Tuesday, August 7, 2012

OBAMACARE: THE ROAD TO REPEAL STARTS WITH THE STATES

Posted by WP

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Obamacare: The Road to Repeal Starts in the States





States that have refused to implement the Obama health law have already blocked $80 billion of its new deficit spending. If more states follow suit, they can block the other $1.6 trillion and force Congress to repeal the law.
The law relies on states to implement two of its most essential pieces: health-insurance "exchanges" and a vast expansion of Medicaid. Exchanges are government agencies through which the law channels $800 billion to private health-insurance companies.
The Medicaid expansion adds another $900 billion to the federal debt, with private insurers again taking a slice. States are under no obligation either to implement either. Responsible state officials will say no to both.
It is a myth that creating an exchange gives states more control over their insurance markets. Yes, the law directs the federal government to create one in states that do not. But every exchange must be approved by federal bureaucrats, empowering them to impose whatever oppressive rules on "state-run" exchanges they would impose through a federal exchange.
A critical mass of states could literally force Congress to repeal the Obama health law.
In contrast, by refusing to create an exchange states can block the law's debt-financed subsidies to private insurance companies and avoid new taxes on their employers and consumers.
The law imposes a $2,000 per-worker tax on employers, but only in states that create an exchange. (If Virginia creates one, there will be a giant sucking sound as employers flee to Louisiana, Texas, South Carolina and Florida, which have said they will not.) States creating exchanges will have to increase taxes another $10 million to $100 million per year to cover their operating costs.
* * * * *
The Supreme Court further empowered states when it overturned the law's Medicaid mandate. That mandate required states to expand their Medicaid rolls dramatically on pain of losing all federal Medicaid funds, which comprise 12 percent of state revenues. Twenty-six states challenged that mandate as unconstitutionally coercive.
They won. The court held the federal government cannot withhold existing Medicaid grants from states that fail to expand their programs. States may now refuse to expand their programs without fear.

And they should. My Cato Institute colleague Jagadeesh Gokhale estimates this expansion would cost Florida, Kansas, Illinois and Texas roughly $20 billion each in its first 10 years. New Jersey and New York would pay $35 billion and $53 billion, respectively. So you know we're not cooking the books, Gokhale projects California would save money.
But not for long. President Obama is already trying to shift even more Medicaid costs to the states. It's called "predatory federalism": Washington uses a low introductory rate as bait, then once states are hooked it changes the terms. In the end, even California will take it on the chin.
This is money states don't have. Nor can Washington, with its trillion-dollar deficits, afford the $900 billion the Congressional Budget Office estimates this Medicaid expansion would cost the federal government.
In total, state officials can block $1.6 trillion of deficit spending simply by sitting on their hands. According to CBO estimates, the handful of states that have already refused to expand Medicaid are saving taxpayers $80 billion.
* * * * *
Blocking these provisions will expose the full costs of the law, instead of allowing the federal government to shift those costs to taxpayers. The resulting backlash will push members of Congress to switch their votes and support repeal, just as two House Democrats did during the latest repeal vote. A critical mass of states could literally force Congress to repeal the Obama health law.
Opposition to these individual provisions, like opposition to the Obama health law, is bipartisan.
Among the governors refusing to create an exchange is New Hampshire's Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who signed a law forbidding one. Montana's Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer is among the dozen or more governors who are balking at the Medicaid expansion. Not that it takes a governor — a solid bloc of state legislators, or even just one committee chairman, is enough.
The Obama health law is weaker, and the path to repeal is clearer, than it has ever been.

