Obama Shuts Down Terrorist Investigations Calling It Racial Profiling.

shutterstock_84125155

A former employee of Homeland security is blowing the whistle on Homeland Security. He claims political correctness and the Obama Administration is preventing  Homeland Security from investigating terrorist organizations. Why would political correctness stop the investigation of potential terrorists? This administration calls it profiling and discrimination against Muslims.

In a speech after the San Bernadino attacks, President Obama made a speech citing,

“We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam….If we’re to succeed in defeating terrorism we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate….. it is the responsibility of all Americans — of every faith — to reject discrimination.  It is our responsibility to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country.  It’s our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim Americans should somehow be treated differently.”  

These words from our President sound reasonable. However, when the same administration defies reason by shutting down terrorist investigations by Homeland Security, because he feels it profiles Muslims, then you must ask yourself whether he is acting in the true interest of the United States and it people. Has political correctness taken over common sense and trumped our safety? At what point does the personal feelings of a group of terrorists become less important than the slaughter of innocent Americans going about their daily lives.

In a recent report on the Kelly File, the facts about political correctness and its negative effects into the investigation of radical Islamic terrorism was revealed.

[Philip Haney’s job with HSA was to investigate individuals with suspected radicalized ties to terrorism. He had received a commendation letter for successfully tracking down 300 terrorists. When he noticed a trend of people with radicalized ties coming into the United States, he began looking into a collection of global networks that were infiltrating radical Islamists into the U.S. A year into the investigation, he was visited by the State Department and the Homeland Security Civil Rights Division.  They said tracking these group and individuals was problematic because they were Islamic groups and it was considered profiling. A memo was sent out denying any investigation tied to Islamic groups. As a result, his investigation was shut down.  Sixty seven of his records were deleted. Among those records were investigations into the mosque in San Bernadino which was tied to Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, responsible for the terrorist attacks in the same city. Haney said if his work had continued he may have been able to thwart the attack in San Bernadino.  A year ago he notified Congress and Department of Homeland Security about these issues, yet the investigation was not re-opened and the HSA retaliated by pulling him from his duties and revoking his security clearance.]

Under the Obama administration, we have seen the dismantling of intelligence in Iraq, an executive order banning CIA “enhanced interrogations” and the closing of “black Sites.  Under the Bush Administration, three suspected terrorsts were waterboarded and as a result divulged information on other terrorists responsible for  the 2002 bombings in Bali and on Al Qaeda leaders. While over 100 prisoners released from Guantanamo Bay have gone back to terrorism, President Obama is still determined to release the remaining prisoners and close Gitmo. Should the United States continue to “play by the rules” when our enemies refuse to do the same?

As all Americans have witnessed of late, President Obama has no problem working up a sweat over the gun rights of American citizens and has promised to pass, by executive order, strict gun laws bypassing Congress and our Constitutional rights. Still at the forefront is the administration’s view that Global warming is our biggest national security threat, and along with Bernie Sanders, and other Democrats actually believe that climate change is the main cause of terrorism today.

The real question is why President Obama has no problems calling out lawful gun owning Americans but still refuses to link self-professed Islamic terrorism to Islam. Now, he has gone so far as to shut down actual successful terrorist investigations because they happen to involve radical Islamic Muslims and calls it profiling. God help us all!

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Clearly The Pot Is Calling The Kettle Black!

88aa5a9708fe10faa3529b8420fc07aa

A Federal judge, James E. Shadid, a nominee of the Obama administration and the only Arab Federal judge in Illinois, was lucky enough to draw a case involving religious discrimination against Muslims.

Two Muslim drivers, hired by Star Transport, were fired for refusing  to transport alcohol as part of their job, and as a result were fired. They then sued the company for religious discrimination, supported by the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) and won a $240,000 settlement.

The question is not whether they were aware of the fact that Star Transport distributed alcohol, or whether or not there were alternate routes that did not involve alcohol. the real question is why the Obama administration supported this law suit?

We have seen over the past months, Christians persecuted and financially punished for religious objections involving marriage licenses and wedding cakes. When Kim Davis refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples citing religious beliefs, she was sued by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) on behalf of all homosexuals. As a result, Judge Steven L. Bunning ordered Davis to issue the marriage licenses, threatening to hold her in contempt resulting in possible jail time and monetary fines. In the end, the court released its opinion, leaving Davis with the option of resigning her office, finding a compromise or being held in contempt of court.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry awarded $135,ooo to Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer, a lesbian couple, in a law suit filed by them against a Christian mom and pop bakery who refused to bake their wedding cake because of religious beliefs. A Lakewood bakery in Colorado experienced two protests, a Facebook driven boycott and a discrimination complaint from Attorney General Eric Holder , for refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple because of their religious beliefs. This was also followed by the same results in cases in Gortz Haus,  Iowa,  Fleur Cakes in Oregon,  Victoria’s Cake Cottage, Iowa, Masterpeice Cakeshop, Colorado, as well as many others. A Methodist owned event venue in New Jersey lost its state tax exemption and is currently being sued for refusing to host a gay wedding in 2007. Even religious institutions are not allowed to make decisions based on their religious doctrines and beliefs.

In Houston the mayor, Annise Parker, issued subpoenas, demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons involving homosexuality, gender identity or the fact that she, herself, was a lesbian. If they failed to turn them over, she would hold them in contempt of court.

The Obama administration’s attorney admitted that the “right” to same-sex marriage as determined by the Supreme Court, would result in the loss of tax exempt status of anyone or any religious institution who refuses to acquiesce.

“The tax-exempt status of churches which stick with their traditional beliefs on marriage in the wake of such a ruling won’t be an “issue” for the left. Instead, their elimination will become a goal.” (Tom Blumer @ Newsbusters)

Recently, a flight attendant, Charee Stanley,  who converted to Islam after taking the job, refused to serve alcohol on a flight and was placed on administrative leave, by her employer. In response, Mrs. Stanley said,

“I don’t think that I should have to choose between practicing my religion properly or earning a living,” Stanley said. “I shouldn’t have to choose between one or the other, because they’re both important.”

When comparing the Davis and Stanley cases, we see Kim Davis became and remains the target of attacks and ridicule by Obama, Democrats and the mainstream media all while Mrs. Stanley is celebrated as a victim for hers.

President Obama  recently spoke at a Democratic LGBT gala and made it clear that the United States is a country where religious freedom is embraced and tradition is respected, but at the same time stated,

“We also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.”

Has the United States now become a place where ones constitutional rights are realized on the backs of other’s religious rights? Will the Obama administration and Democrats continue to teeter back and forth on the “rule of law,” as it pertains to their agenda?

How can the administration stand up for the religious rights of Muslims while persecuting Christians for their religious beliefs? Obviously, Obama and Democrats have become the pot calling the kettle black!

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Political Correctness, Not Critical Thinking, Is The Key To Our Demise!

shutterstock_322803332

We have all heard it before. Students at colleges and universities around the country are demanding that anyone who has a differing opinion than their own should be tarred, feathered, banned and removed from their sight.  Student groups claim that inviting anyone with a differing opinion onto their campus threatens their very safety or well-being. Sound ridiculous? Leaders at these educational institutions are listening to these demands  resulting in the creation of a generation that is single-minded, self-absorbed, and intolerant of others all while the same generation demands a voice, respect and tolerance from others.

What happened to “teaching our kids how to think and not what to think?”  This old adage is truly at the core of critical thinking and should be practiced at all learning institutions around the country. When a university or college stops exposing our children to differing opinions or ways of life, then we are doomed to live a life that no longer offers diversity, but demands that we all live, act and believe the same.

In a recent article by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt,  on the September cover of the Atlantic,

“In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection form words and ideas they don’t like and seeking punishment of those who give even accidental offense. This is disastrous for education and likely to worsen mental health on campus.”

“Today , what we call the Socratic method, is a way of teaching that fosters critical thinking, in part by encouraging students to question their own unexamined beliefs, as well as the received wisdom of those around them. Such questioning sometimes leads to discomfort, and even to anger, on the way to understanding. But vindictive protectiveness teaches students to think in a different way. It prepares them poorly for professional life, which often demands the intellectual engagement with people and ideas one might find uncongenial or wrong….the new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically.”

Can you imagine where the world would be if we all adhered to this thinking? Those who believed the world was actually round would have been ridiculed and Columbus would never have sailed the ocean blue. Other ideas that were ridiculed include the computer, the automobile, genetics, plate tectonics and the continental drift. If, throughout history, we all bought into this educational example of shutting down those who believe differently, the world would be a different place.

Where does this  “idea discrimination” originate? Dr. Richard Paul, Director of Research and Professional Development at the Center for Critical Thinking said,

“Many of our answers are no more than a repetition of what we as children heard from adults. We pass on the misconceptions of our parents and those of their parents. We say what we heard, not what we know. We rarely join the quest with our children. We rarely admit our ignorance, even to ourselves.”

Could this bashing of anyone who thinks differently and the polarization of ideas be contributing to the increased incidences of shootings around the country? Could this atmosphere of political correctness be giving offenders a justifiable reason to believe that those with differing opinions should be dealt with violently? If our children were taught to be open to others experience and opinions, could we, as a society, become more tolerant of others and in the end solve our own politically induced problems?

Universities and Colleges across the country should be rejecting the new status quo of bias and polarization and instead base their educational instruction on critical thinking.

A well cultivated critical thinker:

  • raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely;
  • gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;
  • thinks open-mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and
  • communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native ego-centrism and socio-centrism.

As a society we must reject this pattern that has been developing and spreading like a cancer throughout our educational system. If the United States wants to remain competitive in the global market,  if our young generation wants to be successful within the workplace, we need get back to common sense, logic and critical thinking and it should begin at home and within our educational institutions.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Is This Really The Democratic Party You Signed Up For?

