» Schumer: Three Branches of Gov’t Are House, Senate and White House

Schumer: Three Branches of Gov’t Are House, Senate and White House

Um, Senator Schumer… the House and Senate are both part of the same branch of government: the Legislative Branch.

Oh, and by the way… you sit on the Senate Committee that oversees the third branch: The Judiciary.

This guy is a Senator? How did that happen? He describes the 3 branches of government .. as the House, the Senate, and The President. Uh, even my public education correctly taught me the 3 branches are the Legislative, the Juducial, and the Executive. (And here’s the even bigger alarm. Shumer sits on the the Senate Committee with oversight over the Judiciary.. the branch of Government he left out in his professorial remarks. Schumer once again displays his ignorance and determination to keep the course — leading America into Financial Chaos.

ACLU, feds coordinated attack on Arizona crackdown on illegals

‘It’s one thing to share disrespect for rule of law, but it is quite another to collude’

Posted: January 29, 2011
12:00 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WorldNetDaily


Arizona governor Jan Brewer speaks to the media following a meeting with President Barack Obama on Arizona's new immigration law, at the White House in Washington on June 3, 2010. UPI/Kevin Dietsch Photo via Newscom

A public interest organization that uncovers and prosecutes corruption in government said it has confirmed from Department of Justice documents that the federal agency under Barack Obama‘s command worked hand-in-hand with the American Civil Liberties Union to attack Arizona over its tough new immigration law.

That law, SB 1070, now is being challenged before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. It created applause from secure borders advocates and a furor among a wide range of immigrant rights advocacy organizations last year when state officials adopted plans to let state law enforcement officials crack down on illegal aliens who already are violating federal law.

Get the facts on the threat to America coming across its own borders, “In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security”

Judicial Watch, the corruption-fighting Washington organization, earlier had submitted a filing in the court case on behalf of Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of the state’s SB 1070, asking the appeals court to reverse a preliminary injunction granted by a district court in July, just as the law was about to take effect.

That injunction has not yet been lifted.

(Story continues below)

The district court judge suspended four of SB 1070’s key provisions as the Obama administration called the plan racist even though it specifically prohibits racial profiling.

Now Judicial Watch has posted online a file of nearly 100 pages of documents it obtained from the government, revealing that the DOJ “worked hand-in-hand with the American Civil Liberties Union.”

The documents, obtained through the Federal Freedom of Information Act, revealed that there was an exchange of “touching base” e-mails between Lucas Guttentag, chief of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, and Edwin Kneedler, deputy solicitor general under the Obama administration’s Department of Justice.

From Guttentag to Kneedler was:

I left a voicemail earlier today about checking in once the district court rules. Would you be available then? [Redacted statement] And from all of us, thank you again for your argument on behalf of the United States. Lucas

Responded Kneedler:

Thanks Lucas. We should definitely check in once we hear. We’ll be huddling here as soon as we can. What is your thinking at this point on if/how you will proceed in various possible scenarios? It was good to see you, even if only briefly, and to be on the same side for once! [Redacted statement] I have a feeling we might be seeing each other again on this case. Ed

Following up was Guttentag:

Thanks Ed. Yes, a real pleasure to be on the same side. I think we will be strongly inclined to seek an immediate emergency injunction from the 9th Circuit… Can you share your current thinking with regard to the various scenarios? Best Lucas

Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce, author of Arizona's illegal immigration law Senate Bill 1070, poses for a photo in Mesa, Arizona July 19, 2010. The SB 1070 law is currently being challenged at the U.S. District Court to prevent it from going into effect on July 29, which would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. REUTERS/Joshua Lott (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS SOCIETY)

“It is one thing to share the ACLU’s disrespect for the rule of law but it is quite another to collude with the organization on a prosecutorial strategy against the state of Arizona,” said Tom Fitton, chief of Judicial Watch.

“Frankly, these new documents show it is hard to tell where the ACLU ends and the Justice Department begins. The Obama Justice Department is supposed to be an independent, nonpartisan law enforcement agency. Many Americans will be disturbed, though maybe not surprised, to find that Eric Holder’s Justice Department is colluding with one of the most leftist organizations in the nation.

“We know whose ‘side’ this Justice Department is on when it comes to the enforcement of our immigration laws,” Fitton said.

Also revealed in the cache of documents were e-mailed exchanges between ACLU staff members and Joshua Wilkenfeld, the assistant U.S. attorney who signed the government’s pleadings in the lawsuit against Arizona.