SLOW GROWTH?? PROGRESSIVES ARE TO BLAME

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

No Mystery to Slow Growth: Progressives Are the Problem




No Mystery to Slow Growth: Progressives Are the Problem

The Big Picture Lesson of the 20th century was that capitalism works and socialism and communism don't. The rest of the world learned that lesson far better because they and their close neighbors suffered far more with the socialist and communist progeny of Saul Alinsky's first radical. But America should know better because it has enjoyed most the workers paradise of capitalism.
Yet those who call themselves Progressive, a polite, Americanized word for Marxist, refuse to accept that obvious conclusion. That is why our politics have become so nasty. The Progressives know they can't win a debate based on reason. So they turn to name calling, demonization, ostracism, anything to distract from and avoid a reasoned debate. Hence the widespread use of the term "dumbass" by pot smoking hippie Progressives in commenting on the reasoning of careful scholars that they disagree with, or the ubiquitous allegations that anyone who disagrees with them is lying, or bought off.
This reflects the despotic nature of the Progressive personality and philosophy. Progressives most fundamentally are certain that they are so much smarter than the rest of us, and that they are so much more moral than the rest of us. Because of that they are certain that they have the right to rule over the rest of us. It's a very anti-social attitude that the rest of us should not be expected to have to live with.
That is why they are not interested in reason. They are interested in power, for themselves, over the rest of us. In their view, they have the unquestionable right to rule, and the rest of us have the unquestionable duty to obey. The last time America was authoritatively subject to that attitude was under the reign of King George III. And, of course, you know what happened then (unless you are in public school).
That is why the Progressives are so fundamentally in rebellion against the U.S. Constitution. That governing framework was designed to preserve the rights and liberties of the people, and to restrain the powers of government and of self-appointed, supposedly benevolent despots. But if you are so sure you are so much smarter and more moral than everyone else, then the Constitution is an outdated, 18th century barrier to your imposition of your notion of the perfect society on everyone else. That is why for over 100 years now, so-called Progressivism has been an open conspiracy against the Constitution, and so at its root treason.
All of the supposed fevered passions of the Progressives are really just props to justify more control over more money and power for them. The Progressives claim they will take care of the poor, if only we will give control over the money and power to the Progressives. They are not really interested in economic growth and prosperity, which is the only real solution to poverty. That does not expand their power and control over the rest of us. They are interested in promoting dependency, which builds their political machine, and their power.
That dependency perpetuates rather than solves poverty is not a problem for the so-called Progressives. They are perfectly happy with that vote buying, long term, status quo, even if that is really no damn good for the poor. See, e.g, Medicaid, under which the poor suffer and die, because the government won't pay the doctors and hospitals enough to serve them.
Similarly, Progressives believe in Keynesian economics not because it works to promote economic recovery and growth. Borrowing a trillion dollars out of the private economy for the government to spend a trillion dollars back into it does nothing to promote economic recovery and growth on net. Obamanomics just proved that again.
Moreover, in a market economy there can be no such thing as inadequate demand, the central concern of Keynesian economics. That is because in a market, if demand is inadequate to sell the supply, prices just fall until supply equals demand.
But that logic and experience has no effect on Progressive devotion to Keynesian economics. That is because the real reason they are in favor of Keynesianism's proven nonsense is not really because they think it works, but because it justifies what they want, which is more government spending, deficits, and debt, as that means more power and control for government and the all wise Progressives guiding us to their promised land.
The same can be said about the hoax of global warming, a greater scandal of science in the end than Lysenkoism. Carbon dioxide is a trace gas natural to the environment and essential to all life on the planet. There is no sound science demonstrating that it controls the climate, much less that the return closer to historic levels of CO2 in the atmosphere threatens catastrophic global warming. See the thorough scientific explanation that the pattern of global temperatures throughout the 20th century to today is dominantly controlled by natural causes definitively demonstrated in the more than 1,000 pages of the Heartland Institute's Climate Change Reconsidered, published in 2010, and the succeeding Interim Report, published in 2011. This is why advocates of catastrophic, anthropogenic, global warming effectively admit that they cannot defend their claims in public debate.
But science has nothing to do with the belief of Progressives in the theory of man caused, catastrophic, global warming. Progressives worship it because again it means more power and control for governments the world over, from local governments, to national governments, to ultimately world government, which again means more power and control for Progressives to rule us in accordance with their benighted vision of the perfect world.
The greatest Progressive passion of all is supposed to be equality. That is not the classic liberal concept of equality under the law, or equal rules for everyone, which protects and maximizes individual liberty. It is the totalitarian concept of equality of results, which requires the abnegation of personal liberty to enforce.
A regime of equal incomes and equal wealth for all leads not only the more productive to flee the regime, but anyone who does not want to live in an economically stagnant, poor society. That is the result because under a regime of equal incomes and wealth for all, there are no grounds for any capital investment at all, the foundation of economic growth and prosperity. That is because capital investment and wealth increases the income and wealth of the investor, and so would have to be confiscated to enforce equal incomes and wealth, leaving no basis for anyone to pursue any such capital investment.
Moreover, under such a regime, there are no grounds for any work either. That is because if you work more than average, the extra income that would result would have to be confiscated as well. But if you work less than average, the government would pay you out of what is confiscated from the more productive to restore your income to the average. Consequently, there is no reason for anyone to work at all, because all would be paid the same as anyone else in any event.
This is where the Berlin Wall came from. But so-called, progressive, social justice equality requires even more egregious transgressions in personal and individual liberty. It would require reversing all the voluntary transactions in a free society that result in unequal incomes and wealth.
These are the reasons why social justice equality is the ultimate for supposed Progressives. It requires the reversal of all the preferences and choices of the common man, in favor of the vision of the all wise Progressives.
This all adds up to the conclusion logically that Progressivism is not just wrong, but evil, as it involves the assertion of despotism over the liberties of common men and women, and abnegation of their personal prosperity, as it has all over the world wherever Progressivism has been taken to its logical conclusion.
This is why as long as free elections are maintained, common men and women will always throw off the yoke of Progressivism. But this time, once the people are truly liberated, those who are certain that they are smarter and more moral than the rest of us must be empowered to exercise that superiority to the fullest, among themselves, through some form of separation from the rest of us.
But will free elections be maintained? Or how far down will America fall?

