left’s bullying rather than outwardly protesting, I suspect another reason for Christians’ silence is intimidation. A tactic of the Left is to brand all opposition hate which sends many running to the tall grass in fear.

For example, I proposed patriots coming to Oregon for a rally expressing massive support of the Kleins. Numerous “smart people” cautioned me not to do such a rally because the Left will call it a hate rally.

Okay, so we should allow Christians/Americans to be bullied because the evil bias mainstream media, Democrats and other Leftists will gang up on us and call us names?

Folks, in case you have not noticed, this Leftist invasive army marching across our country occupying everything in sight has gotten out of hand. For crying out loud, the Left wants to ban the term, “husband and wife”. http://bit.ly/1I5PEYg

Lincoln Nebraska schools will no longer refer to the kids as boys and girls because it is not gender inclusive. They must be called “purple penguins.” http://fxn.ws/1HiJ9LS

Leftist media are publishing articles claiming that homosexual marriage is superior to heterosexual. http://politi.co/1dQS1Ql

A Leftist article says homosexuals are superior parents. http://bit.ly/1JUNcnG

A shocking video exposed that Planned Parenthood is harvesting and selling aborted baby body parts. While sipping red wine and eating a salad, an abortion doctor was caught cavalierly explaining how they are careful not to crush the most prized body parts. She, disrespectful of human life, mentioned recently doing a “17 week-er” (aborted a 17 week old baby). Disturbed by her callousness, Dr Ben Carson said at 17 weeks a baby is responsive to its environment. Shamefully, the Left rallied to defend the stone-cold abortionist while demonizing the people who exposed the evil scandal. http://bit.ly/1HybJeu Dr Carson said it is tragic that opposition to a woman killing her baby is deemed (by Leftists) hate for women.

We are fast approaching the day when Christian ministers who preach the Bible will be arrested. http://bit.ly/1gDP9s5

Pushing back against the Left’s tyrannical evil is not easy and could cost you everything.

For the past week or so, this little chorus keeps popping up in my brain. “I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus. I have decided to follow Jesus. No turning back. No turning back.”

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

06/30/15

Celebrating What?

T F Stern
The Moral Liberal

I started to write a short comment, something to do with preparing to celebrate the 4^th of July. Oh, well, as often happens; a different avenue presented itself. Speaking of different roads to go down…

With all the changes in accepted public attitudes is it any wonder some folks are calling for the destruction of long revered symbols from the past?

Young rabble rousers have been challenged to stomp on the American Flag, same sex marriage was found to be a God given right in the constitution according to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court; albeit the use of the term ‘God given’ was not used, only that it was a ‘right’.

The Confederate Battle Flag was found guilty of racism and banished to the same closet with the Washington Redskins logo as it clearly has no place in society today.

The odor of cooking of bacon bothers followers of Islam enough that some restaurants have been forced to remove it from the menu; mustn’t antagonize our Muslim neighbors who have been so tolerant of others.

Rumor has it there’s a lawsuit attempting to force a remake of the movie, Paint Your Wagon. Instead of Clint Eastwood’s character, Partner, butchering the tune, They Call the Wind Mariah, a local Imam wants it redone as They Call the Wind Sharia…; claims that because of Islam’s long standing contributions to the founding of America, a claim which Obama has often referred to as part of America’s great heritage…(forgive me; I’m cleaning off some excess residue from my brown shoes while writing. Yes, I’ll go to great lengths for a pun)

While we’re busy changing things, let’s go for the gold…What say we get a new National Anthem, one that is all inclusive, something that matches the debauchery which has become acceptable in society?

Cole Porter had a life style that shocked civilized society not too long ago; but his extraordinary talent permitted such indiscretions. In our day he might have trouble keeping up. Porter wrote this catchy little number and it took off like a bat out of hell back in his day, Anything Goes.

Can’t you just see an Olympian stand on the winner’s block, the new National Anthem of the United States of America played as the Rainbow Flag is spotlighted for all the world to acknowledge our accomplishments. The athlete turns his/her back to the camera, drops his/her drawers and moons everyone. That folks, could very well be our destiny.

