Aug. 14, 2010 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
43:35
20100814_Hour_1
|
Time
Text
Welcome to the Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populous conservative radio program.
Here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host for tonight, James Edwards.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to another live edition of the award-winning Political Cesspool Radio Program.
I'm your host, James Edwards.
It's Saturday evening, August 14th.
We're coming to you live again from AM 1380 WLRM Radio in Memphis, Tennessee, our flagship station, but by no means our only affiliate, thanks to the Liberty News Radio Network.
And we're also streaming live online tonight at thepoliticalcesspool.org and libertynewsradio.com, where you can find our broadcast archives at the conclusion of each show.
Joining me for the first hour, as he does every week, Mr. Keith Alexander.
And Keith, I got to tell you, the reason I was chuckling at the beginning of the intro just a second ago is because we are going to be hard pressed, my friend, to make more news this week than we did last week.
Over the course of the past seven days, the political cesspool has been written about in no less than 105 newspapers around the world, not to count all of the blogs and radio shows that have been talking about our interview with Hutton Gibson.
We were also, a skit about us was performed by Jimmy Kimmel on the Jimmy Kimmel live show last Monday night.
And I even had a phone call from the producers of Entertainment Tonight asking if I would come on their show to talk about what went down with Mr. Gibson on the show a week ago tonight.
Keith Alexander, why don't you tell them what exactly it was and why we reached out to Hutton to begin with?
I've got to hand it to you and Bill, James.
You guys can sure get things stirred up.
Every time that you guys put your heads together, we either have, first of all, Eddie and you did the Paul Babu thing with the SB 1070 law in Arizona and got the state of Arizona in an uproar.
Then you and Bill topped that one by getting Hutton Gibson on.
You know, if we could find some way to turn all this media attention into money, we'd be millionaires.
We've got to go to some seminar that Morris D would hold that tells us how to convert all of this attention into money.
But then we're not in it for the money.
We're doing it because we're trying to get the message across to more and more people to wake up, let the scales fall from their eyes.
And Hutton Gibson, I mean, he really strikes a hot button with the media and with all of the typical enemies of the Cezzpool show.
We're very popular with our enemies.
Now, if we could find some way to get popular with people that might give us money, then we'd really have it all beat, wouldn't we, James?
Well, we would, Keith.
But as you mentioned, it's not unlike our adversaries at the Southern Poverty Law Center, our sole mission is not to make money.
It's to propagate the word and to spread the message and to honor our ancestors.
And that's why we reach out to men like Hutton Gibson.
We don't reach out, we don't reach out to Hutton because he's the father of Mel.
You know, I've known Hutton for quite a while now, and he's certainly a friend.
But his interview last week caught fire.
And I mentioned just some of the newspapers and radio shows and television outlets that were dogpiling him, as it were.
The Hollywood gossip sites were going berserk.
TMZ, radar online, Perez Hilton, I mean, Salt Lake City, Channel 4, ABC, the New York Post.
It was in Canada, Australia, some of the biggest newspapers in Europe.
The Catholic Church was going wacky, all because Hutton Gibson stood up and said something that we agree in, and this is why we invited him on the show.
He said that the leadership in the Vatican is subverting the church from within and actively facilitating its own destruction.
And Keith, that strikes a chord with us because we see and we lament on this broadcast the fact that all the institutions that were produced by our people by Western civilization are becoming corrupted and are being subverted from within, whether it be academia, the media, government, even the church.
That's why we reached out to Hutton Gibson because we share common ground with him.
We wanted to give him a platform to express his views.
This is the only platform, by the way, that Hutton Gibson will give an interview to.
I talked to Hutton a couple of days ago, and he just doesn't talk to anybody but us.
And anyway, that's why we reached out to him.
We find common ground.
And, you know, certainly we're excited about all the media attention, but that's not the reason we do these things.
We do it because Hutton Gibson is a patriot.
He is a man who stands for what he believes in.
He speaks his mind.
We need more men like him.
And as I said on the blog and our coverage of this incident, the people who are his detractors aren't fit to shine his shoes.
Well, Hutton Gibson, being the father of Mel Gibson, who the mainstream media and particularly the entertainment media seem to have an undying hatred for, and they're not going to rest until they can wipe him out, really gets the crazies out.
