Ben Affleck gets his “liberal” lunch handed to him by Bill Maher …
Poor Ben Affleck was just a perplexed mess as for once he was not surrounded by individuals who were just there to agree with him in an echo chamber. Affleck was given a lesson into the real war on woman. However, I hardly believe that he thought such a thing would happen with his appearance with Bill Maher. Affleck had a look of disbelief when Maher said, “It is the only religion that acts like the Mafia. They will F*cking kill you if you say the wring thing, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book.”
It was not too long ago when Maher ripped Charlie Rose a new one and informed him that Islam was not like other religions.
Affleck was noticeably uncomfortable and frustrated throughout the discussion, calling claims that there are widespread problems within the Islamic religion “racist” and “gross.” Maher said liberals should stick up for liberal principles that many in the Muslim faith do not value, such as freedom of speech and equality for women.
Later in the segment, Affleck said the United States has “killed more Muslims” than radical Islamists have killed Americans while asking Maher to lay out his solution.
“I can show you a Pew Poll of Egyptians, they are not outliers in the Muslim world that say like 90 percent of them believe that death is the appropriate response to leaving the religion,” Maher eventually responded. “If 90 percent of Brazilians thought death was the appropriate response to leaving Catholicism, you would think it was a bigger deal.”
Posted October 5, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, Beheading, Bill Maher, Democrats, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speach, Good & Evil, ISIS, Islam/Muslims, Islamist, Islamofascist, Jihad, Liberal Intolerance, Liberals, Murder, Progressives, Radical Islam, Religion, Terrorism, War on Terror, You Tube - VIDEO | one comment
Sarah Palin launches her own on-line TV channel to eliminate the liberal media news filter and speak directly to the people. Subscribers to the Sarah Palin Channel will have the ability to post their own videos to the website, submit questions to her and participate in online video chats with her and other subscribers. Palin says, most importantly, I want you to talk directly to me. Palin says, the channel is more than just news, it is a community.
Go to Sarah Palin Channel and check it out for free.
The Sarah Palin Channel, which costs $9.95 per month or $99.95 for a one-year subscription, will feature her commentary on “important issues facing the nation,” as well as behind-the-scenes looks into her personal life as “mother, grandmother, wife and neighbor.” Palin serves as executive editor, overseeing all content posted to the channel.
“I want to talk directly to you on our channel, on my terms — and no need to please the powers that be,” Palin, who is also a Fox News contributor, said in a video announcing the channel. “Together, we’ll go beyond the sound bites and cut through the media’s politically correct filter.”
Rasmussen Poll Shows Many Americans Have No Concept of Free Speech … 55% Favor Government Oversight of Political Ads & Candidates’ Comments
ARE YOU INSANE … DID ANYONE TAKING THIS POLL UNDERSTAND WHAT FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS? DO YOU WANT TYRANNY?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
An alarming 55% if likely voters in a recent Rasmussen poll stated, “they believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy.” It gets better, they also wanted to punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. OK FOLKS … HAVE YOU COMPLETELY LOST YOUR MINDS!!! You do realize that “Freedom of Speech” is intended to prevent a tyrannical government from trampling the speech, opinions and comments of ab individuals right? I could care less what party was in power, I would never want a government to control campaign speech. It is up to the voter to inform yourself as to whether some one is fabricating the truth. If that is too difficult, don’t vote.
So 55% of clueless voters would want whatever political party was in power to review and determine whether a political ad was truthful or not? Who could see anything going wrong with that because of course political parties are not partisan of course. The American Spectator has an idea, just create more government bureaucracy and a new agency, call it the Ministry of Political Truth, to oversee this brave new government power. Oh wait, you don’t want the government agency to do it, how about the media?
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments this week in a case aimed at overturning an Ohio law that makes it a crime to make false statements in a political campaign. But most voters favor government policing of the truthfulness of campaign ads and statements.
