Freedom of speech for everyone except Christians

Eat more chicken

By Cal Thomas    7/31/2012

Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy is in hot water with the LGBT community because he committed the cardinal sin in an age of political correctness: Thou must not speak ill of anything gays, lesbians, bisexuals or transgenders wish to do. 

In an interview with the Baptist Press and later on a Christian radio program, Cathy, whose father, the philanthropist Truett Cathy, founded the company, defended marriage between a man and a woman and when asked about the company's support of traditional marriage said, "Guilty as charged. We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit." Cathy believes American society is rotting (and where is evidence to the contrary?) because the country has turned away from God.

That was it. Cathy did not say he would deny someone with a different view than his the right to eat in or work at any of his fast-food restaurants, which would violate the law. He did not say anything hateful about them. He simply expressed a deeply held conviction rooted in his Christian faith.
The reaction tells you everything you need to know about certain liberals who believe every sort of speech, activity and expression should be protected, except the speech, activity and expression of evangelical Christians.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said he would try to deny Chick-fil-A's application for permits to open restaurants in that city. Now that's discrimination. Menino wants to ban Chick-fil-A in Boston, not for discriminating against customers or employees, but because of its owner's beliefs, a threat he has since backed away from. Does Boston have "thought police" who might be ordered to investigate whether other business owners already operating in the city hold similar views? I'll bet there's someone at Durgin-Park who holds similar views. What about a player for the Boston Red Sox? Better follow them to see if any of them go to church.

Maybe Mayor Menino would like to force business owners in the city to testify before an official panel of grand inquisitors and then deny operating licenses to anyone who believes traditional marriage should be the norm?

In Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has said, "Chick-fil-A's values are not Chicago values." Are Chicago values represented by the anti-Semitic firebrand Louis Farrakhan with whom Emanuel is going to partner in hopes of reducing the number of homicides in his city? Are Farrakhan's anti-Semitic and anti-gay sentiments somehow more palatable, more of value, than Dan Cathy's support of marriage and family?

The Weekly Standard found a video posted on the Nation of Islam's website of a Farrakhan speech two months ago in which he blasted President Obama for endorsing same-sex marriage. Farrakhan said Obama is "the first president that sanctioned what the scriptures forbid." He added, "...sin is sin according to the standard of God" and "the Bible forbids it."

That goes a lot further than Dan Cathy.

The Jim Henson Company has decided to pull its Creature Shop toys from Chick-fil-A and donate profits already made to GLAAD, the media-monitoring group that promotes the image of LGBT people. I knew Jim Henson when we both worked at the NBC-TV station in Washington in the mid-1960s. While we never discussed politics, I don't think at the time, at least, he would have wanted his characters, which appeal to everyone, involved in a cultural and political battle.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former Senator Rick Santorum, both also former presidential candidates, have called for a show of support for Cathy. They want people to eat at Chick-fil-A restaurants on August 1.

This is more than an economic battle. It is a First Amendment issue. Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Constitution. Dan Cathy has a right to his opinion, so does Farrakhan, so do we all.
The real "war" in this country is not only against the supposed civil right of nontraditional marriage. It is a war against conservative Christians and a denial of the same rights the LGBT community claims for itself. Free speech is an American value. We shouldn't settle for anything less.

#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#

We have to fights back. We have to stand up for Chick-fil-A because, by doing so, we are standing up for the first amendment, for free speech, and for our values.
A number of people including former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, have suggested we adopt August 1, 2012 as "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day" and that we demonstrate our support for them by eating at least on meal that day at one of their restaurants.

I think that's a good idea and I am going to do it. And I'm asking you to join me in doing the same. And to lend your voice to the thousands of people who are stating their support for Chick-fil-A on Twitter, on Facebook and on other social media platforms.

Under Barack Obama, the far-left has tried to make outcasts of ordinary citizens who stand up for traditional American values. We can't let them get away with it. We have to stand up for what's right. Please join me on August 1st in doing the right thing.

PS... FYI... Chick-fil-a also gives a discount to all Military, Retired Military, and Disabled Vets. (regardless of their race, religion, or sexual orientation).

This madness has gone so far that simply defending marriage is enough to get you banned in Boston. There may be room, however, for a legal challenge, as UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh notes:

“Denying a private business permits because of such speech by its owner is a blatant First Amendment violation. Even when it comes to government contracting — where the government is choosing how to spend government money — the government generally may not discriminate based on the contractor’s speech, see Board of County Commissioners v. Umbehr (1996).”

 Eat mor chikin...

