Welcome to The Portage County Ohio TEA Party

Totally Engaged Americans

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

National and World News

TEA Party Group Supports Renacci Bill

E-mail Print PDF


For Release: July 23, 2014

TEA Party Group Supports Bill to provide "Clean Audited Financial Statements" for Federal Government


Akron, OH - Tom Zawistowski, President of the We the People Convention and Executive Director of the Portage County TEA Party, came out today in support of the Renacci-Carney "Federal Financial Statement Transparency Act of 2014". The bill would require that the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB) provide Congress, and the public, with "Clean Audited Financial Statements" of the Federal Government's assets and liabilities without interference from the Treasury Department or any other part of the Executive Branch.  The bill has been introduced in the US House by Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Renacci and Delaware Democratic Congressman John Carney. The bill fixes a major transparency issue caused by the fact that the United States Federal Government is currently the only government entity in the nation that is not required to produce "Clean Audited Financial Statements" or follow the rules created by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) which all state and local governments must follow.


In supporting the bill Zawistowski said, "No business would ever attempt to address their financial situation without the critical accounting information provided by "Clean Audited Financial Statements". Yet the largest business in the world, the US Government is doing just that.  We can not make good decisions in Congress without knowing both sides of the ledger. How much debt do we really owe? What are our other liabilities? What assets do we the American people hold through our federal government?  How much are those oil assets worth that are under federal lands? How much land do we own and what is that worth?  Could we reduce our debt by selling some of our land? Without this bill, it is impossible to make those kinds of decisions. This is a non-partisan issue. We all need to know where we stand financially, in our personal lives, in our businesses and yes in our government. This bill is critical to our being able to make intelligent decisions concerning our financial future."


Zawistowski concluded by saying, "We ask all citizens to contact their Congressman and Senators and ask them to support this bill and to get this bill passed. It is incredibly disturbing to citizens, who give so much of their hard earned money to the government, to learn that no one actually knows what the assests and the liabilities of the United States are at a time when we are constantly debating issues like debt and spending. It is the law in this nation that no one can sell securities without having clean audited financial statements, yet the US Government is selling securities through the Treasury Department, in violation of the law, because it can not produce clean audited financial statements. This must be rectified. The TEA Party Movement will be actively engaged in supporting passage of the "Federal Financial Statement Transparancy Act of 2014."


Last Updated on Thursday, 24 July 2014 17:47

TEA Party Asks Portman to Renounce Cochran

E-mail Print PDF
For Immediate Release: Friday, July 18, 2014
TEA Party Demands that Senator Portman
Renounce Support for Cochran in Mississippi
Kent, OH - Tom Zawistowski, Executive Director of the Portage County TEA Party, reacted angrily to Ohio Senator Rob Portman's claims in a Cleveland Plain Dealer article this week that he had no idea that the $25,000 from his PAC would be used by the Thad Cochran Campaign in Mississippi to air racially charged attacks on the TEA Party. Portman was quoted in the article as saying " I believe using race as a political issue, as these ads apparently did, was wrong."
Zawistowski, said "Isn't it convenient Senator Portman, that you had nothing to say about the horrific, disgusting, totally dishonest racist ads run by Thad Cochran's campaign until you were identified as having provide funding for this despicable human being Thad Cochran? Where was your moral outrage the days after the ads became public? You know that the TEA Party is made up of hard working, God fearing, Patriotic Americans who do NOT hate blacks or any other minority, yet you did nothing to defend those TEA Party members from these vicious attacks by a person you supported financially! You say that "the TEA Party activists . . . must come together to take back the Senate", yet you support a man who votes with Democrats most of the time, and who told black voters that the TEA Party is affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan and that we want to deny blacks the right to vote. Why in hell should we support someone like Thad Cochran after what he did? Why would you even suggest that the TEA Party do so? Why would you or any other Republican support anyone who would commit such a heinous act against Chris McDaniel A LOYAL REPUBLICAN????"
Zawistowski concluded by saying "Senator Portman, actions speak louder than words. You must renounce your support of Thad Cochran immediately and demand that he drop out of the race. You must demand that your fellow Senators who supported Cochran do the same. Not to do so would show that you in fact condone the actions of the Cochran campaign and that you do not respect either the TEA Party movement or black voters. There is no place in our government, let alone in the Republican Party, for such a hateful, racist, person. So we throw your challenge back in your face and that of the Republican Party. If you believe that we must win the Senate this year, meaning with true Republicans like Chris McDaniel, and if you want to win the White House in 2016, you need to come together with the TEA Party and the social conservatives and black and latino conservatives. For I assure you, if you do not choose the moral path at this critical time, we will never forget your and their role in this sordid event, and we will do everything in our power to make sure that Thad Cochran and every RINO like him loses in the fall."
Last Updated on Sunday, 27 July 2014 09:17

Accountability Key to VA Reform

E-mail Print PDF

Three statues portraying a wounded soldier being helped stand on the grounds of the Minneapolis VA Medical Center.

Jim Mone • Associated Press,

Accountability is the key to real VA reform

  • Article by: Jason Quick
  • September 11, 2014 - 6:38 PM

Minnesota has always been known for its top-rated health care — even for veterans. During the nationwide Department of Veterans Affairs scandal this summer, the Minnesota VA touted some of the lowest wait times in the country and was essentially left out of the conversation. Until now.

A recent investigative report by KARE-TV, Ch. 11, found two former employees from the Minneapolis VA who exposed malpractices that have plagued other such facilities around the country. The women told harrowing stories of long wait times, secret waiting lists and falsification of data — which at this point are almost uniform issues at the VA.

When they finally couldn’t take the injustice any longer, they attempted to alert upper managers of the problems — but instead of addressing the problems, they said, the VA fired the whistleblowers. Unfortunately, this sort of story is all too familiar. Good people who try to reveal bureaucratic problems get no response beyond punishment for disturbing the status quo. (The director of the Minneapolis facility, Patrick Kelly, told KARE that allegations of wait times were “unfounded” but later issued a statement saying that the facility welcomes an investigation.)

The common problem at the VA? Accountability. There’s no one keeping a watchful eye on the department to ensure that its work is done efficiently and that it is giving veterans the service they deserve.

My organization, Concerned Veterans for America (CVA), is a sort of “watchdog” for the VA. This includes VA malpractices and the mindless flow of money from Washington that does nothing more than feed the broken machine. The administration wants to solve the VA problem like it solves most of its problems — with more money — but dollars are not the problem at the VA.

It’s going to take large-scale reforms and an all-out culture overhaul to bring any real change to fruition. The problem lies in the attitude that systemically alters the motivations of the bureaucratic higher-ups. The mission of the VA is to serve veterans, not administrators.

This attitude comes from a bureaucracy that wants nothing more than to continue to feed itself as it is instead of bettering itself in order to improve services for veterans. Furthermore, not a single person has been fired during the entire scandal. If you can’t clean out the people feeding the problem, how are you supposed to effect any sort of change in culture?

A month ago, President Obama signed into law the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014 — legislation CVA fought long and hard for. It finally gave the VA power to fire bad executives. However, even with this valuable tool in place, we still haven’t seen it happen.

Realistically, the Minnesota VA just happened to be next in the line for publicly exposed VA mistreatment, but solutions are needed beyond Minnesota. They must go all the way to Washington, where lawmakers will try to wipe their hands of veterans issues after having passed some legislation and seeing the VA scandal fade from the headlines.

