President Obama told graduates to reject voices that warn about government tyranny. Was this another of his "off-the-cuff" remarks, or does President Obama have something more sinister planned for the nation? Find out on this Trifecta.
Showing posts with label Obama Tyranny. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obama Tyranny. Show all posts
Thursday, May 9, 2013
PJTV Trifecta - Bill Whittle - Class Maledictorian: Obama Tells Graduates Not to Worry About Government Tyranny
President Obama told graduates to reject voices that warn about government tyranny. Was this another of his "off-the-cuff" remarks, or does President Obama have something more sinister planned for the nation? Find out on this Trifecta.
Labels:
Bill Whittle,
Obama Tyranny,
PJTV Trifecta,
Scott Ott,
Steve Green
Friday, April 12, 2013
Matt Barber - Fighting for the Soul of America
I just had breakfast with the Rev. John Peter Gabriel Muhlenberg. Well, not the real Peter Muhlenberg, but a preacher friend of mine named Travis Witt. Travis does a powerful impersonation of the Revolutionary War-time pastor-patriot at churches and other venues around the country.Travis will be in his full Muhlenberg character at The Awakening 2013 on April 19-20 in Orlando, Fla. The Awakening is a life-changing, spiritual-political revival.
But more on that later.
At breakfast, Travis and I were discussing the man Muhlenberg and what he stood for.
One early Sunday morning in January 1776, Rev. Muhlenberg was preaching what seemed his normal weekly sermon. His Scripture for the day focused on Ecclesiastics 3, which observes, in part, “To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven.” Muhlenberg continued: “In the language of the holy writ, there was a time for all things, a time to preach and a time to pray, but those times have passed away.”
With his voice reaching a dramatic crescendo and his congregation now captivated, a fiery Pastor Muhlenberg then declared: “There is a time to fight, and that time has now come!” He then tore away his clerical robes, revealing, underneath, the crisply pressed uniform of a Colonial Army officer.
His congregation gasped.
Pastor Muhlenberg then marched to the rear of the church building, turned and shook the walls, declaring, “Who among you is with me?” That very day, 300 brave men from his relatively small church stood with Peter Muhlenberg to become the 8th Virginia Regiment.
Frederick Muhlenberg, the good pastor’s brother, questioned, in a letter, whether it was Peter’s place to fight. Peter wrote back with words as true today as they were then. “I am a Clergyman, it is true,” he wrote, “but I am a member of the Society as well as the poorest Layman, and my Liberty is as dear to me as any man, shall I then sit still and enjoy myself at Home when the best Blood of the Continent is spilling? … so far am I from thinking that I act wrong, I am convinced it is my duty to do so and duty I owe to God and my country.”
I think Peter Muhlenberg set an example for each of us to follow. I think we all owe a duty to God, country and one another to stand up and fight for liberty, regardless of our station in life.
Like then, we find ourselves today in the midst of a revolutionary war. Not a war with guns, but a war of ideals. We battle not against a foreign king, but a man among us who thinks he’s king. We struggle not against a tyrannical foreign government, but a government of our own making – a government that tilts toward tyranny.
We desperately need revival in this country – spiritual, cultural and political revival. It’s time for the next Great Awakening.
To that end, I invite you to be part of The Awakening 2013: Fighting for the Soul of America, in Orlando, Fla., at First Baptist Oviedo, April 19-20. It is our intention to begin the next Great Awakening.
While there, you will hear from over 60 of our nation’s top religious and policy leaders, including Rep. Michele Bachmann, Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar of the TV show “19 Kids and Counting,” Rev. Samuel Rodriguez and many more.
The early colonialists like Muhlenberg came together in meetings just like The Awakening and looked to God, not government, to guide public affairs. These boldly committed leaders understood that God has given us certain unalienable rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that any government that transgresses against what God gave us has disqualified itself to lead. It has become tyrannical.
Today we face unprecedented threats to our faith and freedom as the government is forcing religious organizations and businesses to provide abortion drugs through the Obamacare mandate. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Our basic liberties and moral foundations are under violent assault.
We have come to a critical crossroads. The future of America will be determined in our lifetime by our actions. What we do now will echo throughout history.
