Government Zero: No Borders, No Language, No Culture (27 page)

That just shows you their other positions on constitutional and national sovereignty issues are a sham. The minute their pals in big business can make a few extra billion, they’ll give the rest of the world the keys to America and let it empty the vault.

Any free-trade deal with poorer countries in Asia is going to be a one-sided arrangement under which middle-class jobs move out of America and even more cheap, foreign-made goods flood our markets. It will be great for big business and Wall Street, lethal for small business and Main Street, and will expand our already overflowing welfare rolls.

It’s another double-win for our Marxist in chief. With one stroke of his unconstitutional pen, he’ll direct billions more to his crony capitalist friends and further overwhelm the system, Cloward-Piven style, in his quest to turn America into a socialist welfare state.

While working on a deal to export the last manufacturing jobs out of America, the administration continues the practice of outsourcing high-tech jobs to visiting foreigners through the H-1B visa program. Earlier this year, Southern California Edison laid off four hundred employees and replaced them with foreign workers visiting the United States on H-1B visas.
²⁷

This program’s stated mission was to admit temporary workers from foreign countries to do jobs there are no U.S. citizens to fill. Southern California Edison claimed that was what it was doing, but California congressman Darrel Issa wasn’t buying it.

“This appears to be an example of precisely what the H-1B visa is not intended to be: a program to simply replace American workers en masse with cheap labor from overseas,” he said in a statement.
²⁸

The progressives are torn between their ties to big labor and their unqualified support of the president in bringing in as many immigrants as possible, whether legally, illegally, or through programs like this. The far left within his own party oppose the program. Bernie Sanders managed to get a restriction on H-1B visas for the banking sector into the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, cosponsored by Republican senator Chuck Grassley.
²⁹

Establishment Republicans like Jeb Bush line up with the internationalists in supporting the program. Bush said it would be foolish not to extend the H-1B visa program.
³⁰
Unlike the trade deal, however, Republicans are not so uniform in their support of the H-1B sellout.

The problem for defenders of the program is there is no shortage of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) workers in this country. On the contrary, there is a shortage of jobs for them,
³¹
as several studies have indicated.

The real reason the program enjoys the political support it does is cost. Big business realizes huge cost savings by employing visiting workers on this program. Officially, workers hired on H-1B visas are supposed to be paid on the same scale as American workers filling that job would be. But there are all sorts of ways to get around that requirement, as Southern California Edison demonstrated. The company can simply lay off its STEM workers and coincidentally hire H-1B workers for “new positions.”

Don’t misunderstand me. I am all for companies being aggressive in cutting costs and getting the most talent for their money. I don’t believe anyone is entitled to a higher salary. Everyone should compete in the market with other candidates for the jobs they seek. But “the market” shouldn’t include foreign workers from much poorer countries that offer no similar opportunities in return to American workers.

The H-1B visa program is just another point of agreement between progressives and establishment Republicans to sell out the American people for big business and their international agenda. Support for this program alone should eliminate Jeb Bush as a viable candidate for anyone who opposes the progressive agenda.

As with illegal immigrants, our legal immigration policies should put the needs of Americans first. Instead, our Government Zero uses this program to reward multinational corporations and promote the progressive anti-Americanization agenda.

Overall, every one of the administration’s policies weaken the American economy for Americans and benefit America’s economic rivals or enemies. The progressives are more worried about equal opportunity for Asians and Muslims than protecting American workers and small businesses. The nonexistent Republican opposition cares only about big business and Wall Street.

We don’t need a progressive or even a conservative economic policy. I’m not sure if
conservative
means anything anymore, with Republicans like Mitch McConnell calling themselves by that name.

We need a nationalist economic policy. We need representation for the 315 million Americans who live in this country, not for multinational corporations or the rest of the world. It’s not the government’s job to help Third World countries be more competitive. It’s the government’s job to represent the interests of the people who elect and pay them.

In May, two homegrown Islamic terrorists claiming allegiance to the Islamic State opened fire on a free speech event in Garland, Texas.
¹
The event, organized by activist Pamela Geller, included a “Draw Muhammad” cartoon contest. For this, American-born U.S. citizens under the influence of radical Islam decided they must die. But for the heroic actions of an off-duty traffic cop, they would have.

Instead, only the two terrorists were killed. That’s the good news. The bad news is free speech may have been seriously wounded, thanks to the propagandists in the media.

Free speech is a topic I know an awful lot about. I’m in the free speech business. Without the First Amendment, I wouldn’t be on the radio, which would please many on the left who don’t believe in free speech at all. They believe in controlled speech. They believe in government speech. They believe in progressive speech.

