Post Scripts

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison

Posted by Tina

The atmosphere in Washington has become fetid with the aroma of scandal but a report from our friends at PJ Media is evidence that a culture of corruption in the form of anti-conservative and racial bias may have run rampant throughout the immense bureaucracy in DC as well. The evidence is contained in a resignation letter written by Ondray Harris, former executive director of the Public Employees Relations Board (PERB). The article takes note of glaring incidences of racism and bigotry detailed in the letter:

Ondray Harris, an attorney, resigned as executive director of PERB on May 24, 2013. His resignation letter contains accounts of disturbing, racist, and illegal behavior by board members Don Wasserman and Ann Hoffman. Among the behavior:

Harris, an African-American, was criticized by board member Don Wasserman for hiring white men to work for PERB. From the letter:

“Mr. Wasserman rebuked me with regard to my hiring white male employees. What is more, Mr. Wasserman demanded that I ‘refrain from hiring white men in the future’ to fill open Attorney-Advisor positions supporting PERB.” …

… On November 8, 2012, PERB conducted a confidential executive session where hostility toward hiring conservatives was on open display.

At the confidential executive session, PERB members Don Wasserman and Ann Hoffman sought ways to fire Erin Wilcox.

Her transgression? From the letter:

“They objected that Ms. Wilcox, a white female, had a professional employment record which they perceived as being conservative or politically right-of-center. In fact, Ms. Hoffman declared: ‘Someone with a resume like hers doesn’t belong here’ and ‘should never work here.'” (continues)

This activity is not just disturbing, it is illegal, yet these employees, these servants of the people, have flourished in an environment of leftist power entitlement.

Read another PJ Media article on the damning report issued by the DOJ Inspector General regarding similar workings within the DOJ Civil Rights Division here. It includes a summary listing of egregious behaviors:

– “Numerous witnesses told us that there was widespread opposition to the Noxubee case among the Voting Section career staff.” Noxubee was a case in which white voters were victimized.

– DOJ employees opposed the bringing of a case against a black defendant to help white victims in Noxubee County, Mississippi.

The report: “Coates and other career attorneys told the OIG that they were aware of comments by some Voting Section attorneys indicating that the Noxubee case should have never been brought because White citizens were not historical victims of discrimination or could fend for themselves. Indeed, two career Voting Section attorneys told us that, even if the Department had infinite resources, they still would not have supported the filing of the Noxubee case because it was contrary to the purpose of the Voting Rights Act, which was to ensure that minorities who had historically been the victims of discrimination could exercise the right to vote.”

– “Many of those individuals told the OIG that they believed that the reason the voting rights laws were enacted was to protect historic victims of discrimination and therefore the Section should prioritize its resources accordingly. Additionally, some of these individuals, including one current manager, admitted to us that, while they believed that the text of the Voting Rights Act is race-neutral and applied to all races, they did not believe the Voting Section should pursue cases on behalf of White victims.”
– Threats were made to African American employees by other Justice Department staff.

The threats were made because the black employees were willing to work on cases like the New Black Panther voter intimidation case and a case in Mississippi involving a black wrongdoer and a white victim. I testified about this disgusting hostility toward race-neutral enforcement of the law, and today’s report confirms it took place.

– Attorney General Eric Holder was approached by Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King: King complained about cases that Voting Section Chief Chris Coates was bringing. King didn’t like that Coates was willing to use civil rights laws to protect white voters. Coates had brought and managed the New Black Panther voter intimidation case.

Holder greenlighted King: do what was necessary to take care of Coates.

– Attorney General Holder told us that he understood from what others told him that Coates was a divisive and controversial person in the Voting Section and that one concern about Coates was that he “wanted to expand the use of the power of the Civil Rights Division in such a way that it would take us into areas that, though justified, would come at a cost of that which the Department traditionally had done, at the cost of people [that the] Civil Rights Division had traditionally protected.”