 

url

Recently, Debbie Wassermann Shultz, the Chair of the Democratic Committee, was asked the difference between Democrats and Socialists. She was unable to answer the question;  not once, but twice. Why? Could it be that there is no difference?  I can remember a time when any Democrat would have been insulted to be called a socialist. Now there seems to be pride associated with the label. Thousands of Democrats have turned out to support Bernie Sanders for President even though he is a self-professed socialist.

What is a socialism and why has the Democratic party aligned itself with this destructive form of government? Webster’s definition is as follows:

Socialism

noun so·cial·ism \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\: a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies. Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

Are Democrats really lobbying for the government to take complete control of  all businesses and private property?   Are private citizens really considering supporting a candidate that supports socialism for the United States?

As history has proven to us again and again, government is not capable of running a profit-making entity nor successfully choosing those businesses that will succeed. They have tried and continue to try, but have proven over and over to be unsuccessful. The Obama administration gave millions of taxpayer dollars to green companies, though loans and stimulus monies they thought could succeed. As of 2014, 32 have gone bankrupt and taxpayers have lost over $3 billion to the bad choices by government. How can we ever forget the Obamacare website which, alone, has cost taxpayers over $2 billion. A lack of government awareness and acumen has also resulted in the hacking of personal records of millions of Americans, with no end in site, yet they want to take control of all American’s healthcare information and force us into a one payer healthcare system. The embarrassing failures of  the Veterans Administration, the IRS, and other government agencies that have wasted billions of taxpayer dollars  continue to fail and still refuse to fire or reprimand those who approved, caused or encouraged the failures. Add insult to injury, the Obama administration, without any real business success or experience  has already imposed over 21,000 regulations on small business, with more promised to come in 2015.  The majority of which were imposed without the consent or notification to Congress.

Some say Democrats only want the government to care for and give a voice to women, children, the elderly, and those who are incapable of taking care of themselves. But is that who they are truly supporting today?

Let’s look at caring for those without a voice, those who are definitely our most vulnerable citizens of the United States. Babies. Democrats are now supporting the right of mothers to abort their babies up to and including nine months of gestation.  They claim that life does not begin at conception and in fact does not count until the baby is actually  born. However, in a recent interview with Steven Crowder, a political commentator, Abby Johnson, an ex-Planned Parenthood Director  explained  why she left her job and changed her opinion on abortion. She claims that one day, a new doctor wanted to use an ultrasound machine to assist him with the abortion, and asked her to assist him,

“My job with to hold the ultrasound probe on the woman’s abdomen so he could see what was going on during the abortion, and I watched a 13 week old baby fight and struggle for his life during that abortion procedure, and I knew then that I had been lied to. I knew that because of that, I had, in turn, lied to thousands of women who had come through my facility.”

We have seen multiple videos showing Planed Parenthood discussing the dismemberment and sale of aborted baby organs and body parts for profit.  Is this really giving a voice to our most vulnerable citizens? Democrats support a woman’s right to have an abortion though nine months of pregnancy but since when does the law allow anyone to take the life of another human being in order to accommodate their own lifestyle or to simply stamp out what they consider an inconvenience? Even in the light of the atrocities of Planned Parenthood dismembering and selling baby parts for profit, Democrats still refuse to stop taxpayer dollars from flowing freely to an organization steeped in illegal behavior. The Department of Justice refuses to investigate their behavior but instead have decided to investigate the company shining the light on their despicable behavior. When a vote to defund Planned Parenthood was raised in the Senate, every Democrat, except two, voted to continue forced taxpayer funding of this despicable, illegal behavior, claiming it takes healthcare away from women. However, the funding of women’s healthcare still flows freely to every other organizations offering free, and legal healthcare to women who need it.   Harry Reid and Elizabeth Warren accuse Republicans of losing their moral compass and their sanity for objecting to this horrific behavior. Who are these people and do they really  represent the new Democratic party and their new vision the United States?

What about a voice for our Veterans? These men and women have fought, sacrificed their families and their lives to give all Americans the freedoms we enjoy.  Yet the government seems incapable or unwilling to do what is necessary to fix the VA which has abused their power and wasted taxpayer money by refusing to offer the services our Veterans have earned and the lack of said services which have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of our wounded veterans. Obama and Democrats have fostered an environment within the United States that encourages disrespect and abuse of our veterans.

So who is this new Democratic party truly fighting to support?

They trust  and support Iran on its quest for Nuclear weapons while refusing to trust our own military with carrying weapons on base. even stooping so low as to charge an officer for firing his weapon while trying to  disarm a terrorist in Chattanooga.

They trust and support illegal immigrants, even to the detriment of those who have jumped through all our hoops to become legal citizens. We all know there are good and law-abiding immigrants who have come into the country illegally simply looking for a better life. But how are we to determine who is coming into the country for a better life or who is here to escape prosecution for crimes within their own country, or to sell drugs within the United States or to do us purposeful harm? We can’t. Our borders are porous and our government, under Republican and Democratic rule, have refused to secure our sovereignty. However, under the Obama administration and Democrats, our immigration laws currently on the books are not enforced, and they have threatened those who  follow the rule of law with law suits and the withdrawal of federal funds. They support sanctuary cities that protect criminal illegals who have killed innocent Americans, and continue to  offer up driver’s licenses, homes, education, healthcare and now the vote to illegals all while forcing “we the people” to pickup the tab. Now, a California city is even appointing illegals as city commissioners. Where has the common sense gone.

Democrats and the Obama administration have refused to call out ISIS as Islamic terrorism while persecuting Christians within the United States.  The government has allowed other countries to make their fortunes trading within our borders, while refusing to reciprocate. We have had our economy destroyed, our sovereignty ignored, our jobs killed, our hard-earned dollars stolen and spent against our will, and our freedoms taken. We are required to follow the rule of law all while the political elite refuse to tell the truth, spin the facts to confuse the masses, and under the auspices of security force us to forego our privacy and then force us to pick up the tab.

Is this really the future you want for the United States? Is this truly the Democratic party you signed up for?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The United States Under Obama: A Criminal Haven For Our Enemies!

shutterstock_175527044

 

President Obama and Secretary of State, John Kerry agreed and signed a deal with Iran. Although just yesterday, Iran citizens and their leader were burning the American flag and shouting death to America and death to Israel. Why would our President and Secretary of State, who are in charge of protecting the American citizens agree to such a bad deal? Because they believe,

“Iran has the right to a peaceful Nuclear program”- John Kerry

We have seen this administration literally slam the only democratic country in the Middle East, and our ally, Israel. Officials in the White House have called Netanyahu a “chickenshit,” used taxpayer dollars to oust Netanyahu out of office, and even refused to meet with him while visiting the United States.  However, while Iran screams death to America and Israel, our fearless leader signs a nuclear deal with Iran that literally sets them up to have Nuclear bombs within 5-15 years.  Nuclear bombs that could literally destroy Israel and the United States and end the very lives of our children and grandchildren.

Back on the home front, the Obama administration has refused to enforce our immigration laws and as a result, taxpayers on the hook for homes, food, education, and healthcare for all illegals and their families residing in the United States. Our school system is overcrowded, communities have exceeded budget constraints and are going broke trying to educate and pay for the millions of dollars required to house and educate illegals within our communities.  Local governments were never consulted before planes, trains and automobiles rolled into their towns releasing illegals into their communities. All under the blanket of protection of President Obama.

This administration has also released hundreds of thousands of illegal criminals back into our communities with devastating results. Thousands of Americans have been killed because of the release of these criminals. The most recent being Kate Steinle, 31 and an expectant mother was gunned down by an illegal immigrant felon who had been deported 6 times for criminal behavior. A 13 year old girl was kidnapped and sexually assaulted by an  illegal in Florida. Sabine Durden’s son Dominic was killed by a drunk driver, also an illegal alien. The families of Jamiel Shaw Jr., Don Rosenberg, Lupe Moreno, and Brenda Sparks, are just a few of the other families that have lost loved ones because of the actions of illegals in the United States.  Yet President Obama has remained silent about these deaths all while stepping up to the plate and attending funerals of criminals killed by police, hyped up by the press as white on black hate crimes.

Obama wasted no time holding a press conference claiming Treyvon Martin could have been his son before the trial had even begun in the Zimmerman case. He wasted no time in sending three White House officials to attend Michael Brown’s funeral, who was killed while trying to take a police officer’s gun after attempting to rob a convenient store. That was three more than were sent to attend former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s funeral last year and none were sent to the funeral for Maj. Gen. Harold Greene, the highest-ranking U.S. military officer killed in combat since the Vietnam War.  The Obama administration devoted considerable resources to the Michael Brown shooting and sent Attorney General Eric Holder to Ferguson, as well as dozens of investigators prior to any of the facts being revealed. However, the Obama administration refuses to comment or offer condolences to the family of  Kathryn Steinle, whose death was a direct result of Obama’s refusal to enforce United States deportation laws.  Although the White House claims it does not have the time to comment on all victims of crimes, Obama found ample time to meet with four convicted drug felons in order to support his release of 45 prisoners. And let us not forget the phone call he made to Sandra Fluke to make sure she was okay after negative comments were made regarding her snit fit over a Catholic University refusing to pay for her birth control.

How can any of us forget President Obama’s condescending comments about Republicans who were demanding our border be secure? President Barack Obama noted the steps taken by his administration to strengthen border security, but said Republicans in Congress were never satisfied and mocked that they will want a “higher fence” and then “a moat,” and then “alligators in the moat.”They’ll never be satisfied. And I understand that. That’s politics.”

However, if our borders were, in fact, secure, as Obama claims, how did all these convicted felons return to the United States after being deported time after time after time? Now add insult to injury, Democrats are pushing to not only give driver’s licenses to illegals but the right to vote in our local and national elections. Are the lives of American citizens really expendable in order for Democrats to gain more votes?