Fifty-five percent (55%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should be allowed to review political ads and candidates’ campaign comments for their accuracy and punish those that it decides are making false statements about other candidates. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 31% oppose such government oversight. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Presently we have a president in Barack Obama who thumbs his nose at the US Constitution, you would actually give him the power to control political speech for campaign speech, REALLY? WAKE UP AMERICA, many brave souls fought and died to bring freedoms and independence to the colonies and form a United States. Act like it!
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo Says that Conservatives Who are Right to Life & for 1st and 2nd Amendmends ‘Have No Place in the State of New York’
More liberal tolerance … What has taken over the Democrat party … So much of a government in NY state of, by and for the people, all people.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said during a WCNY radio interview with Susan Arbetter that that if “extreme conservatives” are “right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay,” then “they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” Seriously? Isn’t the governor of a state supposed to represent all the people? Could you imagine if a governor from a “red” state said that no one who was pro-choice, pro-gay or pro-gun control has no place in their state? The MSM would be in a complete and total uproar. Cuomo went on to say that “moderate Republicans have a place in this state” and noted that he can work with moderate Republicans, as they’ve consistently passed his agenda. So only those that agree with Cuomo have a place in New York state. UNREAL! Imagine if Chris Christie made such a comment? Once again we are witness to another double standard. Let’s hope this socialist clown never runs for president.
“Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”
This intolerance is coming from a state governor, this is why the framers and Founding Fathers wrote a Bill of Rights to the US Constitution to protect the people from a tyrannical government.
So let’s get this correct, an individual who expresses their First and Second Amendment rights of the US Constitution have no place in New York state? I thought it was the Democrats who claim to have a big tent and are oh so tolerant. The sad reality of Andrew Cuomo’s comments is that he is being seriously and this is what the liberal, socialists who have taken over the Democrat party believe. So for all you folks outside of New York City and who live in upstate New York, you best not be for the rights of new born babies, you best not support the right to bear Arms and you best not be for religious freedom and the right to follow your religious beliefs.
SUPPORT PHIL ROBERTSON & DUCK DYNASTY … Sign the A&E Boycott … Get Ready for a Chick-Fil-A Boycott Response on Steroids!!!
DUCK, DUCK …
A&E really stepped in it by their knee-jerk reaction to the pressures for gay activist groups like GLAAD. The permanent suspension of Robertson family patriarch Phil Roberson for basically espousing his US Constitutionally protected free speech and religious beliefs may just be more than many are willing to take lightly. In many respects this is not a case of one’s religious beliefs, it is greater than that … it is a free speech issue that affects even those who may not have the same beliefs as Phil Robertson. This situation reeks of the Gay activists attack on Chick Fil-A when CEO Dan Cathy was attached for his free speech as well. Hmm, how did that support turn out for Chick-Fil-A? I will say that the support for Duck Dynasty will look like Chick Fil A on steroids.
Governor Jindal said, “Phil Robertson and his family are great citizens of the State of Louisiana. The politically correct crowd is tolerant of all viewpoints, except those they disagree with. I don’t agree with quite a bit of stuff I read in magazine interviews or see on TV. In fact, come to think of it, I find a good bit of it offensive. But I also acknowledge that this is a free country and everyone is entitled to express their views. In fact, I remember when TV networks believed in the First Amendment. It is a messed up situation when Miley Cyrus gets a laugh, and Phil Robertson gets suspended “
Several prominent conservatives have expressed their support for “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson following his suspension by A&E for making controversial remarks about homosexuals.
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted a picture of herself with Robertson and his family on Facebook Wednesday night. The caption reads: “Free speech is an endangered species. Those ‘intolerants’ hatin’ and taking on the Duck Dynasty patriarch for voicing his personal opinion are taking on all of us.”
EXIT QUESTION … Wonder how incumbent Louisiana Democrat Senator Mary Landrieu is feeling right about now? In the past we have had the voting blocks of Soccer moms, NASCAR and now we have the Duck Dynasty voters.
