Rep. Michele Bachmann tells Newsmax that the financial reform bill recently signed into law is a “disaster” that will immediately have a negative impact on average Americans, and should be repealed if Republicans regain control of Congress. She talks of her plans for the new Tea Party Caucus in Congress and plans to probe the Obama administration.

A clear pattern of behavior has emerged over the last sixteen months. According to liberals, if you disagree with the their thinking, and if you disagree with the current administration, you are not only wrong, you are a “racist.”  The latest strike by the left comes from the NAACP, who has resolved that the tea party movement is inherently “racist.”   At its most simple, this is a direct attack on the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans.

The NAACP has long history of liberalism and racism.  If you are a conservative, including a conservative African American, there is no room for you at the NAACP.  If you have opinions that differ from the NAACP and the liberal establishment, and if you are African American, you are an “Uncle Tom,” a “negro,” “not black enough,” and “against our people.”  In other words, the NAACP fancies itself the thought police for millions of black Americans. Disagree with them and you will be ostracized and attacked.  You will be subjected to public humiliation and racist commentary from NAACP leadership. The message is clear; tow the line or pay the price.

But the NAACP does not stand alone in this regard.  There is a long history of the use of the race card on the left, and it has been pulled on people all across the political spectrum.  In recent memory, President Clinton was smeared as a racist by the Obama campaign when Hillary Clinton was running for President. It seems that anyone who disagrees with the far left, socialist policies of Barack Obama and the current administration is subject to the heavy hand of the race card.

The race card is generally played when all else has failed.  It was inevitable that it would eventually be used aggressively against the tea party movement. First, members of the tea party movement were called disgruntled voters, then Speaker Pelosi said our movement was nothing more than “AstroTurf” and laughed off as a flash in the pan that would disappear overnight.   Next the DNC relased an ad calling us an “angry mob.” Most recently, we’re being called racist.

All of these attacks have failed because they are untrue and the American people know it.  According to recent polling, over 49 million people are active members of the tea party movement (Winston Group, April 1, 2010).  Over 145 million people say that the tea party movement is a good thing for America (Rasmussen, June, 2, 2010).  The Obama White House and liberal interest groups are hitting the panic button as they read the weekly polls showing diminishing support for their radical big government issue agenda, and a weariness for the politics of division.

Like all movements, the tea party has its fringe.  President Obama’s domestic terrorist friends from the 60’s antiwar past never represented the Americans of good conscience who opposed the Vietnam war.  In a similar vein, the racist posters of a few at a Tea Party rally do not represent the feelings or behavior of Americans who believe in this movement.  

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would be proud of this movement.  He dreamed of a colorblind society.  The tea party is a truly post-racial movement.  Based strictly around the three simple principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free market capitalism, the movement is uninterested and uninvolved in the politics of race.   We are freedom loving Americans numbering in the millions who have come together to express their outrage against a government no longer of, for and by the people.  Standing together as brothers and sisters in the fight to return America to its founding principles, skin color, religion, social status, and even political party affiliation are irrelevant to the people involved in this movement.  These are the facts.  And these facts have already withstood sixteen months of liberal media scrutiny and bombardment.  

Today, the NAACP again brings up the completely falsified charges of racial epithets hurled at members of Congress during the debate leading up to the passage of Obamacare.   Widely reported as fact by the liberal media, even an offered reward of $100,000 to anyone who could provide documentary evidence proving the charges could not coax videotape, audiotape or a single witness out of a crowd of thousands present on Capitol Hill that day.   The race card; played again, and once again discarded by the American people.  

When Kenneth Gladney, a black conservative activist was brutally beaten by SEIU thugs at a protest outside of Rep. Russ Carnahan’s office, the NAACP and the liberal left refused to intervene.  To the contrary, at an NAACP press conference in St. Louis in May, Gladney was referred to as a “negro,” an “Uncle Tom,” and someone not worthy of the protection of the NAACP, because he’s working for the “other side.”  The NAACP has defended the thugs who beat Gladney, and at the press conference, money was raised for the defense of the “brothers.”  The race card played once again, this time in confusing fashion, against an African American who was deemed “not black enough,” and found himself on the wrong side of the NAACP thought police.

While I still hold on to the theory that The Daily Show host Jon Stewart is a progressive, he seemed to have put David Axelrod’s feet to the fire in reference to the Obama Administration’s leadership capabilities – or lack thereof. You be the judge.

The Obama administration has been holding behind-the-scenes talks to determine whether the Department of Homeland Security can unilaterally grant legal status on a mass basis to illegal immigrants, according to Fox News.

The source for this bombshell – which could ignite a national uproar given that a majority supports tougher laws against illegals – is an unidentified former Bush administration official who spoke with at least three people involved in those talks.

The issue was raised publicly by eight Republican senators who wrote to the White House on Monday to complain that they had heard the administration was readying a “Plan B” in case a comprehensive immigration reform bill cannot win enough support to clear Congress, according to Fox.

The White House would not confirm or deny the claim. But the former Bush official said the discussions are real.

“The administration at the very minimum is studying legal ways to legalize people without having to go through any congressional debate about it,” the source said, calling the senators’ claim credible. “Whether somebody pulls the trigger on that, that’s another issue.”

The senators — Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; David Vitter, R-La.; Jim Bunning, R-Ky.; Saxby Chambliss, Ga.; Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.; James Inhofe, R-Okla.; and Thad Cochran, R-Miss. — claimed in their letter that the administration was looking at extending what is known as deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States.

Get more on this devlopment by clicking here.

Move America Forward (www.MoveAmericaForward.org) the nation’s largest grassroots pro-troop organization, is calling on discharged General McChrystal, formerly in command of the American forces in Afghanistan, to come public with the true extent of the Obama Administration’s disengagement with the war in Afghanistan.

As the Obama administration fumes over General Stanley McChrystal’s comments in the upcoming Rolling Stone article “Runaway General,” the pro-troop group organization is expressing shock that the President of the United States can be disinterested and uninformed on the war against Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan.

“Now that General McChrystal is no longer part of the military chain of command, he is free to expose the mismanagement of the war by the Obama administration, which is what got him in trouble in the first place.” said Move America Forward’s Director of Communications, Danny Gonzalez.

“The focus of news media reports has been on the poor judgment shown by McChrystal is his Rolling Stone article, but the real important issue to Americans is the conduct of the war to protect us against Islamic extremist.  Our doubts and concerns about President Obama and his seeming lackluster approach to the war have been accentuated by the McChrystal revelations.  We hope that he would do a great service to the American people by elaborating on the frustrations that ultimately led to his ouster.

“In a time when America is at war, when the greatest threat to American security is Islamic terrorism, it is appalling and inexcusable that the Obama administration is preoccupied, uninformed, and disinterested in winning the war in Afghanistan. It’s now public that McChrystal was frustrated with Obama’s people who are getting in the way of progress in Afghanistan, and the American people deserve to know the truth. We implore General McChrystal to blow the whistle and go public with what he knows.” Gonzalez said.

Is bribery becoming Standard Operating Procedure in the Obama White House? As unanswered questions over the alleged bribe of Congressman Joe Sestak continue to mount, new allegations of bribery are starting to see the light of day. 

Is there a pattern of illegal behavior within the Obama administration? Is it possible that the Obama White House attempted to bribe a number of public officials on multiple occasions? 

The American people deserve answers because bribery is an impeachable offense.  Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” 

Fortunately, some of our elected officials are starting to heed your calls and are stepping forward.  On Wednesday, Congressman Darrell Issa sent a formal request to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel calling for an investigation. 

Make no mistake… our elected leaders are emboldened to move forward because they are hearing from patriotic Americans like you… and they must continue to hear from you because you give them the courage to act.

Just when you thought that it was only the mainstream media that felt threatened by conservative speech and thought, 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued a 47-page bureaucratic plan for the “Reinvention of Journalism” that outlines a series of taxes that would stifle free speech and silence conservatives.

MRC’s Vice President for Business and Culture, Dan Gainor, who helped break this shocking story, says the report contains the word “tax” 95 times and is part of “an extensive attempt by the Obama Administration to seize control of the press.”

And the conservative media are directly in the crosshairs of the Obama team. The FTC paper includes…

• A “Drudge Tax” on news aggregators like The Drudge Report who stand on the front lines of the struggle to expose the Leftist agenda.
• A “journalism division” of AmeriCorps — forcing taxpayers to pay the Obama Administration to train up the next generation of liberal journalists!
• A direct Journalism Bailout fund to “help pay the salary of every journalist” — YOU AND I will be forced to fund the liberal media!
• A 5% tax on consumer electronics (like the iPad)
• Possible taxes on cell phones, television and radio that would all be part of a massive $35 billion “Citizenship Media Fund”

This new FTC document combined with the FCC’s moves to impose a “Fairness Doctrine” pose an ominous threat to conservative speech that would empower the Obama administration to control the dissemination of information while imposing punitive taxes on ideological opponents. We simply must respond and say “NO!” to Obama’s efforts to censor, regulate, tax and control our free speech!

Next week, the FTC will be holding a workshop on the “Future of Journalism” as a follow up to the release of its 47-page “Drudge Tax” proposal.

The FTC is accepting comments in advance on next week’s meeting on June 15. Please go here to let the FTC know what you think about their “Reinventing Journalism” document and this effort to censor and tax conservative speech and our free speech rights in general. (Note: Although this site mentions a March 9 meeting, this is the link provided by the FTC for comments on the June 15 meeting.)

The last thing we need is a “free speech Big Brother”. If you value free speech like I obviously do, then sign the above petition. Otherwise, who is to say that the FTC doesn’t become the equivalent of Pravda?