Like Muhlenberg, I ask, “Who among you is with me?” We’re calling for an army of citizen activists – peaceful warriors for Christ, ready to take back America. The Awakening 2013 provides a powerful blend of spiritual, patriotic and grass-roots training that will have a lasting effect on your life and on America. Take a stand for righteousness and justice and join the next American Revolution.
John Adams, our second president, once said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Indeed, in contrast with the deeply held religious and moral values embraced by our Founding Fathers – men like Peter Muhlenberg – today’s America is governed by an “immoral” and “irreligious” chief executive. Barack Obama is the King George of secular-socialism. He seeks to undermine – if not altogether dismantle – the American exceptionalism that, hitherto, has been fundamentally woven throughout our national fabric. He aspires to the lowest common denominator. He seeks to uproot Ronald Reagan’s “shining city on a hill” and relocate the “land of the free and the home of the brave” to a much lower altitude, alongside those Euro-Marxist nations he so admires and wistfully desires to emulate.
Yes, for everything there is a season.
Now is the season to fight.
Matt Barber
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Austin Hill - So Goes Venezuela, So Goes The U.S.? The Limited Powers Of Government Are Weighing In The Balance
Some Venezuelans are concerned that their President might be violating their nation’s Constitution.
So, where have these Venezuelans been for the past 14 years? And do any Americans have the same concerns about their own President?
The headlines emerged about a week ago on January 7th. In a hastily arranged press conference, the leadership of the Venezuelan Catholic Church announced that delaying President Hugo Chavez' inauguration would be a "morally unacceptable" violation of their national constitution. According to the Venezuelan constitution, Chavez’ term in office was to have officially ended on January 10th, whereupon he would have been sworn in to his next (and fourth) term in office.
However, Chavez has been ill with cancer for the past 18 months or so – at least we think that’s what is going on. Depending on what “news” source you’re reading, he’s either near death, or he’s just resting up as he regains strength on the road to recovery. In any event, Venezuela’s Attorney-General Cilia Flores and the collective voice of the Venezuelan National Assembly (the legislature) all agreed to hold the next Chavez inauguration ceremony when Chavez is ready. According to them, the constitutional date of January 10th isn’t that big of a deal, and things will just have to happen according to Hugo’s schedule.
On this point, it may be of interest to some that the 13th Vice President of the United States actually missed his official inauguration, and was sworn-in to office at a hospital located in – of all places - Cuba. In fact, William R. King didn’t even campaign with presidential candidate Franklin Pierce back in 1852, because he was severely ill with tuberculosis, and he never served one day of his Vice Presidency on American soil. After President Pierce’s inauguration, a “special act of Congress” allowed King to swear his oath of office bedside in Havana, the same bed where he died a few weeks later in 1853.
But Venezuela’s accommodations of Chavez have forced some important questions to the table. How ill is Chavez, really? Who is actually acting as President right now? Why are other constitutionally elected officials in the Venezuelan government so beholden to Chavez, and so ambivalent about their nation’s laws? And how legitimate is the current Venezuelan government – or for that matter, Chavez’ alleged landslide re-election last October?
It’s good that the Catholic clergy in Venezuela has taken notice of Chavez’ “morally unacceptable” behavior. But where have the supposed arbiters of moral authority been since Chavez first took office in 1999? Hugo’s presidency is more aptly described as a “reign of terror,” and the ambivalence to the rule of law displayed by the country’s other elected officials today is a reflection of the citizenry’s ambivalence to Chavez’ lawlessness years ago.
Chavez campaigned in the late 90’s against private sector economic mismanagement, and what he called the “harsh realities” of global capitalism. He pledged during his campaign to end corruption in both the government, and the private sector.
After taking office, he claimed that he had “inherited” the worst economic situation in his country’s recent history (sound familiar?). And then, the new President began to consolidate his power. He managed to remove judges from his nation’s Supreme Court, and to appoint new members who would acquiesce to his agenda. Chavez then got the court to approve a new national constitution – one that would allow him to be re-elected to the presidency indefinitely.
Then came the economic and human rights abuses. Once privately-owned enterprises were confiscated by the “Chavez Administration” and became government-owned and operated entities. Several businesses were “restructured” so as to become, essentially, “workers’ cooperatives.”