From Guttentag to Wilkenfeld was:

Josh …Yes, look forward to talking. I’m getting a fuller briefing on yesterday’s hearing later this morning (Calif. time) and then I am tied up for a short while. Would it work for you to talk at about 4.00 or 4.30p Eastern? If it’s okay with you, I’d like to include two colleagues. By the way, we tried to order a transcript yesterday but understand the US Attorney’s office already did. Can we get a copy directly from you when it’s available?

All best,

Judicial Watch reported it documented that Wilkenfeld sent the transcript later that day.

It was May 17, 2010 when the ACLU, and other groups including the National Immigration Law Center, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and National Day Laborer Organizing Network, filed a class action lawsuit against Arizona over its legislature’s attempt to protect its citizens and its jobs from illegal aliens.

“On July 6, 2010, the Obama DOJ filed a lawsuit of its own, which has been described by Congressman Peter King, R-N.Y., as a ‘cut and paste’ version of the ACLU lawsuit,” Judicial Watch reported.

WND previously reported when Judicial Watch asked that the provisions suspended by the judge be reinstated:

  • Section 2(B) [reasonable attempt to determine a person’s immigration status] “imposes no ‘new’ burden on lawfully present aliens because Arizona law enforcement officials have the discretion to inquire about a person’s immigration status regardless of Section 2(B). Section 2(B) also does not place any undue burden on federal resources because Congress has mandated that the federal government respond to requests from state and local law enforcement officers about persons’ immigration status.”

  • Section 3 [willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document] “does not regulate the conditions under which a lawfully present alien may remain in the country. Instead, Section 3 utilizes ordinary state police powers to create criminal penalties for the failure to comply with a federal registration scheme.”

  • Invoking Arizona’s broad authority to regulate employment under its police powers, Section 5 [unlawful employment of illegal aliens] “seeks to strengthen Arizona’s economy by protecting the state’s fiscal interests and lawfully resident labor force from the harmful effects resulting from the employment of unlawfully present aliens.”

  • Section 6 [warrantless arrest] “does not grant Arizona law enforcement officers the authority to determine whether an individual has committed a public offense that makes him removable. Section 6 only authorizes Arizona law enforcement officers to make a warrantless arrest of an individual who has already been determined to have committed a public offense that makes him removable.”

Fitton said Pearce “specifically crafted” the law “to be entirely consistent with federal law.”

He earlier said, “The district court jumped the gun by invalidating components of the law on a purely speculative basis. It is shameful that the Obama administration has chosen to mount a legal assault against the state of Arizona for simply trying to protect its citizens.”

It was U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton who struck the state law’s provisions, drawing applause from both the U.S. and Mexican governments.

The case is expected ultimately to be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court.

But national support continues to grow for the law, which is designed to make up for a lack of federal enforcement of immigration laws by giving more authority to state officials. Other states have begun copying it, too.

“This is a matter of America’s sovereignty and security, and every patriotic American must get involved,” said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law Center.

The organization, a national, public-interest law firm in Michigan, filed a brief in support of Arizona’s law.

“If we can’t defend our borders from attack by illegal immigrants, in time we will lose our country,” Thompson said. “What confidence should we have in an attorney general who, without even reading the law, accused Arizona of racial profiling? Patriotic Americans must show they stand with Arizona in this matter.”

Read more: ACLU, feds coordinated attack on Arizona crackdown on illegals

Mom Exits Prison as School Choice Week Ends

Earlier this week I reported on the hero-mom who went to jail for trying to get her children a decent education.  In short, Kelley Williams-Bolar was convicted of a felony for hauling her daughters across a school district boundary.   She committed this crime in order to enroll them in a school with decent standards, one that would provide them the kind of opportunity you would want your own children to have.  Today she was released from prison.  The Heritage Foundation reports this courageous woman’s ordeal in more detail, and puts the whole event in context But the bottom line is this.  The politicians and teachers unions in Akron, Ohio believe that mothers like Williams-Bolar pose a very serious threat to society.

How is it that the Left, which purports to care so much for children and is always preaching equality of both opportunity and outcome, remains so strongly opposed to school choice?  As this incident exposes, liberal double standards are not flaws in an otherwise sincere world view.  They are the visible aura of a lust for power that is routinely disguised as concern for the common man. 

In this case, as in many school districts around the country, that power consists in a corrupt alliance between teachers unions and the politicians they fund.  The resulting political machine feeds off the cynical exploitation of our children while at the same time utterly disregarding the educational needs of those same children.  This machine is fueled by tax dollars, and oiled with the good intentions of uninformed voters who have genuine concerns about education but no understanding of the scam. 

Otherwise, why is it that the same liberals who support open borders and sanctuary cities prove so willing to imprison an inner city mother for no other crime than taking her children across an arbitrary districting line?  If this same woman had been an illegal alien, and had brought her children across our national border to provide them the identical educational opportunity, liberals would be celebrating her.  They would be lining the streets in protest, and insisting that her children be allowed to remain in our schools.  “Why should the children be punished,” they would insist?  “They didn’t violate any laws.” 

In point of fact, liberals already demand in-state college tuition for the children of illegal aliens, along with affirmative action benefits which amount to special advancement ahead of the children of legal residents—ahead, for instance, of the children of the American mother who was released from prison today.  A recent bill before Congress sought to grant effective amnesty to the children of those who have illegally entered our country.  But in the case of American born Williams-Bolar, liberals proved eager to send men with guns to lock her behind bars and to remove her children from the school they had been enrolled in for two years.  According to the judge, it was important to make an example of her.

So why this stark and brutal contrast in liberal sensibilities?  Why do liberals welcome illegal aliens with every form of booty and special consideration they can squeeze out of the taxpayers while at the same time vigorously enforcing the relatively insignificant boundaries of a public school district?  Why do they insist upon putting a poor American mother in jail for crossing a trivial line not shown on most maps, while at the same time insisting upon amnesty and public largesse for those who illegally cross our national borders?

Power is the only answer that accounts for this inconsistency.  Liberals see illegal aliens as a potential voting bloc, which they intend to demagogue and then manipulate as they have the black vote.  African Americans vote 90% Democrat.  Why is that?  In large part because Democrats have consistently promised them “benefits” and government “programs.”   Yet the plight of black families in America is worse than when these programs began.  Black education, in particular, has suffered spectacularly.  It is a sad irony that this poor woman—a black woman, by the way–who was released from prison today probably voted for the straight Democratic ticket.  Liberals intend to seduce Hispanic immigrants in this same way.  They do not see the illegal immigrant as an individual human being with personal dreams and hopes for achievement.  They see a tribe that can be seduced into dependency upon government and then conscripted for political warfare.

When it comes to school choice, the power dynamics are very similar.  For years the teachers unions have lobbied for laws that guarantee them forced dues, job security and a closed shop.  In return, these unions have funded the politicians who support their agenda.  The currency that lubricates this perpetual influence machine is taxpayer funding, which is metered out on the basis of student attendance days.  Since in many cases the public schools are doing a very poor job, a fact which both unions and politicians evidently understand all too well, concerned parents quite naturally wish to find better alternatives. 

But what if even one parent is allowed to withdraw her children from the assigned school?  Of course a mass exodus would follow.  Funding for the rejected school would soon collapse.  Teachers would be laid off, with the bad ones unable to find new jobs.  Campaign funding for the politicians supported by the teachers unions in such districts would dry up as well.  In order to prevent this, the education oligarchy, in collaboration with legislators and judges, has shown that it is quite willing to send mothers to jail.         

For the education establishment today, and that means unions, administrators and politicians, our children are often little more than a commodity to be exploited.  To get decent public education, we must cut the money supply that feeds this trade in young and vulnerable human lives.  We must allow families to choose their own schools, so that the effective schools can grow while the bad ones are eliminated.  Until we do that, we are collaborating in the destruction of our own children. 

Jim Wagner

» Is SEIU Working With Hamas And FARC? – Big Government

Is SEIU Working With Hamas And FARC?


Andrew Marcus

Prominent current and former members of SEIU local 73 are being investigated for their potential ties to the Hamas and FARC terrorist groups.

Late last year, their homes were raided by the FBI, and they were subpoenaed to appear in front of a grand jury for questioning.

Joe Iosbaker, Chief Steward of SEIU 73, and Tom Burke (former board member of SEIU 73) are among 9 people who are subjects in the investigation. None of them have been charged with any crimes, yet.

Two days ago, they refused again to appear in front of the grand jury.

The interesting thing about these SEIU folks is that they also belong to a violently radical group called the Freedom Road Socialist Organization. From their website:

The Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO) is a revolutionary socialist and Marxist-Leninist organization in the United States.

1) We stand for the right to self-determination up to and including secession for the African American nation in the Black Belt South.

While rejecting Zionist claims on Palestine and white supremacist claims to a white southern nation or northwestern nation, we do acknowledge the fact that the most advanced sections of the Black liberation movement, from the 1800s on, have demanded a Black Republic in the South.

It gets worse from there.

