Patriots Are Radical, Racist, Hate-Filled Terror Suspects

On the heels of the National Defense Authorization Act’s indefinite detention provision and Attorney General Eric Holder’s unfortunate “the U.S. government has the right to kill you” speech and while the word “terrorist” is used ever more loosely, left-wing activists groups are ramping up their campaigns against those who believe in smaller government.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (also known more accurately as the Southern Preposterous Lie Center here at Personal Liberty Digest), long known and called out for its shameless exploitation of race for profit, has released its latest report profiling hate in America: “The ‘Patriot’ Movement Explodes.” The word “patriot” as defined over the course of about 3,000 words by the author, however, varies a bit from Webster’s definition and the likely definition of most people who feel patriotic: “One who loves and loyally or zealously supports one’s own country.”

The author instead likens the word “patriot” to any person who is affected by “superheated fears generated by economic dislocation, a proliferation of demonizing conspiracy theories, the changing racial makeup of America, and the prospect of four more years under a black president who many on the far right view as an enemy to their country.” The author also, interestingly, describes the “Patriot movement” as something that began in 1994 as “a response to what was seen as violent government repression of dissident groups at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and near Waco, Texas, in 1993, along with anger at gun control and the Democratic Clinton Administration in general.” The “Patriot movement,” as defined by the SPLC author, peaked in 1996 “after the Oklahoma city bombing” and then faded as the new millennium began.

Following the alarmist introduction, the author tells his readers that the so-called “Patriot movement” is again on the uptick, growing from 149 groups in 2008 to 512 in 2009, and again in 2010 to 824, and then, last year, jumping to 1,274. The title of the report and the groups contained under the author’s definition of “patriot” likely alarm the everyday conservative who may spend time on weekends organizing for like-minded political candidates, lecturing friends about the value of our Founders’ vision laid forth in the Constitution of the United States, decrying the continual expansion of an ever-stifling Federal bureaucracy or waving signs on the local courthouse steps with Tea Party peers.

Following are some of the subgroups into which the alarmists at SPLC divide patriots:

  • Anti-Gay: Patriotic Americans as defined by SPLC can be members of one of 27 militantly anti-gay groups that are involved in “efforts to ban or repeal marriage equality and what seemed to be an intensification of anti-gay propaganda in certain quarters.”
  • Anti-Muslim: The author contends that people who consider themselves to be American patriots may be involved in one of the 30 groups that exist throughout the Nation that vilify and commit hate crimes against Muslims.
  • Black Separatists: Black Americans who consider themselves patriots, have an unfavorable view of President Barack Obama or who believe the Constitution is an important document are likely members of the small portion of African-Americans belonging to the greater sovereign citizens movement, according to SPLC.
  • Christian Identity: Patriots who are also Christians may believe that Jewish people are direct descendants of Satan and people of color are “soulless mud people” in SPLC’s view.
  • Ku Klux Klan: The SPLC believes that the growing Patriot movement also coincides with a growing number of Ku Klux Klan members in the country.
  • Neo-Confederates: Centered on the Alabama League of the South, a group founded in 1994 with the alleged goal to organize a second Southern secession, there are 32 neo-Confederate organizations that SPLC says American patriots may belong to.
  • Racist Skinhead Groups: SPLC believes that American patriots could belong to any number of racist skinhead organizations — groups that have been defined over the past several decades as being fond of punk rock, anarchy and racism.
  • White Nationalist Groups: In SPLC’s view, patriotic Americans may be white nationalists, similar to those who protested school integration and racial equality during the Civil Rights era.

Having known many American citizens and politicians who define themselves as Tea Party Patriots, or simply patriots, and having attended Tea Party events where signs emblazoned with patriotic messages are proudly waived, this author has never encountered a member or supporter of one of the above-mentioned groups. Furthermore, it is probably safe to assume that most of those reading this article who are Constitution lovers, Tea Party activists, Ron Paul supporters, patriots, etc., have never been affiliated with or known someone who is affiliated with one of the hate movements. That’s not to say there is no hate or extremism in the United States; there is. But SPLC covers only one side of the political hate spectrum — hence, the moniker we have given it– in an effort to retain its extremist liberal donors; the unfortunate consequence, however, is the organization must label people who are not extremists as such so they have something to write about.