THE SECOND ADMENDMENT

The following article is from personaiilberty.com

Responsible Gun Owners, Obama Nothing Alike

How exactly does the President define “soldier?”

Last week, President Barack Obama was criticized for suggesting that American gun owners would agree with him that firearms such as AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not criminals, during a speech before the National Urban League.

While he did not say it directly, the President’s remarks are indicative of a veiled push by Federal officials to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired under President George W. Bush. This is not a new goal of the Administration.

From a 2008 Obama campaign document:
As a long-time resident and elected official of Chicago, Barack Obama has seen the impact of fully automatic weapons in the hands of criminals. Thus, Senator Obama supports making permanent the expired federal Assault Weapon Ban. These weapons, such as AK-47s, belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets. These are also not weapons that are used by hunters and sportsmen.

In his speech last Wednesday, Obama, using the Aurora, Colo. massacre as an opportunity, reiterated his view on assault rifles. “I — like most Americans — believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms,” Obama said. “I think we recognize the traditions of gun ownership passed on from generation to generation, that hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage.

“But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,” he added.

“When there’s an extraordinarily heartbreaking tragedy like the one we saw, there’s always an outcry immediately after for action,” Obama said. “There’s talk of new reforms. There’s talk of legislation. And too often those efforts are defeated by politics and by lobbying and eventually by the pull of our collective attention elsewhere. But what I said in the wake of Tucson is we’re going to stay on this persistently.”

Conservative columnists pounced on Obama’s use of AK-47s — synonymous with rebellions, communists and terror, as well as the chosen weapon of many American enemies — as an example. The American military has little or no tactical use relationship with the mentioned weapon.

It was also pointed out by many gun enthusiasts that of course violent criminals and the mentally unstable should be weeded out in a vetting process leading up to firearms purchases, and they often are. Even with systems designed to keep firearms out of the hands of people with criminal intentions, some people argue that without the ability to read minds anomalies like James Holmes (no serious criminal record, no reason “for him to be on anyone’s radar”) would still exist. Stricter gun laws would still fail at times. The fail-safe prevention, they say, would be the impossible: complete elimination of every single firearm in the world.

For anyone seeking irony in Obama’s remarks, it was likely easily found. Especially so if they consider the recent controversy surrounding the President’s own Department of Justice and its Fast and Furious initiative. Evidently, officials in that Department disregarded the White House memo about AK-47s belonging on the battlefield when they urged gun sellers to disregard the check system put in place to keep guns out of the hands of criminals;they allowed 2,000 Ak-47s and .50 caliber rifles, among others, to “walk” into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. Many gun sellers initially reported to the government suspicious activities like “ordering large numbers of AK-47 variant rifles and other so-called ‘weapons of choice’ used by the Mexican drug cartels, and paying with large sums of cash brought in a paper bag.” But in 2009, they were told to allow the sales and that government officials had it under control and were “tracking” the weapons. On Dec. 14, 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot in the back by the member of a Mexican drug cartel with an AK-47 provided through the Federal government’s “gun walking.”

Here are some other results of the initiative from the Justice Department:
One AK-47 type assault rifle purchased by a Fast and Furious suspect was recovered Nov. 14, 2009 in Atoyac de Alvarez, Mexico after the Mexican military rescued a kidnap victim.

On July 1, 2010, two AK-47 type assault rifles purchased by Fast and Furious suspects were recovered in Sonora, Mexico after a shootout between cartels. Two murders were reported in the incident using the weapons.

On July 26, 2010, a giant .50 caliber Barrett rifle purchased by a Fast and Furious suspect was recovered in Durango, Mexico after apparently having been fired. No further details of the incident were given.

On Aug. 13, 2010, two AK-47 type assault rifles purchased by a Fast and Furious target were recovered in Durango, Mexico after a confrontation between the Mexican military and an “armed group.”

On Nov. 14, 2010, two AK-47 type assault rifles purchased by Fast and Furious targets were recovered in Chihuahua, Mexico after  “the kidnapping of two individuals and the murder of a family member of a Mexican public official.” Sources tell CBS News they believe this is a reference to a case we previously reported on: the terrorist kidnapping, torture and murder of Mario Gonzalez Rodriguez. Rodriguez was the brother of then-attorney general Patricia Gonzalez Rodriguez. The terrorists released video of Rodriguez before his death, in handcuffs surrounded by hooded gunmen.

On May 27, 2011, three AK-47 type assault rifles purchased by Fast and Furious targets were recovered in Jalisco, Mexico after having been fired. No other details of the incident were provided, but the date and location match with another incident previously reported by CBS News. On May 27 near Jalisto, cartel members fired upon a Mexican government helicopter, forcing it to make an emergency landing. According to one law enforcement source, 29 suspected cartel members were killed in the attack.