PREVIEW OF HHS MANDATE DANGERS

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Chick-fil-A Firestorm: A Preview of HHS Mandate Dangers


Chick-fil-A Firestorm: A Preview of HHS Mandate Dangers

The mayors of Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C. are publically threatening Chick-fil-A, telling them they are not welcome to expand in “their” cities because CEO Dan Cathy does not support same-sex marriage. Edwin Lee, mayor of San Francisco, even tweeted a threat: “Closest #ChickFilA to San Francisco is 40 miles away & I strongly recommend that they not try to come any closer.”
It does not seem to matter that the First Amendment is crystal clear: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.”
Unfortunately, these political thugs are only echoing the same tactics our own President is using to impose the funding of abortion on all Americans in his HHS Mandate. Obama’s Department of Justice is arguing in the courts that private owners of a family business must not be allowed “to impose” their personal religious beliefs on their own company.
Obama’s DOJ lawyers further assert that all businesses are inherently secular so neither the business nor the owners have religious freedom in operating their businesses. Tax penalties for failing to comply with Obamacare run as high as $100 per day per employee, crippling or even destroying any business that resists.
Keep in mind that the HHS mandate does not just require that virtually everyone help pay for free contraception, sterilization, and morning after pills. Hidden in Sec 1303 of Obamacare is also the requirement that millions of policies must take at least $1 per month directly out of employee paychecks to pay into a free elective abortions fund.
Alliance Defending Freedom estimates this will total nearly $1 billion per year—maybe a lot more. At an average cost of $450 for a surgical abortion, that is enough to add another two million pre-born child deaths to the national toll.
CEO Dan Cathay wholly and unapologetically built Chick-fil-A on Christian principals. Even the mission statement plainly says that the company is to “glorify God.” This is not just jingoism. Unlike any other national chain, Chick-fil-A forgoes millions in profits by refusing to open its doors on Sundays so that employees may take advantage of the Christian ‘day of rest’ for family and hopefully attend Church.
Both same-sex marriage and abortion are irrefutably matters of conscious and religion. So what is the difference between economic intimidation by Obamacare and economic threats by these mayors’ against Chick-fil-A? None—both put political power above constitutional rights.
So, the critical question is this: When elected officials start to believe they are justified in forcing their ideology upon the rest of us—Constitution be damned—what are we going to do about it?

LIBERAL TYRANNY AND THE "CLUCK" HEARD ROUND THE WORLD

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Liberal Tyranny and the Cluck Heard ‘Round the World