Minnesota legislators have been no different. While senators like Al Franken may claim victory simply because they voted for the VA reform bill, in reality they were dragged into voting for it by the scandal. Franken and others thought that Minnesota was a shining star in an otherwise tattered bureaucracy, but what we quickly discovered after months of shocking stories is that our star had fallen, too. It turns out the department’s problems are deeply systemic, and when the time came for Minnesota’s U.S. senators to add early support for legislative reforms, they were nowhere to be found.

U.S. Rep. John Kline, a Republican from the Second District, was an early cosponsor of the VA Management Accountability Act, signing on to the bill Feb. 27. Rep. Paulsen, a Republican from the Third District, was also cosponsor, joining the bill May 19. In the Senate, the story was different — Franken and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, both Democrats, became cosponsors of the legislation only after it had passed the House and after we ran ads holding several of their peers accountable for the their lack of support. Eleven days after the legislation received overwhelming bipartisan support in the House and the writing was on the wall, our senators decided to lend their voices to veterans.

The media ran their breaking-news stories. Congress feigned outrage and passed its piece of legislation. The president signed it into law. Problem solved, right? Not the case. Nobody has been fired, and veterans continue to wait excessive times — and in some cases die waiting — for the care they have earned. Clearly, our leaders and the media have shown that if veterans don’t stand up for themselves, no one will.

CVA refuses to let this problem be swept under the rug, because there is not a group of individuals more deserving of quality health care than those who put their lives on the line for our country. We will continue the fight to hold not only rogue VA executives accountable, but also those legislators who failed to lend their support to real reform proposals when veterans needed them most. Join us at 9 a.m. Friday for a rally before the VA town-hall meeting at the Whipple Federal Building in St. Paul. It’s time for us to demand real reform.

We supported meaningful legislation before it suddenly became everyone’s favorite talking point, and we will keep fighting well beyond the next news cycle.


Jason Quick is the Minnesota state director for Concerned Veterans for America. He served as a scout squad leader in the U.S. Army 82nd Airborne Division.

Last Updated on Thursday, 18 September 2014 07:38

Federal Court Rules Ohio Law Unconstitutional

E-mail Print PDF

Federal court overturns Ohio law

barring false campaign statements


Supreme Court SBA.JPG
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser talks to reporters after the U.S. Supreme Court heard her organization's challenge to an Ohio election law. (Sabrina Eaton, The Plain Dealer)
By Sabrina Eaton, Plain Dealer Washington Reporter 
Follow on Twitter
on September 11, 2014 at 6:14 PM, updated September 12, 2014 at 1:38 AM

WASHINGTON, D. C. - An Ohio law that criminalizes campaign lies was found unconstitutional and the state of Ohio was permanently blocked from enforcing it under a Thursday court decision that quoted scheming politician Frank Underwood in the Netflix TV Series "House of Cards:"

"There's no better way to overpower a trickle of doubt than with a flood of naked truth."

U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Black's decision released late Thursday vindicated a four-year challenge to the law by the Susan B. Anthony List anti-abortion group, which was accused of violating it by a congressman whom the group claimed had supported taxpayer funded abortion in voting for the Affordable Care Act.

"In short, the answer to false statements in politics is not to force silence, but to encourage truthful speech in response and to let the voters, not the Government, decide what the political truth is," Black's decision said, after quoting the television show. "Ohio's false statements laws do not accomplish this."

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court paved the way for the Susan B. Anthony List to dispute the law by determining the group had standing to launch a challenge even though it was not found guilty of a violation.

Former Cincinnati Democratic congressman Steve Driehaus charged the group with violating the law during his unsuccessful 2010 re-election campaign. He claimed its statement was false because the Affordable Care Act does not allow taxpayer-funded abortion, although he dropped his Ohio Elections Commission complaint after losing the election.

The Susan B. Anthony group said the law barring false campaign speech was unconstitutional and that a politically appointed panel shouldn't be allowed to judge the truth of political statements.

It also said it plans to post billboards in this year's election that will attack Toledo Democratic Rep. Marcy Kaptur in the same way that it did Driehaus. It's anti-Kaptur billboards will say: "Shame on Marcy Kaptur! Kaptur voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion."

It argued that keeping the law in place would chill its ability to speak out, and cause the group to "suffer substantial financial, political and reputational harms, including potential criminal penalties (i.e. up to six months in prison)."

"After four years and a trip to the U.S. Supreme Court, today we finally have a victory for free speech," said a statement released after the decision by the group's president Marjorie Dannenfelser.

When asked about the upcoming billboard campaign, Kaptur spokesman Steve Fought said the anti-abortion group is "more interested in the right to lie than the right to life."

"The Susan B. Anthony List has no respect for the truth," said Fought. "Even their name is a lie. Susan B. Anthony was a progressive and there's nothing even remotely progressive about them. They should come clean and rename themselves the Sarah L. Palin List or the Ann H. Coulter List."

A spokesman for Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine declined comment on the ruling. While his office defended the law on behalf of the Ohio Elections Commission, DeWine himself filed a "friend of the court" brief that argued the law should be struck down.

DeWine spokesman Dan Tierney said the office would have to consult with the Ohio Elections Commission before deciding whether to appeal the decision.

The decision said that voters, not the government, should decide political truth.

"We can all agree that lies are bad," the decision said. "The problem is, at least with respect to some political speech, that there is no clear way to determine whether a political statement is a lie or the truth, and we certainly do not want the Government (i.e. the OEC) deciding what is political truth anyway, for fear that the Government might persecute those who criticize the Government or its leaders."


Last Updated on Thursday, 18 September 2014 07:38

Frederick Douglass Foundation Manifesto

E-mail Print PDF

The Frederick Douglass Foundation 

"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe."                                        