The President doesn’t know that the American military has never used the AK-47 as a primary battle weapon, and he is at the helm of an Administration that allowed thousands of them to be handed directly to violent criminals. It isn’t likely that “a lot of [responsible] gun owners” would agree with Obama or his Administration on much of anything regarding firearms. A responsible gun owner would not talk to large groups of people in authoritative tones about the merits, or lack thereof, of weapons about which he knows nothing. And a responsible gun owner would never hand his rifle to a criminal just to see what might happen.

#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#**#*#*

I would like to add my own opinion.

A favorite line of the anti-gun bunch is “When the second amendment was written, it was referring to the type of weapons citizens owned at the time”.  Which of course were very crude by today’s standards.   They use that as a reason that we should not be allowed to have automatic weapons.

I see it a little differently.  I would like to point out that the weapons citizens owned it the time were exactly the same as the ones being used by the military.   It seems obvious to me what they intended.

 AND REMEMBER WHO SAID IT AND WHEN?

INTERESTING CONSPIRACY THEORY

If you like interesting conspiracy theories, you will love this. 

THE FALSE GUN GRAB
With the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty negotiations ongoing (and going badly for the gun grabbers and elite power brokers), a game-changer was needed. It came in the form of James Holmes, “The Joker” who allegedly shot up a Colorado movie theater July 20.

Holmes is almost certainly a patsy — a term used to describe those used by government agents to pull off their hits or staged false flag events. There are just too many questionable aspects to the whole story — and Holmes himself — for the incident to have gone down as depicted by government authorities.

The shooting has given President Barack Obama the cover he needs to both go after guns and sign the treaty. He was receiving a lot of pressure from his American gun-grabbing constituency to sign the treaty. But he was also receiving a lot of pushback from Congress — no doubt pressured by the powerful and much-feared National Rifle Association lobby — and a growing number of Americans concerned about Obama’s gun-grabbing proclivities.

Here’s what we know: Holmes was operating under a government grant that paid him $26,000 per year to work in the study of neurosciences. He was a medical student seeking a Ph.D. at the University of Colorado. Several agencies of the U.S. government have long funded neuroscience research.

For more than 20 years, beginning in the 1950s, the CIA funded a project called MK-Ultra. The research for those mind-control experiments was undertaken at 80 institutions, including 44 colleges and universities, as well as hospitals, prisons and pharmaceutical companies. This program came to light during the Senate’s Church Committee hearing and the Presidential Rockefeller Commission in the 1970s.

While that program was supposedly suspended in the 1970s, CIA whistleblowers, including 14-year veteran CIA agent Victor Marchetti, have stated in various interviews that the agency routinely conducts disinformation campaigns and that CIA mind-control research continued. In a 1977 interview, Marchetti specifically called the CIA claim that MK-ULTRA was abandoned a “cover story.”

In MK-Ultra, researchers used mind-altering drugs, hypnosis and other methods on test subjects. Many people believe that Robert Kennedy assassin Sirhan Sirhan, Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho, Arizona shooter Jared Lee Loughner and Jim Jones and the Jonestown cult were part of CIA MK-Ultra operations.

In fact, Holmes is behaving much like Sirhan did after shooting Kennedy. He’s telling guards he has no memory of the shooting and doesn’t understand why he’s in jail. During his court appearance, he behaved oddly, much like someone under the influence of drugs.

Holmes amassed an arsenal of weapons, costing as much as $20,000 by some estimates, even though his only known source of income was the grant. He also apparently was trained in the use of explosives. His apartment was booby-trapped with devices that police called “sophisticated” flammable devices like none they had ever seen.

Eyewitnesses claim Holmes had help. Various news agencies quote witnesses as saying someone opened the emergency door for him and that at least two people were throwing tear gas grenades in the theater. A second gas mask and bloody knife were found on ground at the end of a blood trail on the far end of the theater from where Holmes was arrested. This indicates an accomplice who may have been injured or taken an injured hostage with him. Police say Holmes bought a ticket and propped open the emergency door himself.

Holmes calmly walked through the crowd firing his shotgun, then his Glock, then his rifle. After the shooting, he surrendered to police and told them about the booby traps in his apartment.

The assault was obviously well planned and well financed. But Holmes was described by those who know him as shy and introverted and incapable of pulling off such an attack.