The SPLC has given conservative Americans a valuable lesson in liberal semantics with its latest report, a perfect demonstration of the reason liberal mouthpieces get away with saying things similar to things for which conservatives are attacked. With reports like this, the SPLC makes it fine for Democratic Representative Maxine Waters to say the “Tea Party can go straight to hell,” union thugs like Jimmy Hoffa to declare war on Tea Party “sons of bitches” and mouthpieces like Bill Maher and The New York Times’ Maureen Dowd to make disparaging and unsolicited remarks about prominent conservative women while conservative shock-jocks like Rush Limbaugh are attacked vehemently by the liberal media for the same behavior — even when commenting on women who flaunt their own premarital promiscuity before the U.S. Congress. It is excusable, because in the SPLC’s view all Tea Party members, conservatives and self-proclaimed patriots are likely involved in any number of hate crimes and reprehensible acts.

The latest report (which, by the way, was a top headline for the liberal Huffington Post on Thursday) is only the latest installment in the organization’s ongoing campaign against conservatism for financial gain.

Wesley Pruden, former editor of The Washington Times, credited the organization with inventing the new racism, writing in one editorial: “Campaigns of smear and guilt by association have always proven lucrative in terms of fundraising. Realizing the decline in the size of their most lucrative opponent, the SPLC quickly concocted a new one. Immediately, a new racism was to be found — racists, nativists, xenophobes and hate-mongers were suddenly to be discovered lurking under every rock. Particularly attractive targets were immigration reformists who wanted American laws enforced and illegal immigration halted. A new McCarthyism was born.”

With the help of eager liberal allies from the media, the halls of Congress and the White House, SPLC will continue to rake in money from donors terrified of villainous, prejudice anti-government conservatives. All the while, those who believe the Constitution to be the supreme law of the land, those who love the Nation, call themselves patriots and believe it is the duty of the people to keep Federal tyranny in check, become the ultimate victims: the new face of terror in the United States.

Judge: 4th Amendment Does Not Extend To Cellphones

Does the protection of the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures” provided by the 4th Amendment mean information contained on your cellphone is safe from government snoops? No.

Even though Americans keep vast amounts of personal — and perhaps, unwittingly, self-incriminating — information on their cellphones, and even though most modern cellphones are more like tiny computers than phones, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit has ruled that it is legal for police to search them without a warrant.

Stemming from a case wherein Indiana police arrested a drug dealer and obtained information about his activities from his cellphone, the latest assault on the Bill of Rights is simply another liberty victim of the War on Drugs. Judge Richard Posner ruled that police would not have time to obtain a warrant for cellphone searches in many circumstances because suspects could wipe the devices clean in minutes. The judge likened cellphone searches to another case, United States vs. Robinson, in which it was ruled that a “container” on someone’s body at the time of arrest could be searched for evidence relevant to the crime for which he was arrested.

A portion of Posner’s opinion reads:

It’s not even clear that we need a rule of law specific to cell phones or other computers. If police are entitled to open a pocket diary to copy the owner’s address, they should be entitled to turn on a cell phone to learn its number. If allowed to leaf through a pocket address book, as they are, United States v. Rodriguez, they should be entitled to read the address book in a cell phone. If forbidden to peruse love letters recognized as such found wedged between the pages of the address book, they should be forbidden to read love letters in the files of a cell phone. There is an analogy (implied in United States v. Mann, and cases discussed there) to the requirement that wiretaps “minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception.”

It is unclear whether removing the cellphone’s battery, completely turning off the device or protecting it with a password would be an effective way to avoid a warrantless cellphone search.

‘Doomsday Bunker’ Show On Discovery Channel

A new show that premiered on Discovery Channel yesterday follows the day-to-day activities of a company that specializes in building bunkers for disaster scenarios.

Dallas-based Deep Earth Bunker owner Scott Bales and his engineers show exactly what goes into making intricate survival bunkers. In each episode of “Doomsday Bunkers” viewers get a start-to-finish guide to building a bunker. Whether power grid failures, nuclear disasters, shooting sprees, tsunamis, earthquakes, terrorist attacks or economic collapse are his customers’ concerns, Bales can build a shelter to suit.