Frederick Douglass           
"The Largest Christ-Centered, Multi-Ethnic, and Republican Ministry in America, Today"
Ten Ways The Frederick Douglass Foundation
WILL Save the Republican Party
There are many out there giving all sorts of reasons for the fact that Mitt Romney earned fewer votes than John McCain.  Few however, are mentioning that, of all the groups under this so-called big tent that supposedly needs to be bigger, blacks aren’t being invited into the tent with anything other than half-hearted invitations that are met with rejection by the bouncer at the tent’s front entrance.  The bouncer tells a few blacks about the rear entrance, but many are written off as unimportant.  Not all blacks want to remain on the government plantation, and their reasons have little to do with anything coming from the mouths of the Republican Party’s squishy risk-averse politico wizards who are continuously running the Republican Party into an icy snowdrift of defeat.  Many Republicans and conservative-minded people feel like the Republican Party doesn’t even like its own base and would rather replace us with another that would vote blindly and religiously without being allowed to have input.  Well, that needs to change right now.
The Frederick Douglass Foundation is the largest Christ-centered, multi-ethnic and Republican ministry in America.  We have the first-hand knowledge of and experience in what it takes to show minorities how too many of them are voting against their own self-interests.  As well, we know how the Republican Party should cater its message for these minorities.  We know how to communicate with the black community through the black pastors.  Without us, the Republicans are as welcome at the front door of the black church as blacks feel at the front entrance to the Republican Party’s so-called big tent.  We know the problems, we have the solutions, and the Republican Party needs us at the table.
The Problem
In communicating with minorities, we first reach out.  Then we teach the truth about history, conservatism and how conservatism, in its purest form, correlates with the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Once we’ve established credibility by reaching out and teaching, we are able to preach to the people what we believe and why we believe it.  This method works, but without street credibility, of which the Republican Party has none in most minority communities, the Republican Party will have no chance of making their tent bigger.
It’s true, not all minorities should be Republicans.  Some are socialist stooges on which any efforts to recruit would be completely wasted.  However, there is a strong conservative and Christian ethic inside many minority communities that serves as the foundational yearning for the strong familial bonds that minority communities once shared.  The black family wasn’t always in such tatters as it is now.  In fact, before socialism was injected into the American political body starting in the 1930’s, black children were actually more likely to be in two-parent homes than were white children.  In fact, in 1965, when Daniel Patrick Moynihan issued his report, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action,” a massive 24% of all black children were born out of wedlock.  Today, 29% of white children are born out of wedlock, and more than 70% of black children are.  That’s how bad the situation has gotten.  Those that run the system that has made the problem so much worse scoffed at Moynihan, but the numbers suggest he was right.  How high do those numbers need to go before we take the situation seriously?
These socialist policies were implemented to buy the black vote away from the Republican Party and were implemented in a way so as to discourage the creation and the maintaining of the black family.  The Republican Party has not only failed to fight the destruction of the black family and to fight every governmental program that is put into place in order to serve as a replacement for this said family, but they’ve shown nothing but disinterest to those in the black community pleading with the party for help in freeing the blacks from this modern-day government plantation.  In return for welfare of all sorts, the party of government only requires that minorities vote for them and that there should not be a man in the home of a woman with children.  The establishment does not want competition for their influence on the minds of children from upstanding men who aren’t afraid to be fathers.  The influence of fathers is being replaced with the influence of government, and without the male/female balance of influence, children grow up in chaos.
The best way to keep a child out of poverty is to allow that child to grow up in a two-parent family.  A child with two parents is less likely to get into trouble in school, less likely to drop out of school, less likely to be sexually molested, less likely to graduate functionally illiterate, less likely to join a gang, less likely to abuse drugs, and less likely spend time in jail or in other liberty-killing government institutions.  Knowing this, our goal at the Frederick Douglass Foundation is not only to strengthen the American family, but also to fight any liberal efforts to weaken it.  And we do this unashamedly. 
Too often, the Republican Party has been timid in its willingness to stand up for traditional American values.  But this unwillingness will continue to be met with an unwillingness of conservative-minded voters to actually show up at the polls for them.  In times like these, the Republican Party has no room to continue to refuse to reform.  The endless printing of money to fund the multi-trillion dollar deficits and the resulting devaluation of the dollar will only lead us to a third-world living standard.  The line in the sand’s been crossed.  America’s already sliding swiftly down the slippery slope to nowheresville.  The Republican Party’s weak-kneed attempts at pretending to fight must absolutely and immediately be replaced with a warrior-like crusade to free our country from the stranglehold of big government.  We must be the party of ideas, and we must not shirk our duties as the adults in the country to explain to the voting population why conservatism is right.
For many in the minority communities, they will not notice the difference in America as we drift of into a stagflationary economic nightmare.  Their living standards are already third world in nature, but when the rest of the country is living like that as well and when there are too few productive people left to pay the taxes to support this glorious third-world living standard, where will we be then?
The Republican Party must realize this and realize it quickly.  The answer is not to give up and go along, but it is to educate, in terms people will understand, why conservatism is the answer.  If the party refuses to clean up its house, not only will the Republican Party find it impossible to win national elections, but they will also find winning such elections more and more meaningless as they continue to allow the people living on the system to just make run after run on the bankrupt national treasury in order to vote themselves raises. 
Politics is like a chessboard, but the Republicans are playing checkers.  By failing to control the narrative, we are too often on the defensive. Republicans are forced to defend their beliefs while others have already defined our motives in terms that aren’t true.  It’s as if we’re regularly four steps behind.  The Republicans need to start playing chess.  Accepting the system the way it is, we need to start proposing policies within the system that produce the results that are conservative.  Instead of calling for getting rid of the welfare state, we should be proposing taxation, benefits and incentives inside the system that will yield conservative results.  In doing so, we will force those who disagree with us into a defensive fetal position when they are forced to defend the status quo by making arguments that completely violate everyone’s Christian heritage and sense of decency.  We will need to anticipate the arguments that they will be required to make against our common-sense proposals, and then we will need to further put them on the defense.  In the meantime, we will gain the trust of exactly those voters whom we’ve completely ignored.  We will be able to define conservatism on our own terms, as well as prove it is indeed the only good choice.
The Solution
Here are ten things that the Frederick Douglass Foundation propose:
One of the minority community’s collective fears is that the Republican Party wants to take away their benefits.  Of course no one’s willing to tell them differently.  Since the Republican Party message isn’t geared towards getting minorities to vote for them, the Republican Party gets defined as a racist and bigoted organization that wants to put blacks back in chains- to paraphrase our distinguished Vice President.  One of the Frederick Douglass Foundation’s duties is to refute this nonsense.  We need to explain how these “benefits” come with strings and that these strings are used to keep the blacks in metaphorical chains on the government plantation.  We’ll need more than just Christian-based arguments for traditionalism.  We will need to explain to the minority populations that conservatism is in fact the way to a more prosperous life with a fatter pocketbook.
We must go over the establishment’s heads to educate minorities on the real history of the political parties in America.  This might involve commercials strategically placed on BET and on black radio.  A series of super PAC commercials starting immediately will serve as the new educational foundation for the blacks in the community.  These will be promotional commercials for the Frederick Douglass Foundation, and each will tell a quick little startling story about history or offer set of facts that will completely undermine the reason any black person would ever vote for a Democrat.  It could be as simple as this: “Did you know that it was the Republican Party, under their first President Abraham Lincoln, who freed the Slaves.  It was the Democrat Party that fought under the rebel flag to keep slavery as an institution in America.
Once the Democrats lost the war, they formed the KKK to lynch blacks and Republicans.  The KKK would force blacks to vote for Democrats at the point of a gun.  Over the Democrat Party’s efforts to stop them, the Republicans passed amendments to free the slaves, to give blacks citizenship and the right to vote, and it was the Republicans in congress who passed all of the civil rights bills.
Yet the Democrat Party still voted for segregation, while it was the Republicans who voted to end segregation.  We’re the Frederick Douglass Foundation.  Learn more at FDF dot org.  The Republican Party is the Party of the black man.  We’re taking it back.  FDF dot org.”  All we need to do is plant the seed.  Radio advertisement on black radio stations will be more effective than TV ads, which are too often ignored with the use of DVR fast forward.  We need to hang slavery, segregation, the KKK and the black genocide on the Democrat Party.  Let them defend it, and then blast them with more facts once they do.  That’s how we play chess- with the big guns.
By the way, this information should be plastered all over every Republican website out there.  The fact that so many Republicans don’t know their own great history only makes it harder to make arguments on behalf of their party.

We must get the Republican Party to propose something that might seem radical, but will make sense in the long run.  Once the Republican Party has reached the black community and educated them on true history, the Republican Party needs to propose something that will lift the black man up.  The main issue that keeps the black man down is the fact that so many black children grow up in one-parent homes.  The strings that come with welfare benefits require that a man not live in the house where a woman is raising her children.  In other words, the government has convinced single mothers that, if they decide to break the rules and get married, then they will lose their benefits.  This is why, in some inner cities, 90% of all black babies are born out-of-wedlock.  The government should not be discouraging beneficial behavior like marriage with social policies that hurt black children by depriving too many of them of the important influence of a father.

