Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Friday, November 7, 2014

Obama Is Nailed By A Popular Stay At Home Mom!


First, watch this video…

Now that you’ve seen the video, what do you think? Do you feel like Obama merely misspoke? Or do you feel like he’s just cluing people in on the things he really believes?
The American family is one thing Obama doesn’t hold in high regard. He’s proved it time and time again over his 6 years in office. And that’s why Sarah Palin came to the defense of American moms across the country after Obama said “no one wants moms to stay at home.”
Obama’s quote should be condemned by any feminist, but most liberals don’t seem to want to touch this with a ten-foot pool.
Palin on the other hand is not like most feminists.
Here’s her rant straight from her Facebook page:
Obama Declares Stay-at-Home Moms Aren’t Worth a Hill of Beans; Says It’s a Choice ‘We Don’t Want Americans to Make’
Well that just takes the cake. Sure, Obama’s latest shot across the bow in his own “War on Women” is easily deflected by women like my friends and me testifying to the most precious, irreplaceable seasons of our lives when we were BLESSED to be “stay-at-home moms” (though I don’t remember any of us actually “staying home” in those busiest times of our children’s lives), but Friday’s jab deserves something right back nonetheless.
On behalf of former and current stay-at-homers, including my girlfriends who still get together to bake cookies for the bake sale (see photos in my kitchen above), and volunteer to coach kids ball teams, and man the church’s food bank, and entertain latchkey kids, and all that other obnoxiously “housewifey” stuff, the President needs to be spanked.
Barack, do you not know any stay-at-home moms? Are you and Michelle so disconnected from the real world that you think women will accept your intolerant view that we should not have a choice in how we wish to live our lives? You have a way of arrogantly demanding that we fall in line with your sad opinion of today’s American woman.
It seems you’d shackle us by your snobbish shunning of one traditional lifestyle choice while taking advantage of power to manifest your liberal view by manipulating public opinion and resources to diminish moms who put career on hold to raise a family. You are really messed up. And you’re so 1960’s.
Yes, the 60’s are calling and they want their ardent yet narrow sexist confines back. See, you just set the women’s movement back a few decades, and I think it’s hilarious because for being the smartest man in the room, you ain’t too smart.
Do you even understand that many stay-at-home moms also run businesses out of the home? Welcome to modern technology where you don’t have to go to a physical office to work. You can run a business from a laptop these days!
You’ve repeatedly suggested that women aren’t capable or responsible – starting, for example, with your classic “punished with a baby” offensive declaration in the ’08 campaign. Add your attempts to convince America that only guys in government should control birth control – since free women aren’t capable in a free market of walking down the drug store aisle to find it ourselves.
Add, too, your shameless silence on the deplorable human rights violations in countries you’d befriend even though women are treated mercilessly there. Seriously, not a peep from atop your soapbox about the common practice of radical Islamist men going all jihad, literally, on females who’d dare cross their male “masters”?
And in that creepy way you prioritize your time and our resources, instead of using your Nobel peacenik creds to influence the misogynist crazies in some of these Islamic death cults, you’re out playing hoops… with the guys. Oh, also add your good ol’ boys club (aka the White House) that still pays women less than men, and I’ll stop with the nonstop examples.
You really are stuck in a contorted kind of ’60s feminism where you obviously don’t trust women to make their own decisions, so you’re frustrated. Despite your view – and policies – that government must lord over women, in keeping with radical liberalism, you have to fake support for our equal rights; so you do it in a militant sort of way to compensate for your confusion.
On pretending to know what’s best for us you’ve got nothing but a silent scream demanding, “Hear me roar.” Your stubbornness and the Obama priorities prove this. While Michelle’s busy telling “incapable” stay-at-home moms what to feed their kids (hey, if you don’t know how to feed your kids, maybe you shouldn’t be having kids) you’re busy broadcasting that hypocritical misogynist view that women really shouldn’t have a choice in what we want to do in life, and you’re administering anti-growth, debt-inducing policies that crush young women’s future opportunities.
Now, I’m sure your star struck female minions in the media will writhe and wiggle in defense of you on this, they always do, even though you just marginalized a most valuable sector of American society while having the gall to admit that, for you, it’s only all about the money. Work at home or not? It’s not about kids or quality of life or personal opinion.
You said homemakers will be paid less than women working outside the home (well, duh), “… and that’s not a choice we want Americans to make.”
Why not, Barack? What’s to fear from letting go of some control you’d want over the women of America and trusting us just a wee bit to make a personal child-rearing choice, despite your disclosure that in your infinite wisdom you conclude staying home just “isn’t a choice we want Americans to make.” Isn’t it every woman’s right to choose to make a sacrificial decision to put careers temporarily on hold to raise their kids how they see fit?
Besides you proving the liberal double-standard in regards to choice and sexism, you demean some of the hardest working women on the planet. Perhaps you never witnessed the benefits a “full-time mom” provides a family, a community, our schools, our nation, but you’re a big boy now so figure it out yourself without me lecturing you on the beauty of a homemaker. Suffice it to say “stay-at-home moms” make the world go ’round.
– Sarah Palin
Not too bad, Mrs. Palin.
While you might not agree with everything she wrote, one thing is obvious abut Obama. For the president, making money is better than raising kids. According to him, leaving the workplace to raise a child is not a choice any smart woman should make.
When you watch the video above what’s obvious is that Obama would rather women be in the work force making a fair wage than pouring into the the development of their own flesh and blood.
Let’s cut to the crap.
Being a stay-at-home Mom might be not be the most career friendly decision, that’s true. But when it comes down to it, raising a child who knows how to think, works hard, and isn’t brainwashed by a school or television isn’t just a good thing… it will actually do wonders for the economy.
It’s like he refuses to admit the obvious.
Oh wait, he pretty much always refuses to admit the obvious.
Keep in mind that Obama’s pretty much always on a teleprompter.
He has a clear plan and agenda…

Iran's Good Friend In The White House, Writes Them A Love Note Without Advising Saudi Arabia, UAE Or Israel!

obama and iran

US President Obama reportedly wrote a secret letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei urging Iran to reach a nuclear deal, without informing Israel.
khameneiSenior sources have revealed that US President Barack Obama secretly wrote to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei in mid-October, and urged Iran to reach a deal on its nuclear program and join the US coalition against Islamic State (ISIS).
The letter, revealed by Wall Street Journal, told Khamenei that cooperation on ISIS depends on an agreement being reached by the November 24 deadline regarding Iran’s nuclear program, which Israel has warned aims to build nuclear weapons.
Obama administration officials didn’t deny the letter when asked by foreign diplomats in recent days, the report added, although the US didn’t inform Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates about the letter. The move is seen as disregarding the security concerns those countries have raised regarding Iran’s nuclear program and a potential nuclear arms race it could spark.
Khamenei has called for Israel’s destruction, and last month around the time of Obama’s letter blamed America for creating ISIS, while Iran’s Revolutionary Guards recently clarified America remains its number one enemy.
Just last week American and Arab officials revealed to the Wall Street Journal that Obama has moved closer to Iran and it’s terror proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. They noted on secret channels of communications to Iran via senior Shi’ite sources in Iraq.
For the full story, click here.
Source: Israel National News
Copyright 2014 Mike Mintz
Copyright 2014 Mike Mintz

Thursday, November 6, 2014

If You Lose Your Head And Say Something Bad About Allah, You Will Lose Your Head!

Disturbing Photos Of ISIS’s Public Executions For Committing The ‘Ultimate Sin’

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon
Gut-wrenching photos have been released of what appears to be public executions of several men, and for a disturbing reason.
The photos were uploaded to several Arabic blogs, announcing and praising that three men were beheaded under Islamic Sharia law, as Allah commands.
Each site claims that the men were sentenced to decapitation for “insulting Allah.” This could include a verbal condemnation of the Islamic god or simply being accused by those claiming to have witnessed the unforgivable sin of blasphemy.
The executions were reportedly carried out through ” state regulation ” in the Syrian city of Raqqa on Sunday.
source claims the judge was “the Office of the Ombudsman and the judiciary in the Islamic state,” citing that the word of the “Islamic State of the caliphate” is the final judgement.
One site alleges that the men were found guilty in a “court ruling to strike the head of anyone who dares to insult the Lord of Glory,” yet CONTINUES to claim that this is the same “merciful God” of Islam. The order was to be enacted “in front of a gathering of Muslim rule.”
It is unclear exactly what the men are accused of doing or saying.

Banning Eyes In Saudi Arabia. Are They Absolutely Nuts? Where Is Gloria Steinem? Where Are The Other Women's Lib Frauds?