This is the same group who, along with the other subjects of the FBI investigation, takes credit for staging the 2008 RNC protest-riots.

Shockingly, SEIU leadership is supporting their accused members, and the chosen strategy of not cooperating with law enforcement.

Beginning at 6:15 in the video below, SEIU’s Matt Brandon gives the union’s full-throated support for targets of the investigation.

Let that sink in for a minute. SEIU members are being investigated for potential ties to terrorists, and SEIU leadership is supporting non-cooperation with law enforcement. Can we question their patriotism yet??


Imagine Haliburton being investigated by DOJ for potential ties to terrorists, and their management comes out in support of ignoring grand jury subpoenas. Do you think mainstream media outlets might cover it?

The bottom line is that in addition to demanding the right to riot on the streets of America, the Progressive movement in this country (including SEIU) wants the right to organize “non-violent” actions with Hamas and FARC.

Pay close attention to the 2 minute mark in the video below. The Lawyers Guild protester lets the cat out of the bag when he talks about Global Exchange being threatened by all of this. Global Exchange is one of the groups that helped organized the violent Hamas flotilla.

So here you have SEIU members participating in violent revolutionary causes, and SEIU leadership defending them.

This raises a lot of questions about the extent of coordination between the American Progressive movement and global terrorist organizations. We can think of at least two people who are strongly associated with this exact SEIU local 73, people who might be able to shed some light on the actions of its members:

Andy Stern


And President Barack Obama


From the 2008 SEIU 73 annual report:

SEIU Local 73 was all across the nation in 2008 assisting Barack Obama in his historic run for the White House. Members and SEIU Local 73 staff worked the primaries not only in Illinois, but in Ohio and other key states. The Purple Army was out in force to turn our nation blue!

To say that they are close is an understatement.

What does the President know, and how long has he known it?

Shocked.. Shocked, I say! SEIU in collusion with the likes of Hamas and FARC? Can it be?

Hmm. After examining the backgrounds of many of our members of the House of Representatives.. I’m not so shocked or surprised. Look here for a little more background on members of today’s U.S. Congress.. and the associations they support and encourage ( or are even members of)

On Amazon- ” The Cartel” Systematic Destruction of Public Education


Thank you Americans for Prosperity for the screening of this movie at the Clackamas Public Safety Offices!  This is an eye opening documentary that only  scratches the surface of today’s enormous corruption problem…and it is destroying our next generation.  Isn’t it time to root out this evil?

Get Real- It’s time to quit hiding behind rhetoric and face the Truth

What Obama (and Republicans) Didn’t Say

Posted by Rick Moran on Jan 27th, 2011 and filed under Daily Mailer, FrontPage.

Our unfunded-entitlement train is careening down the tracks about to tip over, but the conductor is lecturing us about staying in our seats until we come to a full stop.

That, among other things, was one of the important problems with the president’s State of the Union speech. It was also what was wrong with the GOP response delivered by Rep. Paul Ryan. Neither party is telling the American people the truth about the coming entitlement crunch which threatens not only our fiscal solvency, but our national security, our economic vitality, and ultimately, our way of life. Every year we delay the bitter medicine we must take to get our fiscal house in order adds trillions in unfunded debt to the entitlement burden we already carry.

We expected President Obama to downplay the problem. He’s got a re-election campaign to win and the hugely unpopular entitlement cuts and tax increases that are going to be necessary to address the problem would be his doom if he proposed them. There were exactly two paragraphs in the president’s speech that dealt with this nation-threatening crisis – as if it should be treated as an afterthought rather than as the 3-alarm fire it is. What’s worse, the president made it seem as if fixing our entitlement problems will be a lot easier than it is surely going to be.

He claimed that Obamacare would “slow these rising costs” for Medicare – an extremely dubious claim unproven by the facts – while assuring seniors that we must “strengthen” Social Security without “putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.”

In other words, some day in the future, a president is going to wave a magic wand and the trillions of dollars of Social Security unfunded liability is going to disappear. No one suffers. No one gets hurt. Presumably, the “rich” will take a hit, but then no one really cares about them

Newsflash: All the easy fixes for our entitlement nightmare have already been tried several times. We’ve raised the retirement age, raised the eligibility age for Medicare, raised Social Security and Medicare taxes – doubling them over the last 30 years. We’ve fiddled, we’ve tweaked, we’ve performed all the dishonest accounting possible, hiding the truth from the American people for as long as we could, and yet – here we are at the gates of fiscal hell, the devil is opening the door and there’s nowhere to run.

