Janet Napolitano Address the Council on Foreign Relations

“When we add a prominent former computer hacker to our Home Security Advisory Council as I just did…”

“Our physical United States border should be our last line of defense…”

“We’re going well beyond what we’ve done in the past…”

Pro-lifers, states rights advocates, constitutionalists, those concerned about illegal immigration, Iraq war veterans and anyone expressing their support for Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or Chuck Baldwin… Look out!

Obama/Google Blasphemy and Net Neutrality

I am on the email list of Redstate.com, but I usually don’t pay any attention to anything they say because they are typical neocons, generally willing to support any Republican candidate no matter how much they compromise on traditional conservative issues.

But the following article caught my attention for several reasons. I am against net neutrality (as is Ron Paul). Internet providers should be able to set whatever rules they see fit as far as what content is allowed.

The offensiveness of the video and flippancy of Mr. Lessig is also of note.

The most scary aspect of this is that Google is a corporate sponsor of the Council of Foreign Relations, and these neocons at Redstate are supporting CFR member John McCain for President. Google is the provider of this very forum.

Dear Friend,

ACTION ITEM: Call the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee at 202-224-5115 and protest Larry Lessig and Google denigrating Christ while Google censors Christians online. Details below.

A friend and adviser to Barack Obama, Larry Lessig, is going to testify before Congress on Tuesday to advocate for "net neutrality," a position strongly supported by Google, Inc.

Google, recently allowed Larry Lessig to talk to Google employees. During his talk, Lessig showed a video of Jesus, depicted as gay and wearing a diaper singing the song "I Will Survivor" until Christ is run over by a bus. You can see for yourself here.

Lessig told Google's employees, "This is a little bit touchy to some people. I don't get it, so just chill."

Google and Lessig believe that intellectual property rights should be curtailed and internet providers should be forced to allow anyone and everyone to use their networks.

While Google is pushing net neutrality and blaspheming Christ, Google is also censoring Christians online. As I document here, Google has censored a pro-life group online. Google has also been sued for anti-Christian discrimination in the United Kingdom.

Of course, while Google is happy to censor Christians while denigrating Christ, Google has gone out of its way to censor content that might offend muslims.

Google should have no right to demand open access to your internet while censoring and denigrating Christians on its network. And the Senate should not give Larry Lessig a platform to advocate Google's position while Google behaves in that manner.

Call the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee and tell them you find it disgraceful that Google could advocate an open internet while censoring Christians and laughing while Larry Lessig denigrates Christ. The number is 202-224-5115.

Also, please forward this to your friends. Have your friends join this list. We should not let the left get away with denigrating Christ and sending those who do to Congress to advocate for companies that routinely censor Christians.

Together, we can stop this.

All the best,

Erick Erickson
Editor, RedState.com

Republicrat Alternatives, part 3

For people who don’t care for the three candidates big name candidates that the news media is pushing, Alan Keyes is someone to cautiously consider for president. He may run as either a Constitution Party candidate or as an independent. This is my third post in a series on third-party and independent candidates for president.

At first glance, Keyes seems to be staunch, right wing conservative dedicated to restoring God-given liberties which have long ago been lost. If you look on his website, he says that he is 100% pro-life, against gay marriage, against anti-disciminatory laws for gays, against “health-based” sex education, pro-school choice, pro-second amendment, pro-border security, pro-Fair Tax, anti-Federal Reserve, and anti-globalist.

But Keyes sometimes seems to speak out of both sides of his mouth.

On the one hand, he says that he is against affirmative action, quotas, and in general “preferential treatment for groups defined by race or sex”. But I have also heard him say that he is in favor of reparations.

While talking as an anti-globist on the one hand, he says, “The original purpose of the UN is quite clear, and I don't believe it's blamable…Should this pernicious tendency persist, the United States will have to withdraw from the United Nations…” and that the U.S. should “…firmly maintain our ongoing international responsibilities as a sovereign nation and world leader.” What does he mean should this “pernicious tendency”. Forming a One World Government isn’t “blamable”? Hasn’t the UN already violated our enough by forcing us to go along with corrupt oil-for-food programs and rules for fighting wars and environmental rules which are not enforced on other nations? How are we to be a “world leader”? By being the policeman of the world?

Alan Keyes says about the Iraq war, “…it was not what would have been my choice… [but] after we won the military victory in Iraq …what we should have done was to keep the security aspects to ourselves and turn all the political junk over to the UN.”

Keyes allegedly has CFR connections, and is a member of the supposedly conservative, but secretive Council for National Policy, which was addressed recently by John McCain.

Keyes criticized Hillary Clinton for “carpetbagging” to New York to run for senator. But then he hypocritically did the exact same thing by moving from Maryland to Illinois to run against Barack Obama (of all people) in the wake of the Ryan scandal.

Some people who have worked in his campaign have said that he just runs for office to make a living with no real intentions of winning.

Keyes is a Roman Catholic.

I guess I would vote Keyes if he were the only other candidate besides McCain, Hillary or Obama, and a murder-legalizing Libertarian.

But even if he really does run, I may not get that chance. He has already run as GOP candidate, which disqualifies him to run in states which have “sore loser” laws. This is another reason to hope that he does not get the CP nomination. My state (Ohio) has such laws, but I don’t know if this law applies in this case since Keyes’ name did not actually appear on the ballot here. But I read on Keyes’ website that he is mounting a campaign to change the law in Texas.

I will get to candidates who I would be more likely to vote for in the coming weeks.