Monday, July 16, 2012


I have coined a phrase that explains how President Obama's reelection team and the Democrats are fighting Mitt Romney. I call it OCCUPY SQUAWK STREET. How it works: Fill the media with anti-Romney "news" and controversial statements that anger conservatives and Republicans, and we will all forget to talk about the president's pitiful performance.

Remember, the Democrats' self-professed goal this election season is to DESTROY ROMNEY.  So much for the post-Gabby appeal for peaceful discourse made after the assassination attempt on her. In DESTROYING Romney, and avoiding discussing the president's poor record, Dems get us sidetracked, squawking about non-essentials -- throwing the Jello of speculation, suspicion and spurious accusations against the Media Wall, stories that stick just long enough to occupy the very limited mass media air space: Talk about Romney's dog. Romney's wife's wardrobe. Romney's venture capital activities at Bain Capital. And don't forget -- Romney is rich, out-of-touch and white. (Weren't past Democrat candidates rich and white? John Edwards. Al Gore. John Kerry.  Doesn't matter.)

Their goal is to stuff the air waves, fill the talk shows, Occupy Squawk Street as much and as long as possible with character-assassination and that old politics of personal destruction. With the aid of a willing media, anti-Romney stories are released to float about, poisoning the air just long enough to poke and prod Romney, and keep us talking and thinking -- about nothing. More air space is used as Romney rebuts, responds and denies.  But it's all diversion, fulfilling the Dems plan to destroy Romney cut by cut, innuendo by innuendo, with fickle, unproveable (or slow-unprovable) accusations.  Have you noticed how each story seems to fizzle away in the face of truth? 

Here's more Jello. Controversial rants by the President (telling business people that they need to pay more taxes because they didn't build their businesses or their wealth "by themselves") provide more distraction and chatter. Business people are up in arms, filling the air space with angry rebuttals to a Socialist-leaning president's obvious pandering. This all takes up more Squawk Space, keeping us from talking about this president's dismal, debt busting, high unemployment record. Like their sister occupiers -- those Wall Street anarchists and public park demonstrators -- we can only hope that the Democrats' Machiavellian strategies will soon be exposed and shamefully fade away.

Murdock Gibbs
Coppell TX

Thursday, August 4, 2011


My letter to Rush Limbaugh: Would you consider toning down the name-calling? On Tuesday, Aug. 2, 2011, you aired the audio of President Obama's speech hailing the debt ceiling deal. As the president spoke, you interjected the word "Jackass". That took even me, a Rush listener since the early 90s, by surprise. Does this kind of language really help promote conservatism? We conservatives will never convince black voters or liberals of the superiority of our ideas when we so recklessly reinforce the stereotype that we're mean-spirited, bigoted, racist, and so cavalier in our disdain for the nation's first (self-described) black president. The black voters who hear you and others use these kind of unnecessary and cruel invectives simply become more entrenched in their anti-conservative, anti-Republican, anti-white positions and suspicions. It only intensifies their resolve to support the man -- even defend the man -- when that perception is reinforced by insulting comments from leading conservative commentators like yourself.

Rush, c'mon..."Jackass"? Crude, pointless, condescending and...yes, mean. Let's focus on the man's policies, and not his person. It would be awfully big of you to apologize on air for using that word to describe the President of the United States.

Saturday, January 22, 2011


January 22, 2011

Dear President Obama:

Perhaps you will find it in your heart to address the greatest civil rights violation since American slavery: the mass murder of unborn children. It pains me to see you uphold a practice that is snuffing out the lives of millions of children. What's more, the disproportionate amount of black children being aborted should concern you: 40 per cent of all abortions are performed on a people that make up only 13% of the population. As a black American, I find these statistics alarming.

WHY, WHY, WHY do you consider an unwanted pregnancy as being "punished with a baby"? Is your partnership with Planned Parenthood, the nation's biggest abortion provider, THAT strong, sir, that you will fight to preserve a practice that is so inhumane and barbaric? Your policies have never shown the slightest sentiment or empathy for the plight of the unborn. Have you ever once publicly decried the suffering and death of mothers involved in legal abortions, or the macabre practice of abortion "doctors" killing late-term babies and even infants born alive.

Many Christians are praying that you -- a fellow Christian, will reconsider and somehow be moved to change your heart and mind to protect these precious innocents. It is a human rights issue because unborn babies ARE human. It's a civil rights issue because the rights of our most vulnerable and helpless citizens are being trampled upon as they are stabbed, sliced and diced, and suctioned out of the womb -- mostly because of our greed and selfishness.