The Republican Party should thus propose a new welfare policy that actually encourages marriage.  Instead of losing benefits, welfare recipients who get married will get a temporary boost in government funds, and these funds will not be taken away for a certain period of time if one or both of the parents decide to get a job.  For the first two years of marriage, this couple’s income will be super-charged with a continued influx of welfare funds.  These funds can be slowly lowered over that period of time, but in the end, the family will more than likely find itself able to live without the benefits.  Along the way, this family will be strengthened as the parents replace the low self-esteem of being on welfare with the pride that comes with achieving self-sufficiency. 
In the long run, this will save the government welfare costs by encouraging those on welfare to get married and support themselves without welfare.  It will also allow many more black children to grow up with their fathers, making it less likely that they will end up in jail, which will save more taxpayer dollars by decreasing the number of people in jail.  The government costs will go down in many ways if the black family is returned to its former glory, and when blacks go from being users of taxpayer dollars to being working taxpayers, the government will find it even easier to remain solvent.  The road to solvency involves the creation of more taxpayers.
Of course, there will need to be rules in place to prevent fake marriages.  If a marriage dissolves within five years, the couple will be required to pay back the additional welfare dollars that they’d received as part of the deal.  At the same time though, if there are bad circumstances that necessitate the dissolving of the marriage (such as physical abuse or other abuses) this rule can be waived.  Regardless, the Republicans need to use social policy as a way to help those enslaved on the government plantation find freedom.  As 21st Century Abolitionists, this is our underground railroad.  It’s not something that the most in the government would ever support because they do not support the strengthening of the family.
The entrenched incumbents’ resistance to these common-sense ideas will make it even easier to win elections.  When making the arguments for helping those on welfare to get off it by financially encouraging marriage, while having the establishment scoff at the idea, it will be easy for the Republican Party to point to the fact that the establishment doesn’t really want minorities to have a better life.  It would rather minorities live in poverty, dependent upon the moldy government cheese, than find freedom through self-sufficiency.  A wise chess player will anticipate the arguments the establishment will need to make in order to stop the Republican Party’s efforts to bolster the black family.  Checkmate. 
We must address and expose the blatant racial motives in the government party’s sacrament of abortion.  Abortion is a tool of the Eugenics movement used to kill as many blacks as possible.  It is also a money-laundering scheme whereby Planned Parenthood gets about one million dollars a day to kill black babies, and the pro-abortion party gets money back as campaign contributions.  In other words, the government establishment is partially funded with the blood-money government-subsidized profits of killing unborn babies.  And regular commercials need to be on black radio making this point.  There’s a reason that most Planned Parenthoods are located in minority communities, and minorities need to know the historical reasons for this.  As well, it must be made clear that about 1,200 black babies are killed in America every day.  The Tuskegee Institute estimates that the KKK lynched and killed about 3,500 blacks in 86 years.  In other words, more blacks are killed in the Democrat Party’s abortion mills in 3 days than the KKK killed in 86 years.
The Republican Party, with the help of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, needs to lay this race-based blood letting on the party that promotes it.  And we need to draw attention to the glee with which they takes these lives and how they benefit financially from doing so.
At the same time, we need to be sensitive to those who’ve had abortions.  Post-abortive syndrome is a common in both men and women, and we need to be very sensitive to its effects on those who need to receive our message.  These folks need to be reminded of the forgiveness that Jesus Christ offers to those who are willing to receive it.  I wouldn’t want to hold my breath waiting for the pro-abortion establishment to talk about the forgiveness that Jesus Christ offers to those who’ve been convinced to have an abortion.  But I’d love to hear the establishment’s spokesmen explain how those who’ve had abortions have no need of forgiveness, simply because Planned Parenthood has paid tribute to them in the form of campaign contributions.
In order to fight the government’s efforts to make abortion common and free through the use of tax dollars to fund abortions for low-income people, the Republican Party needs to make abortion more cost prohibitive.  The nanny staters love to put sin taxes on tobacco, alcohol, sugary drinks, fattening foods, carbon-based energy and even work.  They do this because they know that taxing something means that there will be less of it.  How is murdering an unborn baby not a sin?  If we want less abortion, we should propose a 300% sin tax on all abortions.  Of course, the pro-abortion party will oppose this with the fury of a witch holding a broken broom stick, but let’s allow them to make the argument that killing the unborn is not a sin. 
This is a national conversation that the Republican Party should love to have.  Why is a profitable outfit like Planned Parenthood a non-profit organization?  Why shouldn’t they have to pay taxes on their profits?  Why shouldn’t the American population be made aware of the fact that Planned Parenthood gets a million dollars a day in taxpayer money and doesn’t have to pay taxes on their profits, yet they have extra money to pay tribute to the abortion party in the form of campaign donations?  You don’t have to be head cashier at the jiffy mart to figure out that the abortion party is playing mob boss by accepting protection money from the abortion mills. In answer to the question about what we should do with the children that are born to mothers who can’t afford to take care of them, the Republican Party needs to get behind faith-based adoption agencies and defend their rights not to be forced to allow babies to be adopted by homosexuals. 
The right of religious people to adhere to their faith must not be violated through frivolous lawsuits that impose governmental regulations on religious groups who cannot, in good faith, allow children to be adopted by homosexuals.  Attention must be drawn to the fact that Catholic adoption agencies in Massachusetts were forced to close down because the state, which imposed the redefinition of marriage on the people, refused to allow them to adhere to their faith as they performed their adoption-agency duties.  Preservation of the family unit, as imagined by God, is of the utmost importance in the preservation of our United States.  Redefining the family unit to accommodate those who define their identity by the sin of homosexuality will only weaken the institution of family.  Strengthening the family unit, especially in the black community, must be our number one goal at all times.  Dare the party of big government to argue against that. The Republican Party must not write off the traditional values voters by half-hearted attempts to preserve the institution of marriage.  It must be protected from redefinition by the secular left.
Marriage is a religious institution that existed before the United States of America was even thought of.  The State did not create marriage and has no business redefining it.  If the meaning of marriage came from God, as it did, allowing man the arrogance it takes to assume he’s wise enough to change its meaning will only render it meaningless.  We need the Republican Party to be led by a man who can make this argument without allowing the liberals to shame him into submission.  We need the party to be willing to stand up and make these arguments.  A marriage amendment is necessary and possible.  Marriage wins at the ballot box just about every time it’s put to a vote.
And it will win even more easily if we’ve got a party willing to make the easy argument for marriage.  We should not feel shame for supporting traditional marriage, but those that support the redefinition are the ones that need to know what shame is.  As of now, they appear to have no shame whatsoever.  Let them display that lack of shame.  I can’t imagine too many parents looking forward to attending their child’s gay “wedding.” In this same vain, the Republican Party needs to stand up for those religious folks who are being persecuted for not being willing to work for homosexuals.  In states where “gay marriage” is occurring, those who work at weddings doing catering, music, photography and managing wedding halls are being sued if they refuse to take the job from homosexuals trying to get “married.”  Many of these people are being forced to pay hefty fines and having to give up their businesses and livelihoods.  Our party needs to stand up for religious rights.  We have no obligation to work for those whom we choose not to work.  It is our right not to have to work for them.  Is this discrimination?  No.  The government has no right whatsoever to rewrite the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God so that religious people will be conscripted into a life of sin as defined by the God they worship.  This, if allowed by the government through the government’s courts, is a violation of the 1st Amendment. 
The Republican Party, with the help of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, needs to be able to make this argument and to be willing to do so with the unquestioned authority of God Himself. The Republican Party needs to cease allowing itself and its motives to be defined by the establishment.  Spokesmen for the Republican Party need to make sure that liberals aren’t allowed to use their preconceived talking points as the basis for what is wrong with this country.  The economy isn’t in shambles because of the policies of President George W. Bush.  It is in shambles because the Republican Party has allowed the liberals to run the government with liberal social policies that have consequences. 
Those consequences were felt with the collapse of the housing market.  That had nothing whatsoever to do with tax cuts and lack of regulation.  Instead, it had everything to do with forcing banks to lend to those they knew wouldn’t be able to pay the money back- that is in fact a symptom of overregulation of the marketplace.  One of the driving forces behind this movement was actually an organization with which the president was affiliated- ACORN.  The consequences of trying to fix a problem created by liberal social policies with more liberal social policies will be devastating.  America is about to get the worst possible first-hand lesson in economics in the next few years that one could possibly imagine.  The Republicans need to stop pretending that liberal talking heads understand enough about economics to be legitimate voices at the table.  Instead, it should be our duty to help educate them as to why they are wrong.
As well, we need to continuously explain why the coming recession is indeed a product of the establishment’s socialist big-government policies.  It is not a hangover from the Bush economy.  It is big-government establishment’s goal to impoverish as many Americans as possible so as to make them dependent upon government programs and financially coerce them into voting for big-government incumbents into perpetuity. We are the rebels who refuse to be controlled by those who would have us trade our freedom for their power. The Republican Party needs to make arguments against amnesty for illegal aliens in economic terms that will explain how amnesty will actually cause wages for other people to go down, including legal Hispanics.  As is, the government subsidizes the labor of illegal aliens by giving them free healthcare and food stamps, thus enabling them to work for lower wages under the table.  Once amnestied and legalized, they will no longer be able to work for such low wages.  At that point, they will be forced to compete with American citizens and legal immigrants for low-paying but legal jobs.  This will create a demand for more unskilled illegal aliens who will be willing to work under the table, while, at the same time, creating a larger supply of workers competing for low-paying and unskilled legal jobs.  This will make it even harder for all Americans to find lower-paying jobs, and it will enable the companies to offer even less money and fewer benefits, as there will be even more folks looking to take those jobs.
Those in the government trying to replace the electorate it despises loves to paint we who oppose amnesty for illegal aliens as racist, but how is supporting a system that allows Americans- black, Hispanic, white or whatever race- to get higher paying jobs racist?  If preferring that a black-American or an Hispanic-American be the preferred candidate for a $10 an hour job over a newly legalized alien who broke the law to come to this country and who will work for $8 an hour is racist, then the Republican Party might as well give it up now.  But, it’s as if we already have.  The Republican Party spokesmen are too often unable or unwilling to make this argument based on economics.  They should, and they need to learn how to do it.  It’s not bigoted to stand up for the laws of our nation or to stand up for those whose ability to make a living is hindered because foreigners refuse to obey our laws and come here legally.
And for those who’d worry that making these arguments will hurt with the Latino vote- why would they assume that all Latinos support the lawbreakers in their communities who refused to live by the same rules as they did?  Isn’t that assumption kind of racist in itself?  Let the party of big government make the argument that all Hispanics are in favor of breaking the law out of loyalty to their race.  Sure, those at La Raza are indeed a bunch of racist gringo-hating socialist conquistadors, but let the open-borders crowd make the argument that all Hispanics think like that.  We at the Frederick Douglass Foundation know for fact that that’s not true.  Once the economic argument has been made, it will be much easier to close the border and control who comes in.
The Republican Party, with the help of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, needs to explain why conservative social issues and economic issues will help minorities.  After actually sincerely reaching out, we must remind and educate everyone that the entrenched party of government is the party of slavery, segregation, the KKK and the black genocide of abortion.  We must then explain how the present-day government establishment uses social policy to enslave many minorities in this country on their government plantation by attaching strings to the benefits they offer in exchange for votes. 
These strings are what hurt minorities financially, and if the Republican Party simply reaches out to the minority communities with unabashed conservative arguments, we will be received.  Why must we assume that all minorities, simply because they might get benefits from the government, would prefer a system that makes the creation of a traditional family more unlikely?  We have to show and prove that this is exactly what the party of government prefers and envisions for their own benefit and to the detriment of the black family and of all the black children who are forced to grow up without fathers as a result. 
It may not happen immediately, but a concerted effort to go over the heads of the liberal gatekeepers of socialism with a strategy for educating those who’ve been programmed by the liberal institutions will ultimately enable us to compete for minority votes.  Failing to reach out though, as is the Republican Party’s habit, will yield no results whatsoever.  We’re the Frederick Douglass Foundation.  Join us in our efforts to heal our nation.  Thinking big, planning ahead and taking risks will grow the party.  First we reach out, second we teach, and then we preach with the credibility we don’t have now.  Failing to do so will keep us walking in the political desert for generations.