“The series takes a really interesting look into this subculture or movement, from radical folks who really take these precautions to an extreme, to the average person who is using their common sense and taking responsibility for what could happen,” executive producer Anna Geddes told FOX News. “The core focus is really on how Scott built his business – he is an engineering genius with an incredible passion for design, and is always dreaming up ways to improve something.”

During the show, Bales and his team go to great lengths to test their bunkers by trying to blow them up and set them on fire and by shooting and hurling objects at them.

“Some of these bunkers can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars with radiation infiltration systems, booby traps, gun vaults, decontamination rooms and high-tech software to counter security breaches, while others are much more simple,” said Geddes. “It might seem extreme to pile guns or food in anticipation for disaster, but we’ve become so dependent on infrastructure and most of us aren’t self-sufficient anymore.”

Are All Airline Employees Taking Notes From The TSA?

A woman from Burbank, Calif., was arrested after a flight from Los Angeles to Houston because she painted her nails on the airplane.

According to CBS News, Jeanie Daniels was on the flight on Feb. 26 to see her boyfriend, who lives in Houston. Daniels asked passengers on both sides of her if they would mind her painting her nails. They said they would not; a flight attendant, however, took issue.

“I thought it was all going well until the attendant came over and was very upset I was painting my nails, saying it was offending everyone around me,” Daniels told the news station.

The passenger then went to the plane’s lavatory to finish where she was accosted by another flight attendant.

“She said, ‘Weren’t you just told not to paint your nails?’ and I said, ‘Actually, I wasn’t. I was just told it was offending people around me so I did the right thing and went to an enclosed area,’” Daniels said.

When she went back to her seat, the first flight attendant continued to reprimand her, prompting the passenger to ask her to shut up and calling her an expletive.

The disagreement resulted in police officers arresting Daniels when her flight landed and her subsequent detainment for 10 hours before it was deemed that no charges would be filed.

Breitbart Obama Video To Be On ‘Hannity’ Tonight After Edited Version Emerges

Editor-in-Chief Joel Pollak and Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro of the late Andrew Breitbart’s breitbart.com will appear on The Sean Hannity Show to discuss and release the tape of President Barack Obama mentioned by the journalist at the Conservative Political Action Conference.

Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith announced on Twitter earlier today that video researcher Andrew Kaczynski had discovered “the mysterious Harvard/Obama/race video that the Breitbart folks have been talking about.” The video shows a young Obama protesting on behalf of Professor Derrick Bell, who had ties to Jeremiah Wright, according to breitbart.com.

The website says, however, that the footage was not provided in its entirety: “However, the video has been selectively edited–either by the Boston television station or by Buzzfeed itself. Over the course of the day, Breitbart.com will be releasing additional footage that has been hidden by Obama’s allies in the mainstream media and academia.”

The allegedly edited version can be seen below:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz3qShugQ9I&w=420&h=315]

Federal Judge Overturns UnConstitutional Maryland Handgun Law

A Federal judge ruled that residents of the State needn’t provide a “good and substantial reason” in order to legally obtain a handgun permit, because the 2nd Amendment is substantial enough.

The case began when Plaintiff Raymond Woollard obtained a handgun permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002, but could not renew it in 2009 because he could not show officials he had been subject to “threats occurring beyond his residence.” After repealing and being rejected by the review board, which found he hadn’t demonstrated a “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun as a reasonable precaution, Woollard filed suit in 2010.

In his ruling on the case, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg said that placing the burden of providing a reason why they need a gun on gun owners was unConstitutional.

The judge said in his opinion:

A law that burdens the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right by simply making that right more difficult to exercise cannot be considered reasonably adapted to a government interest, no matter how substantial that interest may be. Maryland‘s goal of minimizing the proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them, is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too broadly.

G8 Moved So World Leaders Can Avoid Angry Proles

Sensing the anger of the masses, world leaders fearing mass protests in Chicago during this spring’s G8 Summit have opted to avoid the proles altogether by moving the meeting to the Presidential compound at Camp David in Maryland.

Leaders from the United States, Russia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.K. and European Union had planned to meet in Chicago this May for the annual economic meeting. Protesters and demonstration groups, including Occupy Wall Street offshoots, were also orchestrating events to coincide with the meeting in the Windy City. But with barely two months until the event is slated to occur, the G-8 Summit is being moved to Camp David.