Not surprisingly, unemployment has remained persistently high, even as Chavez has gone about implementing his much-celebrated “reform” measures. Hugo’s regime has seized privately owned banks, farmland, radio and television stations and newspapers, as well as private bank accounts and gold reserves. And while private citizens have had to struggle with worsening economic conditions, government officials have nonetheless continued to exert increasing levels of control over the nation’s wealth, and have continued to enrich themselves from that wealth, despite the suffering of “the governed.”
Throughout his presidency, Chavez has described himself as an “anti-imperialist,” preaching against wealth and power and promising to bring “economic justice” to the poor and middle class. Yet as history could have predicted, his supposed remedies to the “injustices” -confiscating other human being’s wealth in the name of the collective good of the country- have only added to his own personal power, so much so that now, the entire government is abandoning the rule of law so as to accommodate him. The fact that we really don’t know the truth of Chavez’ health is because he (and his lieutenants) control nearly all the nation’s media.
Americans, much like Venezuelans, are too quick to believe the promises of politicians. And the current U.S. President is on-record saying that the U.S. Constitution is deficient, because it only stipulates what the government cannot do to you, rather than specifying what it should do for you.
Problems are not solved by empowering one’s government – either through proactive support or by ambivalent disregard- to control more of private people’s lives. And ignoring abuses of power only begets more abuse.
Will Americans declare their own government “morally unacceptable” – before Chavez-styled constitutional crisis arrives?
Austin Hill
So, where have these Venezuelans been for the past 14 years? And do any Americans have the same concerns about their own President?
The headlines emerged about a week ago on January 7th. In a hastily arranged press conference, the leadership of the Venezuelan Catholic Church announced that delaying President Hugo Chavez' inauguration would be a "morally unacceptable" violation of their national constitution. According to the Venezuelan constitution, Chavez’ term in office was to have officially ended on January 10th, whereupon he would have been sworn in to his next (and fourth) term in office.
However, Chavez has been ill with cancer for the past 18 months or so – at least we think that’s what is going on. Depending on what “news” source you’re reading, he’s either near death, or he’s just resting up as he regains strength on the road to recovery. In any event, Venezuela’s Attorney-General Cilia Flores and the collective voice of the Venezuelan National Assembly (the legislature) all agreed to hold the next Chavez inauguration ceremony when Chavez is ready. According to them, the constitutional date of January 10th isn’t that big of a deal, and things will just have to happen according to Hugo’s schedule.
On this point, it may be of interest to some that the 13th Vice President of the United States actually missed his official inauguration, and was sworn-in to office at a hospital located in – of all places - Cuba. In fact, William R. King didn’t even campaign with presidential candidate Franklin Pierce back in 1852, because he was severely ill with tuberculosis, and he never served one day of his Vice Presidency on American soil. After President Pierce’s inauguration, a “special act of Congress” allowed King to swear his oath of office bedside in Havana, the same bed where he died a few weeks later in 1853.
But Venezuela’s accommodations of Chavez have forced some important questions to the table. How ill is Chavez, really? Who is actually acting as President right now? Why are other constitutionally elected officials in the Venezuelan government so beholden to Chavez, and so ambivalent about their nation’s laws? And how legitimate is the current Venezuelan government – or for that matter, Chavez’ alleged landslide re-election last October?
It’s good that the Catholic clergy in Venezuela has taken notice of Chavez’ “morally unacceptable” behavior. But where have the supposed arbiters of moral authority been since Chavez first took office in 1999? Hugo’s presidency is more aptly described as a “reign of terror,” and the ambivalence to the rule of law displayed by the country’s other elected officials today is a reflection of the citizenry’s ambivalence to Chavez’ lawlessness years ago.
Chavez campaigned in the late 90’s against private sector economic mismanagement, and what he called the “harsh realities” of global capitalism. He pledged during his campaign to end corruption in both the government, and the private sector.
After taking office, he claimed that he had “inherited” the worst economic situation in his country’s recent history (sound familiar?). And then, the new President began to consolidate his power. He managed to remove judges from his nation’s Supreme Court, and to appoint new members who would acquiesce to his agenda. Chavez then got the court to approve a new national constitution – one that would allow him to be re-elected to the presidency indefinitely.
Then came the economic and human rights abuses. Once privately-owned enterprises were confiscated by the “Chavez Administration” and became government-owned and operated entities. Several businesses were “restructured” so as to become, essentially, “workers’ cooperatives.”