While eliminating any and all references to the grand and glorious history that made America Home of the Brave and Land of the Free, the Twenty Dollar Bill could easily have a woman’s image on it; perhaps Madalyn Murray O’Hair; and you can bet the farm by the time this happens our money will cease to have In God We Trust engraved on it.

As this rant comes to a close it’s only appropriate to follow with another tune, one that reflects my doing a face palm, Look What They’ve Done to My Song…

Before our history is completely wiped clean, removing from our memory the ramblings of some old White guys, sometimes called our Founding Fathers…

Let us prepare to celebrate our Independence Day, keeping in mind many high school graduates believe that July 4^th is the day Hot Dogs were first sold at a televised baseball game; take a moment to appreciate that once upon a time most folks understood that individual liberty was paid for by men who mutually pledged to each other their Lives, Fortunes and sacred Honor; and none of this could have happened without Divine Intervention.

The Moral Liberal’s Senior Editor, T.F. Stern, is a retired City of Houston police officer, self-employed locksmith, and gifted political and social commentator. His popular and insightful blog, T.F. Sterns Rantings, has been up and at it since January of 2005.

06/27/15

Overthrow the Judicial Dictatorship

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Commentators have missed the real significance of Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the gay marriage case. He calls the decision a judicial “Putsch,” an attempt to overthrow a form of government—ours. His dissent, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, was written “to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.”

His comment about the Court using the kind of reasoning we find in a fortune cookie is a funny line. But there is much of the Scalia dissent that is not funny and which serves as a warning to the American people about what the Court has done to us.

Scalia understands the power and meaning of words and he chose the word “putsch” for a specific purpose. One definition of the term means “a secretly plotted and suddenly executed attempt to overthrow a government…” Another definition is “a plotted revolt or attempt to overthrow a government, especially one that depends upon suddenness and speed.”

Hence, Scalia is saying this was not only a blatant power grab and the creation of a “right” that does not exist, but a decision that depends on public ignorance about what is really taking place. It is our system of checks and balances and self-rule that has been undermined, he says.

In that sense, he is warning us that we need to understand the real significance of this decision, and go beyond all the commentators talking about “marriage equality” and “equal rights” for homosexuals. In effect, he is saying that the decision is really not about gay rights, but about the future of our constitutional republic, and the ability of the people to govern themselves rather than be governed by an elite panel making up laws and rights as they go.

Scalia’s dissent cannot be understood by listening to summaries made by commentators who probably didn’t read it. Although I may be accused of exaggerating the import of his dissent, my conclusion is that he is calling for nothing less than the American people to understand that a judicial dictatorship has emerged in this country and that its power must be addressed, checked, and overruled.

The implication of his dissent is that we, the American people, have to neutralize this panel, perhaps by removing the offenders from the court, and put in place a group of thinkers who are answerable to the Constitution and the people whose rights the Court is supposed to protect.

He says the majority on the court undermined the main principle of the American Revolution—“the freedom to govern themselves”—by sabotaging the right of the people to decide these matters. The Court destroyed the definition of marriage as one man and one woman “in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law.” In other words, the Court acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally.

Scalia called the decision “a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.”

Justice Scalia goes on, however, to attempt to explain why this is happening. He basically says, in so many words, that the majority of the Court is un-American, completely out of touch with American traditions and the views of ordinary Americans. He rips the Federal Judiciary as “hardly a cross-section of America,” people from elite law schools, with not a single person from middle-America, and not a single evangelical Christian or even a Protestant of any denomination. He calls the Court, on which he serves, a “highly unrepresentative panel of nine,” that has engaged in “social transformation” of the United States.

More than that, after examining the elite views and backgrounds of the “notorious nine,” he declares that while the American Revolution was a rejection of “taxation without representation,” we have in the gay marriage case, “social transformation without representation.”

One cannot help but think that Scalia wants readers to recall Obama’s promise of the “fundamental transformation” of America, except that in this case Obama has been assisted by five judges who did not represent, or even care about, the views of America as a whole.