Meanwhile, the GOP is riding high at the moment and doesn’t want to sour the mood of the voters with blood curdling tales of $100 trillion plus in unfunded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare. But that’s the reality of our situation and someone, somewhere, somehow is going to have to take the bit in their mouth and lead us out of this house of horrors we’ve constructed for ourselves.

Rep. Ryan, whose “Roadmap” at least offered an alternative to business as usual, was strangely quiescent about the entitlement mess. Not once in his response to the president’s speech did he mention Social Security or Medicare. Ryan at least had the courage to point out that we were in a major crisis headed for fiscal disaster, but the man who has offered a politically poisonous but realistic alternative stopped far short of endorsing what he so bravely put forth just a few months ago.

Cosmetic gambits like “spending freezes” and “doc fixes” can’t even begin to address the danger. This is political gamesmanship and it should anger us that the politicians know it but do it anyway. It’s not that the crisis is hidden, or has come upon us suddenly. We’ve known for decades where we were headed, but Washington chose the easy way: the politicians ignored the problem, kicking the can down the road, assuming they would be well into retirement — living off their extravagant congressional pensions — before history forced our hand.

The can has now been kicked into a cul de sac and there’s no way we can start kicking it back down the road. It may not be our fault, but we’re the ones who are going to have to pay for all of these promises so recklessly made by previous generations. One way or another, a solution will be found — or imposed — on us. Those are the only alternatives. Either the politicians will find the political courage (that they won’t get credit for) to start cutting and slashing at the monster or the monster will solve our problem for us by devouring us.

A few bare bones numbers are needed to prove that this is not hyperbole or political exaggeration. If we were to fulfill the promises made to every American from those born as I write this to the oldest citizen regarding Social Security and Medicare, it will cost us at least $130 trillion. Long before then, the entitlement crunch will have destroyed our economy. By 2016, 71% of the federal budget will be dedicated to paying entitlements of one form or another, the vast percentage of that being Social Security and Medicare.

There are 78 million baby boomers set to retire over the next 30 years, all expecting that monthly Social Security check for the rest of their lives. The significance of this is a matter of demographics. The number of workers paying into Social Security was 5.1 per retiree in 1960; this declined to 3.3 in 2007 and is projected to decline to 2.1 by 2035. We are currently in hock to the Social Security Trust Fund to the tune of $2.5 trillion. This number is expected to rise to $3.8 trillion by 2019. But by 2015, payments to Social Security beneficiaries will begin to exceed tax receipts. And by 2037, payments to recipients would start declining automatically – whether we wanted them to or not. The Trust Fund would be exhausted and Congress would be unable to tap any other revenue streams from the government to pay for it.

Medicare is in even worse shape. Bruce Bartlett read the last report from the Medicare trustees and noted that it would take an increase in personal income taxes of 81% to pay for the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare:

• To summarize, we see that taxpayers are on the hook for Social Security and Medicare by these amounts: Social Security, 1.3% of GDP; Medicare part A, 2.8% of GDP; Medicare part B, 2.8% of GDP; and Medicare part D, 1.2% of GDP. This adds up to 8.1% of GDP. Thus federal income taxes for every taxpayer would have to rise by roughly 81% to pay all of the benefits promised by these programs under current law over and above the payroll tax.Is it any wonder that President Obama or Rep. Ryan chose not to mention how serious the problem really is, and that addressing the crisis is going to be extraordinarily wrenching?

It took our politicians four score and five years to begin to address the evil of slavery. In truth, America deals with insoluble dilemmas by working around the edges of the problem, refusing to confront the roots of what ails us. The great compromises of 1820 and 1851 on slavery kept the nation from flying apart but did not address what was eating away at the body politic: that slavery was a wrong that needed to be righted.

We have spent a quarter of a century tinkering with Social Security and Medicare, stretching out the day of reckoning without addressing the fundamental math that underpins both programs: that someday, they would become unsustainable and drag us all to economic calamity.

That day has arrived. But you’d never know it listening to the president the other night with his new spending schemes and “things are getting better all the time” rhetoric. It hardly matters. One way or another, our fiscal crisis will be solved — either through bold and courageous actions that save us or our total collapse which will ruin us.

Obama’s America: A Fabian Socialist Dream Come True

Topic: Collectivism

The gradual revolution of the Fabian Socialists is quickly becoming a reality in America.

by Republicae
Monday, August 4, 2008


The Fabian Society began in England in 1887 by a very small group of elitist socialist that sought to reform society gradually into one of socialism instead of through violent revolution. At first their purpose was to be an alternative in Britain for the more dominate Marxist Social-Democratic Federation, but their true goal was to accomplish socialism through a very gradual process using the voting booth and representative democracy as their instrument of change. In fact, one of their symbols is a Turtle with the motto: “When I Strike, I Strike Hard”. Another symbol is the Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing and the Globe on an Anvil being hammered into the Fabian model.