In the spirit of history's advocates for the emancipation of black people, I pray that you use your office to give the unborn their rightful place as HUMAN, as CITIZENS, as AMERICANS: Please extend human and civil rights to those who have no voice -- America's unborn children.


Murdock Gibbs

Sunday, October 24, 2010


Is there any merit at all to the various polling data -- and even the expectations of both parties -- that the Republicans will make significant gains this Nov. 2 election season? Is there merit to the prognostications of pundits and politicos that Democrats are in for a major wake-up call on November 2nd?

And just why is that?

Is it because a bunch of ignorant voters have been fooled and "worked-up" by the angry voices of those "dumb", racist, provincial, lily-white Tea Party agitators... or does it represent something different: perhaps, more specifically, a wholesale rejection of the party (and president) that continues to rush the passing of bills and bailouts without welcoming input from anyone who opposes them? Millions of voices -- voters -- are declaring their opposition to the plans and measures that President Obama and his party have passed. They are tired of the tyranny of liberalism -- its unwillingness to listen, and its lack of transparency?

Is there NO MERIT AT ALL to the fact that President Obama's policies of "hope and change" are being rejected by an electorate that doesn't want full scale Socialism and Bigger Government to be the destiny of the U.S.?

And for not doing even more, this administration wants to blame Republicans for not cooperating, for being the "Party of No". Democrats have controlled BOTH houses, in addition to the Executive Branch. They can push and pass anything they want with their majorities. The only thing that has stood in the way is a handful of DEMOCRATS that joined the Republican opposition at times. Conversely, to look at the election landscape now and to listen to the ads, one can barely find a Democrat running for office who will dare stand with the President and profess support for his spending, national defense, environmental and social policies. You'd think they were running AGAINST Obama-Palosi-Reid.

When I listen to people who oppose conservative and centrist views, I often wonder whether they see ANY MERIT AT ALL in the sensitivities and positions of conservatives, Tea Party members and people from the Right. It's as if Liberals would rather be blind to the groundswell of people opposing their policies and methods, treating this rejection of their governance as more of an aberration than a real and passionate expression of dissent and thought-out opposition. Frankly, it's as if they have no clue.

Look at the polling data: 70% of the people don't want Obamacare and government mandated health care. About 70% of Americans are not in favor of the Ground Zero Mosque. Majorities in all states do not want gay "marriage". Most of America supports Arizona and other states protecting their citizens by enforcing illegal alien laws (but there's a president who "doesn't have the time" to visit Arizona and see first hand what the problems are). There's even a slim majority of Americans who are pro-life and not in favor of unfettered abortion, especially as a method of birth control. Most of us do not want high taxes and burgeoning bureaucratic federal agencies. But do you hear the President or members of his party acknowledge this glaring opposition, or give it a serious hearing in the making of policy? No.

Even liberal Socialist billionaire, George Soros -- the money man behind Media Matters, and big donor to The Center for American Progress and PBS -- calls this expected wave of Republican victory an "avalanche". But Democrats seem to think all the voter agitation is a "tempest in a Tea [Party] Pot", worthy of dismissal. And there's the president -- apparently oblivious to the hue and cry of the majority of the people, people he is supposed to serve.

But people -- like children tugging at Mamma or Daddy to please listen to them -- get angry. There comes a time in a free society when people confront their leaders and ask, "Don't our ideas, our desires, our majorities mean something?" Perhaps November 2nd will validate whether it's truly a teapot tempest or an angry avalanche of change.

Thursday, May 20, 2010


I heard a few Hispanics on the air today talking about how they went through the legal immigration process -- got the Green Card, worked and paid for citizenship, and how they resent the ones who are coming here illegally. They support the new Arizona immigration law.

As I watched the thousands of Hispanic protesters so willingly displayed on television, I asked myself, I wonder how many of these people have actually READ THE LAW? I suspect they are taking their marching orders from what people are saying ABOUT the law. And you gotta be suspicious when the hue and cry is coming from the President of Mexico (whose immigration laws would qualify as inhumane for those who would take the time to read them), from illegals, from folks connected to drug-cartels, from China, and from my good liberal friends -- useful idiots (in my opinion) of people who don't want to see enforcement of border security.

Read about how Mexico treats illegal aliens: How dare they criticize Arizona for trying to stem the tide of illegal aliens from coming into their state!

How many Arizona law-critics are simply being led (like Attorney General Eric Holder, like Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and like Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner) by what they heard or what they THINK the law says. All admitted on national TV interviews that they HAD NOT READ THE LAW.

Look at the president -- first, right out of the box, he says the law is "misguided," [one can only ask, had HE even read it], and now he says his Administration is going to look into the law and see IF...yes, IF the law is indeed discriminatory (misguided). His response reminds me of (his quick to judge before he got the facts) comment about how the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" with the arrest of his buddy Professor Gates.

The Obama administration is led by an agenda. Agenda trumps the facts. Agenda gins up emotion and loud protests, accusations of racism and the "potential" for violations of human rights.

And now CHINA is criticizing us because they are led to believe that the Arizona law could lead to possible human rights abuses. What??? China??? One only has to Google "China, persecution"* and see what REAL persecution looks like. Compared to the brutal atrocities of Chinese persecution, the Arizona Law is like sitting in a corner at school for punishment. The Chinese have a lot of nerve to even whisper that we might be violating "human rights"-- hypocrites! And again, these Chinese critics probably HAVEN'T READ THE LAW either!

Glen Beck read the WHOLE BILL on his show recently. He reported on what the bill actually SAYS. Protestors, White House officials and other Obamatons are simply parroting what they are SUPPOSED to say in opposition to something they are ignorant of. Ridiculous.

A large collection of news stories covering Christian Persecution in China.

PERSECUTION IN CHINA. While Falun Gong is practiced openly in 70 countries, today in its homeland of China it is subject to severe human rights violations.

BBC NEWS Asia-Pacific China's Christians suffer for their ...Nov 9, 2004 ... Human rights groups say that persecution against Chinese Christians is ... To an Evangelical Protestant like Mr Xu, joining one of China's


Tuesday, March 16, 2010


President Obama said this: Health care deserves "up or down vote". As a show of respect to him, you would think that a loyal Democrat Congress would proceed with that vote. But what if many of those voting don't want their constituents to know how they would have voted, what could they do to take cover? Enter the Slaughter Solution. We now learn that the House of Representatives can pass the bill without voting at all.

The Slaughter Solution is a procedure being named for Democrat House Rules Chairwoman, Congresswoman Louise Slaughter where the House would pass the Senate's healthcare bill "without a vote." "A television news correspondent said this morning the healthcare bill would be the biggest change in healthcare in 40 years, yet House Democrats are trying to pass it under a sneaky scheme. The Capitol Hill Publication Congress Daily AM reported that House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is preparing to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote. Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version." -A note from Senate Minority Leader, John Boehner.

Oh yes, President said in a speech the other day that with this new health care bill, premiums will fall 3000%. Do the calculation. Doesn't something normally equal zero when it falls by ONE hundred percent?

And then there's Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi; regarding the bill, she says, "It’s going to be very, very exciting. But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." WHAT? Let me read that again: "...we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." Even if you are in favor of the Health Reform bill, is this logical? Have you ever bought some high-ticket item and the salesman tells you, "You're gonna love this car. You can't see it yet, but trust me -- it's a beauty. No, I don't have any photos and, no, you can't test drive it, either. It's gonna cost you $100,000, and there's no money back guarantee. Just write the check. Trust me." If this happened to you, wouldn't you think that you were being snookered? Even if all these statements are gaffes, it seems that Democrat leaders are simply pulling out all stops -- no matter how idiotic, to push this nearly 3000 page, nearly one trillion government entitlement.

Stupid statements abound as they try to assure you and me and the unwashed masses that this is a good thing. So if it's such a good bill, why the scratching at the bottom of the barrel to get enough votes to pass it -- from your own majority party? Why all of the congressional deal-making (bribery), threats, and arm-twisting? Why the glowing assurances of passage, and projections of how much we're going to enjoy it? Remember that the tax increases begin almost as soon as it's passed, while most of the benefits don't kick in for four years! And how many of our representatives have even read it? The more time the public has to actually SEE what they are voting for, the less we like it. About three out of four Americans don't want it! This is no way to pass law -- especially not one so far-reaching and costly, and full of objectionable pieces of legislation. But "best" of all, Pelosi and company can pass it WITHOUT VOTING. Desperation in motion.

Monday, December 21, 2009


Use this holiday to give gifts that you don't have to pay for. Yes, be a free gift-giver. The Snuggies, gift baskets, bicycles, Wii games, Barbie Dolls, GI Joes, gift cards and fruit cakes all cost money. And what to buy, what to buy, what to buy? How often do we fret about which gift to buy? "Is this something she needs? Is this something he'll like -- or even use?" I think my brother still hasn't used that $20 Wal-Mart gift card I gave him three years ago. But it's the free gifts that provide the most lasting and life-changing fuzzies.

Consider giving truly lasting gifts, gifts that are guaranteed to be used because they feed the human spirit; they satisfy the thirst of the soul. They are timeless. These are the gifts that truly make a difference in people's lives -- and especially in the lives of people you care about. You can give these gifts all year long, and they don't cost a thing. Here are a few:

Give the gift of patience. There are times when we need to slow down, pause, and allow for the other person to be themselves. Give the teen who's learning to drive some slack. Wait for wifey to put on that last piece of jewelry before leaving for the party. Give that newby employee a little time to learn the ropes. Patience de-stresses everybody, gives people room to grow, creates a climate of acceptance. A Chinese proverb says, "If you are patient in one moment of anger, you will escape a hundred days of sorrow." There's power in being patient with other people, and even with yourself. In the words of G-rated entertainment ads: It's a gift the whole family will enjoy.

Give the gift of encouragement. There's an old saying: "A word of encouragement during a failure is worth more than an hour of praise after success." The world is littered with the demoralized and wanting souls hungering for encouragement. As much as I enjoy a good athletic competition, I get a little bothered when I hear fans boo players. Modeling such behavior with impressionable kids in tow creates the grievous impression that the ultimate goal in life is to please the maddening crowd. Encouragement is a gift that releases other gifts in the recipient: self-acceptance, confidence, peace of mind, and self-assurance. And it doesn't cost a thing.

Give the gift of listening. One of my favorite pithy T-shirt sayings reads, "My wife says that I don't listen to her...or something like that." We all have a need to be heard. When you give the gift of listening -- I mean, really listening -- you are telling the other person that they matter, that their ideas, concerns, frustrations, complaints and priorities really do matter to you.

Ever notice that angry feeling of disgust that you get when the fast-food clerk at the drive-through gives you pickles, onions and mustard on your sandwich, when you specifically told her, "No pickles, no onions and no mustard!" And you told her twice! Translation: Did my request really matter? Was anybody listening?

Who could you be a better listener to: your spouse, your son or daughter, your students, your friends, the people you work with? Listening is often simply the gift of silence, and sometimes silence speaks louder than words. Giving our undivided, uninterrupted, non-judgmental attention validates the other person. You're saying, "You matter to me." No pickles, onion or mustard? No problem. The gift of listening -- a beautiful gift, and it's free.

Finally, give the gift of kindness. Exactly how can you show kindness to someone? It takes a little thought. A nice note. A compliment. A pat on the back. A hug. I know that I feel good when someone shows kindness to me. Don't you? Aren't those unexpected acts of kindness toward you the ones that simply make your day?

My hero of kindness was Mother Theresa, a diminutive Catholic nun who dedicated her life to helping the poor. I consider her the "Queen of Kindness." She said, "At the end of life we will not be judged by how many diplomas we have received, how much money we have made, how many great things we have done. We will be judged by 'I was hungry and you gave me to eat, I was naked and you clothed me, I was homeless and you took me in.' Hungry not only for bread -- but hungry for love. Naked not only for clothing -- but naked for human dignity and respect. Homeless not only for want of a room of bricks -- but homeless because of rejection." She lived to be kind.

She reminded a world of admirers and visitors to her mission sites that helping Calcutta's poor wasn't necessarily everyone's calling. Instead, she encouraged everyone to show kindness right where they lived. In a memoir about her visit with Mother Teresa, singer-songwriter Maria T. Elias wrote, "This saintly woman's message was to tell people that it is not necessary to go to Calcutta or Beirut or any other foreign land. She told us to begin with our own family. Keep a special love kindled, so that the times together will be good. Many need to hear a kind word, feel the touch of a caring hand or hear the sound of a friendly voice.

"In families or neighborhoods, maybe right next door, there are people who are lonely. Visit them, perform an act of kindness. Mother Teresa said, 'Just a simple 'hello' can make a person's day brighter.' This feeds more than food. Thank God for your country, for your blessings, for all that he does for you. Use your gifts to help others." Then she said, "Bread lasts but a day; love is for always."

The physical gifts last but for a season, but patience, listening, encouragement, and kindness are gifts that last a lifetime. Any of us can give them. These are the gifts we all treasure. They're not cheap, but they're free.