Liberal Tyranny and the Cluck Heard ‘Round the World

Writer Sinclair Lewis is credited with saying, “When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross.”
Close, but not quite. Truth is, fascism has come to America; but it’s wrapped in a rainbow flag and waving, well, let’s just say it sure ain’t waving a cross. With its latest wave of scorched-earth malfeasance, the radical left has awakened freedom-loving America to this reality.
Liberals learned a hard lesson on Wednesday. While the generally silent majority was showing exuberant support for free speech, the institution of true marriage and Chick-fil-A, “progressives” were gorging themselves on crow sandwiches doused in bitter hate. While Chick-fil-A was eating at liberals, millions of God-fearing Americans were eating at Chick-fil-A.
It was glorious. Those who would silence free speech were shouted down through an unprecedented – dare I say miraculous – show of unity in the body of Christ. Millions of God-fearing Americans took part in the “buy-cott” as Chick-fil-A’s cup runneth over.
It was a beautiful thing to behold. It made you proud to be an American. Most of the characteristically cocky “progressive” blogs and “news” sites observed radio silence as left-wing elitists – media, activists, politicos and pundits – sat in stunned disbelief.
Their wrongheaded Chick-fil-A boycott had backfired catastrophically.
Quite troubling, however, was when this predictable “progressive” hissy left the realm of comedy and breached the realm of tyranny. Multiple elected officials – all Democrats – disgraced both themselves and the offices they hold by pledging to shut Chick-fil-A down, simply because they disagree with its leadership’s biblical viewpoint.
But the American people stood strong. In response to illegal threats by the mayors of Chicago, Boston, San Francisco and Philadelphia to ban Chick-fil-A from their respective jurisdictions, the residents of those great cities rebuked these Constitution-dumping donkeys with “freedom chicken” lines that wrapped-around city blocks. “Mayor Emanuel,” they declared, “your godless values are not ‘Chicago Values!’”
In fact, Pastor Rick Warren tweeted that Chick-fil-A COO Dan Cathy called him to say that sales for Wednesday smashed all records. (Put that in your “progressive” pipe and smoke it, lefties.)
Still, not to be outdone, liberals were determined to beat a dead chicken. As liberty-loving folks peacefully showed support for real marriage with nuggets and waffle fries on Wednesday, “gay” activists held a pathetically attended “kiss-in” at various Chick-fil-A locations on Friday.
We couldn’t ask for a starker contrast. Whereas marriage supporters peacefully patronized Chick-fil-A to demand tolerance for varying viewpoints, homosexual activists engaged in gross, sexually charged public displays deliberately designed to shock and offend children and families. (Warning: vile and profane. Click here for report).
Disgusting. (Please, do keep it up, though, liberals. True colors are brightest. America is watching. Oh, and the vandalism, bomb threats and bullying of teenage girls working at Chick-fil-A? Nice touch!)
Nonetheless, I believe “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” was just the appetizer – a foretaste of things to come. In November, America serves Obama and Democrats the main course.
And the Democratic Party is helping itself not one little bit. Leading up to Wednesday, a platform change was announced. Hard-left extremists within the party are moving to endorse what some have dubbed, with plain-spoken accuracy, “sodomy-based marriage.”
At a time when record numbers of Democrats in the House and Senate face the very real threat of ouster, the DNC has inexplicably opted to put its stamp of approval on the radical redefinition of marriage – the fundamental cornerstone of any healthy society.
Already nervous, Democrats in at-risk districts are now popping anti-depressants like Pez. They have reason to freak out; especially when you consider that the Democratic Party itself remains robustly divided over this highly controversial issue.
Republicans’ response? Oh please, please don’t throw us in that briar patch.
Of course, Wednesday’s massive outpouring of support for Chick-fil-A provided a visual reminder to all concerned that the vast majority of morally minded Americans reject the oxymoronic notion of so-called “same-sex marriage.” It proved with earthshaking resonance that liberals’ whole “gay-marriage-is-inevitable” thingy remains as sterile as the fraudulent concept itself.
Don’t forget, we live in a constitutional republic where “we the people” are the sovereign, and elected officials are the hired help. When “we the people” have spoken on marriage, we’ve spoken without stuttering.
Thirty-two states have voted on it, and 32 states have protected it via constitutional amendment. Marriage is as marriage was and will be forevermore: the joining of man and wife.
But hey, Democrats made their silly mock-marriage bed, they can sleep in it.
Still, there’s another white paper bag full of goodies to take home from Chick-fil-A. Executives from corporations, large and small, should sit up and take notice. Don’t be intimidated by insufferable homo-fascist organizations like the incongruously tagged “Human Rights Campaign” and GLAAD, the “Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.” Their bark is much, much worse than their bite.
No, you’ve just seen a highly successful business model in action. It’s simple: 1) Publicly acknowledge God’s objective, transcendent truth; 2) Infuriate the toothless “progressive” establishment, prompting calls for boycotts and empty threats to ban you; and 3) Rake in the cabbage.
Stand up for what’s right, good and true, and America’s got your back.
So be encouraged. Despite liberals’ best efforts, freedom of speech, God’s design for marriage and reverence for sexual morality are alive and well in America. There is still hope for this great nation.
But not without a fight.
The line in the sand has been drawn.
It’s perverse “pride” versus patriotism. Liberal lies versus truth. Tyranny versus freedom.
On which side will you stand?

GOD'S COMMANDS COME WITH WONDERFUL PROMISES

Posted by The Circuit Rider

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

God's Commands Come With Wonderful Promises



With most unmarried evangelicals in their 20s apparently having occasional or frequent sexual intercourse, some say pastors should offer contraceptives, and others say they should merely offer louder "Thou Shalt Nots." Belden Lane's Ravished by Beauty: The Surprising Legacy of Reformed Spirituality (Oxford University Press, 2011) suggests an alternative.
A bit of background: I've learned much from John Piper and his Desiring God ministry. Basing their approach on the work of Puritan Jonathan Edwards, Desiring God notes that "God designed humans to seek their happiness in Him.?...?Joy glorifies God." Desiring God reaches secular, post-Christian Westerners by saying, "You are not nearly hedonistic enough," and contrasting short-lived thrills with the "never-ending satisfaction in seeing and savoring Jesus Christ."
Author Lane is unconnected with Desiring God, and he goes off on political tangents at times, but he aptly quotes Calvin's comment about God: "We will never spontaneously and heartily sound forth His praises until He wins us by the sweetness of His goodness." Jonathan Edwards also preached more about God's glory mirrored in the beauty of the world—"Nature teaches us God's beauty"—than about God's anger.
Puritan Richard Baxter wrote in 1650, "What a pleasure it is to dive into the secrets of nature." Lane dives, as in this example: "Ten miles deep in the ocean's abyss are blind creatures illuminated with some of the most lustrous colors imaginable. And for what purpose? They can't even see each other. It is almost as if their glory were created for its own sake"—and, more importantly, for God's. Why else would "marvelous shades of color" be found inside abalone shells?
So much pleasure: The Blue Ridge mountains are beautiful and so are cities filled with people, all images of God. The Puritans' "language of desire" honored God who created beauty in both nature and humanity. Most men four centuries ago and now feel the joy evident in Lewis Bayly's declaration—The Practice of Piety (1611)—when he beheld "the lovely beauty of Women" and exclaimed "how fair is that God, that made these fair!"
Maybe because my wife and I celebrated on June 27 our 36th anniversary, I'm impressed that, as historian Amanda Porterfield wrote in 1980, Puritans often "loved their wives beyond measure." The love was both spiritual and physical: Unlike killjoys who saw marital relations as matters of duty, Puritans said husbands and wives should "delight each in the other [during] mutual dalliances for pleasure's sake."
Wives often loved being loved. Margaret Dunham, wife of a Glasgow University professor, wrote in 1668 of the "love-faintings?...?high delightings ... love-languishings?...?and heart-ravishings" that characterized both love of Christ and love of husband. She noted "those beautiful blushings [and] humble hidings?...?on the Bride's part, and those urgent callings and compellings?...?on the Bridegroom's part."
Since it's beyond us to know the depths of God's love but not to grasp marital love, the Bible describes the former by the latter, and so did some pastors. Francis Rous, preaching on "Mystical Marriage," noted "a chamber within us, and a bed of love in that chamber, wherein Christ meets and rests with the soul." John Cotton of First Church in Boston, describing how we should long for Christ, wrote, "It will inflame our hearts to kiss him again."
A satisfying marriage points us to the satisfactions of God. As the Desiring God website states, "God is most glorified in you when you are most satisfied in him." And what if, instead of learning satisfaction in God and the good gifts He provides, we proceed on our own path? What if we have a run of encounters commemorated by sexting photographs and asterisking phone numbers on iPads? What if we cohabit without covenant in the way we might try out a variety of gods?
"You shall not commit adultery," like all of God's commands, has an implicit promise: "You shall enjoy the sweetness of God's goodness in providing marriage." In C.S. Lewis' The Magician's Nephew, Digory arrives at an Edenic garden and finds Jadis there. She has gorged herself on one of the apples, despite a sign forbidding that. She could have relished goodness, but instead becomes the White Witch. Whenever we advise the unmarried, we need to ask: God, or Jadis?