Timothy F. Johnson
Founder and President/CEO 
Last Updated on Wednesday, 27 August 2014 22:31

IRS used "Secret Research Project" on Conservatives

E-mail Print PDF

New IRS Documents Show Lerner Did Not Need Conservative Group Donor Lists – Emails Mention “Secret Research Project” by Top IRS Official

September 4, 2014

Documents also reveal that 75% of targeted non-profit groups were conservative, just 5% were liberal

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released a new batch of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) email documents revealing that under former IRS official Lois Lerner, the agency seems to acknowledge having needlessly solicited donor lists from non-profit political groups. According to a May 21, 2012, memo from the IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel: “such information was not needed across-the-board and not used in making the agency’s determination on exempt status.” Later, in her May 10, 2013, remarks in which Lerner first revealed in response to question she planted about the IRS targeting of conservative groups, she conceded that the requests for donor names was “not appropriate, not usual.” The new documents obtained by Judicial Watch also reveal that 75% of the groups from whom the lists were solicited were apparently conservative, with only 5% being liberal.

The documents came in response to an October 2013 Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:13-cv-01559)) filed against the IRS after the agency refused to respond to four FOIA requests dating back to May, 2013. The emails are contained in the sixth batch of documents the IRS has been forced to produce in response to the Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit.

Contained in the newly released IRS documents is an email from Deputy Associate Chief Counsel Margo L. Stevens that was sent in response to a question from Lerner concerning attempts to return donor lists the IRS had controversially obtained.  In Stevens’ May 21, 2012, email to Lerner, she wrote:

Lois, I wanted to get back with you with respect to your question whether TEGE [Tax Exempt & Government Entities] could return to those organizations from whom donor names were solicited in questionnaires following their submission of applications for recognition of their tax exempt status (under 501(c)(4)), now that TEGE has reviewed those files and determined that such information was not needed across-the-board and not used in making the agency’s determination on exempt status.

Key parts of this email and other documents the IRS produced to Judicial Watch have been blacked out.  (Many of the documents are completely blacked out (or partially redacted) seemingly because they are allegedly “pre-decisional” or “deliberative,” information that might be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.  The Obama administration’s decision to withhold this information is completely discretionary and is not required by law.)

subsequent IRS email thread on June 27, 2012, revealed that inappropriately obtained donor lists were being used for a “secret research project” and that a top official wanted then-Acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller to decide how to handle the issue.  The email exchange, with the Subject line “donor names,” included the following:

Joseph Urban [IRS Technical Advisor, Tax Exempt and Government Entities] had actually started a secret research project on whether we could, consistent with 6104, argue that [REDACTED] Joe was quite agitated yesterday when I told him what we were doing. (He was involved when the initial question was raised, but we didn’t continue reading him in). At one point he started saying that this was a decision for Steve Miller–I told him we were already doing it, and that I didn’t know whether Lois had already talked to Nikole [former IRS Chief of Staff to IRS Commissioner Steve Miller] about this. Would not be surprised if he already started working on Lois.