Latest Muslim Insanity Calls for Ban of Certain Facial Features

If it wasn’t enough that women are required to cover every square inch of their bodies in Saudi Arabia allowing only a small peep-hole for their eyes to view the world, the women there are now being subjugated to even more asinine rules in the name of the country’s psychotic religion.
Latest Muslim Insanity Calls for Ban of Certain Facial Features
The nation’s Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Viceannounced on Sunday that women who have been deemed to have “tempting eyes” will now be required to cover this last remaining body part as well.
Spokesman for the Saudi Arabian committee, Sheikh Motlab al Nabet, said in his announcement:
“The men of the committee will interfere to force women to cover their eyes, especially the tempting ones. We have the right to do so.”
The men in the country apparently have so little self-control that women can now be blamed for seducing men simply for having what they consider “tempting eyes.” But what is the process to determine if a woman is guilty of flaunting those “tempting eyes”?
According to one unnamed Saudi Arabian journalist, this term could be defined as the following:
“Uncovered eyes with a nice shape and makeup. Or even without makeup, if they are beautiful, the woman will be in trouble.”
The journalist voiced his displeasure over the ban, however, going on to say:
“It’s so stupid. I don’t know what to say. They have to stop this. Many people will oppose this in the country. They won’t be silent.”
It’s so incredibly sad how women are viewed and treated as property in this Muslim society. Perhaps we should reconsider doing business with a country that treats their women in such a despicable manner. Why doesn’t the rest of the world acknowledge that this is truly the war on women?

Americans Rebel Against Obama's Agenda Sending Democrats To The Woodshed.

Revenge of the middle class

Hello. I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. I don’t mean to say “I told you so,” but I told you so!
I was the first political commentator in the country to predict a GOP landslide in Tuesday’s election. I described the predicted GOP landslide as “massive and historic.” I made the prediction not only here at Personal Liberty but for weeks now on hundreds of radio stations, American TV, Canadian TV and at Fox News.
Tuesday’s results literally define “massive and historic.” The GOP needed to win six U.S. Senate seats. It looks like they’ve won a remarkable nine (with a comfortable lead in Alaska and a projected win in the December Louisiana runoff). The 12 House seats won by the GOP now expand the GOP majority to historic levels.
But there are more highlights. The GOP destroyed Jimmy Carter’s grandson in Georgia’s governor race. Governor Scott Walker was re-elected in Wisconsin despite tens of millions of dollars spent by unions across the country. The GOP elected governors in deep, deep blue states like Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland. Barack Obama himself campaigned for the Democrat governor candidate Anthony Brown in Maryland. The man that some in the media called “mini Obama” went down to a stunning defeat. Michelle Obama campaigned for Senator Mark Pryor in Arkansas. He lost big time in the same state where he won 79 percent of the vote only six years ago. Hillary and Bill Clinton campaigned all over the country; almost every candidate they supported was wiped out (only Senator Jeanne Sheehan in New Hampshire won). And the defeat of a Democratic governor in the president’s home state hasn’t happened since 1892. When I predicted “massive and historic,” I might have understated the results!
So what happened? How did I know what was about to transpire?
This was a total rejection, repudiation and condemnation of everything Obama believes in. This was middle class America telling Obama to shove it where the sun don’t shine. I wrote the national bestseller “The Murder of the Middle Class” pointing out what Obama and his socialist cabal were doing to America, capitalism and the great American middle class. What we all just witnessed was a middle-class uprising. This was the revenge of the middle class.
What woke the sleeping giant? What caused the middle class to rise up against Obama? In my previous commentaries I explained that the root of Obama’s Election Day debacle would be the Obama lies about the economy and the twin disasters of Obamacare and Ebola.
Let’s start with the economy. Obama constantly repeats the lie that the “economy is improving” and “we are in recovery.” But middle-class America knows otherwise. The election results prove middle-class voters are no longer buying Obama’s lies or the government’s manipulated economic statistics. In exit polls 70 percent of voters said the economy is bad, versus 30 percent that called it “improving.”
Then there’s the centerpiece of this middle-class economic disaster known as “Obamacare.” Millions of Americans have either seen theirhealth insurance canceled or gotten dramatic premium price increases. These were the angry, intense, motivated voters of the2014 midterm elections. This was a vote to gain revenge on the man who promised, “If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance.”
Then there’s Ebola. Obama’s response to this potential deadly pandemic has ranged from inept and incompetent to downright dangerous. Look no further than the new Ebola czar, who has no medical background and who has never been seen again since the day his appointment was announced. Maybe he’s in quarantine. Ebola made it clear to angry middle-class Americans that our president is not keeping our children safe at night. I always believed that Ebola was simply “the straw that broke the camel’s back.” Ebola may have so far only killed one person in America, but it just killed the entire Democratic Party.
Now throw in our open southern border, Obama’s failure to foresee the rise of ISIS, his lack of a coherent strategy to fight ISIS and this jobless economy, and anyone but a Washington, D.C., insider could clearly see a Democratic Party disaster in Tuesday’s election.
But the reality is elections aren’t won or lost just based on issues. Elections are won based on “the ground game.” It’s not who supports a candidate or party that matters; it’s who brings the most voters to the polls. Back in 2012, Obama put together the most sophisticated “ground game” to get out the Democratic vote in the history of American politics.
The GOP failed miserably at the same “ground game.” The GOP actually had no ground game. Their new “get out the vote” system (named ORCA) bombed on the morning of the national election, meaning the GOP never turned out a single vote.
The failure of the GOP vote tracking system changed the outcome of the entire presidential election. Having no idea if your most loyal voters have gone to the polls or not is like flying a plane blind.
Fast-forward to today. Two crucial political developments have changed in favor of the GOP. These are the two concrete reasons for the GOP landslide:
  • First, the GOP is now for the first time effectively competing with the Obama machine in the “ground game.” The GOP turn-out-the-vote machine was so effective this time around that the GOP actually pulled even with Democrats or led in early voting in places where Republicans often lose by large percentages. This is very good news. As a matter of fact, it had never happened before. Republicans always lose the early voting, then desperately try to play catch-up on Election Day. No more.
  • Second, there are now voter ID laws in place in 15 states where none existed in 2012 and in 22 states where none existed in 2010. Not only are Democrats great at getting out the vote, they are even better at getting out fraudulent voters and illegal immigrant votes. Voter ID prevents election fraud. That is very bad news for Obama and his allies moving forward. If they can’t cheat and steal elections, they’ll have a much harder time winning elections.
Tuesday’s “massive and historic” GOP landslide will usher in a dramatic rebuke to Obama and a dramatic change in political power in Washington, D.C. The question is: What will the GOP do with it?
The answers to these questions will determine the future of the Republican Party, American politics and America itself. There is so much to do. Let’s get to work.
I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. Let’s all celebrate for a few days. We deserve it. See you next week. God bless America.