SO WE DIDN'T BUILD THIS,OBAMA??

Posted by WP

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

So We Didn't Build This Mr. President of the United States of America?




So We Didn't Build This Mr. President of the United States of America?

It is a great irony that our last two presidents have sold themselves to us as uniters, and instead have proven divisive largely because of their eagerness to please. President Obama is now on his resentment-tour, finding every interest group that he can and then pandering to them with all his might.
But that anti-Republican, anti-wealthy coalition building tour has gone off track: the smartest president in history, Barack Hussein Obama, is currently doing everything that he can to distract from his latest and most egregious gaffe in a campaign that has been almost nothing but a long train of gaffes.
Out of fairness to our president, I will give you plenty of context.
"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. 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. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together."
Now, the president and his campaign are claiming that the word "that" refers to roads and bridges. "That," of course, is singular; "roads and bridges" are plural. How pernicious of those Republicans to assume that he used correct grammar! Shouldn't they have been able to tell by his pseudo-Southern twang that he was talking down to the common plebeians? How else could a guy from Hawaii, who spent his youth in Indonesia, talk like that? He thinks that the American voter is too dumb to use correct grammar and too dumb to realize that he is attacking a straw man.
After all, who would have thought that a presidential campaign in 2012, in a year with a 1.3 trillion dollar federal deficit, and unfunded liabilities somewhere in the neighborhood of 112 trillion, that the main issue of the campaign would be roads and bridges?
Let's assume that the president meant what he now says he meant. In that case, his logic is even worse than his grammar. The argument that he makes in the above gaffe is taken almost directly from another Harvard-associated lawyer, Elizabeth Warren, who is now terrorizing the rational half of the country by running for United States Senate.
Mr. Obama and Mrs. Warren have forgotten that there are many other nations in the world with roads, bridges, teachers and other government services that have not even come close to the achievement levels of the United States. What those countries lack is the entrepreneurial spirit and the can-do attitude that allowed for the uniquely American explosion of talent and accomplishment. America is an exceptional country, a concept that President Obama has grave difficulty with. It is time to celebrate what makes us great, and platitudes about doing "things better together" is not it. If we continue to denigrate America's accomplishments from the highest levels of government, the can-do spirit will be replaced by a mentality of complacency that will quickly manifest itself in the decline of a great nation.
We must instill in people, Left, Right, and center, the fact that prosperity and freedom are the exception to the rule. In the history of the world, poverty is the norm, tyranny unsurprising. What we have in America is a precious gift from God that, once gone, is not at all certain to come back. Life is terribly unfair, and so for us to take our blessings for granted makes no sense whatsoever. We are the few, the happy few; we are Americans.