At what point will the President of the United States start  taking the necessary steps to protect the citizens of the United States, and our sovereignty? At what point will our Congress take the necessary steps to stop the actions of Obama while he does everything within his power to protect, support and empower our enemies?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Marriage: A Ceremony Complicated By Government Interference

shutterstock_130862363The Supreme Court has ruled that gay marriage is the new norm.  But the real question is, should the government have any say in what constitutes marriage at all? What if there was a way to stop the controversy? What if we took government out of the business of marriage completely?

We have seen, over the past 6 years, government remove any signs of “Faith” from our schools, our government offices, our memorials, our military and our foreign policy.  But why then, are we allowing the government to make a decision about what most believe is a religious ceremony?

How can a government who claims to support the “freedom of religion,” threaten to take away tax exempt status and any and all government benefits due under the law, because religious beliefs don’t align with the government’s new regulations or interpretations of the law? Are we now going to allow our government to define and regulate our religious doctrines? Hillary Clinton and President Obama have both suggested that religious organizations and believers need to change their views regarding marriage and abortion. However, they don’t seem to understand that our religious beliefs come from God not the government and therefore cannot be regulated or mandated.

How did the government get involved in marriage in the first place?  In an article by Stephanie Coontz, titled “Taking Marriage Private,” she says,

The American colonies officially required marriages to be registered, but until the mid-19th century, state supreme courts routinely ruled that public cohabitation was sufficient evidence of a valid marriage. By the later part of that century, however, the United States began to nullify common-law marriages and exert more control over who was allowed to marry.

By the 1920s, 38 states prohibited whites from marrying blacks, “mulattos,” Japanese, Chinese, Indians, “Mongolians,” “Malays” or Filipinos. Twelve states would not issue a marriage license if one partner was a drunk, an addict or a “mental defect.” Eighteen states set barriers to remarriage after divorce.

In the mid-20th century, governments began to get out of the business of deciding which couples were “fit” to marry. Courts invalidated laws against interracial marriage, struck down other barriers and even extended marriage rights to prisoners. But governments began relying on marriage licenses for a new purpose: as a way of distributing resources to dependents. The Social Security Act provided survivors’ benefits with proof of marriage. Employers used marital status to determine whether they would provide health insurance or pension benefits to employees’ dependents. Courts and hospitals required a marriage license before granting couples the privilege of inheriting from each other or receiving medical information.

So in history, marriage was not a complicated thing, until Uncle Sam decided to regulate it.

The word marriage should be replaced with “unions,” in the eyes of the government. Unions between two people who want to spend their lives together. Ceremonies then are chosen based on personal or religious beliefs and/or preferences. No ones belief system trampled or punished.

Today, some “relationships,” may have nothing to do with a life long commitment, love, or even children, but a necessity of life. In order for the government to keep track of unions for beneficiary information, why not apply for a “benefit distribution license.” All Americans would then have the right to determine who can and will receive the benefits they have worked for and earned, without complicated regulation by the government. Whether it be a husband, wife, sister, brother, cousin or friend. As we have all seen, the more government becomes involved the more complicated it becomes and the more regulations it requires.  Therein lies the problem…government interference.

Government cannot continue to step on the rights and beliefs of others while enforcing laws that they conveniently  label as “tolerance,” when it is anything but tolerant. Those who believe in gay “marriage” cannot force those who believe in traditional marriage to perform gay marriage ceremonies, and a right to a union of your choice should not morph into a mechanism to destroy those who believe differently.  How can anyone who has fought for their rights be content to strip others of their rights in order to realize their own?  Ben Carson asked a very relevant question,

“What position can a person take who has absolutely no animosity toward gay people but believes in traditional marriage that would be satisfactory to them?”

My answer would be to take government out of the equation and offer up “Civil Unions,” “Free Choice” and “Benefit Distribution Licenses.”

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Full Disclosure For All!

shutterstock_144659312

Our government has pushed food labeling to the extreme. Demanding that calories, fat, sugar and other ingredients be fully visible to the public in order for them to be able to make informed decisions about the food they eat. But what about informing the public about the news they receive on a daily basis? Does the public deserve the same transparency about their news sources that the government is now demanding from food manufacturers and restaurants?  After all, if how the public is informed  will affect the way this country is governed, shouldn’t the they be informed what political party a news anchor, reporter or station supports before they get their daily dose of political propaganda?

Have you ever wondered about the news anchor or the station that you watch on a daily basis? Do you know the political party of the owner of the news station you listen to on a daily basis? Do you ever wonder whether the political leanings of reporters actually affects the news they report? When a nightly news anchor choses the stories they report on a daily basis, do they choose them or alter them according to their political leanings? Does the public now receive the news in a completely unbiased format? We have all seen the political polarization that has intensified in this country over the last several years. Lines have been drawn between friends and family, relationships strained, friends lost and unfriended on Facebook over political opinions and leanings. But what about the very people who are supposed to inform us, without personal feelings, about the most important events happening around us on a daily basis?

Did you know that all journalists are required to follow a Code of Ethics? As part of these ethics, news anchors are supposed to  “distinguish between advocacy and news reporting,” while simultaneously “seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues.”  But, is this what they do today? Are you actually receiving a fair and comprehensive account of the news or are you receiving political propaganda and half-truths according to the political leanings of the station and reporter feeding you the news on a daily basis? Are they using the news as a platform to further the political agenda of the party they support?

The American people used to count on the press to act as a check and balance with our political leaders. To question motives, decisions, actions and ethics. Would President Nixon have resigned  because of Watergate had Bob Woodard and Carl Bernstein not investigated and exposed his illegal actions? Has it become obvious that this era of reporters and so-called journalists no longer honor their ethical responsibilities over their personal beliefs and views?

As we are now headed into a big election year, 2016 stands to be the most important election this country has seen in years. It is not only about which party will lead us the next four years, but which direction this country will be headed.  The Democratic and Republican parties have chosen polar opposite directions in which they believe the country should be headed. It is imperative that the public be fully and correctly informed about the platforms that each party supports. It is imperative that the public be fully and correctly informed about the actions the Democrats and Republicans have taken and will take in order to follow the platforms they support and further the agenda they have chosen to follow.  So should we, the people, be given full disclosure about the very people and stations that deliver the news?

George Stephanopoulos:  Host of Good Morning America and This Week with George Stephanopoulos. George is a Democrat, and served as communications director for Bill Clinton and later became his White House communications director.  It was recently discovered that he donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation all while he grilled Peter Schweitzer on his recent book, Clinton Cash, which casts a shadow of doubt on the source and use of  Clinton charity funds.

Christiane Amanpour: Anchor CNN. Christiane is a Democrat and is married to former US Assistant Secretary of State, James Rubin, a democrat and an informal adviser to Hilary Clinton, presidential candidate.

Chris Cuomo: Democrat and former host of Good Morning America, 20/20 and currently CNN’s morning show, “New Day.” Chris’s father, Mario Cuomo was the former Democratic Mayor of New York. His brother, Andrew Cuomo is the current Democratic New York Governor.

Brian Williams:  Anchor ABC and Democrat. He began his career as a White House intern under Jimmy Carter. Recently, he was suspended for 6 months due to fabricated news stories.

Savannah Gutherie: Co-anchor of the Today Show,  and co-anchor of the MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown,  Savannah is currently married to Democratic political and communications consultant, Michael Feldman.

Rachael Maddow: Anchor of the Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. A 2011 Hollywood Reporter profile of Maddow said that she was able to deliver news “with agenda, but not hysteria.” A Newsweek profile noted, “At her best, Maddow debates ideological opponents with civility and persistence… But for all her eloquence, she can get so wound up ripping Republicans that she sounds like another smug cable partisan.”

Bill O’Reilly:  Anchor of the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News, a conservative station, is a registered “independent” yet a traditionalist. He is married to Maureen McPhilmy, a public relations representative.

Megyn Kelly:  Anchor of the Kelly File on Fox News considers herself to be a moderate and reasonable. She often speaks in ways that run counter to Fox’s image. She is married to Douglas Brunt, who is a full time writer and novelist.

Did you know?

  1. ABC News President, Ben Sherwood, is the brother of Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall, a top national security adviser to President Obama.
  2. CNN’s deputy Washington Bureau chief, , is married to Tom Nides, who was deputy secretary of state under Hillary Clinton.
  3. Former White House press secretary, Jay Carney’s wife, Claire Shipman, is a veteran reporter for ABC, and currently is the senior national correspondent for Good Morning America.
  4. NPR’s White House correspondent, Ari Shapiro, is married to Michael Gottlieb, who is currently employed at the Obama White House counsel’s office.
  5. Michele Norris of NPR’s “All Things Considered,” is married to Broderick Johnson, who worked for Senator John Kerry’s presidential campaign and then moved on as an unpaid adviser to Obama’s campaign in 2008, and full-time advisor in 2011.
  6. The Post’s Justice Department reporter, Sari Horwitz, is married to William Schultz, the general counsel of the Department of Human Services under the Obama Administration.
  7. David Rhodes, CBS news division president is the brother of Benjamin Rhodes, a key foreign policy specialist under Obama. Both David and Benjamin also work at the NSC on foreign policy issues directly related to Benghazi.

Let’s go even further and disclose that only six corporations own and control the majority of mass media outlets in the United States.

  1. Disney
  2. CBS Corporation
  3. News Corporation
  4. Viacom
  5. Time Warner
  6. Comcast

So what happens when a news story involves bad publicity for one of these companies, or goes against the political agenda they are pushing? Could the story be shut down or underplayed in the media? The Telecommunication Act of 1996, signed into effect by then President Bill Clinton, enabled this handful of corporations to expand their power and enabled tighter control of information. Chris Hedges argues that corporate media control “of nearly everything we read, watch or hear,” is an aspect of what political philosopher Sheldon Wolin calls inverted totalitarianism. This is defined as a situation “where every natural resource and every living being is commoditized ad exploited to collapse as the citizenry is lulled and manipulated into surrendering their liberties and their participation in government through excess consumerism and sensationalism.”