While Scalia zeroed in on his colleagues on the Court, we can easily apply his analysis to the unelected members of the liberal media who pretend to offer the American people an objective and sensible interpretation of the decision.

On CNN, for example, anchor Brooke Baldwin “moderated” a discussion between lesbian liberal Sally Kohn and liberal pro-gay “Republican” Margaret Hoover. The only issue was when the Republican Party would accept gay rights and sell out conservative Christians. Baldwin herself is a member, or at least a supporter, of the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association.

Conservatives watching Fox News and hoping for a pro-traditional values perspective are likely to be seriously disappointed as well. The new Fox star, Megyn Kelly, is getting rave reviews from the liberals for defending homosexual and transgender rights. A special report by Peter LaBarbera examines how Fox has been almost as biased on this issue as other media, calling the channel “unfair, unbalanced and afraid.” The word “afraid” describes the general failure to challenge the homosexual movement, into which Fox News has been pouring a significant amount of money for many years. Indeed, some “conservatives” have gone way over to the other side, with Greg Gutfeld, another rising Fox star, insisting that gay marriage is a conservative concept.

The Scalia dissent demonstrates why the fight for traditional values cannot and must not stop. That fight must continue because our form of democratic self-government is in grave jeopardy, and has in fact suffered a major blow. A federal constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage is one obvious course of action. But that won’t solve the basic problem of an emerging judicial dictatorship willing to redefine historical institutions, make up rights, and defy common sense.

The court’s reputation for “clear thinking and sober analysis” is in danger because of this terribly misguided decision, Scalia writes. In other words, the Court is drunk with power and cannot see or think straight.

The same can be said about the major media, which cover this decision as just another controversial ruling that people will disagree on.

In fact, as the Scalia dissent notes, this decision will live in infamy. It is as if a Pearl Harbor-type attack has been achieved on America’s moral fabric and constitutional foundations.

In this context, Scalia talks about the Court overreaching its authority and moving “one step closer to being reminded of our impotence.” In my view, this is an open invitation for responsible elected officials to take power away from this Court and return it to the people.

But how will the Republican Party respond? Some big money players are demanding the white flag of surrender, so the GOP can “move on.” This is what the British “Conservative” Party has done, and we see the consequences there, as Christians are now being arrested by police or fired from their jobs for expressing views in favor of traditional values and traditional marriage.

Scalia’s discussion of “social transformation” of the United States without the voluntary input or approval of the people captures the essence of the coup that has been carried out. This process now has to be explained in terms that most people understand. It is, in fact, the phenomenon of cultural Marxism, an insidious process explained so forcefully in Professor Paul Kengor’s new book, Takedown.

As Kengor notes, gay marriage is only the beginning of this cultural transformation. By redefining the historical institution, the Court has opened the door to multiple wives, group marriages, sibling marriages, fathers and stepfathers marrying daughters and stepdaughters, and uncles marrying nieces.

A country that descends to the bottom of the barrel morally and culturally will not be able to defend itself against its foreign adversaries and enemies. Indeed, we have the evidence all around us that, as the culture has degenerated, our ability to defend ourselves has simultaneously been weakened. The recent Pentagon gay pride event featured a male General introducing his husband, as a transgender Pentagon civilian employee looked on.

The next step, from the point of view of those objecting to this fundamental transformation of America, has to be to find those elected leaders willing to act. The presidential campaign of 2016 is an opportunity to find out who understands the crisis and whether they have a way out.

06/17/15

Study Marxism to Understand Hillary

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s speech that launched his presidential campaign on Monday noted that Hillary Clinton’s “progressive agenda” includes the admonition that traditional religious beliefs “have to be changed.” Mrs. Clinton’s entire quote, in talking about opposition to her version of feminism and demands for abortion, was that “…deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Bush also said of the Democrats, “They have offered a progressive agenda that includes everything but progress.”