The New York Times reported:
“There was no way I thought he could have the capacity to commit an atrocity like this,” said [Billy] Kromka, who is from Aurora. Mr. Kromka said that Mr. Holmes’s “disposition was a little off” and that he could be socially awkward, one of the quieter people in the lab. He spent much of his time immersed in his computer, often participating in role-playing online games.

Beyond a traffic ticket, Holmes had no criminal history. In fact, it appears he has no history at all. Google searches reveal nothing about him. This is highly unusual in today’s society where personal privacy is nonexistent.

And then there’s the curious incident of the disappearing FBI warning about a possible movie theater shooting issued May 17 but pulled from Federal websites when bloggers brought attention to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTj7LZgqu_I&feature=player_embedded#!

Law enforcement also claims Holmes sent a package to a psychiatrist that outlined his plans. But stories about that are being changed faster than a baby’s diaper: It sat on a dock; it sat in a mail room; it didn’t get there until Monday.

The bodies had not even been removed from the theater before New York City nanny Mayor Michael Bloomberg was calling for stronger gun-control laws and encouraging police officers to go on strike until gun laws were passed. Of course, neither strong gun laws nor police saved movie-shooting victims.

Aurora, Colo., has some of its State’s most stringent gun laws:

• “Dangerous weapons” including firearms prohibited.
• Revocation of license for furnishing a firearm to a minor or someone under the influence.
• Window displays cannot include firearms with barrels less than 12 inches long.
• Unlawful to carry concealed “dangerous weapon.”
• Unlawful to discharge firearms, unless by law enforcement on duty or on shooting range.
• Unlawful to possess firearm while under the influence of intoxicant.
• Unlawful to have loaded firearm in motor vehicle.
• Unlawful for a juvenile to possess a firearm.

And, of course, all the explosives Holmes had planted in his apartment were illegal.
The theater had a no-guns policy, ensuring that the shooter would be able to carry out his attack unmolested. The police who Bloomberg wants to be the citizen’s only defense sat outside assessing the situation and waiting on gas masks while shots were heard from inside.

The Aurora theater shooting has all the marks of a false flag operation designed to shred the 2^nd Amendment and give impetus to the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, which Obama has said he wants to sign. Just like Operation Fast and Furious, it’s a concerted effort by the elites to instigate violence against innocent people to further their goal of disarming Americans.

And this government and others throughout history have used false flag events to advance their agendas. Among them the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building, 9/11 and the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

The FBI is known to create terrorists so it can swoop in to save the day. And governments have lied to their subjects from the beginning of time.

More and more, it looks like the American people are once again victims of their own terrorist government.

EVERYONE PLEASE READ

The following is written by a man who is not afraid to speak his mind.  If he were a white man, he would be called a racist by ALL liberals regardless of their race.  

 I may have posted this before, but it doesn’t matter, it’s worth posting again. 

Mychal Massie

The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obamas? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obamas? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed their Christmas family pic."

The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation.

I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.

I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.

I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagans made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?

Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry and they display an animus for civility.

I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able too be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites, because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.

I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.

And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea.He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He has fought for abortion procedures and opposed rulings that protected women and children, that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel. His wife treats being the First Lady, as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement - as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.

I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.

Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin, it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their playing the race card.

It is my intention to do all within my ability to ensure their reign is one term. I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.

As I wrote in a syndicated column titled "Nero In The White House" - "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequaled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood ... Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed."

Mychal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles.

Chick-fil-A

From World Net Daily
When Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy said he supports biblical marriage between a man and a woman – rather than homosexual marriage – several U.S. mayors threatened to ban the fast-food chain from coming to their cities.

But would such a move be legal?

Liberty Counsel President Mathew Staver told WND’s Greg Corombos that city bans on Chick-fil-A would be unconstitutional.

He said this reaction proves that homosexual activists are militantly intolerant and are interested in intimidating and silencing critics rather than engaging in an actual debate.

Boycotts were called, homosexuals threatened to hold kiss-ins at Chick-fil-A restaurants and at least three big-city mayors blasted the fast-food chain: Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee.

Emanuel declared that “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values.” Emanuel’s spokeswoman later said the mayor wouldn’t stop Chick-fil-A from opening a new restaurant.

In a letter to Cathy, Menino wrote, “There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it.” Menino later said he was expressing his own opinion and couldn’t stop Chick-fil-A from coming to Boston.

Lee tweeted: “Closest (hash)ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer.”

Staver said threats to ban Chick-fil-A from cities are irresponsible, and blocking a business from opening due to the personal beliefs of its leader would be discriminatory and, therefore, illegal.

