September
30
2014

The Growing Threat of an EMP Strike

September 30, 2014

Protect and Defend the U.S. from EMP Threat

emp-strike-screen-cap

High altitude nuclear detonation over North America resulting in a cataclysmic EMP

The United States could find itself in a precarious position much worse than the recent D.C. earthquake if attacked by an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon. An EMP would  cause current and voltage surges and burn out the semi-conductor chips of all electronic devices within the line of sight. A single nuclear weapon detonated at a high altitude has the potential to instantly send the United States back to the 19th century. The Heritage Foundation recently devoted one of its public events to this important issue. As James Carafano, Baker Spring, and Richard Weitz argue, despite the EMP Commission’s 2004 and 2008 recommendations, hardly any progress has been made in protecting the country from the consequences of an EMP attack.

A long-range ballistic missile shot from Iran, Russia, China, or North Korea could deliver a nuclear payload to an altitude high enough to cause an EMP blast. Less technologically challenging short-range nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles, launched from vessels such as freighters, tankers, or container ships off U.S. shores, could cause an EMP effect.

The best way to address the EMP threat is to build a robust missile defense system, comprised primarily of Aegis ballistic missile defense capable ships;Aegis Ashore, a land-based missile defense component; and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle capabilities. So far, the Obama Administration’s record is questionable. It has made massive cuts to the U.S. missile defense program and cancelled some of the most promising programs.

An EMP could be inflicted without an organized group behind it. With the right equipment, a lone terrorist could cause a blackout of a city—and he would not even need a nuclear weapon. The EMP effect can also be created during an electromagnetic solar storm—known as a Carrington effect—and could impact the grid the same way as a nuclear weapon.

It is imperative for the United States to prepare for an EMP attack. For about $200 million, the United States can harden the major transformers associated with major metropolitan areas. This relatively minor investment could save millions of American lives.

September
30
2014

Conservative Apps for your Really Smart Phone

September 30, 2014

Savvy app designers are wisely customizing more and more smart phone applications for conservative consumers. These are the first generation of Conservative Apps for your Really Smart Phone. 2reaganoho

  • The Tea Party App: This app links to the social networks of 2.7 million Tea Party, 9/12, Liberty, Patriot, Militia, Civitarian, Libertarian, and other groups throughout the country. Very popular with activists and operatives, through the instantaneous sharing of information the Tea Party App helps you find the closest rally, protest, public hearing, council meeting, townhall, or other function where you can join other like-minded folks by the thousands and scare the hell out of politicians who think it’s still 2008.
  • The Gadsden Flag App: projects a holographic image of a waving Gadsden Flag. It is designed to be used along with the Tea Party App when you arrive at a rally or protest, and didn’t have time to grab the real thing.
  • The Hayek App: It beeps an alarm signal when you have gone too far down the road to serfdom.
  • The von Mises App: is a speech recognition app able to discern the difference between “Classical Liberal” rhetoric, and “Radical Leftist Liberal” rhetoric. The von Mises App is recommended for users who get confused about which school of Liberalism is the topic of political discussion. If the rhetoric is Classic Liberalism, “Human action is purposeful behavior,” for example, it will play a soothing harp tune. If the app detects Radical Leftist Liberal rhetoric, “I got me Obama phone,” for example, it will sound an alarm reminiscent of WWII-era Air Raid sirens.
  • The Ronald Reagan App: Captures biofeedback and when it senses the onset of negative emotions sends a text message with an encouraging Reagan quote such as, “We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we will always be free,” or “I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph. And there’s purpose and worth to each and every life.”
  • The John Wayne App: Offers support when you have a question about an important decision. You enter information about the situation followed by the hashtag  #WWJWD and it offers up 3 suggestions for “What Would John Wayne Do?” in a given circumstance. THIS APP IS ESPECIALLY HELPFUL IN ARMED CONFRONTATIONS AND BAR FIGHTS.
  • The American Flag App: Projects an image of the American flag waving in the breeze on any flat surface such as a wall. To be used in places where commie pinkos refuse to display the American flag.
  • The “Make My Day” App: With the touch of a button this app makes the beautiful sound you hear when a twelve-gauge pump-action shotgun is being cocked. Very useful in dark places full of unruly Democrats.
  • The Chris Kyle App: uses GPS and laser-assisted triangulation to help you increase your accuracy on the range. Used in conjunction with a high-powered sniper rifle, the Chris Kyle App is particularly helpful when your target over 1 mile away and is about the size of a human head.
  • The Bill Clinton App: Use the settings in this app to protect all the women in your life. Using GPS technology it sends a customized alarm tone accompanied by a text message saying. “Watch your backside!” whenever former President Bill Clinton comes within one hundred yards of a woman’s vicinity.
  • The “Ugly Liberal Women” App: This favorite among men is a simple application which accesses a cloud database of images of all ugly liberal women of the last 60 years. It’s very useful when your liberal friends ask why such a nice guy could be a conservative. Just open this app and they will clam up for months.
  • The “Weak, Pencilneck Liberal Men” App: Works the same as the “Ugly Liberal Women” app, to be used to remind your lib gal friends that their men–if they have men–are pussies.
  • The “Lower Education” App: uses a cloud database of all the “in the name of Heaven, don’t send your kid there” Stalinist-infiltrated, crazy commie pinko pervert colleges and universities in the country. It’s easy to use. Just enter the name of an institution and it will give a rundown of all administrators, faculty, and other staffers that belong to the Communist Party of America, Socialist Party of America, North American Man-Boy Love Association, New Domestic Subversives Brigade, and others. This app is a little buggy because of the need for almost daily updates due to the increasing number of American colleges being run by former KGB agents.
  • The Patton App: This application is used exclusively by men in combat. It works to boost morale and incite courage during the heat of battle. The app projects a holographic image of General George S. Patton in his field uniform saying the following words, “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.”
  • The R. Lee Ermey App: Simpy sync this app with all your Internet media accounts and with the touch of an icon you can leave an R. Lee Ermey-generated comment on any blog, newspaper, and even Facebook and Twitter. The following comments generated by the R. Lee Ermey App were found on Huffpo and Think Progress websites: “What the hell is wrong with you people? Were you born ugly, or did your mama use your face as a meat tenderizer?” and, “You sniveling bawl-babies make me puke. Like dumb shits you spew your Commie Pinko lies like there was no tomorrow. You disgust me!” and the favorite, “Drop and kiss the ground you spineless, witless piece of flea crap! Fifty push-ups now, if you wanna live you pathetic maggot!”