  • June 27, 2012 9:02 AM — Holly Paz to David L. Fish:

Thanks for the heads up. The decision was made by Steve, based on advice from P and A. [Procedure and Administration]

Lerner’s and other IRS officials’ concerns about how to handle these donor lists came on the heels of an advisory from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to her and other IRS officials in late March 2012 of “an audit we plan to conduct of the IRS’s process for reviewing applications for tax exemption by potential section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) organizations.”  The documents produced do not detail the “secret research project” nor disclose how the IRS used the donor names the agency improperly obtained.

Then-IRS Commissioner Miller initially testified to Congress on May 17, 2013 that “instructions had been given to destroy any donor lists,” but donor lists were actually produced to the House Ways and Means Committee four months later. The House Ways and Means Committee also announced at May 7, 2014hearing that, after  scores of conservative groups provided donor information “to the IRS, nearly one in ten donors were subject to audit.”  In 2011, as many asfive donors to one conservative (c)(4) organization were audited, according to the Wall Street Journal.  And this past June, the IRS admitted wrongdoing in releasing the conservative National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) confidential tax return and donor list, which were published in March 2012 by the Human Rights Campaign. The Human Rights Campaign is the chief political rival to NOM; its outgoing president had been named a national co-chair of the Obama Reelection Campaign. The IRS reportedly agreed to pay NOM $50,000 to settle the lawsuit.

The documents obtained by Judicial Watch also include a July 18, 2012, email to Lerner from Judith Kindell, senior technical adviser to Lois Lerner, showing that 75% of the nearly 200 non-profit 501 (c)(4) political activist groups targeted by the IRS were conservative, and only 5% were liberal:

Of the 199 (c)(4) cases, approximately 3/4 appear to be conservative leaning while fewer than 10 appear to be liberal/progressive leaning groups based solely on the name. The remainder do not obviously lean to either side of the political spectrum.

Shortly after this email exchange, another email chain on June 28 between Lerner and Holly Paz, the former director of the Office of Rulings and Agreements,shows that Lerner believed that the TIGTA and congressional inquiries into the IRS’s practices were “dangerous”:

  • June 28, 2012 8:57 AM — Paz to Lerner: “Now TIGTA wants to talk to me. I am guessing they read this morning’s paper. [Apparent reference to Wall Street Journal article concerning IRS scrutiny of Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS tax exempt status]Will keep you posted.”
  • June 28, 2012 9:13 AM — Lerner to Paz: “Not alone. Wait til I am there.”
  • June 28, 2012 09:17 AM — Paz to Lerner: “Sorry. Too late. He already called me. It was not about WSJ. Just him trying to get better understanding of the scope of the [House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave] Camp [R-MI] request.”
  • June 28, 2012 8:22 AM — Lerner to Paz: “Just as dangerous. I’ll talk to you soon. Be there in half hour.”

The “dangerous” Camp request to which Paz and Lerner referred was apparently a reference to a letter sent in Mayby Republican Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, David Camp, to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman requesting copies of all 501(c)(4) applications from 2010 and 2011. Despite the consternation expressed about the “dangerous” Camp applications request, an August 14, 2012, email from Lerner to Paz revealed that as of that date, “…no one from the Hill has shown up to look at them.”

The new documents also include emails further contradicting President Obama’s February 2014 excuse that the IRS targeting was entirely the fault of “bonehead decisions in local offices.”  Obama was parroting Lois Lerner’s May 2013 claim that the targeting of conservative groups was the fault of “low-level” employees in Cincinnati for the targeting of conservative groups.  In the months leading up to the 2012 presidential election, Lerner and other top IRS officials made it clear that no “advocacy” applications should be approved or denied without express approval from Lerner’s office in Washington, DC:

  • June 20, 2012: — Email from IRS attorney Michael C. Seton to managers in Exempt Organizations division defining targeted groups’ approval procedures:

Please inform the reviewers and staff in your groups that before issuing any favorable or initial denial rulings on any cases with advocacy issues, the reviewers must notify me and you [Lerner and other senior IRS staffers] via e -mail and get our approval. No favorable or initial denial rulings can be issued without your and my approval. The e-mail notification includes the name of the case, and a synopsis of facts and denial rationale. I may require a short briefing depending on the facts and circumstances of the particular case.

  • June 29, 2012: –  Email from Lois Lerner to Nikole Flax apparently criticizing the IRS Exempt Organizations Determinations Unit for taking too long to categorize non-profits as political and  directing that top Washington IRS official Holly Paz would settle disputes over who was to be targeted:

Although Quality was on board and involved with the training, we are seeing some tendency for Determs staff to continue to over -develop political activity issue. When asked why, they say they are concerned that if they don’t, Quality will ding them. If can’t reach agreement, it comes to Holly.

  • June 26, 2012: — Email from Lerner to Holly Paz and Cindy Thomas in which Lerner notes that TIGTA asked for files directly from the Federal Records Center and warns that this makes sense in “context of a really sensitive investigation alleging political bias by the IRS.” The Federal Records Act (FRA) requires the preservation of official e-mails at the National Archives Federal Record Center. This email from Lerner was dated during the same time period during which the IRS claims her emails were lost and her Blackberry was “wiped clean” and “removed as scrap for disposal …” In violation of Section 3106 of the FRA, the IRS failed to notify the Archives that Lerner’s emails were missing.

The IRS also produced an email exchange in which Lerner takes issue with IRS spokesman Dean Patterson, who had revealed March 8, 2012, Roll Callarticle the existence of a “companion process” for administering applications for tax-exempt status. After Lerner received an advisory from TIGTA asking to discuss the Roll Call article, the following email exchange occurred:

  • April 2, 2012: 7:00 PM — Lerner to Patterson:

Importance: High. As you can see below [email from TIGTA Audit Manager Thomas Seidell], we are meeting with TIGTA later this week. They have given us a list of topics they want to discuss. I am not familiar with the Roll Call article he sites –can you shoot us a copy please? Thanks

  • April 3, 2012: 8:59 AM — IRS Public Affairs Specialist Burke Anthony to Lerner :

Lois, per your request, here is the Roll Call article. I put Dean’s quote in bold; it’s about 17 graphs into the story:

“Dean Patterson, a spokesman for the IRS, denied the existence of a special committee but said the IRS has a “companion process that administers the same provisions of the tax law in the context of new applications for tax-exempt status. The legal issues and the information that will inform our discussions will be similar in both contexts.”

  • April 3, 2012: 9:26 AM — Lerner to Anthony:

Thanks–sorry, but I really have no clue what he means by a companion process that “administers the same provisions of the tax law in the context of new applications for tax -exempt status. The legal issues and the information that will inform our discussions will be similar in both contexts.” As I will need to talk to TIGTA about this on Thursday, perhaps you can give me a better sense of what he is referring to? I could guess, but don’t want to be guessing in this context.

On October 9, 2013, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the IRS asking the District Court for the District of Columbia to compel the agency to produce records of all communications relating to the review process for organizations seeking 501(c)(4) non-profit status since January 1, 2010. The lawsuit also asked the court to order the IRS to provide records of communications by former IRS official Lois Lerner concerning the controversial review and approval process. The IRS failed to respond to the four FOIA requests at issues in this lawsuit dating back to May 2013.

The communications sought by Judicial Watch covered portions of the same period for which the IRS on June 13, 2014, notified the Senate Finance Committee that Lerner’s emails had been lost or destroyed but did not notify the Court or Judicial Watch about these missing emails.  In response to our request for more information, U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan held a July 10 hearing and order the IRS to produce sworn declarations about its efforts to find and restore Lerner’s allegedly missing emails.