“It’s a wake-up call to all of us who have biblical values and share these moral principles that natural marriage is a union of one man, one woman,” Staver said. “[W]e’re facing a very intolerant movement that wants to silence biblical views and views on natural marriage and morality.

“Here we have the president of Chick-fil-A, a privately owned, family run business, who expresses in an interview – based upon the Bible – that natural marriage is the union of one man and one woman. As a result of that, a firestorm breaks out and you have government officials, such as the mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, and the mayor of Boston, Mayor Tom Menino, and you also have the alderman in Chicago, all of whom are saying that Chick-fil-A cannot do business in their cities – that they’re not going to allow them to have a business permit, zoning permit. They’re going to block them from having a Chick-fil-A restaurant.

“That’s absolutely outrageous, and it should be a wake-up call to every American and everyone who believes in liberty and freedom.”

Staver said the belief that marriage is a union of one man and one woman has been shared by various cultures and religions throughout history.

“It’s common sense and part of who we are as Americans and as individuals around the world,” he said. “Now Mayor Rahm Emanuel says that those values are incompatible with the values of Chicagoans. They may be incompatible with Rahm Emanuel’s values, but they’re certainly compatible with most of Chicagoans and most of America.”

He noted that many legal professionals have condemned the mayors’ threats to block Chick-fil-A from their cities.

“These statements should not be made by government officials,” he argued. “These statements are the height of discrimination, and they simply undermine the Constitution. They are absolutely uncalled for, and these individuals ought to be ashamed that they even made these kinds of statements against Chick-fil-A, Mr. Cathy or anyone else who hold those views while they were in their government position.”

Staver noted that UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh has written an article saying the mayors have opened up their cities to criticism and even litigation because of their threats. He said even the ACLU condemned the statements. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg – despite his own support of same-sex marriage – said he disagrees with his fellow mayors.

Bloomberg said on his weekly radio show on WOR that it is wrong for the government “to look at somebody’s political views and decide whether or not they can live in the city, or operate a business in the city, or work for somebody in the city.”

Even Richard Socarides, a New York lawyer and former Clinton White House adviser on homosexual “rights” who is calling for a boycott of Chick-fil-A, told the Associated Press cities cannot regulate speech by denying business permits based on political beliefs.

Staver said, “Every person from left to right and anything in between – within the legal arena, law professors and public-interest organizations – has said that these are outrageous, they’re uncalled for, and they cross the line. Government officials should not censor what you’re doing, in your speech, in your private views, and therefore try to hold over you an opposition to even do business.”

Staver warned that the homosexual-marriage movement is not about “tolerance.”

“This is not about what two people want to do in the privacy of their own home,” he said. “This is an ideological clash of unprecedented proportions. There will be one winner, and there will be one loser. …
“I’m not optimistic that it’s going to tone down any time soon. But what I am saying is that we need to be vigilant, and Liberty Council is ready to not only educate but also to defend the line. This is a battle that we cannot lose … This is a battle that is absolutely intent on silencing biblical viewpoints.”

 #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#

We have to fights back. We have to stand up for Chick-fil-A because, by doing so, we are standing up for the first amendment, for free speech, and for our values.
A number of people including former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, have suggested we adopt August 1, 2012 as "Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day" and that we demonstrate our support for them by eating at least on meal that day at one of their restaurants.

I think that's a good idea and I am going to do it. And I'm asking you to join me in doing the same. And to lend your voice to the thousands of people who are stating their support for Chick-fil-A on Twitter, on Facebook and on other social media platforms.

Under Barack Obama, the far-left has tried to make outcasts of ordinary citizens who stand up for traditional American values. We can't let them get away with it. We have to stand up for what's right. Please join me on August 1st in doing the right thing.

PS... FYI... Chick-fil-a also gives a discount to all Military, Retired Military, and Disabled Vets. (regardless of their race, religion, or sexual orientation).

 Eat mor chikin...

LETTER TO OBAMA

Give this teacher, a true American, a standing ovation. 

This 4th grade teacher has said it all, & she was brave enough to attach her name to it.

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500

Mr. Obama:
I have had it with you & your administration, sir. Your conduct on your recent trip
overseas has convinced me that you aren't an adequate representative of the United
States of America collectively or of me personally.

You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans & the Muslim world that you
have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America.
You are responsible to the citizens of the United States. You are not responsible to
the peoples of any other country on earth.

I personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United States
telling Europeans that we are arrogant & don't care about their status in the world. Sir,
what do you think the First World War & the Second World War were all about if not
the consideration of the peoples of Europe?