The Fabian Plan for gradual Socialist Revolution was as definitive as it possibly could be, to say it has been a conspiracy is simplistic in the extreme. It instituted a widespread educational program for its leadership and its minions, as time progressed, it opened schools, such as the London School of Economics, and the New School of Social Research.

One stroke of genius was that instead of advocating a Socialist State, they assisted in the implementation of the Welfare State, which as we should all know is merely a few steps away from a purely Socialistic State. It was, of course, implemented gradually, and played upon the weaknesses of human nature to gain popularity. Unlike the usual Socialist points of views, the Fabians didn’t advocate complete State ownership of businesses, industry, agriculture or land, instead they sought to involve the State into very specific areas of importance such as electric power production, transportation, precious metals and of course, credit. The remaining balance of economic systems would be left to the private sector however; it would be highly regulated by the State and operated according to the wishes of the State.

If you look at Britain, you will see that they accomplished their goals with ease and while American has been more difficult, the goals are the same and they have made enormous advances toward those goals, as we all know. Much of their accomplishments have been realized without using that dreaded word: Socialism. They have brought the Fabian Dream to America through an extremely brilliant system that has been openly accepted by the voters of this country without the hint of suspicion on their part that they were voting a Socialistic system into place.

Now, make no mistake about it, Fabian Socialists are Statist, they are absolutely authoritarian in their philosophy. Their long-term goal has always been a Socialistic Dictatorship with full-imposition of a very legalistic society where the individual is simply a part of the collective. An example of this can be found in the writings of one of the founders of the Fabian Society, George Bernard Shaw speaking of the Socialist Utopia, he said: “Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not the character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”

Of course, all of this would be in the best interest of society as a whole and the whole made up simply of parts, individuals merely cogs in the machine of social justice. This idea of social justice is the biggest selling point and perhaps the easiest to peddle to the people. Programs of social reform, incremental at first, allowed for the tempering of the people; allowing for them to grow accustom to the intervention of the State in the affairs of the individual. Of course, such reforms are never an end unto themselves only stepping-stones to a greater Socialist construct of society.

Regarding the great strides made toward these goals, Max Beer stated with confidence: “There was no reason for Socialists to wait for revolution. The realization of socialism had begun the moment when the State became accessible to social reform ideas.” Indeed, the revolution was already half realized at the moment when the State stepped over the threshold of progressive social construction and intervention into the private lives of the people.

The first step in any Socialist plan is the reform of capitalism, when the capitalist system is sufficiently neutralized the rest comes relatively easy. The first step to an efficient plan of capitalist neutralization is control over the money supply and for that a central bank is required along with a fiat monetary system, in this country that was initiated with the advent of the Federal Reserve. Later, of course must come effective controls over major infrastructure and services, all accomplished through the New Deal. The New Deal accomplished substantial feats toward the Fabian Socialist construct with numerous price controls, quotas, subsidies, inspections, regulations, licenses, fees, penalties and massive government interventions into what was formerly private enterprise. Although you would never hear politicians of either political party to admit to support the ideals of socialism, they nevertheless n

ot only support such measures, but also promote them.

We have recently seen a greater push toward socialism, though few realize it. The government is assuming more and more responsibility for and authority over the economy, all under the guise of protecting the people from potentially unscrupulous free marketeers. We are being moved yet another step closer to the dream-society of the Fabians. Of course, these are simply steps, essential parts to a much broader agenda, one that is authoritarian in nature and execution, even the centrally planned economy is a mere step, not the end product. It is all carefully crafted, manufactured to ensure the most popular support possible for “people-friendly” solutions while instituting a fraudulent system of central control over the unsuspecting public. The system has been marketed to the public, one specific component at a time, each component essential to the completion of the whole and that is the brilliance of this gradual imposition of Fabian Socialism in this country.

The greatest bulwark against tyranny in America has always been the system of private ownership and free enterprise, it is the cornerstone of our system of government and without it our freedoms and liberty are in jeopardy. Central economic planning is, in a very basic sense, the keystone to Fabian Socialism, for in order for it to succeed, central State planning and control must replace the system of free enterprise. While it was not necessary for the State to actually own or directly control all the elements in the economy it is enough for the State to have the right to assert itself in any area that it deems necessary. The Fabians called it “the democratization of economic power”, in other words socialized and centralized control over economic direction within the country.

In 1942, Stuart Chase, in his book “The Road We Are Traveling” spelled out the system of planning the Fabians had in mind; the interesting thing is to look at that plan in comparison to 2008 America.

1. Strong, centralized government.

2. Powerful Executive at the expense of Congress and the Judicial.

3. Government controlled banking, credit and securities exchange.

4. Government control over employment.

5. Unemployment insurance, old age pensions.

6. Universal medical care, food and housing programs.

7. Access to unlimited government borrowing.

8. A managed monetary system.

9. Government control over foreign trade.

10. Government control over natural energy sources, transportation and agricultural production.

11. Government regulation of labor.

12. Youth camps devoted to health discipline, community service and ideological teaching consistent with those of the authorities.

13. Heavy progressive taxation.

It should be evident that while Socialist no longer use the name that the plan is Socialism at its heart. The Fabian Socialist Revolution began in earnest in this country in 1933 with the imposition of the Welfare State and has been steadily progressing since. Those who are promoting this system, whether in the Republican Party or Democratic Party, are nothing less than Traitors, guilty of a type of high treason that deserves the most punitive penalty for such treachery. Listen carefully to the propositions of both McCain and Obama; I suspect that you will quickly find both of their positions are not only similar, but propose in essence and detail the Fabian Socialist construct. The system that these marauders are imposing upon us will ultimately alter our system of government beyond recognition.

It is all accomplished with the utmost respectability of course, they would not dream of such an imposition without popular support and they will make sure that they have popular support.

In 1933, they proposed that private enterprise had failed leaving the jobless to starve, hope to fade and that the State must step in to save the country and protect the people from the dangers associated with the inherent problems of free enterprise. Today, the call is very similar, the State must step in to protect the people. The Corporate State is, in the minds of Fabians, the ultimate protector of the common man, the provider of security on all fronts, but it requires our complete compliance and the relinquishment of our liberty in exchange. The State is to ultimately be the only one allowed wealth, the problem is that wealth is the people’s wealth confiscated in exchange for their hard labor. It is, in essence, a plan for a modern feudal society of peonage and the people are the peons.

Proofs of a Conspiracy? Look around…

In Liberty and Eternal Vigilance,


Controversial Muslim cleric caught sneaking into the U.S. –

Controversial Muslim cleric caught sneaking into the U.S.

Originally published January 26, 2011 at 5:08 p.m., updated January 26, 2011 at 8:56 p.m.


Authorities are holding a Muslim cleric who was ousted from Canada three years ago and discovered this month hiding in the trunk of a BMW after after he illegally crossed into San Diego County from Mexico.

Said Jaziri, a Tunisian imam, is expected to testify against American citizen Kenneth Robert Lawler, who was driving the vehicle Jan. 11. Lawler is charged with immigrant smuggling.

According to court documents, Jaziri traveled from Tunisia to Spain to Guatemala to El Salvador to Belize and then to Chetumal, Mexico. He rode a bus from there to Tijuana, where he found someone to smuggle him into the U.S.

Jaziri said he paid $5,000 to a smuggling group, namely a white man named Robert who spoke English.

“He told Robert he just wanted to go to a safe place anywhere in the United States,” court records show.

Jaziri will undergo deportation proceedings for illegal entry and unlawful presence in the U.S. after the case against Lawler is closed, said Steven Pitts, a spokesman for the U.S. Border Patrol.

In 2007, Jaziri was deported from Canada to Tunisia for lying on his refugee application about jail time he served in France years earlier. His supporters said Canadian officials targeted him for his Islamic fundamentalism, according to news reports in Canada.

As imam of the Al-Qods mosque in Montreal, Jaziri was well-known for being outspoken on behalf of Sharia, a strict form of Islamic law, including his denunciation of homosexuality.

News reports also said he was a notable figure on issues related to reasonable accommodation, which in Canada refers to the debate over whether anti-discrimination laws require the government, schools, businesses and others to change certain practices to honor minorities’ cultural and religious beliefs.

The apprehension of a high-profile and controversial figure is unusual in the San Diego border sector, Pitts said.

Last year, only 2 percent of the people apprehended in this sector said they weren’t Mexican, Pitts said. A breakdown of countries of origin for those 1,306 individuals wasn’t immediately available. So far this year, 254 of the sector’s 11,000 apprehensions have been listed as “other than Mexican.”