The White House issued the following statement on Monday:

In May, the United States looks forward to hosting the G-8 and NATO Summits. To facilitate a free-flowing discussion with our close G-8 partners, the President is inviting his fellow G-8 leaders to Camp David on May 18-19 for the G-8 Summit, which will address a broad range of economic, political and security issues. The President will then welcome NATO allies and partners to his hometown of Chicago for the NATO Summit on May 20-21, which will be the premier opportunity this year for the President to continue his efforts to strengthen NATO in order to ensure that the Atlantic Alliance remains the most successful alliance in history, while charting the way forward in Afghanistan.

Conveniently for world leaders who do not want to have to listen to the complaints of their people, the U.S. Congress recently passed HR 347, which is awaiting approval. The 1st Amendment-quashing bill will make a criminal any protesters who attempt to get near Camp David.

Get Married For Heart Health

Being married, it turns out, can be good for your heart health.

A new study that appears in the Journal of Health and Social Behavior this month finds that married adults who undergo heart surgery are three times as likely as single patients to survive the three months following the procedure.

“That’s a dramatic difference in survival rates for single people, during the most critical post-operative recovery period,” says Ellen Idler, a sociologist at Emory University and lead author of the study. “We found that marriage boosted survival whether the patient was a man or a woman.”

Though the most striking difference in outcomes between married and unmarried patients occurred during the first three months, the study demonstrated a strong protective effect of marriage that continues for up to five years following coronary artery bypass surgery. The chance of death is nearly twice as great for unmarried as it is for married patients about to undergo the surgery.

The study followed more than 500 patients undergoing either emergency or elective coronary bypass surgery. All subjects were interviewed prior to surgery. Data on survival status of the patients were obtained from the National Death Index.

“The married patients had a more positive outlook going into the surgery, compared with the single patients,” Idler says. “When asked whether they would be able to manage the pain and discomfort, or their worries about the surgery, those who had spouses were more likely to say, yes.”

The patients who survived more than three months were about 70 percent more likely to die during the next five years if they were single.

The researchers say that even though marriage appears to be strong medicine for healing hearts, it is in short supply. The Pew Research Center indicates only about half of adults in the United States are married, the lowest number ever.

Parents Frustrated With Government School Failure Want Control

Frustrated with the failed bureaucracy that has left one local school operating less-than-satisfactorily, parents in the small desert town of Adelanto, Calif., have decided to take over the school and fix its problems themselves.

Through a 2010 California law, the parents are working up a petition that will allow them to do such things as fire the school’s principal, close the school and reopen it as an independent charter.

“We just decided we needed to do something for our children,” Doreen Diaz, a parent organizing the trigger effort told The Washington Post. “If we don’t stand up and speak for them, their future is lost.”

According to the newspaper, Diaz’s daughter attends Desert Trails Elementary where last year two-thirds of students failed the State reading exams, half were not proficient in math and 80 percent failed the science exam. The school has reportedly for the past six years been ranked among the bottom 10 percent of schools in the State.

If the parents are successful, they are seeking to get preschool classes, a longer school day, a computer lab, every teacher to have a master’s degree, a full-time librarian and clean, working restrooms, among other things at the school. The district school superintendent says the demands are impossible to meet because of financial constraints.

Parents in other school districts throughout the Nation have taken similar steps. The Florida Legislature is voting on a parent trigger this week, and at least a dozen other States are weighing similar measures this year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Federal Government Denies Tombstone Residents Water

Federal government bureaucracy is protecting wildlife near Tombstone, Ariz., at the expense of the health of town residents. As a result of the policy, Tombstone residents are being forced to bathe and drink water from ground wells — one of which contains arsenic.

Last summer a massive fire dubbed the Monument Fire that tore across Arizona damaged several pipelines that provided water to the town’s 1,500 residents and nearly 400,000 annual visitors. The Federal government has told town officials that they may not repair the waterlines because they are located in a wilderness area that would be damaged by mechanized equipment brought in for the job.

George Barnes, Tombstone’s city clerk and manager told The Daily Caller, “We began working with the Forest Service but then we realized and found what an incredible boondoggle that could be, even though we are very confident we have a special status because our rights there pre-existed the Forest Service and even the BLM [Bureau of Land Management]. We were there long before anything and all we are asking is to fix our stuff.”