And then on August 25, Department of Justice attorneys for the IRS conceded to Judicial Watch that Lerner’s “missing emails” (and all government records) had been backed in case of catastrophe but that it would be too “onerous” to search this backup system for Lerner’s emails.  The Justice Department has since put out anonymous statements alleging Judicial Watch “misheard” what its lawyers said and that the agency did not disclose “new” information about a back-up system.

It is not in dispute that the existence of any back-up system was withheld from the court despite two orders (order 1order 2) demanding specifically sworn declarations about where Lerner’s emails may be residing and effort to obtain them.  The Obama administration has refused Judicial Watch’s requests to amend the sworn declarations and finally inform Judge Sullivan directly about this back-up system.  Administration lawyers have steadfastly refused and subsequently submitted a “status report” to the Court on August 29 that, again, makes no mention of any back-up system.

Judicial Watch lawyers are preparing now to ask the Court for relief in light of the Obama administration’s continuing obstruction and contempt for Judge Sullivan’s orders.

“Again, Judicial Watch has uncovered more shocking emails from the IRS, forced out by a lawsuit and a federal court,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Now we learn the stunning news that Obama’s IRS had a ‘secret research program’ using illicitly-obtained confidential donor lists of conservative and Tea Party organizations that opposed President Obama’s agenda or reelection.  With all this IRS abuse, it is no wonder Lois Lerner said that questions by Congress and others were ‘dangerous.’  And it is well past time that President Obama should be held to account about his repeated and recent falsehoods about his IRS scandal.  Next up:  Judicial Watch will ask Judge Sullivan for help in requiring the Obama IRS to stop its obstruction and disclose the no-longer-missing emails of Lois Lerner and other IRS officials.”

Read more about 

Last Updated on Thursday, 11 September 2014 17:12

The Truth about Gay Population in US

E-mail Print PDF

August 4, 2014


Gays Are 1 in 50, Not 1 in 4

8:00AM EDT 8/4/2014 Michael Brown

According to a 2011 Gallup poll, Americans thought that 25 percent of the population was gay (meaning one out of every four people), while those aged 18-29 put the figure at closer to 30 percent (meaning almost one in every three people). The reality is that less than 2 percent of the population is gay (meaning fewer than one in 50 people), and many gay leaders know this is true.

People of America, you have been duped.

For many years, we were told that "one in every 10 Americans" was gay, a figure based on the massively flawed 1948 study of Alfred Kinsey. (Kinsey actually relied on data from male prisoners to come up with his statistics.)

Even though gay activists knew the figure was inflated, they used it as a convenient lie, since, as two leading gay strategists noted in the late 1980s, "there is strength in numbers." (For details, go here.) As expressed by a gay leader a few days ago, "The truth is, numbers matter, and political influence matters."

In other words, if Americans realized that less than 2 percent of the population was gay rather 10 percent (let alone 25 percent), they would have a very different view of "gay rights."

To be sure, it is wrong to bully or oppress or mistreat anyone based on gender or ethnicity or romantic attractions, so that is not the question. And whether gays are 1 percent of the population or 90 percent, they should not be mistreated.

But you don't overhaul the legal system to the point of attacking freedoms of speech, conscience, and religion based on the sexual and romantic desires of a tiny percentage of the population, nor do you engage in a massive social experiment, like redefining marriage, because of a statistically tiny group of people.

Back in 2003, in their official brief in the landmarkLawrence v. Texas Supreme Court decision, a major coalition of 31 gay and pro-gay organizations used the figures of 2.8 percent of the male population and 1.4 percent of the female population as identifying as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.

This means that these activist organizations were fully aware that the 10 percent figure was completely bogus and yet they never protested when that figure was used to advance their cause. Why expose such a useful lie?

In 2011, UCLA law school's Williams Institute released a study done by Dr. Gary J. Gates, who serves as the Williams Distinguished Scholar at the Charles R. Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law and Public Policy. His official bio also states that, "Dr. Gates co-authored The Gay and Lesbian Atlas and is a recognized expert on the geography and demography of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender  population. ... Many national and international media outlets regularly feature his work."

According to Dr. Gates, just 1.7 percent of the population identifies as gay, with about the same figure identifying as bisexual.

Contrast this with an informal poll I conducted while speaking at a Christian youth conference last month, asking these committed young people what percentage of the population was gay. (Some of these kids were home schooled and most seemed less aware of the more notorious cable TV shows, so they were less worldly wise than your average young people.) The first teen answered, "Thirty percent." The second said, "Forty percent."

Where in the world did they get such ridiculous figures? You can thank the media for that, by which I mean the sitcoms, dramas and movies along with the major news outlets. (For an enlightening Pew Research survey, gohere.)

But this is where things get very interesting. For years gay activists worked to get a sexual-orientation question on the CDC's National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a document of major importance in both government policy and public perception.

That question was included in the 2013 survey, and the results, released last month, made for shocking story lines: "1.6 percent of adults self-identify as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent consider themselves bisexual."

These figures approximated the ones used by conservative leaders for years, because of which we were mocked as liars and vilified as haters. Now the government confirmed what we knew to be true.

Gay and lesbian leaders weren't happy with the results, with Dr. Scout, director of the nonprofit CenterLink's Network of LGBT Health Equity, stating, "If we really are 2 percent vs. 4 percent, it means people are going to say, 'OK, I'm only going to care half as much.'"

How about changing that to, "If we really are 2 percent vs. 25 percent, people are going to say, 'OK, I'm only going to care one-twelfth as much.'" And take note: Dr. Scout only claimed that 4 percent were gay.

Bisexual leaders were concerned as well, with Ellyn Ruthstrom, president of the Bisexual Resource Center in Boston, opining, "For such a respected survey as the NHIS to produce such a small number is a blow."

"It's just going to make it harder for us when we're going out and talking to people about the bisexual population," she said. "We have a real hard time already with people not taking the bisexual identity seriously."

But it gets more interesting still. An article in theWashington Post entitled, "Gay rights groups dispute federal survey's estimate of population," notes that the 2013 National Adult Tobacco Survey came up with results that "more resembled what gay-rights groups had expected. It found that 3.5 percent of Americans considered themselves gay, lesbian or bisexual, with 1.9 percent labeling themselves gay or lesbian, and 1.6 percent identifying as bisexual."

This means that gay-rights groups knew full well that, rather than being one in 10, their numbers were closer to one in 50, with fewer than one in 60 identifying as bisexual.

The truth is that America has been lied to and duped, and gay activists have been complicit in the deception, if not actively leading the way in the ruse. With the new survey out, it's time to expose the lies.

The reality is that fewer than one in 50 Americans identify themselves as gay, out of which only a minority wants to be "married."

How foolish, then, to redefine marriage, restrict freedoms of conscience, speech, and religion, and engage in a massive social experiment based on such a tiny percentage of the population.

We won't be duped again.

Michael Brown is author of Can You Be Gay and Christian? Responding With Love and Truth to Questions About Homosexuality and host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network. He is also president of FIRE School of Ministry and director of the Coalition of Conscience. Follow him at AskDrBrown on Facebook or at @drmichaellbrown on Twitter.

