From Alan Keyes to the 2nd Amendment

Here is the upcoming schedule for The Political Pistachio Radio Revolution:

Alan Keyes to Discuss Obama Citizenship / Birth Certificate, plus other issues on PPR
Alan Keys is our guest tonight to discuss Obama’s Citizenship question, socialism, and the United States Constitution. 4/3/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

Grammy Nominee Steve Vaus on Taking Back America on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Saturday’s Guest in the second hour was Nominated for Grammy Awards in 2007 and 2008, Steve Vaus is a Country Western Star that loves America. In 1992 his hit “We Must Take Back America” was climbing up the charts and made it to #56 when suddenly RCA inexplicably pulled the CD off the Radio and Shelves, cancelled Vaus’ tour, and all because the song was too patriotic and conservative. Now, Steve Vaus has updated the song and plans to re-release it. 4/4/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

Blagojevich Indicted, Illinois Governor Candidate Adam Andrzejewski on Political Pistachio Radio
Illinois ousted Governor Rod R. Blagovich needs to be replaced. Now that he has been indicted, the candidates are lining up. One of the Conservative Front Runners is Adam Andrzejeski, and he is our guest Sunday Night! Learn more about Blagojevich’s antics, Chicago Politics, and about the real conservative vying to be Illinois Governor. 4/5/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

Can Healthcare Costs be Reduced? Guest James Lansberry says Yes – Political Pistachio Radio
As experts proclaim that Social Security and Medicare could be bankrupt by the time most of us get to age 64, Political Pistachio Radio guest James Lansberry says the costs of healthcare can be reduced – and Obama doesn’t even realize that the solution is already here (or maybe he does know, and refuses to acknowledge it). Political Pistachio Radio Revolution – Conservative News and Commentary. 4/10/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

HSA’s Better Than COBRA on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Guest Ron Greiner of http://www.save101.com says Health Savings Accounts are better than COBRA, and employees are even better off with an HSA than an employer-provided insurance plan. 4/11/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

Special Easter Message on The Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
The Storms of Life, The Greatest Gift, and Words of Encouragement. Political Pistachio, Conservative News and Commentary. 4/12/2009, 7:00 PM, 120 Minutes

Larry Pratt, Exec. Dir. of Gun Owners of America on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Omnibus Public Land Act (H.R. 146) increases the amount of government land that would forbid guns. 90% of Illegal Firearms in Mexico Not from USA! Left believes Gun Control in U.S. will solve Mexican Drug War! Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary. 4/18/2009, 7:00 PM

And Here Are The Archive Links To Episodes Last Month You May Have Missed:

Andrea Shea King and the Orlando Tea Party on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Andrea Shea King was one of the speakers at the Orlando Tea Party a week ago. Hear about her experience at the tea party, and her article at World Net Daily that discusses why the media has said nothing about the tea parties. 3/29/2009

Warner Todd Huston on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution, then The Wave Movie
Warner Todd Huston is a familiar Conservative Name around the internet. His Publius Forum, and contributions to NewsBusters, Conservative Crusader, American Daily Review, Renew America, and other sites, have made him one of the leading voices in conservatism. Listen to Warner Todd Huston as he joins Political Pistachio Radio for a little political talk. Then, during the second half of the show, we will revisit the 1981 movie, The Wave. Conservative Commentary. 3/28/2009

American Daily Review Executive Director on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
John Barnhart, Executive Director of American Daily Review, is my guest to discuss the Conservative Revolution, and how American Daily Review plans to be in the thick of things for the long haul. Note: John and I launched American Daily Review January 17th, and the impact of the site has been phenomenal. Listen to this episode – Conservative Commentary 3/22/2009

Gnosticism in Today’s Socio-Political Environment on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
In hour one the author of “The Truth About Jesus and the ‘Lost Gospels'”, David Marshall, joins us to discuss the Nag Hammadi texts, and how Gnosticism is enjoying a rennaissance in today’s society. During the second hour Augie Sodaro of Special Guests will come on to discuss how Political Pistachio gets some of these great guests – Show hosts in particular will enjoy this segment, and learn how to gain the opportunity to lock into a system that ill help in securing great guests for your show. 3/21/2009