People like Perez Hilton.
I'm waiting for Howard Stern to put you on his show doing a naked interview, James.
But Hutton Gibson is both stimulating to listen to and he's alarming because this is a very intelligent man who's 90 years old.
He has lived through the transformation of America and of Christianity.
Now, Hutton Gibson is a devout Roman Catholic and he sees everything through the prism of his own religion.
But we see things in a broader context, James.
And what we have seen is that the Roman Catholic Church is not alone in having the old-time religion subverted by liberals.
Liberals have subverted the mainline Protestant denominations.
If you want that chronicled for yourself, you need to look up a book called The Empty Church by Thomas Reeves.
And he tells you, you know, verse and chapter starting in the French Revolution and moving forward, exactly how the mainline Protestant churches were transformed into, basically they've dropped the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and substituted for them the Gospels of Peter, Paul, and Mary.
Now, even James's beloved fundamentalist churches, what we call evangelicals down here, they're falling like dominoes.
We have now as heroes of the evangelical churches, people like Sean and Lee-Ann Tue, and they have just totally embraced the social gospel to the point that they have totally excluded the real gospel from their message.
And this is just, like James said, another part and parcel of the cultural Marxist long march through the institutions.
The long march through the institutions, unfortunately, hasn't just gone through the schools.
It hasn't just gone through the entertainment media or the news media or academia.
It has also gone through the churches.
And this is what Hutton Gibson sees very clearly, and he can really give you an insider's view of that transformation from a Roman Catholic perspective.
And if you want to read more about our take on the Hutton Gibson interview, last week's interview with Hutton, go to our website, thepoliticalcesspool.org.
Scroll back through the blog over the course of the last seven days.
We have four or five articles on there.
And visit Hutton's website, huttongibson.com.
Show him your support.
As I mentioned, I spoke with him a couple of days ago.
He was well aware that the media could lash out against him, and he's not concerned with it.
And of course, neither are we.
And he's excited that the word has been spread.
And again, so are we.
You know, our website has absolutely been flooded with new visitors who have come to know of our work as a result of the intense media coverage that our interview with him has received.
Many of them have signed up for our email list, and many of them have sent us emails to let us know that they stand with us and that they had no idea that such a courageous radio program existed.
And that's what we're here to do.
And we're very excited about that.
We're going to talk more about Hutton Gibson and the fallout from his interview in the third hour.
We're going to have a Hutton Gibson reprise with Winston Smith.
He'll be joining me for the second and third hour tonight as my co-host.
And so we're going to revisit everything that's happened with regard to the Hutton Gibson interview a little later on in the show during tonight's third hour.
But I tell you, Keith, and we're going to talk about this a little later on maybe around Labor Day when we do a political cesspool summer rewind.
But every month it's just been huge news for us.
Constant media attention is being lavished on this show because we're one of a kind, because we're courageous, because we don't back down.
And in June, July, and now August with Hutton Gibson, we have had worldwide media coverage dedicated to us, and we are right there where we want to be.
And I think when we ask for those donations, because this is a listener-supported program, we tackle controversial political issues, and as a result, we can't get corporate sponsors, even though we reach a massive audience.
So we rely on listener support to keep us going.
And I think when people can see this kind of return for their investment, it makes their willingness to give all the more.
We are getting the kind of media coverage that is reserved for people like Limbaugh and Hannity.
And we're going to talk more about it when we come back.
We've got to go to break right now.
Keith Alexander with me.
I'm James Edwards.
Big show coming up.
Reverend Ted Pike's coming up in a little while.
Going to be a good one.
So stay tuned.
We're going to cover some more issues when we return on the Liberty News Radio Network right after these words from our sponsors.
Don't go away, the Political Cess Pool, guys.
We'll be back right after these messages.
Jump in, the political says, pull with James and the game.
Call us tonight at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the Political Cesspool, James Edwards.
All right, my friends.
Welcome back to the show.
What a week it has been.
Keith and I touched on that briefly there in that opening segment of tonight's program.
Winston Smith and I will cover it in a little more depth during tonight's third hour.
In between now and then, Reverend Ted Pike will be on the radio program to talk about three of his most recent articles.