After the fire Arizona Governor Jan Brewer declared the town under a state of emergency due to the water situation and issued $50,000 for the repair of the water lines because 50 to 80 percent of Tombstone’s water supply was provided via the pipelines. Town officials now say residents in the area only have a two-day water reserve at any given time and there is not enough available water to even combat structure fires.

The town and the Goldwater Institute — its Phoenix-based legal counsel — are waiting for a decision from U.S. District Court Judge Frank Zapata, who will rule on whether to compel the Forest Service to allow Tombstone to get up into the Huachuca Mountains and repair its water infrastructure.

“The Tombstone case is the ultimate showdown between state sovereignty and federal overreach,” Nick Dranias, a member of the Goldwater legal team told The Daily Caller. “The reason why I say that is the case involves the federal government, through the Forest Service, threatening the very existence of the historic city of Tombstone and threatening the literal health and safety of its residents and tourists.”

Poll: Americans Say Don’t Strike Iran Or Meddle In Syria

A new poll for The Hill shows that more than half of likely voters agree with Ron Paul in regard to staying out of other countries’ business.

According to the poll, 57 percent of respondents believe the Administration of Barack Obama should “leave the situation alone” in Syria. Only 25 percent think the United States should “get more involved” in helping rebels in their fight against the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.

When asked about the Presidential administration’s foreign relations with Israel, respondents were split in their opinions; 32 percent said Obama should be more supportive of the country, 25 percent say President is too supportive and the rest believe the U.S.-Israel relationship is “about right.”

The poll also found that 52 percent of respondents would be very (28 percent) or somewhat (24 percent) supportive of an Israeli strike on Iran, while 41 percent were very (19 percent) or somewhat (22 percent) opposed. Only 21 percent of respondents were very supportive of a U.S. strike on Iran, 20 percent were somewhat supportive.

Terror Lawyer Gets Top Position At Justice Department

The new lawyer appointed to oversee Justice Department policy for detainees at Guantanamo Bay was previously a defense attorney for a fighter who admitted to fighting for the Taliban in Afghanistan.

According to the Daily Mail, Tony West, who was appointed as acting associate attorney general, the agency’s number three spot, represented American Taliban member John Walker Lindh.

Lindh was charged with conspiracy to murder U.S. citizens and aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban. West was the public spokesman for the 20-year-old American Taliban fighter throughout his trial. Lindh pleaded guilty to carrying explosives for the Taliban and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Critics say the appointment of a lawyer who once defended terror suspects to a position overseeing terror detainees and a variety of other Justice tasks is symbolic of the United States’ increasingly radicalized Justice Department.

J. Christian Adams, Obama Justice Department Black Panther case whistleblower and author of Injustice said on Fox and Friends over the weekend, “The most dangerous thing is that West is overseeing Gitmo policy. It’s not that he’s just some guy at the Justice Department licking envelopes.”

NASA Watching Asteroid To Pass By Earth

NASA scientists are keeping an eye on a large asteroid that they believe could possibly smash into earth in February 2013.

Data shows the 60-meter asteroid (2012 DA14), which was spotted by Spanish stargazers last February, will pass by Earth in 11 months. While the asteroid’s exact trajectory is unknown, the scientists believe that it will pass very close to the planet. There is a possibility that it could collide with earth, but further calculation is required to estimate the potential threat and work out how to avert possible disaster.

According to RT, NASA expert Dr. David Dunham told students at Moscow’s University of Electronics and Mathematics (MIEM):

“The Earth’s gravitational field will alter the asteroid’s path significantly. Further scrupulous calculation is required to estimate the threat of collision. The asteroid may break into dozens of small pieces, or several large lumps may split from it and burn up in the atmosphere. The type of the asteroid and its mineral structure can be determined by spectral analysis. This will help predict its behavior in the atmosphere and what should be done to prevent the potential threat.”

Scientists say that the energy released in the event of a collision would equate to the destructive power of a thermo-nuclear bomb.

Libyan Rebels Torture Black Africans In Video

Rebels in Libya, liberated with “non-war” help from the Administration of Barack Obama last year, are seen allegedly torturing a group of black Africans in a video discovered online.