Global Governance and the Obama Administration – Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
A taste of ideas doing the rounds in Obama circles includes a thirst for international agreements and treaties. Is the audacity of hope preparing to send us into the audacity of a world government? Political Pistachio Conservative Commentary. 3/15/2009

Impact: Passion of the Christ Dir. Tim Chey, Adam Bitely of Americans For Limited Government
In addition to his latest Christian Movie Industry film, “Live Fast, Die Young,” Tim Chey has directed a number of films over the years. Impact: Passion of the Christ, however, is a searing commentary on today’s socio-political environment from the Christian point of view. Tonight Tim joins us to discuss his latest film, as well as Impact: The Passion of the Christ. During the interview, unknown facts about the Columbine Shootings are revealed as well. Catch this exclusive information on this episode of Political Pistachio Radio. Also, in the second hour, Adam Bitely of Americans for Limited Government and NetRight Daily joins us to discuss the Obama Presidency. Join us on the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution – Conservative Commentary
3/14/2009

U.N. to dictate American Parental Rights on Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Mike Donnelly Esq. of the Home School Legal Defense Association is my guest tonight to discuss the UNCRC treaty that Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and the Democrats are pushing that could take away American Parental Rights. 3/8/2009

Islam in America, Christianity Out, Socialism In, Liberty Out, Slavery In – Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Obama Repeals Bush Abortion Regulation as Montana Passes Personhood Amendment. The Chinese take advantage with a Power Grab you will not believe – right here in America! H.R. 45 to begin Federal Gun Control Measures. Muslim Brotherhood in California Protests FBI investigations into Mosques. Obama Citizenship Eligibility being demanded by Military Officers. Obama, the economy, and health care. Tea Parties Across America. Illinois Bans Prayer in Christian Schools. Obama seizing opportunity of Crises. Obama disses Britain. Hillary embarasses America in Russia. Conservative Commentary. 3/7/2009

Gunny Pop, The Cigar Marine, returns to Political Pistachio Radio Revolution
Tank Commander Gunny Pop Popaditch is a proud United States Marine who survived an RPG hit to his Tank. His book, Once A Marine, tells the story of courage and bravery – but now he’s a civilian, and the good news in Iraq is not on the airwaves, and the life of a Marine is not his daily life anymore – or is it? Join Guest Nick Popaditch on Political Pistachio Radio. 3/1/2009

Liberty Dying Like The Snow Falls

A few snowflakes does not make a snowstorm. A few puddles does not mean there will be massive flooding. But, unfortunately, a few bad apples can ruin a barrel. On the same token, if you see the tip of the iceberg, it may be possible there is a whole lot more from where that came from.

“Walter Reed” has become synonymous with what people believe to be a failing Military Hospital and Veterans Administration system. It doesn’t matter if the connections exist between Walter Reed and any other medical facility in or out of the system. People automatically assume that if an Army Hospital is capable of a breakdown in command and proper leadership, the entire military hospital network, including Veteran’s Affairs – in their minds, is a listing ship ready to take a nose dive into the bowels of Davey Jones’ Locker. However, nothing could be from the truth. Overall, the military hospitals are top notch facilities manned by military personnel doing all they can to take care of their own. Veteran’s Affairs, though it can sometimes become a bureaucratic nightmare, is a fairly stable system with a handful of loose bolts that are constantly being searched out and tightened.

The political game is not much different. When George W. Bush, and a few wayward Republicans, determined that the best way to save the Free Market System was to inject government money, which always includes government regulation and control, any member of The Right that later criticized the Obama Administration for their massive budget and bailout plans was immediately reminded of the socialism injected into the system by the so-called Compassionate Conservative President Bush. As if all folks on The Right have to join into lock-step with anything Dubya did, and to say anything to the contrary is hypocritical.

The political minefield is full of such explosive traps. And I agree with many Democrats that George W. Bush wasn’t the greatest president ever to walk God’s green Earth. But, because there are a few policies, including his spending tendencies, which is now being dwarfed by the current administration’s gluttonous spending spree, that I disagree with, it does not mean that I must then draw a line in the sand and proclaim that Bush is the worst president ever, or that my Republicans are a bunch of screw-ups. In truth, the problem does not lie with Conservatism, anyway, but with Liberalism in the first place.