But it’s never been the case that the progressive agenda offers real progress, as ordinary people understand the term. Instead, the “progressives” offer what Professor Paul Kengor calls cultural Marxism. This is the planned disintegration of the traditional family structure that has been the basis of Western civilization. Kengor, author of the new book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage, told me in an interview that the progressives are guided by the belief that “new rights are coming all the time and that everything is in a state of evolution.” He added, “There are no absolutes for them.” Hence, the gay rights movement has now morphed into rights for so-called transgenders, as we see in the relentless media propaganda that is designed to convince the public that men can, and perhaps should, become women. Kengor says the next step is for “progress” or “evolution” to a new level that includes such concepts and arrangements as multiple wives, group marriages, sibling marriages, fathers and stepfathers marrying daughters and stepdaughters, and uncles marrying nieces.

It’s no secret that Bill and Hillary Clinton’s family structure exists in name only. Bill, the disgraced former president impeached by the House, betrayed Hillary and had sex with a White House intern. He is a serial adulterer. But the Clintons have stayed together for political reasons, so that Hillary can pursue her political career. Together, along with daughter Chelsea, this arrangement has generated nearly $2 billion in donations to a family foundation that now finds itself embroiled in financial scandals over where the money went, and what it paid for.

Looking back on Mrs. Clinton’s career, I continue to be struck by the wisdom of Barbara Olson, the author of the 1999 book Hell to Pay: The Unfolding Story of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Olson was the lawyer and conservative commentator who was murdered by Islamic terrorists when the aircraft she was on, American Airlines Flight 77, was hijacked and flown into the Pentagon in the September 11, 2001, attacks. The crash killed 125 people on the ground and another 64 passengers and crew.

I interviewed Olson on December 8, 2000, when I hosted a radio show in the Washington, D.C. area. What follows is an edited transcript of that interview.

Q: Do you believe that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a Marxist?

A: I believe she has a political ideology that has its roots in Marxism. In her formative years, Marxism was a very important part of her ideology…But when you look at her ideas on health and education, you see more government and less individual control. You see very little regard for families…

Q: Do you see Hillary as in favor of Socialist-style thinking at the global level?

A: We saw that with her activities as First Lady. She traveled more than any other First Lady. She had a global view. She spoke at the Beijing conference on women. She was very active in organizations and conferences that seem to be concerned about human rights but which are also directed toward a centralized governmental view. That is, one world. I looked at her travels and saw what she was doing. I always assumed Hillary was going to run for president. And I assumed that these international travels and her work with the Beijing women’s conference and the U.N. were going to be her way into the White House; that she was going to have a foreign policy platform that not many women have…

Q: So you do believe that she will run for president?

A: I do. She believes her ideology to the core. She’s worked for it behind Bill Clinton for years. I have thought that Hillary was going to run for the White House since 1993 when I started investigating the Clintons. She doesn’t compromise. She doesn’t come to the center. She believes in a true leftist, Socialist kind of government.

Q: She portrays her causes such as children’s rights and women’s rights in such an attractive manner. She has put conservatives on the defensive once again.

A: She has. That’s the central focus of her public relations campaign…But her ideas about health care and education have very little to do with women and children. They are the lever she uses to bring the government into the family.

Q: She’s been pushing treaties such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. Isn’t she promoting global government?

A: Yes. We all know about her book, It Takes a Village. She says the future is not family but the larger village of teachers, pediatricians and social workers. She talks about raising children as less of a parental task than a social one…You have the destruction of the family unit. That’s very basic when you study socialism and Marxism.

Mrs. Clinton’s speech to the Women in the World Summit, where she spoke on how religious beliefs have to be changed, was significant for several reasons. The event was sponsored by Tina Brown, who launched The Daily Beast and later became editor-in-chief of Newsweek. The event was conducted in association with The New York Times, and included actress Meryl Streep and comedian Jon Stewart. These were the elites of the progressive media and Hollywood.

Typically, Mrs. Clinton talked about families at the event. “We know that when women are strong, families are strong,” she said. “When families are strong, countries are strong.” It’s important to understand this comment in light of her own failed marriage, which she has held together for political purposes, and how she has adopted the entire progressive agenda regarding how traditional families have to be changed to accommodate new sexual rights and new “family” structures. Olson’s book is still important in order to understand what Mrs. Clinton means by families, and how Marxists use family-friendly jargon to confuse and mislead. Kengor’s book is absolutely essential to understand how the progressive agenda would continue to transform the nation under a President Hillary Clinton.

Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign announcement demonstrated that he is aware of the political and semantic games that the modern-day progressives are playing on the American people. If he focuses on this Marxist strain in the Democratic Party in order to identify the forces that are rotting America to the core, he will find many conservatives receptive to his message. At the same time, if he pursues this course, the progressives in the media who gathered around Hillary Clinton during that April feminist summit will come down on the former Florida governor like a ton of bricks.

Will Bush follow up with a full frontal assault on the progressive forces destroying America? Or will he wilt under pressure and make nice with those prepared to destroy the country he wants to lead?

06/5/15

“Happy Pride Month” From the Media

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

The coming out of Bruce as Caitlyn Jenner is happening as various sexual minorities are celebrating “Pride Month.” It used to be “Gay Pride Month,” but the number of oppressed sexual minorities seems to be growing at an amazing pace. Without a scorecard, it is hard to keep up.

Sooner or later, pedophilia will emerge as just another orientation.

One of the leading enforcers of political correctness in the media, the site known as BuzzFeed, is coming down hard on “misgendering” by other outlets. It is not permissible, according to this way of thinking, to refer to “Bruce Jenner” anymore, or to call him a male.

The BuzzFeed literary editor has published a quiz titled, “How Transphobic Are You?” That’s right: “transphobia” is the new catchword, designed to silence those of us who still believe in the scientific, biological and traditional definitions of the sexes.

Publications such as BuzzFeed and The Huffington Post, as well as the National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA), represent the forces of cultural Marxism, designed to highlight and affirm what seems like an endless stream of sexual minorities objecting to their oppression by pro-traditional forces in society.

In a similar vein to what the NLGJA has directed in terms of acceptable coverage of transgenders, the ACLU has gotten into the business of telling the media how to report and what to think. The Daily Caller refers to it as the ACLU going “full fascist,” though it would be more accurate to label it as a Marxist way of thinking.

In any case, ACLU official Casey Strangio has declared, “Words matter, and erasing the identity of trans people by calling them by their birth names and birth-assigned sex is an act of hatred—one that is inextricable from the brutal violence that so many trans people, particularly trans women of color, encounter just for existing in the world.”

Strangio goes on, “There is no need to mention what her name used to be or what sex she was assigned at birth. And as writer and activist Janet Mock brilliantly explained to Piers Morgan, neither Janet nor Caitlyn were ‘born boys.’ They were born babies and they are women—brave and fabulous women.”

This is really beyond the pale. Babies are not born male or female anymore, just babies? What’s more, we are supposed to wait years or decades, in order to determine what they are, or at least what they claim to be.

“Caitlyn Jenner still has her penis” is the headline over a Richard Johnson story in the New York Post. That seems to make him still a man, at least in my book.

What’s more, Jenner still has male DNA. He can never eliminate that.

Nevertheless, “Caitlyn Jenner” is being honored with the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at The 2015 ESPYS on ABC on July 15.

At the same time, CNN has announced that some “activists” are objecting to the “misgendering” of Caitlyn Jenner when people in the media label “her” as a “him.” These activists “say that when news anchors and commentators purposefully use a male pronoun for Jenner, such as ‘he,’ they are misgendering her, thereby insulting her and the transgender community more broadly,” CNN reports.

CNN adds, “News outlets are generally striving to be sensitive. Many journalists immediately adopted ‘she,’ and ‘her’ in articles and discussions.”

Count me a member of the “insensitive” group of journalists and commentators. I still believe in the science and biology of DNA.

The propaganda barrage comes as President Barack Obama has officially designated June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month.

Interestingly, however, the Defense Department is highlighting “the achievements and sacrifices of LGB service members and LGBT civilians.” That’s because transgenders cannot yet officially join the combat services.

DoD News reports that Air Force General Counsel Gordon O. Tanner, a gay attorney, said he plans to do two things in celebrating LGBT Pride Month—“set new mentoring goals to mentor more rising young LGB leaders, and visit the gravesite of former Air Force Tech Sgt. Leonard Matlovich in the Congressional Cemetery on Capitol Hill.”