Are you brain dead? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about? Do you
not understand or know the history of the 20th century? Where do you get off telling
a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country?
Have you not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United
States? This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics & the principles
governing this country, at least until you came along, come directly from this
heritage. Do you not understand this?

Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans. Our
President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia. You
didn't show Great Britian, our best & one of our oldest allies, the respect they
deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia. How dare you sir! How
dare you!

You can't find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because
you don't want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey.
You offended our dead & every veteran when you give the Germans more respect
than the people who saved the German people from themselves. What's the matter
with you? I'm convinced that you & the members of your administration have the
historical & intellectual depth of a mud puddle & should be ashamed of yourselves,
all of you.

You are so self-righteously offended by the big bankers & the American
automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation,
Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamies Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses &
the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do you intend to do about them? Anything? I
seriously doubt it.

What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to
their staff members on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers
gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I took a
5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer. You haven't said anything about
that. Who authorized that? I surely didn't.

Executives at Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in
bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that's $45 million more than the AIG
bonuses. In fact, Fannie & Freddie executives have already been awarded $51
million not a bad take. Who authorized that & why haven't you expressed your
outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have
right now?

I resent that you take me & my fellow citizens as brain-dead & not caring about
what you idiots do. We're watching what you're doing & we're getting increasingly
fed up with all of you.

I also want you to know that I personally find just about everything you do & say
to be offensive to every one of my sensibilities. I promise you that I'll work tirelessly
to see that you don't get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful
country.

Sincerely
Ms Kathleen Lyday
Fourth Grade Teacher
Grandview Elementary School
11470 Hwy. C
Hillsboro, MO 63050
(636) 944-3291 Phone
(636) 944-3870 Fax

This woman may lose her job for this letter. I believe we owe it to her for expressing the outrage that we feel but fail to address. Please share this message with others.
It's past time for all Americans to wake up!

JUST GIVE ME THE FACTS

Many years ago there was a cop program on TV called “Dragnet” which stared actor Jack Web.  His favorite line was “just give me the facts”.  It sure would be nice if the News Media would “just give us the facts”.

The Liberal media does not “report the news,” it invents the “news.” 

Want a few examples?  Check out this link.

http://mrctv.org/videos/liberal-medias-history-falsely-blaming-conservatives-massacres

OUT OF CONTEXT

Out of context my butt.   
Here are his un-doctored words taken directly from this White House web site.  http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/13/remarks-president-campaign-event-roanoke-virginia

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

To understand where he’s coming from, you must realize that he is a product of affirmative action.  His remarks about “you didn’t make that happen!”, when all is said and done, is one hundred percent accurate when applied to himself.

His life is all about he not making anything happen. All doors were opened for him. He simply has to step in.  His small, closed, reactionary rigid mind lacks the flexibility and imagination to understand that others don’t share his experience.  Big Government, in his mind, is Affirmative Action for all.  

He didn’t make his college admission possible.  He didn’t write his “best seller”.  He didn’t buy his house in Chicago without “assistance”. His wife didn’t get her high flying jobs on her abilities.  He didn’t make that Nobel happen either.  When someone glides through life as he most certainly has, they tend to see things differently.

I'm moving to Mexico

Dear President Obama: I'm planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me. We're planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. Into Mexico, and we'll need your help to make a few arrangements. We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I'm sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I'm on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following: 1. Free medical care for my entire family. 2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not. 3. Please print all Mexican government forms in English. 4. I want my grandkids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers. 5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history. 6. I want my grand-kids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school. 7. Please plan to feed my grand-kids at school for both breakfast and lunch. 8. I will need a local Mexican driver's license so I can get easy access to government services. 9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico , but, I don't plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won't make any special effort to learn local traffic laws. 10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer. 11. I plan to fly the U.S. Flag from my house top, put U S. Flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals. 12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start. 13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy. 14. I want to receive free food stamps. 15. Naturally, I'll expect free rent subsidies. 16. I'll need Income tax credits so although I don't pay Mexican Taxes, I'll receive money from the government. 17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Govt pays $4,500 to help me buy a new car. 18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I'll get a monthly income in retirement. I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who walk over to the U.S. From Mexico . I am sure that President Calderon won't mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely. Thank you so much for your kind help. You're the man!!!

Who Really Invented the Internet?

Who do you think invented the internet?

Al Gore once said he did.  NOT TRUE.

As part of his campaign rhetoric, Obama said The Government did.  Also NOT TRUE.

So who did?  A recent article in The Wall Street Journal has a very good explanation. 
 
Here is the link. http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444464304577539063008406518.html

You don’t have to read the whole thing.  Here are some excerpts.