Official Statement from Robertson Family Regarding A&E’s Suspension of Phil Robertson … ‘We Cannot Imagine the Show’ Without Phil Robertson
‘Duck Dynasty’ Family: ‘We Cannot Imagine the Show’ Without Phil Robertson …
So what is the state of affairs of the reality TV show ‘Duck Dynasty’ going forward on A&E following their knee-jerk reaction to suspend family patriarch Phil Robertson indefinitely for stating his Constitutionally protected freedom of speech and region as a result of pressure from gay activist groups? The family makes it very well known that are about God and family first and foremost which would signal that the future of the show continuing on A&E without Phil is nil.
The Robertson Family Official Statement from Duck Commander.com:
We want to thank all of you for your prayers and support. The family has spent much time in prayer since learning of A&E’s decision. We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word. While some of Phil’s unfiltered comments to the reporter were coarse, his beliefs are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. Phil is a Godly man who follows what the Bible says are the greatest commandments: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Phil would never incite or encourage hate. We are disappointed that Phil has been placed on hiatus for expressing his faith, which is his constitutionally protected right. We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but, as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what that means for the future of Duck Dynasty. Again, thank you for your continued support of our family.
Check this out, not only did sponsor Skyjacker pledge their support to Phil and the Robertson family and that they would stay with ‘Duck Dynasty,’ but according to TMZ, so is main sponsor Under Armour (UA).
The company adds, “We are obviously aware of the situation. And his comments are not indicative of Under Armour’s views.”
UA insists the company is committed to treating all people equally and with respect … even if Phil isn’t.
Tennessee Judge Lu Ann Ballew Orders Baby’s Name be Changed from ‘Messiah’ to Martin DeShawn McCullough
Huh, who knew that a judge could order your child’s first name be changed? So what would the judge have done if the child’s name was Jesus and the actual last name was Christ?
Talk about some judicial over-reach … A Tennessee Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew who serves the 4th Judicial District ordered a 7 month old’s name be Martin DeShawn McCullough. It includes both parent’s last names but leaves out Messiah.The issue came before the court initially, not because of the child’s first name, but because the parents could not agree on a last name. The judge stated, ‘the word Messiah is a title and it’s a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ.” The judge went on to say, she made this the decision is best for the child, especially while growing up in a county with a large Christian population. Wow, how is this allowed because of a judge’s religious beliefs? Also, the judge claimed it was in the best interest of the child. So if the family was not in a predominately Christian area, it would have been OK? The case is supposed to be appealed on September 17th.
What ever happened to the First Amendment of the Constitution of Freedom of Speech and Religion?
Hmm, although I think it is poor form and sacrilege for the family to have named their child “Messiah,” there is no way in Heaven that a judge could be allowed to make this family change the child’s name because of her religious views. Sorry, but it is not the court’s right to do so. Look for the ACLU to be ll over this one. Does a court really have the right to determine what your child’s name should be? Really? Obviously, this case has some extreme religion undertones, but where does the government think they have the right to order a child’s name be changed? The only reason why this went to court was because the mother and father could not agree on a last name. So had that never happened, it would have been fine for the child to have gone through life as Messiah?
A Newport mother is appealing a court’s decision after a judge ordered her son’s name be changed from “Messiah.”
Jaleesa Martin and the father of Messiah could not agree on a last name, which is how they ended up at a child support hearing in Cocke County Chancery Court on Thursday.
That is when the first name came into question.
Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew serves the 4th Judicial District of Tenn. including the following counties: Cocke, Grainger, Jefferson, and Sevier.
What would Barack Obama, the Obamamessiah have to say about this?
Ted Nugent Says, ‘Trayvon Got Justice,’ as Anti-American Libs Try to Stop Free Speech … Calls Petitioners “Idiots” and “Subhuman Numbnuts” & Calls Out Barack Obama and Eric Holder
Whether you love him or hate him, Ted Nugent, the Motor City Madman rocker is allowed his “free speech” as afforded by the United States Constitution.