The video portrays the detainment and torture of a group of black Africans at the hands of Libyan rebels. The victims are allegedly held in a zoo cage with their hands bound as their tormentors shout at them.

“Eat the flag, you dog. Patience you dog, patience. God is great,” screams a voice off-camera in the video according to RT.

According to the Daily Mail, the men in the cage are presumably captured mercenaries suspected of fighting for the toppled government of Moammar Gadhafi last year. While the news source says it is impossible to verify whether the video is authentic, it emerged as the United Nations last week said that the Libyan revolutionary brigades still hold captive and may torture three-quarters of detainees from the country’s civil war.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuCJcaQRIuA&w=420&h=315]
According to RT, Before the Libyan uprising, the country hosted about 1 million black African workers, who were employed in domestic work, construction, trash collection and other low-wage jobs. Some human rights groups suspect Libyan rebels of ethnic cleansing of the black population of the country.

Harvard: Free Federal Dollars Hurt State Economies

Often when a member of a State’s Congressional delegation holds a powerful committee seat in Washington, the lawmaker can count himself safe from voter wrath come election season. After all, what voter wants to lose a powerful earmark-happy legislative ally in the Nation’s capitol? A new study by Harvard Business School challenges this way of thinking.

The Harvard researchers found that people who favor laissez-faire economic policies are likely correct in believing that when government money is pumped into a region, private enterprise suffers.

In a study published in the Journal of Political Economy authors Lauren Cohen, Joshua Coval and Christopher Malloy contend that when a Senator gains more earmarking power as a chairman, publicly traded firms in his home State scale back employment growth by 3 to 15 percent. On average a State experiences a $48 million per year drop in capital expenditures and a $44 million per year drop in research and development spending by publicly traded companies. Some firms that are direct beneficiaries of government money do grow, but the researchers say that Federal funds mostly hurt private enterprise.

The study tracks only money that came with no strings attached, negating the popular argument that stimulus funds have to be paid for with higher taxes, thus hurting private sector business revenues.

“These findings argue that tax and interest rate channels, while obviously important, may not account for all or even most of the costs imposed by government spending,” the researchers write. “Even in a setting in which government spending does not need to be financed with additional taxes or borrowing, its distortionary consequences may be nontrivial.”

The authors offer an explanation of why “free money” from the Federal government actually hurts State economies and use the creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority which drove private companies out of the electrical business across the South in the 1930s.

“Some of the [government] dollars directly supplant private-sector activity—they literally undertake projects the private sector was planning to do on its own,” says Coval. “The Tennessee Valley Authority of 1933 is perhaps the most famous example of this.”

The authors also say that the government money also raises the cost of doing business for private sector business because of inflation.

Despite the findings, when Congressional elections roll around, Americans will undoubtedly be bombarded with promises to “take care of the State with Federal funds, because big government will spend the money anyway.”

“The jobs created from federal transfers are generally much easier to identify and quantify than those lost—indeed Senators often tout the number of jobs that their earmarks have been able to create in their home states,” the authors speculate. “Identifying and measuring those that have been lost is not as easy. When a firm shuts down because labor costs have become prohibitive, it can never be cleanly tied to the wage pressure produced by federal transfers.”

Romney, Obama Battle Over Who’s The Average Joe

Seizing the 99 percent zeitgeist, President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama are increasingly trying to appeal to blue collar Americans as an alternative to the perceived Gordon Gekko persona of GOP Presidential contender Mitt Romney.

According to The Hill, Obama has used recent speeches to peddle himself as a regular guy talking about such things as having trouble paying off his student loans and his care for families with tight budgets.

“I got my start standing with working folks who’d lost their jobs, folks who had lost their hope because the steel plants had closed down,” Obama said during a speech Tuesday. “I didn’t like the idea that they didn’t have anybody fighting for them. The same reason I got into this business is the same reason I’m here today.”

Republicans say that it is unlikely that anyone believes Obama is a regular guy, considering he spends a great deal of time rubbing elbows with Hollywood elite and hosting campaign dinners where plates are sold for thousands of dollars.