As the sources for all our news gets smaller and smaller, and the majority seemingly controlled by one political faction, it is time to demand full disclosure before every news cast so the public is truly informed who is spoon-feeding them their news for the day.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The Chains of Government Strengthens as our Morality Weakens”

imgres

 

“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”- Benjamin Franklin

What has happened to the United States? Many say that it is a natural progression that is inevitable, but is it actually the breakdown of our morals, our ethics, our family structure and our school systems? Is it the inevitable “chains of government,” that have slowly but surely bound us with the very freedoms we claim to embrace?

In the name of progression, we have thrown out the very things that made this country great. Our leaders have shunned the very thought that the United States is a Christian Nation and our freedoms are slowly being taken from us on a daily basis. Government of the people, by the people, for the people, exists no more!  We are now being ruled by the political elite who have adopted  “political correctness,” as the new rule of law.

Writer Malcomb Muggeridge (one time editor of Punch magazine) wrote,

“It is difficult to resist the conclusion that 20th century man has decided to abolish himself . Tired of the struggle to be himself he has created boredom out of his own affluence, impotence out of his own erotomania, and vulnerability out of his own strength, He himself  blows the trumpet that brings the walls of his own cities crashing down until at last having educated himself into imbecility, having drugged and polluted himself into stupefaction, he keels over, a weary old brontosaurus, and becomes extinct.”

In a recent speech, Christian apologist, Ravi Zacharias,  speaks of the progressive movement and secularism.

“It proclaims the gospel [bible], as the last hoorah of an antiquated outlook, to a generation who is intellectually unkept, morally unzipped and volitionally uncurbed. They reveal their sickness of soul by derogating terms like morality, piety, family, work, patriotism, born again, theology , evangelical and christianity. They dismiss [the bible] as middle class hedonism, declaring it intellectually inadmissible while meanwhile, they espouse a life that neither reason nor conscious nor spirit can support or condone……”

Is Christianity so intimidating that our government must stop it at all costs? Why does the progressive movement so determined to redefine our morals and replace them with a sense of self-importance with no sense of shame or responsibility? Is the United States truly a autonomous culture? Do we really respect the right of everyone to believe as they choose? Live and let live? Although we pride ourselves as being autonomous,  has it become a bait and switch society?  We are told that we have freedom of religion and freedom of speech, however, the moment our views do not fit the dialogue taught by the progressives, we are forced, through new government laws and regulations, to change our beliefs. If we are truly an autonomous culture, we must be mutually respectful and civil towards others views and life choices.  However, we are now at the mercy of political correctness which is quickly becoming forced integration.

Recently, Fairfax county in Virginia voted to allow transgender bathrooms in our schools and our communities. This is becoming the norm in cities and states across our nation. Is this progression, or does this fall under the definition of a free society? If an individual has been born with the desire to be a different gender, should we force society to acquiesce to that need? Should our government decide at what age our children should, learn about, experience and accept the definition of transgender? Does this infringe on the freedoms of parents to make a decision regarding the age appropriateness of the subject? Have we taken “freedom” too far? If you choose a lifestyle, you are free to live it. However, should we force everyone to accept it and embrace it?  This is where our society has taken a turn away from common sense. Must we now label bathrooms with every sexual preference regardless of how it infringes on other’s rights?  Will they be labeling bathrooms with a long list of those who are allowed to enter at their own risk? What happened to the simplicity of “Men” and “Women” bathroom signs, and allowing the individual to decide which applies to them? Why must we label every sexual preference on our bathrooms and then force society to embrace it? What is next?

Should we rule that pedophilia is no longer a sexual deviation, but sexual liberation? Believe it or not, progressives are actually debating this issue as we speak.

In an article by The Guardian, “Pedophilia: bringing dark desires to light,” it says,

“The reclassification of pedophilia as a sexual orientation would, however, play into what Goode calls “the sexual liberation discourse”, which has existed since the 1970s. “There are a lot of people,” she says, “who say: we outlawed homosexuality, and we were wrong. Perhaps we’re wrong about pedophilia.”

The United States is a country founded on freedoms. However, have we taken leave of our senses? Have we taken “political correctness” to a level that we must allow, accept and embrace any and all behavior, no matter the deviation from the norm? Under the new progressive movement, must we allow babies to be ripped from their mother’s wombs up to and including 9 months of gestation, in order to allow freedom of choice for women?  Must we educate our young children on the different sexual lifestyles; heterosexuality, homosexuality, bi-sexuality, pedophilia, bestiality, through the public school system, in the name of sexual freedom?  Must we embrace the destruction, looting, burning and violence that comes with protests in order to support the freedom of speech? Must we point the finger of blame for the sins of the past, demand restitution while enduring reverse discrimination in the name of equal rights? Must we quiet the voices of Christianity, while lifting up Islamic extremism, in the name of religious freedom? Must we, not only welcome, and pay for illegals but allow them a voice in our elections in the name of voter rights? Must we accept the NSA into our bedrooms, homes, computers, bank accounts, phone calls and every aspect of our personal lives in the name of national security? Must we accept the audits and persecution of the IRS when our political beliefs and voices go against the beliefs of the political elite? Must we all follow the dietary rule of law set by government because they say we simply do not know better? Must we allow the political elite to indoctrinate our children through a government controlled education system that will ensure the decline of our competitive standing in the world and the continued control of the masses? How long can we continue to allow our constitutional republic to be turned into a tyrannical system of government? If  Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry, then we are seeing our country fundamentally changed against our will every day.

Must we accept the mutilation of our constitution and accept lies and deceit in place of truth all in the name of politics and power? Must we accept that we are no longer the electorate and the elected, but the ruling and the ruled? It is time to stand up and break the chains of government that have bound us all and get back to the basics on which this country was founded. Family, hard work, an understanding of right and wrong, and common sense freedoms that were intended by our Founding fathers.

“When secularism has evicted everything that is sacred and made a free for all grab for sensation and feeling alone it will ultimately irradiate a feeling of shame in a culture. Shame is a desperately needed sensation when things are wrong deep within you. Show me a man or a woman or a culture without shame and I will show you monstrosity in the making. If secularism leads to a society without shame, society cannot survive.”- Ravi Zacharias

‘If chance be the father of all flesh, disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear a state of emergency…. sniper kills, youths go looting, bomb blasts school…. it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker.”-Steve Turner.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Democrats Push Voting Rights For Non-Citizens To Ensure Election Wins!”

imgres

President Obama in a recent interview, admitted that he would pass his agenda items by “hook or by crook.” Was he just waving the green flag to all Democrats to do whatever is necessary to win and in turn, further the liberal agenda? This seems to be the new platform for the Democrats.  If you can’t accomplish it on your own steam and through the proper channels, then lie, cheat, and steal to get it done. By “hook or by crook!”

Mayor Bill DeBlasio, Mayor of New York, has decided the only way he has a chance at gaining a second term in New York, is to allow non-citizens the ability to cast votes in New York elections.  A move that takes the voice away from “The People,” as laid out in our Constitution, and gives it to those who are here as guests in our country.  Add in a growing number of illegal voters casting fraudulent ballots at local and national elections, and the American people will no longer have a say in how we are governed.  As we look at DeBlasio’s first term in office we cannot help but remember back in 2014 when he blocked charter schools,  using space inside failed public school buildings.  He chose to support teachers unions over what was best for the kids of New York. DeBlasio also proposed a law that would end horse-drawn carriages in the city and in turn force 300 drivers from their jobs at a time when the economy was less than optimistic. Add in his termination of the “stop and frisk,” laws and his vocal condemnation of his own police force, during the Michael Brown case, prior to proper investigations and rulings by the court system, and the people of New York were less than pleased. His current odds at winning a second term are not promising. His best path to win the next election seems to be opening up the voting booths to anyone and everyone who might cast a ballot for him and the Democratic party.   We do know the majority of  non-citizens will cast their ballot for a Democrat, because of course, they will never bite the hand that feeds them.

Hillary Clinton, Democrat, who wrote her thesis in college on Saul Allinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”, has found herself in yet another pot of hot water over her “deleted” email server used during her entire tenure as Secretary of State.She has no real accomplishments as Secretary of State to speak of, except her “restart” button with Russia, which obviously didn’t work, and the chaos that has been created around the world by her and President Obama’s failed agenda.  She will use her gender as a voting tool, however, she will have to explain why the Clinton Foundation has taken millions of dollars in donations from countries that have allowed the horrible abuses of women. She says she is running on income inequality while she charges $250,000 for speeches at Universities while “demanding crudités, hummus and sliced fruit.” Despite a lifetime career in politics and constant questionable illegal activities, she has decided to throw her hat into the ring for President of the United States in 2016.

It has become a pattern that seems to have gained popularity within the Democratic party. Lie. Cheat. Steal. Deceive. Deflect. Ignore. Do whatever is necessary to keep your job, win a seat, or warp the voting process in your favor. And in the process, pass legislation that will allow all non-citizens as well as illegals to cast their ballot in the next election so they can vote for Democrats.

The bill proposed in New York that will allow non-citizens to vote in local elections that has also found its way to Washington, DC,  The Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2015.  As reported in the weekly Standard,

“If the bill passes, it would not make D.C. the first to have allowed non-citizens to vote in local elections. Currently, half a dozen towns or jurisdictions in Maryland, including Takoma Park, allow the practice, while Chicago allows all (presumably legal) residents to vote in school board elections. In much the same vein, non-citizens in California now have the right to act as poll monitors, to practice law (even if an illegal alien), and also to serve on juries.”