During an interview with Maine radio station WGAN, Nugent defended his recent comments regarding Trayvon Martin, blacks and crime and those that think that he should not play rock and roll in Connecticut were “idiots”. Those that have an issue with the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution have started a petition to prevent Nugent from performing at Toad’s Place in New Haven, CT. Really folks, this is how you direct your energies? Nugent called a group of petitioners who want his August gig at the nightclub Toad’s Place in New Haven canceled “subhuman numbnuts.” I guess it is safe to say that none of the “numbnuts” will be attending his concert. These same “idiots” are the ones who are claiming that “Justice for Trayvon” and wanting to get Attorney General Eric Holder and the DOJ to file a Civil Rights case against George Zimmerman. Oh the irony, as at the same time the collective “idiots” are trying to take away Ted Nugent’s freedom of speech. What a shock that there is a liberal double standard.
Ted Nugent stated that “Trayvon Martin got justice”. Personally, I think this is a poor choice of words because of how individuals define justice. What Trayvon Martin got was his day in court. Initially that is what Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Barack Obama, Martin’s parents and the liberal MSM wanted when they made this story a race issue and forced Florida to try the death of Trayvon after prosecutors in Sanford. FL had decided not to. But that is not what they really wanted, they wanted their pound of flesh from George Zimmerman. They were only after a guilty verdict no matter what the evidence showed. They could not accept a jury’s “not guilty” verdict in the case and now are seeking other avenues of going after Zimmerman. As if this case has not been exploited enough.
Ted Nugent expresses his views as only the ‘Motor City Madman’ can …
When asked about the “idiots” in Connecticut who think he “shouldn’t play rock and roll,” Nugent told the conservative host: “You and I stand on the line of reason” and must not be silenced.
“People who hate Ted Nugent hate freedom,” he said, and promised to continue to speak what he sees as the truth.
Nugent also had some choice things to say about liberals, racial activists and Trayvon Martin during the interview.
Defending his previous comments about blacks and crime, Nugent insisted the statistics bear him out.
Of the Trayvon Martin case, Nugent said, “Trayvon got justice.” He went on to say that Martin was a “gangsta wannabe” who had a “bloodthirst,” as evidenced by the fact that he was supposedly eager to “get into fights with people.” He said Martin showed racism in calling George Zimmerman a “cracka.”
Ted Nugent went on to say …
Nugent said Zimmerman got only a “sliver of justice.” Although Zimmerman was found not guilty, powerful people from President Barack Obama to Attorney General Eric Holder have targeted him, as have “Holder’s best friends,” the New Black Panthers. Nugent implied the president and Holder are trying to subvert the legitimate verdict in the case.
“It pains me deeply” to have to acknowledge that the president and some others in the administration are “just bad people,” Nugent said. He said he had hoped to be able to speak better of the country’s top officials.
IRS-GATE … Drip, drip, drip.
Holly Paz, an IRS senior supervisor in Washington, DC admitted to targeting Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status. She stated she was personally involved in scrutinizing up to 30 Tea Party applications. Now according to reports, she is gone, but gone where? Fired, transferred, on administrative leave with pay? One thing is for certain, it’s no longer about rogue agents in the Cincinnati office, the IRS scandal that targeted conservative groups and Tea Party organizations now leads to Washington, DC.
From FOX News:
A Washington-based IRS supervisor acknowledged she was personally involved in reviewing Tea Party applications for tax-exempt status as far back as 2010, Fox News confirms — a detail that further challenges the agency’s initial claim that the practice of singling out those groups was limited to a handful of employees in Ohio.
Congressional sources confirmed to Fox News that Holly Paz, who until recently was a top deputy in the division that handles applications for tax-exempt status, told congressional investigators she reviewed 20 to 30 applications. Some requests languished for more than a year without action.
The account undercuts the narrative that senior officials only learned of the practice after it had already started in the Cincinnati office.
Details of Paz’s role were first reported by The Associated Press. Still, Paz provided no evidence that senior IRS officials ordered agents to target conservative groups or that anyone in the Obama administration outside the IRS was involved.
Instead, Paz described an agency in which IRS supervisors in Washington worked closely with agents in the field but didn’t fully understand what those agents were doing. Paz said agents in Cincinnati openly talked about handling “tea party” cases, but she thought the term was merely shorthand for all applications from groups that were politically active — conservative and liberal.
The Gateway Pundit provides an important little tidbit of information, Holly Paz was a Barack Obama donor.
ACLU Files Lawsuit Challenging NSA’s Patriot Act Phone Surveillance Against We the People … Violates Americans’ Constitutional Rights of Free Speech, Association & Privacy
Once again we are witness to a government that has become just too big.
As reported at the New York Times, the ACLU has filed a aw suit against the federal government challenging the NSA’s phone surveillance against “We the People”. In an interesting twist, the left leaning ACLU has filed a law suit against the far-Left Obama administration over the collection of logs of domestic phone calls of all Americans where they were the target of an investigation or suspected of terrorism or not. The law suit names Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, NSA Director Keith Alexander, Attorney General Eric Holder, Defense Secretary Charles Hagel and FBI Director Robert Mueller III as defendants. It is pretty bad when the ACLU is forced to sue the Obama administration over such an issue, or face a complete lack of credibility.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Obama administration on Tuesday over its “dragnet” collection of logs of domestic phone calls, contending that the once-secret program — whose existence was exposed last week by a former National Security Agency contractor — is illegal and asking a judge to stop it and order the records purged.
The lawsuit could set up an eventual Supreme Court test. It could also focus attention on this disclosure amid the larger heap of top secret surveillance matters revealed by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor who came forward Sunday to say he was their source.
I have personally disagreed with many actions in the past and inactions by the ACLU, who is supposed to defend all Americans civil liberties. However, I have to give them credit here. The ACLU filed a law suit charging that the program violates Americans’ constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy. It is troubling that the US government thinks that it can just sweep up all data without any cause of legal search and seizure. It is even more eye opening that Barack Obama when he was Senator and candidate Obama ridiculed and vilified this program. When he became president, the program went on steroids.
In the wake of the past week’s revelations about the NSA’s unprecedented mass surveillance of phone calls, today the ACLU filed a lawsuit charging that the program violates Americans’ constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy.
This lawsuit comes a day after we submitted a motion to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) seeking the release of secret court opinions on the Patriot Act’s Section 215, which has been interpreted to authorize this warrantless and suspicionless collection of phone records. [...]
The ACLU’s complaint filed today explains that the dragnet surveillance the government is carrying out under Section 215 infringes upon the ACLU’s First Amendment rights, including the twin liberties of free expression and free association. The nature of the ACLU’s work—in areas like access to reproductive services, racial discrimination, the rights of immigrants, national security, and more—means that many of the people who call the ACLU wish to keep their contact with the organization confidential. Yet if the government is collecting a vast trove of ACLU phone records—and it has reportedly been doing so for as long as seven years—many people may reasonably think twice before communicating with us.
Legal Insurrection reminds us that this was not the first law suit filed when it comes to the NSA data dragnet, Larry Klayman, former chairman of ‘Judicial Watch’ filed one as well.
On Sunday, a similar suit was filed by Larry Klayman, former chairman of Judicial Watch, against President Obama, Eric Holder, Keith Alexander, the NSA and Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam, among others. The suit claims that the government’s phone surveillance activities “violates the U.S. Constitution and also federal laws, including, but not limited to, the outrageous breach of privacy, freedom of speech, freedom of association, and the due process rights of American citizens.”