Stay tuned when next month we churn out the NextGen of Conservative Smart Phone apps.

by Marjorie Haun  7/19/14

September
27
2014

Answering the Lies of the Disarmament Crowd

September 27, 2014

Rebuttal of NYT’s and arms control advocates’ lies

Originally posted by author, Zbigniew Mazurak on September 26, 2014

142074.439nuclear_explosion

The advocates of America’s unilateral nuclear disarmament are at it again. They’ve launched yet another attack on the US nuclear arsenal – the only thing that is deterring Russia, China, and North Korea from attacking the US with nuclear weapons.

But fear not, Dear Reader. The pro-disarmament-crowd’s latest media attack on the US nuke deterrent is yet another litany of blatant lies that don’t even pass the laugh test. They are the same old tired lies that the treasonous pro-disarmament crowd has been peddling for many years. Evidently, like their intellectual godfather, Joseph Goebbels, they believe that repeating a lie a hundred times makes it true.

But it doesn’t.

The New York Times ran a story this week about the Defense Department’s nuclear arsenal modernization plan. America’s current ballistic missile submarines, nuclear-capable bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles, and associated nuclear warheads – built during the 1970s and 1980s – are aging out and will need to be replaced soon.

Not wanting to miss an opportunity to disarm America unilaterally, the anti-nuclear Left – led by the NYT and pro-unilateral-disarmament groups – is conducting a propaganda campaign falsely claiming that the modernization/replacement effort will cost $1 trillion, that nuclear weapons are supposedly useless, that this conflicts with Barack Obama’s pledge to seek a “world without nuclear weapons”, etc.

Needless to say, all of their claims are blatant lies.

The Cost Of Nuclear Modernization

Firstly, the $1 trillion figure comes from an anti-nuclear propaganda pamphlet cooked up at the extremely-leftist, anti-nuclear Monterrey Institute for International Studies and was personally rigged by well-known anti-nuclear hacks such as Jeffrey Lewis (who has been proven wrong on many issues, including the range of China’s ballistic missiles and the size of China’s nuclear arsenal).

To say it very politely, Lewis is not an authority on nuclear weapons or defense spending.

Wildly exaggerating the costs of nuclear modernization is an old tactic of unilateral disarmament advocates, dating back decades. It’s nothing new. The anti-nuclear Ploughshares Fund has been caught doing so. It’s no surprise the liberal MIIS is now lying so blatantly as well.

And even if the $1 trillion figure were correct – which it isn’t – it refers to planned spending on nuclear modernization over the span of THREE DECADES. That is, MIIS claims the US will spend $1 trillion over a span of 30 years on nuclear modernization.

Simple math tells us that $1 trillion divided by thirty is around $33 bn per year. That works out to around 5-6% of the DOD’s annual budget (around $600 bn per year).

It is ridiculous to claim that a Department that has an annual budget of around $600 bn – larger than the GDP of most countries in the world – can’t afford to spend a meagre 5-6% of its budget on modernizing and preserving America’s nuclear deterrent.

Therefore, the claims of dinosaur politicians like former Clinton Defense Sec. William Perry and anti-nuclear hacks such as ex-Gen. James Cartwright (Obama’s “favorite general”) that the Obama administration’s modernization plans are “unaffordable” are completely false prima facie.

In fact, over the next 30 years, the DOD is poised to spend $20 trillion on all sorts of military things. $1 trillion is a tiny fraction (5%) out of that figure.

Moreover, if the DOD’s nuclear modernization plans are “unaffordable” (which they are not), the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program to develop and procure 2,443 short range fighters is even more so unaffordable, with a price tag of $400 bn to develop and procure and an additional $1 trillion to operate over 50 years! $1.4 trillion for a fleet of far less capable systems!

Compared to this, nuclear weapons are cheap.

Anti-nuclear hacks such as those on the “National Defense Panel” also falsely claim that also falsely claim that nuclear modernization spending will siphon lots of money from America’s conventional forces.

But that is also a blatant lie. As stated above, nuclear modernization will cost only 5% of the DOD budget over the next 30 years.

Moreover, nuclear modernization programs aren’t the costliest ones in the DOD’s budget plans. Not even close. A recently released “Weapon Systems Factbook” by the CSBA documents this.

CSBA’s “Factbook” says the DOD will need to invest $73 bn to develop and build 100 stealthy bombers and $90 bn to build replacements for America’s current, obsolete, noisy, and ageing ballistic missile subs (SSBNs). (The bomber program will, in fact, cost only $55 bn, not the $73 bn that the CSBA claims.)

That’s $163 bn in total, per the CSBA “Factbook.”

By far the most expensive weapon program in the DOD’s current plans, and indeed in US history, is the conventional F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, aiming to develop an aircraft that can do everything from air superiority to close air support, but which in reality will produce an aircraft mediocre at every task.

This program will in fact develop and procure a fleet of partially stealthy, short-ranged, slow, sluggish, unmaneuverable, underpowered, poorly armed, useless “strike fighters” designed for strikes against massive Soviet tank armies in Germany – a threat that no longer exists. It is now intended by the USAF to fight enemy aircraft and go into airspace protected by modern SAM systems – missions it is utterly incapable of performing.

The F-35 is also short-ranged, with a combat radius of about 1,800-1,900 kms at most, meaning that, like other US fighters, it would need to use bases close to potential adversary countries – bases that are well within the range of enemy medium range ballistic and cruise missiles. As Congressmen Randy Forbes and Chris Stewart explain here, cutting spending on bombers to protect short-range fighters would be a grave mistake.

Per CSBA’s Factbook, the F-35 has already cost taxpayers $100 bn and will cost another $251.3 bn in the coming years to complete the program.

That is $88.3 bn more than the cost of the long-range strike bomber and new ballistic missile submarine programs COMBINED! And that is using the CSBA’s grossly exaggerated estimate of the bomber program’s cost!

In other words, if the DOD cancelled the useless F-35 Junk Strike Fighter, it could pay the entire cost of both the new bomber and the new ballistic missile sub programs COMBINED and still make a saving of $88.3 bn!

“Oh, but other dastardly nuclear weapon programs will siphon more money”, anti-nuclear propagandists will claim.

No, they won’t. The other nuclear weapon programs the DOD has in store, the Trident II missile and the B61 nuclear bomb toolkit, will cost $5.6 bn and $1.2 bn, respectively, a total of $6.8 bn. Paying for them from savings generated by F-35 cancellation would still leave the DOD with a saving of $81.7 bn!