Not surprisingly, unemployment has remained persistently high, even as Chavez has gone about implementing his much-celebrated “reform” measures. Hugo’s regime has seized privately owned banks, farmland, radio and television stations and newspapers, as well as private bank accounts and gold reserves. And while private citizens have had to struggle with worsening economic conditions, government officials have nonetheless continued to exert increasing levels of control over the nation’s wealth, and have continued to enrich themselves from that wealth, despite the suffering of “the governed.”
Throughout his presidency, Chavez has described himself as an “anti-imperialist,” preaching against wealth and power and promising to bring “economic justice” to the poor and middle class. Yet as history could have predicted, his supposed remedies to the “injustices” -confiscating other human being’s wealth in the name of the collective good of the country- have only added to his own personal power, so much so that now, the entire government is abandoning the rule of law so as to accommodate him. The fact that we really don’t know the truth of Chavez’ health is because he (and his lieutenants) control nearly all the nation’s media.
Americans, much like Venezuelans, are too quick to believe the promises of politicians. And the current U.S. President is on-record saying that the U.S. Constitution is deficient, because it only stipulates what the government cannot do to you, rather than specifying what it should do for you.
Problems are not solved by empowering one’s government – either through proactive support or by ambivalent disregard- to control more of private people’s lives. And ignoring abuses of power only begets more abuse.
Will Americans declare their own government “morally unacceptable” – before Chavez-styled constitutional crisis arrives?
Austin Hill
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Matt Barber - Liberal Tyranny and the Cluck Heard ‘Round the World
Writer Sinclair Lewis is credited with saying, “When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in the flag and waving a cross.”Close, but not quite. Truth is, fascism has come to America; but it’s wrapped in a rainbow flag and waving, well, let’s just say it sure ain’t waving a cross. With its latest wave of scorched-earth malfeasance, the radical left has awakened freedom-loving America to this reality.
Liberals learned a hard lesson on Wednesday. While the generally silent majority was showing exuberant support for free speech, the institution of true marriage and Chick-fil-A, “progressives” were gorging themselves on crow sandwiches doused in bitter hate. While Chick-fil-A was eating at liberals, millions of God-fearing Americans were eating at Chick-fil-A.
It was glorious. Those who would silence free speech were shouted down through an unprecedented – dare I say miraculous – show of unity in the body of Christ. Millions of God-fearing Americans took part in the “buy-cott” as Chick-fil-A’s cup runneth over.
It was a beautiful thing to behold. It made you proud to be an American. Most of the characteristically cocky “progressive” blogs and “news” sites observed radio silence as left-wing elitists – media, activists, politicos and pundits – sat in stunned disbelief.
Their wrongheaded Chick-fil-A boycott had backfired catastrophically.
Quite troubling, however, was when this predictable “progressive” hissy left the realm of comedy and breached the realm of tyranny. Multiple elected officials – all Democrats – disgraced both themselves and the offices they hold by pledging to shut Chick-fil-A down, simply because they disagree with its leadership’s biblical viewpoint.
But the American people stood strong. In response to illegal threats by the mayors of Chicago, Boston, San Francisco and Philadelphia to ban Chick-fil-A from their respective jurisdictions, the residents of those great cities rebuked these Constitution-dumping donkeys with “freedom chicken” lines that wrapped-around city blocks. “Mayor Emanuel,” they declared, “your godless values are not ‘Chicago Values!’”
In fact, Pastor Rick Warren tweeted that Chick-fil-A COO Dan Cathy called him to say that sales for Wednesday smashed all records. (Put that in your “progressive” pipe and smoke it, lefties.)
Still, not to be outdone, liberals were determined to beat a dead chicken. As liberty-loving folks peacefully showed support for real marriage with nuggets and waffle fries on Wednesday, “gay” activists held a pathetically attended “kiss-in” at various Chick-fil-A locations on Friday.
We couldn’t ask for a starker contrast. Whereas marriage supporters peacefully patronized Chick-fil-A to demand tolerance for varying viewpoints, homosexual activists engaged in gross, sexually charged public displays deliberately designed to shock and offend children and families. (Warning: vile and profane. Click here for report).