The Liberal Left is all about party, and all about increasing government involvement in our lives. They proclaim that all Democrats are the greatest beings to ever grace the presence of the United States, while all Republicans were stupid, misinformed oafs that somehow managed not to completely ruin the country. They proclaim, since the Democrats support government handouts to anyone that will take them, this somehow makes the Democratic Party the party that is in the corner of the poor, and therefore, Republicans must only be for the rich, and desire to fill the pockets of the rich with more cash while draining any remaining blood from the poverty stricken masses. This is simply not true.

On the same token, while Liberals proclaim the sainthood of their various historical Democrats, any facts that may not completely fit their mold is conveniently forgotten. John F. Kennedy is hailed as a great Democrat, yet his willingness to fight (using the United States Military) when the enemy stood on the doorstep, or his affinity for cutting taxes, is hardly ever mentioned by anyone on the left, and especially by the bias stricken mainstream media. Franklin Delano Roosevelt is, in the minds of many, the greatest thing to hit economic woes since sliced bread, when in reality if the numbers during the implementation of his New Deal (Raw Deal?) are closely scrutinized, he actually prolonged The Great Depression with his increased taxation, government spending, and creation of socialist programs akin to the practices of the rising enemy, communism. Nations that allowed the Free Market to correct itself maintained lower unemployment numbers, and pulled out of the depression earlier, worldwide.

Though the occasional Larry Craig, or Republican spending spree by the Bush Administration, does not define an entire GOP that is populated largely by Conservatives, a continual track record of tax and spending for the last century by the Democrats does give us a glimpse of what lies beneath the liberal iceberg.

Now that communism lies in disgrace with the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the Chinese decision to inject a little capitalism into their economy, of which the result has been massive economic growth, why is it that liberalism hangs on to the very ideals proven to fail?

Norman Thomas, six-time Socialist Party candidate for president said it best: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”

This is because liberalism, socialism, or if you will – Marxism, is about control. Members of the Democratic Party could care less about the economic stability of the nation, when it really comes down to it. Their greed for power overshadows that, and they are already trying to figure out how they can stay in power during the next election cycle. This is why the Democrats act like classic liberals, but proclaim conservatism (like claiming to give tax cuts to 95% of the people when they have no intention of doing such a thing, and a simple change in income tax withholding is nothing of the sort).

The occasional misstep of a few Republicans is a perfect example of a few bad apples ruining the barrel. The problem with the Democrats is that the barrel is rotten from top to bottom. The Obama budget bill is way over budget, and some members of the left are now proclaiming that conservative bloggers are domestic terrorists, and now to make sure you stay in goose-step with the Liberal takeover of America, H.R. 1388 is moving forward to put into place a compulsory (yet called voluntary – talk about Orwellian Double Speak) civilian national security force requiring community service (in a special uniform) of young Americans. Some would call it Obama’s version of The Brown Shirts.

Liberty, unfortunately, usually dies under the guise of security, and is greeted with thunderous applause. The blizzard has arrived, and the onslaught of Liberal Socialism is more than just a few snowflakes.

American Daily Review bursts on the conservative scene

American Daily Review Gone Gang-Busters

American Daily Review is one of the premiere conservative web magazines on the world wide web. In the two month period since its launch it has already nearly surpassed over 100,000 hits. Notable writers from around the net are joining the site as contributors. War has been declared against the mainstream media, and the conservative alternative known as American Daily Review is on the front line.

In reality, the story behind this up and coming star of the conservative internet brigade began with a few phone calls. John Barnhart, the Executive Director behind American Daily Review asked a few people attached to Conservative Solutions (aka Let’s Get This Right) what they thought about his idea for a new site geared at Christian Conservative Commentary, and a site that would ultimately go to battle against The Daily KOS and Huffington Post. The folks over at Conservative Solutions listened carefully, understood John’s desire to be networked with sites like theirs, yet independent, and his desire to find people with the same talent and fire in their belly as he.

They recommended that John contact me, Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio.

Our early phone conversations last August began the birthing process of American Daily Review. Slowly, we designed the site, and John became the technical brains behind the outfit. When the site launched January 17, 2009, immediately ADR received a plethora of hits. With the superior content provided by myself, John, and a host of other contributors, the readers began to return for more, and tell their friends.