Of course, Reverend Ted Pike is a frequent guest on this show and is the director of the National Prayer Network.
And he has just hit back to back to back three articles that are just incredible.
He's going to be on to talk about each of them in just a little bit.
Don't forget, ladies and gentlemen, that my new book is out and available for purchase tonight, Racism-Schmeissism: How Liberals Use the R-word to push the Obama agenda.
If you do support our work and you want to make a contribution to help keep us on the air, why don't you do so in a way that will benefit you and your conservative friend or family member?
Buy my book.
Get a copy for them.
They're on sale tonight at thepolitical Supple.org.
And as I mentioned, all proceeds go to keeping this program rolling well into the future.
We're six years in, want to be around for about 60 more, right, Keith?
And that being said, the thing that really got Hutton Gibson going last week on the comment that the media latched on to was when Bill Rowland, my co-host, asked him, is the Catholic Church willing to address issues pertaining to homosexuality, or why aren't they willing to address issues pertaining to homosexuality,
particularly when this is something that is specifically forbidden by God, sodomy, homosexuality, and the fact that it's a contemporary political issue now more than ever with the overturn of Prop 8.
And of course, Hutton went on to say that the reason they don't do it is because half the people in the Vatican, including the Pope in his opinion, are homosexual.
And that's what got this story, that interview, you know, global publicity.
Well, that being said, Keith Alexander wanted to pick up on that and let you know where it all started.
And of course, it all started in 1954.
And he's going to connect the dots from then to now and let you know how the will of the majority in this republic has been overturned by judicial review.
James, we were talking during the break about Napoleon's famous comment, cynical comment, which was that God is on the side of the big battalions.
What Hutton doesn't understand and what we don't understand until you really start breaking things down is why the left, which is really a minority position, 20% of America at most, identifies themselves as liberal.
How does that 20% manage to control everything and how do they manage to get all of these changes made in our lifestyle, in our institutions that they want to against the vehement objections of the majority of Americans?
Well, this Proposition 8 situation is a perfect example of how the left does it.
And we want to break that down for you and let you see exactly how they manage.
You know, it was Winston Churchill who said that we'll fight them on the beaches, we'll fight them on the white cliffs of Dovers, we'll fight them in the villages and hedgerows, we'll fight them in the streets and alleys of London.
Well, that's the way the left fights.
Only they're not on the defensive, they're on the offensive.
And what they do, they break down the public consensus about how society should be run by legislative action, if that's possible.
But then many times their position is very unpopular.
So they can't get it done through the legislature.
Then they prefer to get it done by executive order.
You know, we have three big branches of government in the United States in the federal system: the executive branch, legislative branch, and the third, which Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Paper No. 78, said was the weakest and least dangerous branch is the judicial.
Well, the judicial branch is far from being the weakest and least dangerous.
In fact, none of the founding fathers ever got anything more wrong than Alexander Hamilton did when he described the federal judiciary.
The federal judiciary is the last redoubt of liberalism.
When they can't affect change any other way through referendum, you know, just look at Proposition 8.
They had a referendum.
They thought that the liberal state of California would certainly go their way and endorse gay marriage.
But even in liberal California, gay marriage is a loser when you pitch it to the population as a whole.
So what do they do?
They do what they've always done, beginning with Brown versus Board of Education.
They shop it to a liberal, friendly, leftist judge in the federal system, not the state system now, but the federal system.
And they get this liberal to dishonestly say that he's now reviewed the Constitution and something is in that Constitution that the last 200 years of judges in the Supreme Court and elsewhere have been unable to find, and that's tucked away somewhere in the First Amendment is a right for homosexuals to marry.
Surprise, surprise, as Gomer Pyle used to say on the Andy Griffith show or on Gomer Pyle USMC show back in the 60s.
They are, when they can't get their changes made any other way, they use the power of judicial review in a very cynical, unprincipled way.
And they started this, for all intents and purposes, with the Brown versus Board of Education decision.
Now, a lot of our paper-trained conservatives in America today, they don't want to go back as far as Brown versus Board of Education.
Instead, they like to go back to Roe versus Wade, but there would never have been a Roe versus Wade if there had not been a Brown versus Board of Education.