In fact, if the DOD simply cancelled the F-35 program, it could pay for upgrading F-15s and F-16s, prolonging their service lives by decades, building all the planned 100 stealthy long range bombers and 12 replacements for Ohio class submarines, for the Trident missile, for B61 modernization, for the KC-46 tanker, the V-22 Osprey, the Virginia class of attack submarines, and dozens of other weapon programs – and still have healthy savings left.

(Speaking of the V-22 Osprey, can’t the CH-46 do the job? Some naval aviators, such as Jack McCain, believe it can.)

So contrary to anti-nuke propagandists’ claims, no, the Long Range Strike Bomber and the Ohio class replacement will NOT crush conventional weapon programs. The F-35 Junk Strike Fighter will.

The proverbial elephant in the room is the F-35.

Moreover, the Long Range Strike Bomber will be as much a conventional weapon platform as a nuclear one. It is needed for both conventional and (if need be) nuclear strike. It is needed because America’s potential foes (Russia, China, Syria, Venezuela, and even Iran and North Korea) possess such sophisticated air defense systems (especially the first three countries) that America’s nonstealthy bombers (B-52s and B-1s) can’t go into their airspace, and B-2’s stealth technology is 1980s vintage. Moreover, the USAF has only 20 B-2s – way too little for any effective campaign against even a mid-sized adversary.

Unsurprisingly, the National Defense Panel, which the NY Slimes quotes so approvingly, strongly supports the Long Range Strike Bomber (p. 45):

“Whether the aircraft is designed to be manned, unmanned, or “optionally manned,” the need to bring such an aircraft into service by the mid-2020s, when modern air defenses will put the B-2 bomber increasingly at risk, is compelling. We are concerned that continued budget cuts and the resulting programmatic instability would jeopardize this critical investment.”

The need for the LRSB has been irrefutably proven time and again.

The Need For Nuclear Modernization

Anti-nuclear hacks such as the CLW’s Kingston Reif – who has been proven wrong on every issue he’s written about – protest, however, that nuclear weapons are “useless” for countering any threats to US national security, so it doesn’t matter if they cost little. In a recent screed published by DefenseOne, Reif and his fellow CLW hack Angela Canterbury falsely claim:

“But the most explosive (literally) power tool has neither prevented nor will be useful in addressing any of today’s international security issues: nuclear weapons. The current U.S. arsenal of approximately 4,800 nuclear warheads is a Cold War anachronism. (…) The current modernization plan is geared towards building nuclear weapons that we don’t need and can’t afford.”

(http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2014/09/its-time-rein-nuclear-spending/95174/?oref=d-skybox)

They also falsely call the new National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund “a nuclear submarine slush fund”.

In another screed for DefenseOne, Rep. Mike Quigley, a liberal Democrat from Illinois, falsely claimed that:

“not every element of NATO’s power is useful in combating the Russian threat to European security. NATO’s nuclear weapons strategy in Europe is no longer relevant… (…) The nuclear weapons we deployed for the Cold War, which ended two decades ago, are simply not the same weapons we need for the “hot” war threat that our eastern NATO allies, and Ukraine, face today.”

But they are dead wrong, because nuclear weapons are of paramount importance to countering threats to America’s security. The gravest of these threats are the nuclear arsenals of Russia, China, and North Korea and Iran’s ambition to develop its own atomic weapons.

ONLY nuclear weapons can protect the US and its allies from these grave threats.

The nation’s second most senior military officer, Adm. James Winnefeld, understands this, which is why he said earlier this year at the Atlantic Council:

“If we consider that at the top of our list of national security interests is probably the survival of our nation, then at the top of the list of threats to that interest is a massive nuclear attack from Russia.”

Indeed, the Russian nuclear threat is the gravest of all. Russia’s nuclear arsenal is huge, numbering anywhere between 6,800 (per the FAS) and 8,000 (per the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists) nuclear weapons, deployed and nondeployed.

In early September, while NATO leaders were gathered in Wales for a NATO summit, Russian nuclear-armed bombers simulated (for the upteenth time since 2012) a nuclear strike on the US! Shortly thereafter, they tested the air defenses of northern European countries, again carrying deadly nuclear payloadsthen practiced a strike on the US again, but the much-maligned F-22 Raptors intercepted them.

Since 2007, Russia has threatened to aim or use nuclear weapons against the US and its allies at least 15 times, including in recent months!

Russia’s nuclear triad numbers over 400 ICBMs (capable of delivering over 1,600 nukes to the continental US), 13 ballistic missile subs (boomers) capable of delivering over 2,000 warheads to America’s shores, and 251 strategic bombers capable of delivering another 1,400 nuclear warheads to the US. The Tu-95 bomber fleet alone can deliver over 700 warheads.

On top of that, Russia’s attack and cruise missile submarines can deliver further over 1,000 atomic warheads to the US on their cruise missiles.

And as Russia replaces older, single- or low-number-warhead missiles (like the Topol) with newer ones (e.g. Yars, Bulava, and Liner), capable of carrying more warheads, Russia’s nuclear arsenal will only grow.

Moscow has just announced that three more missile regiments will, by this year’s end, swap their single-warhead Topol missiles for 4-warhead Yars ICBMs.

Putin has also stated Russia will grow its atomic arsenal and develop new, “offensive” nuclear weapons.

So Russia’s nuclear arsenal will grow STILL FURTHER, with new, “offensive” nukes aimed against the US and NATO.

Even larger is Russia’s tactical nuclear arsenal, estimated at 4,000 warheads and deliverable by a wide range of short- and medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles, surface ships, tactical aircraft, artillery pieces, and other systems.

China also has a large nuclear arsenal, estimated at between 1,600 (per General Viktor Yesin) and 3,000 (per Dr Philip Karber, the DOD’s chief nuclear strategist under President Reagan) warheads and the means to deliver many of them. It currently has at least 75 (and likely many more) ICBMs capable of reaching the US, including at least 55 multiple-warhead ICBMs (DF-5s, DF-31s, DF-41s) capable of striking the Continental US.

Moscow and Beijing are also both developing next-generation bombers.

Both Russia and China are rapidly growing, not cutting, their atomic arsenal. In these circumstances, it would be utterly suicidal for the US to cut – or neglect to modernize – its own nuclear deterrent. It would be an invitation of a nuclear first strike by Russia or China.

And that’s before mentioning North Korea, which already has miniaturized nuclear warheads it can mate to missiles, and ICBMs capable of delivering them to the US.