“Sergeant Matlovich was the first to fight the ban on gays serving in the military,” Tanner told DoD News. “His picture was on the cover of Time Magazine in 1975; NBC made a movie about his life.”

Matlovich died of AIDS in 1988.

The Washington Blade reports that Tanner is the first-ever presidential appointee confirmed by the Senate who’s not only openly gay and married to a same-sex spouse, but also a military veteran. He was confirmed by the Senate by voice vote last September without any dissent.

Much has happened in the intervening years, to the point where the Council for Global Equality recently marked the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHOT). I am not sure what “biphobia” is.

The Council for Global Equality was a recent co-sponsor of the “Conference to Advance the Human Rights of and Promote Inclusive Development for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex (LGBTI) Persons.” The term “intersex” is apparently another new addition to the list of politically correct gender identity categories. I’m not really sure what it means, either.

What’s important, of course, is that in addition to the Obama administration, a lot of big liberal money is backing this international campaign for new “rights” for various sexual minorities.

The Council reports that it has been “generously funded” primarily by the Arcus Foundation, Sigrid Rausing Trust, the Open Society Foundations, Ford Foundation, and an anonymous source.

The executive director of the Arcus Foundation is Kevin Jennings, the former Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education in the Obama administration, while the Open Society Foundations are funded by billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros.

You may recall that Jennings’ activism was “inspired” by Harry Hay, the Communist Party member and “Radical Faerie,” who believed in the power of the occult. Hay was also a supporter of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

Now that Robert Gates, the former defense secretary and current president of Boy Scouts of America, has called for the organization to open itself to homosexual Scoutmasters, can the acceptance of pedophilia as just another sexual orientation be far behind?

NAMBLA operates in the open, with a website devoted to “the benevolent aspects of man/boy love” and advocating “sexual liberation and youth liberation.”

In the past, the ACLU has defended NAMBLA, saying it goes to bat for “unpopular organizations” and believes in “robust freedom of speech for everyone.”

On the other hand, if you call Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner a he, which is how he was born, you are denounced by the ACLU as being guilty of hatred and possibly provoking violence. That’s enough to intimidate most of the media.

This is how a society spirals out of control, with the media afraid or unwilling to tell the truth any longer. Young people are clearly being singled out as the next victims, with sexual abuse being defined as love.

You might think, based on the media’s preoccupation with the terrible sexual abuse that has been documented in the Duggar family, that the media would oppose the sexual exploitation of children. But this scandal seems to be a convenient way for many in the media to make fun of the Duggars’ professed Christianity.

Our media have no principled objection to making children into sex objects. Otherwise, they would campaign to close down NAMBLA and expose the evil campaign to make sexual exploitation into just another sexual orientation.

The next phase of this sick campaign will be to present kids claiming to benefit from having sex with adults. If you object, you will be labeled as insensitive.

04/29/15

Wicked.

Chris Muir – Day by Day Cartoon

04/29/15

Was the Jenner Interview a Big Hoax or Sham?

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

An article on a left-wing website called AlterNet carries the title: “What My Female-Born Transgender Autistic Brother Can Teach You About How We Construct Our Identities.” This may be the next phase in the campaign for transgender rights. Perhaps it will be the next reality show, following Bruce Jenner’s.

I understand that the politically correct response is to consider this article in a serious manner and perhaps contemplate the dire circumstances of the subject of the piece. But my honest reaction is that the story must either be a hoax or something so out-of-touch with reality that it can’t, or shouldn’t, be taken seriously. Even worse, it may be exploitation of a disturbed young person, if the person in the article actually exists.

The notion that a person constructs his or her own sexual identity is something at complete variance with genetic and biological reality. Somebody “constructing” a sexual identity doesn’t actually change one’s DNA. This basic science is something that is being conveniently lost in this national discussion.