It’s an urban legend that the government launched the Internet. …The truth is a more interesting story about how innovation happens—and about how hard it is to build successful technology companies even once the government gets out of the way. …If the government didn’t invent the Internet, who did? Vinton Cerf developed the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet’s backbone, and Tim Berners-Lee gets credit for hyperlinks. …But full credit goes to the company where Mr. Taylor worked after leaving ARPA: Xerox. It was at the Xerox PARC labs in Silicon Valley in the 1970s that the Ethernet was developed to link different computer networks. Researchers there also developed the first personal computer (the Xerox Alto) and the graphical user interface that still drives computer usage today. …So having created the Internet, why didn’t Xerox become the biggest company in the world? The answer explains the disconnect between a government-led view of business and how innovation actually happens. Executives at Xerox headquarters in Rochester, N.Y., were focused on selling copiers. From their standpoint, the Ethernet was important only so that people in an office could link computers to share a copier. …As for the government’s role, the Internet was fully privatized in 1995, when a remaining piece of the network run by the National Science Foundation was closed—just as the commercial Web began to boom. Economist Tyler Cowen wrote in 2005: “The Internet, in fact, reaffirms the basic free market critique of large government. Here for 30 years the government had an immensely useful protocol for transferring information, TCP/IP, but it languished. . . . In less than a decade, private concerns have taken that protocol and created one of the most important technological revolutions of the millennial.”

There you have it.

Al Gore debunked.

Obama debunked.

Urban legend debunked.

ACORN EXPOSED ... VERY EYE OPENING!!!

WHAT YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ACORN.
A LIBERAL BLACK LADY ... ANITA MONCRIEF ... WHO WORKED WITH ACORN HAD HER EYES OPENED TO SOCIALISM AND OBAMA. 

HERE IS HER STORY ... PLEASE FORWARD SO MORE CAN KNOW THE TRUTH...

Very, Very much worth your time! 

Part I http://www.youtube.com/embed/3CmkbShVqNA?feature=player_embedded
 
Part II http://www.youtube.com/embed/gy6odnqyLeU?feature=player_embedded

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY

THE MAIN THING THAT’S WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY IS THE CRAP THEY HAVE BEEN TEACHING IN OUR UNIVERSITIES FOR THE PAST 20 OR 30 YEARS!

The following is a perfect example.  Far too many of our young people have bought into this CRAP and it’s destroying the country.

###################################################

Welfare state must rise up, 'exert control over free market'

Professor teaches it's necessary for 'racially just society'

The “welfare state” must rise up and take control in the United States, declares a teacher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

The textbook used by Mustafa Emirbayer for his Sociology 134 Class, “American Racial and Ethnic Minorities, is his own book, “Racial Domination, Racial Progress: The Sociology of Race in America,” reports CampusReform.org.

The text calls for a “racially just society” in which “the welfare state would rise up to exert control over the free market,” according to the report.

“The American welfare state – perhaps the skinniest in the developed world – could be fattened up,” he wrote in the book co-authored with Matthew Desmond. “The skimpy American welfare state – in large part responsible for the millions of citizens living hand-to-mouth today – would expand by generous proportions.”

Emirbayer writes the “welfare state would rise up to exert control over the free market, making sure to protect vulnerable citizens from its erratic whims.”

His students can find the book on Amazon.com, where it sells for nearly $70.
His book is the only text he assigns for the class.

University officials declined to respond to repeated requests from CampusReform.org for comment. Emirbrayer did not respond either to CampusReform.org or WND requests for comment.

An online description of the course announces that besides addressing the issue of minorities, the course “also [is] an introduction to the sociological study of whites and whiteness in America.”
“When you speak in class, please refer exclusively to authors and texts we happen to be reading that day (or read earlier in the semester),” the teacher instructs students.

At the Ratemyprofessors.com site, Emirbayer repeatedly is criticized for being “boring.”

“As interesting as this subject matter is, I really couldn’t stand this class. The lectures were not well organized, he often got behind, and he could have articulated himself better. The exams (written by the TA’s I might add) were extremely poorly written. He was not about helping students, and insisted that you ask only a TA for help,” said one student.

Another wrote, “He wrote the book, and is not only biased but obsessed with himself.”

“His book makes some interesting points but it’s very biased,” added a third. “Many of his arguments are reaching and some of them are just completely inaccurate.”

CampusReform.org previously reported the University of Minnesota-Duluth launched a race-based advertising campaign that blasted whites for being “privileged” in society.