LIBERALS DECLARATION OF DEPENDENCY

Posted by WP

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

The Democratic Party’s Declaration of Dependence

The belief that no one owes me anything is one of the greatest gifts my hardworking, blue-collar father gave me when I was young. His words carried me through some difficult times growing up, sustained me through widowhood, years back, and helped to shape me into the person I am today.
Once upon a time in America, and not so long ago, my dad’s can-do attitude toward life was common place, until liberals and their faithful following began to understand that immense and everlasting power could be bartered by peddling handouts in exchange for votes.
If liberal politicians know anything, it’s human nature. If you give people things they did not earn from sources from which they did not contribute, those same people will soon become dependent on whatever you give them. Add to that a bit of Machiavellian trickery to redefine those handouts into rights, and voila! You have just created a permanent voting base.
In truth, liberals simply rebranded the definition of what our founders meant when they scribed the words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” Spinning and twisting the interpretation by suggesting “unalienable rights” are tangibles like health insurance, college educations, and food stamps rather than the intangibles our founders envisioned as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” liberals transformed the Declaration of Independence into a Declaration of Dependence. Before long, people bought into their lies, believing they had rights to certain “entitlements” simply because they breathed.
Sadly, these lies metastasized within today’s Democratic Party; chock full of liberals so extreme, Blue Dogs have all but disappeared. Now the entire Democratic Party platform revolves around the dangerous and devilishly un-American idea that individuals cannot achieve success without government intervention. They are dead wrong.
That the Democratic National Convention (DNC) would ask Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren to speak at its national convention in September tells us all we need to know about the DNC’s vision for America. Warren’s words spoken in 2011, and so echoed in recent days by President Obama, suggesting it is impossible for Americans to attain success devoid of the federal government is an indictment on how far from the American dream they have fallen.
Ms. Warren further suggests that successful job creators are obligated to an "underlying social contract” in order to “pay [it] forward for the next kid who comes along,” thereby ensuring future generations will never have the ability to stand on their own without the government.
The fact that unemployment rose to 8.3 percent last week is an indictment on President Obama, Elizabeth Warren and big government Democrats who believe rights are endowed by government. The ridiculous notion that business owners didn’t build their businesses speaks to their ineptitude and explains why unemployment numbers continue to move in the wrong direction. Obviously, Ivy League school attendance and acumen are not always mutually inclusive.
Had our founding fathers believed in entitlements over ingenuity, this “New World” would be just like the old one, which is a case study in what happens when liberals are left to themselves.







OBAMA SUES TO BLOCK MILITARY VOTING

Posted By Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

1229
228
105K

Print ArticleSend a Tip
2 Aug 2012989post a comment

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."
Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.
[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.
I think it's unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.
If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will loudly scream that the proposal could "disenfranchise" some voter, somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men and women of our military.
Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice. 
 by wp:   It appears as though the Demorats are very afraid that our military is not as enamored of obama as they try to make them appear.  A honest vote may be very damaging to the liberals.  With all their other dishonest tricks this rates right up there.





Monday, August 6, 2012

PERFECT STORM OF BLACK VIOLENCE ON GAYS

Posted by WP

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

Perfect storm' of black violence on 'gays'

Media blackout, victim fear and cultural condemnation

twitter icon Follow author rss feed Subscribe to author feed

Editor’s note: Colin Flaherty has done more reporting than any other journalist on what appears to be a nationwide trend of skyrocketing black-on-white crime, violence and abuse. WND features these reports to counterbalance the virtual blackout by the rest of the media due to their concerns that reporting such incidents would be inflammatory or even racist. WND considers it racist not to report racial abuse solely because of the skin color of the perpetrators or victims.
Please be forewarned the links in the following report may contain offensive language.