The bureaucracy in DC is too big, too arrogant and too political. It does not serve in the interests of the people. It is corrupt and in great need of cleansing! We could start by downsizing the government and consolidating or eliminating some departments. Others like this DOJ, which are necessary, must be excised!

by Jack

The United States government has direct ownership of almost 650 million acres of land (2.63 million square kilometers) – roughly 30% of our total land mass. You might say, well that’s not really government land… it’s our land, because we’re the government.   Technically speaking that may be true!  After all you helped pay for all this government land.   But, try walking on posted federal property sometime and let’s see how your theory holds up in court.  Be prepared to carry some fine money.

Arguably, one could say then they (the gov) own 100% of all the land in the US, we don’t really own anything!   And that’s closer to the truth.  Don’t believe me? Try NOT paying your property tax, the government will swoop in and take it away from you. That fact they can take it away implies they own it, not you. You just have a contractural agreement to rent it (via paying taxes) and it will never be yours, because there’s never going to come a time when you are allowed to assume full ownership (stop paying taxes).  Only American Indians are afforded the privilage of sovereign ownership and just like royalty, they are actually paid to live on their land.   It’s a great gig if you can get it. 

Seems to me that in a rational and just world there should come a time in an ordinary person’s life that we’ve paid our fair share in house taxes and we can finally take a break.   It just doesn’t seem right that an elderly coupled could be forced out of their home of 60 plus years because their paltry retirement income isn’t enough to pay the taxes on their house.   Of course when that happens we (younger taxpayers) pay even more to place them in a rest-home or in expensive low income housing .   That’s the opposite of smart.

This is why I think there should come a point in every person’s life where we finally get to stop paying our taxes on our treasured home, so we can focus on enjoying it without fear of losing it to the tax man.   Of course this is way too rational for our government to ever adopt, especially since they spend our tax money faster than it comes in.   They’ll never be in a position to let you opt out at any age.   We’re just stuck and the answer to the original question is…it’s the government - the same could be said of the old Soviet Union.  Have a nice day Comrade.

Posted by Tina

Authorities in Iraq have told the BBC they’ve uncovered an Al Qaeda chemical weapons plot with targets that included Europe and North America:

Defence ministry spokesman Mohammed al-Askari said five men had been arrested after military intelligence monitored their activities for three months.

Three workshops for manufacturing the chemical agents, including sarin and mustard gas, were uncovered, he added.

Remote-controlled toy planes were also seized at the workshops.
Mr Askari said they were to have been used to release the chemical agents over the target from a “safe” distance of 1.5km (1 mile), reports the BBC’s Rami Ruhayem in Baghdad.

All of the arrested men had confessed to the plot and said they had received instruction from another al-Qaeda offshoot, he added.

David Cameron will give a speech tomorrow about the recent violent murder of a young British soldier but former PM Tony Blair has voiced a strong opinion today on the Islamic threat the West is facing:

Mr Blair urges governments to ‘be honest’ and admit that the problem is more widespread.
‘There is a problem within Islam – from the adherents of an ideology which is a strain within Islam,’ he writes.

‘We have to put it on the table and be honest about it. Of course there are Christian extremists and Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu ones. But I am afraid this strain is not the province of a few extremists. It has at its heart a view about religion and about the interaction between religion and politics that is not compatible with pluralistic, liberal, open-minded societies.’

Bush and Blair took our defense operation to the enemy in nations where terrorists the lived and hid. A more appeasing and retreating approach has been adopted since leadership changes took place in both Briton and America. In the ensuing years terrorist organizations have blossomed and spread to other regions. Their operatives are stationed in cells around the world waiting to be activated in just such an operation as that foiled in Iraq.

The overt threat from Muslim terror has not been as dramatic as the 911 bombings in New York or the 7/7 London Train bombing but they have been no less illustrative of the intent and commitment of the extremists who perpetrate these plots and attacks.

Tony Blair is correct. We have to be clear about the nature and background of the radicals involved and we have to be willing to honestly discuss the threat they pose to free and open societies around the globe.