The school’s “UnFair Campaign” was being promoted by University of Minnesota-Duluth Chancellor Lendley Black

In a university website statement posted just weeks ago, Black wrote, “The UnFair Campaign strives to raise awareness about white privilege in our community, provide resources for understanding and action, and facilitate dialogue and partnership that result in fundamental, systemic change towards racial justice.”

He continued: “Advancing equity, diversity, and social justice requires persistence and long-term difficult work at all levels of our campus community. Remember, ‘Equity and diversity efforts must be led not only by people with formal authority, but also by faculty, staff, students, and administrators at every level of operation and responsibility.’ (Reimagining Equity and Diversity: A Framework for Transforming the University of Minnesota)”

A public service announcement features white people with slogans written on their faces. They make statements including, “We’re privileged and that’s unfair.”

WND also previously reported on a “White Privilege Conference” held in Minneapolis. An organization called the Minnesota Justice Collaborative was host, and partner sponsors included Hamline University, Augsburg College, Gustavus Adolphus, The Denver Foundation, University of St. Thomas and the National Center for Race Amity.

The conference’s premise is that the U.S. was started by white people, for white people. It examines “concepts of privilege and oppression and offers solutions and team building strategies to work toward a more equitable world.”

In an article in the organization’s inaugural journal edition, Paul Kivel, a “violence prevention educator” and co-founder of the Oakland Men’s Project, elaborated on his belief that whites are oppressors.

“I think that it is safe to say that all white people benefit some from racism, all men benefit some from sexism, but only those at the top of the pyramid truly gain from this system and enjoy privileges that most of us can only imagine,” he wrote.

Kivel said Christianity “has also played a key role in developing and justifying systems of oppression such as racism, sexism, colonialism and genocide.”

“Racism also had its beginning in Christianity as the distinction between Christians and non-Christians took on a biological difference during the Inquisitions, when it was decided that Jews and Muslims who converted were false converts because they did not have clean blood,” he said. ” … This was the beginning of modern or biological racism.”

It was all too much for commentary contributor Katherine Kersten in the Minneapolis Star Tribune newspaper.

She noted the conference website warned, “There’s always the possibility that the ‘haters’ … will descend in mass and try to disrupt peaceful discussions about the advantages of being white in America and the oppression that has led to.”

“Not a chance,” said Kersten. “We’re laughing too hard.”

Kersten pointed how that Lakeville, Minn., schools sent a delegation to the events, paying $160 per person, plus $125 a day for substitutes. The conference expenses came even as the school board was announcing $7 million in budget cuts with 94 teachers losing their jobs.

“There was wailing and gnashing of teeth, but the board set its jaw: There’s not a dime for anything extra,” Kersten wrote. “Unless you’ve got an ax to grind with white folks. Then the money spigots open.”

Columnist Warner Todd Huston had a decidedly critical view of the conference.

“Alright you evil, rotten, racist, white oppressors, it’s time once again for the ‘White Privilege Conference,’ this year to be held in Minneapolis, Minnesota. … Come on out you white teachers so we can get your rotten minds right about how racist you are and so that you can go back to your students and let them know how racist they are,” he wrote.

“We are all the same, you see, Indians, Hispanics, Blacks, all at harmony and all equal … well, unless you are a whitey, of course. If you are a whitey, well you have some splanin’ to do! … It’s about time you admitted your malevolence, dang it!”

The “cure” offered by the conference is “a weekend of indoctrination on white’s crimes all for the ultimate education of our children back home in our schools. You see, the kids are all right … as long as they ain’t white,” he wrote.

Previously, the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities drew criticism for a plan to teach America is a “hellhole.”

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or FIRE, questioned President Robert Bruinicks about the legality of the program, which proposed evaluating teacher candidates on the basis of “white privilege” and providing “remedial re-education” for those who hold the “wrong” views.

FIRE later announced that in response to its pressure, university officials were backing away from their plans “to enforce a political litmus test.”

“The plans from its College of Education and Human Development involved redesigning admissions and the curriculum to enforce an ideology centered on a narrow view of ‘cultural competence,” FIRE said.

Similar attitudes were found by watchdogs at the University of Delaware.
As WND reported, the university’s office of residential life was caught requiring students to participate in a program that taught “all whites are racist.”

School officials immediately defended the teaching, but in the face of a backlash from alumni and publicity, the school decided to drop the curriculum, although some factions later suggested it be revived.

---

Special offers:
The corrupt state of U.S. colleges exposed
“Fish out of Water”

I WONDER JUST WHO THE HELL DOES HE THINK EARNS THE MONEY TO SUPPORT THE WELFARE STATE.