Last summer the United States saw an unprecedented “rush” on our southern borders.  The Obama administration’s pattern of hindering our current deportation laws, has layed out the red carpet for illegals to freely enter into the United States.  The majority of these illegals, who crossed the border were not deported, but transported via plane and charter bus, at taxpayer’s expense, throughout communities within the country. They were then given roofs over their heads, food, healthcare, and then placed within public schools without vaccinations, putting American citizens at risk. They have been offered driver’s licenses, and the right to work within the country without fear of deportation. Illegals are now even protesting without fear of retribution demanding even more money, more rights and more services. Current reports are already predicting a repeat of another surge this coming summer. When will it stop? Never, as long as Democrats rule the roost.

What has been done by this administration since 2008 to correct the problems at the border?  Nothing. With endless open borders, and public services offered up like al a carte menus to illegals within the country as well as those looking to come in the future, the taxpayers will not only be looking to forego more hard-earned dollars, but their constitutional right to choose our leaders. Even the IRS has gotten in on the ruse by offering billions of dollars in tax credits to illegals that have never even worked.

There has recently been a growing pushback from Americans fighting the influx of foreign workers via the H1-B visa program. Companies are ousting American workers to fill  jobs with cheaper, lower level workers currently held by more expensive American workers. The Obama administration is pushing to allow nearly 100,000 spouses of foreign workers in high-tech jobs and want to further ease restrictions  making it easier to import high skilled workers from foreign countries. These policies will further hinder the job market for American citizens. President Obama and Democrats have decided to cater to anyone and everyone except Americans. It seems as though they have forgotten their place and the people they have been elected to serve.

It is time to bring back simple common sense and logic to our country. It is time to put Americans first!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Americans Held To Different Rule Of Law Than Our Elected Officials!

imagesWhat would happen to any American citizen if their computer servers were subpoenaed and they responded by destroying them?  Do you think jail time would be a potential outcome?  Obviously, Hillary Clinton believes she lives by a different “rule of law” than the average American.  These are the very people who decide what the rule of law will be and obviously, who will be required to live by them.  As we have seen year after year, and term after term, our law makers and our president live by a completely different set of rules than the American citizens.

The Benghazi committee headed by Senator Trey Gowdy, released this statement:

“After seeking and receiving a two-week extension from the Committee, Secretary Clinton failed to provide a single new document to the subpoena issued by the Committee and refused to provide her private server to the Inspector General for the State Department or any other independent arbiter for analysis.”

“We learned today, from her attorney, Secretary Clinton unilaterally decided to wipe her server clean and permanently delete all emails from her personal server. While it is not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department. “‘

In July of 1992, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was put into law, to address corporate responsibility and accountability, and also addressed destruction of evidence.

“With the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which President Bush labeled as “the most far-reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt,” and the increased commitment of prosecutors to stamp out corporate fraud, today’s company executives have more legal requirements and challenges to meet than they have ever faced in the past. In particular, 18 U.S.C. § 1519 takes aim at individuals who obstruct justice by destroying or altering documents in an attempt to thwart criminal and other government investigations or inquiries.”

The institution of this law allows for more strict enforcement and punishment of individuals who destroy evidence during an investigation or criminal case, and punishes those who destroy evidence under even the “contemplation” of an investigation.

“The new provisions reach those who destroy documents merely “in contemplation” of an investigation or “any matter” within the jurisdiction of a federal agency. Moreover, destruction of documents under § 1519 contains a maximum sentence of twenty years, at least twice what could be attained under the previous statutory scheme.”

Based on this law, the average American citizen can be sentenced to prison for destroying evidence even when the government is merely thinking about investigating them or their company. Martha Stewart was sent to jail under the provisions of this law. So it appears as though Hillary Clinton has broken the law and should be held accountable. This means jail time.  But will she be punished as any other American would be?  Only time will tell if the powers at be will demand she follow the rule of law or if, once again, the Clintons and everyone else on the Hill will be held under different  standards than the rest of us.

Although Hillary Clinton claimed she refused to use her government server because she wanted to avoid   carrying two different phones,  just weeks before in an interview, she admitted to having an iPhone, a blackberry and a iPad.

Clinton said, during her press conference at the UN,

“The vast majority of my work emails went to government employees at their government addresses, which meant they were captured and preserved immediately on the system at the State Department.”

Yet it was discovered that “Hillary Clinton emailed with her top advisers at the State Department about the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya on their own personal emails,” as reported by The New York Times.

During her press conference at the UN, Clinton said,

“The server contains personal communications from my husband and me, and I believe I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private and I think that the State Department will be able, over time, to release all of the records that were provided. “

When asked about emails, Bill Clinton stated he only sent two emails his entire time in office, one of them going to John Glenn in 1998 and the other went to U.S. troops serving in the Adriatic. He said he still does not use email today.

Questions still remain regarding the legality of Hillary Clinton’s deletion of her server.  Americans have to ask themselves if this is the person that should be running for president of the United States? We have certainly seen the negative results of a “lack of transparency” within the Obama administration.

The American people are owed the truth and should have access to the communications from and between our elected officials. When we begin to allow the laws to be manipulated by those in power, while we are held to task, we certainly have graduated from the “elected over the electorate to the ruling over the ruled”- Edward Snowden.

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Obama and Democrats Now Targeting Lawful Businesses?”

shutterstock_168011186

 

 

Is the Obama Administration now targeting lawful businesses?  Mike Hawkins, owner of Hawkins Guns, LLC received a notice from his bank on November 13, telling him his business account was going to be closed because he was a gun dealer.  Upon visiting the bank, he was able to record a conversation with the bank official who said,

“We don’t do firearms, ammunition, Uhm, (unintelligible), (unintelligible), auctioneers and check cashing companies.”

Hawkins also owns a private investigative business and as a result was able to look deeper into the matter and was shocked by what he found.  Hawkins said ,

There are many Americans across the country that have been affected by this. They may not have come forward yet, but the US Consumer  Federation are getting numerous calls since my story broke and hopefully more people will come to the table with what has happened to them.”

The Department of Justice released the following statement,

“We do not target businesses operating within the bounds of the law and we have no interest in pursuing/discouraging lawful conduct.”

The Wall Street Journal published an article saying,

When you become a banker, no one issues you a badge, nor are you fitted for a judicial robe. So why is the Justice Department telling bankers to behave like policemen and judges? Justice’s new probe, known as “Operation Choke Point,” is asking banks to identify customers who may be breaking the law or simply doing something government officials don’t like. Banks must then “choke off” those customers’ access to financial services, shutting down their accounts.

The industries that seem to be targeted include 22 categories of business, including, but not limited to  Firework sales, tobacco sales, coin dealers, pawn brokers, pharmaceutical sales, and home based charities and even “As Seen on TV,” businesses.

It is true,  some businesses within these categories can have questionable ethics and practices, which is true in any business. However, should banks be the judge in determining whether a business is operating within the law? Can the Obama Administration and the Department of Justice force the closing of businesses with which they disagree, by shutting off their access to credit and banking services, without giving them their day in court?

Also in the Wall Street Journal,

Unfortunately, the strategy is legally dubious. Justice is pressuring banks to shut down accounts without pressing charges against a merchant or even establishing that the merchant broke the law. It’s clear enough that there’s fraud to shut down the account, Justice asserts, but apparently not clear enough for the highest law-enforcement agency in the land to prosecute.

Alden Abbott of the Heritage Foundation describes Operation Choke Point,

“Banks receive notifications from federal regulators, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the agency responsible for insuring bank deposits), that the government considers certain types of businesses “high risk.” Banks then are pressured, though the implied threat of government investigations, to sever ties with customers engaged in those enterprises.”

In the past, banks have always worked hand in hand with law enforcement by reporting suspicious banking behavior to combat identity fraud, counterfeit debt and credit cards along with tax evasion and wire transfer fraud. However, law enforcement agencies are responsible for deciding whether suspicious activity represents actual criminal violations, not the banks. When these suspicions are realized, suspects are entitled to their day in court, as mandated by our Constitution.  Now, the Justice department is punishing banks that refuse to shut down unpopular but legal industries, by threatening penalties.

Despite your political leanings. we should all be concerned that a President or one party can make decisions that affect the constitutional rights of all Americans without our input or the input of our elected officials. One day, you or your business could be targeted as well, regardless of which political party you support. Is this the United State of America, or Obama’s Nation?

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

I’m Mad As Hell And I’m Not Going To Take It Anymore!

 

 

iStock_000010295104_Small“The president has far exceeded his constitutional authority. … We all want to do things to stop the president from his illicit activity.” – House Speaker John Boehner

“It is time to allow this Homeland Security funding measure to come to the floor. This is our colleagues’ chance to do exactly what they led their constituents to believe they’d do: defend the rule of law, without more excuses.” – Mitch McConnell

“It’s important for people who agree with us that the president doesn’t have this ability to put illegal immigration laws in place executively.” – Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, the House GOP whip.

“The president chose to use an authority that he said 22 separate times he didn’t have the authority to do.” – House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

Each of these representatives voted today to fully fund the DHS and President Obama’s unconstitutional, illegal amnesty.  Each of them promised voters in November that they would not allow Obama to get away with passing illegal amnesty with his pen and phone.  They lied!

How many times will voters allow this to continue? When is the lying going to stop? Why are politicians allowed to use “bait and switch” and get away with it?

The Republicans that voted to pass this legislation are as bad as President Obama and need to be taken out of office.  What makes them any different from Obama?  Frankly they are worse. Why?  At least we all know Obama planned on “fundamentally changing” America. He admitted it and was voted into office anyway.  He has constantly told us over and over of his intentions. He promised to use his pen and phone to pass laws that he wants passed, regardless of the system of government our Republic demands.  At least he told the truth. They lied!

Republicans have lied and lied over and over again to their constituents. They promise to stand up to Obama’s illegal, unconstitutional executive orders, yet again and again they cave. They lied to get into office and then do exactly what Obama and Democrats tell them to do.

What are the people to do when their elected officials refuse to carry out their wishes? What should the people do when the government takes control of every aspect of our lives, against our will? What should the people do when the government of the people, by the people, for the people becomes of the government, by the government, for the government? When our voices and our votes no longer matter, what are we to do?

It is time to stand up and say enough!!! The 2016 Presidential election is around the corner. At this point, it seems our choices will once again be a  Clinton or a Bush. AGAIN!  The establishment has taken over our lives and forgotten their place.  They are elected by us, paid by us, and yet they have chosen to believe that we are their pawns to move around as they please. They do this all while stealing our hard-earned dollars, destroying the American dream, empowering illegals by forcing us to pay their way and allowing them a vote that will eventually move Americans right out of our own country!

They barely work, yet complain that there $174,000 salaries along with their ill-gotten millions through insider trading, isn’t enough to fund their multimillion dollar homes, jets and vacations, all while telling the American people that “income inequality” is our problem.  They claim we are “racists” and “bigots” all while they fuel the “divide and conquer” mentality. They point the finger of blame at each other while behind closed doors they make secret deals going against the very wishes of the American people. They take away our rights to our own property, take our jobs and give them to immigrants, refuse to seal our borders, expose us to terrorism by refusing to fight it or call it by name. They take control of our air and water and call if conservation. They tell us what we can eat and what we can drink because we don’t know any better. They take over our healthcare, charge us more, reduce the services, and require us to pick up the tab for those who don’t want to work. They take away our full-time jobs and replace them with part-time, under-employment and call it recovery. They take over our internet, saying they will protect us from the big, bad internet companies. They spy on us through our phones, our televisions, and our computers and call it protection,  they decide what news we watch by allowing one political faction to control the media, and threaten anyone who stands against them.  They use the IRS to punish any American who tries to enact change. They pledge allegiance to the United States and our flag, promise to uphold our Constitution and protect the American people, yet defy those pledges on a daily basis.

They criticize Russia because Putin has remained in control  for over 24 years, but the Clintons and the Bushes have controlled the Presidency for over 24 years and after the 2016 election, probably another 8, meaning only 2 families will have controlled our country for over 32 years.  When is it enough? When is it time to tell the establishment to go to hell?

We, the American people need to let our government know we will no longer accept the status quo! It is time to elect a President that does not represent Republicans or Democrats. It is time to rid ourselves of the two party system. It is time to elect an American who believes in the Constitution, the American Dream and the rule of law!

It is time to stop putting career politicians and lawyers into office.  No more criminals allowed in office. If you don’t pay your taxes, you’re fired! If you don’t do your job, you’re fired! If you take a bribe, you’re fired! If you lie to get elected, you’re fired!

It is time to do what our founding fathers meant for us to do. Everyday, hard-working Americans should represent our country for a short period of time, then go back to their jobs and their lives. Only then will the people’s voice be heard!  It is time for term limits, a balanced budget, and common sense.  No more Department of Education, no more Department of Human Resources, no more IRS, no more Federal Reserve Bank, no more Energy Department, no more stealing, cheating, fraud, and NO MORE LIES!!!

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Republicans and Democrats…A Choice Between Two Evils!

VoteBoth the Congress and the Senate passed a 2015 spending bill, in record time, that has been labeled a “Cromnibus.”  But where was the fight? Where were our representatives who swore they would not fund amnesty, Obamacare, taxpayer-funded abortion, and more irresponsible spending? No where to be seen!

About Obama’s illegal amnesty,

“We are going to fight the president tooth and nail if he continues down this path. This is the wrong way to govern. This is exactly what the American people said on Election Day they didn’t want.” – John Boehner

About the passage of Obamacare,

“And look at how this bill was written,”  “Can you say it was done openly, with transparency and accountability? Without backroom deals and struck behind closed doors hidden from the people? Hell, no, you can’t.” – John Boehner

“When we came here, we each swore an oath to uphold and abide by the Constitution as representatives of the people.” “But the process here is broken. The institution is broken. And as a result, this bill is not what the American people need nor what our constituents want.” – John Boehner

These are the exact words John Boehner spoke as recently as November, 2014, in reply to President Obama’s announcement to offer amnesty to millions of  illegals inside the United States and the passage of Obamacare, both bills, openly rejected by the American people.

So how did the Republican leader decide to fight President Obama on amnesty, Obamacare, abortion and spending? By giving the Department of Health and Human Services’s unaccompanied children’s program an $80 million increase. He also offered up an additional $14 million to school districts stuggling with the influx of illegal students. Add insult to injury…he has also agreed to give an additional $260 million to the Central American countries from where the illegals are coming. Obamacare was, once again, fully funded, along with Planned Parenthood, the largest provider of taxpayer-funded abortions, and the House signed off on increasing the amount wealthy donors can throw into the political arena, increasing the current cap of $32,400 to $777,600 per person per year.  Frank Dodd regulations have been rolled back allowing banks to participate in the same derivatives trading which exacerbated the financial crisis in 2008, and the real clincher? The bill calls for more spending then what the government anticipates bringing in, resulting in yet another year of increased debt, which has now surpassed the $18 trillion mark, representing a 70% increase in our national debt since Obama took office.

I think New York Post’s Kyle Smith hit the nail on the head when he said,

“2014 was the year when the truth was optional. 2014 was the year when convenient fabrication was the weapon of choice for celebrities, activists, big business and politicians.” 

In November of this year, we had a midterm election that trumped most others. The GOP swept the country by extending their majority to near historic levels, speaking loud and clear to President Obama, “enough is enough”!!! The American people said they did not like Obamacare and were not happy about our open borders and the surge of illegals allowed to enter into our country and take part in our taxpayer-funded services. The American people are no longer interested in bailing out anyone…especially the banks that caused the financial crisis in the first place, we do not want to pay for others abortions and we want the budget balanced, and for good measure, let’s throw in term limits. But is that what the American taxpayer got?

Even President Obama jumped on the bandwagon supporting the spending bill….what could this mean? Since when has the president ever agreed with the GOP? If he is signing off on this budget deal with no fight, then the American people are obviously the losers!

Lawmakers, led hand in hand by Boehner and Reid, signed off on a 1,603 page bill that Rollcall.com said,

“If members averaged 200 words per minute to read the dense legislative text, they would need 24 hours just to get through the bill.”

Joseph Curl from the Washington Times said,

“When House Speaker John Boehner campaigned for the leadership job years ago, he vowed to give members at least 72 hours to read any bill before a vote. Back in 2010 the speaker said he didn’t think ‘having 2000 page bills on the House floor serves anyone’s best interest – not the House, not for the members and certainly not for the American people.'”

I guess the massive 2,700 page, insurance canceling, $2.6 trillion budget draining,  Obamacare, “have to pass it to see what’s in it” bill, taught them no lessons. When will our representatives start studying history and learning from past mistakes? When will they stand up for the rule of law? When will they stand up and defend our Constitution? When will they say what they mean and do what they say?

If, in fact, the president’s actions on immigration are against the Constitution and the rule of law, then why would the GOP cave in on the budget negotiations and actually allow them to be funded? Even though the money only supports the illegal amnesty until February of 2015, doesn’t the vote itself validate the president’s illegal executive action?

Senator Ted Cruz took a stand on that issue and tried to fund the government for additional days allowing the House to reconvene on Monday to further discuss the bill.  Cruz lost the support of  most Republicans and Democrats, but he did get the vote on record for anyone wanting to know who supported the funding of Obama’s amnesty without a fight. It puts all politicians on record for supporting the bills that the American people do not support.

Even Democrat, Jim Moran said.

“Democrats got virtually everything they wanted in the bill. In twenty years of being on the appropriations committee, I haven’t seen a better compromise in terms of Democratic priorities.” 

When did lies become the new truth? When did misrepresenting, misinforming, misguiding, deceiving, defrauding, misdirecting and betraying the American people become the norm? I know absolute power corrupts absolutely, but it has definitely reached a new high. Add in the press, who refuses to truthfully inform the American people as to the real actions of our government, the real state of the economy and the job market, and we have the perfect storm brewing!

Once again, in words from Boehner  in 2010,

“Around this chamber, looking upon us are the lawgivers from Moses, to Gaius, to Blackstone, to Thomas Jefferson. By our actions today, we disgrace their values. We break the ties of history in this chamber. We break our trust with America.”

As Americans, it is hard to resolve the feelings of betrayal and even harder to come to terms with an election that all our politicians felt had nothing to do with them or their actions. It is hard to reconcile that our choices at the ballot box have come down to choosing between the best of two evils. When the depth of corruption, deceit and red tape bureaucracy reach such  astronomical levels, it is time for a complete overhaul! Fire them all!!

FYI……..

A “yes” vote is a vote to pass the bill.

Voting yes were 31 Democrats, 24 Republicans and 1 independent.

Voting no were 21 Democrats, 18 Republicans and 1 independent.

Democrats Yes

Baldwin, Wis.; Begich, Alaska; Bennet, Colo.; Cardin, Md.; Carper, Del.; Casey, Pa.; Coons, Del.; Donnelly, Ind.; Durbin, Ill.; Hagan, N.C.; Heinrich, N.M.; Heitkamp, N.D.; Johnson, S.D.; Kaine, Va.; Landrieu, La.; Leahy, Vt.; Mikulski, Md.; Murphy, Conn.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Pryor, Ark.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.V.; Schatz, Hawaii; Schumer, N.Y.; Shaheen, N.H.; Stabenow, Mich.; Udall, Colo.; Udall, N.M.; Walsh, Mont.; Warner, Va.

Democrats No

Blumenthal, Conn.; Booker, N.J.; Boxer, Calif.; Brown, Ohio; Cantwell, Wash.; Franken, Minn.; Gillibrand, N.Y.; Harkin, Iowa; Hirono, Hawaii; Klobuchar, Minn.; Levin, Mich.; Manchin, W.V.; Markey, Mass.; McCaskill, Mo.; Menendez, N.J.; Merkley, Ore.; Reed, R.I.; Tester, Mont.; Warren, Mass.; Whitehouse, R.I.; Wyden, Ore.

Democrats Not Voting

Feinstein, Calif.

Republicans Yes

Alexander, Tenn.; Ayotte, N.H.; Barrasso, Wyo.; Blunt, Mo.; Boozman, Ark.; Burr, N.C.; Coats, Ind.; Cochran, Miss.; Collins, Maine; Cornyn, Texas; Enzi, Wyo.; Fischer, Neb.; Graham, S.C.; Hatch, Utah; Hoeven, N.D.; Isakson, Ga.; Johanns, Neb.; Kirk, Ill.; McConnell, Ky.; Murkowski, Alaska; Roberts, Kan.; Thune, S.D.; Toomey, Pa.; Wicker, Miss.

Republicans No

Corker, Tenn.; Crapo, Idaho; Cruz, Texas; Flake, Ariz.; Grassley, Iowa; Heller, Nev.; Johnson, Wis.; Lee, Utah; McCain, Ariz.; Moran, Kan.; Paul, Ky.; Portman, Ohio; Risch, Idaho; Rubio, Fla.; Scott, S.C.; Sessions, Ala.; Shelby, Ala.; Vitter, La.

Republicans Not Voting

Chambliss, Ga.; Coburn, Okla.; Inhofe, Okla.

Independents Yes

King, Maine.

Independents No

Sanders, Vt.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2014/12/14/3872420/senate-roll-vote-on-11-trillion.html#storylink=cpy

 

 

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2014/12/14/3872420/senate-roll-vote-on-11-trillion.html#storylink=cpy
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2014/12/14/3872420/senate-roll-vote-on-11-trillion.html#storylink=cpy

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Trickle Down Hatred and Contempt”

COMIC white house _edited-1 copy copy

Trickle down hatred and contempt. Is it real? Is it being used to control us?  Where does the buck stop on this issue, or more importantly, where does it begin?

We have all heard of trickle down economics, but what about trickle down hatred and contempt?  Can a leader set the stage and simply, imply by their action or non action, that they will tolerate hatred and contempt of a specific group in order to further their own agenda? Can negative comments by a leader regarding specific groups of people influence how those people will be treated or seen by others? Should the president of the United States be  representing only the portion of the public that believes as he does? How do our leader’s comments and actions influence the level of tolerance or acceptance exhibited by the American people?

The International Journal of Leadership Studies released a study by Diane J. Chandler from the Regent University School of Divinity, United States titled, “The Perfect Storm of Leaders’ Unethical Behavior: A Conceptual Framework,

“We can and do condemn the actions of leaders who decide to lie, belittle followers, and enrich themselves at the expense of the less fortunate.”  Unethical leadership behavior is, therefore, defined  as the organizational process of leaders acting in a manner inconsistent with agreed upon standards of character, decency, and integrity, which blurs or violates clear, measurable and legal standards, fostering constituent distrust because of personal interest.”

“Unethical behavior and its persistence must have a catalyzing starting place, a tipping point moment that prompts all subsequent unethical behavior, similar to the vortex of a tornado drawing everything into its fury.”

“Unethical charismatic leaders select or produce obedient, dependent, and compliant followers. Consequently when leaders deviate from ethical norms, compliant followers tend not to critique leaders’ decisions, since leaders are considered to be the standard bearers for moral conduct. The downside of charisma concerns possible negative consequences, including abuse of personalized power, the nurture of blind loyalties, and the inhibition of any criticism.”

Since the beginning of the Obama presidency, many of his speeches have resulted in great condescension towards Americans who disagree with his policies.  Obama has claimed that Americans who don’t agree with his administration on climate change are “a fairly serious threat to everybody’s future,” and “we don’t have time for a meeting of the flat earth society.” In another speech,  “You go in to small towns in Pennsylvania and it’s not surprising that they get bitter, they cling to their guns and their religion.”  In another, “Ideological extremism and maximalist position is much more prominent in the Republican party.”   Obama has made negative inferences regarding Fox News on more than one occasion, and a top official in his cabinet called Netanyahu a “Chickens**t.” In a ‘hot mic’ moment, Obama was caught calling tea party members, “dangerous extremists.” Is calling out those who disagree with his policies the proper behavior for the President of the United States? Are those who disagree, really a threat to society, racists, naysayers, flat-earthers, terrorists and extortionists?

When the president demonizes groups that disagree with him is he encouraging the mistreatment and exploitation of these groups? Do his comments influence and encourage the press and his public supporters to treat members of the tea party as extremists,  small town Americans as crazy and christians as religious fanatics? Is it right for the President of the United States to single out members of American society for disdain, ridicule or potential retaliation?

In June of 2013, according to a Rasmussen report, one in four voters who supported Obama reported believing that the tea party was the biggest terror threat to the United States. The most surprising aspect of this poll was that one in four believed that tea party members were not only the biggest threat to the United States, but a bigger threat than terrorists.

What about the race card?  Has the president and his team, used race as a tool to garner support for their policies, elicit votes or basically stir up opposition and in turn create more racial divide?

In October, in the Review and Outlook section of the Wall Street Journal, it was said,

“All this brings to mind a young presidential candidate named Barack Obama, who warned in 2008 that Republicans would play the race card. “They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’” he told a rally. Mr. Obama won, and won again, but that hasn’t stopped Democrats from rolling out that same racism charge at any opportunity, using it in particular as a tool to drive minority turnout in elections….But Democrats do themselves no credit and the country no good by playing up racial divisions for partisan ends. Alas, they’ll keep doing it until voters stop rewarding them with votes.”

Are there still racial issues currently in the United States? As long as there are people in the world, there will always be differing opinions and therefore discrimination against many races and religions.   However, in the United States, we have made giant steps towards resolving these issues since Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement. In 2008, we elected a black president.  According to exit polls, President Obama did better with white voters than the past 2 democratic nominees, John Kerry and Al Gore. However, even with such great support from whites, Democrats still blame racism for the downward spiral of support for Obama.  Did every white person who voted for Obama suddenly turn racist? Or could it possibly be attributed to a failure in his policies and the continued stagnation of the economy and job creation among other heated issues?

In his recent speech to the UN, Obama compared the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson to the situation the world faces with ISIS. Does this place mis-founded ideas about racism over and above the threats by ISIS? Do his comments supporting Michael Brown over the police, prior to the completion of an investigation, cause distrust of our police by other communities, therefore encouraging unnecessary protests and dissension?

Does Obama’s silence on the slaughter of Christians around the world, represent a trickle down condemnation, and therefore, without words, send a message that Christians are no longer a group that we, as Americans, should support?

Ben Carson a pediatric neurosurgeon, and current candidate for the 2016 presidential election said,

“We need to understand that we are not each others’ enemies in this country. And it is only the political class that derives its power by creating friction. It is only the media that derives its importance by creating friction…that uses every little thing to create this chasm between people. This is not who we are……I think one of the keys to leadership is recognizing that everybody has gifts and talents. A good leader will learn how to harness those gifts toward the same goal.”

Martin Luther King said,

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character.”

As Americans we must not allow our leaders to use polarization for their own political ends. We must work towards a common goal and find solutions to make the country stronger.  Having an open mind and listening to all sides is a true sign of maturity, broad mindedness and tolerance. If we can all learn to co-exist and attempt to understand the position of others, instead of demonizing those who think differently, the country will be able to heal itself.   If you preach tolerance, and expect other to be tolerant, then you must be tolerant yourself. If you preach divisiveness, then you must expect divisiveness from others, therefore prohibiting the very tolerance we all so desperately  want.
 We must recognize, that when we support leaders who use polarization to their own political ends, then it will, one day,  be our own beliefs that will be at the receiving end of the trickle down hatred and contempt.
Links: (http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/ijls/new/vol5iss1/IJLS_Vol5Is1_Chandler%20(2).pdf)
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/307655-obama-we-dont-have-time-for-a-meeting-of-the-flat-earth-society
http://redalertpolitics.com/2014/08/09/obama-calls-democrat-position-common-sense-trashes-republican-view-wacky-nonsense-new-york-times-interview/

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Separation of Church and State?

shutterstock_41791735

Is there really a separation of church and state and has the current administration honored it? Have Democrats around the country been stepping on our rights to Religious freedom?

In February, President Obama spoke at the National Prayer Breakfast and said,

 “It’s also clear that around the world, freedom of religion is under threat…..No society can truly succeed unless it guarantees the rights of all its people, including religious minorities.”

 But is that being practiced here in the United States? Are our religious freedoms being taken from us one day at a time? We continue to see case after case where this “separation” has been challenged.

Recently in Houston, the mayor, Annise Parker, started quite a firestorm when she demanded local pastors be served with subpoenas in regards to the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, (HERO), signed into law in May. The subpoenas were issued after a law suit was filed by the pastors over a provision in the ordinance which would allow men, who identify as women, to use women’s bathrooms.

In a recent article by Dylan Baddour of PolitiFact, Texas,  the mayor of Houston, Annise Parker, instructed officials to issue subpoenas to local pastor’s requesting,

  • “All speeches, presentations, or sermons related to Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, (HERO), the petition, Mayor Annise Parker, homosexuality or gender identity prepared by, delivered by, revised by, or approved by you or in your possession.”
  • “All communications with members of your congregation regarding HERO or the petition.” (writings, notes, diaries, electronic or videotape recordings, emails, instant messages, text messages. ) Jared Woodfill, who is representing the pastors said,

“This is a mayor who has waged a full-scale war on the churches in Harris County. These pastors are standing up and saying enough is enough and we are not going to allow it to happen on our watch.”

In response to the mayor’s actions, more than 1,000 bibles were sent to Parker’s office in protest.  In a press conference today, Parker announced that she is directing the legal department to withdraw the subpoenas.