America’s Allies Get It; American Anti-Nuke Activists Don’t

Hardly surprising, then, that America’s European allies – especially those most threatened by Russia – have also once again underlined the importance of NATO’s nuclear deterrent. The Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated: “The current situation reaffirms the importance of NATO’s nuclear deterrence policy.”

Because America’s nuclear weapons also serve another vitally important function: reassuring them that they are protected by the US, safe from potential aggressors like Russia and China, and therefore don’t need to develop their own nukes.

But they will if the US continues to cut its arsenal. Already 66% of South Koreans want their country to “go nuclear”; Poland’s former President Lech Walesa has said his country should do the same; Saudi Arabia has already ordered nuclear warheads in Pakistan andDF-21 ballistic missiles  in China; and Japan has opened a facility that can produce 3,600 nuclear warheads in a year if Tokyo ever decides to “go nuclear.”

And if America continues to cut its own arsenal, they won’t have any alternative. They cannot afford to bet their security and their very survival on American liberals’ fantasies of “a world without nuclear weapons”. They know that Reif’s and another anti-nuclear hacks’ claims that “nuclear weapons are useless” are patently false.

So if America continues to cut its nuclear arsenal, we will see MORE nuclear arms and MORE nuclear-weapon-wielding states in the world, not fewer. Potential enemies, emboldened by America’s disarmament, will arm themselves. Nervous allies, worried about their security, will also obtain nuclear weapons. 66% of South Koreans also want their country to do so. Japan is ready to do likewise the moment its Prime Minister decides to do so.

Therefore, no matter how much nuclear modernization will cost, it is a national security imperative – and even the anti-nuclear President Obama has realized it.

Forget About The “Nuke-Free World” Fantasy

Critics claim that by pursuing it, he’s violating his pledge to seek “a world without nuclear weapons.”

But he isn’t. There is nothing inconsistent with seeking a long-term goal of such a fantasy world (which will never exist) while modernizing the US nuclear arsenal to maintain it for the foreseeable future.

From the beginning of his first presidential campaign, Obama was saying explicitly that as long as nuclear weapons exist, the US will have to maintain a safe, secure, and reliable nuclear arsenal.

And let’s be honest: there will never be a world without nuclear weapons. There is zero chance of such a world existing. More and more countries are developing nuclear weapons or at least considering it and talking openly about it. The world is heading towards MORE nuclear arms and more nuclear weapon possessing states.

Obama’s “nuclear-free world” was always a totally unrealistic, childish fantasy. It should’ve never been pursued.

But when the NYT and anti-nuclear groups like the “Council for a Livable World” and the “Arms Control Association” complain that nuclear modernization plans impede the goal of “nuclear disarmament”, they are not talking about GLOBAL nuclear disarmament.

No, they are talking about their long-held goal of the nuclear disarmament of the United States. That is what they seek and have always sought.

Their goal is not to free the world from nuclear weapons. Their goal is to disarm the US unilaterally and to expose it to Russian and Chinese nuclear attack.

They must be stopped at all costs.

Reposted with permission of the author 9/27/14

September
26
2014

Democrat Apps for your Not-so-Smart Phone

September 26, 2014

Hey kiddos, have you heard of the “Rape Whistle App” or the “Anthony Weiner App?” Well, stop texting for one frigging minute and check out the new and amazing Liberal Democrat Apps for your Not-so-Smart Phone!

hill222

  • The Slick Willie App: Extremely popular with single men, this app uses GPS and facial tomography software to identify reasonably attractive women within the user’s vicinity and alerts him as to their location. It has a sensitive, high-definition camera lens that can work from as far away as 300 yards. The user simply scans his surroundings and the camera will identify and pinpoint any woman over the age of 15 and under 300 lbs as a potential pick-up.
  • The Lois Lerner IRS Emails App: This powerful app has the ability to scour clean the hard drives of computers and servers, eliminate emails stored in the computers and servers of those who received them, and cause hard copies of sensitive data to dissolve into the ether. Once you upload the Lois Lerner IRS Emails App you will also be able to strike from the memory of any person in the world any data which may have been obtained through Lois Lerner’s emails.
  • The Border Invasion App: This application works much a silent dog whistle. It emits no discernible sound but when activated sends a signal to all the poor people in Central America calling them to show up at the Border where they will get open passage into the country, free food, medical care, transportation to the city of their choice, and a CD containing all the speeches of Barack Obama in Spanish.
  • The Terrorist Border Invasion App: Like its sister app, this one links into the social networks of terrorist cells in Mexico, Central and South America and beyond. When activated it will send a direct message to its terrorist users written in Arabic saying, “The border with America no longer exists. Dress like a peasant, keep your head down, and enter by blending with the tens of thousands pouring into America, get an apartment in Austin, sign up for food stamps, and start building your bombs. See you in September.”
  • The Border Invasion Language App: This powerful application uses Universal Translator software to help politicians such as Sheila Jackson Lee and Nancy Pelosi welcome illegal aliens into the country. The user speaks into the microphone and the speech is audibly translated into Arabic, Chinese, Yemeni, Urdu, Russian, Nahua, or in a pinch, Spanish. This app is a mandatory feature of all iphone 5s currently being distributed by the Department of Self-Immolation to all illegal border invaders.
  • The Hillary Clinton Benghazi App: Nobody knows what this app does, but what difference, at this point, does it make?
  • The Bowe Bergdahl App: The ratings for the Bowe Bergdahl App are not good because of its buggy nature. Once downloaded the app will take up the 24 hr news cycle for approximately 2 weeks and then it will inexplicably disappear, never to be mentioned again.
  • The Depressed Taliban App: Using a digital voice software which mimics Barack Obama, this app sends voice messages of encouragement and hope to terrorist detainees at Gitmo, all of whom have an iphone 5.
  • The Anthony Weiner App: Also known as “digital male enhancement,” this app works with your camera to enlarge a specified portion of a photographic image while keeping everything in the background in its proper proportion.
  • The Hobby Lobby App: For reasons which remain a mystery to ordinary smart phone users, this app, when activated, causes liberal women to go into convulsions and scream, “My body, it’s my body, and I have a right to make you pay for my contraceptives!” This app comes with an appropriate warning, which usually goes unheeded by Democrat-leaning sluts.
  • The Rape Whistle App: Liberals and most Democrats, who have an unusual aversion to the mere concept of guns and armed self-defense, like this simple app. In the case of an attempted rape the user simply activates the app and it emits a shrill sound similar to a whistle. Although it has reportedly never prevented a rape, it remains popular among liberal gals because it makes them feel good.
  • The Obamacare Website App: Although this application has been in development for years and has cost nearly a billion dollars to bring to market, it is still too buggy for consumer use. It is likely the developer will have no choice but to create the Single Payer App in its stead.
  • The Veterans Administration Waiting List App: There is a real version of this app, and a fake version of this app. Neither works properly, but the fake version creates the appearance that its working. In the end, it’s a totally useless piece of crap. No one, however, is willing to take this expensive piece of crap off the market and replace it with something that works because hundreds of thousands of over-paid bureaucrats like it just the way it is.
  • The Al Sharpton App: This application works much like a teleprompter but uses phonetic syllables to help the speaker say even the simplest words correctly. Within the text are alerts in a bright yellow font reminding the speaker to “speak slowly and don’t spit so much.”
  • The Alinsky App: This handy application, with just the touch of an icon, can help idle Socialists plan how to use racial politics, wedge issues, hate mongering and scare tactics to organize their neighborhoods into little balkanized islands consisting of haves and have nots, blacks and whites, rich and poor. Extremely popular among Democrats the Alinsky app is tricky to use and will cease to function if the Free Market Capitalism App is used in the same vicinity.
  • The History Revision App: Liberal teachers love this app. It works as a sort of translator and can translate text, or website content taken from history texts or databases, and revise it to fit the liberal, “America sucks” narrative. Using terminology such as “genocide,” “conquest,” “invaders,” “religious zealots,” and “Capitalist pigs,” the History Revision App will take the most heartwarming American tale and turn it into a story of injustice, racism, violence, and hate, almost too much to bear.
  • The Liberal Male App: This optical application turns the screen of your smart phone into a sort of fun house mirror. The typical liberal male, physically inadequate with splotchy face and body hair, sallow skin and dead eyes, can gaze into this app and it will reflect back to him an image which is well-muscled, fit, and properly hairy. Though it may give the liberal male a temporary boost of confidence, liberal females have been known to break phones with this app, having a rabid hatred of manly men.
  • The Liberal Female App: Much like its counterpart, this application is to be used only in secret. They typical grotesque liberal female gazes into the screen of her smartphone and reflected back is the image of a beautiful woman such as Sara Palin or Megyn Kelly. Liberal females must be careful not to use this app in the presence of a liberal male as it has a tendency to cause them to become Conservative Republicans.