Disgusting. (Please, do keep it up, though, liberals. True colors are brightest. America is watching. Oh, and the vandalism, bomb threats and bullying of teenage girls working at Chick-fil-A? Nice touch!)
Nonetheless, I believe “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day” was just the appetizer – a foretaste of things to come. In November, America serves Obama and Democrats the main course.
And the Democratic Party is helping itself not one little bit. Leading up to Wednesday, a platform change was announced. Hard-left extremists within the party are moving to endorse what some have dubbed, with plain-spoken accuracy, “sodomy-based marriage.”
At a time when record numbers of Democrats in the House and Senate face the very real threat of ouster, the DNC has inexplicably opted to put its stamp of approval on the radical redefinition of marriage – the fundamental cornerstone of any healthy society.
Already nervous, Democrats in at-risk districts are now popping anti-depressants like Pez. They have reason to freak out; especially when you consider that the Democratic Party itself remains robustly divided over this highly controversial issue.
Republicans’ response? Oh please, please don’t throw us in that briar patch.
Of course, Wednesday’s massive outpouring of support for Chick-fil-A provided a visual reminder to all concerned that the vast majority of morally minded Americans reject the oxymoronic notion of so-called “same-sex marriage.” It proved with earthshaking resonance that liberals’ whole “gay-marriage-is-inevitable” thingy remains as sterile as the fraudulent concept itself.
Don’t forget, we live in a constitutional republic where “we the people” are the sovereign, and elected officials are the hired help. When “we the people” have spoken on marriage, we’ve spoken without stuttering.
Thirty-two states have voted on it, and 32 states have protected it via constitutional amendment. Marriage is as marriage was and will be forevermore: the joining of man and wife.
But hey, Democrats made their silly mock-marriage bed, they can sleep in it.
Still, there’s another white paper bag full of goodies to take home from Chick-fil-A. Executives from corporations, large and small, should sit up and take notice. Don’t be intimidated by insufferable homo-fascist organizations like the incongruously tagged “Human Rights Campaign” and GLAAD, the “Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.” Their bark is much, much worse than their bite.
No, you’ve just seen a highly successful business model in action. It’s simple: 1) Publicly acknowledge God’s objective, transcendent truth; 2) Infuriate the toothless “progressive” establishment, prompting calls for boycotts and empty threats to ban you; and 3) Rake in the cabbage.
Stand up for what’s right, good and true, and America’s got your back.
So be encouraged. Despite liberals’ best efforts, freedom of speech, God’s design for marriage and reverence for sexual morality are alive and well in America. There is still hope for this great nation.
But not without a fight.
The line in the sand has been drawn.
It’s perverse “pride” versus patriotism. Liberal lies versus truth. Tyranny versus freedom.
On which side will you stand?
Matt Barber
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Alfonzo Rachel - The Individual Catdate: Neuter Your Pet or Pay Taxes
The constitution says that Congress can regulate commerce, but that is not good enough for liberals. Liberals want to compel commerce. Are liberals therefore the agents of totalitarian government? Find out on this ZoNation.Monday, April 2, 2012
Barack Obama Pre-emptively Lashes Out at "Unelected" Supreme Court
The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) was created in President Obama’s health care law.IPAB has been given too much power. Fifteen "Unelected Bureaucrats" appointed by the president can make major decisions which will affect tens of millions of Medicare recipients. Without oversight from our elected representatives, the panel is unaccountable and uncontrollable.
IPAB’s annual operating budget has been put on auto-pilot, with a direct tap on the Medicare trust funds. This means it won’t have to undergo the yearly congressional budgetary review that applies to almost all other agencies. Instead, its funding will come directly out of the trust funds used to pay Medicare beneficiaries’ health care claims. Incidentally, employment at IPAB will be pretty cushy. Salaries for 2012 will be $165,300 for the board’s members, $179,700 for its chairman, and up to $145,700 per employee. Plus, taxpayers will cover all work-related travel and stipends.
IPAB is a “constitutional trifecta”: an executive agency wielding legislative power immune to judicial oversight. In effect, it is the sole judge of the laws that it creates and executes. Such a concentration of power would be reprehensible to the Founders. As James Madison argued in The Federalist, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
April 2, 2012
Barack Obama against the individual mandate to buy insurance
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