Posted by Tina

The IRS is a mess to say the least. First we discover the agency targeted conservative groups in an act of sheer partisan bullying for political advantage, then we are treated to contemptuous retorts from IRS employees in congressional hearings, next we are informed that the IRS employees union endorsed Obama and contributed 94% to Congressional Democrats in the 2012 election, and now we find out they think they are entitled to party hearty on the tax payers dime:

The Internal Revenue Service spent an estimated $49 million on at least 220 conferences for employees over a three-year span beginning in fiscal 2010, according to a forthcoming report that will prompt fresh scrutiny of the already embattled agency.

Please remember that these clowns will also oversee Obamacare compliance. (Californians should be aware that insurance premiums in this state are projected to increase by 64% to 146% as Obamacare is enacted at the end of the year.)

How much more fundamental transformation can our free nation, our economy, and our wallets endure?

Wake up America:

It’s time for a fundamental tax code transformation!

And it’s time to get rid of the big bureaucratic IRS and the corrupt union that works there!

by Jack

I’m watching a new channel, TM News I think, and the woman newscaster is interviewing a British Muslim commentator in the UK.  This is about the attack on a British soldier and the backlash from UK citizens.  Seems the locals are angry at the Muslims for this latest attack and their anger has been building with the mounting attacks and plots to kill them…go figure?    So the reporter asks him this softball question,  “Why is it that every time there is a terrorist attack people expect Muslims to  apologize for it as if they had something to do with it?”  He responds, “Good question Susan, I really don’t know why?    We didn’t demand President Bush apologize for invading Iraq or Afghanistan.   I have no idea why people think Muslims should be apologizing or condeming terrorism when they had  nothing to do with it!” 

This answer satisfied the smug newswoman and they went on to pontificate about the terrible injustices heaped upon Muslims today due to those random acts of violence by a few terrorists who by some sheer coincidence just happen to be Muslims.   Getting mad at the Muslims is unfair they said.  This injustice could cause some otherwise peaceful Muslims to become radicals and do something violent!  

They were doing the advance work for terrorism again, establishing a justification for a future terrorist attack.    The ever apologetic liberals will always say, it’s our fault because we pushed them into it.  They did it on 9-11 and so many other times, yet they never would never even remotely expect that same apologetic tone from the very religion that is behind the terrorism.         

Well, I would like to answer her original question.    If terrorism always led back to a common denominator, like the Elks Club or democrats or some other such organization, it would take no time at all for people to declare that group persona non-grata.   We did it to the Klan, right? Avowed Klan members can’t belong to the military.    

However, despite this regular Muslim connection to extreme terrorism some liberals feel they should get a free ride because they’re a big religion and they didn’t all do it?  Or they don’t want to criticize them because they are too powerful they don’t want to risk offending them or holding them accountable?  Their logic of this one escapes me.   Why are libs so cautious about sstanding up to the bullies of the world?

Regardless of the liberals best efforts we can’t keep a lid on this one any longer people are figuring it out.   We’re finally to a point that when a Muslim attacks us we connect it to their religious doctrine – we know that motivated them to do the violence.   That is also a supportable fact.   So, it’s reasonable that we should hold a religion accountable for the actions of a minority of their members.   Much of the hate rhetoric that serves as a motivation for terrorism comes from the highest ranks within Islam.  We have whole sects of Islam (Wahabi-Taliban, etc.) dedicated to violent conquest and hate speech.  

Even the low information voters are starting to get it.  I heard one of them say just the other day,  “If they honestly don’t like what their members are doing (terrorism),  maybe they ought to think about joining another religion?”  Great idea, except for one thing.   They can’t, the religion of peace will have them killed.  Changing religions is a death penalty offense among Muslims.   Of course any rational person would think this is nuts, yet millions of Muslims around the world believe it’s fair.  That’s scary, no wonder they can justify killing women and children.   

This is a deeply flawed political-religious movement and we need to wise up and deal with their issues head on.  They don’t belong in America if they can’t support our idealism and freedoms.  We should have no reservations about publicly denouncing their cruel and violent beliefs either…that’s our duty as a nation founded on free speech.  We owe it to those who can’t speak freely!  In this exceptional case (Muslim Terrorism), if we were to be more [intolerant] it might bring an end to such things quicker than appeasement and wouldn’t that be a good thing?   

by Jack Lee

Speaking on the recent flurry of gun-grabber bills that would stomp all over the 2nd amendment, CA Sen. Steinberg echoed the thoughts of VP Joe Biden, when he said if these gun control laws will only save one life it was worth it.  Of course that’s completely absurd, if that is the test for the things we do every day, then we should ban  space launches, stop driving cars or stop climbing mountains or stop flying planes, or any ban a number of things that result in fatalities every year.  