by Marjorie Haun  9/26/14

September
25
2014

Ten Ways to Tweet Yourself onto an NSA Watchlist

September 25, 2014

“I didn’t send those tweets. My Twitter account was hacked!” ~ Congressman Anthony Weiner (former, NY)

For those unacquainted with the subtleties of the tweet, let me offer you a short Twitter primer.

  1. Tweets must convey information, a thought, a picture, a URL, or a combination of these in 140 characters or less.
  2. Handles must always have the @ preceding them. It’s kind of like owning a planet when you can put @ before your name.
  3. Hashtags–these things #####–are used to create searchable content, such as a group interest item (#TeaParty) a trending item (#Election2016) something completely irrelevant (#ObamasSuccesses) or something designed to be controversial (#ThingsIProbablyShouldntTweet)

Back in 2012, that year of innocence when hope was high and life worth living, I actually got away with these tweets!

 

 

September
23
2014

Seven Ways Progressivism Leads to Civil Decline

September 23, 2014

Progressivism, with its flawed, illogical tenets which lead to the destruction of individuals and civilizations, is as much a war with God as it is with humanity.

Rachel Carson, whose birthday was memorialized earlier this week in a “Google Doodle” was such an anti-human. She provides the perfect example of how a progressive “feel good” theory leads to human death–sometimes millions of human deaths. Rachel Carson provides our Number One way progressives are anti-human.

2eug

Environmentalism

  • Progressives and their conjoined twins, militant environmentalists, use the “preservation” of nature to promote policies that harm people. Consider Rachel Carson’s non-scientific crusade that resulted in the ban of DDT. Although humans had been exposed to DDT for decades with no documented ill-effects or harm to the environment, and despite the fact that harm to bird species was never conclusively proved, Carson’s hysterical tome, “Silent Spring” emboldened leftist politicians and activists to ban the use of DDT-based pesticides in most of the world. Since the ban, tens of millions of people in undeveloped equatorial countries have died needlessly from mosquito-borne illness.  Global warming, endangered species, pollution, genetically-modified products, and other “causes” exemplify how Progressives crush human movement, development, prosperity, hope, and lives using a mixture of bad science and anti-human philosophy.

Eugenics and Abortion

  • Vestiges of Eugenics run through modern political theories and the legalization of abortion via Roe vs. Wade in 1973, in many ways, gave eugenicists all they ever wanted, and more. The central motif of the Eugenics Movement was a “healthier” race brought about by elimination of human deficiencies; deficiencies such as mental illness, retardation, physical disabilities, and of course, colored skin. Margaret Sanger took racism to its most lethal heights, and it’s no accident that the majority of Planned Parenthood clinics were–and are–located in minority-dense, inner-cities. Sanger’s racist goal to eliminate substandard elements from humanity,  has been borne out in America’s black community where nearly 43% of pregnancies end in the termination of the baby’s life. But beyond the elimination of the “unwanted”, abortion is the religion of Progressives. The penultimate litmus test for political worthiness, abortion trumps all other issues. Militant feminists worship at the altar of abortion, encouraging all woman to participate in its lethal rites. We all know abortion kills the unborn, and is often paired with infanticide, as in the case of Curtis Gosnell. But abortion hurts–is devastating–to women. So-called women’s rights organizations sacrifice women to their abortion god. The personal mental and physical toll women have paid for the “right to abortion” is no less ignored by Progressives and their media minions than is visual and scientific evidence that abortion kills living human beings. But one characteristic of Progressivism is that ideology is supreme, and though lives are destroyed, when it comes to furthering even the most flawed ideas, everyone is expendable.

Gun Control

  • Gun control is a lie. Progressives don’t believe in gun control, they want full-out gun confiscation. Law-abiding citizens control their firearms quite well. Why? Because they control their lives, their emotions, and they understand the power and usefulness of guns and when they may be discharged appropriately. But Progressives want to disarm law-abiding gun owners because they pose the first line of defense against tyranny. To Progressives the supremacy of the state takes precedence over the security and liberty of individuals, and so they would disarm gun owners, or punish them into submission, because that is the final path to full state control over every aspect of life in America. The Leftist push for gun control requires submission to the state, and when citizens go unarmed against a tyrannical regime, human life becomes very cheap.