Media, in recent months, have attacked Romney for comments (sometimes taken out of context) about his wealth, including his comment about his wife’s two Cadillacs, assertion that he “likes being able to fire people,” saying he “isn’t concerned about the very poor” and his infamous $10,000 debate bet with Rick Perry. The candidate, in an attempt to portray himself as a NASCAR fan, asserted this week that he has several friends who own NASCAR teams.

Financial filing reports show that both Romney and Obama are favored by wealthy campaign contributors far more than any of the other 2012 Presidential contenders. A separate report by The Hill shows that Romney and Obama both receive hefty contributions from wealthy backers who also spent hundreds of thousands of dollars lobbying to alter Federal legislation.

A poll conducted by CNN and ORC earlier this month shows that most Americans have a clear belief about which candidate most favors the middle class in the United States: 52 percent said Ron Paul, 28 percent said Romney and 40 percent said Obama.

Massive Solar Storm Could Kill Grid By 2020

The number of American preppers appears to have grown in recent years. With shows such as “Doomsday Preppers” on major television networks, the prepper lifestyle has become a bit more mainstream. If one space physicist is correct, now may be a better time than ever.

According to research published by Pete Riley, senior scientist at Predictive Science in San Diego, Calif., in Space Weather, there is about a one in eight chance that the Earth will be hit by a massive solar megastorm this decade. The event would likely fry electrical components and cause trillions of dollars in damage.

Solar flares are caused because the sun goes through an 11-year cycle of increased and decreased activity. During solar maximum, sunspots and enormous magnetic whirlwinds erupt from its surface. Sometimes, the flares burst outward from the sun, spewing a mass of charged particles out into space.

The biggest solar event ever to affect Earth, the Carrington Event, occurred in 1859. Astronomer Richard Carrington watched an enormous solar flare erupt from the sun’s surface, emitting a particle stream at the Earth traveling more than 4 million miles per hour. When the energy reached the Earth’s atmosphere, the particles generated the intense ghostly ribbons of light known as auroras.

A 2008 report conducted by the National Research Council concluded that in today’s electronic world a similar event could spark: “disruption of the transportation, communication, banking, and finance systems, and government services; the breakdown of the distribution of potable water owing to pump failure; and the loss of perishable foods and medications because of lack of refrigeration.”

Coulter: Santorum Clueless On The Constitution

Conservative columnist Ann Coulter penned an article earlier this week assailing Republican Presidential candidate Rick Santorum over his disdain for State’s rights.

Coulter, in her piece, points out that many of the issues Santorum braces his campaign with are ones that would be better suited for someone running for a gubernatorial position to take on, “family oriented matters about which the federal government can, and should, do very little.”

Coulter writes:

States could outlaw purple hats or Gummi bears under our Constitution!

State constitutions, laws, judicial rulings or the people themselves, voting democratically, tend to prevent such silly state bans from arising. But the Constitution written by James Madison, et al, does not prevent a state’s elected representatives from enacting them.

The Constitution mostly places limits on what the federal government can do. Only in a few instances does it restrict what states can do.

A state cannot, for example, infringe on the people’s right to bear arms or to engage in the free exercise of religion. A state can’t send a senator to the U.S. Congress if he is under 30 years old. But with rare exceptions, the Constitution leaves states free to govern themselves as they see fit.

In New York City, they can have live sex clubs and abortion on demand, but no salt or smoking sections. In Tennessee, they can ban abortion, but have salt, creches and 80 mph highways. At least that’s how it’s supposed to work.

And yet when Santorum tried to explain why states could ban contraception to Bill O’Reilly back in January, not once did he use the words “Constitution,” “constitutionally,” “federalism,” their synonyms or derivatives. Lawyers who are well familiar with the Constitution had no idea what Santorum was talking about.

The columnist then deducts that Santorum has little to no understanding of the U.S. Constitution.

Coulter’s piece backs up what GOP candidate Ron Paul has been saying about Santorum throughout the campaign: He is a fake, big government “conservative” using hot-button social issues that the Federal government has no business addressing to bolster support from social conservatives and the religious right.

Navy Testing Electromagnetic Railgun

The Navy has announced that it is getting close to developing an electromagnetic gun that can fire rounds at targets more than 100 miles away.