Ben Carson's Political Voyage. Will He Be The Republican Candidate in 2016?

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Ben Carson
Ben Carson
It’s not just the United States Senate that switched political parties on Election Day.
Ben Carson, the neurosurgeon and conservative phenomenon who rocketed to fame when he challenged Barack Obama at a prayer breakfast last year, also officially changed his political affiliation, moving from independent to Republican.
The step is another indication Carson may run for president in 2016.
Carson, whose career was spent as a doctor at Johns Hopkins University Hospital in Maryland, filed the paperwork in his new home county of Palm Beach, Florida, a traditional Democratic Party stronghold.
“It’s truly a pragmatic move because I have to run in one party or another. If you run as an independent, you only risk splitting the electorate,” Carson told the Washington Times just after making the change. “I clearly would not be welcome in the Democratic Party, and so that only leaves one party.
“Fortunately, the fit is pretty good,” he added. “I believe in reasonable sized government. I believe in personal responsibility. I believe in individual freedom. And I believe in creating an environment to let free markets grow our economy. And all of that is very consistent with being a Republican.”
Carson told the paper he actually grew up a Democrat, but then changed his party affiliation to Republican in the 1980s after hearing Ronald Reagan.
“Like most Democrats who were black I was told most Republicans were evil, racist people. But then I started listening to Ronald Reagan and I thought, ‘God, it just makes so much sense. Let me investigate this,’” said Carson.
He switched to being an independent about 15 to 20 years ago after getting a “sour taste” watching Republicans who had their own personal foibles impeach President Clinton over an extramarital affair. “I just saw so much hypocrisy in both parties,” he explained.
Carson told the Times his move now to the GOP makes sense, long before any decision next spring on a potential White House run.
“If I make the decision to run, then I clearly don’t want to be backtracking and do something in a hurry. It’s one of those things I wanted to be thinking about far ahead.”