Now, American Daily Review has become a major force in the battle to return this country to its Conservative roots.

Tonight, live on the Political Pistachio Radio Revolution, John Barnhart, Executive Director of American Daily Review, joins the show to discuss the evolution of American Daily Review, and the issues Conservatives are confronting today as the Liberal Left Democrats dominate our government, and are steering this nation headlong into a socialist mistake.

Join the show live at 7pm Pacific, or catch the archive later: HERE

Bankrupting America

The American Century Dictionary defines Bankrupt as “Legally declared insolvent.” Insolvent is defined as “Unable to pay one’s debts.”

The majority of Democrats, and a surprising number of Republicans, believe that the Obama Administration is on the right course to save the nation’s financial system. The same Democrats that screamed bloody-murder over George W. Bush’s spending habits, spending sprees that I also was in grave disagreement with, are now proclaiming that not only will President Barack Obama’s massive budget proposal not bankrupt the country, but that deficit spending into the trillions of dollars is what is necessary to save us from a looming sequel of The Great Depression.

Republican House Representative John A. Boehner, the House minority leader, said recently in defense of his idea to freeze government spending that, “We simply cannot afford to mortgage our children and grandchildren’s future to pay for this big government spending spree.”

Imagine, if you will, and I will use myself as a hypothetical example, that I had hit some hard times. Investments were going sour, logging and construction downturns placed a burden on my financial well-being, and my wife and I were no longer able to go out to fine places to eat, or attend entertainment venues that we would normally frequent. Cooking at home takes work, after all, and tightening our belts and curbing our spending habits would take away from our ability to participate in a lifestyle we have been enjoying for years.

So, one night I sit down with my wife and say, “You know, the way to help our economic situation is to create in influx of cash so that we can get things moving again. That way, with all of that extra cash, we can go out and buy the things we feel we need to buy, and not have to spend so much time worried about trying to juggle the bills.”

She decides to agree in this world of fantasy, and so we max out our credit cards and get more of those little plastic devils so that we can use them for whatever we desire. After all, we need to fix the infrastructure of our lives by buying new cars, adding on to the house, building an additional structure on our property on the Oregon Coast, and pulling out our driveway and replacing it with new concrete – oh, heck, its free money, we might as well lay interlocking bricks. That way, it is more appealing to guest that visit too.

Eventually, the credit cards become too much for us to manage. But, hey, no problem, the 80 acre place in Oregon is paid off, and even with the slow down in real estate it is worth more than one can shake a stick at, so we can just borrow against the property. We’ll set up an account that allows us to write checks, that way the equity is fully available, and always at our fingertips.

During the time period of all this money flowing in we go out, buy new cars, and live it up. Those around us proclaim, “Gosh, even with the economic difficulties this nation is facing, the Gibbs’ family is doing well. I wonder how they do it?”

What is that you say? Eventually I will have to pay back all of that money I created by financing myself up to my eyeballs? No problem, the creditors will stay off my back just long enough for me to die of old age, and then my kids can worry about it. No worry. They’ll figure something out.

Obviously, the high deficit world I created in the above scenario would be a foolish way to run my household. As a business owner, trying to fix an ailing business by going into deeper debt would be foolish as well. So I ask this: If it is the wrong thing to go deeper into debt to create an influx of funds, and if it is wrong to just leave the worries of it to my children and grandchildren, as an individual or business owner, then why would it be the right thing to for the United States Government?

Historically, raising taxes and increasing government spending creates more harm than it helps. Lyndon B. Johnson and Jimmy Carter are great examples of that. And don’t give me this “Obama is cutting taxes” bull, either. Taxes are being raised in ways that we don’t even recognize them as such. Fees and licenses and fines for regulatory disobedience are all taxes, in my book. Even the simple little Business License is a city business tax, even though the word tax is not present. While quacking like a duck, even though the animal has a name tag that says hyena, does not make a duck suddenly a hyena. Eventually, the Democrat’s spending, led by Barack Obama, is going to get so massive, and it is already beyond the abilities of the top 5% to shoulder the full burden, that Obama will tax as Democrats always tax – massively along all points of the economic spectrum. Uh, that means you, too. You will all feel the pain of an Obama Administration frantically trying to gather more funds after everything begins to collapse further.