Called an electromagnetic railgun, the weapon consists of parallel rails and uses a magnetic field and electric current to generate energy to fire rounds accurate at up to 115 miles. The weapon will be able to hurl its 40-pound projectile at a speed of 5,600 mph at a rate of 10 guided projectiles per second.

The 5-inch guns currently used on Navy on destroyers typically have a range of about 15 miles.

According to Navy researchers, the weapon’s high-velocity and range would allow ships to provide support for Marines as well as self-defense against cruise and ballistic missiles and could target enemy ships.

The video below shows a Naval Research-funded electromagnetic railgun prototype launcher that was recently installed at a test facility in Dahlgren, Va. The test shots begin a month-long series of full-energy tests to evaluate the first of two industry-built launchers.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhBIZF35rSM]

Congress: Your First Amendment Rights Annoy Us

Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The 1st Amendment has been under attack by the American political elite for some time, and a bill voted on in the House on Monday sets the next portion of the Amendment in line for the chopping block.

The House voted this week 388-3 to pass H.R. 347 a bill called the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. The bill was slightly amended and voice-voted by the Senate earlier in the month; House passage of the Senate version sends it to the White House for President Barack Obama’s signature into law.

Congress makes it illegal in the bill to trespass on the grounds of the White House. The wording in the bill, however, goes on to allow the government to enforce trespassing laws against more than tourists and protesters near 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

A portion of the bill explains who it criminalizes:

`(a) Whoever—`(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so; `(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions; `(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or `(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds.

The bill also explains what are considered restricted places for peaceful protesters:

`(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–`(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds; `(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or`(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and `(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.

Basically, anyplace where Secret Service agents are present or any building where government business is being conducted is made off limits to “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” by language in the bill. Both GOP candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum are currently protected by Secret Service agents, and Newt Gingrich has asked for protection. Ron Paul is the only candidate who has said that he will likely not opt for Secret Service protection during the campaign.

According to the Secret Service website, the agency is authorized to protect:

  • The President, the Vice President, (or other individuals next in order of succession to the Office of the President), the President-elect and Vice President-elect.
  • The immediate families of the above individuals.
  • Former Presidents and their spouses, except when the spouse remarries.
  • Children of former Presidents until age 16.
  • Visiting heads of foreign states or governments and their spouses traveling with them, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States, and official representatives of the United States performing special missions abroad.
  • Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, and their spouses within 120 days of a general Presidential election.
  • Other individuals as designated per Executive Order of the President.
  • National Special Security Events, when designated as such by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

Because foreign dignitaries are often protected by the Secret Service, the Federal government could consider demonstrations against any foreign president on American soil a violation of Federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive.

Secret Service’s ability to be present at any “National Special Security Events, when designated as such by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security” is also particularly alarming for free-speech advocates, as it could mean no peaceable assembly just about anywhere Janet Napolitano sees fit. According to RT, about three dozen events in all have been considered National Special Security Events since the term was created by President Bill Clinton. Among the events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list were Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

The only “no” votes on the bill were from Representatives Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Paul Broun (R-Ga.) and Keith Ellison (D-Minn.).

Amash commented about the bill on his Facebook page saying, “Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights.”

Nanny State To Mandate Rear-View Cameras In All Vehicles

The National Highway Safety Institute has set in place a law that will require that all vehicles come equipped with rear-view cameras, a measure that — if 100 percent effective — will prevent 228 American deaths each year at a cost of about $12 million each to American auto buyers.

According to The New York Times, in a preliminary version of the measure released for public comment, regulators predicted that adding the cameras and viewing screens will cost the auto industry as much as $2.7 billion a year, or $160 to $200 a vehicle. Some of the cost is expected to be passed on to consumers through higher prices.

Government statistics say that 228 people — 44 percent of whom are younger than 5 — die each year after being backed over by passenger vehicles. About 17,000 people a year are injured in such accidents.

Critics of the measure say that efforts to encourage Americans to pay more attention would be a much more effective way of avoiding tragedies without putting in place yet another auto-industry mandate to reduce the competitiveness of American autos.

Reason reports: “…Legislators put minimum effort into finding the most cost-efficient solution to this problem and failed to consider that car design isn’t really their job in the first place. Clearly, when considering the fact that most backover accidents involve the parent or relative of a child, the right course of action would be legislation that prohibits parents and relatives of children from driving in the first place.”