From Hillsdale College’s American Heritage Online Course – Week 8
The Progressive movement in America dawned with the 20th century. Animated by a common dedication to statism, and influenced by the ideas of Darwin, self-identified Progressives believed that the problems associated with the urban and industrial revolutions required government to assume a more active and powerful role in the lives of citizens.
Jay Smith confronts Muslims and attempts to debate them …
Were the Boston Bombers Religious Muslims?
We all saw the events surrounding the Boston Bombings, but many people were asking whether these two brothers (Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev) were actually Muslims, who carried out the bombings for religious reasons. Jay decided to take these questions down to Speaker’s Corner two days after the brothers were killed and captured. Watch the video and see just how difficult it was for Jay to engage in this debate, concerning these questions. The Muslims, who are always challenging Jay to debate them, now seemed to be balking on this subject, and tried to take the challenge away from Islam and onto Christianity.
The GOP is committing suicide. The go-along-to-get-along, beltway, elitist, moderate mentality is apparently in complete denial of their conservative base—indeed they have attacked Tea Party and even blamed them for Mitt Romney’s 2012 loss.
Frank Luntz, GOP message man and image consultant, recently spoke to University of Pennsylvania students and was asked about political polarization. His reply was to blame conservative talk radio:
“They get great ratings, and they drive the message, and it’s really problematic.”
Frank Luntz on Rush Limbaugh
Luntz had requested that his answer be “off the record”, and although the student who originally asked the question agreed to this, Aakash Abbi, the student who recorded Luntz’ statement, did not. He subsequently forwarded it (a recording) to Mother Jones.
From the article:
In an op-ed for the Daily Pennsylvanian, Abbi outlined his reasoning for making and leaking the recording, explaining that “in a room filled with scores of independent students, ‘off the record’ is not a Patronus charm. Luntz may have felt that he was invited to speak candidly by acclimation, but I disagreed entirely.”
Frank Luntz has made a very successful career out of advising Republicans on the content of their message. He was asked one of the most important questions of the day in terms of American politics (“what is causing extreme polarization between the parties?”), and refused to speak freely. Why? Because doing so may harm his commercial interest. And this attitude is at the root of the problem. If influential GOP figures like Frank Luntz truly believe that the party’s media kingmakers harm the national interest but refuse to say so for fear of backlash, they knowingly work against the spirit of open and honest debate.
In other words, the people creating the “chilling effect” on discourse are not students like Abbi, but the very people Luntz was afraid to go on the record criticizing in the first place.
So Abbi , with the help of Mother Jones, is making the point that it is the fault of Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin for creating a “chilling effect” … Voicing their opinion is their 1st Amendment right and Abbi, Mother Jones and Frank Luntz are going to have get over the “chilling effect.” I would venture to say that it is “chilling” to them because it is the truth.
And that is why the message that Limbaugh and Levin broadcast is “problematic.” It makes the GOP uncomfortable—it means they will have to get off their collective asses and do some work. I think the GOP is perfectly content being 2nd place in Washington, DC. To them, it’s all about perpetuating their corrupt, beltway, game-board strategy in which they continue to receive kickbacks and benefits, while pretending to be the foe of big government and the consolidation of federal power.
FRANK LUNTZ: And they get great ratings, and they drive the message, and it’s really problematic. And this is not on the Democratic side. It’s only on the Republican side…[inaudible]. [Democrats have] got every other source of news on their side. And so that is a lot of what’s driving it. If you take—Marco Rubio’s getting his ass kicked. Who’s my Rubio fan here? We talked about it. He’s getting destroyed! By Mark Levin, by Rush Limbaugh, and a few others. He’s trying to find a legitimate, long-term effective solution to immigration that isn’t the traditional Republican approach, and talk radio is killing him. That’s what’s causing this thing underneath. And too many politicians in Washington are playing coy. (April 22, University of Pennsylvania College Republicans)
There is nothing about this latest attempt to legislate amnesty that Rubio has pledged allegiance to that is legitimate. It is sadly disappointing. I had a great deal of respect for Rubio, but he seems to have thrown his lot in with the go-along-to-get-alongers. This craptastic legislation was pasted together by Chuckie Schumer and it is a “5 year plan” that says “if it doesn’t work at the end of 5 years then it gets turned over to a multi-border-state committee”; well, whoopity-doo! It isn’t going to work, and there will be 5 more years of untold millions of who-knows-whos scampering across the border and then ANOTHER COMMITTEE will try to solve it? How many years does THAT committee get to work on it?
Mark Levin grills Marco Rubio on immigration proposal
Build the damn fence and close the damn border already and be done with it!
This is what I am talking about. Any time someone speaks the truth or questions ANYTHING the Democrats want to do, then it is hate speech! Whoever said it is celebrating Hitler’s birthday in their basement and is a bigoted, homophobic, Islamohater! The truth is all too inconvenient to moderates and progressives.
Washington is den of thieves. Very few of them are truly vested in the best interests of America. They are perpetuating the “process” so they can continue to bilk us out of money and liberty to advance their own agendas. They’re in it for themselves.
The first real job I ever had was at an animal hospital and kennel where I learned a great deal about both dogs and cats. I was 14 years old. It was here at this animal clinic that I learned how amazing man’s best friend can be–but nothing close to what I learned when I heard Mike Ritland’s story. It brought back a plethora of memories and moved me to the point of wanting to share his story with you.
Mike is a former SEAL who trains dogs for military and police duties, but also operates a retirement home for the dogs they are unable to place with caretakers upon their retirement. During the interview on Coast to Coast AM, Mike talked about training elite Navy SEAL dogs.
SEAL dogs are similar to other working dogs, but what sets them apart is their determination to perform this unique kind of work in the most unimaginably distracting environments. Detailing one incident, he described how a SEAL dog was shot at point blank range in the chest by an insurgent, yet still managed to subdue and hold on to his target until his SEAL the team operatives arrived to take control. The dog was then evacuated out via a medical helicopter and treated by a surgeon just like any other soldier. The dog subsequently recovered, and was actually redeployed. He is now retired and resides at Ritland’s K9 Warrior Foundation.
I thought you would appreciate the amazing effort that goes into the training of these truly phenomenal creatures and the incredibly honorable tasks that they perform. I salute them and their handlers.
Was the Constitution written in Egyptian hieroglyphics? Latin? Swahili? Hell no it wasn’t, it was written in English, by men with far more gray matter than our current collection of clown-car, modern progressive, megalomaniac, egghead elitists!
Following the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change.” He was referring to national security and the possibility of future terrorist attacks. “The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Bloomberg pontificated during a Midtown press conference. “But we live in a complex world where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”
Mayor Bloomberg, who has come under fire for the N.Y.P.D.’s monitoring of Muslim communities, other aggressive tactics and his nanny-state, anti-soda crusade, said the rest of the country needs to learn from the attacks in Boston. “Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11,” he lectured. “We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to,” he continued.
The mayor implicated to the gun debate and made note of the courts allowing for increasingly restrictive regulations in response to ever-more evil looking weapons. “Clearly the Supreme Court has recognized that you have to have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and what it applies to and reasonable gun laws … Here we’re going to to have to live with reasonable levels of security,” he reasoned—or did he? Why did he need to use the word “clearly”? “It really says something bad about us that we have to do it. But our obligation first and foremost is to keep our kids safe in the schools; first and foremost, to keep you safe if you go to a sporting event; first and foremost is to keep you safe if you walk down the streets or go into our parks,” he said. “We cannot let the terrorists put us in a situation where we can’t do those things. And the ways to do that is to provide what we think is an appropriate level of protection.” Then, Bloomberg argued the attacks shouldn’t be used as an excuse to persecute certain religions or groups: “What we can’t do is let the protection get in the way of us enjoying our freedoms,” he said. “You still want to let people practice their religion, no matter what that religion is. And I think one of the great dangers here is going and categorizing anybody from one religion as a terrorist. That’s not true … That would let the terrorists win. That’s what they want us to do.”
Well, Mayor Blooming-Idiot … you really need to get a clue. To begin with, the Constitution is not in need of “reinterpretation.” That is an excuse for progressive tools like yourself to make laws that make you feel good about yourself, but actually restrict liberty, but are useless in solving whatever YOU think the problem is. The Constitution is deliberate, concrete and literal—it means what it says and it was written by men who were far more intelligent and kind-hearted than you will ever hope to be.
Conservatives are sick and tired of your rules and restrictions. You pile them atop one another endlessly, until there are rules for following the rules and no one knows what the hell they are allowed to do anymore. Political Correctness is strangling the American spirit and fueling the engines of the trial lawyers. Conservatives are not extremists; they are not imposing their will upon anyone. They only want the Constitution and the rule of law to be observed in the literal and original manner that the Founders intended. People are entitled to disagree with your progressive opinion and it is not “extreme” to do so. What is extreme is that liberals, progressives and or Democrats will only entertain their own opinions—it is always a one-way street, factual evidence be damned. Secondly, the attacks in Boston are NOT an excuse to persecute a “certain religion”—you mean Islam, so just say it. The REAL problem—the UGLY TRUTH is that Islam is itself guilty of persecution! The Qur’an commands Muslims to persecute nonbelievers and the longer you bleeding heart, liberal, elitist, know-it-alls ignore this truth the more dangerous our circumstance becomes. How do you explain the President’s silence in the face of near genocidal persecution that Christians are experiencing in Egypt, throughout the Middle East, Indonesia and central Africa?
Conservatives are questioning and merely critical of Islam; criticism can hardly be construed as “persecution.” Muslims are burning churches, attacking worshippers with acid, weapons of all varieties and beheading them without so much as mention from the news media or the leader of the Free World—but if anyone dares to ask “why,” then they are automatically branded a bigoted Islamophobe!
There are moderate Muslims, with peaceful mindsets, but that does not change the fact that Islamic doctrine dictates that Muslims are superior to everyone else and that all other religions are subordinate to them. Muslims are not entitled to “special” dispensations that other citizens are not granted—specifically “Sharia” law. They aren’t any better than anyone else.
You have NO AUTHORITY to impose these ridiculous infringements on liberty. You have NO AUTHORITY to slander and libel those who are guilty of nothing more than sharing their own opinions and rightfully questioning yours. You are clueless in world that is so far from reality that I find it bewildering and your interpretation of the Constitution is and will be perverted!
Understanding the Islamic Bombing of the Boston Marathon
Sahih Muslim 33—It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.
Qur’an 9:30—And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!
Obama crying like a little baby after gun-control amendments failed in Senate
President Obama took to the Rose Garden yesterday to bitch and moan and piss and groan because the Senate did not pass his precious “Gun Control” legislation. He claimed lies were told and the “gun lobby” had managed to fear-monger the Senate into not passing his “common sense” assault on the Bill of Rights.
Mr. President, we already have “background checks,” and a gazillion other laws to prevent gun violence, and you don’t enforce them. Your lousy approach to gun violence is on full display in your own home town of Chicago, where gun laws are the strictest in the nation, and gun violence is through the roof.
Furthermore, Mr. President, you have a lot of nerve wagging your finger and complaining that this legislation that failed in the Senate yesterday was lied about. Mr. President, you haven’t told us the truth about Benghazi. You haven’t told us the truth about Fast and Furious. You lied to us about the transparency of your administration, the contents and cost of your HealthCare Bill, your bankrupt Green Energy scandals, and about a hundred other things that could fill the rest of this page.
Fact is, Mr. President, YOU are a LIAR and this country is not yours to “fundamentally transform.” You are the most miserable, money-squandering failure to ever stain the Oval Office and you disgust me. You have failed our men and women in Uniform and you have failed to defend the Constitution–indeed; you have attacked the Constitution. You, sir, are a failure.
The President’s whiny Rose Garden Response in full (13:43)
You claim 90% of the American people supported more “gun control.”But they do not, or it would have passed. You are the one who is politicizing this by parading the parents of the Sandy Hook victims as “props” and using them as pawns for your political gain. If I’m not mistaken Mr. President, looks like you can’t handle being told “no” for once in your spoiled-ass life!
The Bill of Rights was defended yesterday, Mr. President. Get over it. Or, better yet, resign the Presidency. You’re not worthy …