Early during the last century a recession loomed on the horizon, and Presidents Harding and Coolidge were fiscal conservatives that adhered strictly to the U.S. Constitution. As the economic times were becoming more difficult, as they are now, Harding, and then Coolidge later, cut federal spending and cut taxes. As a result, people were able to do more with more, and their incomes rose, increasing revenue while stimulating the economy. The boom years of the 1920’s followed.

President Hoover, a fitting predecessor to the socialist stylings of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was not anything like his fellow fiscally conservative Republicans. Hoover, as Roosevelt would later, piled up big deficits to support huge public-works projects. Federal spending soared during the final years of the roaring 20’s and into the early 1930’s. In fact, federal spending increased by more than 50%, the largest increase in federal spending ever recorded during peacetime.

Public projects Hoover decided to undertake included the San Francisco Bay Bridge, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, and the Hoover Dam. Yes, I know these are wonderful projects that we benefit from to this day, and the world is a better place with them, but was this the best thing to do as the nation was entering into The Great Depression? Sure, Hoover became very popular with the labor forces that participated in the projects who were convinced by government to refrain from cutting wages as the economy fell. But was it government’s responsibility to correct the market? Or was it the fault of central planning, protectionism (like the Smoot-Hawley tariff), and central banks like the Federal Reserve System controlling the economy (that became known as the New Deal later) that caused the economic upheaval, and extended it well into the 1940s?

Like with the Obama Administration, where the market seems on the surface to have failed, the government stepped in to protect the common citizen, increasing spending to do so, therefore creating debt – and in Obama’s case, writing checks on money that doesn’t even exist, and in turn devaluing the dollar.

I know that the Liberal anti-truth machine is even now rewriting history, proclaiming that Hoover, contrary to popular opinion and factual historical text, was actually trying to balance the budget by cutting spending, and it was those actions that caused The Great Depression. Robert H. Frank of the New York Times even goes so far to “lie,” I mean “say,” that Hoover not only actually cut spending, but that there is a consensus out there among economists that cutting spending is a huge mistake.

Do you hear that? Balancing the budget, cutting spending, and essentially being responsible with the American Citizen’s tax money is a bad thing? Putting less on the credit cards will harm us? Mortgaging America into bankruptcy so that our children and grandchildren in their lifetimes could never pay it back in full is the right thing to do to stimulate the economy? Are they insane?

Owing more than you have coming in, in other words, deficit spending, is a one way ticket to bankruptcy. It was wrong when George W. Bush did it, and it is wrong now. The Free Market is self-correcting. The people know best, not the government. The size of government has been steadily increasing over the last twenty years under the very moderate Bush Family, Bill Clinton, and now Obama (with a short spurt of a balanced budget that created a surplus that was engineered by the House Republicans led by Newt Gingrich during the nineties, of which The Left loves to give the credit to Bill Clinton on). If an increase in the size of government is such a good thing, and if deficit spending is what helps the economy grow, then tell me: After all of these years of deficit spending and a constant expansion of the federal government, why is it that we are in this financial mess? Could it possibly be that the seems of our economy are busting loose because of government intervention in the Free Market? Could it possibly be that the Free Market is trying to adjust after a decades of artificial manipulation by the United States Government? And since when is ever financing ourselves into oblivion a reasonable thing to do?

The Obama Administration, and the village idiots that populate the U.S. Congress, are bankrupting us. And what is most concerting about it is that a large segment of the U.S. population is actually greeting this destruction of the American financial system with thunderous applause, and mindless approval. Our founding fathers, President Harding, and President Coolidge would be disappointed. We have truly lost our way, and the Pied Pipers of Washington are leading us to a cliff. It is essential that we turn this around with fiscal conservatism, or else in the end, like the rats in the river, we will be drowning as a result of our own stupidity.

— Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Five Myths About the Great Depression by Andrew B. Wilson

When ‘Deficit’ Isn’t a Dirty Word by Robert H. Frank

Gnosticism and Today’s Politics

Gnosticism, Lost Gospels, and today’s Politics

In 1945, near the town of Nag Hammadi, a farmer found a red jar containing 12 papyrus books bound in leather. The writers of these codices were followers of an ancient movement called Gnosticism. The tales in the texts claim to be written by Jesus’ first disciples. Five of the Nag Hammadi words call themselves Gospels. Some scholars believe that these documents rewrite the story of Christianity.