In other words, they believe in
their
hate speech and no one else’s. As with everything else, you can count on progressives
to side with the Islamists on free speech issues and smear anyone who tries to stand up to them.

Deniers of the new holocaust constantly tell us ISIS is not a threat to the United States. They mock conservatives who talk about the danger of sharia law as “conspiracy theorists.” As I tell listeners on my show,
The Savage Nation
, the conspiracy theorists of twenty years ago have become the news reporters of today.

We are fighting right now to preserve our most basic principles in the face of a Progressive-Islamist takeover that is attacking them on every front. Both liberals and supposed conservatives in the media are playing for the other side, whether they realize it or not.

I’m talking about how Bill O’Reilly and Greta Van Susteren bent over backward to blame the victims. They didn’t attack the Islamic murderers. They didn’t attack the religion itself for putting hatred in the minds of these throwbacks. No, they attacked the person who provoked them, Pamela Geller:

O’Reilly couldn’t have been more wrong. It accomplished an awful lot. It flushed out hateful terrorists and hateful liars in the media. It showed us there are Muslims ready to kill over
a cartoon and it showed us who in the media is on the side of hate.

Two Muslim fanatics, as we know, did the shooting. Pamela Geller didn’t do the shooting. Two Muslim fanatics, identifying themselves as ISIS, have now attacked in America, right in our homeland. O’Reilly, Van Susteren, and liberal journalists, who are really one and the same, deplored Geller’s exercise of free speech and blamed the victims.
³

O’Reilly said what Geller did was stupid. Insulting the First Amendment is even more stupid. Nor does that advance the cause of liberty.

The media said Geller provoked the radical Islamists into attacking the event. Of course she provoked them. She did it on purpose to show the world what they’re capable of. Today, it’s cartoons of Muhammad. What is it tomorrow?

You have to understand that large numbers of Muslims don’t just want to ban pictures of Muhammad. They want to ban any speech critical of Islam. And I can guarantee you Hussein in the White House is already drawing up plans to ban the criticism of Islam.

Soon thereafter, ABC News described Geller’s group as “notorious for its anti-Islamic views.” Notice that they didn’t say the Islamists were notorious for killing. They didn’t condemn the fatwa issued by ISIS against Pamela Geller for drawing cartoons. They didn’t condemn the maniacs setting people on fire while they are still alive. No, the cartoonists were the problem, not the killers.

Indeed, everything is upside down, just like in
Alice in Wonderland
. That evening, on Monday, all of the so-called networks were repeating the description of Geller’s group as a hate group. They probably based that on the Southern Poverty
Law Center’s (SPLC) website, which lists Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) as an anti-Muslim hate group. The SPLC is the real hate group. It’s a leftist, fanatic hate machine. The people who run this left-wing propaganda center are some of the sickest, most demented, Soros-funded people in America.

The SPLC itself encouraged violence against the conservative Family Research Council. After the SPLC labeled it a hate group, along with conveniently identifying its headquarters on a “hate group map,” a left-wing shooter showed up at the council’s offices and attacked.
⁴
So, in my opinion, the Southern Poverty Law Center is far more responsible for having encouraged violence than Pamela Geller or other opponents of radical Islam. Look into old Morris Deeds, Mr. Holier-Than-Thou, and his Al Sharpton–like SPLC. You’ll find out who the real hate groups are.

Based on sources like the SPLC, the AFDI was smeared on MSNBC, CNN, and elsewhere. NBC terrorism analyst Evan Kohlmann even claimed the AFDI was not holding a free speech event. Can you believe that? He said, “These people are not standing by that principle, they’re standing by the principle of hatred for other people.”
⁵
So Kohlmann now wants to define what speech is. This is how obnoxious it’s become.

I’ll quote Winston Churchill again, who said that the object of the protections of free speech is to protect offensive speech. I’ve said it to you a thousand times. Polite speech does not need the protection of the First Amendment. It’s obnoxious and offensive speech for which the First Amendment was written.

Kohlmann actually made my arguments unintentionally when he went on to say, “The police told them in order to hold this event they would have to have $10,000 worth of security
on hand. They had a SWAT team outfitted like it was Baghdad. So obviously someone knew there was a likelihood that some stupid person would do this.”
⁶

He was trying to further blame the victims, but his comment actually begs the question: Is it even America anymore when one has to hire a SWAT team for protection just to draw cartoons? Why don’t those who mock and insult Christianity have to hire SWAT teams? Why don’t the media claim they are “provoking violence” when they put pictures of Jesus in bottles of urine? Do I have to remind you that the National Endowment for the Arts subsidized the maker of
Piss Christ
in the 1990s?

Obama was quick to denounce the “Innocence of Muslims” video his administration tried to blame for causing the Benghazi attacks, but he had no objection to this desecration of Christ when it was displayed in Manhattan in 2012.
⁷

Do you remember what the Brooklyn Museum did when they showed a dung-covered art work of the Virgin Mary? The man running the Brooklyn Museum giggled, saying the exhibit was protected by the First Amendment. The National Portrait Gallery promoted a video of a crucifix with ants crawling over the body of Christ. Was that freedom of speech? We were told it was.

The answer is it was freedom of speech. We have room for that in America, but not in Muslim America. The throwbacks want to bring their backward world to your community. And with the Progressive-Islamist media’s help, they just might succeed. Most of you don’t know this war of Islam against the world has been a war of attrition, spanning a millennium. It didn’t start on 9/11. It started a thousand years ago. But thanks to multiculturalism, no one knows the truth anymore.

Multiculturalism metastasized under Bill Clinton, who opened our borders in a way they were never intended to be
opened. Since then, the nation has been flooded with people whose views are antithetical to the views of America. They’re refusing to join the melting pot. They want you to melt into their retrograde world.

If you think these two shooters in Texas are alone, you have more naïveté than Bill O’Reilly and Greta Van Susteren combined.

Not long after the attacks, I came across a story on PJ Media, one of those rare media outlets not bought and sold by progressives. They reported:

Now this would be the equivalent of holding a public funeral for 1930s Nazis who tried to murder Americans and were killed in the process. Imagine if a German Lutheran Church had then wanted to have a funeral for them. That never happened, but you can imagine the outrage you’d hear from the liberal media even then.

We actually tolerated Nazis in America back in the 1930s more than we do patriots today. The Nazis once had events in America on stages where they had a Nazi flag on one side and
an American flag on the other. I’ll never forget learning that when I was a little boy in the 1950s. I was going through old magazines and I found out that the Nazis had been that prominent in America as far as the late 1930s, and brazen enough to hold rallies in Madison Square Garden and other venues here in the United States of America. We didn’t stop them, because we believe in freedom of speech in this country. That’s how committed to it we are. Do you remember the American Nazi Party marching in a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Illinois, forty years later? They were defended by the American Civil Liberties Union, made up mainly of Jewish lawyers, who said, “They have every right. We don’t agree with the Nazis, but we’ll defend their right to march.” Where were all those good, Jewish liberals in May? Why weren’t they defending Pamela Geller?

By the way, one of the board members of the Kansas City mosque supported the requested ban on free speech back in 2012. Mohammed Kohia, who helped start the petition, said, “Insulting somebody else or putting somebody down can insight [
sic
] violence and lead to people losing their lives. We’re trying not to give these people a chance to misbehave.”
⁹

Surprisingly, the ACLU actually stepped in and disagreed. I was pleasantly shocked by what the ACLU attorney said:

I’d like to hear the ACLU’s opinion today. By the way, this same mosque “had hosted internationally renowned Islamic hate speaker Khalid Yasin, whose controversial statements
include calling for the death penalty for gays and describing the beliefs of Christians and Jews as ‘filth.’”
¹¹

The Garland, Texas, shooting showed you what is under the surface in this country. Every sane member of the military in my audience knows what the battle really is. Ask any soldier who fought in Afghanistan or Iraq what they saw Muslims doing in the countries they were deployed in to liberate. Ask them and find out what terrorism really is. You don’t even have to go that far. Just remember watching people being set on fire while they are alive. Ask about the Yazidi women being raped as young as eight years old by these “peace-loving Muslims” in the Middle East. Ask about the kidnapping and the murders. Ask about all of these things and you’ll understand what the battle really is. You’ll understand that the event in Texas was only a spark in America. It’s a global war of attrition that has spanned a millennium.

Pamela Geller is not the problem. She’s the solution. The real problem here is cowardice. The real problem is not understanding that this is about freedom of speech, not about freedom of speech according to some. Geller may be a provocateur, but she did nothing wrong. She and those who participated in that event were peacefully exercising their right to free speech, in opposition to the murderous violence that occurred in France related to
Charlie Hebdo
and many others who have suffered or have been murdered because they dared to criticize Islam.

There is no excuse for violence simply because someone said something or drew something you find offensive. That’s not the American way. What’s next? Is it okay for the LGBT crowd to bomb churches because their pastors provoke them by speaking out against homosexuality? Is it okay for some to attack liberal churches because they promote abortion?

Of course not.