Jaziri successfully scaled a border wall on Jan. 10 and made an overnight trek through the backcountry, according to court documents. He, the guide and Mexican national Gonzalo Gutierrez-Mercado emerged near Tierra Del Sol Road close to the intersection of Moon Valley Road, where the BMW was waiting. The guide helped the men into the vehicle before he ran away, the documents said.

A group of state firefighters watched the men climb into the BMW and one of them reported the incident to a border Patrol agent. The agent then alerted other agents, who spotted the vehicle and apprehended it near the Golden Acorn Casino.

Lawler, who told authorities that he was homeless and unemployed, said he was instructed to take Jaziri and Gutierrez-Mercado to a parking lot in Mission Viejo for a hand-off. The travelers’ final destination remains unknown, according to court records.

What does it take to get our government to focus on their primary responsibility? A regime change, perhaps?

Cons and X-Cons –

History will eventually distill Bill Clinton to a single quote:  “I did not have sex with that woman.”  And yet a majority of Americans still like the old rogue, and think of him as the bright, jolly fellow who managed a period of prosperity and good feeling.  Heck!  I even like him.  It would be great to jerk catfish out of the bayou with him while throwing back a few buds and listening to him brag and lie.   But for most Americans, the disconnect between Bill Clinton’s character and his public persona is invisible.  They know there is a certain disjunct, but only in an academic sort of way.  They cannot get their heads around the significance of his personal betrayal and systematic deception as they relate to the public trust.

In his “State of the Union” address last night Obama lip-synched a portfolio of old promises as ably as anyone since Milli Vanilli.  I suppose it would be too much to expect the majority of Americans to recognize that literally everything he said was either recycled, false, or both.  He spoke of reviving our employment market with “jobs in clean energy” as if he had just been elected yesterday, as if the last two years of record unemployment under his watch were merely a bad dream.  Obama is not getting the credit he is due for a stupendous achievement.  He mocked reality for more than an hour, and no one laughed.  Even Fox News pretended to take seriously his rote iteration of old campaign rhetoric and rehashed demands for costly new government programs.  But some of Obama’s lies were so Clintonesque–so finger pointing–that they deserve special mention. 


Take the conflict in Iraq as an example.  Obama now promises future success in a war he repeatedly opposed as a candidate and promised to end by 2009.  Or how about the deficit?  After a blitz krieg of wasteful spending to “stimulate” the economy, and with nothing to show for it, he has the audacity to promise milk and honey if we will just “invest” in yet more extravagant government programs like (and I am not making this up) high speed rail.  The entire speech was an un-nerving incongruity.   While gravely and repeatedly pointing to the star of fiscal responsibility, our captain has ordered full sails into an expanding welfare state.  Demagogues of the past took comfort in the success of a single great lie.  Obama last night created a symphony of lies.  And if there was a single truth in it, I missed it.

But, some will say, Obama now has a plan to lead us out of the doldrums into which he has so glibly piloted the ship of state?  “Sputnik!”  You heard that right.  The man who wanted to dismantle the space program and use its hull as an outreach to Muslims now says we should base our plan for economic recovery on a Russian missile program from the 1950’s.  (The irony that Sputnik was engineered by captured Nazi scientists and based on the V-2 rockets that blasted London during WW II will be lost on all but a few history cranks.)

It would be too tedious to recap every lie Obama was able to pack into last night’s snoozer.  And in a certain perverse way, troubling to refute each bead in such a string of whoppers only serves to lend them credibility.   When your child says the dog ate his homework, he has already won the essential point if he can just persuade you to take his claim seriously.  By holding a family trial over each absurd and childish fib, you make yourself ridiculous.   But some grown-ups never learn.  There is a matching lesson in this for the nation.  Sometimes the only appropriate answer is, “Nice try!”

Polls show that most Americans like Obama, though at present they claim to dislike his policies.  How do I explain to the world that a man and his policies are one?  Policies are actions.   Liking a man but not his actions is like enjoying an apple but not its taste.  It is the worship of image at the expense of meaning.  For a victim of the recent multi-billion dollar junk bond scam to say, “I like Bernie Madoff but I don’t like his policies” is to elevate style over substance in a way that evinces a very destructive stupidity.  Some date rapists, I am sure, are charming.  And I imagine there were among history’s most brutal tyrants some elegant conversationalists with enormous charm and wit.  But let me leave you with this thought.  Our prisons are full of people whose criminal success consisted in nothing more than persuading people to concentrate on their charms while looking past their actions.  No one was ever seduced by a con artist he did not like.

Jim .. You’ve got a way with words….