Source: Charisma News

Last Updated on Wednesday, 27 August 2014 22:31

Illegal Immigration Protest Friday & Saturday

E-mail Print PDF
Americans to protest in Chardon, Ohio and AKRON
as part of
Another Great Turnout on Saturday, July 19th in Akron, OH for Close the Boarder Protest!
We estimate that 30,000 cars and trucks passed under our bridge in the four hours that we were there. We were getting 15 horn honks per minute. Awesome.  We had Bikers, NRA Members, Social Conservatives, Citizens for Common Sense Immigration, Akron TEA Party, Stark-Tusk TEA Party and Portage County TEA Party in attendance.
So PROUD to be TEA Party Strong!!!
Close the Boarder Protest in Akron
Great turnout today in Chardon for Pro-America/Defend our Borders Rally!
Looking forward to Saturday's event in Akron!!!. 
Americans want our immigration laws enforced and our borders secured!
Amnesty is unacceptable.  Please join us this Friday and Saturday with appropriate signs and/or flags!
Click on the Graphic Below to See a list of Protests planned for accross the nation:


Ohio Citizens for Sensible Immigration
“A nation that cannot control its borders is not a nation.” 
Ronald Reagan 
“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” 
The Portage County TEA Party Supports LEGAL Immigration but does not support Illegal Immigration or Amnesty.
Last Updated on Sunday, 27 July 2014 09:18

TEA Party Win in VA Send Immigration Message to DC

E-mail Print PDF
TEA Party Defeat of Eric Cantor in VA Sends Message on Immigration to Everyone in Washington
Akron, OH - Tom Zawistowski, President of the We the People Convention and the Ohio Citizens PAC, said tonight that the defeat of Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor by TEA Party candidate David Brat in Virginia sends a message about Immigration Reform to everyone in Washington.  Zawistowski said, "First, I must congratulate my friend and colleague Larry Nordvig, Executive Director of the Richmond Tea Party, for a tremendous victory. The Richmond TEA Party is one of the strongest in the nation and I am confident that they will do the hard work to take David Brat to Congress in November. Second, this win is a message for everyone in Washington, both Republicans and Democrats, that Americans are not interested in amnesty for illegal immigrants and we are outraged by a President that will not defend our borders and is actually encouraging tens of thousands of poor children to leave their parents to advance his flawed political agenda. We do not want people coming to our country illegally and taking jobs from Americans - particularly jobs from hard hit American minorities. Stop playing politics with our national security. Close the borders and fix the front door so that those who want to legally immigrate to America can do so in an orderly and timely fashion. We don't give a damn about rich Republicans who want cheap illegal labor and we don't give a damn about Democrats who want to buy votes of immigrants with our tax dollars."
Last Updated on Friday, 13 June 2014 12:48

NSA Spying on Americans Worse than Thought

E-mail Print PDF

The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control

At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the US, says whistleblower William Binney – that's a 'totalitarian mentality'

William Binney testifies before a German inquiry into surveillance.
William Binney testifies before a German inquiry into surveillance. Photograph: Getty Images

William Binney is one of the highest-level whistleblowers to ever emerge from the NSA. He was a leading code-breaker against the Soviet Union during the Cold War but resigned soon after September 11, disgusted by Washington’s move towards mass surveillance.

On 5 July he spoke at a conference in London organised by the Centre for Investigative Journalism and revealed the extent of the surveillance programs unleashed by the Bush and Obama administrations.

“At least 80% of fibre-optic cables globally go via the US”, Binney said. “This is no accident and allows the US to view all communication coming in. At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the US. The NSA lies about what it stores.”

The NSA will soon be able to collect 966 exabytes a year, the total of internet traffic annually. Former Google head Eric Schmidt once arguedthat the entire amount of knowledge from the beginning of humankind until 2003 amount to only five exabytes.

Binney, who featured in a 2012 short film by Oscar-nominated US film-maker Laura Poitras, described a future where surveillance is ubiquitous and government intrusion unlimited.

“The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control”, Binney said, “but I’m a little optimistic with some recent Supreme Court decisions, such as law enforcement mostly now needing a warrant before searching a smartphone.”

He praised the revelations and bravery of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden and told me that he had indirect contact with a number of other NSA employees who felt disgusted with the agency’s work. They’re keen to speak out but fear retribution and exile, not unlike Snowden himself, who is likely to remain there for some time.

Unlike Snowden, Binney didn’t take any documents with him when he left the NSA. He now says that hard evidence of illegal spying would have been invaluable. The latest Snowden leaks, featured in the Washington Post, detail private conversations of average Americans with no connection to extremism.

It shows that the NSA is not just pursuing terrorism, as it claims, but ordinary citizens going about their daily communications. “The NSA is mass-collecting on everyone”, Binney said, “and it’s said to be about terrorism but inside the US it has stopped zero attacks.”

The lack of official oversight is one of Binney’s key concerns, particularly of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa), which is held out by NSA defenders as a sign of the surveillance scheme's constitutionality.

“The Fisa court has only the government’s point of view”, he argued. “There are no other views for the judges to consider. There have been at least 15-20 trillion constitutional violations for US domestic audiences and you can double that globally.”

A Fisa court in 2010 allowed the NSA to spy on 193 countries around the world, plus the World Bank, though there’s evidence that even the nations the US isn’t supposed to monitor – Five Eyes allies Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – aren’t immune from being spied on. It’s why encryption is today so essential to transmit information safely.

Binney recently told the German NSA inquiry committee that his former employer had a “totalitarian mentality” that was the "greatest threat" to US society since that country’s US Civil War in the 19th century. Despite this remarkable power, Binney still mocked the NSA’s failures, including missing this year’s Russian intervention in Ukraine and the Islamic State’s take-over of Iraq.

The era of mass surveillance has gone from the fringes of public debate to the mainstream, where it belongs. The Pew Research Centre released a report this month, Digital Life in 2025, that predictedworsening state control and censorship, reduced public trust, and increased commercialisation of every aspect of web culture.

It’s not just internet experts warning about the internet’s colonisation by state and corporate power. One of Europe’s leading web creators, Lena Thiele, presented her stunning series Netwars in London on the threat of cyber warfare. She showed how easy it is for governments and corporations to capture our personal information without us even realising.

Thiele said that the US budget for cyber security was US$67 billion in 2013 and will double by 2016. Much of this money is wasted and doesn't protect online infrastructure. This fact doesn’t worry the multinationals making a killing from the gross exaggeration of fear that permeates the public domain.

Wikileaks understands this reality better than most. Founder Julian Assange and investigative editor Sarah Harrison both remain in legal limbo. I spent time with Assange in his current home at the Ecuadorian embassy in London last week, where he continues to work, release leaks, and fight various legal battles. He hopes to resolve his predicament soon.

At the Centre for Investigative Journalism conference, Harrison stressed the importance of journalists who work with technologists to best report the NSA stories. “It’s no accident”, she said, “that some of the best stories on the NSA are in Germany, where there’s technical assistance from people like Jacob Appelbaum.”

A core Wikileaks belief, she stressed, is releasing all documents in their entirety, something the group criticised the news site The Intercept for not doing on a recent story. “The full archive should always be published”, Harrison said.

With 8m documents on its website after years of leaking, the importance of publishing and maintaining source documents for the media, general public and court cases can’t be under-estimated. “I see Wikileaks as a library”, Assange said. “We’re the librarians who can’t say no.”

With evidence that there could be a second NSA leaker, the time for more aggressive reporting is now. As Binney said: “I call people who are covering up NSA crimes traitors”.

Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 17:04
  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  6 
  •  7 
  •  8 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »

Page 1 of 8

Fair Tent Maze Video

Click [  ] for full screen


Click [  ] for full screen

Upcoming Events

Tue Sep 23 @06:30PM -
September Monthly Meeting
Wed Oct 22 @06:30PM -
October Monthly Meeting