Black mob violence against “gay” people is a perfect storm of three secret worlds: Newspapers do not report the predators, victims do not report the crimes and being “gay” is “about the worst thing you can be in black culture,” CNN anchor Don Lemon told the New York Times.
That is why a growing number of people – black and white, “gay” and straight – say this violence is more widespread and less reported than most people think.
So let’s start the reporting, beginning with the benign and working toward the violent.
Sometimes the homophobia is just talk. Black people voted overwhelmingly against “gay” rights initiatives in California and North Carolina. “Gay” writer Dan Savage belled the cat: “I’m done pretending that the handful of racist gay white men out there … are a bigger problem for African Americans, gay and straight, than the huge numbers of homophobic African Americans are for gay Americans, whatever their color.”
Convoluted? Yes. But in the hyper-sensitive environs of the politically correct, this was a shot heard round the world.
Black antipathy toward “gay” people is featured in the work of the most popular black hip hop performers. Comments from superstar 50 Cent represent hundreds of articles and videos old and new easily found on the Internet: “I ain’t into f——. I don’t like gay people around me, because I’m not comfortable with what their thoughts are.”
Talking is one thing. Violence another. And more people are finding it harder to ignore the “anti-gay violence that plagues the black community,” says a headline for an article by Kenyon Farrow in The Grio, a black news website produced by NBC News.
“Incidents in the black community usually receive little or no attention, we have our own problems with homophobic violence here in the U.S.”
The most visible recent case of black mob violence against a “gay” person happened in Atlanta.
A “gay” man goes into a store, comes out and finds a dozen men taunting him with anti-”gay” epithets. Then they beat him. They threw a tire at him. All on video with commentary featuring lots of laughing.
He did not report the crime until the video of his beating went viral.
Newspapers in Atlanta – and the rest of the country – are getting more and more perplexed about what to do with citizen reporters not trained to ignore racial violence.
Such was the case when hundreds of black people raged through a crowd at an outdoor summer movie festival in an Atlanta “gay” neighborhood. One witness was so unhappy at the newspaper’s lack of coverage, he reported it himself on YouTube.
“What happened last night (June 3) at Screen on the Green was not simply ‘fights’ between unruly teens as the local TV stations would like their audiences to believe. These savages went ape—- and hunted down ‘gays’ and lesbians to attack!” the report said.
“They specifically began targeting members of the LGBT community around Blake’s and along 10th St. The local news media is acting as if this were a simple scuffle and that’s totally unacceptable.
“It was like a riot in a third world country,” the report said.
At least one other article about the widespread black-on-”gay” violence appeared in the local “gay” paper. According to Jesse Rhodes, a “gay” person: “We felt like sitting ducks. They were definitely targeting gay people. One of my good friends, who is gay and works at Swinging Richards, got jumped by five people and beat up.
Rhodes added, according to the article, that when he was walking out of the park he was called ‘f—–’ and other obscenities and said women at the event were also called lesbians.
The next day, Atlanta police said they had no reports of any anti-”gay” violence and very little information about violence of any kind at the festival.
Let’s move over to Chicago: Ground Zero for racial violence and denial.
Boys Town in Chicago is a “gay” neighborhood. Also called Streeterville, this usually tranquil and “eclectic” (that’s the journalistic code word for “gay”) area saw more than its share of black racial violence in the summer of 2011.
In July 2011, a man spilled a drink on another man, accidentally. The man who got wet was part of a large gang of black people. The soon-to-be-victim was a beautician walking with his boyfriend. He got stabbed and beat up. It’s on video. Let’s go to the local ABC affiliate:
“It was an obvious mob mentality. You saw people cheering it on. People running in to give one quick jab or kick and then back out and cheering them on. It’s scary,” Sall said.
Though unrelated, residents say this is the third stabbing in the area in recent weeks. The last one happened five days ago, just one block north, when a man was robbed in a 7-Eleven parking lot at Halsted and Roscoe.
Residents say the problems are due to large groups of people from outside the neighborhood loitering in the area. Alderman Tom Tunney, 44th Ward, said Monday night that this is a subject that has been coming up for the last couple of years.
“There tends to be large groups of minority youths on Halsted.”
Lots of episodes over a long period of time? Third stabbing in a few weeks? No one knew about the racial violence. No one knew about the “gay” bashing until this alderman revealed it almost by accident.
In June 2011, Chicago police arrested several black men for a series of four attacks and robberies in the same neighborhood. Any distinguishing features of the victims or assailants? You could not tell if you only listened to this account.
But the people arrested were black. At least one of the victims was “gay.” And everyone was a lot happier not talking about it. Except for this dude, a local “gay” resident who says the problem of violence and lawlessness is reaching epidemic levels.
“A rash of violent crime by black youth in Chicago’s predominately gay and white Lakeview neighborhood (aka, Boystown) has residents on edge, and sparking age old tensions between Blacks and the White GBLT community,” said one video blogger. “It’s been going on for a couple of years. People are getting very, very frightened.”
The blogger says white people are afraid to mention the race or their attackers, for fear of being labeled a racist.
“But if it’s true it’s true,” he said.
In July, 100 black people pelted cars outside of a “gay” club with bottles and rocks. When police were slow to respond, one man accused them of being racist because they would not arrest the black law breakers.
Even the Chicago Sun-Times is getting religion. Kind of. After a series of violent episodes in Streeterville, some on video, the outcry against black-mob-on-”gay” violence is rising even above the fear of being called a racist.
The police and politicians don’t talk about it, but drug dealing, gang activity, prostitution and muggings are not uncommon. They also don’t want to talk about the fact that many of the perpetrators are people of color.
People of color? Indians? Native Americans? Asians? Even the bravest in this crowd just cannot make themselves think the unthinkable: This is racial violence from groups of black people on “gay” people.
Some in Boystown have even set up their own Facebook page to fight the violence. Robberies here are up 23 percent over last year and 118 percent over 2010. This page carries an exhaustive list of criminal activity. And page members do not try to cover up who is responsible for the epidemic of criminal activity.