Debt and Big Government

  • Economic policies that create debt and suppress economic growth go hand in hand with Progressivism. Keynesian spending policies that burden the nation with debt seep into the bank accounts of earners, and private property becomes subject to perverse Progressive economic theories–theories that never work in practice. When the government can confiscate or control the private property of individuals; earnings, real property, time, investments, land, and future earnings, humans become little more than a means to serve the insatiable maw of a bloated, inefficient, and increasingly unjust government.  Progressivism so devalues the lives of individuals, crushing individual dreams, creativity, and sapping the energy out of even the most robust entrepreneurs, that it becomes the very definition of anti-human.

Obamacare

  • The most  intimate of all possessions, besides our thoughts, are our bodies. Obamacare has turned the American healthcare system inside-out, and in doing so has put control of our most personal decisions into the hands of bureaucrats, algorithms, and death panels. America’s healthcare system became great because of Americanism; the worth of individual life, the fighting spirit, innovation, progress, and excellence. Obamacare and other perverse versions of socialized medicine will soon drive every one of those characteristics out of the healthcare system, leaving a few doctors here and there fighting to maintain excellent, personalized care despite a law that was designed to destroy their autonomy. The elderly, those with chronic ailments and disabilities which require high levels of care, the “least among us” will succumb to the inevitable rationing that comes with government-run healthcare. And it is a matter of time before various forms of killing–other than abortion which is already covered–will become common as part of a long-term healthcare plan. This is our medicine, our bodies, our very lives, that are being extinguished.

Massive Bureaucracy

  • Though created for all the right reasons, the Veterans Administration is guilty of wrongs perpetrated against our veterans because it is a massive, impersonal bureaucracy. Civil servants are not servants of the people, but are bureaucrats served by public sector unions, unparalleled benefits packages, and impossibly complex rules that protect the jobs of even the most corrupt and ineffective workers within the system. The Veteran’s Administration, not unlike virtually all government agencies, is collapsing under the weight of its own corruption; corruption generated by cronyism, systemic cheating and theft, and a focus on job security which I call “employee entitlement myopia.” Veterans have died needlessly and are still languishing because the VA, though well-funded, rewards its employees who most skillfully game the system through cheating and intimidation. The VA is in collapse, and the care of those who most deserve the help of the government they served, has been sacrificed while ineffective, incompetence, corrupt bureaucrats have gotten away, literally, with murder.

Moral and Military Weakness

  • Obama’s foreign policy is so muddled and disingenuous that it can’t really be defined as progressive. But it is, without a doubt and by design, anti-American. The roots of Progressivism are anti-American. The heart of the American ideal; Capitalism and individual freedom, are antithetical to Progressivism, and from the time Woodrow Wilson rejected “national interest” as a justification for military action, Progressives have sought to weaken America’s military and moral defenses. When Ronald Reagan reminded us that America is the “Last, best hope of man on earth,” the “Shining city on a hill,” he wasn’t referring simply to our free-market economy or military superiority, he was reminding us that Capitalism and human liberty are the moral tenets that best serve all humankind. Peace through strength is an immutable truth. When America is at its best, when free markets thrive, people are freed from government bondage and the chains of immorality, it is strong, and a strong America made the world a safer, more prosperous, more hopeful place for all. Just a few years of Obama’s insurgent Progressivism have tactically and morally weakened the Armed Forces. America lies exposed to threats that could collapse its fragile economy in a matter of days. And above all, Progressive equivocation on key moral concepts; human rights and the free exercise of conscience and worship, has given Islamic Sharia States, their militant counterparts, and oppressive Socialist regimes, free reign to perpetrate oppression and violence on people throughout the world. Because Obama is a Progressive and the mainstream media are in ideological agreement with 21st Century Progressivism, the destruction resulting from his disastrous laws, impotent foreign policy pronouncements, and moral reversals at every level, is ignored–perhaps condoned. But one thing is true, Progressivism is the enemy freedom and prosperity. And humans yearning to breath free and access the dreams that could be created by their own hands if they had the freedom to do so, find themselves suffocating. That is cruel, that is anti-human.

by Marjorie Haun 9/23/14

September
22
2014

Movies that Honor our Military Heroes

September 22, 2014

Why Can’t We See This in the Cinema?

From The Daily Signal of September 19, 2014

Photo via ‘Fort Bliss – The Movie’ Facebook Page

Of late, Hollywood has given us all kinds of movies about the military. The worst of them—such as “Green Zone,” a dreadful 2010 film that rightfully bombed at the box office—demonize and diminish our men and women in uniform to feed Tinseltown’s impulse to please the Code Pink crowd.

But sometimes, a maverick movie breaks out that portrays the heroic side of service. Films such as “Lone Survivor” (2013) often get scorned by the left and snubbed at the Oscars but earn significant applause in the theater.

Life is not easy for many veterans. They make up a significant portion of the homeless population. About 18 per day commit suicide.

It’s all too rare we see movies that humanize those who fight for us, that deliver a truly honest portrayal of the difficulties of balancing service and sacrifice. There is a movie that’s getting a limited theatrical release that does just that.

Fort Bliss” is the fictional account of an Army medic who returns from combat deployment overseas and struggles to reconnect with her five-year old son. Filmmaker Claudia Myers found inspiration for the film from working with the military.

“It made me realize I’d been very sheltered from this aspect of the war,” she said in a recent interview. “I didn’t understand….there was a story there to be told.”

There is more than a little realism in this story. And, that’s something America needs more of. There has been an outpouring of concern for veterans who have served since 9/11, but much of that empathy has been a reaction to the costs of conflict.

St Petersburg Times/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom

But there are more than 22 million living veterans, and life is not easy for many of them. They make up a significant portion of the homeless population. About 18 per day commit suicide. Nearly a half-million are living with wounds sustained in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Through it all, they are veterans, not victims. They want to be like the rest of us, to come home and reconnect with jobs and families. A movement has arisen to press communities to have a more realistic appreciation for America’s veterans and to understand better how we can serve them.

That said, there ought to be more films like “Fort Bliss,” but Americans would never know that if they don’t get to see the film. The film has gotten rave reviews at a handful of screenings, such as one at the GI Film Festival where it won the award for Best Narrative Feature, but that’s about it. Today the film opens in limited release in just three theaters in New York, California and Texas. If it does well, it might earn more screens along the way.

Portrait of James Carafano

James Jay Carafano, a leading expert in national security and foreign policy challenges, is The Heritage Foundation’s Vice President, Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, E. W. Richardson Fellow, and Director of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies. Read his research.

