I hate to say it but I told you so

I saw this coming in 2007

On August 1, 2007, I smelled a rat when Dr. Richard Land was scheduled to debate “Christian” socialist Jim Wallis. I had already shown how fallacious it is to try to shoehorn Jesus into the socialist framework. I wrote that it seemed odd that Land (whom I had already spotted as a wolf in the sheep fold) would be debating Jim Wallis unless Wallis knew Land would be playing softball. I said:

… leftists normally eschew debate with biblically grounded Christians.  They debate only when they feel they can gain something in the incremental dialogue toward realization of their socialist vision. Which makes me wonder what Wallis knows that we don’t and whether punches will be pulled in his favor.

This was only a hunch but a very very strong one because I had read some of the politically correct tripe Land had written — including his glowing endorsement of Al Gore.

Now it looks like Land is moving even further to the left and openly siding with Wallis.

But it’s even worse than that, much worse, as Brannon Howse shows in the column below. Unlike Howse, however, I would not stay in the SBC any longer with the ever more leftward-leaning Land in the top echelons of the national organization. It is only a matter of time before things begin to unravel on the local level as the hands at the top get heavier and heavier, push toward more and more socialism and ram more un-Biblical social ideas (same-sex “marriage” perhaps?) down the throats of the faithful. Of course, that is just a hunch.

A very very strong one.

Don Hank


Marxists, Muslims, Mormons, Globalists, and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention
By Brannon Howse


For many years, including in my most recent book, Grave Influence, I have been warning about the rise of ecumenicalism and globalism and my concern that evangelicals would be used to give credibility to these movements.

Sadly, I believe the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission headed by Richard Land is being used to push radically unbiblical, politically correct, and anti-American agendas. As a member of a solid, Bible teaching SBC church, I am very concerned about Land’s activities. However, I think even those that are not a member of an SBC church should be concerned since Land is speaking as an evangelical.

The Southern Baptist Convention is the nation’s largest protestant denomination. I believe Mr. Land’s office, which is funded to the tune of over $3.2 million dollars, is largely working against the Biblical worldview convictions of not only most of the SBC church members but most conservative, Bible-believing Christians.

Land Endorsed the U.S. Muslim Engagement Project and is helping to build Mosques: 

In September of 2010, the Anti-Defamation League formed an “interfaith coalition” to help Muslims build mosques in America. Of course Land did not pass up the opportunity to be involved in one more pluralistic, politically correct project. Why would any Christian, much less a Christian leader, be working to help build Islamic Mosques? Islam is an antichrist, demonic, religion. This is a clear violation of the Biblical mandate not be involved in spiritual enterprises with non believers as revealed in 2 Corinthians 6:14. SBC members are not paying Mr. Land to help build Islamic Mosques.

The name and mission statement of many of the organizations that make up this coalition clearly reveal their ultimate goal is not just building mosques but pushing ecumenicalism. The website says, that member include, the “Vicar for Ecumenical and Inter-Religious Affairs”.  The keyword is ecumenical. Then there is Dr. Eboo Patel whose organization is “Interfaith Youth Core” and his website declares that their goal is “to introduce a new relationship, one that is about mutual respect and religious pluralism. Instead of focusing a dialogue on political or theological differences…”

Read more.

Brazil: Terrorists ok, Abortion, no way

Brazil has long accepted far-left Lula da Silva as their beloved president. Relying on natural resources and help from our far-left White House resident, he has kept the Brazilian economy on course and enjoyed popularity.

As you might expect, Brazil didn’t seem to mind that their most popular presidential candidate, Dilma Rousseff, is a communist and a terrorist. After all, history classes in Brazil don’t teach that communism killed off 100 million, so they simply aren’t aware of the death connection. (Of course, how many Americans are?).

So the last thing you might expect of this country that tolerates Marxism is resistance to abortion.

But abortion turns out to matter to Brazilians.

God has a mysterious way of working.


Internet, abortion and religion affected Brazilian presidential elections

By Julio Severo

Abortion and religion may have provoked a run-off in the presidential election in Brazil.