The Jesus Seminar wrote a new translation of the Gospels using the Gnostic influence. Writers like Elaine Pagels have written extensively on the “lost Gospels.” Before long, the lost Gospels began to be used as a way to undermine Christianity, using a linguistic shell game that has created confusion and doubt among some in society. However, Gnosticism didn’t receive center stage until Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code hit the book shelves in 2003.

Fifty million readers of Dan Brown’s best selling novel read in The Da Vinci Code that the Nag Hammadi writings are “unaltered Gospels” which present Jesus Christ in “human terms.” Dan Brown’s book claims that the lost Gospels were rejected by The Church for political reasons, and that the story of Jesus is a much different tale than what is portrayed by Christianity. And with the popularity of Dan Brown’s novel, in addition to a number of Hollywood releases using Gnosticism for the stories, the Gnostic Rennaissance is in full bloom.

In 2007, David Marshall published his book, The Truth About Jesus and the “Lost Gospels.” The book delves deep into the “Lost Gospels” to answer what they are, where they came from, if they are trustworthy, if they are on par with the Holy Bible, and whether or not we have had wrong perceptions about Jesus all along.

Tonight, during the first hour of Political Pistachio Radio, David Marshall is my guest. In tonight’s interview, we will go through a careful comparison of the “Lost Gospels” to the Bible, as well as investigate how Gnosticism has infected our society, and political system.

The Episode Airs Live at 7:00 pm Pacific Time on Political Pistachio Radio – catch it live, or the archive later, HERE.

During the second hour of the show, we will be joined by Augie Sodaro of Special Guests to discuss how agencies like Special Guests work, and how internet radio is influencing todays entertainment industry.

Israel Moves Into Gaza

Israel Moves Into Gaza with Troops and Tanks

Israel sent thousands of troops, backed by tanks and helicopter gunships, into the Gaza Strip as they lauched a ground offensive in Gaza last night. This action follows a week of airstrikes into Gaza that were aimed at stopping rocket and missile attacks against Israel from the Muslim controlled region. Since 2005, after Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, relinquishing full control to the Palestinians (and eventually to the terrorist group, Hamas) 6,500 rockets and missiles have been fired into Israel, primarily targeting civilians, killing indescrimitantly.

Hamas, while living up to the “Death To Israel” chant you hear often coming from the lips of Islamists, has used women and children as shields while proclaiming to the world that Israel is in fact the aggressors. Palestinians, and the rest of the Muslim world, continuously remind us that they are committed to Israel’s destruction, will never recognize Israel as a nation, and will never end the violence against the Jewish State; yet the moment Israel responds with military actions against the continuous onslaught of violence against them, the Muslim world (and liberal left media alike) screams out that Israel’s response is an unbelievable display of disproportionate aggression.

You’d think, if you believe what you read in the newspapers and news magazines, or even kind of believe what you hear on the alphabet news channels, that the Palestinian casualties in a few days of Israeli strikes are astronomical when compared to the deaths of Israelis over any period of time, when in reality the constant pounding of Israel by her neighbors has taking its toll – and the toll has become such that Israel has finally taken action.

Could you imagine if Mexico, declaring that the Southwest United States belonged to them (as the Muslims have declared regarding the Jewish lands), decided to start lobbing rockets into San Diego, San Antonio, and Yuma? How long do you think it would take before the United States took action? Would Americans then be crying out once America took action to stop the attacks? Would the U.S. response be seen as disproportionate? Would we sit still if Mexico or Canada suddenly declared that they were committed to our destruction as a nation, and were willing to use any violence necessary to destroy us? Would we stand for even a single attack against our soil? If you are not sure of the answers to those questions, remember how you felt on September 11, 2001 when the Twin Towers fell.

And here is the real kicker. If any nation other than Israel fights a war and loses, that nation simply lost a war. But Israel, surrounded by the enemy, and existing in a world filled with nations that desire their destruction, must win every war – for to Israel, to lose a war is to cease to exist.