Would you want to live so sheltered that risk is prohibited by law? 

California’s gun grabbers have tried to pass twenty or more worthless pieces of gun grabbing legislation just this year and nearly the same last year and the year before.  They just keep tightening the nose on gun owners hoping they will surrender to their authority.   Never mind the total lack of evidence that any of the gun control laws passed in the last decade have had any impact on gun violence!   The democrats don’t care about evidence.  They are obsessed with this blind hate for guns because they grew up that way.  They don’t have any practical or rational understanding what the 2nd amendment represents and they don’t care.  They only know one thing – get rid of all guns and we can all finally live in peace! 

Now there’s a fairy tail that only a crazy liberal could believe, but believe it they do!  These wacko’s have this blind faith notion that removing legal guns from law abiding owners will somehow end gun violence?   This is like their religion -  they believe it so deeply!  This is why they are on this relentless crusade against guns and they just won’t stop until they have us or we have them, its a fight to the bitter end with these kooks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jn11fCN1Jik

by Jack

Across the big Atlantic something sinister is afoot in Europe…and it has been for many years.   It’s a failure of multiculturalism!  This is where nations have allowed in large enclaves of isolated sub-cultures of mostly Islamic-North Africans and Eastern European Muslims without proper assimilation.   The manifest symptoms are social unrest, leading to broad cultural misunderstandings and a general a societal-wide divide that results in the host nation feeling threatened.   Europe is going through a tremendous social challenge thanks to their large immigrant (Muslim) populations.

The social instability this has caused is a great concern to them and it should be to us, because we’re headed the same way.   What they’ve been experiencing is working it’s way to America, make no mistake.   As the transient Islamic populations took root their numbers grew faster than the older population, then suddenly there was a visible change in demographics!   This has resulted in the newer [foreign] culture to exert themselves over the historic [older] culture and you know that has caused no end of trouble.  

Enter the radicalized Muslim.   It’s mostly Muslims we’re talking about now, but I think this is only by chance or fate, because thoughout history we can find other sub-cultures that have clashed with the indigenous population and it had the same effects.  Militancy and violence.   When push came to shove it was a numbers game to see who would win….same thing happening right now, look at the French!      

It’s important to note that today’s immigration/radicalization movement has many faces and they’re not all Muslim.  However,  they all share at least one common agenda, to fundamentally change society to better accommodate their culture.   Change can come at a great price too and forever alter the values of a nation.  

France is a nation under extreme pressure.   The radical elements of Islam in France are dedicated to making sure that multiculturalism fails because they have a vested interest in failure, not assimilation as was the French tradition.   The radicals low objectives are enhanced only through division and unrest..ie failed multiculturalism.   Cases in point, we’ve witnessed (TV) the mobs of Muslim youth burning cars in Paris, and again Muslims rioting in London or throwing firebombs in Stockholm.  It’s all part of a very predictable course that has been well charted in history.     

To quote from Ecclesiastes, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”   In short, there’s nothing new when it comes to politics.   What Europe has been experiencing is what we are beginning to experience, and we better get ready for it.   The radicals have empowered and emboldened their followers to take violent action, fortunately few have taken their urgings to heart.

Now, in response to the latest attack by two radical Muslim’s in London,  Prime Minister David Cameron said in a speech to the people and in particular to their political leadership and I am paraphrasing .., we should not automatically embrace multiculturalism for it’s own sake.   Before inviting anyone to share a place at our table, we should first ask:  Do you believe in equal rights?  Do you believe in free speech?  Do you support and respect tolerance for religions other than your own?  Do you believe in the rule of law?  Do you believe in the democratic process?  

And I’m still paraphrasing… then if the answer is no – we have no room for you.  