Both use the same technique to thwart the will of the people.
Brown was the first time that the court had made a ruling invalidating a policy, segregation in the public schools, that one, was experienced by just about all Americans.
Back in 1954, virtually everybody who wasn't a Roman Catholic had their children going to public schools.
And furthermore, racial segregation in the public schools, and you never guess this from listening to the liberal commentators that tell you all about the sainted decision of Brown versus Board of Education today.
Back then, racial segregation in the public schools was wildly popular, not just in the South, but in the Midwest and in any area in which there was a large population of blacks or Hispanics, particularly blacks back then.
We didn't have much of a Hispanic population back in the 50s.
In fact, we had Operation Wetback.
We had an American president, Dwight Eisenhower, whose reaction to growing numbers of illegal aliens from Mexico was to mobilize the armed forces and the immigration service and to rout these people out and drive them out of the country.
So much for the idea that we can't do anything about all these people.
But see, Brown versus Board of Education was the first time when they found that they could take something that was really unpopular, ram it down the throats of Americans, and make it stick.
That's exactly what's been done by this Judge Vaughan Williams in San Francisco, who apparently is a closeted gay.
At least that's what's being reported in all the mainstream media outlets.
He takes his predilections and turns it into a constitutional right.
And now the rest of society is backpedaling, trying to somehow find a way to overcome his decision.
This is right out of the liberal playbook, and you'll never see a more classic example of thwarting and undermining the will of the American people than this.
And of course, it all started with Brown.
We're going to let Keith Alexander continue his excellent opinion and analysis on how we got to hear from there when the political cesspool returns here on the Liberty News Radio Network, thepolitical cesspool.org.
I'm James Edwards, and I'll see you after the break.
The Political Cesspool, guys, we'll be back right after these messages.
On the show and express your opinion in the Political Cesspool, call us toll-free at 1-866-986-6397.
We've got a...
Welcome back to the show.
Keith Alexander was mid-stride in his excellent commentary, which is explaining in detail and very matter-of-factly why the left continues to trample our rights and how they're able to do it through judicial review.
And it all started back in 1954 with the Brown versus Board of Education decision and the subsequent decisions that came during the so-called civil rights era.
And I wrote about this on my blog last week at thepolitical Cesspool.org.
It's amazing to me that all of these Christian organizations, with whom I'm in agreement, I mean, they're right.
It's wrong that the courts can overturn the will of the people and say it's all right for two men to marry or two women to marry.
It's sick.
It's disgusting.
It's immoral.
It's wrong all the way around.
But what gets me about it is that they have the audacity to oppose this while saying it was okay for the courts to do similar rulings back in the 50s.
This is what I understand that they can't seem to understand.
You know, you can think, as I wrote on the blog, Martin Luther King and his crusade to make it illegal to recognize important distinctions between human beings for this.
Had the courts never thrown out laws against miscegenation, we wouldn't be having this discussion now.
Now, whatever your opinion on miscegenation laws may be doesn't change the fact that that should have been something decided by the various state governments and not by a single judge overturning the laws that were implemented by the people arbitrarily.
But since they got away with it then, they will continue to get away with it now, and they will continue to get away with it in the future until we do something about it.
And Keith, this was the discussion that you and I were having over lunch earlier in this week.
What can we do about it?
Obviously, the people can't go out and turn the judge out of office.
These people are elected for life.
Now, on the Supreme Court, at least, so, you know, we can now you would think, well, the state government will just ignore the ruling.
They could certainly do that, but to do so would be defying the federal government.
You know, the southern governors did it in the past.
It didn't work, but they tried.
And the reason it didn't work is they didn't take it far enough.
But nevertheless, the question is, we know why these people are allowed to get away with it because we let them get away with it in the 50s and 60s.
So why are they going to stop now?
This is something that works for them.
What can people like me and you do as just average citizens to try to restore the Constitutional Republic as our founding fathers intended?
I mean, never did they intend for black-robe tyrants to legislate from the bench.
Well, what we need to do, James, is we need to look back and study history because, quite frankly, until the Brown v. Board of Education decision, every chief executive, every president of the United States that was confronted by an attempted exercise of judicial review by a U.S. Supreme Court blithely ignored the Supreme Court.
The first instance was Marbury versus Madison in 1803, in which Thomas Jefferson basically just ignored the Supreme Court's decision, which again was the first recorded instance of an effort of the U.S. Supreme Court to say that they were the final word on what was constitutional and what was not.
The next opportunity for an executive to confront a U.S. Supreme Court trying to override either executive policy or legislative enactments of the U.S. Congress was during the Andrew Jackson administration when they passed the Indian Removal Act.
Well, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Indian Removal Act, which you've all heard about, you know, the famous Trail of Tears where the Cherokees and other indigenous Indians were moved out of what is now the American South, for the most part, and parts of the upper Midwest to places like Oklahoma, which is where it used to be the Indian Nation.
When he heard about John Marshall, the Chief Justice of the United States decision in the Indian removal case, his response was, John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.
Now, the real firebrand of the bunch was Abraham Lincoln, and this is the sainted Abraham Lincoln of liberalism, but this is a story about Abraham Lincoln that the liberals don't want to tell you.
Now, Abraham Lincoln's encounter with the Supreme Court was with Chief Justice Roger Taney.
He was the successor as Chief Justice to John Marshall.
John Marshall had held the position almost from the very beginning of the American Republic.
I think the first Chief Justice was John Jay, who was one of the great founding fathers, by the way.
Read his writings and you'll find out what I mean.
But basically from, I think, the Adams administration on, that's John Adams, not John Quincy Adams, John Marshall had been the Chief Justice, then Roger Taney took it over.
He, again, overturned a congressionally enacted law in the Dred Scott decision.
At that time, basically nothing was done to enforce his decision, but Lincoln wasn't the president.
Then, when Lincoln, Abraham Lincoln, was elected president, a case came before the U.S. Supreme Court called State X-Rel Milligan.
This was a case about the arrest and holding without habeas corpus of the entire legislative delegation recently elected to the Maryland legislature.
Maryland, of course, was on the northern side of Washington, D.C. Maryland sympathies in the Civil War trended towards the southern viewpoint.
In fact, once this legislature, newly elected, was sworn in, their first order of business was to vote to secede from the Union.
Well, Abraham Lincoln wasn't going to let this happen, so he sent federal troops in, arrested all of these newly elected legislators before they could get sworn in, and then held them for the duration of the war until 1865 in the holds of prison ships docked in the Potomac River in Washington, D.C.
They said, you can't hold us here without telling us what the charges are against us and without letting us go to trial.
So they brought a writ of habeas corpus and the federal courts denied it, the ones that were under the influence of Abraham Lincoln, and it went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court, led by Roger Taney, said this is an illegal act on the part of the president.
He's denying these people their right to habeas corpus.
The federal government, and that's again all that the Bill of Rights was originally intended to cover, and still to this day, at least among honest constitutional scholars, they'll tell you that that's all.
There's a case called Britain versus Baltimore in which John Marshall established that principle in a decision, but it's also clear from just reading the Bill of Rights.
But nonetheless, what happened was that when the Taney decision came down telling Abraham Lincoln that he had to bring these people to trial or free them, he sent or was on the verge of sending armed federal troops to Roger Taney's house to arrest him and throw him in the hold of a prison ship in the Potomac River.
Now, I guess luckily for Taney, cooler heads prevailed, but again, he just ignored the decision of the Supreme Court attempting to exercise judicial review.
The first time that there was an assertion of judicial review that the executive actually followed without any type of threat was Brown versus Board of Education.
And some people say that Dwight Eisenhower, being an old soldier, felt that when he heard an order, he had to click his heels together, salute, and obey.
But the truth of the matter is he was a leftist Republican, what they called back in the 60s a Rockefeller Republican.
And he probably had no great quarrel with the Brown decision.
And of course, the real teeth of the Brown decision was at Little Rock Central High School in 1957, in which Dwight Eisenhower sent federal troops or federalized troops, National Guard troops, with pointed bayonets into Little Rock to enforce the Brown decision on the hapless people of Little Rock, Arkansas.
Got to take a break right there, ladies and gentlemen.
Keith Alexander and James Edwards will be back with you right after these words on the Liberty News Radio Network.
You're listening to the political cesspool radio program, thepolitical cesspool.org.
Don't go away.
The political cesspool, guys.
We'll be back right after these messages.
We gotta get out of this place.
If it's the last thing we ever do, we gotta get out of this place.
Welcome back.
To get on the political cesspool, call us on James's Dime, toll-free, at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the Political Cesspool, James Edwards.
Coming up immediately after this segment at the top of the second hour, Reverend Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network will be joining us to answer a few questions.
The ADL says 80 million Americans are infected with anti-Semitism.
We're going to get Ted's take on that and more.
Is the ADL at war with Christianity?
We're going to ask him that.
So that's going to be an exciting second hour.
Winston Smith will be coming in to co-host with me as we interview Ted Pike.
And then in the third hour, we're going to be covering some more contemporary political issues and also revisiting the media attention, the incredible amount of media attention from entertainment tonight to newspapers in Ireland, India, the United Kingdom, Russia.
I saw a Russian newspaper article.
The only word I could read in it was political cesspool.
The rest of it was in that script that they used that no one can decipher.
But this is a worldwide media frenzy taking place as a result of Hutton Gibson's appearance on this very show last week.
Winston Smith and I will talk about that and more during the third hour with Reverend Ted Pike coming up in just a second.
But first, Keith Alexander, we're in studio right now here.
I'm sitting here behind the mic.
Keith Alexander is literally, I'm going to give you a play-by-play on this.
He's pacing the floor like a caged tiger because he's so excited to be able to break down what's going on as a result of judicial review.
We were going to talk about it from 1954 to present day.
I heard he got back into the Lincoln administration a minute ago.
He's digging deep into his intellect to really explain to you what all is going on here, what's all in play.
And he's going to finish that commentary right now.
James, you know, all of our mealy-mouthed mainstream conservatives like to go back to Roe versus Wade as the penultimate example of judicial review run amok in America.
But of course, the real bell ringer, the real progenitor decision for all of this was Brown versus Board of Education, which said that segregated schools were contrary to the 14th Amendment.
Now, how do we combat, how do we fight judicial review?
Because it is basically tyrannical.
You've got an unelected federal judge who is protected from being removed from office for anything other than high crimes and misdemeanors.
You have to go through a very lengthy and difficult impeachment process to get him out.
How do you cope with them?
What can we do?
Well, the people to cope with them would be our chief executive, the way that the chief executive did it throughout American history up to the point of the Brown decision.
If you have a chief executive, in other words, a president, that's not willing, like Dwight Eisenhower, to send armed troops with bayonets drawn in to enforce the Supreme Court's decision, you can just ignore it and it becomes a dead letter.
That's what happened in Marlbury versus Madison.
That's what happened in the Indian Removal Act case.
That's what happened with state X-Rel Milligan under Abraham Lincoln.
And that is what could happen today.
What you would do, what the rationale for it is this.
The President of the United States, like Andrew Jackson, could say, just like the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, I too have taken an oath to defend and support the U.S. Constitution.
And I see nothing in the Constitution that would justify this decision.
I therefore am going to refuse to enforce this decision because I think it oversteps the constitutional bounds of the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Period, end of sentence.
Again, it's the key to winning.
The key to winning is to get a president with a pair of cojones who is really a conservative, not one of these lackeys of the ruling elite class.
James?
Well, Keith, once again, I say it every week.
They probably think we've got a little button we push here in the studio that prompts my, once again, you've hit it out of the park.
But I mean, if this guy, if Keith, if you were in the major leagues, you'd lead it in home runs.
You would lead the major leagues in home runs, and you'd be making a lot more money.
And then you can donate to the show.
We got to get you in spring training here.
You've already missed it for this season, though.
Another excellent commentary.
And I'll tell you, you know, you don't hear this kind of stuff anywhere else but the political cesspool.
I mean, that's why so many people flock to this show because you get a breath of fresh air every week.
You get the kind of news you need to be hearing about, but is hushed up or distorted by the other outlets unless they are ripping off our ideas.
And Keith, you seem to think that the very biggest names in talk radio are ripping off the ideas of the political cesspool, which is okay with us because it's all about the message.
But still, a little credit never hurt.
Look, this week alone, I heard Rush Limbaugh talking about validation of your ideas, that you don't need the left to validate your ideas.
This is a theme that we've been going over for months on the political cesspool.
I guarantee that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and others, they either are listening themselves or they have idea men that are supposed to be feeding them ideas that are listening to our show and cribbing ideas from us and passing them on because we're having an influence.
Now, we really don't care whether we're getting credit for it or not.
What we care about is getting these ideas out here and changing America for the better.
Now, our topic for this last segment is black cities and the decline of America.
Now, this, of course, is something you'll never hear on another radio program in the United States, at least not one that has the prominence that we have.
Here's an article that was recently in the website of the Council of Conservative Citizens, our good friends, you know, headed up by Gordon Baum and Bill Rowland, who's with our show, is also the editor of their newspaper, The Citizen Informer.
Here's what it says.
Crime and welfare abuse has completely bankrupted majority black cities.
Across the United States, every city with a significant black population in America today is struggling to pay for both social programs and law enforcement.
Blacks use social programs at a rate five to six times higher than that of whites.
Blacks also stay on social programs far longer than whites.
Meanwhile, blacks commit crime in extreme disproportion to their numbers, causing white taxpayers to flee cities.
What is left is a bankrupt city that cannot pay for all the welfare abuse and high crime.
90% of all blacks will have been on food stamps at some time by the time they are 20 years old.
That's an alarming statistic.
Oakland, California is cutting police officers due to budget cuts.
Camden, New Jersey, the first major American city with a black elected mayor in 1969, has closed its remaining three library outlets, so it no longer has a public library.
East St. Louis is cutting police officers due to budget cuts.
Both cities, overwhelmed by violence and crime of a certain variety that have an eroding tax base, no longer are capable of maintaining an already porous infrastructure.
Food stamp usage sits at 40.8 million people in the United States now.
However, funding for this program is in jeopardy of being diverted to pay for other more pressing matters.
And this is their so-called friend, the Obama administration, and the Democrats.
Food stamp, excuse me, some Democrats are upset and advocacy groups are outraged over the raiding of the food stamp cupboard to fund a state aid bailout that some call a gift to teachers and government union workers.
Now, why is the Obama administration doing this?
It's very simple, as Alan Stein, who's been on our show numerous times, would say.
Teachers and government employees are, one, better educated than welfare recipients.
Two, they're organized.
They have a teachers' union.
There's not a union for welfare recipients.
Therefore, if one group of solid Democratic supporters really needs to be helped, and it comes down between welfare recipients and government employees, it's going to be the government employees that went out, and that's what's going to happen.
And that is what has happened last week in the U.S. Congress.
That's why Congress was held over from a summer break so that they could pass that particular law.
Now, the bill also requires that $12 billion be stripped from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, commonly known as food stamps, to help fund the new bill, prompting some Democrats to cringe at the notion of cutting back on one necessity to pay for another.
The federal assistance program currently helps 41 million Americans.
Now, see, we've got people, this is the first time in the history of America that we have more public sector employees in private sector, and they are disproportionately minority group members.
Again, the black cities and all the problems that come from them are what is dragging America down, financially and otherwise, James.
Thank you, Keith Alexander.
Give him a hand, ladies and gentlemen.
Whether you're driving in your car, well, you can do it a one-handed clap.
If you're at home listening on the computer, give him a two-handed clap.
Keith Alexander, the best in the business.
I'm blessed to be able to work with him each and every week.
Coming up right after this, Ted Pike will be our guest, Winston Smith, and I will interview him here on the Political Cess Pool Radio Program live tonight, Saturday.
August 14th.
I'll see you in a bit.
Hour number two of the political cesspool comes your way right after these messages.
Harve leaped to his feet and says, Some's got a hold on me.
Yeah, the day the squirrel went berserk in the first self-baptist church in that sleeping little town of Pastor Goober.
It was a fight for survival.
And that broke out in revival.
They were jumping, views, and shouting.
Hallelujah!
Well, Harve hit the aisles dancing and screaming.
Some thought he had religion, others thought he had a demon, and Harr thought he had a weed eater loose and his proven blues.
He fell to his knees to plead and beg, and the squirrel ran out of his britch's leg unobserved to the other side of the room.