I have concluded that the Bruce Jenner ABC interview was either a hoax or a sham. Please recall that Jenner laughed when asked by Diane Sawyer whether it was a publicity stunt. But then we learned that Jenner will star in his own “docuseries” for the E! network “chronicling his life as a transgender woman.” Hollywood Reporter said, “The eight-part project, documenting his life as a transgender woman, will premiere in July.”

The publication said the series will be produced by Bunim/Murray Productions, which is also responsible for “Keeping Up With the Kardashians.” Married three times with six biological children, Jenner divorced his wife, the “Kardashian matriarch” Kris Jenner, after nearly 20 years of marriage. Jenner will be one of the executive producers of his own reality show.

The Hollywood Reporter said that individuals who will be consulted on the production of the series include Jennifer Finney Boylan. She is the Anna Quindlen writer in residence and professor of English at Barnard College of Columbia University, a national co-chair and member of the board of directors of GLAAD, and a contributing opinion writer for The New York Times.

This makes it sound like some kind of pseudo-documentary with a scientific veneer. Plus, The New York Times connection has been thrown in, giving the appearance of some form of approval or sanction by this major liberal paper.

Pardon me if I don’t buy it. It sounds like the series was being contemplated at the same time Jenner was telling ABC that his interview was not a publicity stunt.

Jenner was said to be coming out as a woman but still wants to be referred to as a “he” or “him.” The always politically-correct BuzzFeed informs us that “Since Jenner has not expressed a preference for female pronouns and Jenner’s publicist declined to comment on the question, this story uses male pronouns.” Well, that solves that.

Perhaps, during week four of the new reality show, he will suddenly announce he wants to be addressed as “she.” Or, perhaps, he will decide he wants to remain as a man.

I almost laughed myself silly when he “came out” as a conservative Christian Republican. By that same standard, I am a transgendered communist.

I think Jenner and his Reality TV cohorts are laughing all the way to the bank. Some long hair and changes in facial features do not a woman make.

The results are in. “Bruce Jenner interview scores big ratings,” reports USA Today. “Bruce Jenner’s much-hyped interview with Diane Sawyer brought ABC’S 20/20 its biggest audience in 15 years and the most-watched Friday program (excluding sports) since 2003…”

The insightful Judi McLeod at Canada Free Press notes that Jenner’s “deeply personal” story, as it is being advertised, is going on Reality TV, hardly a deeply personal vehicle for such a deeply personal story. Doesn’t this make one suspicious of what this publicity is all about? Have we suspended our ability to think rationally just because someone is claiming to be a brand new sexual minority?

McLeod gets to the heart of the issue, commenting, “Whether he wears high heels or not, Jenner’s still what his Creator made him—a guy.”

That’s the reality. Or, rather, the actual or “real” reality. But Biblical values, which happen to correspond to science and biological facts of life in this case, are not, of course, relevant, as the media constantly inform us.

If the Jenner show succeeds, I can imagine that the AlterNet writer’s “transgender autistic brother” might be the next sexual minority to be given a reality show so he/she can teach us all about how we can construct our own sexual identities. “More than simply being clear about their gender identity, it is possible that people on the autism spectrum, less inhibited by social constructs, are able to conceptualize gender fluidity in a way that neuro-typical people are not,” she writes. That’s an important revelation, I suppose.

So that’s next: a show featuring people with autism defining and then constructing their own sexual identities, so we can learn from them. It would constitute media exploitation and sensationalism of the worst order.

I’d be laughing harder if this tendency to exploit people were not so sick and twisted. I am always amazed at how the bottom of the barrel gets lower and lower. In this case, we have not yet hit the bottom.

04/27/15

Alan Keyes on God-ordained Natural Marriage

By: Cliff Kincaid
America’s Survival

Alan Keyes drew attention to the Marxism of Barack Obama when he ran against Obama for the U.S. Senate in 2004. “Thanks to my experience with Obama,” he said, “I had the strong sense that his tenure would mark a major crisis that would threaten the survival of constitutional self-government, of, by, and for the people of the United States.” In this presentation to the America’s Survival conference, “Cultural Marxism and America’s Moral collapse,” Keyes discusses the assault upon America’s unalienable rights and essential liberties represented by same-sex marriage. www.usasurvival.org