Heroes Weekend

Taking Chance Home on Political Pistachio Radio —- Tonight at 7pm Pacific

The first weekend of 2009 is Heroes Weekend on The Political Pistachio Radio Revolution. Tonight the account of Valor, Honor, and Respect – Marine Lieutenant Colonel Strobl escorting the remains of Lance Corporal Chance Phelps home – and also information on the movie starring Kevin Bacon that takes this story into the theaters.

Monica Brown, Silver Star Recipient – The tale of bravery and heroism in Afghanistan —- Sunday Night at 7pm Pacific

Monica Brown is the second woman since World War II to receive the Silver Star. She’s an Army Medic that risked her own life to save the lives of a pair of critically wounded paratroopers. Her story received the spotlight when 60 Minutes interviewed her. Tonight we will discuss her story in this second installment of Heroes Weekend on the Political Pistachio Revolution.

The links above are to listen live, or to catch the archive later – Political Pistachio Radio

Barry and Rod

Obama Connection to Rod Blagojevich?

Friend, and political ally, of Barack Obama – Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich – was indicted for operating a bribery scheme that specifically was designed to sell Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder. Such a political corruption scandal has Obama’s political foes asking about connections between Barack Obama and the Illinois governor – after all, it was Obama’s Senate seat that caused the stir in the first place.

The scandal carries with it the typical degree of illegality and corruption one expects to see out of Illinois politics – after all, the corruption of Chicago area politicians is well known, and dang near legendary. In fact, Blagojevich is the 4th of the last seven governors to find himself behind bars.

Interestingly, after bail was paid, Blagojevich went back to work as if nothing had happened, and then refused to resign after many people of both parties asked him to do so. Even President-Elect Barack Obama recommended that Blagojevich step down. One comes to the conclusion that he is either very arrogant, or lacks a conscience, or both.

Immediately, after the scandal broke, Barack Obama said he had no contact with the governor, or Blagojevich’s office – this coming only a month after Obama’s advisor, David Axelrod, said otherwise in an interview on Fox News Chicago. Axelrod, of course, later issued a retraction, claiming that he was mistaken.

But here is what interests me: Obama’s vacant Illinois Senate seat was to be filled by an appointment by the Illinois Governor, Blagojevich, and surely Barack Obama would have kept tabs on the status of the choice. Also, considering the close ties Obama had with Blagojevich, you would have thought they had at least had a conversation here and there, regardless of whether or not the exchange was regarding the U.S. Senate seat. The suggestion that Barack Obama has not talked to Governor Blagojevich since the election, to be honest, seems ludicrous.

In fact, I fully expected that they had been in contact, and I would not have been saying “ah ha!” had that come out after this scandal. The fact that Obama is claiming there has been absolutely no contact with Blagojevich, or his office, sends up many more red flags, than if Obama had said something like, “Yes, we’ve been in contact, but I was not aware of, nor did Rod say anything about, trading favors for my vacant Illinois Senate seat.”

But that is the way Barry works. The moment a scandal, or a connection that may make him look bad, crosses the horizon, he detaches any and all connections to that person. But does it seem reasonable that the person who left a senate seat open would have absolutely no contact with the person tasked with filling the seat? Would it seem reasonable that something as exciting as being elected President of the United States would not prompt Barack Obama and Rod Blagojevich to at least have a chat about it?

Unlikely.

Gay Marriage and the Equal Protection Clause

Proposition 8, The Equal Protection Clause, and the Coming Wave of Lawsuits

I guess Proposition 8, the State Constitutional Amendment in California defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, angered a few people. Lawsuits against the choice of the people are emerging.

The opponents of the amendment claim that it violates the “Equal Protection Clause” of the U.S. Constitution, as set out in the fourteenth amendment. Since rights apply to individuals, the Equal Protection clause applies to potential state violations of the rights of an individual, based on the individual’s status. A law or Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a woman means “any” man and “any” woman. This applies to any man or woman who wish to marry, and are of legal age or have parental consent. So, the law does not prohibit the rights of gays to marry. A homosexual male and a homosexual female are free to marry one another if they so desire.

The right to marry has not been eliminated from anybody. However, marriage is not necessarily a “right” anyways. If I wanted to marry a supermodel, I don’t have a “right” to that marriage. Nor would I have a “right” to marry my car, dog, or neighbor’s horse.