Polls in the in the past months had consistently been giving Dilma Rousseff a victory of 51-59%. Rousseff is the chosen candidate of popular socialist President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva to replace him in the Brazilian presidency. According to the Brazilian Constitution, a candidate wins the election when he makes 50% or more, but apparently absolute majority escaped Rousseff, and she will have to work harder in the run-off.

Major newspapers in Brazil have attributed this result to abortion. Folha de S. Paulo reported that “Dilma lost votes among evangelicals”, while O Estado de S. Paulo said that “something new began to happen”, and then it details that Rousseff, who wanted liberalization of the abortion laws in 2007, “had to say openly that she is against abortion and that she would take no measure to legalize it”.

O Estado de S. Paulo suggested that “the controversy on the legalization of abortion may have had a greater influence on the ebbing of those that intended to vote for Dilma”.

In other article, entitled “Internet e religião podem explicar queda da petista” (Internet and religion may explain drop of Workers’ Party member [Dilma Rousseff]), the same Brazilian paper says that her drop was caused, among other reasons, “because of the controversy on internet over her view on abortion”.

Many Brazilian websites, including Notícias Pró-Família (the Portuguese version of LSN) and my blog, have been working to make Brazilians aware of the life issues. The Brazilian election on October 3 revealed the results of this hard work.

Overall, Brazilian voters are disillusioned with politics. Excepting for the abortion issue, Brazilians do not take elections seriously anymore and any candidate can be elected. In fact, a clown received massive voting in São Paulo and, even though he is illiterate, he will be a representative in the Brazilian Congress!

Rousseff, a self-proclaimed Catholic and the political heiress of Lula, won 46%. Her main opponent, Catholic social-democrat Jose Serra, got 32%, and evangelical Marina Silva got 19%. Silva, who for many years was a member of the Workers’ Party and now is in the Green Party, has connections to Al Gore and is famous for her focus on environment issues.

Lula has noted that, for the first time in the Brazilian history, all the presidential candidates are socialists. Nevertheless, he prefers Rousseff, who was a member of a communist guerilla group in the 1960s and probably will be politically more aggressive in the promotion of her party’s agenda.

Even though none of them is a legitimate pro-family candidate, pro-family advocates in Brazil have chosen the “lesser evil” path. Probably it has worked. For two months, a YouTube video from Brazilian Baptist minister Paschoal Piragine has garnered almost 3 million hits. His message exposes the pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality policies of the Workers’ Party and encourages evangelicals not to vote in it.

For many months, Lula’s high popularity and several polls signalized a certain and easy victory for Dilma Rousseff. Yet, the run-off provoked by the abortion issue may make her victory elusive.

The SAVE Act: not worth saving

My Position On The “Feel Good Act” AKA The SAVE Act

by Dave Levine

The SAVE Act will never pass and for good reason–it doesn’t go far enough and gives a false sense of having supposedly halted the Invasion from Mexico. Arizona’s 1070 Law (which is being contemplated by 22 other states) goes much farther and has made the SAVE Act obsolete before it becomes law, if ever.

If supporters believe what they read from the left-leaning Pew or the anti-enforcement DHS reports, they are delusional. They are not to be believed and are based on anecdotal evidence, not empirical evidence. BP boots on the ground will tell you that along the 2,200-mile Southern Border, between 5,000 and 10,000 illegals break into the U.S. every 24 hours. While the break-ins may have dropped to the 5,000 per day level, that is still 1.5 million illegals breaking in per year NOT including the 40-50% of all visa holders who overstay and are not tracked down and deported. We’re letting in close to 2 million legal aliens per year, an unheard of amount in the Western world. That’s at least 800,000 overstayer illegal aliens you can add to the 1.5 million (min.) Border jumper illegals.

The SAVE Act is what I term “a feel good act”. Here’s what it does and doesn’t do:

-Leaves out “for all employees, both Current and New” from the E-verify mandatory change that is proposed. What about the 8 million-plus illegals earning a paycheck? Why are they being left alone? I’ll tell you why–the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

-Doesn’t remove the word “knowingly” from Federal Immigration law. The entire “enforcement against criminal employers” is a waste of taxpayer money and time as only a handful of employers have been prosecuted and convicted. Why? The word “knowingly”. It is virtually impossible to prove “intent” and get convictions! So prosecutors, rather than risk losing millions of dollars in litigation, don’t even bother with indictments against employers. This is THE biggest loophole for employers of illegals in the U.S.