These are my words now.  You should not be here to use your religious freedom to preach intolerance, hate and exploit division.    We hold the notion that free speech has it’s limits and no one should be allowed to use it against us, even if they hide behind freedom of religion.   Now I quote from Mr. Cameron… “Make sure that the people who come here… wherever they come from… are coming here for the right reasons.”   This is the litmus test that must be applied before our leaders reach out to openly embrace immigration and multiculturalism. 

President Obama (I like to call him the Wizzard of Oz) has shared his stage many times with radicals that did not meet Mr. Cameron’s cultural test.  Obama has invited some of these same radicals into our White House, an honor they did not earn nor deserve much less appreciate.   As an American I am offended by this, I find it insulting just like I did with his apology tour.     

America is under siege, make no mistake about it.  And it’s not just from Muslim radicals, it’s from many forms of radicals, from racists, to socialists to fascist.  Some of the worst people to exist are to be found right here in California and some holding high office!   They’re former college radicals, they are avowed communists ( tenured professors like Angela Davis), they’re racist teachers who are behind La Raza or Meccha teaching hate to schoolagers.  They are socialists using disenformation to undermine our resolve and even to (literally) disarm the general public.  And then we have the low information voters.  They play the most important role because they make up the populist movement that is controlled by the radicals.  They are the useful fools that always vote stupid.   Collectively they’re all part of the huge problem facing us and I fear there’s so many elements that are unravelling this nation at this moment,  it would take nothing short of an all out armed conflict to clean it up and that’s not something I see happening whether it’s deserved or not.

It seems things are so bad these days that wherever I look there is someone in some authority doing something stupid or criminal or un-Constitutional.  These are often people who could not pass Mr. Cameron’s test.   It makes you wonder what happened – how did it ever get this bad? 

Good luck America – I fear we’re going to need it.

by Tina Grazier

Barack Obama stated his intention to fundamentally transform America. Today we have to wonder if the destruction of the United States of America has been high on the list of priorities for the radicals in control of the Democrat Party. The IRS scandals and union and ACORN activism surrounding sub-prime lending and the resulting banking collapse point to an unofficial and highly organized party army designed to undermine our republic from within. A nonchalant response from this administration concerning hacking activity by the Chinese calls up even greater concern that this administration does not operate in the best interest of America and her citizens. Michael Oberndorf recalls that the Chinese Connection harkens back to the Clintons:

Over the past couple of years, the Obama administration has allowed – he’s supposedly “Commander-in Chief,” and thus responsible for all national security issues, including breaches – the Communist Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to hack into our military computer system and steal virtually all our military weapons designs.

What Obama got in return is not clear, since like everything else in his “most transparent administration ever,” his political donors have been largely kept secret. However, given the massive amounts of money Bill Clinton got from the Chinese, it is unlikely that the greedy pigs in the Obama campaign machine didn’t take even more.

Clinton’s quid pro quo included giving the Communist Chinese all sorts of help getting established in places like both ends of the Panama Canal and the Bahamas, selling them the technology to actually get their missiles to hit their targets, and enabling them to continue to steal all of our top-secret nuclear technology. By 2002, they had the capability to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles, armed with cutting edge atomic warheads, and hit what they were aimed at. It appears that Obama’s quid pro quo is allowing them to set up Special Enterprise Zones across America, and giving them the information to make all our weapons systems totally vulnerable. Yet none dare call any of this treason.

The Obama administration has overseen the greatest expansion of government in our nation’s history making us weak and vulnerable. This administration has done this under a borrow and spend program that includes paying billions in interest to the Chinese. The administration has also overseen trade policy that places America in deficit to the Chinese. Under this administration the value of the dollar has declined giving the Chinese and others reason to consider trading in currency other than the American dollar.

Does it occur to anyone else that Obama’s intent is to bring America down? Does it occur to anyone else that our President has more in common with the values of the Communist Chinese than he has with the values of freedom, equality, and capitalism that define these United States? Barack Obama is not an American in any traditional sense. He has proclaimed his intention to transform this nation and his record reflects that intention. The Chinese connection is just another cog in the transformation wheel.