Not allowing people to marry someone of the same sex is not a violation of the Equal Protection clause. Besides, a state constitution is designed to address “state issues” and cannot be considered in contradiction with the U.S. Constitution if the federal constitution does not address those particular issues in the first place.

The opponents of Prop. 8 claim the Equal Protection Clause was designed for exactly that – to stop the states from violating someones rights based on . . .

Based on what? A behavior? The Equal Protection Clause was a direct result of the abolition of slavery in the United States. The 14th amendment was designed to protect blacks, or any racial group, against unfair treatment. The Equal Protection Clause was written to protect ethnicity and race – not behavior! Since behavior, such as homosexuality, is not specifically addressed in the U.S. Constitution, that means it is not a federal issue, and it is up to the individual states to address the issue – and if a state wishes to ban gay marriage in its state constitution, it is entitled to do so. The federal government cannot (though it has unlawfully in the past) overturn state law or amendments. It is unlawful for the federal government to do so according to the U.S. Constitution!

This very application, in turn, makes the Roe v. Wade decision unconstitutional (Roe v. Wade overturned a Texas State Law). It also makes the practice of the federal government shutting down medical marijuana facilities in California (as long as the drug does not cross state lines the issue remains a state issue) illegal as well. I don’t agree with the legalization of medical marijuana, but from a legal and Constitutional point of view, the state has a right to make such law without federal interference.

In reality, like Roe v. Wade did for abortion, the courts legalizing gay marriage with a court decision (and overturning state law) was unconstitutional in the first place. It is not for the courts to “make” law. Making law is the responsibility of the legislature. The courts were tasked by our founding fathers to provide an “opinion,” and then it is up to the legislature to act upon that opinion by the courts “if” they choose to.

The U.S. Constitution was written to limit the federal government from dictating law to the states, and the branches were set up as they were to limit the judiciary from having too much power. “States Rights” and “The People” are the central themes of the founding documents. Contrary to the lawsuits coming against Proposition 8, the voters have a right to interpret the Constitution, and change it, with their vote.

The Constitution belongs to “The People.” The U.S. Constitution was written for the people, of the people, and by the people. Besides, one does not have to have a law degree to recognize the original intent. However, if the U.S. Supreme Court gets involved, and decides to overturn California’s Proposition 8, there is going to be some serious issues rising from it regarding federal intrusion into state issues.

Barack Hussein Obama and the Logan Act

Barack Obama and His Merry Band of Felons, Violating The Logan Act

The Logan Act is a Federal Law forbidding American citizens not authorized by the President to correspond or meet with foreign governments with the intent of influencing conduct. Violation of the act, which passed in 1799, is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years.

There have been no convictions or prosecutions under the Logan Act. The Text of the Act is as follows:

Private correspondence with foreign governments.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

During the Vietnam War when Jane Fonda went to Hanoi to meet with the enemy she was guilty of violating the Logan Act. During the Vietnam War when John Kerry secretly met with enemy leaders in Paris, he too was in violation of federal law.

Nancy Pelosi visiting the Syrian leader, and Jimmy Carter’s visits to the Middle East talking down America were both in violation of the Logan Act as well.

And now we have running for president, his Lord the Democratic Messiah, Barrack Hussein Obama. During his recent trip to Iraq it is alleged that Obama tried to negotiate with Iraqi leaders to delay the troop withdrawal (of course he wants credit for any troop withdrawal, and if troops begin withdrawing under the flag of victory now, then if he became president it would look as if he was simply continuing to do what George W. Bush had already begun). Word has it that nobody has been willing to follow Obama’s plans of delaying the troop withdrawal.

Notice, the Logan Act has been violated a number of times (surprise! by the liberal left!) yet never with indictments. And the cases I have mentioned above are only the tip of the ice berg. I personally believe that Democrats routinely violate the Logan Act, well knowing that nobody will be willing to prosecute, and even if the GOP tried to launch an investigation, the Republicans would probably not be able to make a charge stick.

The McCain campaign, however, is making sure the Democrats know that The Right has noticed what they are up to.

The Obama Camp has responded to it as well, denying the report that Barry has had secretly urged the Iraqis to postpone a deal to withdraw US troops until after November’s election.

Now that is what I call a patriotic president, right? – After all, his wife, Michelle, loves this country – becoming proud of America for the first time in her life when Barack received a political promotion.