The page owners spend a lot of time fending off accusations they are racist. Few on either side waste any time denying the racial reality of the crimes. Some say noticing it or talking about it is racist. These same people say police are harassing these young men.
Lots of random violence on video as well.
Down the road in Normal, Ill., Eric Unger was recently walking the bucolic campus of Illinois State University when six to 10 black people unleashed a torrent of “gay” slurs and attacked him. He woke up with a broken jaw and a police department curiously unwilling to call this a hate crime on racial or sexual grounds.
In Brooklyn, a group of black men did not like the way Barrie Shortell looked. So they called him some anti-”gay” names, chased him, beat him badly, breaking his jaw and other bones. The story didn’t say who did it. But the commenters did. They were not happy.
In June, a few blocks away, a 7th grade student was taunted for being “gay” and beaten over a period of time until finally, one of the beatings resulted in blindness in one eye, reported The Grio. Despite the fact that those who assaulted him were black, one of the posters to the website was adamant that race had nothing to do with it: “These are the types of trumped up unprovoked attacks that racist trolls on this site are attempting to instigate.”
They were referring to a series of stories in WND on racial violence that someone had posted on TheGrio.com – which were later removed.
Here’s a two-fer: Two crimes on one video. The title of this New York state video says it all: Homophobic African-Americans charged with hate crimes. One of the attacks featured a gang of black people targeting a “gay” man at an upscale mall. Like many attacks of this nature, the two people who were charged were just a fraction of the total number present.
The nation’s capital has seen several examples of black mob on “gay” violence this year.
In July, a yoga instructor and his boyfriend were ambushed returning home. One jaw broken. The attack on these two men came four months after an almost identical episode where “another 29-year-old gay man suffered a broken jaw and other serious injuries from an attack by at least four assailants who shouted anti-gay names at him.”
The Washington Post and other local media do not identify the attackers by race. The local “gay” paper did.
A few miles away, in June, three black people were accused of hurling anti-”gay” slurs at a “gay” teenager, then holding him down while they stabbed him. Then it got really strange in the reader comments section: “I can’t understand why they are angry – did the guy ask them for sex?,” said black commenter Debra Winfield. “Stupid people do stupid things.”
Other readers excoriated her for blaming the victim. Winfield doubled down, saying they were stupid. Over at the Washington Post in a report on the same story, one “gay” commenter summed it up and said what the paper would not:
The level of homophobia within the black community is overwhelming, and in a most calculated way, they spin it to blame gays, when they themselves are voting against LGBT rights at best, and ATTACKING gays at worse. Time to confront the elephant in the room and stop being so politically correct. Black homophobia is celebrated in the black community and no longer does the LGBT community have to stand for it.
We’ll see.
Up the road a bit in Boston, in April 2012, several black men attacked a “gay” guy then tried to pull him off the local subway. Yes, there were all the requisite racial and sexual slurs
In Asheville, N.C., a man was beaten and called “gay” slurs. And the guy was not even “gay.” “He was treated for broken facial bones,” said the paper. The officer failed to file a report. Nothing to see here folks.
The list lengthens. Openly “gay” Matthew McLeod was on his way to his job as a hair dresser in St. Louis when six black people called him “f—–” before the Knockout Game began. He got off with a broken nose and a black eye.
In January of this year, Nihan Thai was walking through his “eclectic” Seattle neighborhood when several black people assaulted him. The openly “gay” man visited his neighbors to talk about an epidemic of violent crime in their neighborhood. According to KING-TV in Seattle:
The robberies continued and Thai found himself becoming someone he’d never expected – a community activist.
He kept hearing crime was down in Seattle – robberies had fallen three percent in 2011 –but it sure didn’t feel that way.
Thai started visiting his neighbors, they had a lot to say, and soon he realized he was doing his own crime survey.
Thai knocked on 49 doors. 32 people were home. How many of them had been victims of a crime since moving to the neighborhood? All but three.
Many victims told Thai they’d never reported the crimes to police.
“It happens to them so often that after 2 or 3 times they stopped reporting because they didn’t see any progress,” said Thai
One of the people he talked to was Danny Vega, also “gay.” Soon after, three black men killed Vega. The 10th such attack in that area in two months, all near the corner of Martin Luther King Way and Othello Street.
All of the suspects in all of the crimes are black.
Police released a video of three black men who are “persons of interest.”
Let’s finish up in Dallas. Starting with the police report:
On March 13, 2012, at about 2:00 a.m. two citizens were walking near the corner of Audelia Road and Forest Lane. A dark colored 4 door vehicle (possibly a Buick) with tinted windows and 24 inch rims approached the two individuals and suspects from within the vehicle began to shout slurs that were disparaging and derogatory toward sexual orientation.
There were believed to be 5 black male suspects in their 20s inside the vehicle. Some of the suspects exited the vehicle, and two of them were brandishing baseball bats. The suspects attacked the two victims causing multiple injuries requiring medical treatment.
They called them sissies. While trying to defend themselves, one of the victims got caught in the car door. The car dragged him until he found a way to free himself.
No one died.
Reporters note: As part of the research for this story, I sent an email to 350 reporters who were self-identified as “gay” or as covering “gay” issues. I told them about the story of black-mob-on-”gay” violence and sent them a link as an example. I asked them if they knew of any black-on-”gay” violence.
Not one “gay” reporter said he knew of even one example.

ANAHEIM ,CALIFORNIA MEDIA BLACKOUT

Posted by Woody Pendleton

FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER  WFZR/TV

 I wonder what is happening in Anaheim, California that we are not supposed to hear about?   There are rumors floating around about police dressed in military uniforms on almost every corner and citizens protesting the heavy handed actions being performed by these police .  Are they real police officers or are they obama's thugs starting the martial law takeover we have heard is coming??

  We are seeking information from any citizens in the area as well as photos etc.  PLEASE SEND ALL INFORMATION TO FREE ZONE MEDIA CENTER.  IT WILL BE POSTED FOR THE WORLD TO SEE AND READ.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...