-Doesn’t require or guarantee more ICE raids like the ones under Bush in 2005 in Ontario and Temecula, CA involving the BP or the ones post-2006-2008 by ICE. Simply hiring more agents won’t guarantee anything. To track down the MILLIONS of visa overstayer illegals, we’d need a hundred thousand ICE agents! Immigration expert Michael Cutler says there are only 200 or so ICE agents being used on overstayers for the entire country. Obama halted all raids against business hiring non-criminal illegal aliens in 2009.

-Doesn’t require that BP agents be stationed ON THE BORDER! Due to the Drug Cartel’s move into Arizona and due to the dangerous situation with the Zetas along the Border, the BP has been told to move BACK and allow break-ins to occur for the agent’s safety. This is insane! A border is supposed to be defended! If it isn’t being defended, for whatever reason, then troops must be used to defend it.

-The “pilot program” is unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer’s money.

-Doesn’t increase funding for 287.g, a highly successful program training local police and sheriff’s deputies.

-Doesn’t get rid of the EOIR as recommended by vdare’s Juan Mann. As Mann wrote, “The lengthy EOIR system of hearings and appeals enables illegal aliens and criminal alien residents to remain in the United States both legally and illegally.” Hiring more judges isn’t the solution but only part of that solution.

There are others, but these prove to me that the SAVE Act should be called “The False Sense Of Security Act”. And one other thing. The advent of 1070 has made the SAVE Act a dinosaur in its own time.

Read about the SAVE Act here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3308:

Obama and Mao, a short history lesson

by Don Hank

Obama has surrounded himself with maoists, like terrorist couple Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

The Czars he has named include Maoist-leaning Van Jones, and his White House Communications Director Anita Dunn has publicly expressed admiration for Mao Tse Tung.

At least three of Obama’s campaigners, Carl Davidson, Bill Fletcher and Mike Klonsky, are big Mao fans.

So if Obama is surrounding himself with Maoists, how is that affecting policy? Or rather, if Obama is enough of an admirer of Mao to have named these people in the first place, can we expect to see some evidence of this in his style of governance?

Well, liberation theologists like Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s pastor, believed that, in a “just” society, accidents of birth (being born black in their case) automatically confer privileges to members of a downtrodden minority. That is in line with Mao’s thinking. For him, a person born as a peasant or worker was to be given special treatment.

Another striking similarity with Mao is Obama’s clever use of thugs. Not only are union thugs useful in intimidating his enemies, but his unprecedented open borders and no-arrest policies vis-a-vis illegal aliens encourage the cartel and undocumented low-life to bludgeon his opposition through often-violent crimes such as the savage murder of rancher Rob Krentz and the recent murder of an American boater on a lake shared with Mexico.

Put the administration’s ignoring of recent murders of Americans by Mexican thugs together with the testimonies of Justice Department whistle blowers Christian Adams and Christopher Coates declaring that the Obama administration had a hands-off order for accused criminal minority members, i.e., blacks and Hispanics, and you get an unmistakable pattern of the double standards for minorities vs whites taught by his beloved Liberation Theology mentor and in line with the thinking of his maoist pals. Under this policy, cases against Black Panther members who were seen by millions of viewers on national TV brandishing night sticks in front of a polling place in Philadelphia, and against prominent Black Panther leader Malik Shabazz, who had recently visited the Obama White House, were dropped by the Obama DOJ without adequate explanation.

The connection to thugs of the historic global left is evident if you look back at the history of the criminal scum who played key roles in the French Revolution, the Paris Communes, Mao’s Chinese revolution, the Mexican Revolution (Pancho Villa), etc.

The lumpen proletariat have long had a role in leftwing revolutions. Even today, by doing nothing to halt crime, Hugo Chavez encourages bands of roving bandits to roam the countryside and the city streets and intimidate and rob the wealthy and intimidate or kill dissidents. The murder rate in Venezuela has tripled since he rose to power.

A look at Part 2 of “Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party,” published by the Epoch Times shows an uncanny similarity with the way Mao Tse Tung used the “scum of society” to intimidate his enemies. This low life, often violent and typically criminally minded, actually was integrated into the Chinese Communist Party. The Chinese analysts identified the “unleashing of the scum of society” as one of the inherited traits of communism in China. They point out that while Marx rejected this lowest of all social classes, Mao welcomed them in his movement. Epoch Times observes:

Fourth Inherited Trait: Unleashing the Scum of Society—Hoodlums and Social Scum Form the Ranks of the CCP

“Unleashing the scum of society leads to evil, and evil must utilize the scum of society. Communist revolutions have often made use of the rebellion of hoodlums and social scum. The ‘Paris Commune,’ actually involved homicide, arson, and violence led by social scum. Even Marx looked down upon the ‘lumpen proletariat.’ [4] In the Communist Manifesto, Marx said, ‘The ‘dangerous class,’ the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there, be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution. Its conditions of life, however, prepare it far better for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue…”…’

“The CCP developed further the dark side of Marx’s theory. Mao Zedong said, ‘The social scum and hoodlums have always been spurned by the society, but they are actually the bravest, the most thorough and firmest in the revolution in the rural areas.’[2]”

Incredibly, Obama is imitating the most virulent and radical of his Marxist forebears. To call him a Marxist is in fact missing the mark. His promotion of thuggery is distinctly Maoist.

So, to get an idea of what awaits American blacks and Hispanics, let’s take a look at what happens to the favored class of peasants and workers (not including the thugs) in a Maoist society.

One of Mao’s first steps after winning the revolution was to confiscate all the land then in the hands of the landlord class and give it to the peasants, who received about 4 acres per family.

For a few years, they lived quite well and were able to even sell off some surplus to buy consumer goods for their families.

But this was too much free market for Marxist ideologue Mao, who soon began confiscating the grain of the peasant class. In perfect imitation of Stalin in his treatment of the Ukrainian farmers, Mao didn’t just make life a little tougher for them by taking a large amount of this grain.

He in fact took it all, every last grain of wheat, in order to sell it to the Russians in exchange for help in industrializing China.

As a result, millions of peasants died of starvation.

All told, some estimate that Mao killed off as many as 70 million of his countrymen, most of whom worshipped him even in their last moments.

 This, then, is the “leader” that Obama’s mentors and supporters admire.

Which begs the question: what is in store for the minorities that voted for Obama and are the most devoted to him?

Already many blacks are complaining of joblessness and the way Obama has catered to the rich bankers instead of giving relief to those who supported him. Others complain that Democrat-run sanctuary cities cater to illegal aliens who steal their jobs.

But this is just a foretaste of the misery. Once the money runs out and the printing presses start rolling, inflation can be expected to eat away life savings in short order, welfare and social security checks will fall to bare subsistance levels.

There is so much more to come. As they say: the revolution eats its useful idiots.

Link recommended by a reader:


Global elite mum on economic analysis in Europe, US

Don Hank

There is a worldwide effort to cover up the truth about the causes of the economic crisis (one main one being bad loans made deliberately and then disguised by bundling into “derivatives” for resale).

A column by Steph Jasky at FedUpUSA shows just how completely some lending institutions ignored their own lending rules and common sense.

Here is a tip of the iceberg example.

This quote is a bombshell:

Ambac found that 97 percent of 6,533 loans it reviewed across 12 securitizations sponsored by Countrywide didn’t conform to the lender’s underwriting guidelines

 Steph Jasky is one of the few reporting this kind of information. One reason for the silence is that such analyses seem a bit technical to many of us. But the main reason is that the mainstream — and even much of the “conservative” media — are ignoring it. After all, GW Bush participated by urging banks to issue no-downpayment loans. (He didn’t do this because he was conservative. He did it because he was not conservative and because he believed in the Global Elite’s wealth redistribution program).

Recently, a conference featuring top economic experts and a few knowledgeable others (like dissident EU Parliament Member Nigel Farage) was held in Germany. Even without any publicity from the mainstream press, 700 attendees showed up. The general consensus was that the euro should never have been devised and rammed down European throats in the first place and that the chickens were about to come home to roost in the form of a collapse of that currency, despite all the futile attempts to bail it out — or rather in large part because of these attempts to tamper with natural and universally applicable economic laws and common sense.

The only mainstream media rep that showed up was Russia Today, which spent the entire day interviewing at the conference.

How is it that the media both here and in Europe refuse to talk about the causes and possible cures of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression?

The non-conspiracy theorists insist this amazing concurrence of non-coverage throughout the West — and the concurrence of abysmal banking procedures on both sides of the Atlantic — is simply a coincidence.

Whatever the case may be, it is time to educate the public and throw out ALL politicians who voted for bailouts and phony “stimulus” packages in the most gargantuan transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich in world history.

It is no wonder that the gap between rich and poor widened last year.

It widened not because capitalism failed but because capitalism is being supplanted by Public-Private Enterprises and government pressure on business and finance to sponsor wealth redistribution schemes.

Barney Frank is the new face of “capitalism.”

On the other hand, the news cover-ups are not working as well as they used to. In the US, we have talk radio and Glenn Beck pummeling the Ruling Class very hard on a nearly daily basis and gradually changing America’s mind. As for Europe, there is anger spilling out everywhere over the bailouts.

The below email I received from a European friend recently illustrates that the grassroots are about to rebel. A friend reminded me that most of the protests reported below were instigated by unions and that would make them left of center. No doubt that is true. However, whether they realize it or not, the protesters are highlighting the main point: The bailouts of the euro and the bankers with shoddy lending practices that have marked the European response to the worldwide crisis (and I need to add: the US response as well) were a sign of profound corruption and gross abuse of the trust the people had invested in their leadership. The ensuing breach between elite and grassroots is profound and quite likely irreparable. And the bottom line is that, even if this is a case of one leftist group playing against another, the group in power, the Global Elite, is now on the losing end in terms of popular support.

Whether the people will ever figure out that the loss of economic freedom and big government were the real culprits, and not, for example, the lack of care from the nanny state, remains to be seen. But the elite are taking a thrashing, and that, at the very least, is interesting to watch.

Just a few of the many protests and demonstrations across the EU state over the past few weeks……..

Spain. Some of the latest protests against the Spanish government’s planned spending cuts turned violent.

In Madrid, police said that some 40 people had been arrested since the strike began in the early hours of Wednesday morning.

In Barcelona, demonstrators hurled objects at security forces and set fire to a police vehicle.

Meanwhile, protesters in Valencia tried to storm a government building. Several were injured in the clashes.

Ministers say the austerity measures are necessary to boost an economy where 20 percent of the workforce is currently unemployed.  Unions countered that ordinary people are being made to pick up the tab for mistakes made by bankers and traders   Scuffles break out during Spanish protests 


Brussels was the scene of one of the biggest demonstrations against government austerity measures.

Tens of thousands of people marched through the Belgian capital to protest against plans unions say will slow economic recovery and punish the poor.

“They are pitting people against each other by relocating businesses to increase profit margins instead of improving conditions. It is scandalous and people have had enough,” said one CGT union member.

Similar sentiments were shared by demonstrators taking part in marches in ten other capitals across Europe.

Police in Brussels say more than 200 people were arrested for minor offences.

Copyright © 2010 euronews

Tags: Demonstration, Europe, Trade unions

Romanian workers protest over austerity measures – nocomment

About five-thousand Romanian workers protested against austerity measures taken by the government to trim the budget deficit during a deep recession. 29/09/2010

Greek truckers pursue protests as strike spreads

Greece has had several days of action since the government cut deep into workers allowances, but Wednesday saw one of the largest protests.   State hospital… 29/09/2010

Social discontent grows across Europe

Europeans are coming out onto the streets in their millions as governments consider legislation aimed at reducing their budget deficits. In France, it is… 24/09/2010

Czech civil servants storm government office

Public sector workers in the Czech Republic on Tuesday stormed the country’s interior ministry during a protest against planned pay cuts. Some 30,000… 21/09/2010

Polish unions join protests over budget cuts

Wet and windy weather did nothing to deter Poles from demonstrating against their government’s belt-tightening measures. Marching under the motto “No to… 29/09/2010

Germany;  Plans to fell 300 trees to make way for the german city’s multi-billion euro rail infrastructure project ended in clashes between police and demonstrators. “This is to teach people a lesson, namely that they have no valid comment to make. The German police have never behaved like this before.” was the reaction of one protestor. There are claims the police used excessive force to quell the protest.

“We are peaceful, what are you?” chanted the crowd. Water cannon and tear gas were used. The authorities say some protesters threw stones at the police. But their actions were in vain as the trees began to tumble as night fell. “I think the trees were felled to show us that there can be no going back. It was meant to demoralise us but I don’t think they will succeed.” said another protestor. The protests have now grown into a national issue. Latest polls suggest that, for the first time in decades, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives could lose their majority in the state’s upcoming elections as a result…………….

Thousands march over Merkel’s nuclear policy

Tens of thousands of protesters have taken to the streets of Berlin to say ‘no’ to Angela Merkel’s nuclear energy policy. They are angry at plans to extend… 18/09/2010

Global cooling and the New World Order


Global Cooling and the New World Order

By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: September 26th, 2010

Bilderberg. Whether you believe it’s part of a sinister conspiracy which will lead inexorably to one world government or whether you think it’s just an innocent high-level talking shop, there’s one thing that can’t be denied: it knows which way the wind is blowing. (Hat tips: Will/NoIdea/Ozboy)

At its June meeting in Sitges, Spain (unreported and held in camera, as is Bilderberg’s way), some of the world’s most powerful CEOs rubbed shoulders with notable academics and leading politicians. They included: the chairman of Fiat, the Irish Attorney General Paul Gallagher, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, Henry Kissinger, Bill Gates, Dick Perle, the Queen of the Netherlands, the editor of the Economist…. Definitely not Z-list, in other words.

Which is what makes one particular item on the group’s discussion agenda so tremendously significant. See if you can spot the one I mean:

The 58th Bilderberg Meeting will be held in Sitges, Spain 3 – 6 June 2010. The Conference will deal mainly with Financial Reform, Security, Cyber Technology, Energy, Pakistan, Afghanistan, World Food Problem, Global Cooling, Social Networking, Medical Science, EU-US relations.

Yep, that’s right. Global Cooling.

Which means one of two things.

Either it was a printing error.

Or the global elite is perfectly well aware that global cooling represents a far more serious and imminent threat to the world than global warming, but is so far unwilling to admit it except behind closed doors.

Let me explain briefly why this is a bombshell waiting to explode.

Almost every government in the Western world from the USA to Britain to all the other EU states to Australia and New Zealand is currently committed to a policy of “decarbonisation.” This in turn is justified to (increasingly sceptical) electorates on the grounds that man-made CO2 is a prime driver of dangerous global warming and must therefore be reduced drastically, at no matter what social, economic and environmental cost. In the Eighties and Nineties, the global elite had a nice run of hot weather to support their (scientifically dubious) claims. But now they don’t. Winters are getting colder. Fuel bills are rising (in the name of combating climate change, natch). The wheels are starting to come off the AGW bandwagon. Ordinary people, resisting two decades of concerted brainwashing, are starting to notice.

Read more.

The King who would be president (and maybe should be)

The King who would be president (and maybe should be)

When it comes to conservative issues and candidates, Dave Levine is the guy I ask when in doubt. Here is Dave’s take on the 2012 lineup as seen from 2010.

Don Hank


Palin vs King in 2012

by Dave Levine

The following subject–who’s going to be the Republican Nominee for President–is going to be the topic of conversation for the next two years. We’re seeing a lot of the same faces considering a run. In my opinion, the most interesting are the ones currently “making noise” in Congress–a lot of noise.

Sara Palin currently has the inside track to become the Republican Nominee in 2012. She has the organizations (PACs), money (PACs) and has been successful in recent Primaries endorsing some Conservatives. However, she’s made some Conservatives very angry with her campaigning for and helping McCain win re-election. While she’s backed Gov. Brewer in her defense of 1070, Palin has not succeeded in convincing “law and order Conservatives” that she’s shed her pro-Amnesty ways. She’s also aged badly and looks nothing like the fresh face of the 2008 campaign. Perhaps most importantly, she hasn’t successfully shed her “ditzy” image.

Let’s look at who she’s likely going to be running against in the Primaries:

The RINOs and Establishment Republicans





The Anti-Establishment Conservatives


-Steve King

Of all these Republican opponents, Romney has the most money and the best looks but also has the most problems. He cannot win the South. He proved that in 2008. He also cannot win the West or even the Northeast. He’s a fool to be considering another run. Will folks forget Mansiongate?

Gov. Perry isn’t liked by many Texas Conservatives. He’s tied to big business the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He’s allowed his state to be overrun by illegals and has done virtually nothing about it, adhering to The Rovian Fallacy–the concept that being tough on illegal aliens will hurt him with Mexican American voters. Perry is not well known and has no clout outside Texas and the South. As the Nominee, he could win some Southern states, perhaps many of them. But his chances in the Northeast and West are about as good as Bush’s were. He might have trouble in Ohio and FL. His fathering the treacherous TTC [Trans Texas Corridor] won’t help him with Conservatives.

Read more.

Russian ministry did NOT report imminent US coup d’etat

By Don Hank

Several blogs, including A Charging Elephant, are carrying the sensational story of how Obama is poised to sell GM to the Chinese. Now, there is legitimate speculation on this topic, covered by mainstream media and it could happen.

But the popular version of the story says the story was broken by a Russian governmental ministry, which supposedly also reported that the US military is plotting a possible coup against the Obama administration.

This is clearly a hoax.

It follows the same pattern of all hoaxes that I have seen referring to a legitimate Russian agency, be it government or media.

A link is provided, which in an authentic report would send the reader to the article in question.

Here we see the link “Russia’s Ministry of Industry and Trade.”

You didn’t click on it, did you? Hoaxters know that most readers won’t, partly because many are lazy but also because they think the site will be in Russian. Try clicking on it.

It brings up only the English language web site of that Russian Ministry.

It not only does not lead you to the article in question, supposedly stating that Obama is selling GM to China (which is nonetheless a legitimate subject of speculation discussed by Wall Street Journal and NYT, with no conclusion drawn), but a quick site search shows nothing like this.

I went to the trouble of searching the Russian language part of the site. The fact that there is a Russian language edition is useful to hoaxters because they want you to believe that that is the part of the site containing the story and they know very few will be able to search it in that language. But I searched the term “GM” at the Russian language site and in fact, it turns out there are some interesting articles on GM there, pertaining to joint ventures between Russian car makers and GM (such as the GM-Avtovaz JV). But nothing on China.

The clincher, however, is the imaginative author’s story that the Russian Ministry is talking about a possible coup in our military.

Let me be blunt: NO serious trading partner with the US would ever write such a thing, even if it were true.

It would destroy their credibility and all their long hours of trade negotiations in an instant.


This is not to say that White House resident would not stoop to selling GM. He might. Who knows?

But that is a different aspect to this story, which is a certifiable hoax. BTW, the US military will never overthrow a president, even a Marxist like Obama. Any sitting president can buy them out or use extortion on them before it comes to that, just as the Brazilian government has bought out and extorted loyalty from their military. Our situation is very similar.

It is understandable that some people are so desperate that they would invent such a story in the hopes that it will encourage the military to action. But it is a childish, misguided action and will only serve to strengthen the Ruling Class in the long run.

Now, finally, you will want to know whether any blog article referring to a Russian news site or government site is legit.

Yes, once in a while that happens. A good example is recent coverage by Russia Today of a conference held in Berlin and featuring economics experts. 700 people showed up and the European media stayed away.

Russia Today spent the day at the conference interviewing participants. Their web site shows videos. DID HAPPEN.

So my suggestion to this conundrum posed by bloggers referring to Russian reporters:

Matthew 10:16.