Reposted by Reagangirl.com  9/22/14

September
20
2014

The Arrested Emotional Development of Liberals

As Obama’s historical presidency looks more and more like an historical wreck, and as he faces serious opposition from House Conservatives in the Obamacare war, it’s useful to consider what’s really behind the hypersensitivity, inflammatory rhetoric, and intense fear displayed by him and all the other Liberals.

September 20, 2014

“If you’re not liberal when you’re young, you have no heart. If you’re not conservative when you’re older, you have no brain.” ~Winston Churchill

Blond Boy Crying There is a lot of evidence supporting the theory that Liberalism is attractive to individuals with some degree of arrested social, emotional, or intellectual development.  Let’s start with human brain development. Executive Functioning is centered in the prefrontal cortex of the brain and determines judgment, risk-taking behavior, selfishness vs. otherness, and higher thinking processes such as political and religious philosophy.  These parts of the brain are not fully formed until age 25 in most people.  Social, emotional and intellectual maturation can continues for years beyond the mechanical maturation of the brain, if the individual nurtures the process through learning and serious self-assessment.

Impulsiveness, emotionalism, selfishness and a lack of the ability to comprehend cause and effect result when when Executive Functioning is not developed. Emotional regulation is part of executive functioning.  Crimes, especially violent crimes, are typically committed by young men.

The majority of residents in American prisons are young men aged 18-25.   The majority of women in prison are also relatively young, aged 18-30.  The brains of youth, especially those raised in a permissive or morally ambiguous atmosphere, are malleable and of lack self regulation. Liberalism seems has evolved to appeal to people whose brains are not fully actualized. Centralized command and control government is attractive to people who want an outside presence; a parent figure, to take charge of some basic functions of life, such as physical security, financial resources, public spaces and activities, etc. Liberalism, which is liberal with government power, but stingy with individual liberty and accountability, is the political philosophy of choice for people who are emotionally young–childish. That’s one reason why the best agitators–the “community organizers,”–always demanding goods and services from tax payer-funded government entities, are Liberals.

Erickson’s Stages of Psycho-social Development correlate observable behavior with certain, predictable stages of emotional growth.  The characteristics displayed by political Liberals align quite well with these developmental stages:

School Age Children (6 to 12 years) Industry vs. Inferiority,  in which children experience feelings of inadequacy and inferiority among their peers and, thus, seek ways to diminish the relative importance of others and increase their own power through tattle-telling, attention-seeking and bullying.

Erickson’s Adolescent Stage (12 to 18 years) Identity vs. Role Confusion, is also a stage in which some Liberals are stuck.  This is the age of identity formulation, learning to negotiate, and developing moral sensibilities.  The moral sensibilities in this stage are based largely upon what works for the individual. Children of this age can appear to be justice seekers, but the form of justice may be that which fits their own interests and ethical paradigm with little consideration for the well-being of others. They are unable to conceptualize that others who are unlike them can actually be good.  It is the classic black and white thinking of a child; we are good so those who are different must be bad.   They are limited in their comprehension of cause and effect and so act like children, accusing without cause and condemning without evidence, their ideological adversaries.  These are prototypical attributes of  arrested development. Through trauma, bad parenting, poor socialization, substance abuse, or simple biological pre-disposition, individuals are unable to grow and develop emotionally beyond the childish stage at which they are stuck.

  • Emotional Awareness: This is the ability to understand emotions and their effect upon thoughts and performance. Liberals tend to act emotionally before reasoning through a given issue.
  • Accurate Self-assessment: This is the honest evaluation of ones strengths and weaknesses.  Liberals naturally lack the sense of humor and perspective about themselves and always attempt to diminish others so they may feel superior.
  • Self-confidence, Self-control, and Trustworthiness: These are stages in which identity, temperance, and honesty and personal integrity are formed and practiced across all settings.  Liberals come up with fallacies such as, “I need to find myself” because identity for them is fluid and largely driven by opinions coming from the leaders of their chosen mob.
  • Conscientiousness: Personal accountability for one’s actions and the outcome of those actions is developed in this stage.   Planning is established in this stage because the maturing mind understands the effect of actions. Liberals are tattle-tales, rarely taking responsibility for their destructiveness or political failures, always shifting blame to a force or person other than themselves.
  • Optimism: A mature mind operates from the hope of success rather than the fear of failure.  Liberals place all hope in outside forces; government, nature, the collective society, etc. and regard the individual as powerless and incompetent.
  • Empathy: Liberals’ empathy and compassion are selective because they are not genuine responses, but rather manipulative efforts designed to bring about a political end.  Suffering that goes against the grain of their political narrative–the pain suffered by babies undergoing abortion, for example–does not exist in the Liberal universe. Yet they will exaggerate the suffering and injustice suffered by “victim classes” who serve to bolster their socialist political goals.

Liberals’ lack of tolerance for debate, their destructive policies,  opportunism, and their capacity to displace morality with political expediency, are largely attributable to delayed psycho-social development.  There’s a multiplicity of explanations for this stunted maturation including early drug use, poor parenting models, environmental and biological influences, and generational government dependency.  This places upon the Conservative movement the additional burden of fighting life-or-death political battles as well as, literally, being the adults in the room.

by Marjorie Haun 9/20/14

September
17
2014

Old Sarge: Ruminations on the State of Western Disintegration

September 17, 2014

These are the politically-incorrect ruminations of Vietnam veteran, author, and friend, Forrest L. Gomez, affectionately known as “Old Sarge.”

 

On the Winter Years of Life

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY:

I want to repeat something that I put out there from time to time. If it annoys some of you who have heard it before, I don’t blame you, and you can move on to postings from our brothers and sisters that actually have good information and opinions to share. And besides, I’m an old guy now and I’m expected to repeat myself. You also won’t get this from the welfare/Obama crowd. I want to thank all of you who work hard (or are trying earnestly to get a job), who pay taxes, and subsequently provide the money for my military pension.

In the winter of my life, as each day the shadows grow a little longer, and as the memories of battle and hard times slowly fade, I find it hard to find the words to express my gratitude to you folks out there that make this country work.

You are the salt of the earth, and I love you all. God, as I proceed to my work today, into your hands I commit my spirit.

God bless you all.

- The Sarge

ClintonLeer

On 9/11, ISIS, and Democrat Lunacy

FROM THE DESK OF OLD SARGE:

Well, tomorrow is Nine-Eleven again, two famous entertainment personalities have passed away in a short time, Obama is getting ready to expand air strikes on ISIS to Syria, Putin is still Putin, and as a result, the conspiracy buffs are once again beside themselves with excitement. Some experts estimate that the average conspiracy buff in America is changing his/her underwear about every half hour.

In the past, I have pointed out some gross ironies in liberal procedures, many of which my Facebook friends spotted themselves. Obama campaigned against “endless war” in 2008, then supported the bombing campaign in Libya, which really was about oil, and through which the anti war movement snoozed. We had the Democrat allegations of a Republican war on women in the 2012 campaign, just before the Dems chose sex predator Bill Clinton as their keynote speaker at their convention, while honoring the memory of another sex pervert named Ted Kennedy (and while booing God).

Then Michelle Obama presented an award for a film about a successful hostage rescue, as the ashes at Benghazi were still cooling. One method of distraction has been to talk about an alleged increase in college rapes (not true), but rape seems to be okay if the rapist’s last name is Clinton, Kennedy, or Gore.

Obamacare is doing the exact opposite of everything that was predicted for Americans and the economy, yet is presented as a success in Dem circles and most of the media. Well, it’s time to move on to other little slips of the mind on the part the collective left in this nation. Children pour over our southern border, and are now receiving benefits that some low income citizens and veterans can’t easily get. The talk shows are peppered with calls from libs who say these children should be absorbed into our population and cared for. Has anyone besides me thought how these children would be viewed if Latin America’s answer to Planned Parenthood had aborted all of these kids in the third trimester? Such a slaughter would be called “progressive” by the left.

And we have one half or more of the country (rightfully so) outraged that a famous athlete punched and dragged his girlfriend, but half of the half don’t care that Ted Kennedy left his date to drown in a car at Chappaquidik, or even about what Bill Clinton did to Juanita Broderick!

To heck with what went on at Abbu Grahib prison years back. That kind of stuff probably goes on at Chappaqua and the Kennedy Compound every weekend! One final two part question for you libs: What dollar amount does a person have to earn to be evil in your eyes, and why do you make such notable exceptions for fabulously wealthy people like the Obamas, the Clintons, the Kennedys, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, etc?

Oh well, what do I know?

May you walk with God daily, and for your remaining years, until we all stand before His throne in Glory!

– The Sarge

Reposted by Reagangirl.com with permission from the author  9/17/14

September
16
2014

Mark Udall: Married to Extreme Environmentalism

September 16, 2014

Mark Udall is married, in every sense, to the extreme environmental Left. His rejection of the Keystone XL project, which would increase America’s energy independence and bring thousands of jobs to states across the country, is indicative of how far he is willing to go to please extremist special interests, and at the same time, keep the peace at home.

Mark Udall, Maggie Fox

Senator Mark Udall (D) Colorado, is known for his alliances with extreme environmental groups and his “I hate fossil fuel” policies, which often puts him at odds with Colorado’s businesses, local interests, and the national economy:

  • Despite a recent study showing that fracking bans in the state of Colorado would have devastating effects on the state and local economies, Mark Udall refuses to disavow fracking ban initiatives.
  • He voted against a non-binding resolution in 2013 supporting completion of the Keystone XL pipeline, despite polling which shows a large majority of Coloradans support it.
  • Udall’s loyalties come into question recently when billionaire philanthropist Tom Steyer vowed to “back” lawmakers who continue to oppose the KeystoneXL pipeline.
  • A proponent of “green” alternative energy, Udall has a record of pushing “climate change” legislation, and saying those in Colorado who have doubts about the science behind so-called manmade global warming have “their heads in the sand.”
  • In 2004 Senator Udall himself received a 100% legislative rating from the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), which is heavily involved in activities that increase Federal Government control over areas in and around national parks and promote their long-term goals of shutting off millions of acres to human activity and development.

One of the reasons Cory Gardner, the United States Congressman from Yuma, Colorado, is such a threat to Udall’s tenure in the Senate, is that Udall has a narrow, ideological focus on environmental issues, ignores the will of the people of his state and the country, and has voted with Obama nearly 100% of the time. Knowing what we know about Udall is unpleasant enough–but many people don’t know that he is married to Maggie Fox-Udall, an environmental lawyer and activist.

Maggie Fox-Udall has been the good wife to candidate Udall. While most political wives are seen in public supporting their men, acting the supporting role of help meet and honey, Maggie Fox-Udall, whose hubby is in a celebrity death match with Gardner, has been strangely silent–inexplicably invisible. Perhaps this is why:

  • Maggie Fox-Udall is currently serving as President and CEO of the “Climate Reality Project”. The Climate Reality Project  is “a non-profit organization leading a campaign to help citizens around the world discover the truth about the climate crisis and bring about global change.”  In a “getboulder.com” magazine interview, Mrs. Udall compares educating “climate change” skeptics that the phenomenon is a reality with that of educating the people of South Africa that Apartheid was wrong.
  • Maggie Fox is the past National President of “America Votes,” which “has built a permanent advocacy and campaign infrastructure that provides coordination, data and targeting services to progressive organizations; pursues electoral reforms that expand voting rights across the country; and advances progressive policies through state and local ballot initiatives. America Votes’ strong progressive infrastructure will support our coalition partners’ advocacy efforts and facilitate the coordination of voter outreach.”
  • Maggie Fox is also a former Deputy Director of The Sierra Club, whose Rocky Mountain Chapter (RMC) advocates…
    • Fracking bans
    • Banning oil and gas extraction and waste disposal
    • Political activities that drive energy development out of the State of Colorado
    • Supports state and federal legislation increasing government control and decreasing local control over land and water rights, and threatening private property rights
  • An ardent Leftist, Maggie Fox campaigned for Obama in 2008. In this clip she stumps for Joe Biden and introduces him with a plug for “a green energy revolution.”

The Maggie Fox-Udall resume’ is rife with examples of extremist leanings. But it should come as no surprise. Udall is known first as an environmentalist and obstructionist of western energy projects. He has tried for nearly 3 years to push national park status for the Colorado National Monument onto the folks of Western Colorado, a large majority of whom don’t want the change. But like all ideologues, Udall and Fox are relentless.

To hardcore Leftists like the Udalls, science takes a back seat to purpose. The ends justify any means, no matter how destructive. Public opinion is a hurdle to be overcome. And truth is what they want it to be.

Colorado is sick of bad science, destructive Democrat policies, and tin-eared politicians who, instead of We the People, serve their own agendas and extreme special interest groups.  Mark Udall is quite literally married to the extreme environmental Left.

by Marjorie Haun  9/16/14

 

 

Content Protected Using Blog Protector By: PcDrome.
WordPress SEO fine-tune by Meta SEO Pack from Poradnik Webmastera