Skip to Content


DOJ Defunds Youth Programs that Reference God


Obama’s Department of Justice has summarily removed federal funding from two Louisiana youth programs, one a Young Marines program, because a local official refused to sign a pledge stating he would require the programs to ban mentions of God.

Julian Whittington, the sheriff of Bossier Parish, La.,  that Obama’s Justice Office of Civil Rights defunded the  chapter and another youth program over mentions of religion. In the case of the Young Marine program, chartered in 1965, the funding was cut off because the group features an oath that mentions “God.” In the other case it was because a program for at risk youth featured a voluntary, student-led prayer session as one of its activities.

Sheriff Whittington says that the DOJ withdrew a combined $30,000 from the programs because the groups refused to remove God from their activities. The sheriff said this was evidence of the government’s “aggression and infringement of our religious freedoms.”

Magpul To Leave Colorado In Grand Style

Seen at :

After the Colorado State Legislature (?) voted to roll back portions of Coloradans Second Amendment rights, Magpul filed suit to fight and pulled up its roots to relocate.

This Saturday yours truly will join Magpul, Free Colorado, and for an epic send-off at Infinity Park. Before Colorado’s anti-Second Amendment laws kick in, Magpul will sell 20 and 30 round standard capacity magazines, in limited supply at the event, and the first 1500 through the gate will receive a  free Magpul Gen M2 MOE 30 round magazine featuring either the Free Colorado or Boulder Airlift design, courtesy of Magpul Industries. 

I’ll be arriving via helicopter and dropping off cases mags for distribution and will say a few words.

Celebrate a fabulous business who has muscled up for the fight against the Second Amendment in and bid them farewell in epic style.

. Proceeds go towards rolling back the assault on 2A rights in Colorado — and in other states.

SCOTUS Overturns DOMA; Kills Ballot Initiatives in Attempt To Punt on Same-Sex Marriage

SCOTUS ruled on a couple more cases today.  Here is the lowdown from .

Ruling 1: Section 3 of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) was ruled unconstitutional, i.e. any legal marriage from a state must be treated equally under Federal Law. This gives legal same-sex marriages the ability to file joint federal tax returns. It also allows benefits given to other married couples in these states.

The vote was 5-4 with Justice Kennedy being the swing vote on this ruling. This ruling affirms the state self governing rules and that how Federal Law cannot overrule this in the cases of equal justice under the law.

It also ensures there will be another case soon that will force the court to rule on the other aspects of DOMA and whether same-sex marriage will be forced upon the country by the court or continue to be the domain of the states.

What this means is that a state has the right to determine whether or not same-sex marriage will be recognized.  What this does not do is overrule any state that does not recognize it.  A gray area here is if someone gets married in one state and then moves (or drives back to) another state where that marriage is not legal.

If gun control is worth doing if it saves just one life, how about limiting late-term abortions?

Is the Department of Justice spying on Congress?

has the following on an interesting question posed to AG holder, but it's an even more interesting (non)answer.

Attorney General Eric Holder refused to answer when asked if the Justice Department is spying on members of Congress, citing the need for a classified conversation, which lawmakers accepted while asking him to make sure that evidence of such surveillance is not destroyed.

“With all due respect, Senator, I don’t think this is an appropriate setting for me to discuss [this issue],” Holder replied during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing when Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., asked if the executive branch was conducting surveillance that would give “unique leverage” over lawmakers.

Kirk replied that “the correct answer would be, ‘No, we stayed within our lane, and we did not spy on members of Congress.’”

Holder assured Kirk that “there is no intention to do anything of that nature — that is, to spy on members of Congress or to spy on the Supreme Court.”

IMHO, it's pretty telling that he wouldn't, or couldn't, give a straight-up "no" to the question.  If a classified conversation was needed for the answer, you can bet the DoJ is snooping in Congress' business.

Anti-Christian Zealot Mikey Weinstein Dictates Air Force Décor

 hits close to home.  Mountain Home AFB is just a hop and a skip away.  Yet another bad .

The Obama Regime’s  from the military :

An inspirational painting that referenced a Bible verse has been removed from a dining hall at Mountain Home Air Force Base after an anti-religion group filed a complaint.

The painting featured a medieval crusader and referenced Matthew 5:9, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.”

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation called the painting “repugnant” and an “overt display of Christian nationalism.”

By “Religious Freedom” they mean “religion free,” although Islam doesn’t count because it shares a common purpose with the moonbats who now control the Pentagon.

MRFF founder Mikey Weinstein called the Pentagon Friday morning to complain about the painting and gave them one hour to comply with his demands to remove the painting. Less than an hour later the picture was removed.

Senator Durbin Not Sure if Bloggers Deserve Constitutional Protection

Last time I checked, the Constitution and Bill of Rights applied to any American citizen.  Thanks for nothing, Richard.  Seen at :

On the May 26 broadcast of the Sunday show, Durbin told host Chris Wallace that he wasn’t sure if bloggers or “someone who is Tweeting” should be given protections under a media shield law.

Durbin noted that he was not prepared to ask for a special counsel to investigate, but he went further to question just who a media shield law would cover.

But here is the bottom line–the media shield law, which I am prepared to support, and I know Sen. Graham supports, still leaves an unanswered question, which I have raised many times: What is a journalist today in 2013? We know it’s someone that works for Fox or AP, but does it include a blogger? Does it include someone who is tweeting? Are these people journalists and entitled to constitutional protection? We need to ask 21st century questions about a provision in our Constitution that was written over 200 years ago.

Durbin did not go on to attempt to clarify what those limits should be.

Syndicate content

by Dr. Radut