Meanwhile in California, Governor Gerry Brown is demanding that all employers, including churches, offer and pay for elective abortion through their health insurance policies. The LifeLegal Defense Foundation and Alliance Defending Freedom are representing 7 churches in a lawsuit against the requirement. Casey Mattox, an attorney with Alliance said,

“Forcing a church to be party to elective abortion is one of the most unimaginable assaults on our most fundamental American freedoms. California is flagrantly violating the federal law that protects employers from being forced into having abortion in their health insurance plans. No state can blatantly ignore federal law and think that it should continue to receive taxpayer money.” 

In Idaho, city officials have demanded that ordained ministers must celebrate same-sex weddings or face fines and jail time. One case involves Donald and Evelyn Knapp, owners of the Hitching Post Chapel. They refused to marry a same-sex couple and as a result are now facing a 180 day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they refuse to marry the couple. The city of Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, has a non discrimination statute and recently the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Idaho’s constitutional amendment defining marriage between and man and a woman. Based on this, the city feels the Knapp’s should be forced to perform the marriage even though it goes against their religious beliefs. The Alliance Defending Freedom has filed a motion arguing that this action,

“violates first and 14th Amendment rights to freedom of speech, the free exercise of religion, substantive due process and equal protection.”

In 2011, family members, visiting wounded soldiers at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, were prohibited from bringing Bibles or any religious reading materials to their loved ones.  When the policy was challenged by Representative Steve King, (R-IA), the medical facility rescinded the policy.

In 2013, The Alliance for Religious Liberty outlined many examples where the military restricted religious expression. In one extreme example, thousands of soldiers received “equal opportunity training,” where “Evangelical, Christians, Catholics and Orthodox Jews were classified as “Religious Extremists” comparable to the KKK and Al Qaeda. Those attending the training were also told, in writing, that they could not support these extreme organizations by fund-raising, recruiting, attending meetings, organizing or distributing literature.” In a letter by the Alliance, they stated,

“In other words, thousands of soldiers were told that they could not go to church, lead Sunday School, tithe, share their faith, or give out Bibles.”

Congressman John Fleming, (R-LA), introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act to ensure religious freedom for service members and chaplains. The Amendment passed the House Armed Services Committee and another passed the Senate Armed Services Committee. However, President Obama said the additional provisions were  “unnecessary and ill-advised.” His advisors recommended he veto the Religious Liberty Amendment.

We, as Americans must understand and demand that our constitutional rights be upheld by the very government, that was elected by the people, and for the people.  The United States Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas Jefferson and edited by the Committee of five, states,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Have these infringements on our religious rights been equally enforced? Have the same demands been made on local Mosques or Temples? Has our government become so politically correct that they create special privileges for some while infringing on the rights of others?

As Americans, we must insist, even with changing times, that the constitutional rights granted us by the founding fathers of this great nation, must remain intact. Our government must protect the “unalienable rights.” without caving to special interest groups, political favor, or a deteriorating morality. We must not allow the government to enforce or mandate any religious doctrines, nor tell us how or what to believe. Although it is not written in the constitution, we have the unalienable right to a separation of church and state.

 

Links:

  • (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/02/06/president-obama-praises-freedom-religion-national-prayer-breakfast)
  • (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/oct/23/greg-abbott/greg-abbott-says-houston-city-attorney-subpoenaed-/)
  • (http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/News/Detail?ContentID=80997)
  • (http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/18/government-ordained-ministers-celebrate-sex-wedding-go-jail/) 
  • (http://cpcfoundation.wordpress.com/2013/06/21/military-warriors-denied-religious-freedom/) 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Votes? Inherent Value or a Political Means to an End?

vote-fraud

 

With midterm elections around the corner,  we have to ask ourselves if our voting system should be about the inherent value of our votes, or simply about winning elections?

Currently,  voter ID laws are the object of fights around the country in a game played out by politicians wanting to broaden their base and win elections.  Unfortunately, the only losers in this game are the American people.

When you are a citizen of the United States, born or naturalized, you are blessed with the opportunity and the right to cast your vote for a representative of your choice. Along with the vote comes great power and  responsibility. You, the individual voter, has the power to grant a politician, of your choice, the responsibility to govern our states and our country with integrity, based on the rule of law and our  constitution, framed by the morals and ethics which have guided this country for generations.

We MUST protect and preserve the integrity of our voting system.  If we allow the system to become corrupt, or to be manipulated then we will see our way of life fundamentally transformed and/or destroyed by the few who have become so powerful that they are willing to do anything, including ignoring and encouraging voter fraud, to hold onto that power.

Since the 2012 elections, there have been hundreds of people and/or groups charged, investigated and convicted of voter fraud. Many involving our government officials.  In a recent news story, it was reported that a Connecticut Democrat Representative, Christina Ayala was arrested on 19 charges of voter fraud. If we cannot trust our elected officials to maintain the integrity of our voting system, then who are we to trust?

Although Democrats continue to claim there is no such thing as voter fraud,  the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) found,

 “Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”

In looking at a small sample of voter fraud headlines, you may tend to disagree with Democrats’ claims,

  • A Shorewood man was charged with 143 counts of voter fraud.
  •  Three women were arrested and charged with 56 counts of voter fraud, in Houston.
  •  A California Senator gets jail time in Voter Fraud Case.
  •  Over 140 cases of Voter Registration Fraud found in Minneapolis.
  •  Over 80 Voter fraud cases sent to Iowa prosecutors.
  • Ex-magistrate in West Virginia 4th official to plead guilty to voter fraud
  •  Woman uses 5 absentee ballots in voter fraud case in Texas.
  •  Cincinnati poll worker sentenced to 5 years for voter fraud in 3 presidential elections.
  •  FEMA official charged in Florida voter fraud
  •  State Representative and Democratic Party worker sentenced to 18 months for 20 counts of voter fraud
  •  Former MA lawmaker convicted of Voter Fraud Scheme
  •  New York Assemblymen uses voter fraud for gaining power.
  •  Over 500 non-citizens removed from Colorado Voter rolls
  •  Voter fraud found in Vernon, CA election – could change winner
  •  10 NDSU football players plead guilty to voter fraud.
  •  Kentucky voter fraud allegedly funded by drug money
  •  State sweep finds 1,251 non citizens voted in Florida

We have also seen alleged cases of fraud involving the stuffing of ballot boxes, non officials allowed to  transport ballots, voters using absentee ballots of friends, neighbors and even dead family members to cast more than one vote, double registration within 2 or more states, and illegal immigrants registering and casting ballots in elections.

Recently, in North Carolina, when SBOE officials did a sample cross check of their database, they discovered 6% or 600 non-U.S. citizens were registered to vote.  Jay DeLancy, executive director of the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina, said

“We want to know how such a large number of non-U.S. citizens were ever registered to vote in the first place. There is clearly a system failure here and we need the Board of Elections and the DMV to help the Legislature and the public understand where the problem lies.”

So, if voter fraud is alive and well, why would any reasonable person or official, elected to uphold the law of our land, fight against a process that ensures the very integrity of the voting booth? Why are our elected officials refusing to acknowledge and repair the issues at hand within our voting system?  Why would Democratic representatives across the country be fighting to give immigrants who entered our country illegally, the right to vote?

In 2012, election officials from more than 60 countries traveled to the United States to observe the presidential elections as part of a program run by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems. (IFES).  The majority of the officials agreed that the open voting system used in the United States, would never work, or be allowed in their countries. They felt the lack of IDs along with online and mail-in voting, allowed for too much fraud. They were also surprised that provisional ballots were even offered and shocked that local poll workers were allowed to “handle” the ballots.

The majority of countries around the world, take their election process extremely seriously. Most require IDs along with voter confirmation notices in order for a ballot to be cast.   Many countries mark voters with indelible ink to insure that each citizen casts only one vote. Why, would the most powerful, and once, the most influential nation in the world not take steps to ensure the integrity of our election process?

In a recent decision by the Supreme Court on voting restrictions in Texas, Justice Stevens noted that there was sufficient evidence of voter fraud,

“It remains true, however, that flagrant examples of such fraud in other parts of the country have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists, that examples have surfaced in recent years, demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.”

However, in the United States, although photo ID’s are required in order to complete the most menial of tasks on a daily basis, it is not required in all states in order to perform the most sacred action entrusted to every citizen of our nation; voting.

There have also been many reports of voting machine errors. Representative Jim Moynihan of Illinois,  said his vote was changed when he cast his ballot.

“While early voting at the Schaumburg Public Library today, I tried to cast a vote for myself and instead it cast the vote for my opponent. You can imagine my surprise as the same thing happened with a number of races when I tried to vote for a Republican and the machine registered a vote for a Democrat.”

In a similar situation, where a selection was changed three times by the voting machine, I contacted the State Board of Elections, who responded by saying,

“Apparently there was an issue in which one candidate was selected and the screen selected another. We regret that this happened. The sensors in the touch screens occasionally need to be calibrated so the area touched on the screen reflects the voter’s choice.”

If this is a situation that has occurred on other occasions, why are these machines not calibrated prior to election day? If these machines can, in any way, change, alter or switch a voters selection, without their knowledge, then why are they even used?

In testing the EDGE voting machines used in Virginia, researchers found “significant security weaknesses throughout the system.”The nature of these weaknesses raise serious questions as to whether the software can be relied upon to protect the integrity of elections, and lack reliable measures to detect or prevent tampering.” (https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/sequoia/avc-edge/)

If there is even the slightest chance that a vote can be altered, or that a non-citizen can cast a ballot, then  the public at large and our elected officials should  be working together to validate our voting system. You must ask  yourself the question,

“Why would one political faction be so determined to expose our voting system to fraud, by allowing anyone, citizen or not, ID or not, to participate in the selection of our elected officials? “

In this day and age of such political polarization, and a time when the media and our elected officials refuse to listen to the voice of the people,  we should all be concerned about the loss of the only voice that we have left, OUR VOTE!   When we lose our voice in the voting booth, the very foundation of our Nation will exist no more.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather