Hollywood, Like Government, Has Forgotten Its Place!

 

shutterstock_215638765

If you refuse to watch, yet another, conservative bashing, congratulatory award program showcasing the self-absorbed, ultra rich in Hollywood, then you didn’t miss much by not tuning into the Golden Globes.  Although it was tough to decide who was the most inappropriate self-centered idiot of the night, the “snob” award of the evening goes to Meryl Streep. It appears as Ms. Streep along with Hollywood and our government of late, have forgotten their place.

You and all of us in this room, really, belong to the most vilified segments in American society right now. Hollywood, foreigners, and the press….. Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. If you kick ’em all out, you’ll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts.”- Meryl Streep

 

I think Meryl Streep and many of the so-called actors in Hollywood are a little full of themselves. They have truly gotten a little big for their own britches as well as the ones given to them by the costume department. Do they really believe that if Hollywood stopped acting, the whole world would fall apart and die in pure misery having nothing to bring true meaning into their empty lives without movies like, A Bullet to the Head, Scarface, Django, and The Devil Wears Prada?  I think that bigger names than Streep might disagree with the premise that Hollywood is the only source of true art in the world…..Rembrandt, van Gough, Monet, Mozart, Beethoven and yes, even Bruce Lee are probably rolling over in their graves at this very moment.

“And this instinct to humiliate, when it’s modeled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody’s life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing. Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. When the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.”- Meryl Streep

Where has she been the last eight years while Obama has done nothing but demean and disrespect every American who has differences of opinion regarding his policies? Does she not see the irony in this statement? Is she not using her platform to demean and disrespect the president-elect and the American people who voted for him? Does she really believe that the senseless violent movies that come out of Hollywood have not incited their own amount of violence on our streets and in our communities?  This is the same hypocrisy that produces videos and tv appearances, ad nauseum, to tell the public that we must support gun control. All while they go to the bank cashing their million dollar checks protected by armed guards while making movies that senselessly kill, maim and destroy through the very gun violence they claim their principles force them to scorn? I guess principles are easily forgotten when money and fame are the alternatives.

“We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage. That’s why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution.”- Meryl Streep

Our founding fathers, yet another group of folks rolling over in their graves because of the lies and disregard for their vision by the liberal left. The “principled” press? We all watched as the so-called principled press lied, cheated, deleted and mislead the American people during the entire election process and the Obama presidency. Obviously learning nothing from their lack of journalistic practices, we watch today as they continue to misrepresent the truth in order to protect the agenda they are all determined to fulfill.

I recently read a letter written by Nigel Bennett, @ncb58 on twitter, that says it best.

“You exist for my entertainment. Some of you are great eye candy. Some of you can deliver a line with such conviction that you bring tears to my eyes. Some of you  can scare the crap out of me. Others make me laugh. but you all have one thing in common, you only have a place in my world to entertain me. That’s it. You make your living pretending to be someone else. Playing dress up like a 6-year-old. You live in a make-believe world in front of a camera and often when you are away from one too. Your entire existence depends on my patronage. I’ll crank the organ grinder, you dance. I don’t really care where you stand on issues.

Honestly, your stance matters far less to me than that of my neighbor. You see, you aren’t real. I turn off my TV or shut down my computer and you cease to exist in my world. Once I am done with you, I can put you back in your little box until I want you to entertain me again. I don’t care that you don’t like Mr. Trump. But I bet you looked cute saying it. Get back into your bubble. I’ll let you know when I’m in the mood for something blue and shiny.

And am I also supposed to care that you will leave this great country [when] Trump becomes president? Ha. Please don’t forget to close the door behind you. We’d like to reserve your seat for someone who loves this country and really wants to be here. Make me laugh, or cry. Scare me. But realize that the only words of yours that matter are scripted. I might agree with some of you from time to time, but it doesn’t matter. In my world, you exist solely for my entertainment.”

I think Meryl Streep and all of Hollywood need to remember just one thing. Without we the people paying for those movie tickets, their industry will not and can not survive! I think that Hollywood, like government, has forgotten its place.

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Trump or Clinton? Who Will Really Fight the Status Quo?

shutterstock_359560856

The mainstream media spent the entire weekend slamming Donald Trump for locker room comments made eleven years ago, while ignoring Hillary’s released emails exposing her dreams of completely open borders, total globalization, an economy controlled by Wall Street insiders, and single payer healthcare.  Hillary  made it very clear over the weekend that she feels it is appropriate for her to say anything in order to win the White House, even if it isn’t true. After all the American people are deplorable, racist, bigoted, irredeemable basement dwellers who are too stupid to understand or make decisions about their own lives.

Let’s start with open borders. We currently have millions of illegals who have  crossed our borders and are receiving free housing, jobs and healthcare, paid for by the American taxpayer. Are we are now to accept and allow anyone and everyone into our country? Can you imagine what the United States would look like 4 years from now if our borders were left completely unchecked? Massive population growth, untold numbers of terrorists, gangs and drug lords setting up business in our local communities, schools overflowing, taxes through the roof, traffic unmovable, lawlessness unchecked, and mass chaos. The reality of open borders is truly a disaster that can be imagined  if Hillary wins the White House.

What about total globalization trumping local business and US-based companies? Our markets flooded with products and companies from around the world with no thought given to the American people,small business and the consequences to our economy, products,  jobs, or our safety?

After the disaster caused by Wall Street banks and government during the housing bubble collapse, can any of us imagine what would happen if we were to place the responsibility of the US economy in the hands of these same Wall Street banks? We currently see the results of the corruption allowed under Democratic policies like Dodd Frank, which have created behemoth banks that are too big to fail while forcing the American taxpayer to bail them out when their corruption is left  unchecked. Not one banker on Wall Street was held accountable, by our government, for the millions of Americans who lost their homes and their savings, walking away richer by betting on the very corruption and chaos they created. In recent months we have seen more corruption from big banks like Wells Fargo, fraudulently stealing money from hard-working Americans in order to fatten their own wallets, unchecked by regulators.  But yes, Hillary wants to place our  economy in the hands of the very crooks who crippled it in exchange for their own power and wealth. The very same power players who are now funding Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

We have all seen the results of placing healthcare in the hands of the government. President Obama’s legacy, the Affordable Care Act, falling under its own weight, and the VA failing to treat and care for our military.   Veterans who sacrifice their very lives to protect the freedoms of the American people, allowed to die as they wait for doctor appointments and are refused care.  Promises by Democrats to fix the situation left unfulfilled while VA employees are offered bonuses and promotions on the back of our dead veterans. Millions of Americans thrown out of the very policies and doctor’s offices Obama promised they could keep, healthcare costs rising astronomically while promises of  savings go down the drain.  Trillions of dollars wasted and hundred’s of promises unkept.

Now, the  Clinton camp dares to condemn Trump for locker room comments made eleven years ago while at the same time, Bill Clinton, responsible for multiple rapes and sexual attacks on female Democratic campaign volunteers, goes unpunished.  Trump called disgusting, while Hillary unleashes verbal attacks and smear campaigns on her husband’s victims, in order to clear the president of his unconscionable behavior.

We, the American people must ignore the blatant distractions being used by the Clinton camp, fueled by the media, in order to push through a corrupt agenda, by politicians who have never been held accountable for their own actions. We must all seek the truth, purposefully hidden by mainstream media, in order to make a truly educated decision on who can really make America great again.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Democrats Promise A Future Of Lawlessness; Coming To Your Town Soon!

th-1

In Milwaukee, Black Lives Matter activists, looters and rioters set out to hunt down and attack any and all white people.  Sherelle Smith, sister of Sylville Smith, the criminal shot down in Milwaukee, called for rioters to stop burning down their own neighborhoods and businesses  and head out to the suburbs and burn them down.

“You’re burning down  s**t we need in our community. Take that s**t to the suburbs! Burn that s**t down! We need our s**t, we need our weaves, I don’t wear them but we need them. We need our gas, We need our food. We need this. You all want to hurt somebody, take that shit further out.”

Was she arrested for inciting violence? Nope! As a matter of fact, CNN, immediately portrayed her as a hero in their newscast. Editing her screams, demanding the death of white people, down to a call for peace.

“Family and friends holding a vigil marked by prayers whith his sister calling for peace.” -Ana Cabera CNN.”

When the media refuses to report the truth, there should be consequences. The media and liberal politics have become interchangeable. The incestuous relationship of the liberal press with government has reached a new high. Media Research Center has a current list of those “revolving between working on behalf of Obama and positions in the news media” which has reached 30. There should be outrage over the destruction of real journalism. When will these so-called news agencies be held accountable for their lies and the fallout caused by their misrepresentation of the truth?

If we shift to Trump rallies and fund-raising events,  we see innocent people attacked, beaten up, spit on and harassed for their political beliefs.  Since the beginning of the campaign season, we have watched the violence escalate, yet nothing is done. Have you seen these videos shown and reported by the mainstream media? No, and you won’t, because if a conservative, a Trump supporter, a police officer or a veteran is attacked for any reason, it will not be reported, because their rights no longer matter under the current liberal definition of free speech, freedom of religion, the rule of law or just plain decency. The so-called tolerant political party only decries violence when it serves their purposes.

Add insult to injury, our government has promoted and continues to destroy the rule of law in the United States. President Obama refuses to enforce our immigration laws, while the IRS hands out tax refunds to illegals. Companies like Disney continue to abuse our visa system as an excuse to fire American workers and hire foreigners, the Department of Justice, headed by Loretta Lynch, recently filed, before a federal appeals court,  that it is unconstitutional to hold criminals, who are poor, in jail when they can’t afford bail. The DOJ has also threatened to deal with anyone who dare criticize Muslims, while terrorism is  targeted at Christians, gays and women. Meanwhile hard-working, law-abiding citizens are targeted for the color of their skin and the Obama administration along with Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine, continuously blame law enforcement and white people for the violence.

We have all seen the destruction and mayhem caused by the importation of un-vetted refugees into Europe. Terrorist attacks and crime have escalated as a direct result of the irresponsible actions of  their government leaders. Yet, as our media refuses to report these horrendous events, our president and Hillary Clinton are determined to march forward with allowing untold numbers of refugees that cannot be vetted, into the United States and into your local community.

What has happened to common sense and the rule of law? It has been ousted as racism, bigotry and white privilege. Therefore, a vote for Hillary will result in an escalation of lawlessness and will soon be on its way to a town near you!

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Bad Policy From A Good Leader?” The Demise Of The European Union.

shutterstock_331912520

If you found yourself asking  “why” the United Kingdom voted to remove itself from its family within the European Union yesterday, then you are not alone. Many across the globe are trying to understand, predict outcomes and second guess the people of the United Kingdom.

To understand this divide, we must start with the most powerful and prominent leader of the European Union, Andrea Merkel. Who is she, and what has she done for Germany?

Andrea Merkel, Chancellor of Germany since 2005, was able, like no other, to pull together the two major political parties of Germany, the Social Democrats and the Christian Democrats. An accomplishment that can only be achieved under a strong leader. An accomplishment that the President of the U.S. has refused to attempt, creating a divide in its citizenry that hasn’t existed since the 60’s. An accomplishment that brought the German people together and made them a force to be reckoned.

In an article, Maureen Orth says,

“To think that only 25 years ago Angela Merkel was a divorced 35-year-old East German physicist specializing in quantum chemistry, who was not allowed to set foot in West Berlin and had never uttered a political opinion in public, was a striking affirmation of both the ability of Germany to recover and her own ability to succeed.”

 Ralph Bolman, a biographer of a leading conservative daily, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, says,

“She’s very popular among the German people, but she doesn’t appreciate the German people so much. She doesn’t have much trust in them,” …..the chancellor treats the German electorate—which recently gave Merkel a 74 percent approval rating—“as if they were children.” Her nickname in Germany is Mutti, or Mommy. (A sticker on a litter can outside my Berlin hotel said, “Be careful. Mutti is watching you.”)”

An economic conservative, Merkel demanded painful structural reforms of Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy and Ireland in exchange for small bailouts.  Merkel pledged in her 2013 campaign that Germany would have a balanced budget by 2015. Today she continues to make decisions based on that pledge. She refuses to go into deficit spending in order to stimulate the economy. As a result, Germany is the largest national economy in Europe, the fourth largest by minimal GDP in the world and a founding member of the European Union and the Eurozone.

She refused to be a part of the Iraq war in 2003 and abstained on the vote within the U.N to join the U.S. in an intervention in Libya in 2011. In 2014, we saw the crisis in Ukraine take hold, and while Barack Obama refused to take a leadership role, Andrea Merkel stood at the helm in dealing with Putin.

When President Obama spoke at Tiergarten in 2008, Dirk Kurbjuweit, a journalist, said,

 “At the time, Merkel told him that Obama’s charisma—the very idea of which is antithetical to everything that is Angela Merkel—was overrated: “When he’s running, he can shine, but when he is in office he will have very different tasks. You can’t solve the tasks with charisma.”

As the United States has found out, charisma has done nothing in solving the problems of the world. Needless to say, the relationship between Obama and Merkel still remains cold.

As we come back to the vote by the United Kingdom (UK) to secede from the European Union (EU) the question remains, Why?

The finger of blame seems to be pointing in the direction of the refugee crisis that has been seen around the world. Andrea Merkel opened the borders of Germany resulting in over a million refugees flooding the country along with an additional numbers arriving monthly. Merkel’s popularity with the German people has dropped to a new low as the Cologne sex attacks of New Year Eve hit the news. Hundreds of women were targeted, raped, molested and robbed while evidence came pouring in that police forces nationwide were suppressing immigrant crime and refusing to pursue migrant offenders.

Orth also says,

“There are other serious issues brewing inside Germany. Her country has one of the lowest birthrates in the E.U., and 35 percent of children under five have an immigrant background, mostly Muslim. At the current rate, Germany could acquire a million refugees every five years. How will they be integrated into German society? “

The New York Times recently reported,

“Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland, countries that long set the standard for welcoming refugees from war and persecution, are rapidly rethinking their generosity as the tide of migrants to Europe strains their budgets and roils their politics.”

Sweden and Denmark currently have the highest number of sexual assaults in Europe. Statistics show that one in every four Swedish women will be raped.

Frontpage Magazine reports,

“With Muslims represented in as many as 77 percent of the rape cases and a major increase in rape cases paralleling a major increase in Muslim immigration, the wages of Muslim immigration are proving to be a sexual assault epidemic by a misogynistic ideology.”

“In Stockholm this summer there was an average of 5 rapes a day. Stockholm has gone from a Swedish city to a city that is one-third immigrant and is between a fifth and a quarter Muslim.” 

“Sweden, like the rest of the West, will have to come to terms with the fact that it can either have female equality or Muslim immigration. It cannot have both.”

Noah Barkin, Rueters bureau chief for Germany, Austria and Switzerland said,

“Without a doubt, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s standing in Europe has taken a hit because of her handling of the refugee crisis.

Her welcoming stance of “We can do it” is seen as naïve, not only in Central Europe but also by close partners like France, which is still reeling from the November terrorist attacks in Paris and is not in the mood for solidarity on the migrant issue. The mass assaults on women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve have deepened the skepticism.”

The Daily Mail reports,

The floodgates would open: Fury over EU plans to make Britain accept 90,000 refugees a year as part of migrant quota.

“This is scandalous,’ said Sir Gerald Howarth, a former Tory minister. ‘The tribunal should have no business in this matter. We have very strict laws on immigration and asylum that are set by Parliament. It is not for the courts to undermine them in this way.”

The Guardian reports,

“Polling suggests discontent with the scale of migration to the UK has been the biggest factor pushing Britons to vote out, with the contest turning into a referendum on whether people are happy to accept free movement in return for free trade.”

“Cameron promised before the 2010 election to bring migration down to the tens, not hundreds, of thousands. However, his failure to live up to his promise, repeated in 2015, has undermined trust in his leadership and contributed to a sense that UK politicians are powerless to lower migration from the EU.”

The Guardian reports another reason for the exodus,

“The leave camp argued that Brussels has been on a mission to expand its powers and sought further political integration, which is far removed from what the UK originally voted for. Voters appear to have decided that this was their one chance to leave a union they never particularly embraced and did not consent to in the first place.”

The dissatisfaction in the United Kingdom seems somewhat similar to the rise of the American middle and working class and the ever building support for Donald Trump.

“The leave campaign has throughout painted the EU and Brussels officials as a hotbed of unaccountable political elites who were not democratically voted by the British people.”

I guess the people have had enough!

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

If Hillary Wins the White House the Liberal Left Will Rule Forever!

 

 

 

shutterstock_423159436

 

What will happen if Hillary Clinton wins in November? There has been much speculation that we will continue to have a failing economy. More regulations. More taxes. More loss of liberty. More loss of Religious freedom. More loss of our second amendment rights. But, outside of these claims, is there a more disastrous outcome to another four years of Democratic rule? If Democrats keep the White House in the next election, they will rule forever. Republicans and/or conservatives will never retake the White House again.

What have we seen happening over the seven and a half years under the Obama administration? He has systematically dismantled U.S. immigration law, and Hillary Clinton has promised to bring about the complete dissolution of our nation’s borders.  Illegals are not being deported, but are being given housing, education and healthcare at the expense of the American worker. Obama and Hillary have promised to open our borders to hundreds of thousands of refugees from Middle Eastern countries without background checks. We have seen Democratic states offer driver’s licenses to illegals and some are taking it a step further by allowing illegals to vote in local elections.

What will happen if Hillary wins the White House? NBC recently reported,

“If elected, the former secretary of state has promised to build on President Obama’s executive actions and introduce comprehensive immigration reform during her first 100 days in office.”

Hillary’s website explains,

“Comprehensive immigration reform means full citizenship for all illegal immigrants, which would give them welfare access, voting privileges and the ability to bring over their family members through chain migration.”

Once the U.S has been flooded by non citizens, and all illegals are granted the right to vote by Democrats, than conservatives and Republicans will NEVER gain access to the White House again. The left will rule and the citizens of the United States will no longer have a voice or the power to reverse the path of the liberal left.

We have already seen the corruption within our government elections. While Democrats scream that there is no such thing as voter fraud, we have seen record numbers of convictions for voter fraud. We have seen voting machines changing votes, people who have voted in more than one state and the reanimation of hundreds of thousands of dead people who have returned from the grave just to vote for their favorite Democrat. California has already passed legislation that will automatically register eligible voters when they obtain or renew a driver’s license. When you sign up for a driver’s license in California, you DO NOT have to prove that you are an American citizen, therefore allowing illegals to participate in our election system unchecked. You have to ask yourselves why Democrats are against voter ID’s? Why are Democrats so determined to leave our borders open? Why is the current president suing any state that enforces our immigration laws? Why is our current Visa system unmonitored?  Why has our current president continued to allow unchecked border crossings and the release of convicted illegal criminals back into our communities? Currently there are over 200 sanctuary cities in the United States that ignore federal law when it comes to prosecuting illegal immigrants. Add in the obvious rigged system we have experienced during the primaries, and the American citizens have to realize that our government is controlling us and we are slowly but surely losing our rights and voices.

We have seen many Republicans refusing to vote for Donald Trump as the Republican Candidate for president. However, we all have to take note that if we want change for our country, then we must vote for change. If you stand your ground and refuse to vote, then you may lose your right to your voice in all future elections! If Hillary wins the presidency in 2016, the liberal left will rule forever!

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Obama and Congress Support Foreign Workers Over Americans!

shutterstock_227251288Happy New Year America!  While you were out celebrating the passage of the new year, President Obama was busy signing another Executive Order that increases the number of Foreign Workers allowed in the United States. He has once again, bypassed Congress and is breaking quotas established by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) of 1952.

Before the New Year, Congress passed an omnibus spending bill that dramatically increased the supply of H-2B foreign workers to fill construction, hospitality, truck driving and other blue-collar jobs. Although it does not allow increases over the current 66,000 cap, it does extend the length of their stays, further hindering the job market for blue-collar workers.  Now President Obama, though his executive action, will offer extensions and increases to the H-1B foreign worker program. It will grant work permits to foreign workers who are in the country on a temporary work visa and offer them green cards. It would also extend the length of work permits for foreign STEM students.

So while Congress and the President seem to believe that jobs are so abundant that we can offer them up to foreign workers, the facts point to a job market that is less than favorable for American  citizens.

  • The U.S. graduates twice as many students with STEM degrees as are hired in STEM occupations.
  • Two thirds of entry-level hires in the tech industry are now going to foreign workers.
  • 92 million Americans have dropped out of the workforce due to a lack of jobs.
  • 2.8 million college educated graduates will enter the workforce this year, yet represent 40% of the unemployed.
  • We have been in the longest sustained period of unemployment since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting their data following World War II.
  • Manufacturing jobs have fallen.
  • More businesses are closing their doors than opening.

Examples of how this program is being used to undercut American workers are becoming mainstream. Recently, Southern California Edison laid off hundreds of loyal employees and forced them to train H-1B guest workers hired to replace them. Disney also laid off hundreds of employees but not before requiring them to train their H1B replacements.  Microsoft laid off over 18,000 U.S workers while lobbying Washington for an increase in H1B visas.  Toys “R” Us,  New York Life Insurance Company, Engage Learning, Intel, and others have displaced thousands of workers in lieu of cheaper, unskilled foreign workers.

Tata and Infosys are two of the largest recipients of H1-B visas, receiving more than 12,400 new visas in 2013 alone.  Tata paid 29.8 million to settle a federal class action bought by 12,800 outsourced workers for mistreatement and Infosys paid $34 million to settle federal charges that it had defrauded immigration authorities. The H1B program has been and continues to be used as a scam for outsourcing firms and their U.S. clients; firing older, more experienced workers in lieu of cheaper foreign workers.

Senator Jeff Sessions has singled out presidential candidate Marco Rubio’s I-Squared bill, which triples the number of H1B visas issued in the United States. Sessions asked why Congress would ever consider

“Advancing legislation that provides jobs for the citizens of other countries at the expense of our own?”

Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft testified before Congress,

“Our higher education system doesn’t produce enough top scientists and engineers to meet the needs of the U.S. economy.”

Gates suggested  that we should allow corporations to hire an ‘infinite’ number of H-1B workers.

While Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg are pushing for unlimited H1B visas,  people like Christine Miller, an American born MIT Graduate with 20 years of research experience with Johns Hopkins is laid off because of funding cuts. Sona Shah, another American born worker with degrees in physics and engineering, was laid off  by a computer company that was simultaneously hiring foreign workers on temporary visas. Figures from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation are indicating that hundreds of thousands of STEM workers in the U.S. are unemployed or underemployed.

Does the United States actually have a shortage of qualified workers or is our government selling us down the proverbial garden path in favor of their biggest supporters….the corporate bottom line?

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Saul Alinsky is Alive And Well On Campuses Across The Country!

hillary-alinsky

Who, you ask, is Saul Alinsky? He was a self-proclaimed radical who supported guerilla tactics and civil disobedience to get what he wanted. In 1971 he wrote about his book “Rules for Radicals,

The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power,”  “Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”

Another notable quote from Alinsky,

“Lest we forget, at least an over the shoulder acknowledgment to, the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology and history, the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

Hillary Clinton admired Alinsky and even chose to write her thesis on his book. David Brock referred to her as “Alinsky’s daughter” in 1966’s The Seduction of Hillary Rodham. At the request of the White House, Wellesley College sealed her 1968 thesis because it showed, “the extent to which she internalized and assimilated the beliefs and methods of Saul Alinsky.” It was eventually opened to the public in 2001.  Alinsky offered Clinton a job, which she turned down to go into politics, commenting,

“Alinsky said I would be wasting my time, but my decision was an expression of my belief that the system could be changed from within.”

One of Alinsky’s rules  says,

* Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

This rule is now being utilized to destroy Dr. Carol M. Swain of  Vanderbilt University.  A student started a petition via Change.org calling for the job of Dr. Swain of “unprofessional intimidation on social media” and “discriminatory practices in the classroom.”  Even though the student has since recanted his comments, the damage to professor Swain has been done. In the midst of all this we have to ask, how students can yell discrimination and demand respect while they attack and attempt to destroy the career of  successful African-American conservative professor?

Who, you ask, is Professor Carol Swain? She was born in Bedford Virginia and grew up in a shack without running water. She was raised with 11 siblings and dropped out of school in the eighth grade. Even after a childhood spent in poverty, Swain earned her GED, while working as a cashier at McDonalds, a door to door salesperson as well as an assistant in a retirement facility. She eventually gained her Associate degree from Virginia Western Community College, a B.S. in criminal justice from Roanoke College and a master’s degree in law from Yale. She then completed her Ph.D in political science from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She received tenure as an associate professor of politics and public policy at Princeton  and currently teaches at Vanderbilt University. She has published multiple award-winning books and has written op-eds in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, The Huffington Post and the USA Today.  Needless to say, I could go on and on with a list of her accomplishments.

She epitomizes the American Dream. She not only tells us, but shows us what anyone is capable of doing if they live in the United States and choose to work hard.  But why has she has become the recent target of the chaos that has erupted on college campuses around the country? One thought might be that a current portion of an entitled college population is shutting down free speech and demanding hard-working successful Americans pay their way. It doesn’t matter who they destroy in the process, what lies they propagate to get their way, as long as they get a free ride.

Ben Carson, presidential candidate who attended Yale discussed the demonstrations on The Kelly file saying,

“Well we’re being a little bit too tolerant, I guess you might say, accepting infantile behavior, I don’t care which side it comes from. To say that I have the right to violate your civil rights because you’re offending me is un-American. It is unconstitutional. And the officials at these places must recognize that and have the moral courage to stand up it. Because if they don’t, it will grow, it will exacerbate the situation and we will move much further toward anarchy than anybody can imagine, and much more quickly.”

In a interview with Neil Cavuto on Fox News, Keely Mullen, an organizer for the Million Student March, laid out the demands of the students,

*Free public college

*Cancellation of all student debt

*A $15 minimum wage

Cavuto asked Mullen who she thought she pick up the tab for all these demands and she replied,

“The 1 percent of people who are hoarding the wealth and causing a catastrophe students are facing.”

Cavuto replied with the following question,

“If the 1 percent just had their taxes raised a few years ago back to almost 40 percent then to pay for the healthcare law, they had them raised another few percentage points, then they had their deductions limited to raise another couple of points — depending on the state or locality — they’re pushing over about 50 percent in taxes. “How much more do you think they should pay?”

Needless to say, the look of constant confusion on Mullen’s face and the lack of any sensical responses said it all. When advised, by Cavuto, that taking 100% of the wealthy’s money, wouldn’t even be able to keep Medicare going for three years, she replied,

“Yeah, I don’t believe that.”  “Yeah, I’m sorry, that just sounds completely ludicrous to me.”

I guess she is unaware that the U.S. government spends about $7  million dollars ever minute. With uniformed responses like that you have to ask yourself what they are teaching our young people in colleges across the country? The American people are already being robbed by the government, but now our so-called future leaders are demanding that we hand over all our money to pay their way? Bernie Sanders, who has traveled to colleges across the country has been spreading the same message to our students; everything should be free and paid for by the evil rich. In an interview with CNBC, Sanders said he would not be opposed to a 90% tax.

This movement among college students is not about the American Dream, it is about getting a  free ride paid for by those of  who have worked hard to gain an education and the appropriate experience to become successful contributors to the United States society. It is about instant gratification, not hard work. It is about destroying those, including professor Slain, who refuse to bend to the Rules of Saul Alinsky; those willing to stand up and fight for the values and ethics that result in becoming one of the many successful contributors to society among us.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

White House Agenda Has Turned U.S. On Its Head!

imgres

Finally common sense floats to the top. FBI Director, James Comey,  speaks out about the “Ferguson Effect.”  Are we seeing an increase in crime across the country as a result of the after effects of Ferguson, Baltimore and other cities where police have been thrown under the bus driven by activists and politicians supporting the “Black Lives Matter” movement. To date, we have seen a 20% increase in violent crimes across the country.

“The question that has been asked of me, is whether these kinds of things are changing police behavior all over the country,” Comey said during a speech at the University of Chicago Law School,

“And the answer is, I don’t know. I don’t know whether this explains it entirely, but I do have a strong sense that some part of the explanation is a chill wind blowing through American law enforcement over the last year. And that wind is surely changing behavior.”

“We can’t lose sight of the fact that there really are bad people standing on the street with guns. The young men dying on street corners all across this country are not committing suicide or being shot by the cops. They are being killed, police chiefs tell me, by other young men with guns.”

In New York, a protest was under way and attended by Quentin Tarantino, a Hollywood director, who has made a living off of representing horrific violence and murder in his films. Tarantino stood before the crowd and said,

“I’m a human being with a conscience,”  and if you believe there’s murder going on, then you need to rise up and stand up against it. I’m here to say I’m on the side of the murdered. When I see murders, I do not stand by … I have to call a murder a murder and I have to call the murderers the murderers.”

Tarantino stood before the crowd and defended the actions of Michael Brown, claiming he was unfairly attacked and killed by police officer, Darin Wilson.

“Michael Brown Jr., an 18-year-old black teenager, was walking to his grandmother’s house and was stopped and harassed by Darin Wilson a Ferguson cop. After being shot once Michael tried to run away.  He was shot a total of 6 times including twice in the head.”

These statements were made even though, after a grand jury hearing, we all now know that Michael Brown was the instigator in the attack on Darin Wilson.

Patrick Lynch, president of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association made the following remarks regarding the statements made by Tarantino,

“The police officers that Quentin Tarantino calls ‘murderers’ aren’t living in one of his depraved big-screen fantasies – they’re risking and sometimes sacrificing their lives to protect communities from real crime and mayhem.  New Yorkers need to send a message to this purveyor of degeneracy that he has no business coming to our city to peddle his slanderous ‘Cop Fiction’. It’s time for a boycott of Quentin Tarantino’s films.” 

What are the facts about police shootings? There are 630,000 active law enforcement officers and in 2014 there were 560 people killed by officers. Of those killed, 268 were whites, 142  were blacks and 90 were Hispanics. Yet, even with these statistics, the Obama administration continues to further the “Black Lives Matters” movement.

President Obama insisted, in July, that the mass incarceration of drug dealers disproportionately affects minorities. He believes that government is targeting blacks in drug investigations. As a result, he has been pushing more lenient sentences and the release of drug offenders  he feels are non violent.  As a result of this new policy, Tyrone Howard, a drug dealer,  who had 28 arrests on his rap sheet, was released and placed into rehabilitation instead of prison and subsequently shot and killed a police officer, Randolph Holder.

In response to Obama’s new policies on incarcerating drug dealers,  FBI Director, Comey said,

“Each drug dealer, each mugger, each killer, and each felon with a gun had his own lawyer, his own case, his own time before judge and jury, his own sentencing, and, in many cases, an appeal or other post-sentencing review. There were thousands and thousands of those individual cases, but to speak of ‘mass incarceration’ I believe is confusing, and it distorts an important reality.”

 

The facts are that fewer than 1 % of  drug convicts have been convicted of simple drug possession. Racially, 48% of all drug offenders in federal prisons are Latinos, 27% are black and 22% are white. According to the Bureau of Justice Stastics  a study revealed that 68% of the prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were re-arrested for new crimes within 3 years of being released and 77% were arrested within 5 years.

The Obama administration as well as Democrats have also shown support for Sanctuary cities around the United States. These cities receive federal funding, and actually provide safe havens for illegal criminals. The most notable case, Kathryn Steinle, was shot and killed by an illegal alien who had been deported from the county and returned 6 times. As a result of her murder, Bill O’Reilly pushed for the passage of “Kate’s Law,” which would impose a mandatory five-year prison sentence on illegal felons caught trying to re-enter the U.S. after being deported. A reasonable law in the eyes of most American citizens, yet voted down by Senate Democrats. The same Democrats refused to pull funding from cities that offer safe havens for  illegal felons. American citizens are not only forced to live in cities where these felons walk freely, but taxpayer dollars are used to house, educate and insure them as well.

What has happened to the United States under the Obama administration? We are now harboring and protecting criminals and putting our law-abiding citizens at risk everyday. We support radical protestors who destroy property and cities while pointing the finger of blame at the very men and women in blue who we demand protect us daily. We continue to see the political elite break our laws yet suffer no consequences while the people are held to task. We continue to place in office, those who refuse to stand up and protect the very people who they are placed in office to represent.  We can no longer look the other way while our country is turned on its head!

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The United States Is Bleeding To Death!

shutterstock_74535232

 

 

The United States is bleeding to death under the Obama Administration and it is time for a full transfusion to rid our country of the cancer that is slowly but surely destroying our way of life.

As we watch in horror at the brutal murders committed by ISIS of innocent men, women and children our commander and chief and democratic presidential hopeful, Hillary Clinton, are claiming Republicans are the real terrorists. As we watch in horror as Planned Parenthood sells baby parts for cash to the highest bidder without parental permission, our so-called leaders, accuse Republicans of advancing the “war on women,” while they continue paying their female workers less than their male counterparts and Obama has offered up an additional $1 million in taxpayer grants to over one hundred Planned Parenthood chapters. While American citizens are fighting to find jobs and support their families, President Obama opens our borders and passes out work permits like candy to immigrants who have broken the law and entered into our country illegally, even after a federal judge ordered him to cease and desist.  The administration has released hundreds of thousands of illegal criminals back into our communities and democratic led cities have created safe havens for  them, while their own citizens are murdered and raped by the very criminals they refuse to deport. The administration refuses to allow our soldiers to protect themselves on military bases by carrying guns, and calls the outright attack by Islamic terrorists on our military bases “work place violence,” resulting in full benefits for the terrorists and denying the same to the military victims.  While we watch in horror as our dedicated police officers are threatened and murdered in cold blood, our so-called leaders turn the other way while rushing to commend the criminals that do the killing.  As our democratic leaders claim they are fighting the war on terror, they do nothing when supporters of the “Black Lives Matter” movement call for their activists to kill all white people and police right here in the United States,

“Today, we live in a time when the white man will be picked off, and there’s nothing he can do about it,” he said. “His day is up, his time is up. We will witness more executions and killing of white people and cops than we ever have before. It’s about to go down. It’s open season on killing white people and crackas.”

Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan called for black Americans to “rise up and kill those who kill us.”  As he posts his speech on Facebook to over 10,000 followers, there is no concern by our democratic leaders and Facebook refuses to take the video down, while they do not hesitate to remove “milder pages and comments.”

Our military has been downgraded to levels not seen since World War II during a time of increased conflict around the world. While the United States and the American people have been threatened by Islamic terrorism calling for our deaths, our president has chosen to decimate our military instead of our enemies. Meanwhile, our veterans coming home from defending this nation, are not being offered the medical care they were promised. Obama recently claimed,

“The VA is handling millions more appointments, inside and outside the VA, and delivering more care. On average, veterans are waiting just a few days for an appointment. And that’s all good news.”

However, while the Veterans Administration’s (VA) budget increased significantly, the backlog of claims have doubled, wait times have increased and no one has been held accountable for the deaths of our Veterans at the hands of a corrupt government system.

Meanwhile, our public universities and colleges, receiving taxpayer dollars, are teaching our kids to hate America and threatening them with lower grades if they use politically incorrect terms such as “he” and “she,” or refuse to defer to people of color. The American flag is being banned and burned on university campuses while Christian clubs are disbanded or denied club status.

Obama now uses the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to force government funded housing into neighborhoods that hardworking Americans have spent years saving to obtain. In Obama’s world, you do not need to work hard to reap the rewards. You only have to “want it” or feel “entitled to it” to get it at taxpayers expense.

Small business  which employs over 50% of the working population and have generated 65% of new jobs since 1995, are shutting down at record rates under the weight of over regulation and higher taxes.  While the Obama administration bogs down small business in layer after layer of regulations and higher taxes, our government spends trillions of dollars and offers up billions in corporate bailouts, have given welfare and food stamps recipients more and more benefits and food stamp participation is at its highest levels then anytime in the history of our nation.  The Obama administration claims the unemployment rate is down while the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the 1970’s, and the economy is circling the drain. Obamacare is cutting worker’s pay by $22.6 billion per year and has eliminated 350,000 jobs, and the weight of regulations under the ACA is killing small business. Obama refuses to sign onto the Keystone pipeline and refuses to lift the ban on United States oil exports which would lead to our energy independence from Middle East. Meanwhile, the political elite on the Hill have become richer and richer while claiming to do the taxpayer’s bidding.

While over two hundred generals and admirals believe the Iran deal is a threat to our national security,  and Iran’s leaders and its people chant “death to America and Israel,”  the Obama administration gathers thirty four votes from Democratic Senators to ensure the deal will go through. As a result, sanctions will be lifted and Russia is now in negotiations with Iran to send them S-300 missiles, putting them in an even more deadly position to threaten Israel and the United States. Iran will also now have access to over $150 billion dollars to continue it’s financial support of terrorism around the world.

The Obama administration continues to demonize Christians while refusing to identify Islam as having any connection to terrorism around the world and here at home. By his side is Valerie Jarrett, his closest advisor, born in Iran and tied to communism through her family history.

The New York Times says Jarrett is Obama’s “closest friend in the White House”, his “envoy,” his “emissary,” his “all-purpose ambassador,” and the “ultimate Obama insider.” Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank says Jarrett’s connection with Obama is “deep and personal” and that she is “the real center of Obama’s inner circle.”

It is definitely disturbing to know that Jarrett has the President’s ear all while Judicial watch has obtained files from the FBI confirming that her father, maternal grandfather and father-in-law were hardcore Communists. Now we are to believe that the best the Democratic party can offer up is a lying corrupt former Secretary of State who has been proven time after time to have lied and feels she deserves different treatment than the rest of America’s citizens and a self professed socialist, Bernie Sanders. What is happening to the Democratic party?

Admiral James Lyon, who commanded the U.S. Pacific Fleet under Ronald Reagan, recently spoke at a Defeat Jihad Summit, sponsored by the Center for Security Policy. He spoke of a number of failed opportunities by the United States, since the late 1970s, to deal a crippling blow to Islamic jihadism and “change the course of history.” 

 

 “You know, we all say we have to identify the threat. Well, I think the one who identified it the best was [President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan from Turkey when he said, ‘Islam is Islam. There are no modifiers.  Democracy is the train we ride to our ultimate objective. Until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religious movement you never are going to come to grips with it.”

  “The Obama Administration  has a strategy. It is very simple. Any thinking American should be able to grasp it. It is anti American, anti-western. It is pro islamic, pro Iranina and pro Muslim brotherhood.”

As more citizens open their eyes, it is imperative that we vote to change the leadership of our country in order to save the United States from bleeding to death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Obama Choses Demonization over Faith?

shutterstock_145324306 2 shutterstock_145324306

The resurrection of Jesus changes the face of death for all His people. Death is no longer a prison, but a passage into God’s presence.  Easter says you can put truth in a grave, but it won’t stay there.  –Clarence W. Hall

At a time when Christians were celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ, an Islamic terrorist group,  Al-Shabaab, slaughtered 147 innocent students.  All Christians.  Yet again, President Obama refused to acknowledge that the continuous slaughter of Christians around the world by Islamic extremists are actually connected to Islam in any way. President Obama was able to complete his entire statement regarding the slaughter at Garissa University College without mentioning the words, “Christian,” “Islam,” “Al-Shabaab,” “Islamists,” or “Islamic extremism.”

However, on Tuesday morning’s Easter Prayer Breakfast, President Obama managed to single out and demonize Christians once again.

“On Easter, I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love, and I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less-than-loving expression by Christians, I get concerned.”

Instead of celebrating the resurrection of Christ, President Obama decided it was appropriate to stray from his planned speech to remind us that Christians, in his opinion, are “less-than-loving?” Did he chose to tell us how “less-than-loving” the Islamic extremists were that chose to slaughter 147 Kenyan students because of their Christian beliefs? Did he chose to tell us how horrific the slaughter and persecution of Christians around the world has been?

  • “We are not at war with Islam”- Obama
  • “Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean the rest of us shouldn’t question those who would insult others in the name of free speech.”- Obama
  • “And lest we get on our high horse?….remember during the Crusades and the Inquisition committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.”-Obama
  • “Slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”-Obama

Obama is also highly critical of the Religious freedom laws in Indiana and Arkansas because he believes this will allow Christians to discriminate against gays, even though the laws make it illegal to discriminate against anyone.  However, when a Muslim bakery is caught on tape refusing to bake a gay wedding cake, the silence from this White House was deafening. Does his blanket condemnation only apply to Christians?

 Do ALL Christians make non-loving statements? No. Do ALL followers of Islam believe in the slaughter of Christians? No. If our President refuses to attach “Islamic” extremism to the continued beheadings, burnings and abuse of innocents, then why does he find it so easy to attach “non-loving statements” and the “violence in the Crusades” and “Jim Crow laws” to Christians?

Why is the President of the United States so attuned to appeasing the Islamic world by refusing to connect Islam extremism to the continued destruction and slaughter of Christians around the world, rather than focusing on lifting up the American people and the world with words of hope and inspiration to believers of all faiths?

In a speech on February 19, to U.S. and foreign officials who met to discuss minimizing jihadi violence, Obama said,

 ”When people spew hatred toward others — because of their faith or because they’re immigrants — it feeds into terrorist narratives. … It feeds a cycle of fear and resentment and a sense of injustice upon which extremists prey…. we have to ensure that our diverse societies truly welcome and respect people of all faiths and backgrounds.” 

 President Obama got a portion of it right in this speech,

“When you spew hatred towards others because of their faith…..you feed a cycle of resentment and a sense of injustice…”

This he has accomplished, right here in the United States!

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Without Obama We Would Never Know……..

 

shutterstock_203733379

If it were not for President Obama and Democrats, would you know that the Taliban is not a terrorist organization but just an “armed insurgency?”

The Taliban shot Malala Yousafzai, a 16-year-old Pakistani child advocate for girl’s education, in the face because she simply wanted an education. Then how could we forget the December attack in Pakistan where the Taliban killed 145 people, mostly children in their school uniforms.  What about the story of the 7-year-old Afghanistan boy who was hung by the Taliban simply because he had American dollars in his pocket? But the Obama administration and Democrats want to educate the American people in the facts….they are not terrorists!

If it were not for President Obama and Democrats, we would not know that trading 5 Taliban terrorists, for Bo Bergdahl, a deserter, is not negotiating with terrorists. Yet when Jordan decides to trade a female terrorist responsible for a 2005 suicide bomb attack for a Japanese war veteran held by ISIS, the White House says,

“We don’t pay ransom, we don’t give concessions to terrorist organizations.”

“We don’t get into negotiation with terrorists. We don’t pay ransom because that cash than fuels further kidnappings, which just continue to exacerbate the problem. So, we’re not going to do that.” (Fox News Sunday)

Meanwhile, it has been suggested that the Army has plans to charge Bergdahl with desertion. And one of the terrorists exchanged by Obama for Bergdahl is now a top ISIS commander.

As reported by the National Report,

“Mullah Mohammed Fazi, one of the five Guantanamo Bay detainees released by the Obama administration in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, has been confirmed to be currently in Iraq. Fazi, the Taliban’s former Defense Minister, is serving in a leadership capacity within the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.”

If it were not for President Obama and Democrats, would you know that ISIS/ISIL, who behead innocent men, women and children from every religious faction, while praising Allah, have nothing to do with Islam? I mean how we would ever know this if we did not have Obama and Democrats telling us so?

Let’s look at our recent and continuing economic and foreign policy lessons we continue to learn from President Obama and Democrats.  Direct from the horse’s mouth, at the recent SOTU, (State of the Union):

Obama:

“America, in 2014, had a “breakthrough year.”  “Our economy is growing and creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999” “Our employment rate is lower that it was before the financial crisis.”

The Reality:

Unemployment is at 5.6%, yet if you added back into the mix all the Americans who have dropped out of the workforce because they have given up trying to find a job, we would be looking at an unemployment rate of 9.1%. According to the Economic Policy Institute, over 6 million Americans have quit looking for jobs that are not there.  They say,

“The unemployment rate published, (5.6%) drastically understates the weakness of job opportunities.”

But how would those unemployed Americans sitting at home, disillusioned and hopeless in rebuilding their lives because the economy still stinks, know that the economy and the job market is really GREAT, if Obama didn’t tell us this?

Obama:

“Tonight for the first time since 9/11 our combat mission in Afghanistan, [Iraq] is over….The Shadow of crisis has passed and the State of the Union is strong.”

The Reality:

According to the Huffington Post, a liberal alternative to the Drudge Report,

“Can we afford another failed state in Afghanistan?”

“In the annals of U.S. foreign policy, Afghanistan stands as a typical case where a flawed military strategy has sidelined viable political solutions.  The U.S. has had a war strategy, but no political strategy or a clear exit strategy.”

“Many of the warlords who Balkanized the country in the 1990s act as high-ranking officials and parliamentarians, ranks they have acquired through the flagrant abuse of ethnic loyalties and tribal quotas. Furthermore, some of these warlords-turned-demagogues have been implicated in crimes against humanity, but remain immune to prosecution with the tacit approval of the United States.”

And from Newsweek,

“A leading politician in Iraq has warned that unless the United States and its allies can quickly liberate the parts of Iraq under ISIS control, people there may soon learn to live with the militants. “Time, is not on our side.”

And from the The Boston Globe,

“The recent terrorist attack in Paris against the Charlie Hebdo magazine and a kosher supermarket stunned the city. For three days we watched the drama unfold; the brazen assault and massacre, the desperate search for the brothers, the subsequent standoff, and a deadly hostage situation that targeted the Jewish community. The conclusions to both crises were violent and virtually simultaneous.”

As stated in the Business Insider in July of 2014,

“The most extreme faction of Al Qaeda is winning, and it’s leading to the destruction of Iraq.”

 Obama:

“We believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil and protect our planet. And today, America is number one in oil and gas. America is number one in wind power. Every three weeks we bring online as much solar power as we did in all of 2008.  And thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump.”

The Reality:

From the Washington Times,

“President Obama has gone to war. But not with the Islamic State group, Iran, North Korea or any foreign threat. Mr. Obama, at the urging of environmental extremists, has declared war on America’s oil and natural gas producers. His weapon of choice is a new Environmental Protection Agency regulation to cut methane emissions by up to 45 percent by 2025.”

From the Wall Street Journal,

 “The Obama administration said Tuesday it would veto legislation that would authorize the Keystone XL pipeline.”

From the Washington Examiner,

“Oil, natural gas and coal production in this country are at record levels. But this is despite Obama’s policies, not, as he implied, because of them. Oil, natural gas and coal production are zooming upwards on private land, but plummeting on government lands.”

“Immediately after taking office in 2009, Obama canceled 77 leases for oil and gas drilling in Utah. Then in January 2010, Obama issued new regulations further restricting energy development on all federal lands.”

“Obama instituted not one but two comprehensive drilling bans in the Gulf of Mexico, the first of which was declared illegal by a federal judge. After lifting his second ban, Obama refused to issue permits for any new drilling in the Gulf, which EIA estimated cut domestic offshore oil production by 13 percent that year alone.”

“Obama has leased less than half as many offshore acres as President Clinton did at the same point in his tenure. And Obama is blocking access to 19 billion barrels of oil in the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, another 10 billion barrels estimated in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast, and another 10 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.”

“Even so, the United States is undergoing an energy revolution, making the U.S. dramatically less dependent on oil from hostile foreign nations. Increased natural gas production is making manufacturing here competitive again due to lower production costs, which in turn fuels a manufacturing employment expansion the country has not seen in decades. It’s the fruit of Americans working together voluntarily in the private sector. Think what they could do if Obama and the bureaucrats would get out-of-the-way.”

From CNN,

Solyndra, Abound Solar, Beacon Power, and Ener1, Obama’s green energy,  firms that all received money from the stimulus totaling over $1 billion dollars, have all gone bankrupt.

Obama:

“Will we allow ourselves to be sorted into factions and turned against one another–or will we recapture the sense of common purpose that has always propelled America forward?” 

The Reality:

From the National Review:

“Considered politically toxic by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush,  Al Sharpton has been enthusiastically embraced by President Obama. He has bragged about helping to pick a new attorney general and communed with the current one. In fact, a much-quoted Politico profile last summer, described Al Sharpton as Obama’s “go-to man on race.”

From Breitbart:

“President Barack Obama invited Al Sharpton to a series of White House meetings on Monday concerning the Ferguson riots, but he did not feel it was necessary to give someone from the Ferguson police department a seat at the table.” 

“Obama also met with two “youth leaders” from Ferguson. Obama later cited their stories and said that hearing “young people feeling marginalized and distrustful even after they’ve done everything right” only “violates” his “belief in what America can do.””

Meanwhile, protestors in Ferguson trashed, vandilized and destroyed over 40 business in Ferguson in protest.

A few of the many other headlines on the Ferguson riots:

  • “Elderly Man Attacked With His Own Oxygen Tank and Carjacked By Protesters.”
  • “Ferguson Rioters Attack Little Kids At Christmas tree Lighting Event.”
  • “Reporter Attacked, Robbed at Gunpoint in Ferguson; Protesters Set his Car on Fire”
  • “Pack of Teens Beat Man to Death Near Ferguson”
  • “Rioters Attack Police Car in Ferguson”
  • “Micheal Brown’s Mother to Face Robbery charges.”
  • “Fox Reporter Attacked by Masked Man in Ferguson”
  • “Officer Violently Attacked, Shot During Ferguson-Related Riot”

“Obama also met with two “youth leaders” from Ferguson. Obama later cited their stories and said that hearing “young people feeling marginalized and distrustful even after they’ve done everything right” only “violates” his “belief in what America can do.””

I guess we wouldn’t know that the Ferguson protesters did everything right if it weren’t for President Obama, Eric Holder and Al Sharpton clearing that up for us.

From The National Review:

 “President Obama said that police in Cambridge, Massachusetts, “acted stupidly” in arresting a prominent black Harvard professor last week after a confrontation at the man’s home.”

From the Huffington Post,

“Obama on Trayvon Martin Case: If I had a son he would look like Trayvon.”(regarding Ferguson, prior to investigations)

“We fund a lot of jurisdictions all across the country. And if we can identify best practices, then for us to be able to say, you need to adopt these best practices, and if you don’t, then perhaps some of the funding that’s available around some things that law enforcement cares about become less available,” Obama said.

“We’re going to provide more to folks who are doing the right thing and we’re going to be investigating folks who are not doing the right thing.”

The American people have been lied to over and over and over again by this President and members of the Democratic party. Decisions are no longer made in the best interest of the country, but in the best interest of politics. The current administration’s cabinet has been filled with Obama cheerleaders who are  determined to continue with President Obama’s agenda to “fundamentally transform the United States” into something we no longer even recognize…..A Nation that now has no morals, has shut out God and welcomed in Islam, where lying is the new truth,  part time work is now the norm, and we, the taxpayer are responsible for funding every illegal in the country to make sure they have a homes, food, education and healthcare, while we go without.  Add insult to injury,  Webster’s dictionary has to be rewritten because you are not allowed to use half the words in it for fear of offending someone!

It is time for change….

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Against the Rule of Law, Terrorists Still Funded by U.S!

shutterstock_141927565

 

Since 1990, the United States Government has committed $5 billion in bi-lateral assistance to the Palestinian Authority (PA) who continue to be the largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid.

In 2006, Hamas, a terrorist organization,  participated and won a majority in the Palestinian parliament, and as a result, the Palestinian Authority (PA) formed a coalition government with Hamas.  Mahmoud Abbas claimed the presidency and Ismail Haniya, a member of Hamas, became the prime minister. However, there was fighting between the two factions over a failed deal to share government power, and over 600 Palestinians were killed. As a result, the government coalition split leaving Haniya, (Hamas) in control of the Gaza Strip, and Abbas (PA) the West Bank.

Who is Hamas? They were established in 1987 and their origins begin in Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood. What do they stand for? In 2006, The New York Times reported on the Hamas Charter which includes, but is not limited to the following items,

  • Hamas’ goal is Jihad and the death of Jews.
  • All Muslims are duty bound to commit jihad against Israel
  • Peace is not an option
  • Women must train their children to become Jihad fighters
  • Hamas cares about human right and religious toleration provided all other religions live in the shadow of Islam.
  • (http://lawofnations.blogspot.com/2006/01/hamas-party-platform.html)

In 2014, the two groups, again, decided to join forces which resulted in the halting of peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Because of the creation of this new coalition government between Hamas and the Palestinians,  Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, responded by saying,

“So instead of moving into peace with Israel, he (Abbas) is moving into peace with Hamas. He has to choose. Does he want peace with Hamas or peace with Israel. You can have one but not the other. I hope he chooses peace; so far he hasn’t done so.”

Should the United States continue its financial support of the Palestinian Authority? More importantly, is it in line with the letter of United States law?

In a report for the Congressional Research Service, prepared by Jim Sanotti, Specialist in Middle Eastern affairs, there are three U.S. policies that dictate the reason for the financial support to the Palestinians from the United States: 

  • Preventing terrorism against Israel from Hamas and other militant organizations.
  • Fostering stability, prosperity and self-governance in the West Bank that inclines Palestinians- including those in the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip- toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and a “two-state solution.”
  • Meeting humanitarian needs

Additionally, the Congressional Research Service states there are restrictions on the United States offering aid to Palestinians, which includes, but it not limited to the following:

  • No aid is permitted for Hamas or Hamas controlled entities.
  • No aid is permitted for a power-sharing PA government that includes Hamas as a member or that results from an agreement over which Hamas exercises “undue influence” unless they have accepted the following 2 principles.  1. recognition of the “Jewish state of Israel’s right to exist” and 2. acceptance of previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements.

The United States has identified Hamas as a “Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization” in October of 1997.  At the website for the U.S. Department of State, there is a list of the current foreign organizations that have been classified as “terrorists.”  In order for the State Department to classify a group as terrorist, they must meet the Legal Criteria for Designation:

  • It must be a foreign organization
  •  It must engage in terrorist activity  or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism.
  • The organization’s terrorist activity must threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security of the United States.

Congress and members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee have raised concerns about  continued U.S. financial support to the Palestinian Authority.  However, even with the restrictions and definitions required by the rule of law, President Obama has stated that he will continue offering U.S. financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority, even though they have formed a coalition government with Hamas, which clearly is in direct conflict with the rule of law. Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee made the following statements:

“The administration is not demanding that [Abbas] return to the negotiation table with Israel without preconditions nor that he stops his unilateral statehood scheme at the U.N.”

“If the PA refuses to go back to the negotiation table with Israel and will not recognize a two state solution, why does the United States continue to offer financial aid to the Palestinians/Hamas?”

“The administration also says we need to help rebuild the Palestinian economy at a time when our economy is facing serious challenges and Americans are suffering.”

How much does the United States currently give in financial assistance to the Palestinian Authority?  In 2014, the United States offered approximately $440 million in assistance to the Palestinians and an additional $200 million annually through the U.N Relief and Works Agency, (UNRWA). Congress has raised concerns in regards to the UNRWA noting that funds might be used to support terrorists. UNRWA claims it screens staff and contractors every 6 months for terrorist ties to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, however, their screening does not include Hamas, Hezbollah or other terrorist groups in the area.

Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netenyahu spoke out in a speech made to the UN in 2014,

 “Last week, many of the countries represented here rightly applauded President Obama for leading the effort to confront ISIS. And yet weeks before, some of these same countries, the same countries that now support confronting ISIS, opposed Israel for confronting Hamas. They evidently don’t understand that ISIS and Hamas are branches of the same poisonous tree.”

“…… they all share a fanatic ideology. They all seek to create ever-expanding enclaves of militant Islam where there is no freedom and no tolerance – Where women are treated as chattel, Christians are decimated, and minorities are subjugated, sometimes given the stark choice: convert or die. For them, anyone can be an infidel, including fellow Muslims.” 

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is deep in negotiations with Iran and their president, Haassan Rouhani,  in assisting in the fight with ISIS. However, what will we need to concede in order to obtain their support, and do we really want to make a deal with the devil?  Iran is a supporter of terrorism and is currently helping Syria’s Assad in the slaughter of rebels, gays, and Christians and has also threatened to wipe Israel and Jews off the map.  Are these really the people we want to climb into bed beside?

President Obama wants to loosen sanctions against Iran in exchange for their promise not to develop Nuclear weapons. A November 24 deadline is looming for Iran and the P5+1 group (U.S. , France, China, Britain, Russia and Germany) to discuss whether Iran will be allowed to continue to enrich uranium in defiance of U.N Security Council resolutions. President Rouhani has said that Iran will not “surrender” on the question of enrichment. In response to Obama, over 30 Republican senators sent a letter to John Kerry, Secretary of State saying,

“We have learned that the United States and its P5+1 negotiating partners may now be offering troubling nuclear concessions to Iran in the hopes of rapidly concluding negotiations for a ‘deal.’ Given that a nuclear Iran poses the greatest long-term threat to the security of the United States, Israel and other allies, we are gravely concerned about the possibility of any new agreement that, in return for further relief of U.S. led international sanctions, would allow Iran to produce explosive nuclear material.”

In August of this year, Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani said,

Iran supports the brave resistance of great and patient Palestinians and Gazan people.” Muslims in Gaza stood firm in the face of blood thirsty Zionists’ bombs and missiles and emerged victorious. Iran always stands by Palestine, Iraq and Syria. The Iranian nation will take the next steps with more power. The world knows that threats and sanctions against this great nation will have no effect.”

In his speech to the UN, Netanyahu further said,

“To defeat ISIS and leave Iran as a threshold nuclear power is to win the battle and lose the war.”

President Obama could learn something from him!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

A Politicians Real Truth Exposed!

Unknown

 

Where will the country stand after the midterm elections? Where will Virginia stand after the next election? How about Kentucky, Colorado, or a host of other states around the country?  Should we have to wait until after the midterm elections to find out exactly who we just voted into office?

I sure hope not, because we all know the outcome to “lies first” and “facts later.” Remember Nancy Pelosi’s now famous line,  “we have to vote for it to find out exactly what is in it?”   How did that turn out? Over a trillion hard-earned taxpayer dollars wasted, millions of Americans losing their policies, insurance rates through the roof and deductibles unattainable.  Millions more set to receive their cancellation letters before Christmas.  But, how did that turn out for our elected officials? They kept their Cadillac insurance plans, subsidized 75% by the taxpayer, no interruption to their daily lives, all while we scrambled around in the mud trying to regain some sense of order to the disastrous mess they made at our expense.  Should we really wait until after the midterms to find out where the United States is headed, or should we grab that bull by the horns and decide which direction is best for the American people and not our politicians?

How much better off would we be, if we could actually hold our politicians responsible for the promises they make?  What if we could throw them out of office, without any fanfare, without any questions or excuses, if we found out that they lied to their constituents? I’m not talking about small untruths, or embellishments,  I am talking about purposeful, bold-face lies that have been told to the American people, in order to further political  careers, embolden political parties and fatten wallets while selling the American people down the proverbial drain?  How many politicians would lose their jobs today, if we were to hold them accountable for the bold-face lies they told? Unfortunately for us, too many to count.

Recently, the Democratic candidate for Kentucky, Alison Grimes, was caught like a deer in the headlights lying to the people of Kentucky. She claimed she was a supporter of the coal industry and  promised to fight for them, against President Obama’s “war on coal,” if elected. Unfortunately for her and fortunately for the people of Kentucky, it was discovered that she, in fact, bold-faced lied!  A major donor to her campaign admitted,

“Grimes is faking her support of the coal industry, and will f**k em as soon as she gets elected.”(http://youtu.be/L4sn-jI12_8)

What about the promises that were made to keep our borders secure? What about the promises that were made to keep our children and our communities safe from infectious diseases?  What about the promises made to send illegals back where they came from? What about the promises made to fight terrorism? As we have discovered, on so many fronts, our politicians refuse to tell us the truth. They bold-face lie! They refuse to answer simple questions on exactly where they stand on the issues.  They refuse to answer questions regarding their actions. We are exposed to evasion, avoidance, manipulation, denial, misdirection, and the ever-present distraction. Yet, predominantly, we see our current politicians bold-face lie to the American people, and meanwhile, mainstream media remains cooperative, collaborative, collusive and completely hand in glove with the political machine. The only truths are discovered through sleuth, by everyday Americans determined to expose our so-called public servants for who they really are.  Is this starting to sound like a conspiracy?  But what do they have to gain from deceiving the American people?  Power and money….it makes the world go round!

Mark Warner, incumbent senator running in Virginia, promised he would never vote for a health insurance bill if it did not allow  you to keep your policy or doctor if  you liked them. He voted “yes” for Obamacare, and he continues to support the failing ACA bill, knowing full well Americans cannot keep their policies or their doctors.  His current ads proclaim him as a successful small business owner, who has proven that he can work across party lines to get things done. But is that true? Mark Warner is currently the second richest Senator on the Hill. His net worth is estimated at over $270 million. Did he earn that by working hard to make his small business a huge success,  or did he use insider information while working with Chris Dodd, Democrat for Connecticut, about the newly emerging wireless industry and spectrum licensing to get a jump on the rest of Virginians? Does he support amnesty? Does he really support the “right to work state,” while pushing for bills that actually support big Unions and hurt the “right to work” cause? Has he really reached across the aisle, or has he voted with President Obama 97% of the time? What is the truth?

Recently, Harry Reid’s body guard physically attacked a “non-mainstream,” reporter for simply asking how Reid could be worth over $10 million on a public servant’s salary of $194,000 a year. If you believe he made it honestly, I have some land that I want to sell you in order to build a bridge across the Colorado River that is a priority to no one but Harry Reid’s bank account.

Last, but definitely not least, It has been proven that President Obama has told countless bold-face lies, in order to be elected and re-elected.

Is this legal? Can our politicians actually bold-face lie to us and get away with it? What if the lies result in disaster for the voting public?

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 9-0 decision determined that political ads are protected by the First Amendment. In other words, our politicians are legally allowed to lie to the American people, and mainstream media is allowed to further those lies, refusing to uphold their oath to actually inform the American people, in order to further their political agenda.  However, in the same breath, 46 Senate Democrats, lead by Harry Reid, decided that the First Amendment was actually an impediment to re-election for them. As a result they decided it would be a good idea to regulate the amount of money everyday citizens could spend advocating for the political candidates of their choice. President Obama even conceded, in an oral argument, that the law being pushed by democrats would in fact, allow the government to ban political books or pamphlets. Imagine if this law had passed. Not only would we not be able to promote our political choices, but the government would have been able to stop American citizens from printing or distributing  any publications or pamphlets promoting our beliefs, all while upholding their right to purposefully bold-face lie  to the American people. The height of hypocrisy!

So what happens when lying is upheld in our court system, and the media, owned in a 75% majority by the Liberal left, promotes these lies that eventually thwart the truth that is necessary for the informed voter to make an educated choice in the voting booth?

If truth be told, the American people are F****D!

Dig deep for the truth, and go to the poles on November 4th and say enough is enough!!!

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Can It All Be Coincidence? by Don Fredrick, (c)2012, blogging at The Obama Timeline….

images

 

After reading this, I felt it was important for others to have access to this information as well.  Alan Caruba, ACaruba@aol.com, another blogger wrote to the author and asked for permission to disseminate it. The author has granted permission to post it if you wish. Please read it in its entirety, I have no doubt you will find it interesting. 

 

As I noted in the introduction to my book, The Obama Timeline, a jury at a murder trial will often find the accumulated circumstantial evidence so overwhelming that a guilty verdict is obvious—even though there may be no witness to the crime. “The jurors in the Scott Peterson trial believed the collection of evidence more than they believed Scott Peterson. Among other things, the jury thought that being arrested with $15,000 in cash, recently-dyed hair, a newly-grown goatee, four cell phones, camping equipment, a map to a new girlfriend’s house, a gun, and his brother’s drivers license certainly did not paint a picture of a grieving husband who had nothing to do with his pregnant wife’s disappearance and murder.”

 

In the four years I have been gathering information about—and evidence against—Barack Hussein Obama, I have encountered hundreds of coincidences that strike me as amazing. None of those coincidences, by themselves, may mean much. But taken as a whole it is almost impossible to believe they were all the result of chance. Consider the Obama-related coincidences:

 

Obama just happened to know 60s far-left radical revolutionary William Ayers, whose father just happened to be Thomas Ayers, who just happened to be a close friend of Obama’s communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis, who just happened to work at the communist-sympathizing Chicago Defender with Vernon Jarrett, who just happened to later become the father-in-law of Iranian-born leftist Valerie Jarrett, who Obama just happened to choose as his closest White House advisor, and who just happened to have been CEO of Habitat Company, which just happened to manage public housing in Chicago, which just happened to get millions of dollars from the Illinois state legislature, and which just happened not to properly maintain the housing—which eventually just happened to require demolition.

Obama just happened to know 60s far-left radical revolutionary William Ayers, whose father just happened to be Thomas Ayers, who just happened to be a close friend of Obama’s communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis, who just happened to work at the communist-sympathizing Chicago Defender with Vernon Jarrett, who just happened to later become the father-in-law of Iranian-born leftist Valerie Jarrett, who Obama just happened to choose as his closest White House advisor, and who just happened to have been CEO of Habitat Company, which just happened to manage public housing in Chicago, which just happened to get millions of dollars from the Illinois state legislature, and which just happened not to properly maintain the housing—which eventually just happened to require demolition.

 

Valerie Jarrett also just happened to work for the city of Chicago, and just happened to hire Michelle LaVaughan Robinson (later Obama), who just happened to have worked at the Sidley Austin law firm, where former fugitive from the FBI Bernardine Dohrn also just happened to work, and where Barack Obama just happened to get a summer job. Jarrett also just happened to follow Obama as a member of the board of the Joyce Foundation, where she served with Michael Brewer, who just happens to be married to Janet Brown, who just happens to be executive director of the Commission on Presidential Debates, which just happened to select four leftist members of the mainstream media to moderate the 2012 presidential and vice-presidential debates.

 

Bernardine Dohrn just happened to be married to William Ayers, with whom she just happened to have hidden from the FBI at a San Francisco marina, along with Donald Warden, who just happened to change his name to Khalid al-Mansour, and Warden/al-Mansour just happened to be a mentor of Black Panther Party founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and a close associate of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, and al-Mansour just happened to be financial adviser to a Saudi Prince, who just happened to donate cash to Harvard, for which Obama just happened to get a critical letter of recommendation from Percy Sutton, who just happened to have been the attorney for Malcolm X, who just happened to know Kenyan politician Tom Mboya, who just happened to be a close friend of Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., who just happened to meet Malcolm X when he traveled to Kenya.

 

Obama, Sr. just happened to have his education at the University of Hawaii paid for by the Laubach Literacy Institute, which just happened to have been supported by Elizabeth Mooney Kirk, who just happened to bea friend of Malcolm X, who just happened to have been associated with the nation of Islam, which was later headed by Louis Farrakhan, who just happens to live very close to Obama’s Chicago mansion, which also just happens to be located very close to the residence of William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, who just happen to have been occasional baby-sitters for Malia and Natasha Obama, whose parents just happen not to mind exposing their daughters to bomb-making communists.

 

After attending Occidental College and Columbia University, where he just happened to have foreign Muslim roommates, Obama moved to Chicago to work for the Industrial Areas Foundation, an organization that just happened to have been founded by Marxist and radical agitator Saul “the Red” Alinsky, author of Rules for Radicals, who just happened to be the topic of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s thesis at Wellesley College, and Obama’s $25,000 salary at IAF just happened to be funded by a grant from the Woods Fund, which was founded by the Woods family, whose Sahara Coal company just happened to provide coal to Commonwealth Edison, whose CEO just happened to be Thomas Ayers, whose son William Ayers just happened to serve on the board of the Woods Fund, along with Obama.

 

Obama also worked on voter registration drives in Chicago in the 1980s and just happened to work with leftist political groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and Socialist International (SI), through which Obama met Carl Davidson, who just happened to travel to Cuba during the Vietnam War to sabotage the U.S. war effort, and who just happened to be a former member of the SDS and a member of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, which just happened to sponsor a 2002 anti-war rally at which Obama spoke, and which just happened to have been organized by Marilyn Katz, a former SDS activist and later public relations consultant who just happened to be a long-time friend of Obama’s political hatchet man, David Axelrod.

 

Obama joined Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC), whose pastor was Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a fiery orator who just happened to preach Marxism and Black Liberation Theology and who delivered anti-white, anti-Jew, and anti-American sermons, which Obama just happened never to hear because he just happened to miss church only on the days when Wright was at his “most enthusiastic,” and Obama just happened never to notice that Oprah Winfrey left the church because it was too radical, and just happened never to notice that the church gave the vile anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan a lifetime achievement award.

 

 

 

Although no one had ever heard of him at the time, Obama just happened to receive an  impossible-to-believe $125,000 advance to write a book about race relations, which he just happened to fail to write while using the cash to vacation in Bali with his wife Michelle, and despite his record of non-writing he just happened to receive a second advance, for $40,000, from another publisher, and he eventually completed a manuscript calledDreams From My Father, which just happened to strongly reflect the writing style of William Ayers, who just happened to trample on an American flag for the cover photograph of the popular Chicago magazine, which Obama just happened never to see even though it appeared on newsstands throughout the city.

 

 

Obama was hired by the law firm Miner, Banhill and Galland, which just happened to specialize in negotiating state government contracts to develop low-income housing, and which just happened to deal with now-imprisoned Tony Rezko and his firm Rezar, and with slum lord Valerie Jarrett, and the law firm’s Judson Miner just happened to have been a classmate of Bernardine Dohrn, wife of William Ayers.

 

In 1994 Obama represented ACORN and another plaintiff in a lawsuit against Citibank for denying mortgages to blacks (Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Federal Savings Bank), and the lawsuit just happened to result in banks being blackmailed into approving subprime loans for poor credit risks, a trend which just happened to spread nationwide, and which just happened to lead to the collapse of the housing bubble, which just happened to help Obama defeat John McCain in the 2008 presidential election.

 

In 1996 Obama ran for the Illinois State Senate and joined the “New Party,” which just happened to promote Marxism, and Obama was supported by Dr. Quentin Young, a socialist who just happened to support a government takeover of the health care system.

 

n late 1999 Obama purportedly engaged in homosexual activities and cocaine-snorting in the back of a limousine with a man named Larry Sinclair, who claims he was contacted in late 2007 by Donald Young, who just happened to be the gay choir director of Obama’s Chicago church and who shared information with Sinclair about Obama, and Young just happened to be murdered on December 23, 2007, just weeks after Larry Bland, another gay member of the church, just happened to be murdered, and both murders just happened to have never been solved. In 2008Sinclair held a press conference to discuss his claims, and just happened to be arrested immediately after the event, based on a warrant issued by Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, who just happens to be the son of Joe Biden.

 

In 2003 Obama and his wife attended a dinner in honor of Rashid Khalidi, who just happened to be a former PLO operative, harsh critic of Israel, and advocate of Palestinian rights, and who Obama claims he does not know, even though the Obamas just happened to have dined more than once at the home of Khalidi and his wife, Mona, and just happened to have used them as occasional baby-sitters. Obama reportedly praised Khalidi at the decidedly anti-Semitic event, which William Ayers just happened to also attend, and the event Obama pretends he never attended was sponsored by the Arab American Action Network, to which Obama just happened to have funneled cash while serving on the board of the Woods Fund with William Ayers, and one speaker at the dinner remarked that if Palestinians cannot secure a return of their land, Israel“will never see a day of peace,” and entertainment at the dinner included a Muslim children’s dance whose performances just happened to include simulated beheadings with fake swords, and stomping on American, Israeli, and British flags, and Obama allegedly told the audience that “Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine” and there has been “genocide against the Palestinian people by (the) Israelis,” and the Los Angeles Times has a videotape of the event but just happens to refuse to make it public.

n the 2004 Illinois Democrat primary race for the U.S. Senate, front-runner Blair Hull just happened to be forced out of the race after David Axelrod just happened to manage to get Hull’s sealed divorce records unsealed, which just happened to enable Obama to win the primary, so he could face popular Republican Jack Ryan, whose sealed child custody records from his divorce just happened to become unsealed, forcing Ryan to withdraw from the race, which just happened to enable the unqualified Obama to waltz into the U.S. Senate, where, after a mere 143 days of work, he just happened to decide he was qualified to run for President of the United States.

 

Obama just happened to save $300,000 on the purchase of a $1.65 million Chicago mansion for which he deposited only $1,000 in earnest money, while the seller’s adjacent empty lot which was appraised at no more than $500,000 just happened to be sold at the inflated price of $625,000 to Rita Rezko, who just happened to earn only $37,000 per year working for Cook County government, and who just happened to be married to Tony Rezko, who just happened to be Obama’s main money man for his political campaigns, and who only days before the Obama mansion purchase just happened to obtain a $3.5 million loan from wealthy Iraqi Nadhmi Auchi, who just happened to have been kicked out of Iraq, and who just happened to have been convicted of corruption charges in France, and who just happened to ask Rezko to ask then-U.S. Senator Obama to help him obtain a visa to travel to the United States.

 

Rita Rezko just happened to borrow the money for the $625,000 empty lot from the Mutual Bank of Harvey, which just happened to be run by Tony Rezko’s pal Amrish Mahajan, whose wife Anita just happened to have been charged with fraudulently receiving $2 million in Illinois taxpayer dollars for drug tests never performed by her company, K. K. Bio-Science,which just happened to have a no-bid contract with the state, and whose computers just happened to disappear right before investigators arrived to take them away for evidence.

 

Obama just happened to obtain a $1.32 million mortgage for his mansion even though the payments of $8,000 per month (plus at least $1,500 per month in property taxes) exceeded 50 percent of his $162,100 U.S Senate salary income, and even though Michelle Obama was claiming that she and her husband were still paying off substantial student loans and were struggling to pay for piano lessons for their daughters, one of whom just happens to look remarkably like one of the daughters of Malcolm X.

 

Obama just happened to obtain his mansion mortgage from Northern Trust Bank, whose Board of Directors just happened to include Susan Crown, who just happened to be part of the wealthy Crown family, which just happened to donate to Obama’s campaigns, and which just happened to have ownership in defense contractor General Dynamics Corporation, and the  Crown family just happened to sit on the board of energy company Exelon, formerly known as Commonwealth Edison, which just happened to have had Thomas Ayers as its CEO, and the Crown family also owned the Maytag appliance company, which just happened to move its operations to Mexico, after its employees just happened to donate to Obama’s campaign, after he just happened to pledge that he would keep their jobs in Galesburg, Illinois.

 

In June 2005, just months after Obama became a U.S. Senator, Michelle Obama just happened to be named a “non-executive director” of the board of TreeHouse Foods, a supplier of Wal-Mart, for a salary of $51,200 in 2005 and $101,083 in 2006, and she just happened to be given 7,500 TreeHouse stock options, worth approximately $72,375, even though she just happened to know nothing about the private sector or running a business.

 

In 2006 Obama pushed for a $1 million earmark for the University of Chicago, and his wife Michelle just happened to be promoted to Vice-President of Community and External Affairs for the hospitals with a salary increase from $121,900 to $316,962, and she just happened to receive public relations help from Obama’s political strategist David Axelrod, whose mother just happened to write for a communist newspaper.

 

In 2006 Sarah P. Herlihy, an associate of the Chicago law firm of Kirkland and Ellis, whose employees later contributed $87,722 to Obama’s presidential campaign, and whose partner Bruce I. Ettleson just happened to be a member of Obama’s campaign finance committee, just happened to write a paper calling for the elimination of the “natural born citizen” requirement in the U.S. Constitution.

 

Obama just happened to visit Kenya in 2006 to support his cousin, Raila Odinga, a Muslim socialist candidate for president, who just happened to have ties to both al-Qaeda and Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi, and who just happened to have been educated in communist East Germany, and who just happened to name his son Fidel, and who just happened to plan on establishing Shari’ah Muslim law in Kenya, and whose activities prompted the Kenyan government to lodge an official protest of Obama’s passport abuse and misconduct, and Obama’s actions just happened to have been denounced by the U.S. State Department as being in direct opposition to U. S. National Security, and after Odinga, for whom Obama just happened to have raised $950,000, lost the election, his Muslim followers just happened to burn Christian women and children alive in a church where they had sought refuge.

 

In 2006 Obama endorsed Alexi Giannoulias in his race for Illinois State Treasurer and stated that he is “…one of the most outstanding young men I could ever hope to meet”—even though Giannoulias just happened to be only 29 years old and even though his family’s Broadway Bank just happened to finance Chicago crime figures like Michael “Jaws” Giorango, a Chicago thug with convictions for bookmaking and promoting prostitution, and even though virtually all of Chicago’s Democrat politicians were keeping their distance from Giannoulias, whose reputation was so questionable he even failed to get the endorsement of the Chicago Democrat Party—which just happens to almost never be concerned about questionable reputations.

 

Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, once worked for the Ford Foundation’s Asia program, which just happened to be run by Peter Geithner, who just happened to be the father of Timothy Geithner, who just happened to neglect to pay Social Security taxes on much of his income, which just happened to somehow qualify him to be Obama’s Treasury Secretary.

During the 2008 campaign Obama’s passport records just happened to have been illegally searched by an employee of a firm headed by John O. Brennan, and Lt. Quarles Harris, Jr., who was cooperating with federal investigators in connection with the incident, just happened to be found with a bullet in his head, and the murder just happened never to be solved, and Obama later just happened to make Brennan his terrorism and intelligence advisor.

 

On election night in 2008 in Chicago’s Grant Park, Obama just happened to wear a black suit and a red tie, and his older daughter just happened to wear a red dress, and his younger daughter just happened to wear a stark black dress, and his wife Michelle just happened to wear an arguably unattractive black dress that appeared to have a giant red X design, which just happened to prompt some to wonder if their clothing just happened to denote black power, communism, and Malcolm X, and at the very least prompted others to wonder why anyone would have his daughter wear a jet-black dress for a celebratory occasion—or where one could even just happen to find a store that sells black dresses for little girls.

 

From election night forward there are hundreds of other “just happeneds,” not the least of which is the long-form birth certificate released by Obama in April 2011 which just happened to consist of multiple image layers, including various objects which can be separated and rotated with computer software—which just happens to be impossible if a birth certificate is merely scanned and not computer-constructed by a forger.

 

Oh, and Obama just happened to have used more than one Social Security number over the years, and one of them is associated with 713 Hart Senate Office Building and starts with the digits 282, which signifies issuance in Ohio, a state in which Obama just happened to have never lived or worked, and another Social Security number used by Obama starts with 042, which signifies Connecticut, another state in which Obama just happened to have never lived or worked, and it just happened that no one in the mainstream media has ever bothered to ask Obama why he has used multiple Social Security numbers or why the 042 number comes up as invalid in the E-Verify system used by employers to confirm whether immigrant job applicants have valid numbers.

 

I could go on… but you get the idea.

 

October 10 update:

 

Obama just happened to attend the 1991 wedding of Julius Genachowski and Martha Raddatz, and Genachowski just happened to become a campaign bundler for Obama, who just happened to name him head of the Federal Communications Commission, and Raddatz just happened to become a journalist and work for ABC, and just happened to be selected to be the moderator for the October 11, 2012 vice-presidential debate between Joe Biden and Paul Ryan.

 www.colony14.net

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

We MUST Bite Off the Hand that Feeds Us!

img345 2

Recently, President Obama told a British news magazine,

 “There’s almost no economic metric by which you couldn’t say that the U.S. economy is better and that corporate bottom lines are better. None.”

 Some facts:

  •  Roughly 50 million native-born, working age Americans are not working. Over half of these people are of prime working age.
  •  67% of children have one parent that is unemployed.
  •  The current unemployment rate is 9.6% (This includes the number of Americans who have dropped out of the market)
  •  Unemployment rate for 18-34 year olds is 46%.
  •  3.9 million Americans are unemployed over 27 weeks.
  •  3.9 million manufacturing jobs lost since Obama took office.
  •  Over 721,000 “Shovel Ready” jobs lost since 2008.
  •  The last time the labor force participation rate was this low was in 1978.
  •  In July 2014, part-time jobs increased by 799,000 while full-time jobs fell by 523,000.
  •  53% of American workers make less than $30,000 a year.
  •  The U.S, poverty rate has increased to 16.1%, higher than when the “War on Poverty” began in 1965.
  •  Median household income in American has fallen for four straight years with an overall decline of $4000.
  •  In 2008, student debt was at $440 billion.  Today student debt is over a $1 trillion.
  •  Gas prices have increased 79% under Obama.
  •  The average increase in insurance rates since Obamacare was implemented is $3,671, with deductibles ranging from $6,000 to 15,000.
  • Over 5 million Americans have lost their insurance due to Obamacare.
  •  Over 47 million Americans are on food stamps.
  •  The U.S. Census reports that over 100 million Americans are enrolled in at least one welfare program
  • In 2008, the U.S. debt to GDP ration was under 70%. Today that has jumped to 110%.

In the same interview with a British news magazine, Obama said,

 “I would take the complaints of the corporate community with a grain of salt. They always complain about regulation, that’s their job.”

 

Is this statement true? Has small business been affected negatively by the number of regulations imposed by the Obama Administration?

The Regulatory Flexibility Act directs federal agencies to assess the effects of rules and regulations on small business. Obama has actually issued fewer regulations for business than Bush, however, the regulations he has enacted have impacted small business more than any enacted by Bush. Therefore, the most important question is not how many regulations have been implemented, but how good are they and do they help or hinder the economy?

In 2012, alone, the American Action forum said,

“The cost of regulations has added tremendous costs to the economy and finds that the year 2012 tops every year in the past twelve in terms of final rule cost.”

 Reported in Forbes in March of 2013,

“Small business is still in recession. The number of startup jobs has fallen 30% below the Bush and Clinton eras. The rate of new business formation in the US has fallen to a record low. The reductions in small business employment during 2008 and 2009 were the largest ever recorded in the history of the National Federation of Independent Business data series. Now, four years after the supposed “recovery,” small business is no better off.”

 “Federal government employment has grown and most big companies have recovered. However, 1 in 5 small firms expect to drop employees and 1 in 3 expect to decrease capital spending and expect to be in more severe cash flow troubles by the end of the year.”

 

What has caused small business growth to remain stagnant? Let’s begin with Obamacare, over-regulation, high corporate tax rates, and the Federal Reserve’s giveaways to “too big to fail” financial institutions.  Did you know that the top four “big banks” control over 40% of the credit markets? Did you know that this percentage has grown over 10% since Obama took office? With the passage of Obama’s Dodd-Frank law, there are over 330 fewer small banks and the volume of business loans under $1 million fell 13%.

 

A new study by the Brookings Institute indicates that businesses are shutting down faster than they are opening. The US economy has become less entrepreneurial over time, but the drop since 2006 is disturbing.

 

“The level of business deaths kept growing along with the overall level of business in the economy, but the level of business births did not- it held relatively steady before dropping significantly in the recent downturn. In fact, business deaths now exceed business births for the first time in the thirty-plus-year history of our data.”

 

A growing economy is necessary for newer and smaller businesses to form and since the economy is not growing, there are many businesses that may never have the opportunity to start-up. The Obama presidency has been good for larger firms and those with connections in Washington. The higher tax rates do not impact large business as much as it does smaller business. So under Obama, we have seen big government and big business thrive while small business, the real driver of job creation and the economy, has been further depressed through higher regulation, higher taxes, and higher healthcare costs because of Obamacare.

 

Obama’s 2009 stimulus did little to stimulate private sector jobs, but gave massive funding to state and local government jobs. Private sector jobs in 2012 were down by 4% from January 2008, however federal employment was actually up 11.4%.  The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported in March that employing government workers costs 45% more than an equivalent private sector worker.  Government workers average 33% higher pay and their pension and retirement benefit costs are now 254% higher as well. The total compensation for government workers is now 45 % higher than the private sector, which partially explains why the federal debt has more than tripled to 110% of GDP.

 

In July 2014, Janet Yellen, Federal Reserve chairwoman, told Congress,

 

“Too many Americans remain unemployed, inflation remains below our longer-run objective and not all of the necessary financial reform initiatives have been completed”.

 

So what is the truth?  In the past, new business bailed out the economy and spurred innovation and new jobs. Without these small businesses, and an economy dominated by big government, big money and political favors, the free enterprise system that the United States has enjoyed since its foundation will never recover.

 

We MUST  bite off the hand that feeds us!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Obama’s War on Immigration Enforcement”

2014-07-16-d26548e3_largeIn researching for a follow-up article on the current immigration situation, I came across a timeline compiled by the office of Senator Jeff Sessions on the administration’s “systematic dismantling of immigration enforcement.”  It contains such eye-opening information on the circumstances that have brought us to the disaster at our border, and the controversy that has erupted across the United States regarding immigration and amnesty.  Please read, comment, share and come to your own conclusions as to how we arrived at our current immigration disaster!

 

A Sessions spokesman noted that due to the actions chronicled, interior deportations have declined more than 40 percent since 2009 and some 75 percent of all deportations are illegal immigrants caught while crossing the border.

 

Read the timetable:

 

Timeline: How The Obama Administration Bypassed Congress To Dismantle Immigration Enforcement

In September 2011, Obama said, “We live in a democracy. You have to pass bills through the legislature, and then I can sign it.” Yet, less than a year after he personally disputed the notion that the Executive Branch could act on its own and grant legal status to a class of individuals, he instituted the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals directive to grant legal status to a large segment of the illegal immigrant population in the U.S. This unprecedented directive, combined with numerous other lesser-reported but far-reaching Executive actions, circumvented Congress, defied federal law, and dismantled interior enforcement. Below is a detailed timeline of many of these Executive actions, which, collectively, undermine the constitutional rule of law upon which our nation’s greatness depends.

January 2009: Obama Administration Ends Worksite Enforcement Actions

In early 2009, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) executed a raid (initiated and planned under the Bush administration) on an engine machine shop in Bellingham, Washington, detaining 28 illegal immigrants who were using fake Social Security numbers and identity documents. Shortly thereafter, pro-amnesty groups criticized the Administration for enforcing the law. An unnamed DHS official was quoted in the Washington Times as saying, “the Secretary is not happy about it and this is not her policy.” Instead of enforcing the law, the Secretary investigated the ICE agents for simply doing their duty. Esther Olavarria, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, said on a call with employers and pro-amnesty groups that “we’re not doing raids or audits under this administration.”

January 29, 2009: Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano Delays E-Verify Deadline

Secretary Napolitano delayed the original deadlines of January 15, 2009 and February 20, 2009, which were set by President George W. Bush, for federal contractors to use E-Verify to May 21, 2009.

April 16, 2009: Secretary Napolitano Delays E-Verify Deadline a Second Time

Secretary Napolitano again delayed the deadline for federal contractors to use E-Verify, this time to June 30, 2009.

June 3, 2009: Secretary Napolitano Delays E-Verify Deadline a Third Time

For the third time, Secretary Napolitano delayed the deadline for federal contractors to use E- Verify requirement to September 8, 2009.

March 8, 2010: ICE Inflates Deportation Statistics

According to the Washington Post: “Months after reporting that the number of illegal immigrants removed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased 47 percent during President Obama’s first year in office, the Department of Homeland Security on Monday corrected the record, saying the actual increase in those deported and ‘voluntary departures’ was 5 percent.”

March 16, 2010: DHS Announces Termination of Funding for Virtual Fence Along the Southwestern Border

Secretary Napolitano announced that, effective immediately, DHS would redeploy $50 million of stimulus funding originally allocated for virtual fence technology because “the system of sensors and cameras along the Southwest border known as SBInet has been plagued with cost overruns and missed deadlines.”

May 19, 2010: ICE Director John Morton Announces Termination of Cooperation with Arizona Law Enforcement

In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Morton stated that ICE would not even process or accept illegal immigrants transferred to ICE custody by Arizona law enforcement, largely because the Administration disagreed with Arizona’s immigration law—which made it a crime to be in the state illegally and required police to check suspects for immigration documents.

May 27, 2010: Internal ICE Emails Reveal Relaxed Security and New Benefits for Detained Illegal Immigrants

An internal ICE email revealed that “low-risk” immigration detainees would be able to have visitors stay for an unlimited amount of time during a 12-hour window, be given access to unmonitored phone lines, email, free internet calling, movie nights, bingo, arts and crafts, dance and cooking classes, tutoring, and computer training.

June 18, 2010: Obama Administration Sues Arizona over Immigration Enforcement Law

The Obama Administration announced that it would sue Arizona to block the implementation of the state’s immigration enforcement law.

June 25, 2010: ICE Union Casts Unanimous Vote of “No Confidence” in Agency Leadership

The National ICE Council, the union representing more than 7,000 agents and officers, cast a unanimous vote of “No Confidence” in ICE Director Morton and Assistant Director Phyllis Coven, citing “the growing dissatisfaction and concern among ICE employees and Union Leaders that Director Morton and Assistant Director Coven have abandoned the Agency’s core mission of enforcing United States Immigration Laws and providing for public safety, and have instead directed their attention to campaigning for programs and policies related to amnesty.” The union listed some of the policies that led to the vote of No Confidence:

– “Senior ICE leadership dedicates more time to campaigning for immigration reforms aimed at large scale amnesty legislation, than advising the American public and Federal lawmakers on the severity of the illegal immigration problem . . . ICE [Enforcement and Removal Operations are] currently overwhelmed by the massive criminal alien problem in the United States resulting in the large-scale release of criminals back into local communities.”

“Criminal aliens openly brag to ICE officers that they are taking advantage of the broken immigration system and will be back in the United States within days to commit crimes, while United States citizens arrested for the same offenses serve prison sentences. . . . Thousands of other criminal aliens are released to ICE without being tried for their criminal charges. ICE senior leadership is aware that the system is broken, yet refuses to alert Congress to the severity of the situation . . . .”

“ICE is misleading the American public with regard to the effectiveness of criminal enforcement programs like the ICE ‘Secure Communities Program’ using it as a selling point to move forward with amnesty related legislation.”

“While ICE reports internally that more than 90 percent of ICE detainees are first encountered by ICE in jails after they are arrested by local police for criminal charges, ICE senior leadership misrepresents this information publicly in order to portray ICE detainees as being non-criminal in nature to support the Administration’s position on amnesty and relaxed security at ICE detention facilities.”

 “The majority of ICE ERO Officers are prohibited from making street arrests or enforcing United States immigration laws outside of the institutional (jail) setting. This has effectively created ‘amnesty through policy’ for anyone illegally in the United States who has not been arrested by another agency for a criminal violation.”

“ICE Detention Reforms have transformed into a detention system aimed at providing resort like living conditions to criminal aliens. Senior ICE leadership excluded ICE officers and field managers (the technical experts on ICE detention) from the development of these reforms, and instead solicited recommendations from special interest groups. . . . Unlike any other agency in the nation, ICE officers will be prevented from searching detainees housed in ICE facilities allowing weapons, drugs and other contraband into detention centers putting detainees, ICE officers and contract guards at risk.”

July 14, 2010: Obama Administration Ignores Dangerous Sanctuary City Policies

Less than a week after suing Arizona to block its immigration law, the Department of Justice announced that it would not sue sanctuary cities, with a spokeswoman stating: “There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law.”

July 30, 2010: Leaked U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Memo Reveals Obama Backdoor Amnesty Plan

A leaked USCIS memo to agency director Alejandro Mayorkas detailed the Obama Administration’s plan to bypass Congress and grant amnesty by executive fiat. The memo, entitled “Administrative Alternatives to Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” listed a number of ways the Administration could act unilaterally to “reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization” and “extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups,” including many that Obama has since acted on and many that appeared in the Senate comprehensive immigration bill (S. 744).

August 2010: ICE Memo Stops Agents from Detaining Illegal Immigrants at Traffic Stops

In August 2010, ICE began internally circulating a draft policy that would significantly limit the circumstances under which ICE could detain illegal aliens. In effect, ICE agents were no longer authorized to pick up an illegal alien for illegally entering the country or for possessing false identification documents. Now, illegal aliens could only be detained if another law enforcement agency made an arrest for a criminal violation. This was the beginning of what would come to be known as “administrative amnesty.”

August 24, 2010: Reports Surface that DHS Is Closing Deportation Cases

On August 24, 2010, the Houston Chronicle reported that DHS had begun “systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants without serious criminal records.”

September 8, 2010: Obama Administration Files Supreme Court Brief Supporting Lawsuit Challenging Arizona’s E-Verify Law

The Obama Administration argued that the Supreme Court should strike down Arizona’s 2007 E-Verify law, which was enacted by the state’s former Governor, Janet Napolitano. The law required all employers in the state to use E-Verify and revoked business licenses of those who hired illegal workers. The Supreme Court upheld the law in May 2011, finding that it was not preempted because “although Congress had made the program voluntary at the national level, it had expressed no intent to prevent States from mandating participation.”

September 16, 2010: Leaked DHS Memo Reveals Obama’s Long-Term Plan To Circumvent Congress and Grant “Broad Based” Amnesty

A leaked 10-page memo dated February 26, 2010, detailed how the Administration had “long envisioned” a two-phase “broad based” amnesty plan “legalizing those who qualify and intend to stay here.” The memo states that “during Phase 1, eligible applicants would be registered, fingerprinted, screened and considered for an interim status that allows them to work in the U.S. . . . During Phase 2, applicants who had fulfilled additional statutory requirements would be permitted to become lawful permanent residents [i.e., obtain green cards].” The memo explains how the Administration could proceed “in the absence of legislation,” including several already put in place by the Obama Administration: deferred action; deferred enforced departure; waiver of inadmissibility for certain illegal immigrants; parole-in-place. Remarkably, the memo contemplates the pros and cons of such unprecedented Executive action:

“A registration program can be messaged as a security measure to bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows.”

“A bold administrative program would transform the political landscape by using administrative measures to sidestep the current state of Congressional gridlock and inertia.”

“The Secretary would face criticism that she is abdicating her charge to enforce the immigration laws. Internal complaints of this type from career DHS officers are likely and may also be used in the press to bolster criticism.”

“Even many who have supported a legislated legalization program may question the legitimacy of trying to accomplish the same end via administrative action, particularly after five years where the two parties have treated this as a matter to be decided in Congress.”

“A program that reaches the entire population targeted for legalization would represent use of deferred action far beyond its limited class-based uses in the past (e.g. for widows). Congress may react by amending the statute to bar or greatly trim back on deferred action authority, blocking its use even for its highly important current uses in limited cases.”

“Congress could also simply negate the grant of deferred action (which by its nature is temporary and revocable) to this population. If criticism about the legitimacy of the program gain[s] traction, many supporters of legalization may find it hard to vote against such a bill.”

“The proposed timeline would require a rapid expansion of USCIS’s current application intake capacity. Significant upfront resources would be needed for hiring, training, facilities expansion and technology acquisition, and the only realistic prospect of a source of funding may be a new appropriation.”

“Immigration reform is a lightening rod [sic] that many Members of Congress would rather avoid. An administrative solution could dampen future efforts for comprehensive reform and sideline the issue in Congress indefinitely.”

“Done right, a combination of benefit and enforcement-related administrative measures could provide the Administration with a clear-cut political win. If the Administration loses control of the message, however, an aggressive administrative proposal carries significant political risk.”

“More ambitious measures would have to be carefully timed. We would need to give the legislative process enough time to play out to deflect against charges of usurping congressional authority. . . . This is likely to mean that the right time for administrative action will be late summer or fall [2010]—when the midterm election is in full-swing.”

“The President could make the case that the nation’s economic and national security can wait no longer for Congress. Administrative action is necessary to restores [sic] rule of law by ending illegal hiring, requiring individuals who are unlawfully present to pass background checks or get deported, and guaranteeing that all employers and workers are paying their fair share of taxes. Clearing backlogs of family-based visas would be an added bonus.”

“If the American public reacts poorly to an administrative registration effort, Congress could be motivated to enact legislation tying the Administration’s hands. This could result, in the worst case scenario, in legislation that diminishes the Secretary’s discretion to use parole or deferred action in other contexts. A heated fight could also poison the atmosphere for any future legislative reform effort.”

October 17, 2010: DHS Dismissals of Deportation Cases Up 700 Percent

According to an October 17, 2010 article in the Houston Chronicle, the government dismissed— unsolicited—hundreds of deportation cases, up 700 percent between July and August 2010. The article states that “government attorneys in Houston were instructed to exercise prosecutorial discretion on a case-by-case basis for illegal immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for at least two years and have no serious criminal history.”

December 2010: Internal ICE Emails Reveal Padded Deportation Statistics

On October 8, 2010, Secretary Napolitano and ICE Director Morton announced that in 2010 ICE had “removed more illegal aliens than in any other period in the history of our nation.” On December 6, 2010, however, the Washington Post reported that internal ICE emails revealed ICE had padded its deportation statistics by including 19,422 removals that were from the previous fiscal year. The article also described how ICE extended a Mexican repatriation program beyond its normal operation dates, adding 6,500 to the final removal numbers.

February 15, 2011: DHS Ignores Mandate To Maintain Operational Control of the Border

During a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, Chair Candice Miller announced that, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), U.S. Customs and Border Protection maintains operational control of only 69 of the roughly 4,000 miles along the northern border and only 873 of the almost 2,000 miles along the southwestern border. Under the Secure Fence Act of 2006, Congress required DHS to achieve and maintain operational control, which is defined as “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.”

March 2, 2011: Morton Administrative Amnesty Memo #1

In the first of a series of memos, ICE Director Morton outlines new enforcement “priorities”— convicted criminals, terrorists, gang members, recent illegal entrants, and fugitives. The memo encourages ICE employees to exercise prosecutorial discretion for illegal immigrants who do not meet these priorities and directs ICE field office directors to not “expend detention resources” on certain illegal immigrants.

March 30, 2011: 9/11 Commission Chair Warns Administration’s Delays of Biometric Exit and REAL ID Risk National Security

Testifying before the Senate Homeland Security Committee, 9/11 Commission Chairman Tom Kean warned that “border security remains a top national security priority, because there is an indisputable nexus between terrorist operations and terrorist travel. Foreign-born terrorists have continued to exploit our border vulnerabilities to gain access to the United States.” In his testimony, he highlighted two programs that the Obama Administration had delayed. He emphasized that “full deployment of the biometric exit component of US-VISIT should be a high priority. If law enforcement and intelligence officials had known for certain in August and September 2001 that 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar remained in the U.S., the search for them might have taken on greater urgency.” He also noted that “no further delay [in compliance with the REAL ID Act] should be authorized, rather compliance should be accelerated.”

May 10, 2011: Obama Declares the Border Secure and the Fence “Basically Complete”

In a speech in El Paso, Texas, Obama stated that his administration has “strengthened border security beyond what many believed was possible” and that the border fence “is now basically complete,” despite the fact that only 33.7 miles of the 700 miles of fence mandated by the Secure Fence Act of 2006 had been completed by that time. Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Michael McCaul responded to the President’s claim, stating “the border is not secure and it has never been more violent or dangerous. Anyone who lives down there will tell you that.”

June 1, 2011: Obama Administration Ignores New York’s Refusal to Cooperate with Federal Immigration Agents

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced he was suspending New York’s participation in the Secure Communities program, which allows law enforcement agencies to run the fingerprints of those arrested against immigration databases, because of “its impact on families, immigrant communities and law enforcement in New York.” The Obama Administration takes no action.

June 17, 2011: Morton Administrative Amnesty Memo #2

Morton issued a second memo further directing ICE agents not to enforce the law against certain segments of the illegal immigrant population, including those who would qualify for the DREAM Act, despite having no legal or congressional authority to do so and despite the fact that Congress had explicitly rejected the legislation three times.

June 17, 2011: Morton Administrative Amnesty Memo #3

Morton issued a third memo instructing ICE personal to refrain from enforcing the law against individuals engaging in “protected activity” related to civil or other rights (for example, union organizing or complaining to authorities about employment discrimination or housing conditions).

June 23, 2011: ICE Union Outraged Over Morton Administrative Amnesty Memos

The ICE union issued a press release expressing outrage over Director Morton’s actions, stating: “Unable to pass its immigration agenda through legislation, the Administration is now implementing it through agency policy.” The release further stated that ICE leadership and the Administration “have excluded our union and our agents from the entire process of developing policies, it was all kept secret from us, we found out from the newspapers. ICE [leadership] worked hand-in-hand with immigrants rights groups, but excluded its own officers.” Describing ICE policy as a “law enforcement nightmare,” union president Chris Crane stated “the result is a means for every person here illegally to avoid arrest or detention, as officers we will never know who we can or cannot arrest.” The release concluded: “we are asking everyone to please email or call your Congressman and Senators immediately and ask them to help stop what’s happening at ICE, we desperately need your help.”

June 27, 2011: DHS Cover-Up of Backdoor Amnesty Policy Revealed

The Houston Chronicle reported that internal ICE emails and memos revealed that DHS “officials misled the public and Congress in an effort to downplay a wave of immigration case dismissals in Houston and other cities that they had created a ‘back-door amnesty.’” In one instance, DHS Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs Nelson Peacock wrote a letter to several members of the Senate Judiciary Committee denying the existence of a directive “instructing ICE attorneys to seek the dismissals of immigration proceedings involving certain classes of criminal aliens”— a directive which not only existed, but had been praised by senior ICE officials.

August 1, 2011: Obama Administration Sues Alabama over Immigration Enforcement Law

The Obama Administration filed a lawsuit to block implementation of Alabama’s immigration enforcement law, which authorizes state law enforcement to act when they reasonably suspect individuals are violating federal immigration laws.

August 18, 2011: Administration Begins Case-by-Case Review of Deportation Cases for Purposes of Granting Administrative Amnesty

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Secretary Napolitano announced that the Administration had begun a case-by-case review of all pending and incoming deportation cases and will stop proceedings against those illegal immigrants who do not meet administration “priorities.”

September 2, 2011: Treasury Inspector General Reports Government Paying Billions in Tax Credits to Illegal Immigrants

A report by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) revealed that the IRS paid out a staggering $4.2 billion in refundable tax credits to illegal immigrants via the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) in 2010. The inspector general stated: “Millions of people are seeking this tax credit who, we believe, are not entitled to it. We have made recommendations to the IRS as to how they could address this, and they have not taken sufficient action in our view to solve this problem.” The report further stated that “the payment of Federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization, which contradicts Federal law and policy to remove such incentives.”

September 7, 2011: Cook County (Chicago), Illinois Board of Commissioners Votes To Ignore Federal Immigration Law

The Cook County Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance directing local law enforcement to refuse ICE detainer requests and access to individuals or County facilities. While Morton acknowledged that the ordinance posed a serious threat to public safety and likely violates federal law, the Administration’s only action was to offer to pay Cook County to honor the detainers and to set up a “working group,” both of which the Board rejected. ICE Executive Associate Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations said the policy presents a major problem for enforcement efforts and was an “accident waiting to happen.”

In June 2011, Saul Chavez, who had a prior DUI conviction, was driving with a blood-alcohol content of nearly four times the legal limit when he hit 66-year-old William “Dennis” McCann. While attempting to escape, Chavez drove his car over McCann’s body, dragging him 200 yards before a witness stopped his vehicle. Chavez was charged with two felonies, and ICE issued a detainer asking Cook County to hold him until he could be taken into federal custody. But, pursuant to Cook County’s new anti-detainer law, he was released when he posted 10 percent of his $250,000 bail. He has since disappeared and is believed to have fled the county.

In February 2012, it was reported that 11 of the 345 inmates released under this policy had reoffended.

September 28, 2011: Obama Admits Deportation Statistics Are “Deceptive”

At a roundtable with amnesty advocates, President Obama admitted that his deportation statistics were misleading: “The statistics are actually a little deceptive because what we’ve been doing is . . . apprehending folks at the borders and sending them back. That is counted as a deportation, even though they may have only been held for a day or 48 hours.”

October 18, 2011: Obama Administration Ignores Santa Clara County’s Defiance of Federal Immigration Law

The Administration refused to take action when the Santa Clara County, California, Board of Supervisors voted to stop using county funds to honor ICE detainers, except in limited circumstances. Santa Clara County’s failure to cooperate with Secure Communities continues to this day.

In August 2013, illegal immigrant Mario Chavez was arrested after threatening his 6-year- old son with a knife. His wife obtained a protective order but Chavez made bail and was released from jail instead of being held for further investigation by ICE. A month later, Chavez went to his family’s new home where he then stabbed his wife to death. According to a report in San Jose Mercury News, ICE officials “contend they could have kept Chavez off the streets,” but the county’s policy limits access that ICE has to inmates. The official reportedly said, “We’re not asking them to do our job. We’re asking them to let us do our job.”

October 18, 2011: ICE Continues To Pad Deportation Statistics

On October 18, 2011, ICE announced its year-end deportation statistics, which it described as “the largest number in the agency’s history.” However, according to the 2010 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, published by DHS’s Office of Immigration Statistics, ICE is detaining far fewer illegal immigrants than ever before, locating fewer than half the number of deportable aliens in 2010 than it did in 2006.

October 19, 2011: Obama Administration Ignores Washington, D.C.’s Defiance of Federal Immigration Law

The administration refused to act when District of Columbia Mayor Vincent C. Gray issued an order to prevent local law enforcement from enforcing federal immigration laws. In June 2012, the D.C. Council unanimously voted to further restrict cooperation with ICE, requiring that suspected illegal immigrants can be detained only if they have prior convictions for violent crimes, among other things. According to the Washington Post, a spokeswoman for ICE stated that “ICE has not sought to compel compliance through legal proceedings. Jurisdictions that ignore detainers bear the risk of possible public safety risks.”

October 28, 2011: Administration Stops Routine Border Searches

According to the Associated Press, Border Patrol field offices nationwide received orders from DHS headquarters to stop regular inspections at transportation hubs—both at the border and in the interior of the country—such as random stops and investigations of suspicious behavior, and instead act only based on actual intelligence indicating a threat. The article noted that “halting the practice has baffled agents” who said it was “an effective way to catch unlawful immigrants, including smugglers and possible terrorists.” The National Border Patrol Council, the union representing Border Patrol agents, responded to the changes: “Stated plainly, Border Patrol mangers are increasing the layers of bureaucracy and making it as difficult as possible for Border Patrol agents to conduct their core duties. The only risks being managed by this move are too many apprehensions, negative media attention and complaints generated by immigrant rights groups.”

October 31, 2011: Obama Administration Sues South Carolina over Immigration Enforcement Law

The Justice Department filed suit against South Carolina, challenging the state’s immigration enforcement law.

November 7, 2011: USCIS Stops Issuing “Notices to Appear” in Immigration Court for Non-Priority Deportation Cases

Following ICE’s lead, USCIS Director Mayorkas issued a new Policy Memorandum stating that USCIS will no longer issue “notices to appear” in immigration court to illegal immigrants who do not meet the Administration’s deportation priorities.

November 17, 2011: ICE Announces Review of Entire Immigration Court Docket in an Effort To Close More Deportation Cases

The ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor issued a new policy memo instructing all agency attorneys to “begin a review of incoming cases and cases pending in immigration court” and identify the cases eligible for “prosecutorial discretion in the form of administrative closure,” i.e., administrative amnesty.

November 22, 2011: Obama Administration Sues Utah over Immigration Enforcement Law

The Obama Administration filed a lawsuit to block provisions of Utah’s immigration enforcement law. This is the fourth lawsuit by the Administration against a state that enacted such a law.

November 22, 2011: Obama Administration Ignores New York City’s Defiance of Federal Immigration Law

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg signed a measure directing city jails to ignore certain requests by ICE to maintain custody of an illegal immigrant, so as to give ICE the opportunity to assume custody. To date, the Obama Administration has taken no action against New York City to compel compliance.

December 11, 2011: Reports Surface That Obama Will Reduce National Guard at the Border

According to several reports, the Obama Administration would reduce the 1,200 National Guard troops stationed along the southwestern border. From 2006 to 2008, under the Bush administration, thousands of troops worked along the border as part of “Operation Jumpstart” to free up Border Patrol to focus on border security. On April 17, 2012, the Administration reduced the number to 300; there are currently about 130 Guard members stationed on the border.

December 15, 2011: DHS Rescinds Maricopa County, Arizona’s 287(g) Agreement

DHS rescinded Maricopa County, Arizona’s 287(g) agreement—a cooperative agreement whereby local law enforcement receive training in identifying and apprehending illegal aliens. Director Morton told the Maricopa County Attorney that ICE will no longer respond to calls from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office involving traffic stops, civil infractions or “other minor offenses.” DHS’ legal reasoning is unclear, given that federal law requires the federal government to respond to inquiries by law enforcement agencies to verify immigration status.

December 29, 2011: ICE Creates 24-Hotline for Illegal Immigrant Detainees

ICE announced a new 24-hour hotline for illegal immigrant detainees to ensure that they “are made aware of their rights.” The hotline is to be staffed by the Law Enforcement Support Center, which ICE had previously claimed was too understaffed to respond to local law enforcement trying to verify immigration status. ICE also revised its detainer form to include a new provision that said ICE should “consider this request for a detainer operative only upon the subject’s conviction”—a change in policy that explicitly ignores that illegal presence is a violation of federal law.

January 5, 2012: DHS Stops Secure Communities in Alabama in Retaliation for State Immigration Enforcement Law

According to an email from DHS to member of the Alabama congressional delegation, DHS stopped the roll-out of Secure Communities in the state because the Administration disagreed with the state’s immigration enforcement law: “Although the federal courts have enjoined several parts of H.B. 56, certain provisions were not enjoined and are currently in effect . . . . While these provisions of Alabama’s state immigration enforcement law, which conflict with ICE’s immigration enforcement policies and programs, remain the subject of litigation, ICE does not believe it is appropriate to expand deployment of Secure Communities . . . in Alabama.”

January 6, 2012: USCIS Announces Proposal To Permit an Entire Segment of Illegal Immigrant Population To Remain in the U.S

USCIS announced a proposed rule to allow the illegal immigrant relatives of U.S. citizens to apply for waivers to remain in U.S., thereby avoiding the law that requires them to return to their home countries and apply for a waiver. On January 3, 2013, USCIS issued the final rule. During a stakeholder call, USCIS Director Mayorkas emphasized that USCIS would also consider expanding the waiver to illegal immigrant relatives of green card holders and clarified that even illegal immigrants in deportation proceedings who had their case administratively closed are eligible for these waivers. On January 24, 2014, USCIS issued field guidance for the program, instructing USCIS officers that an applicant with a criminal history is still eligible for a waiver as long as the offense qualifies as a “petty offense” or “youthful offender” exception under the INA and is not a crime involving moral turpitude.

January 9, 2012: Inspector General Reveals Rubberstamping of Immigration Applications

A report by the DHS Inspector General revealed that USCIS officials pressure employees to approve applications that should have been denied and that employees believe they do not have enough time to complete interviews of applicants, “leav[ing] ample opportunities for critical information to be overlooked. One [adjudicator] said that an [adjudicator] is likely to ‘grant and just move on,’ rather than use information to make a better determination in certain cases.” Ninety percent of those surveyed felt they did not have enough time to complete interviews of applicants.

January 16, 2012: ICE Prosecutors Suspend Deportation Proceedings

Due to the immigration court docket review ordered by the ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor in November 2011, ICE prosecutors in Denver and Baltimore must spend their time reviewing thousands of deportation cases to determine which are eligible for administrative amnesty. As a result, proceedings in immigration courts were stopped for six weeks. On January 19, 2012, ICE prosecutors recommended the voluntary closure of 1,667 deportation cases. On March 30, 2012, the Administration announced the expansion of the program to Detroit, Seattle, New Orleans and Orlando, suspending the immigration court dockets in four large cities.

January 19, 2012: Obama Uses Executive Order to Eliminate Statutory Interview Requirement for Certain Countries

Obama issued an executive order attempting to nullify a longstanding statutory requirement that those applying for a nonimmigrant visa submit to an in-person interview with a consular officer. The order waived these requirements for travelers from China and Brazil, increasing the potential for visa overstays and risking national security and law enforcement threats.

February 7, 2012: New ICE Public Advocate for Illegal Immigrants

ICE announced the creation of the ICE Public Advocate, who is to serve as a point of contact for aliens in removal proceedings, community and advocacy groups, and others who have concerns, questions, recommendations, or other issues they would like to raise about the Administration’s executive enforcement and amnesty efforts.

February 13, 2012: Obama Budget Slashes 287(g) Program

The President’s FY2013 budget proposed a cut in funding for ICE and the 287(g) program, effectively gutting it.

April 25, 2012: ICE Voluntarily Dismisses Over 16,500 Deportation Cases

ICE announced that it would voluntarily close over 16,500 deportation cases pending background checks in connection with the Administration’s larger review of 300,000 cases. The administration also announced that the number of illegal immigrants whose deportation cases it has already dismissed is up to 2,700 from just over 1,500 the previous month.

April 25, 2012: DHS Announces Another Delay of Biometric Exit System

In March 2012, DHS Principal Deputy Coordinator of Counterterrorism John Cohen testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security that DHS’ plan to implement a biometric exit system would be completed in the next 30 days. However, on April 25, 2012, Secretary Napolitano testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that DHS would be able to deploy such a system “within four years” and then only if DHS determined that it was cost-effective. Dating back to 1996, Congress has mandated six times that this system be implemented and the 9/11 Commission recommended that DHS complete this system “as quickly as possible.”

April 27, 2012: Obama Administration Undermines Successful Secure Communities Program

ICE announced that it will no longer ask local jails to detain illegal aliens stopped for “minor traffic offenses,” weakening the effective Secure Communities program. Instead, ICE would only consider detaining an alien if the alien is ultimately convicted of an offense. Also, despite claims of limited resources, ICE announced it planned to take action against jurisdictions with arrest rates the agency deems too high.

June 5, 2012: ICE Deportation Dismissals Up To 20,000

ICE released its latest statistics in its case-by-case review of pending deportation cases. Of the 288,000 reviewed, 20,648 would be dismissed. ICE prosecutors in California also began reviewing more than 18,000 pending deportation cases.

June 12, 2012: Obama Administration Sues Florida for Effort to Remove Ineligible Voters

The Administration filed a lawsuit to prevent the State of Florida from removing ineligible voters, including illegal immigrants, from its voter registration rolls. On June 28, 2012, a federal court denied the Administration’s request, largely because Florida had abandoned its efforts, but also held that a State is not prohibited from removing the names of noncitizens from its voter rolls, even within the 90-day quiet period before a federal election.

June 15, 2012: Obama Bypasses Congress and Unilaterally Implements the DREAM Act

President Obama unilaterally implemented provisions of the DREAM Act, circumventing Congress under the guise of “prosecutorial discretion.” The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or “DACA” program gives amnesty by executive fiat and work authorizations to illegal aliens under the age of 30 who claimed they arrived in the country before the age of 16. ICE officers would later report that this amnesty was being applied to adult illegal aliens who have been arrested for criminal offenses. In an interview the same day, Secretary Napolitano admitted that DHS “internally set it up so that the parents are not referred for immigration enforcement if the young person comes in for deferred action,” thereby further expanding the scope of the non-enforcement directive.

June 25, 2012: Obama Administration Rescinds Arizona’s 287(g) Agreements in Retaliation for Supreme Court Upholding State Immigration Enforcement Law

Immediately following the Supreme Court’s decision upholding most of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law—which required law enforcement officers to take reasonable steps to verify the immigration status of those lawfully stopped or detained where there is reasonable suspicion to believe they are in the country illegally—the Administration rescinded all of its 287(g) agreements in Arizona.

July 6, 2012: Obama Administration Announces Closure of Nine Border Patrol Stations

The Obama Administration announced the closure of nine Border Patrol stations throughout the country—Lubbock, Amarillo, Dallas, San Antonio, Abilene, and San Angelo, Texas; Billings, Montana; Twin Falls, Idaho; and Riverside, California. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman claimed it was being done to more effectively use its personnel.

August 6, 2012: Administration Admits It Does Not Enforce Public Charge Law

The Ranking Members of the Senate Budget, Judiciary, Finance, and Agriculture Committees requested basic information from DHS and the State Department about visa denials after learning that only two of roughly 80 welfare programs were officially considered when evaluating whether an applicant for admission to the U.S. was likely to become a “public charge,” i.e., dependent on government assistance. Under Section 212 of the INA, an alien who is likely to become a public charge is inadmissible. On February 8, 2013, DHS finally responded that, in 2012, not a single immigrant was identified by the federal government as being a public charge, and that from FY2005 to FY2011, just 9,700 applicants for admission through the Visa Waiver Program out of more than 116 million were denied on public charge grounds. On March 1, 2013, the State Department finally responded with data showing that, in 2011, only 0.0033 percent of net applications for admission to the U.S. were denied on “public charge” grounds.

September 12, 2012: Administration Admits Aggressive Campaign To Recruit Immigrants To Sign Up for U.S. Welfare Program

In response to a request from the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack admitted that USDA personnel conducted more than 30 meetings with the Mexican government to encourage noncitizen enrollment in food stamps and 14 other USDA-administered welfare programs. It is later revealed that a pamphlet distributed at Mexican consulates in the U.S. assures non-citizens that food stamp enrollment will not affect their path to citizenship, and that the USDA produced and broadcasted a soap opera-like “radio novela,” the premise of which included pressuring an individual to enroll in food stamps even though she insisted she did not need the benefits.

October 4, 2012: Obama Administration Ignores Los Angeles County’s Defiance of Federal Immigration Laws

The Administration failed to take any action after Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck announced that the LAPD would ignore requests by ICE to detain illegal immigrants arrested for “low-level” offenses.

December 21, 2012: Morton Administrative Amnesty Memo #4

The Friday before the Christmas holiday, ICE Director Morton issued a fourth memo with guidance on implementing administrative amnesty and stating that ICE agents could no longer detain illegal immigrants if the only violation of the law was being in the country illegally. ICE agents could now detain only those who have committed a crime independent of their illegal status, administratively suspending the core elements of the INA.

January 22, 2013: Obama Administration Files Brief in Support of Challenge to Arizona Law Requiring Proof of Citizenship to Vote

The Administration filed a brief in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., challenging Arizona’s law that requires individuals to provide evidence of United States citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. On June 17, 2013, the Supreme Court held that although federal law preempted the Arizona law, Arizona could still request that the Elections Assistance Commission (EAC) to include state-specific instructions on the federal form and a state may challenge a rejection of that request. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia noted: “Arizona would have the opportunity to establish in a reviewing court that a mere oath will not suffice to effectuate its citizenship requirement and that the EAC is therefore under a non discretionary duty to include Arizona’s concrete-evidence requirement on the Federal form.”

February 14, 2013: Administration Announces It Approved Nearly 200,000 DACA Applications

USCIS released its latest DACA statistics showing that the Administration had, to that point, granted deferred action to 199,460 illegal immigrants under the program.

February 26, 2013: DHS Says It Has No Metrics for Determining Whether the Border Is Secure

The GAO released a report stating that DHS had no official metrics by which to determine whether the border is secure and had no plans to adopt any until late 2013. Since 2004, DHS had used “operational control” as a way to measure border security, and, in 2006, Congress mandated that DHS maintain operational control of the “entire international land and maritime borders of the United States.” After DHS reported in 2010 that it had operational control over only 13 percent of the 8,607 mile northern, southwestern and coastal border, and only 44 percent operational control of the southwestern border specifically, the Obama Administration abandoned the metric. On March 21, 2013, the New York Times reported that administration officials admitted that “they had resisted producing a single measure to assess the border because the president did not want any hurdles placed on the pathway to eventual citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.”

February 2013: Obama Administration Uses Sequester as Excuse To Release More Than 2,000 Illegal Immigrants from ICE Custody

After reports surfaced that ICE had been releasing illegal immigrants in ICE custody due to the sequester, ICE Director Morton testified before the House Judiciary Committee that ICE had, in fact, released 2,228 illegal immigrant detainees, at least 629 of whom had criminal records, contradicting earlier statements by DHS officials. Morton also admitted that ICE had rearrested and brought back four of the most dangerous released detainees. According to the Associated Press, more 2,000 had been released before the sequester even took effect and the Administration planned to release 3,000 more.

April 10, 2013: Border Patrol Chief Testified Before Congress that Apprehensions Have Increased

Chief of the Border Patrol Michael Fisher testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee that there had been an increase in “attempted entries,” in part due to Congress’ consideration of an amnesty.

April 23, 2013: Federal Court Holds DHS Does Not Have Discretion To Stop Deportations

In Crane v. Napolitano, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that “DHS does not have discretion to refuse to initiate removal proceedings [where the law requires it to do so].” The court also affirmed that Congress, and not the President, has the plenary power to set immigration law and that the Administration’s prosecutorial discretion and DACA policies violate federal law. The lawsuit originated when several ICE agents sued Secretary Napolitano, Director Morton, and Director Mayorkas, arguing that the Administration’s amnesty policies caused them to violate their oath of office to enforce the law.

August 23, 2013: Obama Administration Adds Broad New Category of Illegal Immigrants Eligible for Backdoor Amnesty

ICE issued a new policy prohibiting its agents from detaining and/or deporting illegal immigrant parents, legal guardians, and “primary caretakers” of minor children. The policy memo states that ICE personnel “should ensure that the agency’s immigration enforcement activities do not unnecessarily disrupt the parental rights of both alien parents or legal guardians of minor children.” In response, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte stated that the new directive “poisons the debate surrounding immigration reform and shows that the Administration is not serious about fixing our broken immigration system.”

October 5, 2013: Obama Administration Ignores California’s Defiance of Federal Immigration Law

California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law prohibiting state and local law enforcement from detaining illegal immigrants pursuant to an ICE detainer except in certain narrow circumstances. The bill was opposed by the California State Sheriffs Association and the California District Attorneys Association. To date, the Obama Administration has taken no action in response.

November 15, 2013: Obama Administration Announces More Administrative Amnesty

USCIS issued a new Policy Memorandum that employed a dubious interpretation of a policy— not based in statute or regulations—intended to allow aliens outside the U.S. to come into the country on a temporary and case-by-case basis under certain circumstances for humanitarian reasons at the discretion of the Attorney General. The Administration announced that it would now use this policy to grant a path to citizenship to illegal immigrant immediate relatives of active and veteran members of the U.S. Armed Forces who are already in the country. Again, no legislation was brought before Congress.

November 30, 2013: Administration Has Approved Over 500,000 DACA Applications

According to USCIS, as of November 30, 2013, USCIS has received a total of 627,763 requests for deferred action. Of the total, 509,926 have been approved and 14,614 have been denied.

December 13, 2013: Federal Court Rebukes DHS for Aiding Smugglers in Violating U.S. Laws

U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, Andrew S. Hanen, issued an order stating: “This Court is quite concerned with the apparent policy of the Department of Homeland Security of completing the criminal mission of individuals who are violating the border security of the United States.” Judge Hanen detailed the practice of DHS immigration agents assisting human traffickers deliver illegal immigrants to their U.S. relatives.

March 13, 2014: Obama Announces Review of DHS Enforcement Practices

The President met with Congressional Hispanic Caucus Leadership to discuss “their mutual efforts to pass commonsense immigration reform legislation through the House of Representatives this year.” A readout of the meeting noted that the President announced to those in attendance that he has directed Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, to “do an inventory of the Department’s current practices to see how it can conduct enforcement more humanely within the confines of the law.” Immigration reform activists see the President’s announcement as an indication that he may weaken current deportation and enforcement policies.

March 31, 2014: DHS DOC Reveals Mass Release of Criminal Aliens

Internal DHS tracking metrics reveal the mass release of criminal aliens in 2013. In some jurisdictions, such as Washington D.C., more than half of encounters with criminal aliens resulted in releases.

March 5, 2014: Administration unilaterally acts to provide work permits to spouses of H-1B guest workers, increasing the supply of guest workers by almost 100,000 plus an additional 30,000 each following year.

Regarding the decision, Judiciary Ranking Member Grassley said in part: “…the Obama administration clearly doesn’t seem concerned with the millions of unemployed Americans, and those who have been forced out of their jobs because companies prefer to hire lower-paid workers from abroad… In addition to their lack of compassion and understanding for American workers, it’s disturbing that the administration is once again circumventing Congress and implementing their own rules… The [Senate’s Gang of Eight] bill, if passed, would allow spouses of H-1B holders to work. Inclusion of this provision signals that the Secretary does not currently have authority [to do so]…”

May 12, 2014: DHS DOC Reveals Thousands Of Criminal Offenders Were Freed in 2013

A DHS document obtained by the Center for Immigration Studies revealed that ICE freed 36,007 criminal aliens from ICE detention in 2013. CIS writes: “This group included aliens convicted of hundreds of violent and serious crimes, including homicide, sexual assault, kidnapping, and aggravated assault. The list of crimes also includes more than 16,000 drunk or drugged driving convictions. The vast majority of these releases from ICE custody were discretionary, not required by law (in fact, in some instances, apparently contrary to law), nor the result of local sanctuary policies.”

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“An Angry Republican” Part 2

 

 

iStock_000010295104_SmallI received a response from the very person that inspired  me to write “An Angry Republican.” I began to reply and decided that the comments made and my response were worthy of another article, which follows. 

In accusing me of sounding like an “angry republican”, I am wondering why you automatically assume I am a republican? Why is it that anyone who believes in our free enterprise system, the freedoms guaranteed by our constitution and small government, must always be “angry republicans?”

 

There are many Americans who are sick and tired of the “fundamental transformation” of a nation that once was the envy of the world. Obama has spent the past 6 years breaking down the constitutional rights that guarantee us our freedoms, transforming the United States into a government conglomerate, run by corrupt bureaucrats determined to turn us into a nanny state that has no sovereignty and can no longer be trusted by its allies and no longer feared by it’s enemies.

 

Milton Friedman once said,

 

“Ever since the first settlement of Europeans in the New World, American has been a magnet for people seeking adventure, fleeing from tyranny, or simply trying to make a better life for themselves and their children.”

 

I still believe that we are the envy of the world if for nothing than the entrepreneurial spirit that remains the backbone of this country.  It is well researched that entrepreneurship empowers all, regardless of education, sex, color of skin and nationality. As we have seen,  many nations have adopted this philosophy and realized great success as a result. We remain the envy of the world because of our constitution and the freedoms we offer our citizens.  The United States has always been regarded as a nation of immigrants and have more than four times as many immigrants than any other nation in the world. We must be doing something right!  And regardless of what Obama says,  I believe we are exceptional!

 

Yet, you are correct, that the United States and its standing around the world in regards to foreign policy has dropped significantly. President Obama took office determined, despite his ignorance, that the world could all join hands, sing kumbaya and automatically “the rise of the oceans would begin to slow and our planet would begin to heal.” However, as “angry americans” recognized from the beginning, his philosophy would never succeed. As Albert Einstein said, “So long as there are men, there will be wars.”

 

I think most  “angry Americans,” recognized the fundamental transformation that began under Obama and as a result have logically become very “angry!”  We have lost our voice in government. Our career politicians no longer understand what it means to take a risk and start a business, run a company, hire employees and make a profit. The word profit and anyone who works towards that end is evil and never pays their fair share.  Our career politicians no longer listen to or represent the people. They make laws that benefit themselves and then pick and choose who will be required to tow the line. The majority lie, cheat and steal in order to keep their jobs and they refuse to live under the very laws they force on us. This has become the rule instead of the exception under the Obama regime.

 

Why is it that so many Americans are uninformed or misinformed? Could it be that the very media that are supposed to keep politicians and government honest have been inundated with liberals who support the fundamental transformation of our nation and as a result mislead and misinform the populace purposefully? Have we become a nation where lies are the new norm and the truth no longer matters? A nation where all you have to do is repeat the lie enough and it will eventually be believed? Is Fox the only answer? No.  To really be informed, you must get your news from many sources including those with whom you disagree. You claim a major international newspaper, who you failed to identify, called Fox News “brash, bombastic and biased,” yet they refuse to comment on the lies, omissions and distortion of the so-called news by the liberal media? And they consider that fair and honest reporting?

 

And let’s not forget John Stewart a liberal who takes every opportunity to twist and turn news stories into funny comedic acts that just further the liberal agenda all under the auspices of comedy.  This is just another way of slowly integrating the beliefs of the left onto the unsuspecting public. He obviously has garnered  a following who believe he is a real news guy who tells the whole truth and nothing but the truth, all while allowing you to laugh and believe you are being informed.  This along with our current government-run education system that continues to slowly dumb down the public; add in the war on women and the constant recruitment of  government entitlement participants, and you have a population of people who will not and cannot survive on their own and have therefore surrendered their lives, their rights, their power  and their very freedoms to the United States government.  Flood the borders with illegals, grant them amnesty and the right to vote and you have liberals in control for ever. We all know you never bite the hand that feeds you!  Long live Socialism!

 

And now, my vote for the absolute worst comment of the day?

“Our right of free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, however, and has little to do with our veterans. This is not to take away the sacrifices our veterans have made, however, but it has nothing to do with the point at hand. These are the kind of comments that politicians make to grab votes.”

These remarks about our Veterans, obviously mimic the feelings of the Obama administration and most liberals regarding our military.  So easily deployed when you need them, but so quickly dismissed when they no longer serve your purpose. You forget that they, on a daily basis, fight for us to keep the very freedoms our forefathers guaranteed under the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.  Your knowledge of our history is seriously lacking if you believe that our Veterans have little to do with the defense of our freedoms. They are the only wall of defense, outside of an informed populace that protects our freedoms and our constitution. It is this very mindset that has so many on the left refusing to stand for the rights of our Veterans. When the people are told that our Veterans made no sacrifices in the name of freedom and our youth are no longer educated on the sacrifices made by our Veterans, then this country will  cease to exist as our forefathers intended. I ask you, if our Veterans do not fight for our very freedoms, then what do they fight for? We are well on our way to an uneducated and misinformed public. Now, let our Veterans die from poor healthcare, send them pink slips on the battlefield, fire all the Generals who do not subscribe to the liberal agenda and soon enough, you have no one to defend our Nation and those who have always wished us harm have exactly what they wished for….no more America, land of the free and home of the brave!

 

We all know that every President makes mistakes that affect the administration that follows.  We all know that George Bush made mistakes, as did most Presidents before him. But when you have an administration, that is incapable of accepting responsibility for its own failed polices and actions and continues to blame others, you must recognize that we have no real leader. We are well into the sixth year of Obama’s presidency and I would like to know at what point Obama plans on becoming the leader of the United States? At what point will he stop blaming Bush and pick up the gavel and lead this country? All I have seen so far is the total takeover and control of our healthcare system, the land we live on, the air we breath and the water we drink, all in the name of global warming and environmentalism. When will it stop? At what point will the economy, jobs, energy independence, freedom of religion, speech, the press and the sovereignty of this nation become more important to Obama than politics, fundraising, golf, and vacationing?

 

Finally your definition of a Liberal,

 

“Read the Constitution again, the sum and substance of which is the people should be free to do whatever they want as long as they don’t interfere with the lives of others, which is the definition of a Liberal if ever there was one.”

 

Ironically,  I will leave the response to this one up to a self-professed liberal….. Alan Clifton, who said,

 

“I’ve written numerous articles defending women’s rights, gay rights, immigrant rights, minority right and equality, and I’ve fiercely opposed racists bigots and intolerance in general. Yet, I’ve been called a racist, bigot, sexist, homophobic woman-hater – all by liberals.”  “Then there are the ‘PC police” types. These are the people who essentially find almost everything offensive. Basically they want a society where everyone better watch what they say or do because you never know who you just might offend.”  “It’s getting to a point where some are going from passionate activists fighting for a good cause to over sensationalized complainers who just want to go around judging anyone and everyone for everything they do.”

 

Finally, something said by a liberal that I can believe in!  Well said Alan, well said!

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“An Angry Republican”

iStock_000010295104_Small

I recently had someone accuse me of sounding like an “angry Republican.” As a result,  I have decided to write a response to this accusation and set the record straight!

Let’s get one thing clear….. I don’t consider myself a republican, a tea partier, or a libertarian. What I do know is that I am NOT  a racist or a flat-earther or a bigot or a terrorist, as the President of the United States has described me. I am a concerned American that believes in our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, the rule of law, the free enterprise system, a days pay for a hard days work, the three arms of government that were put into effect to keep any one from taking too much control, a valid and honest voting booth, a free press that actually reports the facts and not just political rhetoric, the sovereignty of our borders, the compassion, ingenuity and exceptionalism of the American people, who make up a country considered the melting pot and envy of the world.

 

If you still want to call me an angry republican, that is your right, because of course you have been given free speech by the blood of our Veterans, who lost their lives so you can speak your mind.

 

But, the truth is, YOU would be an angry American if you had a clue about what is really going on in this country today.  You do not have to be a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, a Libertarian or any other party you might happen to follow, to recognize that we are being fundamentally changed, against our will, by an administration who chooses not to follow the rule of law, who ignores the very Constitution and Bill of Rights that this country was founded on, and who stands up everyday and LIES to the American people.

 

Now, I am sure I have graduated from “angry Republican” to just plain “politically incorrect.” And guess what? If you did just call me “UN PC”, then you are probably part of the problem.

 

You might be one of those people who listen to the nightly news on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, or maybe even one who thinks Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart are actually “real” news people and couldn’t possibly have an agenda.  You then sit back with a smug smile thinking you are informed, and even got a good laugh while getting your daily dose of the “real” news.

 

When you read facts reported by anyone in the know, because they actually do hours and hours  of research, you can smugly call them “Angry Republicans,” while you bask in your own ignorance.

 

Wake up, open your eyes and watch as the Liberal left led by their king and savior, Barack Obama, take away your rights one at a time, while you are being promised that ,

 

“This is the most transparent government in the history of the United States and that the world is less violent than it has ever been, it is healthier than it has ever been and it is more educated, better fed and more tolerant than it has ever been. That generations from now, we will all be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.” – Barack Obama

 

And if you are truly informed and still believe that, then Barack Obama IS the savior and I am just an Angry Republican!!

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Government: A Monster of Our Own Creation?”

img328 copy

Do we have blind faith in our government?  Do we have blind faith in our Media? Do we believe that our government will always do what is in our best interest? Has the press skirted their duties by allowing party affiliation and personal feelings to skew their reporting and basically stop informing the populace? What is happening to our country? Is the government a monster of our own creation?

 

Let’s start by looking at the current press and how their reporting or lack thereof could be negatively effecting our government and the people they represent.

 

Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodard of the Washington Post, emerged as the most famous journalists in American History? Why?  Between 1972 and 1976, they followed a story regarding a break-in at the Watergate Hotel and discovered a tangled web of deceit and lies leading directly to the White House and President Nixon. Because of a hunch, lots of research and investigation, they uncovered what we now know as “Watergate.” As a result of their hard work and unquenchable thirst for the truth, regardless of their political leanings, their story lead to the fall and resignation of President Nixon.

 

I think the journalists of yesterday helped to keep our government and its officials in check. They helped to keep them honest. No matter what political party you were associated with you still went out in search of the truth, the lies, and the deceptions.  It seemed as though journalists of yesteryear were in the people’s camp. We were all in this together, and the constant scrutiny by the press kept our government honest and working for the people. We knew that if you were corrupt, you would eventually get caught. We could turn on the news and know that the stories they told us were based on fact, hard work, real journalism and truth.  We never knew what party any of our news anchors favored. There was never an indication that they played for one team or the other. The prize was uncovering the truth, and keeping our elected officials honest.

I grew up in an era where journalism and politics were considered honorable professions.  This is no longer true today.

Let’s look at a line from the Society of Professional Journalist’s code of Ethics:

“Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the Journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues.”

 Do you believe this is happening in the reporting of the news today? The majority of bias in the news today is not necessarily the result of lies, but the omission of news stories that might not be consistent with their political leanings or their owners or advertisers. Stories might be omitted because they would not put the current administration in a favorable light.  Instead of seeking the truth and keeping the public informed, it becomes all about politics, advertisers and money.

A perfect example of this would be the story of the IRS and their potential targeting of conservatives.  Let’s look back to May of 2013 when the allegations against the IRS were first reported.

President Obama said,

“If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous. And there’s no place for it. And they have to be held fully accountable. Because the IRS as an independent agency requires absolute integrity, and people have to have confidence that they’re applying the laws in a nonpartisan way.”

 When asked about the IRS scandal in an interview with Bill O’Reilly from Fox news, President Obama said,

”Not a smidgen of corruption. These kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because of you (Fox) and your TV station will promote them.”

 Is that true? Is Fox news only telling the story to make the administration look bad, or is the IRS scandal, in fact, a real story? Let’s look at the facts surrounding the IRS case.

On May 10, 2013, The Internal Revenue Service apologized for targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, and that their applications for tax-exempt status were being improperly delayed and scrutinized.

In the beginning, all the major media outlets were outraged and covered the scandal with the zeal that the Watergate scandal brought about. But then, the coverage all but stopped by mainstream media. What happened?

Reports circulated that groups from both conservative and liberal groups were targeted. This was supposed to make the investigation null and void. If the IRS was targeting both sides of the political aisle, then it was no longer news?

In an analysis by the Media Research Center, The big Three networks devoted a whopping 34 minutes and 28 seconds of coverage to New Jersey’s Governor, Chris Christie’s traffic headache, which they dubbed “Bridgegate.” That is 17 times the 2 minutes and eight seconds devoted to the IRS scandal in the last six months. NBC featured 5 seconds, CBS with 1 minute and 41 seconds, and ABC a meager 22 seconds.

IRS Agents testified before Congress that the agency’s political targeting did not apply to progressive groups as Democrats and the media had claimed. Only 7 applications in the IRS backlog contained the word “progressive” all of which were approved by the IRS, while Conservative groups received unprecedented review and experienced years of waiting for their applications, most of which, have still not been approved. Twenty-four conservative groups were asked for their donor lists. The IRS told Congress that those lists were destroyed, however going through IRS files, they discovered three of the lists had not been destroyed. Of the donors on the lists, 10% were audited. The rate of audits on ordinary Americans is 1%.

Inspector General Russell George, according to his audit said,

 “Our audit did not find evidence that the IRS used the “progressives” identifier as selection criteria for potential political cases between May of 2010 and May of 2012.”

 The inspector general also stressed that,

 “100 percent of the groups with “tea party,” “patriots.” and “9/12” in their names were flagged for extra attention.”

 It was also proven that conservative groups were not only targeted, and harassed with IRS audits, but Lois Lerner was also cooking up plans with the Justice Department to criminally charge conservative groups, and emails were uncovered showing Lois Lerner was, in fact, sharing private taxpayer information regarding conservatives with the Federal Election Commission.

 Still, no news reports from mainstream news. 

In April 2014, Lois Lerner received a criminal referral from the House Ways and Mean Committee and new emails were intercepted proving she fed tax information on a targeted group to Representative Elijah Cummings (D).

 Did we hear updates from mainstream? No. Was Elijah Cummings asked any questions about the shared emails? No.

When Congress demanded the emails from Lois Lerner’s computers, during the time period when this event occurred, they claimed her emails were lost when her computer crashed.  Congress then discovered her hard drive was destroyed as well. Additionally, 6-7 other employees involved in the scandal also mysteriously had their computers crash, and their hard drives also destroyed.

 Did this prompt reports on mainstream media? NO.

Based on this story alone, do you feel that the news is being reported? Do you feel that the mainstream media has your back? Do you think it is important for the United States public to know how and why and who was involved with the IRS targeting of Americans for their political speech and beliefs?

Regardless of your political party affiliation, it IS news. We, as Americans, should be outraged that the press is picking and choosing the stories they report to the American public.

Let’s look at some statistics.

“Surveys by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press among other polling and research groups show that about two-thirds of the general public cite television as their main source for national and international news, more than twice the number of people who rely on newspapers, and about 50 percent more than the growing number of U.S. residents who rely on the Internet (43 percent).”

Australian journalist John Pilger also captures this very well:

“Long before the Soviet Union broke up, a group of Russian writers touring the United States were astonished to find, after reading the newspapers and watching television, that almost all the opinions on all the vital issues were the same. “In our country,” said one of them, “to get that result we have a dictatorship. We imprison people. We tear out their fingernails. Here you have none of that. How do you do it? What’s the secret?”

Ben H. Bagdikian of the Media Monopoly said,

“The inappropriate fit between the country’s major media and the country’s political system has starved voters of relevant information, leaving them at the mercy of paid political propaganda that is close to meaningless and often worse. It has eroded the central requirement of a democracy that those who are governed give not only their consent but their informed consent.”

Daniel Terdiman, a journalist who has been published in Time Magazine, The New York Times, Wired Magazine and many others says,

“You can get so close to a source that you become part of the problem, he added. “Some people say that these powerful people use journalists, and they do. And they will use them to the fullest extent possible, right up until the point where the journalist says, ‘Whoa, that’s too far.’  [Journalists] shouldn’t be willing to water down the truth to protect their access to power.”

The World Press Freedom Index of 2014 rated The United States number 46th in the world for freedom of the press. What does that mean? In 2009, the United States was rated number 22 in the world. What is happening in this country?

Why are Americans more informed on movie star happenings, then events that affect their very lives?

I read an article after the IRS scandal broke where Bette Midler, said, thank you to the IRS for targeting tea party groups, who she sees as haters.  My question to the “Divine Miss M,” would be, how would she feel, if the IRS decided to target red-headed singers/actresses?  How about women with black hair? How about men with brown eyes? What about Christians? How about Jews?

You have to ask yourself one question. Should the IRS have the freedom and the power to target any American for their beliefs?

In this day and age of such polarization, we have to stand up as Americans and fight for the freedoms our forefather’s guaranteed us when this fledgling country was born. We must remember that government, especially in the past 5 years has divided us among families, political parties, religious groups, gay and traditional marriage groups, blacks against whites, males against females, rich against poor…and the list goes on.  Why? As long as we are divided, government grows stronger and the United States gets weaker. We have to recognize that when we, as Americans, are divided, we have already been conquered and the government becomes a monster of our own creation!

 

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“The Iraq Disaster in Shocking Headlines, News Stories and Quotes….”

 

 

 

article-2656905-1EBC51B500000578-158_470x494-1

“Four and a half years later, as you graduate, the landscape has changed. We have removed our troops from Iraq. We are winding down our war in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda’s leadership on the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan has been decimated, and Osama bin Laden is no more.”

“Thanks to the sacrifice and service of our brave men and women in uniform, the war in Iraq is over, the war in Afghanistan is winding down, al Qaeda has been decimated, Osama bin Laden is dead.”

“Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq– and we did. I said we’d wind down the war in Afghanistan– and we are. And while a new tower rises above the New York skyline, al Qaeda is on the path to defeat and Osama bin Laden is dead.”

We are leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq.”

The statements above were  made by President Obama as recently as last week.

Today in the News:

“Americans were being evacuated Thursday from a major Iraqi air base as Al Qaeda-aligned militants toppled cities in the country’s north and threatened to advance toward Baghdad.”

“ISIS, a merger of terrorist organizations Al-Qaeda and Jabhat-Al-Nusra, seized the Iraqi cities of Mosul and Tikrit.”

“ISIS has confiscated $429 million, making them the wealthiest terror group in the world.”

“Iraqi military abandoning their posts, while militants stage a parade of American Humvee patrol cars seized from the Iraqi army. Insurgents have also captured 2 helicopters, 15 tanks and armored cars also belonging to the United States.”

“The insurgents carry out beheadings as they cross Iraq for Baghdad. In one video insurgents are seen knocking on the door of a Sunni police major in the middle of the night. They blindfold him, cuff him and carve off his head in his own bedroom. An image of the officer’s decapitated head was tweeted with the sickening message: “This is our ball. It is made of skin #WorldCup. In their push for the capital, 1700 Shia soldiers have been executed.”

“In another video, gunmen are seen carrying out discriminate drive-by shootings on motorists and pedestrians. Armed with machine guns, the insurgents film themselves shooting cars off the road then move in to video close-ups of the victims’ blood stained bodies slumped in the seats.”

“An estimated 500,000 Iraqi citizens have fled.”

“ISIS removes the border  between Syria and Iraq, to begin the establishment of an Islamic superstate.”

“The White House says the oil refinery in Baji, Iraq remains in control of the government of Iraq.”

“ISIS takes over the oil refinery in Baji, Iraq.”

“ISIS  is currently 70 miles from Baghdad, with plans on taking over the city.”

“Vice President Biden spoke with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki by phone and expressed US solidarity with Iraq in its fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.”

President Obama says:  

 “No boots on the ground. Not being considered.”

The man in charge of ISIS is Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. He was in US custody at Camp Bucca Iraq, until President Obama closed down the prison camp and had him released in 2009. Days after Osama bin Laden was killed in May of 2011, Abu threatened violent retaliation for Bin Laden’s death and three days later claimed responsibility for an attack in Iraq that killed 24 policeman and wounded 72 others. Abu than pledged on AOI’s website that he would carry out 100 attacks across Iraq in retaliation for Bin Laden’s death.  It seems he has been true to his word.

The New York Times says President Obama does not offer the air support requested by the Iraqi government because the White House is,

“Reluctant to open a new chapter in a conflict that he insisted was over when the United States withdrew the last of its forces from Iraq in 2011.”

 

In 2011, Mitt Romney condemned Obama on his decision to withdraw all troops from Iraq:

“The unavoidable question is whether this decision is the result of a naked political calculation or simple sheer ineptitude in negotiations with the Iraqi government. The American people deserve to hear the recommendations that were made by our military commanders in Iraq.”

Former Utah Governor, John Huntsman  said,

“President Obama’s decision, however, to not leave a small, focused presence in Iraq is a mistake and the product of his administration’s failures,” . “The president’s inability to reach a security agreement leaves Iraq vulnerable to backsliding, thus putting our interests in the region at risk. An ideal arrangement would have left a small troop presence that could have assisted with the training of Iraqi security forces and vital counter-terror efforts.”

Lindsay Graham, said,

“ISIS is now a military force that will allow Al Qaeda to plan attacks against the United States from Iraq. The next 9/11 is in the making as I speak!”

Senator McCain on the Senate floor today,

“We need a new team that knows what America’s national security interests are and are more interested in national security that they are in politics.”

“A residual force would have stabilized the country. Most military experts will tell you that.” “You ignore history of what we’ve done after conflicts, which is to leave a stabilizing force behind, which is what we could have done in Iraq and avoided this debacle that we are in today.”

“This decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East. It is clear that this decision of a complete pullout of United States troops from Iraq was dictated by politics and not our national security interests.”

“I believe that history will judge the president’s leadership with the scorn and disdain that it deserves.”

“White House spokesman says the situation in Iraq is “GRAVE” and has deteriorated over the last 24 hours.”

“President Obama says, during a press conference, that he would decide over the next coming days on a range of options presented by his National Security team. He then boarded a plane for a trip to the Cannon Ball, North Dakota area to visit the Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Nation. Then on to Laguna Beach to a $32,000 per person fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee.” 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“States Secretly Voting to Destroy Electoral College”

democracy-vote-problems-24326767

Currently, behind closed doors and under the radar, Democratic led states are deciding to change the way the United States has elected its President for the past 200+ years!

 Have you, the American taxpayer, been notified of this change? Have you been given a voice in this decision? Have you seen any stories on mainstream media about how our voting rights will be changed if this law is passed?
Eleven states have quietly signed into law a new bill, the “National Popular Vote Bill,”  which will get rid of the current electoral college and award the White House to the presidential candidate who wins the popular vote. Why did they not go through the Congress? Why have we not heard about this on the news? Why has this vote been secretly advancing under the radar?
There is not enough support in Congress to make the change, therefore the individual states are taking it upon themselves to change the way the United States has voted from the beginning of our republic and leaving public opinion and state representatives off the playing field.  Could it be that the political force enacting this change feel the majority of Americans would not support changing our Constitutional voting laws? Have they have decided to take it upon themselves to make the change without any press coverage and without the public being aware?
Currently, our president is chosen through the electoral college. How does this work?  Each state is given a number of electoral votes based on the population of that state.  Therefore bigger states have more electoral votes. Americans go to the polls and vote for the candidate of their choice. The candidate that receives the most votes in any one state is then given the electoral votes for that state. This explains why someone can win the popular vote, yet lose the election, such as Bush in 2000, who won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote by 0.5%. Does this mean that if we had a popular vote, that Bush would have lost the election? The answer is no, because money would have been spent differently by the candidates in order to obtain the votes needed to win, regardless of the method…electoral or popular.
Is changing our Constitutional voting process the right thing to do? If you could vote whether to keep our current electoral college method of electing a president, or change it to the popular vote, which would you choose? Which do you think represents the most fair outcome?
 Stated in a paper by William C. Kimberling, Deputy Director of the Federal Election Commission,
“Our forefathers considered electing the president by a direct popular vote. However, a popular vote was rejected not because the Framers of the Constitution doubted public intelligence, but rather because they feared that without sufficient information about candidates from outside their state, people would naturally vote for a “favorite son” from their own state or region. At worst, no president would emerge with a popular majority sufficient to govern the whole country.  At best, the choice of president would always be decided by the larger, most populous states with little regard for the smaller ones. So, the constitutional convention proposed an indirect election of the president through a College of Electors.”
 
Here is a list of the states and the electoral votes they each receive as of 2012:
Alaska: 3 Nebraska: 5
Arizona: 11 Nevada: 6
Arkansas: 6 New Hampshire: 4
California: 55 New Jersey: 14
Colorado: 9 New Mexico: 5
Connecticut: 7 New York: 29
Delaware: 3 North Carolina: 15
District of Columbia: 3 North Dakota: 3
Florida: 29 Ohio: 18
Georgia: 16 Oklahoma: 7
Hawaii: 4 Oregon: 7
Idaho: 4 Pennsylvania: 20
Illinois: 20 Rhode Island: 4
Indiana: 11 South Carolina: 9
Iowa: 6 South Dakota: 3
Kansas: 6 Tennessee: 11
Kentucky: 8 Texas: 38
Louisiana: 8 Utah: 6
Maine: 4 Vermont: 3
Maryland: 10 Virginia: 13
Massachusetts: 11 Washington: 12
Minnesota: 10 West Virginia: 5
Mississippi: 6 Wisconsin: 10
Missouri: 10 Wyoming: 3
Montana: 3
The number of electoral votes can change with each Presidential election if the U.S. Census Bureaus’s decennial head count changes. Therefore electoral votes can be added or subtracted in each election depending on the head count within each state.
The “National Popular Vote” bill has now been signed into law in 11 jurisdictions possessing a combined 136 electoral votes.  They need 270 total electoral votes to bring the “National Popular Vote” bill into effect.  Below are the states that have already voted for the bill that will change the way the United States elects its president and the party the state most strongly identifies with:
Distirict of Columbia (3 electoral votes) –  Democrat
Hawaii  (4 electoral votes) – Democrat
Illinois (20 electoral votes) – Democrat
Maryland (10 electoral votes) – Democrat
Massachusetts (11 electoral votes) – Democrat
New Jersey (14 electoral votes) –  Democrat
Washington (12 electoral votes) – Democrat
Vermont (3 electoral votes) – Democrat
California (55 electoral votes) – Democrat
Rhode Island (4 electoral votes) – Democrat
New York (29 electoral votes) – Democrat
So, the question of the day would be:  “If your state is on this list, did you know about it? Did your representative contact you and let you know that your legislators were making decisions that effect your vote without your knowledge? Is there a reason that only Democratic states have signed on?
How might this bill change the way we elect our President?  Will it favor one party over another? There are lots of arguments for and against this change.
New Yorker  Magazine writes:
“The status quo is not good for small states. It’s not good for big states. It’s not good for medium-size states. The only states it’s good for are swing states, and their ranks are shrinking. Last time, there were just nine, marking the first election in a century or two in which the number of swing states was in single digits. There are now fewer of them than there are National Popular Vote states.
 
Keith Wagstaff of The Week, says, 
 
“ If the popular vote were paramount, candidates might actually visit the National Popular Vote states instead of spending all their time in Ohio and Florida.”
 
Professor Walter E. Williams of George Mason University says:
 
“Were it not for the Electoral College, presidential candidates could safely ignore less populous states,”
 
Gary Gregg II of the University of Louisville says,
 
“The National Popular Vote bill would mean ignoring every rural and small-state voter in our country.”
 
Morton C. Blackwell, from Virginia says,
 
“If the National Popular Vote bill had been in effect in 2008, Delaware would have lost 44% of its power.  Rhode Island would have lost 51.49% of its power. Wyoming’s power would have dropped by 65.48%. The pattern is the same for all the smaller population states. Gainers, under this bill would be the larger states.”
 
If we look at the 33 states that have fewer than 11 electoral votes, each state’s percentage of the 538 electoral votes is larger than the state’s percentage of the nation’s population. This information is based on a calculation by Blackwell, however others believe that the 33 below average sized states are ignored under the current electoral system because they are not battleground states and therefore do not receive any of the campaign events in each election.
Some argue that small states have so few people that they would not attract any attention from presidential candidates regardless of the voting system used. However, others  support the belief that the attention each state receives is dependent on whether it is closely divided by party not its size.
Let’s look at some interesting statistics.  In general, there are more Democrats than Republicans in this country. But, in terms of people who vote, the split is about equal. However, if you have a very high turnout to the voting booth, Democrats would take the election every time.   Do these numbers help you in determining if a popular vote would be more advantageous to Democrats or Republicans?
Regardless of your feelings on this topic, the most surprising element of this story continues to be the secretive way in which it is being handled.  Once again, the American taxpayer is being kept out of the loop. Decisions that effect each of us are being made without our knowledge. Politicians continue to be politicians and feel they have the right to change our Constitution without any input from the American people. When will your state representatives make you aware of any changes? After they have been made!
Are these decisions being made based on political advantage? Are the politicians who claim to represent the people making decisions based on their own welfare? Will the “National Popular Vote” bill truly reflect the wish of the people, or will it serve as a tool to save some politician’s job or his party?
You decide….but be sure to contact your local representative and let them know that we demand to be informed about decisions that will ultimately effect our vote, our lives and our Constitution!
 
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Obama, Bergdahl and the Hornet’s Nest!”

 

1338567_18962827

Everyday is like opening a Pandora’s box! A new lie, an old promise broken, a new scandal revealed a hornet’s nest disturbed!!

Today, President Obama, while in Brussels for the D-day celebration made a statement saying,

“We saw an opportunity and we seized it, and I make no apologies for that.”

“I think it was important for people to understand that this is not some abstraction, this is not some political football. You have a couple of parents whose kid volunteered to fight in a distant land, who they hadn’t seen in five years, and weren’t sure whether they’d ever see again. And as commander and chief of the United Sates armed forces, I am responsible for those kids.”
 
“I write too many letters to folks who unfortunately don’t see their children again after fighting a war,” he said. “I make absolutely no apologies for making sure that we get back a young man to his parents, and that the American people understand that this is somebody’s child and that we don’t condition whether or not we make the effort to try to get them back.”
 
But what about the parents of all the other servicemen fighting this war on terror? Are their lives not just as important, if not more so, if in fact, Bergdahl is a deserter and collaborated with the enemy? Won’t the release of these terrorists put all our servicemen and Americans around the globe in greater danger by placing them right back into the war on terror we remain fighting today?
Back in 2007, a Senior Defense official said, in regards to the release of Gitmo detainees,
I can tell you that we have confirmed 12 individuals have returned to the fight and we have strong evidence that about another dozen have returned to the fight.”
In May  of 2007, Pentagon officials repeated their concern that thirty former captives had returned to the battlefield in testimony before the Congress. In January of 2009, the Pentagon said that 18 former detainees are confirmed to have participated in attacks and 43 are suspected to have been involved in attacks. The Pentagon has also had a long history of describing the Guantanamo prisoners as “the worst of the worst.”
So why would the President even consider releasing 5 of the worst prisoners at Gitmo? Obama in defending his decision to release the prisoners said,

 “ Is there a possibility of some of them trying to return to activities that are detrimental to us? Absolutely.”

According to the  New York Daily News, reporters said,
“A top Middle Easten official said officials in Qatar would do little to hinder the terrorists. The unidentified official told Reuters that the Taliban leaders had already moved into a residential compound in the capital, Doha, and could ‘move around freely’ within the nation. The source said the terrorists will not be treated like prisoners and U.S. officials will not be allowed to monitor them. A Taliban commander in Afghanistan said the men were already bracing for battle. “As soon as they arrived in Qatar, they rejoined the Taliban,” he told the Daily Beast website.  “We don’t care about U.S conditions and obstacles.”
In a story today by Time Magazine, a Taliban commander close to the negotiations that led to the release of Bowe Bergdahl told them the group wants to grab more Americans for similar deals.
“Its better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people. It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”
 
Villagers in Afghanistan told the Wall Street Journal that they were terrified of the newly-freed Taliban leaders. A farmer said that his son has been killed by Fazi’s men and feared they would return to his village to do more damage.
Let’s look at the bios of the five terrorists that were released by Obama:
1- Mullah Mohammad Fazi – Taliban army chief of staff:
He is wanted by the United Nations for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiites.  He is associated with terrorist groups urgently opposing the United States and Coalition forces. As one of the Taliban’s most experienced military commanders, Fazi worked closely with a top al Qaeda commander, Abdul Hadi al Iraqi, who headed as Qaeda’s main fighting unit in Afghanistan prior to 9/11.
2- Mullah Norullah Noori – senior Taliban military commander:
He is wanted by the United Nations for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiite Muslims. He began to work alongside as Qaeda in the 1990’s as a Taliban military general and continued to work with al Qaeda in the years that followed.
3- Abdul Haq Wasiq – Taliban deputy minister of intelligence:
He arranged for al Qaeda members to have crucial intelligence training prior to 9/11. He was central to the Taliban’s efforts to form alliances with other Islamic fundamentalist groups who would fight alongside the Taliban against the U.S and Coalition forces after the 9/11 attacks.
4- Khairullah Khairkhwa – Taliban governor of the Herat province and former interior minister:
He helped secure Iran’s support for the Taliban’s effort against the United States. He was a major drug trafficker and oversaw on of Osama bin Laden’s training facilities in Herat.
5- Mohammed Nabi – senior Taliban figure and security official:
He was a senior official and served in multi leadership roles. He held weekly meetings with al Qaeda operatives to coordinate attacks against U.S. led forces.
What about the six American soldiers that lost their lives looking for Bergdahl when he left his post? According to  a 35 page report, Bergdahl had wandered away from his post on two other occasions, once in California and the other in Afghanistan. When he left the third time, he left all of his equipment behind except for his compass, knives and water. He evidently had shipped home his laptop and journal before he disappeared.
According to Nathan Bradley Bethea, the soldiers who were involved with Bergdahl were forced to stay silent about the disappearance and search for Bergdahl, but now he tells his story. Nathan served as an infantry officer in the U.S. Army from 2007 to 2014 and is now a creative writing MFA student at Brooklyn College. You can read the entire transcript at www.thedailybeast.com, in an article titled: We Lost Soldiers in the Hunt for Bergdahl, a Guy Who Walked Off in the Dead of Night.”  I have posted a paragraph below from this article in which he describes the death of his fellow soldiers.
“Though the 2009 Afghan presidential election slowed the search for Bergdahl, it did not stop it Our battalion suffered six fatalities in a three week period. On August 18, an IED killed Private first class Morris Walker and Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen during a reconnaissance mission. On Augusrt 26, while conducting a search for a Taliban shadow sub-governor supposedly affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Kurt Curtiss was shot in the face and killed. On September 4, during a patrol to a village near the area in which Bergdahl vanished, an insurgent ambush killed Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews and gravely wounded Private First Class Matthew Martinek, who died of his wounds a week later. On September 5, while conducting a foot movement toward a village also thought affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Michael Murphrey stepped on an improvised land mine. He died the next day.”
 
Should President Obama have released these five terrorists in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl? Was Bergdahl a prisoner of war or was he just a deserter? Did he aid the terrorists during his time with them?  According to the UK Daily Mail report in 2010, 
“Afghan intelligence told the British newspaper that one of Bergdahl’s captors has gone on the record of saying that Bergdahl taught him how to dismantle a mobile phone and turn it into a remote control for a roadside bomb. He also claimed that he received basic ambush training from the U.S. soldier.”
According to the late Michael Hastings in Rolling Stone Magazine, Bergdahl told his fellow infantrymen that he no longer supported the U.S. effort in Afghanistan,
“The future is too good to waste on lies, and life is too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong. I have seen their ideas and I am ashamed to even be an American. The horror of the self-righteous arrogance that they thrive in. It is all revolting. The horror that is America is disgusting.”
Oh what a tangled web we weave!!  Do you remember Michael Hastings? He was the reporter with Rolling Stone that was investigating the disappearance of Bowe Bergdahl.  Hastings was killed in a controversial car accident in Los Angeles in June of 2013.  Accusations were flying as to the possibility of foul play in Hastings fatal car accident.  His death was never proven to involve foul play, but there are those who believe otherwise.  Hastings was also a critic and a very vocal critic of  President Obama’s investigation of reporters. His last story was titled, “Why Democrats Love to Spy on Americans.”
Hastings did speak with several men in Bergdahl’s unit, who were forced to sign non-disclosure  agreements forbidding them from discussing Bergdahl’s disappearance.  The FBI was paying quite a bit of attention to Hastings investigation and his article, “America’s Last Prisoner of War.”  The FBI file, which was released after Hasstings death in request to a lawsuit, said that Hastings got caught up into an “international terrorist investigation,” into Bergdahl’s disappearance. In a  statement  by the FBI following Hastings death, it was said,
“Hastings was never directly under investigation by the agency, despite having pissed off a lot of people in very high places.”
The fact that the FBI was looking into the files of Hastings’ sources should definitely raise some serious questions about the reasons there was such an interest in Bergdahl in the first place. Why was President Obama so determined to trade 5 top terrorist for a possible deserter? Questions that remain unanswered, but will, no doubt, cause quite a stir when Bergdahl returns home.
In moving back to President Obama, we need to ask ourselves, “What is the current law that the President was obligated to follow?”
President Obama signed into law Congressional restrictions that require him to notify Congress 30 days before transferring prisoners.
In an interview with CNN on Sunday, Representative Buck McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee,  said,
“Despite Obama’s plan to close Guantanamo, Congress has passed a law and he has signed a law that he will not close Guantanamo. Whatever his desires are, that does not conform to the law and he is the chief administrator of the law of the nation and should uphold his constitutional obligation to follow the law.”
When President Obama signed the restrictions, he attached a notice  saying he reserved the right to bypass the notification requirement if there was a national security interest.  The President cannot change the law with a signing statement.  Interestingly enough, back in May of 2008, then Senator Obama made the following comments,
“When a bill comes to the oval office, the President can either veto it or he can sign it. What George Bush has been trying to accumulate more power in the Presidency is to say that I can change what Congress passed by attaching a letter saying I don’t agree with this part or that part…I’m going to choose to interpret it this way or that way….I don’t agree with that. I taught constitutional law for 10 years and I believe in the constitution and I will obey the constitution.”
Would you say that the powers at be have changed their colors? If attaching a letter saying you disagree with a portion of the bill does nothing to change the bill, then why would Obama call out former President Bush on the power grab and then expect Congress and the American people to accept his letter as a legal change to the very bill he signed into law?
An interesting story that will have an interesting future and an interesting end. Somehow, I feel Bergdahl’s homecoming will definitely disturb the hornet’s nest!
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Obama; King of Mars?

1155284_81680665Just this morning, the Obama Administration  announced new EPA, carbon emission restrictions and regulations that take further aim at the coal industry, based on false reports on the climate by environmental zealots.  He has demanded a 30% decrease in fossil fuel carbon emissions by coal plants.  The new regulations will cost the United States a quarter of a million jobs and will force the closure of coal plants across the country, regardless that they currently supply the U.S. with over 40% of its energy.  Again, these changes have gone through with NO Congressional approval. President Obama has made a decision and despite what the American people want, what the U.S. economy needs and what the Constitution allows, he has decided and we will comply or else!!

 If you currently live in any of the coal-producing states, a state that depends on coal for their very existence, what are your democratic representatives doing for you?  Nothing! But wait, I spoke too soon. The democratic representatives in coal-producing states are writing President Obama and asking that he DELAY  these new overreaching regulations until AFTER the November elections.  They are not asking him to stop them, or reconsider them, just to delay until they can get their butts back in their cushy government jobs. They are basically asking Obama to lie to the public again, so they can continue to lie about supporting their constituents, so they can lie their way back into office, all the while making you believe they really care about your livelihood! This is all about politics folks! Your representatives do not care that your coal-producing state will now suffer higher unemployment and economic woes….they don’t care that all Americans will suffer potentially 80% increases in their energy costs, they just want their seats to be confirmed so they are assured of their big salaries, taken off your backs!
President Obama along with his Democratic followers on the Hill,  and environmental extremists, continue to make so-called “Global Warming,” “Climate Change,” “Global Cooling,” whatever the newest name may be, the primary “FOCUS,” of this Administration.
Interestingly enough, new reports are showing that electricity prices are skyrocketing in the largest wind power states. In fact, electricity prices are rising more than four times the national average in 9 of the 11 states with the most wind power consumption. Texas, is the only one with declining electricity prices because de-regulation rather than wind power is driving down the cost to consumers.
Germany has given up carbon gas taxes because it destroyed their economy and it was unable to supply the needed electricity to its citizens with solar or wind power. They have turned to coal.
Australia has also given up carbon emission regulations and taxes as well. Their economy has been on the same path as ours due to “green initiatives.” They have suffered so badly, that they have elected the conservative political party in after 15 years and are supporting the dissolution of the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Health and Human Resources, along with countless other government agencies and for good measure restructuring Medicare so it won’t go broke. Australia’s news leader, Tony Abbott had a bit of advice for the citizens of the United States,
“The best transformation America could undergo is not Obama’s version, but a return to the limits set forth in the Constitution. Australia is way ahead of the US as they have learned from the errors of environmental laws and the expansion of its government into areas of health and education.”
Gas prices have doubled under Obama, yet he refuses to sign off on the Keystone pipeline. The Keystone would reduce the price of gas significantly as well as offering hundreds of thousands of jobs to Americans and take us out from under the control of the very people who want to see us dead. A recent poll showed between 70-75% of Americans want the Keystone pipeline, but President Obama doesn’t care. The environmentalists have offered up too much cash for them to ignore so regardless of what is best for the US economy, and the American people,  they have chosen to follow the money!
What happened to creating new jobs? What happened to getting the economy back on track? What the hell is going on in America? What has happened to plain old common sense?
At a recent speech for commencement at West Point Academy, Obama said,
“By most measures, America has rarely been stronger relative to the rest of the world. those who argue otherwise – who suggest that America is in decline or has seen its global leadership slip away— are either misreading history or engaged in partisan politics.”
I’m sorry, but I am totally confused? What planet is he living on? Mars???
Lets look at some facts:
* If  you add in the 2.5 million Americans who have simply walked out on the American economy, have stopped looking for jobs, the true unemployment rate is actually at  approximately 8.2% – 10%.
* The Center for College Affordability reports that 8 out of every 10 college graduates move back home with their parents.
*17 million college graduates are working jobs that did not require a degree and still carry huge student loan debts.
*10.5 million college graduates are officially unemployed.
* 37 million Americans are  carrying student loan debt and 5.4 million were past due on payments.
*The labor force participation rate began dropping in 2008 and has remained  on the decline. and is at its lowest level in over 30 years.
*United States GDP, the output of good and services produced in the U.S., has only grown this year by .1%
*Gas prices have doubled under Obama
*Grocery prices have skyrocketed
*Obama has proposed 442 NEW tax hikes since taking office and the majority of the tax hikes will hit the middle class.
*Of the jobs lost, 60% were middle class, and only 19% of jobs added by the so-called recovery , were middle class jobs.
*The median US household income has dropped by almost $4000 since Obama took office.
*Food Stamp participation has increased over 50% since Obama took office.
*Health care costs per family have risen almost $3000
*The penalty for average Americans for not carrying insurance will be $4700 in new fines (sorry, taxes)
*In 2018, a 40% tax will be levied against the value of all health insurance benefits exceeding certain thresholds. So if you did get to keep your plan because you liked it, you will be taxed 40% for keeping it!
And the list continues…..
So, America, if you think the United States is worse off than it was before Obama took office, you are either stupid,  a Republican or you live in the United States and not on Mars!
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Liar, Liar the VA is on Fire???

iStock_000009781153SmallLiar, Liar….pants on fire…but no, it is the VA that is on fire!

Is there anyone in this Administration who is telling the truth?

Let’s look at the current situation with the VA and what the current administration knew and when.

Senator Obama was speaking at a campaign rally in Charleston, West Virginia on March 20, 2008 and said,

 “At a time when we’re facing the largest homecoming since the Second World War, the true test of our patriotism is whether we will serve our returning heroes as well as they’ve served us.”
 
When President Obama took office in 2009, his transition team was told that the VA medical center’s wait list times were not a reality and in effect risked denying military heroes the health care they needed and were entitled to receive.  New evidence shows that the Obama team knew the Veterans Administration was denying medical care to vets with secret off-the-books waiting lists, and that they were reaching a critical point.
A year ago, on July 23, 2012, President Obama gave a speech to the 113th National Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. In his speech he made references to several problems with the VA and its health facilities,
“So when I hear about service members and veterans who had the courage to seek help but didn’t get it, who died waiting, that’s an outrage. And I’ve told Secretary Panetta and Secretary Shinseki we’ve got to do better. This has to be all hands on deck.” I will not rest until we’ve got this right.”
 
On May 19, 2014, when White House Press Secretary,  Jay Carney, was asked when President Obama found out about the VA Scandal. he said,
“We learned about them through the reports on your network and I believe that is when Secretary Shenseki learned about them and immediately took the action that he has taken including instigating his own review but also requesting that the Inspector General investigate.”
 
But wait…….

If we look back, in 2009, allegations were made by 5 whistle blowers from the VA medical facility in Jackson, Mississippi alleging that the staff routinely failed to properly clean and sterilize reusable medical equipment such as scalpels and bone cutters. Another claimed that thousands of radiology images were unread resulting in missed diagnoses of serious and fatal illnesses. The VA investigated the case and substantiated many of the allegations and took steps to fix the problems, but they continued. The case was referred to Secretary Shinseki in March of 2013.  Carolyn Lerner, from the Office of Special Counsel, sent a letter to the White House and Congress regarding the issues in March of 2013. Complaints from this facility were reported to the VA as early as 2009.  Gloria Kelley, one of the whistle blowers was never interviewed  during the course of the investigation which is still under review even though the first allegations were made in 2009.

Oliver Mitchell, a Marine veteran and former patient services assistant at the VA in Los Angeles, said the department chief, Dr. Suzie El Saden initiated discussions in the department to cancel exams and destroy veterans’ military files so no record would exist, thus reducing the backlog they were experiencing, which reflected badly on the hospital’s efficiency.  Mitchell filed a complaint with the Inspector General, who instead of investigating,  gave the complaint back to the facility in LA and made them aware that Mitchell had filed the complaint. In January 2011, Mitchell wrote to Congress about the issue and in March, 2011 he was fired.

 Dr. Stephen Coughlin, a senior epidemiologist with the VA’s office of Public Health, told a subcommittee of the House Committee on Veterans’s Affairs (HVAC) in March of 2013 that the VA ignored veterans who had suicidal thoughts. Over 2000 vets stated they would be better off dead, and in 95% of those cases, the VA did not follow-up or make any attempt to help them. Several of those Vets committed suicide. Coughlin was ordered to suppress data on these vets and when he tried to go to his supervisor, he was threatened, and they initiated disciplinary action against him, which he says is a common practice. He left the VA in December of 2012 and testified 3 months later.
A new internal report says,
“Delays and manipulation are systemic throughout the Department of Veteran’s Affairs (VA), that as many as 1,700 veterans were affected in the Phoenix VA system alone and that the scandal could extend to 42 medical facilities, a substantial increase from previous estimates.
Millions of dollars in bonuses were paid out to these VA facilities based on their purposeful lies and on the backs and lives of our Veterans. Bonuses that were paid out even when the administration was well aware that the books were being cooked.
Steps need to be taken NOW. People need to be held accountable NOW. People need to be fired NOW!!!
President Obama refused to fire Secretary Shenseki, yet Shenseki tried to bring closure to the VA scandal by firing the VA undersecretary of health, Dr. Robert Petzel. However, Dr. Petzel has already announced his retirement and Obama had already announced his replacement.  Is that what the administration calls accountability? Who did Obama decide to fill the vacant position with? Dr. Jeffrey Murawsky, the director of VA’s Great Lakes health Care system in Winchester, Illinois. He actually had oversight responsibility of the Edward Hines VA hospital where millions of dollars were spent on bonuses during the past 3 years., and the facility where five veterans died waiting for care. In 1999, the VA concluded that,
“Hines has the most inefficient physical plant for inpatient care and the most significant compliance issues with patient privacy.”
So now the man in charge of the worst regional office in the country has been placed in a position to oversee the entire VA system? That is your federal government at work.
Democrats are shouting that 43% of Americans believe that the problems at the VA are due to recent budget caps and inadequate financial resources. The VA’s budget was doubled from $57 billion from $28 Billion since 2003, while the patient load was up only one-third over that same period. Once again, President Obama’s response to most problems is to throw hard earned tax dollars at any problem and hope that it sticks. This, instead of true leadership and accountability of those leading the charge. However, the discovery of the millions of dollars paid out in bonuses to the incompetents running the VA hospitals could very well be the biggest problem along with total governmental and  bureaucratic incompetence.
We all know how difficult it is to fire or hold accountable anyone in the federal government. In response to this dire situation,  the Republicans in the House drafted legislation that would give the administration the power it needs to hold high level officials accountable for the complicity in this scandal. The VA Management Accountability Act, passed the House of Representatives with huge bipartisan support. It also passed the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously as well. But upon reaching the Senate, Harry Reid and the Democratic majority are preventing the bill from passing. What is that all about?
What are the Democrats and President Obama afraid of? Add the VA scandal to the growing list of questionable activities by this Administration, and we just might find out that it is time to eliminate the majority of government agencies and get back to the basics of our Constitution and the free enterprise system of real accountiblity.
We know it is definitely  time to shout………
“LIAR, LIAR THE VA IS ON FIRE!!!!”

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Freedom of Religion Trumped by Sensitivity Quirks?

file0001076040425-2

Do you think that your First Amendment rights regarding the free exercise of religion are being protected by the powers at be, or are they being sidetracked by sensitivity quirks?

Let’s talk about the First Amendment to the Constitution and how it applies to Religious Freedom.  What does the amendment say?

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
Four year ago, in Morgan Hill California, four students were told by school administrators to cover up the American Flag on their t-shirts because it was Cinco de Mayo. Some Hispanic students were offended that they would wear the American flag shirts on a day they were celebrating their own heritage. They complained to school officials and they asked the students wearing the flags to turn them inside out, or leave school. The action led to a lawsuit, and the appellate court backed the school administrators. One of the students is now at the University of Nevada and is an Army reservist. Despite the amount of time that has elapsed since the incident, he is still ready to appeal the case.
Two Baptist chaplains said they were forced out of a Veterans Affairs chaplain training program after they refused orders to stop quoting the Bible and to stop praying in the name of Jesus. When the men objected to those demands, they were subjected to ridicule and harassment that led to one of the chaplains leaving the program and the other being ejected. A federal lawsuit has been filed.
A grieving mother erected a roadside cross where her son, Anthony Vincent Devaney, was killed crossing the street in May, 2012. The American Humanist Association filed a complaint and demanded that the cross come down.  They say the display of these crosses around the country remembering those killed offend them and cross the line between church and state. This is the same group that filed a legal action against the Lake Elsinore’s proposed veterans memorial that would have depicted a soldier kneeling in front of crosses and Stars of David. Anthony’s cross has been taken down.
Within the Military we have seen many examples of actions against Christians.  Atheists are battling over a cross that was placed at Camp Pendleton in California, there is a continued push for non-believing chaplains , a cross was removed from an interfaith military chapel in Afghanistan and the U.S. Air Force Academy backed out of a toy drive because it was sponsored by a Christian group, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center implemented a policy that prevented family members of wounded soldiers from bringing Bibles and other religious materials to their loved ones.
In Florida, at Park Lakes Elementary School,  a school teacher told Giovanni Rubeo he was not allowed to read his Bible during “free reading time” in the class. As a result she called his parents in front of the class and left the following message,
“I noticed that he has a book, a religious book, in the classroom, He is not permitted to read those books in my classroom.”
The Rubeo family is currently being represented  by the Liberty Institute.
In Lake City Florida, a Christian ministry who has been providing food to the poor and hungry for 31 years, had a state government worker tell them
“They would not be allowed to receive USDA food unless they removed portraits of Christ, the Ten Commandments, a banner that read “Jesus is Lord” and to stop giving Bibles to the needy.”
 Daly and her staff were stunned when the government officials also informed them that the Christian Service Center could no longer pray or provide Bibles to those in need. So, faced with a choice…God or government food, they chose God.
 “We decided to eliminate the USDA food and we’re going to trust God to provide.” “If God can multiply fish and loaves for 10,000 people, he can certainly bring in food for our food pantry so we can continue to feed the hungry.”
 Churches across Lake City have filled the void left when the government took away their food.
In 2011, Mark Mackey and Bret Coronado were arrested and charged with misdemeanor offenses for reading the Bible outside a DMV location. A Superior Court Judge, found the men not guilty of any offenses and also pointed out that what the prosecutors tried to invoke was unconstitutional.
Senior Master Sgt. Phillip Monk found himself relieved of his duties because his Air Force Base Commander wanted to severely punish an instructor who had expressed religious objections to gay marriage. She demanded  Monk share his own personal views on marriage. When he said he disagreed with her opinion, he was relieved of his duties. His beliefs are a court martial offense in the Air Force and it is quite possible that the 19 year veteran with a spotless record could be booted out of the military because of his Christian beliefs. He is being represented by the Liberty Institute for religious discrimination.
A professor at Florida Atlantic University told his students to write “Jesus Chirst” on a piece of paper, throw it on the ground and stomp on it. When a student refused to do the assignment, a formal disciplinary action was started against him. When the word got out, Christians became enraged and the University changed its mind and the professor was put on administrative leave.
There was a complaint in Arizona from an Atheist that she was offended by the Bible in the nightstand at her hotel near two public universities.  Rather than protecting constitutional rights, the universities removed the Bibles. Alliance Defending Freedom argue that removing the Bibles is actually discriminating against religion. The Supreme Court has repeatedly condemned efforts to exclude or restrict religious materials and activities as viewpoint or content discrimination at universities and elsewhere.  A law suit will be filed against the universities.  David French, senior counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice said,
 “Incidents like this will continue to unfold against religious expression in the public sphere as long as a “quirk” in the law provides “special privileges to offended citizens.”
 
The list of examples of discrimination against Christians and persons of faith continues on a daily basis. Is the punishment of those who choose to practice their faith an infringement on their rights to exercise their freedom of religion? Can the government and private organizations make laws prohibiting the practice of religion when the Constitution “prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion? “
Are these examples truly concerns over the separation of church and state, or just intolerance from those with sensitivity quirks?
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Casting the First Stone in a Neighborhood of Glass Houses.

?????????????????????????????????

The news has been overwhelming in reporting on Donald Sterling and his lifetime banishment from the National Basketball Association.  I must say, that I did not know Sterling or anything about him. I am not much of a basketball fan and therefore do not follow the NBA. When I heard he was banned from the NBA and asked to sell his team over racist remarks during a personal phone call with his girlfriend, I was appalled and intrigued. So, I decided to dig into his past and take a look at what Donald Sterling is all about! What a pandora’s box I opened.

Evidently, Sterling has been in lots of sticky situations regarding his belief system towards blacks, Koreans and women, old people and even general managers. He has been charged with civil rights violations, racial discrimination in business and blatant bigoted remarks. He has been sued for sexual harassment, race and age discrimination, and was described as having a “plantation mentality” by his former Clipper’s General Manager, Elgin Baylor.  Evidently he has quite a reputation within the NBA family and among most who know him or who have had dealings with him. So, the fact that he is a racist or made racist remarks is no big surprise to most.

I don’t know about you, but he sounds like a horrible human being and someone I cannot even imagine wanting to sit next to, work for, associate with, much less date.   However, is it right for him to be banned for life and forced to sell his NBA team, because of some racist remarks made during a private conversation?

I also found other interesting information regarding Sterling and his associations. Did you know that the NAACP  (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) honored Sterling in 2009 with a Lifetime Achievement Award? Did you know that the NAACP was planning on presenting him with another Lifetime Achievement Award in May of this year? The NAACP and Sterling have had an ongoing relationship for over 15 years.  Mr. Sterling has evidently donated an unknown  amount of money to the NAACP over this 15-20 year period.  As a matter of fact, Al Sharpton, agreed to headline the dinner honoring Sterling in May of this year,  but after Sterling’s comments with his girlfriend went public, Sharpton said,

“No one should be allowed to own a team if they have in fact engaged in this kind of racial language.”

NAACP Interim President, Lorraine Miller said, 

“If you are silent about this, then you’re accepting this. People have got to say that this is not good and do something about it.” 

So, the $64,000 question is WHY would the NAACP honor Sterling, not once, but twice, with a lifetime achievement award and WHY would Al Sharpton, agree to host the upcoming award ceremony if they, in fact, knew about all of the racial discrimination lawsuits filed against Mr. Sterling? Why, would the NBA now decide to ban Mr. Sterling, over remarks made during a private conversation when they did nothing to punish him when he lost a major lawsuit with the Federal government involving discrimination and was required to pay a record amount in penalties?
In 2009, Mr. Sterling was sued twice by the federal government for refusing to rent apartments to blacks and Latinos as well as families with children under the Fair Housing Act. The government required him to pay $2.725 million in monetary damages in this suit. He was also sued by Elgin Baylor, a LA Laker’s legend and his former general manager of the Los Angeles Clippers, claiming race and age discrimination and unlawful retaliation. Baylor lost this law suit.
On the business side, CarMax, Virgin America, Kia, State Farm, Red Bull and others are canceling or suspending their endorsements with the Clippers owned by Sterling. A sports business attorney with Foley & Lardner in New York said,
  “When sponsors are threatening or taking action  to terminate their sponsorship agreements that’s detrimental to the league.”
 The Clippers have sold out 140 home games at the Staples Center arena that they share with the Lakers.  The remarks by Sterling could definitely have a negative effect on the NBA as well as the revenue realized by their popularity with fans. Again, why now? Why are sponsors pulling out now, when Sterling’s history with discrimination was common knowledge?
Is this a question of money? Is it okay to discriminate as long as you keep the donations flowing?  Is it okay for someone to be honored by the very organization that represents the fair treatment of blacks, as long as they continue to receive donations to their cause? Is it okay to discriminate as long as it doesn’t affect the money made by sponsors, merchandise and games?
Is it okay to penalize someone, ban them from a National Sport and make them sell their business because of remarks made during a private conversation? Is it legal for Sterlings girlfriend to tape and release their conversation if he was not aware he was being recorded? Do his remarks fall under “free speech?” Can he be held personally and financially accountable for exercising his right to free speech? Are his rights to free speech negated when they effect the financial well being of others? Who will make decisions deciding whether comments are right, wrong, hurtful, discriminatory or just plain distasteful? Who will be the judge?
If we look back in recent history,  there are multitudes of examples of racist remarks being made with no fanfare what-so-ever.
 Jamie Foxx’s comments on Saturday Night Live about his new film. “Django Unchained?”
“I get free. I save my wife and I kill all the white people in the movie. How great is that?”
CNN contributor Roland Martin said,
“The NRA is the new Ku Klux Klan and their arming of the so many black  youths, and loading our community up with drugs and then having an open shooting gallery is the work of people who don’t have our best interests at heart.” 
Democratic Governor, Pat Quinn,
posted tweets condoning an article written in the Chicago Sun Times that compared black Republican supporters of Bruce Rauner ( the Republican candidate) to Jews who collaborated with the Nazis against their brethren.
“As a general rule, individuals will sell out the interests of their groups in return for personal benefit. It isn’t just a black thing. Jews collaborated with the Nazis during World War II, helping them to round up their own people in the hopes they’d be the last to go.” 
Al Sharpton,
“We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”
Joe Biden,
“You cannot go into a 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian Accent. I’m not joking.”
Joe Biden about then Senator Obama,
“I mean you’ve got the first sort of mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking guy. I mean , that’s a storybook, man.”
Jesse Jackson,
 “Barack…he’s talking down to black people…telling niggers how to behave.”
“That’s all Hymie wants to talk about, is Isreal; every time you go to Hymietown, that’s all they want to talk about.”
Marion Barry,
“We got to do something about these Asians coming in and opening up businesses and dirty shops. They ought to go.”
Then let’s not forget Paula Dean, taken down for allegedly using the “N” word over 30 years ago, but Senator Robert Byrd remained in office through 2010 even though he was a member of the Ku Klux Klan and lead his local chapter in his younger years.
Who will be the judge and jury? Who will determine what is right and wrong? What is the timeline on offenses? Can the government monitor your private conversations and then use them to destroy you because they feel your comments were inappropriate or were not politically correct?  These are all very interesting questions and will, no doubt, be the subject of much controversy over the coming days and months.
But wait, thanks to a new bill introduced, we might already have an answer to these questions.  Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) have introduced a bill known as the The Hate Crime Reporting Act of 2014.  This  bill would assign, as judge and duty, the Justice Department (Eric Holder) and the US Commission on Human Rights to decide what constitutes unacceptable speech. If this bill is approved, they will be monitoring the use of telecommunications, including the Internet, broadcast television and radio, cable television, public access television, commercial mobile services, and other electronic media, to find those who, in their opinion, promote hate crimes.
Are you comfortable with the government making these decisions?  Does this infringe on your First Amendment Rights? Should they be your judge and jury? Have we entered into a time where political correctness,  sensitive egos, and selective outrage take precedence over individual rights?  Should those guilty of hate speech themselves, be allowed to sit in judgement?
 “Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones”
“Let him who is with our sin, cast the first stone.”
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Deceit: A Tangled Web

???????????????????????????????????????

I learned at an early age that lying would result in big trouble for me if and when my parents found out. It was then that I learned the saying:

“What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.”

My mom always said when you tell a lie, it always leads to another and another and then a whole string of lies result.  The most difficult part of deceit is trying to remember the lies that you have told. At some point, you WILL get caught because of your own memory loss. You just cannot remember all the lies you have told and to whom you have told them. “However”, she would remind me,  “the truth is never forgotten!”

Have we entered into an age where lies are no longer considered bad? Have we entered into an age where empty promises can be made just to get what you want? Have our leaders woven such an intense web of lies that they can’t even remember what they have promised?

Let’s look at some prime examples of these woven webs!

The one we have heard ad-nauseum, by President Obama;

“If you like your insurance and your doctor,  you can keep them!”

LIES! President Obama knew you would not be able to keep your insurance or your doctor, but he needed to get re-elected and wanted his signature healthcare law passed regardless of how it would effect the majority of Americans.

What a tangled web we weave……

Director of NSA, General James Clapper promised:

“NSA agents are not reading innocent American’s emails and texts or listening into their conversations without probable cause or warrants.”

LIES! In a letter to a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Clapper admits that agents were, in fact, reading innocent American’s emails and text messages and listening to digital recordings of their telephone conversations without warrants.

What a tangled web we weave…..

Lois Lerner and the IRS;

“I have not done anything wrong, I have not broken any laws, I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I haven’t provided false information to this or any other congressional committee. Because I am assuring my right not to testify, I know that some people will assume that I’ve done something wrong. I have not. One of the basic functions of the Fifth Amendment is to protect innocent individuals and that is the protection I’m invoking today.”

LIES! Emails are now confirming that she was conspiring with the Federal Election Commission and other government agencies to specifically target conservatives before the 2012 elections.

What a tangled web we weave…..

Elijah Cummings on the IRS targeting of conservatives;

The Presidents political enemies are lying about the targeting of conservatives during the election…..Based upon everything I have seen, the case of the IRS targeting conservatives is solved. 

LIES! Interestingly enough, emails have been discovered between Representative  Cumming’s office and Lois Lerner’s office. These emails allegedly  involved the sharing of taxpayer information on America Votes, an organization committed to cleaning up voter registrations, who Cummings had attacked in the past.

What a tangled web we weave…..

The current Democratic platform on eduction says;

“Democrats share with all parents the commitment to prepare our children to lead lives of happiness and success. That’s why we’re dedicated to ensuring the next generation has access to a first-rate education and then tools to drive our economy forward.”

LIES! President Obama, Eric Holder, Mayor de Blasio and other Democrats around the country are doing everything within their power to stop Charter Schools from opening and have sued states to stop allowing school choice vouchers from being used by parents and students. Minorities represent 90% of those who use the voucher system to move their kids from failing public schools.

What a tangled web we weave…..

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM);

Took over Arizona grazing lands and restricts the land’s use under the  guise of  protecting the desert tortoises from extinction. 

LIES!  If they really wanted to protect the tortoise, why would they stop funding the effort which would require the Desert Tortoise Conservation Center to euthanize more that half of the animals by the end of 2014.  Another question involves Harry Reid’s support of the government’s position and he and his son’s  involvement with ENN Mojave Energy (a Chinese backed company) in building a solar plant in Clark County.

What a tangled web we weave…..

I could list example after example of the lies and deceit perpetrated by our government and it’s representatives.  These are the people who have been elected to represent Americans and protect our rights. However, have we have become so conditioned to being told what to do and how to do it, that we no longer recognize the fact that the government is there to work for us? Do we understand that the money the government spends wastefully year after year actually comes from our pockets? Do we recognize that “we the people,” have the power to stop the madness, the lies, the corruption and the deceit?

What kind of world do you want for your children and grandchildren? A world where lying is not acceptable? Or a world that accepts lying as just a part of the status quo?

What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Sticks and Stones, the New Tools of Government

Sticks and stones can break you bones, and our leaders love to throw them!

What if a request for tolerance suddenly becomes an outright statement of intolerance? Can people of one view demand to be heard while shutting down and demonizing the opinions of those who disagree? Is this happening more today than in the past? Has it become the new norm rather than the exception?

Let’s begin by looking at the current situation of Mozilla CEO, Brendan Eich, who recently was forced to resign over his personal political beliefs and his right to speak his mind. In 2011, Eich made a $1,000 donation to support California’s proposition 8 ballot measure. Due to his personal support for marriage, he was forced out of his job at Mozilla. Eich, obviously, was not the only one who supported Proposition 8. Does that mean every person that supported it should be fired or forced out of their jobs if their company disagrees with their view? Can we demand equal treatment under the law while discriminating against others? Should we, as Americans, be concerned about this case? if this is allowed to stand, does it set a precedent?  If this is accepted, does it  place us all in a position to lose our jobs based on our personal beliefs? Is it an intentional tool to prevent Americans from speaking out against the current status quo? Are we being scared out of exercising our First Amendment rights?

If you ever felt you were discriminated against, does that mean that you now have the right to discriminate against others as a form of retribution? Do acts of revenge elevate your cause or does it result in a loss of credibility? is it time for all of us to live together and respect our individual choices and preferences or should there be a period of payback, so to speak, so those who have been accused of being intolerant now know what it feels like to be targeted? Is this the Nation we all want to live in? Is this the new United States? Is this the fundamental change our leaders wanted?

Have we become a Nation of intolerance? Have our leaders furthered this intolerance? Do they fuel the flames?

Recently, Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, called the Koch Brothers “un-American.” What was the basis for his claim? Koch Industries is the second largest privately owned company in the country. It employs approximately 50,000 people in the US. They started the LIBTE Initiative, which is a non-profit group that funds public outreach and focuses on public policy, but provides numerous free services to Hispanic neighborhoods. The Koch brothers are not only successful businessmen, but also philanthropists that support such charities as hospitals, the arts and museums. Then the media began focusing on the donations made by the Koch brothers because they were to conservative groups and causes and suddenly they are “un-American” and trying to “buy America.” But we know they are not the only wealthy people who donate to interest groups, political parties or public policy. They just happen to be wealthy people who donate to conservative groups. The Democrats have a long list of wealthy activists, but the media has no interest in their activities. What about George Soros? He has donated millions and millions over the years to  transform the US and its government, but no outrage by Harry Reid or the press? Are they right to hold back the outrage when they happen to support the same causes? Are they not outraged because they have been at the receiving end of those donations? Is that where the line is drawn?

In a 2011 speech at the University of Arizona campus honoring those lost in the Tucson shooting, President Obama said:

“At a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized; at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all hat ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently then we do it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking to each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

However, does President Obama and our leaders really believe this statement? We have heard name calling and extreme comments in describing conservatives.

“Flat-earthers,” ‘bigots,” “racists,” and “extortionists.” – Obama

“Unhinged arsonists” – Wasserman-Shultz

“Insane people who have lost their minds”- Harry Reid

“People with a bomb strapped on their chest” – Dan Pfeiffer

“Blatant extortionists” – Jay Carney

“Legislative Arsonists” – Nancy Pelosi

In a hearing yesterday involving Eric Holder’s lack of action on multiple infractions by the government, he yelled out, during an argument with Representative Gohmert, “good luck with your asparagus.” This was an out-and-out derogatory response about a misspoken comment by Gohmert in a previous committee hearing. Was this purposeful taunt by Eric Holder necessary?  We all misspeak on occasion but should our leaders respond like children on the playground?

When you were little, did you ever hear this rhyme?

“Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me.”

I was raised on that rhyme and was taught by my parents and teachers that calling names was not acceptable and only hurt others as well as yourself. Although name calling is considered childish and immature, why have the slew of insults become more common place in our government? Is this name calling now acceptable because our leaders find it appropriate?

Is this the behavior we should expect of our leaders? Is this the attitude we expect of our President? Our Senate Majority leader? Our elected officials?

Is it right for our leaders to stand by and watch while government agencies are used to punish those who stand against policies of any administration? Does the public understand that the use of these agencies, regardless of political party affiliation, can be turned on them in the next election?

I continue to look for the speech from our leader that asks all Americans, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual preference, economic status, employed or unemployed, or political leaning, to come together and support our Nation. The speech that tells us that everything is going to be okay. That we will work together to get our Nation back on track. The speech that will tell us that our leaders understand what we are experiencing  and will fulfill the promises they made to get elected. I am tired of our leaders enacting laws that destroy business while systematically dismantling  the free enterprise system in order to further the control by the government and the bank accounts of those in office.

So, the next time your child comes home complaining that a bully at school called them names, or made fun of something they said, how will you respond? How will you use the situation to teach your child a lesson? Will you tell them bullies never get ahead, or will you tell them sticks and stones ARE the new tools for our government?

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Uncle Sam says, “Bloggers be Damned!”

Do we all remember the Obama administration’s attempts to send in the FCC to national and local news stations to monitor their activities? There was such an uproar within these news organizations and the public, that the administration and the FCC backed down.  All of a sudden, the same administration and the Department of Justice are interested in protecting the rights of the press by pushing through a “Shield Law” to ensure their freedom of speech and the identity of their sources? Will this new law actually protect them or put them in a very small box while throwing bloggers, free lancers and part timers to the wolves?

President Obama has currently called in the service of New York Democrat and Senator Charles Schumer to write and push through a new “Shield Law” that allegedly protects the freedom of the press and their sources. Add in the opinion of Eric Holder at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and input from Senator Diane Feinstein, Democrat from California, and everyone and anyone who writes articles, news stories and blogs should be very concerned.

Currently, the Federal government has no shield laws in place to protect journalists from being forced to disclose confidential information or sources in court. Most states have some form of these laws and protections in place in some form or another, but they do vary from state to state, and in most cases are seriously lacking.

What exactly will a Federal Shield Law offer in the form of protection? The current bill does not provide absolute privilege to journalists and has exceptions for when information about leaks to journalists could be used to prevent terrorism attacks and the prevention of deaths and kidnappings. The DOJ guidelines said the records of journalists can only be collected if the reporter is the subject of  a criminal investigation. But just last year, the Obama administration and Eric Holder of the DOJ were caught up in the illegal seizing of phone records and emails associated with Fox New’s chief correspondent, James Rosen,  in a 2009 investigation into a story concerning U.N. sanctions and North Korea’s nuclear program. It also came under fire for subpoenaing the phone records from 20 Associated Press phone lines used by over 100 reporters. The DOJ sought out the phone records in response to an investigation over who leaked information that caused embarrassment to the administration.

Who will be protected with this new law? Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat from California said:

“I insist on limiting the legal protection to ‘real reporters’ and not a 17-year-old with his own website. I can’t support it if everyone who has a blog has a special privilege …or if Edward Snowdon were to sit down and write this stuff, he would have a privilege, I’m not going there,” she said. Feinstein introduced an amendment that defines a ‘covered journalist’ as “someone who gathers and reports news for an entity or service that disseminates news and information.”

This still leaves the question of who the government will deem worthy of protection under the Shield Law when it is given the authority of deciding who and what is a “real” news organization. If you blog on a site that constantly  criticizes the administration, will you be protected or just considered a nuisance that needs to be reined in? If you have a website that attracts 3 million followers, are you just a 17-year-old with a website?

The true irony of this law is that even if it passes, Eric Holder and the DOJ would still be able to name any reporter or journalist as a co-conspirator in court, like they did with Mr. Rosen, in order to spy on them. Basically, it gives the government a legitimate reason to “go after” a reporter.  If the government gets to use a “national security exception,” who is really protected?

Will the government be given free-reign under this law to seize what it wants, punish those who speak against it or spy on anyone? Will this law impede the ability of a local blogger or free lancer to actually get the story when sources feel their identity is not protected? Does this give news organizations an unfair advantage by giving them the only source protection needed to get the story?

Is this law a true fight for the freedom of the press and freedom of speech or is it just a way for the Obama administration to say it supports their freedom before the upcoming elections to garner votes and distract us from the failure of Obamacare?

Is the Shield Law truly a quest for protecting the press or is it just Uncle Sam, once again, taking control of another aspect of our lives while saying “Bloggers be damned!”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Follow the Money!!!

Have you ever wondered how much money our elected officials make? Have you ever wondered why there are so many millionaires in our government? Were they all wealthy when they took office, or did they gain their wealth after being elected to office? Why do so many Politicians make a career out of remaining in office? What is the attraction? Let’s follow the money!

Let’s start with some interesting facts and figures. Let’s find the money shall we?

Why is it that the collective net worth of Congress INCREASED by 25% between 2008 and 2010 while the net worth of all American households DECREASED by 23% between 2007 and 2009? Why is it that the percentage of millionaires in Congress is more than 50 times higher than the general population? In 2012 the Washington Post reported that “the median net worth of the current Congress rose 5% during the recession while it fell 39% for the average American. The wealthiest one-third of lawmakers saw their net worth rise 14%.”  

What if I told you that Insider trading was perfectly legal for all our politicians on the Hill? Yes, legal for the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, and every other representative on the Hill along with their staff!. Before the STOCK Act, was put before the House in 2012, insider trading was legal for government officials, but illegal for everyone else. That means that anyone in the United States caught trading insider information in order to make some quick but substantial cash would be put in jail, and subjected to heavy fines, but not our Representatives!  In 2011, Nancy Pelosi, bought stock in initial public offerings that granted her hefty returns while she had access to insider information that would have been illegal for an average citizen.

But, the STOCK Act, which required transparency in trading on the Hill to prevent insider trading, was passed in 2012 thanks to the investigative reporting of 60 minutes, telling the story of such unfair practices by Pelosi, Boehner and other politicians.  However, it was changed in 2013 to no fanfare or attention by the media.  The change in the law delays the creation of systems that enable public access to trading activity by our representatives. This delay was signed into law by President Obama, and the law may even be repealed.  Once again, transparency has been gutted by the administration. Our representatives are not supposed to be using insider information to make their fortunes, but there is basically no way to know for sure if they are following the law. Do you trust your Representative to do the right thing?

Did you know that the House of Representatives, paid by the American taxpayer, is the only institution that votes in its own salaries and pay increases? Yes, they do, regardless of the job they do, how many days they work, or how much or little work they actually do. How much do we pay our Representatives? Since January of 2009, most Representatives and Senators are paid $174,000 while the Speaker receives $223,500, and the majority and minority leaders receive $193,400. They are also offered an allowance to support them with personnel, official office expenses and mail. The average per Representative is $1,446,009.00.

What about retirement? All representatives earn the guarantee of a monthly pension check. They also receive Social Security payments and can opt to pay into the Federal Thrift Savings Plan, which is a 401k style plan with fees that are far lower that most retirement plans.  As a result, longtime members can retire with six figure annual incomes for life.  “If you can get elected to Congress and stay there, you can retire pretty well,” said Chris Kahn, a Bankrate analyst, who conducted the research.  Based on current salaries, members of Congress who serve 5 years are guaranteed annual pensions of more than $14,000 at age 62. Those who serve 20 years or more qualify for a pension of at least $59,000 as early as age 50.

The President will retire with an annual pension of $200,00 a year in addition to Social Security.  The average Social Security recipient receives around $15,000 per year, White House officials can expect $30,000 per year due to their high salaries. And icing on the cake? If lawmakers opt to invest in the Federal Thrift Savings Plan, (a 401k style plan) they receive an employer match and enjoy fees of less than 0.03%. How does that stack up with the average American? A Congressional saver would pay 27 cents in annual fees on $1000 investment, while you would pay more that $5. Over a period of time, the lower fees can mean thousands in savings.

In 2011, the total average net worth of Representatives in the U.S. Congress was $4,946,090,771.00 Yes folks that is in the billions!! The Average net worth of each Representative was $7,888,502.00, and yes that is in the millions.

In 2012, Democrats averaged averaged $13,566,333.00 (millions) in the Senate while a Democratic Representative of the House averaged $5,700,168.00 (million). How did the Republicans fare? In 2012, A Senator averaged $6, 956,438.00  (millions) while in the House, they averaged $7,614,097.00 (millions).

As of 2012, the Center of Responsive Politics says that the majority of the members of Congress are millionaires. While the majority of Americans are struggling in this economy, should Congress continue to receive such high salaries and such generous pension plans funded by the American taxpayer?

Do we consider these elite Representatives on the Hill our equals? Can we expect them to understand and make laws that benefit everyday Americans struggling to make a living?  Recently President Obama said,

“If you’re a family trying to cut back,  you might skip going out to dinner or  you might put off a vacation.” 

Is it fair or even right for the President to ask Americans to put off their vacations while he and his family have obviously not found it necessary to put off theirs?  Do you think he deserves more vacations and golf outings then we do? Does he work harder to earn his money then we do? Should we be forced to rein in our spending and stay within our budgets while the government refuses to do the same? The big difference between us and them? We are spending OUR money and they are spending OUR money!

Can we, as Americans, finally admit that our Representatives definitely follow the money? The vote goes to the highest bidder, the vote goes to the highest campaign contributor, the vote goes to the ones who have the most to pay for it.  How much is your vote worth?

So when you ask, “Where is the money?” I think the path leads to the Hill where our career politicians constantly  “follow the money!”

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Never a Straight Answer!!

Recently, I wrote an article titled “What’s Good for the Goose not so Good for the Gander”concerning Senator Feinstein, a Democrat from California,  and the sale of the United States Post Offices across the country. I asked whether you believed that it is a conflict of interest for a State Senator’s husband to be given a contract, by our Representatives, to sell Post Office properties around the country that will result in record commissions for he and his wife?

Prior to writing this article, I posted a letter to Democratic Senators Warner and Kaine of Virginia asking this very question.  Why would the United States give a contract to a company with financial ties to the husband of one of our Senators? Would this not be considered a conflict of interest? In this economy and weak job market, why not offer individual contracts to Real Estate Firms in the towns where the buildings where to be sold? The Taxpayer did help fund these locations though our taxes. Why not give back to the American people and help create jobs?

Well, I never heard back from Senator Warner, but I did receive the following response from Senator Kaine’s office:

Thank you for contacting me about the sale of United States Postal Service (USPS) facilities.  I appreciate hearing from you.

The U.S. government has provided postal services in the United States since 1775.  In 1971, the USPS became a self-supporting agency, covering its operating costs through sales of postage and related products and services.  Recently the USPS has experienced significant financial difficulty.   From FY 2001 through FY 2010, mail volume decreased by 23 billion pieces, or approximately 42%.  Additionally, in FY 2012 the USPS operated at a loss of $15.9 billion.

The USPS has proposed several ideas to save money and to improve its financial condition.  These proposals include increasing postage rates, recalculating retiree health care and pension payments, closing postal facilities, stopping the current six-day-delivery policy, and selling post office properties.  In the Postal Service’s 2012 report to Congress, USPS said it plans to sell approximately 600 buildings.

In 2011, CBRE Group, Inc. was awarded an exclusive contract to sell USPS facilities, with a commission of between two and six percent.  This contract was bid competitively.

I appreciate hearing your views regarding this issue.  Thank you again for contacting me.

Sincerely,

<9d45dc018059174c0746c81f50a3238d.png>

Tim Kaine

So, do you think he answered my questions? The only thing I know now that I did not know before is that there are actually 600 USPS buildings being sold not 56.  That means that CBRE  now stands to make even more money then originally expected. What is the total commission to be made on selling 56-600 buildings at 2-6%, in prime locations around the country?

Do you think I received a straight answer? Did he even respond to my concerns about a “conflict of interest?” Did he respond to my question as to why we could not spread the wealth around considering the state of the economy and the high unemployment rate around the country?

Are you tired of our Representatives passing laws that we, the American people are supposed to follow, but they do not? Are you tired that we, the American people are suffering the consequences of Obamacare while our Representatives are not held to that standard but have their Cadillac insurance policies funded by the American taxpayer?  Are you tired of the American people being spied on continuously without our consent and against our wishes while our Representatives stand by and say it is what is best for us? But when they realize they are also being watched, it is a violation of THEIR Constitutional Rights? Are you tired of our Representatives getting richer while they serve us while we go broke? Are you tired of our Representatives making a career out of politics as usual?

Is this what was intended by our forefathers? Did they  intend for those representing the people to be real everyday Americans? Did they intend for a person to step up and serve in public office and then return to the private sector? Did they intend for the government to be made up by the people? Or do you think they meant by the same people year after year after year?

Do you believe that term limits will solve any of these issues? If our Representatives were actually required to obtain employment out in the world like the rest of us, would they pass laws that were more favorable to the American People? If they were allowed to run for 2 terms only and then return to the private sector, would we, the American people be better served by our Representatives?

Somehow, I think if we asked our Representatives that question, we would not get a straight answer!

 

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“What’s Good for the Goose, not so Good for the Gander!”

Should the laws that are passed by our leaders, only apply to the American people and not to our Representatives? Is what’s good for the goose not so good for the gander?

 We have all seen Senator Diane Feinstein, Democrat for California, in the news a lot lately. Why?  Should the American People be concerned about the recent stories and are they true?
First, the most recent story involved Senator Feinstein’s outrage at the CIA over the issue of domestic spying.  The Senator accused the CIA of spying on staff members of her committee while they were examining CIA documents in Virginia.
She said,
 “The CIA did not ask the committee or its staff if the committee had access to the internal review or how we obtained it.” “Instead, the CIA just went and searched the committee’s computer.” Feinstein said that she had “grave concerns” the search violated federal law regarding domestic spying as well as congressional oversight responsibilities under the Constitution.” “I have asked for an apology and a recognition that this CIA search of computers used by its oversight committee was inappropriate. I have received neither.”
 
Now,  let’s look back at an October, 2013 article by the Wall Street Journal where Senator Feinstein defended the NSA’s spying program.
“Since it was exposed in June by leaker Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency’s call-records program has become controversial and many have questioned whether its benefits are worth the costs. My answer, it is necessary and must be preserved if we are to prevent terrorist attacks.”
The Senator also claimed that 54 acts of terrorism were thwarted as a result of the bulk data collection program. However, NSA Director, General Keith Alexander admitted that phone records collection stopped terrorist activity in only 1 or 2 terrorist cases. Feinstein went further to say,
“The NSA call-records program is working and contributing to our safety. It is legal and it is subject to strict oversight and through judicial review.”
 
But, are her statements true? Is the collection of our private data legal? Is it okay for the American people to have their private conversations and private date invaded without probable cause, or a warrant?  A lawsuit on  these issues was filed by the ACLU, (American Civil Liberties Union), and a Federal judge dismissed the lawsuit claiming the mass phone data collation was legal. Really?
What does the Bill of Rights say under the Constitution about our rights to privacy?
It protests the,  “Privacy of the person and possessions against unreasonable searches and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.”
What if I told you that the New York Times recently discovered that the NSA had been listening to telephone conversations between lawyers at a highly regarded Chicago law firm and their clients? If you were being attacked by the IRS, a government agency, and you hired an attorney to represent you, would you think your constitutional rights of privacy were being violated if you knew the NSA was listening to your conversations with your attorney prior to your court case? Do you think that it violates the right of clients to speak freely with their attorneys?  Do you think your Constitutional Rights are being undermined?
Does Senator Feinstein entitled to rights that you have been denied?
Let’s look at another news story that has been surfacing on Senator Feinstein. The sale of 56 United States Post Offices around the country and the connection of the sale to Senator Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum.  CBRE is the world’s largest commercial real estate service firm serving its owners, investors and occupiers.  Blum is the Board Chairman of CBRE and owns an investment firm that holds a small percentage of CBRE stock. Do you think it is a “conflict of interest” that Senator Feinstein’s husband is connected to the firm who recently won the contract to sell these USPS properties?
In the San Francisco chronicle on February 8, they said,
“Feinstein is not involved with and does not discus any of her husband’s business decisions with him. Her husband’s holdings are his separate personal property.”
 
Even if she is unaware of his holdings and business dealings, does this make the fact that they are married, a conflict of interest? Could he gain access to inside information regarding the sale of these properties through his wife’s connections in the Senate?  Do we trust our leaders in this day and age to tell the truth? To follow the rule of law? In an article by the Washington Post, The Inspector General criticized the relationship between the USPS and CBRE.  What do you think about it? Is it fair? Is it a conflict of interest?
Do you feel the American people are truly being served by our current Representatives? Are they only interested in making  decisions for you, but in the process ensure that the rules and laws do not apply to them? I suggest you contact your local Representative or Senator and let them know how you feel or at the very least, let them know in the midterm elections, if in fact fraud in the voting booths are not violating our Constitutional rights.
Is the statement true? “What is good for the goose is good for the gander?” Or have our current Representatives changed that to,  “What is good for the goose,  not so good for the gander?”
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Your Vote: Counted or Struck by Lightning?

Does voter fraud exist? When you cast your ballot, are you sure your vote is secure and has been counted? Did your vote actually go to the candidate of your choice?
 Vanessa Cardenas, Director of Progress at the Center for American Progress says, “Voting fraud is not a problem and yet in many states in the country, most notably Florida, are carrying out unconstitutional practices that will suppress the votes of millions of American Citizens.”  “According to election law experts, instances of polling place fraud are extremely rare. In fact you have a better chance of being hit by lightning.”
However, just yesterday, in Ft. Myers, Florida, an investigative journalist , Andy Pierotti, with NBC 2, reported his findings on voter fraud.  He discovered hundreds of non citizens who were registered as US voters by cross referencing jury recusal forms. They had been called for jury duty and refused to serve stating they were not United States citizens. However,  they still voted in countless elections.   County supervisors of elections who were interviewed said they have no way to verify US citizenship. Under the 1992 Motor Voter law, they are not required to ask for proof. The only way they can even investigate voter fraud is when they are given a tip. When asked, the supervisors said that this could definitely change the complexion of an election
 A Department of Justice study said that out of 197 million votes cast for federal candidates between 2002 and 2005, only 40 voters were indicted for voter fraud  and only 26 of those resulted in convictions or guilty pleas. But have things changed since 2005? Has technology advanced to the point where we can no longer trust in any “machine”  when we see  so-called “secure” sites compromised on a daily basis? Should we stop worrying about voter fraud because the Department of Justice says so?
Should we be concerned about the reports around the nation of suspected fraud that occurred during the 2012 election between Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney?
The Ohio Secretary of State,  Jon Justed announced that his office found 17 non citizens who illegally cast ballots in the 2012 elections. He also found that 274 non citizens remained on the voting rolls. Ohio also found 257,000 dead people still listed as active voters in 2011 and 340,000 duplicate voters since removed. Obama beat Romney in Ohio by just 2 percent points.
In Cleveland, it was shown that Romney received 0 votes in 9 different precincts.            Within Cuyahoga County, Ohio, 100 precincts reported 0 votes for Romney while Obama received 99% of the votes. Based on that information, would you feel that the voting process was legal and truthful? With such questionable results, would you want the results to be tossed?
The Department of Justice and Republican Governor Rick Scott are in a heated debate over the state’s efforts to remove illegal immigrants from their voter rolls.  When they cross referenced voter rolls with driver’s licenses, they found 2,600 people were not United State citizens. When the state sent out letters to those voters asking that they confirm their citizenship in order to retain their voting rights,  they were accused of targeting black and hispanic communities, even though 87% of the 2600 voters were in fact minorities.
In upper McCungie  Township near Allentown Pennsylvania, an auditor dispatched by Republicans to monitor the vote on Election day said the software he observed would “change the selection back to default – to Obama.” Here in Prince William County, my husband voted and had his selection changed 3 times to the candidate of the opposite party, during Virginia’s Governor’s race in 2013.  It supposedly went through properly on the fourth try. However,  he requested to review his vote before it was processed. I wrote a letter to the Virginia State Board of Elections relaying my concerns about his experience. They responded by saying, “Apparently there was an issue in which he selected one candidate 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.” They further spoke of their confidence in these machines in processing your vote in a reliable and legal way.
In researching this machine, the EDGE Direct Recording Electronic Voting Machine,  researchers found significant security weaknesses though out 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. Software mechanisms for transmitting election results and updating software lacks reliable measures to detect or prevent tampering.
Under the Motor Voter Registration, if the DMV is not required by law to ask for proof of citizenship, then how do we know that those who have government issued I.D.’s, like state driver’s licenses, are even citizens?  As in the case in Florida, many who received a driver’s license were automatically registered to vote, with no documentation of citizenship required. They were only discovered through the jury recusal forms where those non-citizens who did not wish to serve on jury duty simply used their non-citizen status as a valid reason to be excused?
So is your vote secure? Is it going toward the candidate of your choice? Are we opening up our elections to those who do not have the right to vote? I say, you had better stay indoors during the next electrical storm…according to the so-called election law experts, it seems like you have a pretty good chance of being struck by lightning!!
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Obama’s EPA, Friend or Foe?

Under the Obama Administration, the EPA has become quite controversial. Is this agency, under this Administration, truly a “friend” to the earth, or just another arm of the government being used to further a political agenda and intimidate it’s enemies?

Obama has instituted regulations on the coal industry that will result in the closure of over 200 power plants and the loss of countless American jobs.  In Kentucky alone, more than 6000 miners have lost their jobs. For every mining job that is eliminated,  there are at least 3 related jobs that are also lost. An Obama administration official said that these regulations for new coal plants will increase electricity prices by as much as 80%  for American consumers.

Can the fragile American economy afford such a disruption in jobs and another power grabbing attempt by the United States Government? Do these new regulations really have a heavier impact on the environment or the American people?  Could these regulations be eased into law so the American people are not effected so quickly and negatively in an already weak economy? Emails, forced to the surface by The Freedom of Information Act, found that The Sierra Club, a green group, was involved in questionably ethical  communications with the EPA to adopt regulations for the coal industry that would be impossible for power plants to meet.  Can we afford the shut down of so many coal plants who currently generate over 40% of the nation’s electricity, contribute over $100 billion to the economy and support millions of jobs?

Obama’s EPA is also trying to stop the United States from signing off on the Keystone Pipeline. The Pipeline is a 1,664 mile project that would transport 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day, while creating up to 100,000 new jobs and contribute $3.4 billion to the US economy. Could approving this pipeline also have  positive effects on the United States’ standing as a world power?  Currently Russia has been using their control over Ukraine’s energy supply against them.  Who, in this explosive war on power around the world, should we be scared of? The Middle East or the Canadians? If Middle Eastern oil no longer mattered to the U.S., how would it change or influence US foreign policy around the world?

Obama’s EPA’s newest enemy to the environment is the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska that is estimated to yield 107 million ounces of gold, 80 billion pounds of copper and 5.6 billion pounds of molybdenum, which is used to make steel alloys. The Pebble Partnership has spent $107 million and five years monitoring the soil, water and air to ensure it can mine without hurting the environment. The EPA and it’s green supporters, are, as expected, against this venture. Meanwhile, Democrats are calling on the EPA to use the “Clean Water Act” to block ANY large development projects.

The question for Americans now is how could these 3 projects effect us? Does it help or hurt our future energy use, our economy, the job market or our standing as a Nation in the world? Future environmental benefits are questionable and basically unknown, but job loss and the negative effects on our economy and the job market is a reality now!

So, is Obama’s EPA a friend or a foe?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

“Is a 1st Rate Education a 2nd Rate Proposition?”

President Obama has claimed over and over again that his National imperative is to “prepare our kids for success” by “educating every American student to graduate from high school prepared for college and for a career!”

The official Democratic platform is as follows:

“Democrats share with all parents the commitment to prepare our children to lead lives of happiness and success. That’s why we’re dedicated to ensuring the next generation has access to a first-rate education and the tools to drive our economy forward.”

As a result, President Obama instituted “Race to the Top,” a revolutionary program designed to promote innovation and provide incentives for improvement in education.

But, are Democrats and the President following through by really backing first-rate education for all Americans? Is education really a top priority?

In order to answer these questions, let’s start by looking into campaign  financing.  In the 2008 election cycle, The American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association contributed about $5.4 million dollars to Federal candidates, parties and committees. Of these donations, 95% of their funds went to Democrats. In the 2012 election cycle, close to $20 million dollars was donated to campaigns, of which, 97% went to Democrats. According to the New York Times, Unions spent nearly $450 million in the 2008 elections backing Obama and Democrats. According to the Wall Street Journal, three of the top five spending political groups in the 2010 midterms were labor unions. In fact, Big Labor spent more in campaigns and elections than Big Business.

If Democrats claim to support a “first rate” education to all Americans, then why do they insist on eliminating the school voucher program for students, closing down Charter schools, and refusing to sell or lease failing  public school properties  to successful private sector educational institutions? Why would they not want to learn from these institutions in order to facilitate better education within the public system?

leibowitz2833.JPGToday, in New York, Democratic Mayor deBlasio  is moving to block three charter schools, The Success Academies, from using space inside public school buildings.  His predecessor, Republican Mayor, Michael Bloomberg gave the charter schools free rent in the city owned buildings. The schools were to open in the fall. They have already hired teachers and admitted students. Thousands have showed up to protest the closings of these schools and the city’s attempt to block 17 Charter schools from opening within the city.

Unknown-1Why would Mayor deBlasio want to close down these schools if he and the Democrats, lead by President Obama are committed to offering all kids a top rate education? How does the Success Academies stack up to the Public school system in New York? They rank in the top 1% of all New York schools in Math with 82% of scholars passing the 2013 state exam. The Success Academy in the Bronx ranked #3 out of 3,528 New York State Schools in Math.  Fifth graders in Success Academy in Harlem ranked #1 out of 2,254 schools in New York in math. They ranked in the top 7% of all New York schools in English, and performed 32% higher than public schools and  a staggering 100% earned an advanced rating, the highest possible in Science. So what is the problem? Why aren’t Democrats singing their praises?

Why would President Obama and Eric Holder want to sue states around the Nation to force them to abandon the school voucher program? In Louisiana, 90% of voucher users are poverty level Americans, and were stuck in “C” “D” or “F” rated schools.  However,  Obama and Holder were determined to stop these kids from going to better private schools instead of their public counterparts.Why?

Mayor, Tom Barrett, a Democrat, along with Michael Bond on the Milwaukee school board refused to sell 15 empty buildings, which used to house failing public schools, to successful charter schools. Bond says “letting private education success stories to flourish would be like asking Coca-Cola to turn over it’s facilities to Pepsi.

Can we conclude that Democrat’s are leading the charge against school  vouchers and the attack on successful private and charter schools because of the money given to them by the Unions?  Are these attacks part of a payback? If the public school system fails, teachers lose their jobs, Unions loose their membership dues and Democrats no longer get the big bucks for elections.

Is a 1st rate Education policy a 2nd rate proposition for the teachers or the students?

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

What is Free Speech and is our Government Slowly Chipping it Away?

 

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It ensures against governmental intrusions on the essential personal freedoms – freedom of religion, freedom of the press, free expression, freedom of association, and freedom of assembly. Regarding free expression, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The Courts have interpreted the language to mean that no arm of the government, federal or state, can abridge the free speech right.Has our government been chipping away at our right to free speech and our freedom to practice the religion of our choice? How about the freedom of the press or our freedom to assemble? Have you been watching and listening to the happenings of the past several years? Will you be surprised at the laws that have been passed right under you nose without any major fanfare or celebration? Are you completely aware? Do you care? Are you angry and determined to change the status quo?Let’s look as some of the laws that have been passed, and some instances, that do, indeed, infringe on your First Amendment rights!

Two years ago, Congress passed H.R. 347 entitled the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act. It passed the House by a vote of 399 to 3, with absolutely no fanfare and barely anyone took note. What does H.R. 347 say?

“Whoever knowingly engages in protest near a building where the President is doing his business is guilty of a federal crime if the protest ‘impedes’ or ‘disrupts’ the flow of government business or official functions.”

Take note this is a FEDERAL OFFENSE, which means there is a fine and/or imprisonment for not more than 10 years. So basically you are not allowed to demonstrate at any Presidential appearances, no demonstrating anywhere near the President — or anyone who has Secret Service protection. You cannot raise your voice, say anything against the President, or even talk about doing such a thing or you can get a year in prison.

Who voted for this in the House? Everyone, except for 2 Republicans, Justin Amash and Paul Broun, and one Democrat, Keith Ellison. Does this infringe on your right to assemble and redress grievances to the President or other government officials?

So, now we know of at least one “Chip” in the first amendment! A real blow to freedom of assembly, freedom of protest and freedom of speech.

The second “Chip” is the NDAA, or the National Defense Authorization Act which specifies the budget and expenditures of the US Department of Defense. Section 1021 of the NDAA allows for the “indefinite detention of American citizens without due process at the discretion of the President.” This section has been challenged as a violation of the Bill of Rights. Does this scare you? It should.

Do you remember the White House security aide who was critical of the Obama Administration over the “whitewash” of the attack on Benghazi? He was fired for expressing his First Amendment rights. Can the President detain you if he doesn’t like your politics or your religion or the way you wear your hair? Under the NDAA, yes he can…indefinitely, without charging you with a crime.

We cannot really talk about freedom of speech without addressing the targeting of conservatives by the IRS. Do you consider this “Chip” number three? Whether you believe only conservatives were targeted or if you believe progressive groups were also targeted is really of no concern. What should be a major red flag is the fact that the IRS could be used by any government official to “target” or “abuse” any American based on their political beliefs regardless of party affiliation. If they are allowed to get away with targeting political groups, what can be said when they start targeting people with black hair, or white women, or Jewish men or Christians?

“Chip” number four should address the freedom to practice the religion of your choice. In this day and age, do you feel that you truly have the right to practice your beliefs free from retaliation or prosecution?

In recent years we have heard and witnessed our military finding it difficult to openly express their religious beliefs. In an article by Penny Star, some active members of the military shared their experiences with her. They said “They’ve been prohibited from sharing their faith, prohibited from praying publicly and dismissed from duty for refusing to surrender their religious convictions.” In one case, there was a brief ban on Bibles being allowed in the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.

Mikey Weinstein, an attorney, businessman and former Air Force officer, is the founder of the MRFF, Military Religious Freedom Foundation. He is quoted as saying, “What you’ve got is a lusty and thriving religious intolerance that is objectively manifesting itself in prejudice and discrimination and is obliterating the First Amendment, civil rights, and the U.S. Constitution.”

U.S Representative John Culberson (R-TX) confirmed that the Houston National Cemetery was preventing Christian prayers from being said at Military funerals. The Veterans Administartion settled a lawsuit filed by the Liberty Institute regarding religious freedom and free speech at the cemetery. The VA agreed to terms involving restoration of religious policy and paid legal fees in the amount of $215,000.

What about the murder and persecution of Christians around the world? Why hasn’t the current Administration denounced the behavior? Is that a nod for Religious discrimination by our President? He has been quite vocal on the rights of Muslims in the United States, why not Christians?

“Chip” number five was a situation in the press most recently regarding monitoring of news stations by the FCC under the direction of President Obama. Did this threaten our “freedom of the press?” There was such an outcry over the potential monitoring that the FCC backed down for now. But will we see this come about in a different direction, under the table, without our knowledge?

The sixth “Chip” involves a local event involving students at a High School in California — wearing t-shirts with the American flag on Cinco de Mayo — who were asked to turn their shirts inside out or go home due to complaints and threats made to them by Mexican Students. The First Amendment law says the government should protect the speaker and not the “thugs” or those who threatened. However, in the Court case, the judge determined that students cannot display the American flag in an American School because they might offend and therefore be attacked. Does this seem right? Does this action teach the “hecklers” that they can suppress your free speech by simply threatening violence?

Our Founding Fathers were quite clear on their meaning of “free speech”:

“Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech,or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to perdition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

So, do you think your First Amendment rights are being chipped away?


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Do Words Matter? Do Promises Matter?

Do words matter? Do promises matter? Do you expect follow through and accountability when you have someone, anyone,  make a promise to you?  Does it matter if you voted in an election for a candidate based on the promises they made, yet neglected to fulfill?  At what point should you expect or demand that promises be kept? At what point and in what situation can we make them accountable?

Let’s start by looking at the basic, legal definition and elements of  a contract, promise or agreement.

1- The parties have a mutual understanding of what the contract covers? (“I promise if you vote for me”)

2- The contract involves an offer to another party, who accepts the offer. (Vote for me and I will fulfill the promise)

3-In order to be valid, the parties to a contract must exchange something of value. (Your vote)

4-In order to be enforceable, the action contemplated by the contract must be completed.  (you voted, they are elected)

If the terms of the oral contract can be proved or are admitted by the other party, an oral contract is every bit as enforceable as one that is in writing.

So, should we be able to sue our government or a politically elected official or remove them from office,  if they have made a promise to get your vote and then decided not to fulfill that promise after they have been elected?

How did we get to a point in our society that we no longer make our elected officials accountable for the promises they make? How do we make them accountable? Most Americans would respond that you make them accountable when you go to the voting booth in the next election. However, how much damage can an elected official do in the time they are in office before you have the opportunity to vote them out? Two years, four years, eight years? How many times will they defy the promises they made within that time? How do you get the public to remember each and every promise that was made and broken? How do we watch and listen to past promises and yet just shake our heads while we watch those promises continuously broken. In this day and age of ever progressing technology, why do our Politicians continue to lie, when they know these promises are accessible to all via the internet? Do they really care about us, or are they only concerned about being elected? With our technology, do they have too much information available on our attitudes and preferences so they know the needed promises to make in order to get elected, all the while knowing they have no intention of fulfilling them? Do they know we won’t act or we won’t care, or we are so inundated with information that we will forget the promises made? Do they know all the while, there is nothing we can do about it in a respectable amount of time to prevent them from doing exactly the opposite of what they promised? Where do you stand? How accountable can we make our elected officials? Can we change the laws to make them accountable to the American people? If they could be removed from office if they were found to have knowingly lied, would the promises become more sincere? I think we should make them accountable, after all if is supposed to be a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

On a side note, I spent my entire morning going through news papers, new clips, press conferences, campaign trails and video after video putting together an article on the many statements made by President Barack Obama from his days as a Senator of Illinois through his Presidency today. I amassed so much information, it was mind boggling. However, as I began my third page on conflicting statements and promises made, I came across a video that basically says it all.  So, please watch and enjoy….

“Do Words Matter?”

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Do We Really Have a Voice?

I have always been interested in Politics, and have always voted my conscience. However, in the past 4 years, I have become more politically active as I have seen our Country “fundamentally changed” into something I no longer recognize.

I read 4 Newspapers a day, further research articles that catch my attention, and post on Facebook things that I hope will open the eyes of other Americans.  I have signed hundreds of petitions, written directly to the White House and I have spent countless hours writing letters to my Representatives and to the Newspapers to which I subscribe.  I have sent comments and emails to all the News Stations, and called into countless Radio Shows.  The points I address are real concerns about our freedoms, or lack thereof, fraud in the voting booths, fraud within the government, and I do it respectfully and with integrity and respect.  However, I have come to the realization, that we, as Americans, truly have NO VOICE in our own government. How do we respond? What can we do? Can the “Convention of the States” be a solution for the ever-increasing lawlessness that continues in Washington on a daily basis or will we see Americans rush the Hill in revolt?

I recently had a discussion with David Altschul on Facebook  regarding the “Convention of the States.”  I posted that  “I personally believe this might be the only way we will be able to reign in our government and remind them that they work for the people and not the other way around.” He responded, “I believe a Convention of the States would be an invitation to anarchy, oppression, short-term thinking and disaster, because we lack patriots with the education, literacy, vision, spirituality and accountability of thinkers like Jefferson, Washington, Hamilton, Madison, John and Samuel Adams and Noah Webster.”  In response to David’s comment, I replied, “David, you are right that the likes of our founding fathers do not exist currently on the Hill, however, they do exist within the people.”

We all know someone who we think would be a great representative for the people within our government. However, how many law-abiding, God-fearing, moral Americans would dare want to cross the line into a sea of sharks that are more concerned with their own meal than feeding the people? It is truly a thought to ponder. In this day and age, any candidate, even Jesus would be torn into bits by hook or by crook, by the powers at be for merely wanting the best for America and its people and actually speaking these truths.

What do you think about the “Convention of the States?” Could it be our saving grace, or might it put us in a position worse that where we currently exist? What can we, as Americans, really do to affect the path this Country is currently taking under the Obama Administration? Is it all Obama, or has it been a path that was blazed by previous leaders? Who do we trust? What is the real truth? What is the real end to the means currently being used by so many governments in today’s world? We see the revolts in Venezuela, the demands for a voice in the Ukraine, the people of Egypt marching to have their voices heard. I do believe that most people around the world just want to be free to live their lives. But what is it in our leaders that turns power for good into power for control?

I have never seen such anger and frustration that I have seen of late within the American people. Will we, like Egypt, Ukraine and Venezuela have to stand up and fight on the Capital Steps to have our voices heard? Will we see a Convention of the States and can it realize its goals? My FB friend, David said, “the breathtaking and pervasive contempt for the law shown daily by President Obama leads me to believe that altering the Constitution (through the Convention of the States) would be as useful against tyranny as Chicago’s gun-bans were against crime.  I don’t have facile answers. I speak out. I read the Declaration of Independence, I pray a lot and I continually seek out and strive to strengthen Patriots of like spirits.”

Well said David, well said!!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Politics, Religion or Family?

In these days, there is more divisiveness then ever, in my memory.  We have cut off friends, dissed family members and basically decided to draw a line in the sand when it comes to Politics and Religion.

I just knew this would never happen to me. I would never feel so strong about my views on Politics and Religion that I would knowingly and purposefully move away from family members and friends who feel differently?  Would I? The answer is “yes” I would.

The direction in which this country is moving has reached a point where I feel it has threatened not only my current lifestyle, but has put the very future of my children at risk, and placed me in a position to have to defend my belief in God. Never, in my wildest dreams,  would I have ever thought that to express my belief in God would put my very being in the path of potential violence. Christians are being targeted on a daily basis throughout the world and killed for their beliefs.  Our current Administration has chosen to ignore this very threat to its citizens in the United States and abroad.  I feel I must make decisions to protect my family and their future, even if that means disassociating with friends and members of my own family. Is this the right attitude to take? Is this the Christian path God has planned for me? Is it true that to live a life as a Christian is to live a life of persecution?

The current state of our world has forced me to search out and learn more about the Bible and God has taken the forefront in my life. I have always considered myself to be a Christian, but have realized of late, that my actual position and the truth about my beliefs are not where I thought they were. Attending Church for the purpose of “attending” church as fallen into an abyss.  I no longer seek out organized religion as it seems to have become as crooked and off center as Politics. Those who claim to want to lead us into salvation have been sidetracked from their intended path by money, power and greed. I am much more in touch with God and my beliefs since I have decided to study on my own.  With our access to technology, there are so many options open to us. I have found wonderful lessons and dedicated teachings in Stephen Armstrong through his site, versebyverseministry.org and through lectures and insight with Ravi Zacharias, via www.rzim.org.  I no longer feel the need to “take seat time” in my local church.  Don’t get me wrong, I am not condemning church attendance, but I have noticed that organized religion has taken a path that follows the money and not necessarily the path that follows God. I am able to study the Bible and follow the anointed teachings of those who have dedicated their lives to God and have found my faith to be deeper and more purpose driven.

Today, we are flirting with the total dissipation of a culture. God has been dismissed from government, schools and our court houses, even though our country was founded “under God”. We have been made to acquiesce to other cultures and religions while being asked to dismiss our own God. The United States has always prided itself on the “freedom of religion” and the tolerance and inclusion of other cultures and religions. But we see, the dissemination of our own beliefs and the destruction and fall of the very thing that bound us together and made us the envy of the world.

I have seen gatherings in Washington and time given to the “Atheists ” of America and their  support of the “mocking and confronting of Christians.” Is this the lessons we want our children to learn? Are we ok with belittling and mocking those who think differently then us? Is “bullying” the course we want our kids to take? If this belief was the backbone of America, would we have become the example to the world of freedom and opportunity? As stated by Riva Zacharias, ” In a world of civility you do not mock a counter perspective you dialog with it.” “Take an idea and debate it, you do not need to mock the person.”

I guess a question we need to ask ourselves,  “Is is possible for one man or one woman to lead millions into untold evil?” Could Hitler happen again? Would we or could we follow a leader who divides the country and asks that we disrespect or mock those that believe differently from us. “These days its not just that the line between right and wrong that has been made unclear, today Christians are being asked by our culture to erase the lines and move the fences, and if that were not bad enough, we are being asked to join in the celebration cry by those who have thrown off the restraints religion had imposed upon them. It is not just that they ask we accept, but they now demand of us to celebrate it too.”- Riva Zacharias.

Let us not forget the damage and destruction realized from the divisiveness created by world leaders.  It has been and remains the one thing that can lead us directly into hell, but not the Hell that we have read about in the teachings of the Bible, but the one designed intentionally by those who have chosen power over righteousness.

Where do you stand? What is your breaking point? Are you willing to let go of your basic beliefs and the teachings of the bible to keep the peace? Unfortunately, we have reached a “jumping off” place that demands the choice be made……family, politics or faith?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Where our Education System and the Free Enterprise System Collide!

What is happening to our Education System? What has happened to the Free Enterprise System? Where these two issues intersect, we find some interesting debates and positions on what America needs to do to improve our position in the Global Education battle.

Recently, a study released by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, shows that despite having higher than average levels of educational attainment, adults in the US have below average basic literacy and numeracy skills. The US ranked 16th out of 23 countries in literacy proficiency, 21st out of 23 in numeracy proficiency and 14th out of 23 in problem solving in technology rich environments. Black and Hispanic adults in the US are 3-4 times more likely to have poor skills that white adults. The survey and educational experts agree that the report is a stark reminder of the state of American education and should prompt a re-examination of how eduction is delivered. This information was used to push for the “Common Core” standards in K-12 education. But Common Core is another topic for discussion that focuses on government developing and forcing, yet another,  educational system, when it has failed miserably with all other attempts.

President Obama has traveled across the country stating that “inequality in opportunity” is one of his top priorities. All Americans should have equal access to good education and training to prepare themselves and their children for the future. However, does his position match his actions towards this goal?

Let’s start in Louisuana where the school voucher program is flourishing and  90% of users partaking in this educational upgrade system are poverty level Americans. The majority of students taking advantage of the voucher program currently live in areas where their neighborhood schools are rated “C” “D” or “F”. The voucher program has offered them the “opportunity”, as President Obama has stated, to improve their future by choosing to educate their children at a school that offers the opportunity to gain entry into college, and be competitive with those from better school systems.  So let’s look deeper and question why Eric Holder in the Department of Justice, under Obama’s direction, has pursued legal action to shut down the voucher system there and in other locations around the United States? Why would a President promoting equal opportunity for all Americans, vehemently seek to shut down the very system that offers that equal opportunity in education to all Americans, but especially those who have the least access to it? Obviously, the government lost its attempt to stop the free education choices of it’s citizens in the face of simple common sense. However, the fight continues around the US.

Let’s look at another example of government’s “war” on improved free enterprise education systems in Milwaukee.         St. Marcus Lutheran is one of Milwaukee’s most successful private schools. With a graduation rate of over 90%, citizens within the Parental Choice Program, have lined up to get their children into the school that educates 730 students from grades K through 8. Those wanting to get into the school represent 89% low income families and are 90% black. Aren’t these the Americans Obama is speaking to regarding equal opportunity? Currently, the school district where St. Marcus resides, has 15 schools standing empty. St. Marcus has made an offer to purchase one of these vacant buildings for $1.25 million and pledged another $5-7 million toward improvements. However, although the waiting list for St Marcus has literally hundreds of lower income kids lining up for a chance to get in, the public school system decided to sell the building to developers for $2 million. The Developers plan on tearing down half the school for housing and retail and then leasing back the other half to the failing school system at the cost of $4 million. Is this fair to the taxpayer in Wisconsin? Is this advantageous to the public seeking to improve their educational outlook? Is this the action of a government wanting to offer “equal opportunity” to all? Why would the government not seek to improve the educational outlook for the people while bringing in a profit on the sale of taxpayer funded property? According to Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, the school system is trying to prevent school charters from getting their vacant school buildings because they run the threat of drawing kids out of their failing schools opting for the success of the private, charter schools. The school system has attached deed restrictions to future sales of the failing publicly owned schools so they cannot be sold for “competing use”.  The public school board president, Michael Bonds, said “letting private education success stories to flourish would be like asking the Coca Cola Company to turn over it’s facilities to Pepsi.”

Does our government, under the control of Barack Obama and the Department of Justice under Eric Holder,  really believe that school vouchers which have helped get kids out of failing public schools and into successful private schools,  actually lead to racial segregation, or is there a fear that successful private schools will actually force the shutdown of public schools therefore causing the loss of teacher’s jobs and the end of the teacher’s union as we know it?

 Whatever argument you believe, whatever political affiliation you may have,  we are definitely at odds over what the government claims it wants for the American public and it’s actions in actually achieving them. Have our fearless leaders passed over the American dream in order to satisfy the needs and wants of the Political machine? I think they have!
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Job Bills Stuck in the Senate

Is it right that one man, Harry Reid, can hold the United States Hostage by refusing to put any of these bills, passed by the House, up for a vote in the Senate? Why would the Democratic leader of the Senate refuse to get Americans back to work?
The Liberal Democratic Agenda!!! Contact your Representative and ask them to force the vote!

Jobs Bills Stuck In The Senate

Empower Small Business Owners

Small business owners are being bogged down by burdensome regulations from Washington that prevent job creation and hinder economic growth. We must remove onerous regulations that are redundant, harm small businesses, and impede private sector investment and job creation.

Review of Federal Regulations

H. Res. 72 – Passed by the House (391-28) on February 11, 2011

Passed by the House (391-28) on February 11, 2011

Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act

H.R. 872 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Energy Tax Prevention Act

H.R. 910 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Disapproval of FCC’s Net Neutrality Regulations

H.J. Res. 37 – Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52

Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52

Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act

H.R. 2018 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Consumer Financial Protection & Soundness Improvement Act

H.R. 1315 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act

H.R. 2587 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act

H.R. 2401 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Cement Sector Regulatory Relief Act

H.R. 2681 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

EPA Regulatory Relief Act

H.R. 2250 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act

H.R. 2273 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act

H.R. 3094 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Regulatory Accountability Act

H.R. 3010 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act

H.R. 527 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

REINS Act

H.R. 10 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act

H.R. 1633 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliabilty Act

H.R. 1837 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Land in Accomack County, Virginia

H.R. 2087 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act

H.R. 4078 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Minnesota Education Investment and Employment Act

H.R. 5544 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Fix The Tax Code To Help Job Creators

America’s tax code has grown too complicated and cumbersome. We need a tax code that is flatter, fairer, and simpler to ensure that everyone pays their fair share, lessen the burden on families, generate economic expansion, and create jobs by making America more competitive.

Small Business Tax Cut Act

H.R. 9 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act

H.R. 4 – Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011

Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011

Health Care Cost Reduction Act

H.R. 436 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

3% Withholding Rule Repeal

H.R. 674 – Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011

Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011

Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012

H.R. 3630 – Signed into law by the President on February 22, 2012

Signed into law by the President on February 22, 2012

Job Protection and Recession Prevention Act

H.R. 8 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act

H.R. 6169 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Increase Competitiveness for U.S. Manufacturers

The more that American businesses export, the more they produce. The more businesses produce, the more workers they need. This means job creation. Expanding market access for U.S. made products will be a shot in the arm for businesses small and large and will create jobs.

US-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act

H.R. 3078 – Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

US-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act

H.R. 3079 – Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

US-Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act

H.R. 3080 – Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

Signed by the President on October 21, 2011

Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

H.R. 1904 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

FAA Modernization and Reform Act

H.R. 658 – Signed by the President on February 14, 2012

Signed by the President on February 14, 2012

Apply Countervailing Duty to Nonmarket Economy Countries

H.R. 4105 – Signed into law by the President on March 13, 2012

Signed into law by the President on March 13, 2012

National Stategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2012

H.R. 4402 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012

H.R. 6156 – Passed by the House and Senate

Passed by the House and Senate

Encourage Entrepreneurship and Growth

America has historically been on the cutting edge of innovation and technological development, but we are increasingly falling behind our global competitors. We must make it easier for existing businesses to grow and allow more start-up companies to flourish.

The America Invents Act

H.R. 1249 – Signed into law by the President on September 16, 2011

Signed into law by the President on September 16, 2011

Veterans Opportunity to Work Act

H.R. 2433 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Jumpstart Our Business Startups “JOBS” Act

H.R. 3606 – Signed into law by the President on March 3, 2012

Signed into law by the President on March 3, 2012

Fairness for High-Skilled Immigrants Act

H.R. 3012 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

FDA Safety and Innovation Act

S. 3187 – Signed into law by the President on July 9, 2012

Signed into law by the President on July 9, 2012

STEM Jobs Act

H.R. 6429 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Maximize Domestic Energy Production

The energy sector is crucial to our economic growth, and high energy costs have a major impact on job creation. We need policies that allow us to harness our abundant supply of natural resources in America, develop new sources of energy, and create jobs here at home.

Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act

H.R. 1230 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Putting the Gulf of Mexico Back to Work Act

H.R. 1229 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Reversing President Obama’a Offshore Moratorium Act

H.R. 1231 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Jobs and Energy Permitting Act

H.R. 2021 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

North American-Made Energy Security Act

H.R. 1938 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Protecting Next Generation Energy Security (PIONEERS) Act

H.R. 3408 – Passed by the House (237-187) on February 16, 2012

Passed by the House (237-187) on February 16, 2012

Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act

H.R. 2842 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Conservation and Economic Growth Act

H.R. 2578 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Domestic Energy and Jobs Act

H.R. 4480 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Congressional Replacement of President Obama’s Energy-Restricting and Job-Limiting Offshore Drilling Plan

H.R. 6082 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Coal Miner Employment and Domestic Energy Infrastructure Protection Act

H.R. 3409 – Senate has taken no action to date

Senate has taken no action to date

Pay Down America’s Unsustainable Debt Burden

The federal government is spending and borrowing so much that the United States will soon go broke. Washington’s spending binge has put our nation in debt, eroded economic confidence, and caused massive uncertainty for private sector job creators. It’s time to live within our means.

Budget for Fiscal Year 2013

H. Con. Res. 112 – Senate has not yet considered a budget of its own

Senate has not yet considered a budget of its own

Budget for Fiscal Year 2012

H.Con. Res. 34 – Senate has not yet considered a budget of its own

Senate has not yet considered a budget of its own

Cut, Cap, and Balance

H.R. 2560 – Senator Reid tabled the bill by a vote of 51-46

Senator Reid tabled the bill by a vote of 51-46

 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

I Am Afraid of my Government, by Alan Caruba

I came into this world when Franklin D. Roosevelt was President and I have never been afraid of my government until now.

This goes beyond the ordinary disagreements between individuals and groups that express opposition to the Obama administration. It has the look of a deliberate campaign and we have three more years of Obama as President in which to endure it.
I am not alone. A consistent and growing theme of commentaries on the conservative news sites and blogs that I read every day is the fear of the Obama administration that has been cracking down on those who criticize it. They get audited by the IRS. They are refused the same status as non-profit entitles engaging in public education as Left-leaning organizations. They are accused of being racists, homophobes, anti-immigration, and anti-women.

In a speech to the leftist nonprofit Center for American Progress, Sen. Chuck Schumer, (D-BY) recently urged the IRS to “redouble” its intimidation tactics against the Tea Party. He represents a State whose governor recently said that conservatives were not welcome to live and do business. Its largest city, New York, just elected a Marxist as its mayor.

Lakely cited the growing list of actions taken against who have expressed criticism. It includes Dinesh D’Souza who produced a documentary about Obama’s life, “Obama’s America” and who arrested on felony charges for violating campaign finance law. “This is beyond absurd—especially in light of what the FBI and IRS have found not worthy of any investigation, let alone indictment” in the past. A Hollywood group of conservatives, the only one there, received an IRS demand for its complete donor list; this is a repeat of similar demands of Tea Party groups seeking non-profit status. James O’Keefe whose Project Veritas exposed the nonprofit status of the leftist ACORN is being audited as was Frank VanderSloot, a big Republican donor as was conservative journalist Wayne Allen Root—twice. The list keeps growing.Jim Lakely, the director of communications of The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank that has led the effort to debunk the global warming hoax, recently posted a commentary, “The Unceasing Political Thuggery of Obama’s Gangster Government.” He noted Michael Barone’s description of the Obama administration as a “gangster government.”

The Heartland Institute was subjected to the stealing of its confidential budget and planning documents by global warming activist Peter Gleick “for the purpose of harassing” its donors, but no action has been taken against him by law enforcement authorities.

“Never in the history of this country have we seen such a broad and coordinated abuse of the government’s power to threaten criminal prosecution and ruin the lives and livelihoods of people the President and his party see as political ‘enemies’”, says Lakely.

“This should be the political scandal of the century—if only we had an honorable and competent MSM (mainstream media) press corps in this country.”

Ordinary Americans have cause to share my fear as they discover the wreckage that Obamacare is inflicting on our healthcare system, losing their insurance plans, and now we are hearing that the insurance industry may have to be bailed out as it is subjected to major losses. The government’s website is not only a disaster, but it subjects anyone using it to the threat of identity theft as experts testify it can be hacked with ease.

The economy of a nation with enormous energy reserves, enough to make us energy sufficient for decades, is being undermined by a deliberate campaign to shut down coal-fired plants and make the construction of new ones impossible. The Keystone XL pipeline from Canada has been delayed for five years despite the jobs it represents and access to oil at the same time the government has slowed the provision of leases to oil companies seeking to explore and extract our own reserves.

And millions of Americans are out of work or have ceased looking for work as the result of the worst economic “recovery” in the history of the nation. This is occurring at a time when the Obama administration has added $6 trillion to the nation’s debt, causing a leading credit agency to downgrade the nation’s credit rating for the first time in its history.

The scandals attributed to the Obama administration keep mounting from “Fast and Furious” that transmitted weapons to Mexican drug cartels, to the failure to provide security to our Libyan consulate despite many requests, leading to the Benghazi killing of a U.S. ambassador and three brave security personnel who went to his aid. The list keeps growing.

There is ample reason for Americans to fear their government these days and the mood of the nation is growing worse as they realize that they have a President who lies all the time and pursues “climate change” policies that have no basis in known science and a campaign of class war based on “income inequality” as the incomes of Middle Class Americans have suffered a decline. The solution to income inequality has always been an increase in the national economy.

The nation’s military is being undermined by budget cuts and policies that encourage open homosexual participation and the introduction of women into its combat forces. A growing list of generals and admirals have been forced to retire.

It has taken only five years to bring the nation to this point and none of the scandals has resulted in anyone in the Obama administration being held accountable.

They have good reason. When they can no longer depend on the Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service, and other elements of the government to act lawfully, this nation—a nation of laws—we are all in jeopardy.

For these and other reasons I and many Americans are growing fearful. We have good reason.

© Alan Caruba, 2014

factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Democrat, Republican or Independent?

Democrat, Republican or Independent?

We  hear daily many comments and read many articles from all sides, more from Democrats and Republicans than Independents, but each claiming different agendas and outcomes. Which is true? Who do you believe? Who do you support? Would you change your mind if you were exposed to the real truth?

President Obama and the Democrats want you believe that the economy is back on track.  Unemployment is coming down, and the healthcare website is great while the numbers signing up for Obamacare are almost where they should be to get the system on track. Although the cost has increased, not decreased, and the people who lost their insurance only represent a small percentage of the population,   those who have never been able to get insurance are now covered. A small inconvenience to those who have lost their policies and those who will soon loose their policies through their employers. A small price to pay for the 100+ million Americans trying to deal with the loss of their own insurance.

The USA does not have a spending  problem, therefore we should not be concerned about the deficit or the National debt.  Social security, which has been paid into by every American by force not choice,  may be insolvent, but don’t worry, welfare and food stamps are available for everyone indefinitely. No problem.

The greatest challenge facing the United States right now is income inequality. Those who work hard don’t pay their fair share and those with no job skills should be paid higher wages from the get go.  Why should an employer pay you minimum wage until you gain better skills, then pay you higher wages for unskilled work just because we demand income equality? We should all have the ability to own a home and a car regardless of the motivation to work for it. It is a right and not a privilege.  If you live in the United States, you are entitled to these things regardless if you work hard for them or not. Income inequality should be our main concentration, even though the poor and the middle class are daily stripped of their wealth, their jobs, and their health insurance while politicians see their income rise to the million dollar+ level as soon as they get into office.

The American taxpayer should be funding contraceptives and abortion up to and including 24 week old fetuses for every woman regardless of their  individual beliefs. No one should be able to mention the Bible,  God or Jesus in public schools or government buildings, because although this country was founded under God, we should be acquiescing to all those who do not believe because we might offend them. However, we must teach our kids about Islam, Budda and Kwanzaa because we need to learn about and be tolerant of others.  We cannot offer Christian comfort through pastors in the military during their time serving our country because it’s not believed by all, yet turbans, yarmulkes, beards, and other religious practices have to be tolerated and accepted within our troops because it is politically correct. They want pastors taken out and atheists to replace them. They are currently training the military that Christians are the new threat. But where is the tolerance for Christians?

The IRS admitted to targeting conservatives during the last election, yet the FBI has determined that no crime was committed even though they never interviewed the 282 victims that were actually targeted, and emails were discovered showing taxpayer information was shared outside the IRS for political gains. So now, the Democrats want the IRS to continue to target all tea party members through new legal legislation that prevents them from supporting any political nominee before an election.

Anyone who believes in their second amendment rights to own a gun, those who believe abortion is wrong, and anyone who stands with the Bible and believes marriage is between a man and a woman should not be allowed to live in states where Democrats rule. Will they eventually be run out of the state?

President Obama believes the NSA’s  collection of every email, phone call and intrusion into our financial and health records is good, because it keeps us safe from terrorist attacks, even though we have Al Qaeda on the run, and our top military leaders are being fired daily, 200+ so far. Our Global standing has fallen to new lows and that is a great accomplishment for this Administration. We are no longer to be the salvation or model for the rest of the world. We will bow to other regimes.

Democrats believe Common Core is great for our education system even though the US has fallen from number 1 in education in 1941 to 29th today.  They should continue on the track they have set because they, the government, know best. Teachers unions will remain the number one concern of this Administration because of political contributions regardless of their current downward pull on the education system.  Individual school vouchers are not permitted, even though the majority of the users are low income and poverty based students in “D” and “F” rated school districts, because we don’t want schools to close due to their lack of performance, because teachers might loose their jobs, and the poor might actually have an opportunity to rise above the fray.

They believe that the government should continue to use taxpayer dollars to bail out all big corporations because they have allowed them to get so big they cannot fail due to the economic implications. However all small business must succeed or fail based on their business practices and business acumen.  They feel they must control all ingenuity by regulating every step that you make. If you succeed in business, you did not do that on your own, but if you fail, too bad, your problem…no bail out here!

President Obama believes he holds the power and the executive privilege to pass and change legislation because Congress won’t agree with his agenda. He believes he has the right to do this, even though the process of disagreeing on policies is part of the checks and balances of our current governmental system. He  feels that negotiating is not part of a leader’s job, but standing firm on your personal agenda is, regardless of what the American people want or what might be best for the Country.

President Obama disagrees with what our founding father’s held dear and lost their lives to support. He wants to change the Constitution to fit his agenda. He believes he can pass laws and legislation that will fundamentally change our country because he has a pen and a phone.

Speaker Boehner and the Republicans want you to believe that Obamacare is a failure, but to fight against it and vote to defund it can only hurt the government and the people. God forbid a government shutdown,  that actually pays the employees their wage without working,  might actually help stop a healthcare bill that has devastated the economy, the job market and cost Americans over a trillion dollars.  They fight within their own party and call each other names because another group of more conservative Republicans, referred to as the “Tea Party”  have decided to fight to the death for the issues that their constituents actually voted them into office to change.  The means to fight these beliefs are not always the best path to take, but always add even more fuel to the fire within the party.  To call out members of their own party is more important than fighting against a common enemy, the Democrats, who are determined to fundamentally change our country. Republicans believe that our National debt is a huge problem, and that the government has a major spending problem,  however they won’t vote against a budget that offers up absolutely no spending cuts and even takes away the little ground made through sequester cuts. The more conservative Republicans demand and put through legislation that stops “earmarks”, because they represent wasteful spending, yet the Republicans vote on a budget that is loaded with “earmarks” even while American’s are losing their jobs, their homes  and their healthcare…… Kansas needs a research facility and a military base expansion, Georgia must have a port dredging project and Arkansas has to get funds to keep an Air National Guard base in business. The Senate appropriations committee said the local projects in the bill do not violate the ban on earmarking because these projects were about addressing specific needs. Really? Is there a difference?

The more conservative branch of the Republicans believe we should reduce the size of government, become more isolationists in foreign policy, secure our borders and get back to the Constitution and reduced government interference.

The public, it seems, has had enough of all of it!  There are those who would like to see the Democrats succeed in their agenda strictly because they are Democrats and there are those who will follow the Republicans simply because they have been Republicans all their lives. We have seen a huge upswing in the Independent party of late. The polls say 42% of Americans now claim to be Independent. However, are you sticking with your party because its who you have always supported or because you actually do the research and you really know exactly what your party stands for and what they are currently doing in Washington?  Do you get your news about Washington from the biased mainstream media, or do you seek the truth through your own research?

We all need to realize that in this day and age, we, as Americans, can no longer believe or trust that what we hear from Main Street media as the truth. I believe it is a true travesty that the “News Agencies” no longer report the “real” news. I grew up in an era where journalism and politics were both honorable professions. This is no longer true today. We used to look to the journalists for the “real” story and the facts. We can no longer count on journalists to give us the “real” facts of any story. What we hear is the story with a personal political slant. We used to count on the press to act as a check and balance with our political leaders. To question motives, decisions, actions and ethics. No longer do reporters like Bob Woodard and Carl Bernstein exist, to investigate and report the news regardless of personal affiliations. They were responsible for exposing breaking news which resulted in keeping American politics honest and real. This, will never happen again as this era of reporters and so called journalists no longer honor their ethical responsibilities over their personal beliefs and views.

We, as Americans, MUST do our own research. We MUST search for the truth. We have to stand up for our own rights as our government and the “news reporters” no longer truthfully seek the real answers, but look to deceive, distract and confuse the public.  Watch a sampling of all stations, read the Wall Street Journal along with the Washington Times and the Washington Post. Get emails from The Canadian Free Press and the BBC. Listen to Hagman and Hagman. Listen to what the rest of the world is saying about the United States.  The lack of fiscal responsibility in out country is effecting the rest of the world.  Find out what the rest of the world thinks!  Know what is happening right under your nose…protect yourselves and your families. You owe it to them not to trust what our government is asking you to believe without knowing for yourselves what the truth is!

 
 

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Demanding Constitutional Compliance

This posting is regarding Constitutional Compliance.  As we have seen over the past few years, there have been many questions regarding moves made by President Obama overstepping his authority. Has he made decisions on his own without Congress that would be considered “illegal” in regards to the Constitution? Does the House follow the Constitution? Do they even understand what it says? I have a friend who has written a wonderful article.  Catherine Crabill is proposing that legislation that would make it a class 1 Felony to betray one’s oath to the Constitution. I will give you a brief history on Catherine and then I hope you will read her article on Constitutional Compliance.

Catherine Crabill was the Republican Nominee for the 99th Legislative District of the Commonwealth of Virginia in 2009. Mrs. Crabill ran as an unabashed Christian Constitutional Conservative inspiring great enthusiasm in her district from the voters and inciting a very public battle with the Republican Establishment.

Reading, verbatim, from Patrick Henry’s famous “Give Me Liberty…”speech, Democrat operatives edited the 17 minute speech Mrs. Crabill gave down to a minute and a half making it look as though Mrs. Crabill was calling for armed revolt against the government. This was submitted to the Huffington Post causing a great conflagration.

Then Candidates McDonnell, Bolling, Cucinnelli, Speaker of the House, Bill Howell, as well as Republican Party Chair Pat Mullins, held a special press conference, purportedly coordinated by Ed Gillespie, to denounce Mrs. Crabill’s candidacy and demand she withdraw from the contest. None of the above had ever contacted Mrs. Crabill’s campaign to determine the veracity of this coordinated attack.

Further, the RPV removed her from their website, did not contribute one dime to her campaign, and worked behind the scene to hamper her campaign efforts.

Mrs. Crabill, refusing to apologize of quit, garnered support state wide and brought about a resounding denunciation against the RPV.

Running against a very popular ensconced Democrat, out spent 6:1, battling the Democrats and Republicans, Mrs. Crabill garnered 48+% of the vote, losing by the smallest margin of anyone who had ever campaigned against Del. Albert Pollard. Del. Pollard did not run again.

Catherine’s Article:

11 December 2013:  As America stands upon a great and dangerous precipice, millions of Americans involve themselves battling against an ever emerging Tyranny.

We skirmish on so many fronts that even though our numbers are legion, our efforts are minimized in their effectiveness by the nature of the division intentionally created by those who wage war against our liberty.

As I have prayed and sought The Lord for wisdom, I believe He has shown me a ‘silver bullet’ by which We the People can and must reclaim control over EVERY renegade and corrupt President, Congressman, Senator, State Delegate, Judge, Sheriff, etc..

In fact, this concept will affect every Constitutional office holder and restore said Constitution to its rightful place as Supreme Law of the Land.


Anyone interested in running for any office, from Clerk of the Court to State Governor, Congressman or Senator, would be required by law to pass an examination on the Constitution 
before they could enter any contest as a candidate.I propose legislation, drafted and introduced on a state level, which would make it a class 1 Felony to betray one’s Oath of Office to uphold and defend the Constitution. The penalty would need to be significant in its severity, not only depriving such a criminal of their liberty, mandatorily, but also their personal property.

Just as any person wanting to become a Doctor, Lawyer, Accountant, Realtor, etc, must first be examined for competency, how much more should we expect from those who ‘rule’/represent us?

In addition, an examination proves that the examinee knows what is expected of them and which actions are criminally prosecutable, thus the examinee cannot claim ignorance. The examination is the lynch pin of accountability.

As it stands now, the remedy for removing someone from office, other than the ballot box, (which few trust the veracity of an election anymore), is a recall or an impeachment. While these tools are indeed available, the task of implementing all of the above is overarching in its scope. The vast majority of us feel impotent and frustrated.

I propose in this legislative initiative that a determined number of petition signatures, achievable by a single concerned citizen, would trigger a Citizen Grand Jury made up of volunteers who likewise would have taken and passed the same examination on the Constitution as the Constitutional Office Holder.

Once a Citizen Grand Jury brings forth a Bill of Indictment, the Constitutional Office Holder would have to defend themselves before a jury of their peers, who would also be made up of those who have taken and passed the exam, and be presided over by a ‘judge’ who has also taken and passed the exam, who IS NOT ALLOWED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE BAR, thus avoiding corruption rampant in our judicial system.

Imagine the far reaching ramifications of such an initiative! It would destroy the left-right paradigm, nullifying the republican/democrat/libertarian parties. After all, if everyone in office were held accountable to their Oath it would not matter if you are an avowed Communist! Once you take that Oath you will be held to criminal account for betraying it.

Furthermore, it would decimate the numbers of those whose motive in pursuit of political office may be less than honorable. This legislation would be retroactive in requiring all current office holders to take and pass the same examination. From that point forward they would be held to the same standard as any incoming Governor, Senator, Congressman, Delegate, Sheriff, or Clerk of the Court.

In addition, since We the People would be rightfully empowered to hold these men and women to account, there would be a vast revival in the common man’s interest and study of the Constitution. Such conversations would be had in restaurants, bars, parties, churches, etc, because the Rule of Constitutional law would be restored into the hands of every American.

It would electrify the electorate.

The nay sayers have argued that no legislator would vote to shackle him or herself under these restraints. To that I say who would dare vote against it!? Who could stand before their constituents and explain how they voted against it because they refuse to be held accountable?

Holding our Congressmen and Senators to account would hold the President to account. If we could prosecute our Congressmen and Senators for betraying their Oath to balance the budget, protect our privacy, impeach and prosecute a rogue President and corrupt administration, etc, I submit they would do what they, by virtue of their Oath, should be doing already. We could also recapture control over The Supreme Court for betraying our Constitution by referencing any other law other than our Constitution.

At the time of this writing, I have submitted this idea to 3 state legislators in the Commonwealth of Virginia, one of which has responded and shown a genuine interest.

For those who have made a name in their respective field of expertise fighting unconstitutional assaults on our liberty, this initiative may feel threatening. After all, many have spent a lifetime and a fortune doing battle on their respective fronts. Nevertheless, this would end the need to fight the NSA, TSA, Agenda 21, EPA, etc, etc, as those who, to date, have betrayed our country, our liberty, and our prosperity will have to face We the People on a field they do not control as the Rule of Law is restored to America again.

It is not only our right, IT IS OUR DUTY.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Questions?

Just a few questions I have that just don’t seem to make much sense. Please let me know what your answers are to these questions!

**President Obama says he is all for equal opportunity and that all people should have the chance for a good education so they are able to participate and compete in the global marketplace.  Most states offer a school voucher program that allows kids within bad school districts to move to better schools in order to get a good education. Currently 90% of the vouchers are being used by kids in poverty trying desperately to get out of the schools rated “D” and “F”.Question: Why is Obama and Eric Holder suing individual states to stop them from offering school vouchers?

**Did you know that IBM offered to do the website for Obamacare for free? Did you know that CGI was already charged with defrauding Canada and that the Senior Vice President of CGI was Michelle Obama’s best friends and college roommates?Why would Obama refuse this and then spend $684 million on a failed website?

**Why would Obama, after firing CGI, hire Accenture, a company that has already defrauded the US government? Why has this job not been put out to bid as the law requires?

**Why would Obama take the work requirement out of welfare and unemployment?

** The House has put forth a bill that requires that the Administration warn Americans when their personal information has been compromised through the Obamacare website. Obama has vowed to veto this bill. Why?

**Why would Obama refuse to sign off on the Keystone Pipeline when it could stop America’s dependence on the Middle East for oil and claim it will only bring in 50 jobs when his own  government reports say it would bring the US back to economic stability and create thousands of jobs?

**Why does Obama continue to regulate small business into bankruptcy when they employ 70% of Americans?

**Why does the Supreme Court call a fine a tax? When you are charged a fee for not participating in the government’s forced Healthcare system, even when you are happily insured elsewhere, why are you taxed and not fined?

**Why is Obama able to tell the American people that they can keep their policies and their doctors if they like them before his election, and then not made accountable for lying after his election?

**Why do you hear that there were 1.8 million dead people that voted in the 2012 election but they never backed those numbers out before declaring a winner?

**Why is Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats sitting on 420 bills passed in the house, including job creation bills, the keystone pipeline and tax cuts? Reid refuses to put them up for a vote. Why would they refuse to vote on bills that would create jobs and help Americans and the economy get back on track? Why is one individual able to hold the entire economy and the American people hostage?

**Why would Obama force a $4.5 million fine on Nuns who help the poor because they refuse to supply an abortion pill to it’s flock?

**Why would Obama and Hillary claim that 4 dead Americans was the result of a Video when they know within 18 minutes that it was a terrorist attack and then refuse to send help?

**Why, after the IRS admitted to targeting Americans for their political beliefs and proof positive that Ingram shared taxpayer information with the Federal Election Commission (this is illegal) the FBI claims…”no crime here” while never interviewing the 282 victims?

**Why has Eric Holder not been held responsible for “Fast and Furious” even as we continue to hear news stories of Americans being killed by the guns he sent to Mexico?

**Why has Eric Holder not been charged for committing purjury during his testimony to Congress about the Fox News Scandal?

**Why has Obama not spoken out about the persecution and killings of Christians around the globe, while defending Muslims?

** Why has the food stamp program gone from $17 billion to $78 billion under Obama’s watch?

**Why would Obama be spending $41.3 million a year on advertising to recruit food stamp recepients?

**Why do women make $15-20,000 less than their male counterparts in the White House while Obama claims they should be paid equally?

**Why is Obama waging a war on the Coal industry when they supply 40% of the Nations energy?

**Why would Obama promise to bail out the Insurance companies with taxpayers money if his signature Healthcare bill fails?

**Why was the United States downgraded from 6th to 12th for Economic Freedom under Obama?

**Why does welfare pay more per hour than minimum wage under Obama?

**Why has the unemployment rate not improved in 6 years under this President, while 525,00 have just given up trying to find a job?

**Why has the worker participation rate moved to 62.8%, the lowest in 36 years under the Obama Presidency?

**Why is the government, under Obama, allowed to investigate itself?

**Why, if Obama claims to  want income equality for all Americans, are there more Americans in poverty that anytime in US history and 47 million more Americans on food stamps since he took office?

Why are we running our of Social Security money, but never welfare?

 

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The News Today!

Wow, some interesting developments this morning! Governor McDonnell and his wife actually indicted for corruption charges for accepting gifts from wealthy donor/friend.

On the Democrats side , Harry Reid has been hit with an ethics charge for pushing through visas for foreign investors for a casino and hotel in his state whose attorney just happens to be his son!! Funny enough but the man involved at the State Department who went over the head of Homeland Security to get him the visas was Alejandro Mayorkas, who also was in cahoots with Hillary Clinton’s brother and Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe who also got questionable visas for Chinese investors for McAuliffe’s Greentech Electric cars.

I am all for indicting all Politicians who break the law and exploit their offices for their own personal gain. However, the question is “will all the Politicians who have been involved with questionable and illegal activities be indicted or punished equally? We have been waiting for the results of Terry McAuliffe’s investigation way before the governor’s race. Should one be able to run for public office when they are currently under investigation for defrauding the public trust?

Why was Senator Rangel. Democrat and Chairman for the Ways and Means Committee at the time of the charges, allowed to slip under the criminal charges fence when he decided not to pay taxes on his Punta Cana Rental Villa? Charging $500-1000 per night, it was rented fully between December and April. First he blamed his wife and then the language barrier, ” every time I thought I was getting somewhere they’d start speaking Spanish.” I’m not sure but do you think this excuse would work for any American citizen who conveniently forgot to pay taxes on a villa they owned and rented year round on their taxes? Highly doubtful!

I could fill an encyclopedia with the illegal activities of our public representatives who were never held accountable for their actions. So my question now is ” Why are Politicians allowed to get away with criminal activity that any American would be thrown in jail for, just because they are in public office? I would hope that because they are in public office they would be held more accountable for their actions because they represent the people and in most cases have defrauded that trust as well as the people’s purse. I guess when you are in office, what is good for the goose is definitely not so good for the gander!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather