Category Archives: A Fight for Freedom

What makes us free? What makes us struggle to keep that freedom? These are articles, quotes, stories, and videos that answer these questions.

Republicans Verses Conservatives

     I have a thing with political parties. George Washington warned of parties saying it would split our country. Not even a year later, John Adams (whom I greatly admire) failed Washington and the American people on this one aspect—instead of following in Washington’s footsteps, he ran on party; thus, beginning this tragic fall of the American free election process.
    
I’m no expert as per say—I’m not a politician. I’m an outsider looking in. I guess you can say I’m an expert as a member of the People of this country. I am a registered Republican. So What?
    
In my view: the Republicans and the Democrats are one in the same. Take a closer look at the 2008 election if you’re questioning my judgment. Some advice—read Sarah Palin’s books. If you’re an enemy of Palin, then you’ve been sucked up by this Republican-Democrat machine. They both smeared a good woman.
    
Newsmax’s (Feb. 2012 Issue) article What Romney Must do to Woo Conservatives by David A. Patten (pages 8-9) proves my notion. Patten gives us a list of how Mitt Romney can woo conservatives:

     The first: Emphasize his conservative fiscal record in Massachusetts

  • He took a $3 billion budge shortfall and left a $2 billion rainy-day fund.
  • He dropped Massachusetts’ unemployment from 5.6 to 4.6 percent.
  • He attempted to reduce state income taxes.

The second: Talk up his business background—

  • He’s widely credited for rescuing the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
  • He founded Bain Capital which helped rebuild The Sports Authority, Domino’s Pizza and Staples.

The Third: Reach out to conservatives

  • Stop being indifferent, if not hostile, to social conservatives.
  • Reach out to them and show he genuinely cares about their heartfelt cause.

The Forth: Emphasize electability at every turn

  • Patten states—“electability [of a candidate running for the President of the United States] may be just as important to conservatives this cycle as ideological purity is.”
  • Romney argues he has a superior organization and funding machine. Patten states that he should continue to play this card.

Now let’s put this in prospective by comparing Romney to Palin—

  • Sarah Palin, according to her book, fought against corruption in Alaska before she was governor. She went against the top—all the way to the governor’s mansion—and WON.
  • As governor, she achieved getting the Alaskan pipeline finished within what six months; completing a deal that was going on for 50years.
  • She not only got Alaska out of debt but left a huge surplus, plus every Alaskan who lives there two years are more receives $2,000 a year from the pipeline.
  • She handled all those BIG oil men by tearing up contracts and telling them how they’d do things in her state. She put Alaska in charge instead of the other way around like here in Louisiana. We have countless pipelines and we don’t see a dime!
  • She genuinely cares about America and its citizens.
  • She did these things plus more and at the same time was raising children and managing her own household. Instead of having chauffeurs and fancy limousines and countless maids, to help her state, she did everything herself.
  • Alaska is 1/4 the size of the entire lower 48 and she managed while doing all of the above to visit all of her people not just some.

     How does Romney get to be better than her? Is it because she is a woman? Does that make her less valuable? I was surprised that liberal women organizations did not rally her. How hypocritical!
     During the 2008 campaign, the Republicans did every effort to control this much achieved, true American woman. They went as far as writing her speeches (telling her what to say). Her comment about being a soccer mom and the lip-stick comment, got her heavily reprimanded by her very own Republican team mates. She wore her own jacket at one event and she was reprimanded for that, too.  The Republican party bought all new clothes for her including $70 panty hose which she never wore then demanded that she return them after the election. And you want to talk about wasteful spending! They even reprimanded her for talking directly to the People on her campaign trail.
     To put it simple. The Republican party told her how to walk, talk, eat, s…., and breathe. That’s not democratic or a republic, that’s authoritarian to the core.
     Then after the campaign the Republican party did everything they could to destroy this true American lady’s reputation, guaranteeing she’d never win an election again.
     According to Patten’s article—“the Republicans can thank most for their laser-beam focus on electability is none other than Barrack Obama himself…Contrast [Republicans, today, wanting to oust Obama] this with 2008, when some GOP voters openly mused that Obama might be better than McCain” [a prisoner of war, and a schooled politician having more creditability and on-the-job experience than the puppet!].
     Patten states that Romney is going after the conservatives to win the GOP election then he’ll switch to the middle to win the presidential elections. Does this mean he’ll lie, cheat, steal (do what ever he can) to win over the conservatives?
     I think the whole Republican selection of a candidate is bogus. This country was founded on conservative values and God was always at the forefront of building this great nation. How absurd to ignore Ron Paul! He is the most qualified of all these men. What he has to say aligns with what Palin stands for and what our founders wanted—America is supposed to be a free country with a small government. That’s their message—plain and simple.
     How gullible of the American people to allow these two people to escape their grasp. Even Herman Cain had a true American heart. His statement that he was NOT an African-American but an American was the greatest, most honest, true statement any black man except for King has said.
     Patten mentions serial flip-floppers. I see nothing but flip-floppers. Ron Paul seems to be the only exception. Herman Cain and Sarah Palin—without a doubt stuck to their beliefs as well.
     History shows us where this country has gone astray. Many warnings were given from those who built this great nation:

  • Don’t let outsiders in (meaning foreigners) was the most important.
  • If the federal government got too big and out of control, the People has the right to override it: taking it by force if necessary.

     My questions still go unanswered:

  • Where are all the true Americans?
  • Where are all those tea party people who rallied and rallied?
  • Were all those speeches and signs held just words?
  • Why does the NRA HAVE to fight for the Second Amendment, which allows Americans to protect themselves?
  • Why does Americans have to fight to keep a federal government health take-over which states that they have the right to dictate weather you die or live?
  • Why has this country not impeached the puppet? After all—
  • he’s bowed to kings,
  • he’s disrespected our allies,
  • he’s disrespected the very country he represents by calling us arrogant and apologizes for us being that way,
  • he’s supported terrorism,
  • he’s lied about who he really is,
  • he’s spent more of our tax dollars than any president we’ve had,
  • he has more czars (people we didn’t elect, people who answer to no one but the president; and we pay for them) than any other president,
  • he’s written a book about his hate for white people and his hate for America before he was elected,
  • he’s placed moslems into our government (people who hate the United States of American and who intend to destroy us),
  • he’s criticized American Veterans and has treated American soldiers with total disrespect,
  • he’s weakened our defense,
  • I’m so there’s more…

     He’s so disliked in Southern Louisiana that when he came here (it took him 2 weeks to come) for our tragic oil spill, not one person stood on the side of the road to greet him. NOT ONE!
     The American People have failed our founders, have failed their sacrifices for us to be free. We ARE not a democratic nation and far from being a republic. If you think we are than check out the electoral college, make a list of all the laws and regulations that control everything in your life. Go on, review your income tax form—take a look at how much you and your boss has to pay just on you and convert that to percent. It’s over 12%.
     Republican and Democrat politicians don’t care about America. They just care about personal advancement. Just look at how much they make a year, look at all their benefits, look at how much vacation time they have, check out their homes, their clothes, their staff, maids, cooks, etc.
     How many of you have a limousine or $1,000 suits or a retirement paid by the People. Most of us don’t have any retirement.
     Wake Up! America. That’s the sign I like the most after Next time We’ll Come with Guns.
     Romney is no better than the puppet. You are sleeping if you don’t see it. My suggestion—get rid of them all and regroup. Further suggestions—

  • shut down the government
  • seal the borders
  • throw out every controlling law
  • sell all these government luxuries
  • void every government agency
  • increase our defense (take pride in those who volunteer to defend us)
  • return the National Guard back to their states
  • return our tax money back its original intention
  • oust the electoral college (return the voting and decisions back to the People—as it was meant to be)
  • deport all individuals who aren’t American citizens
  • stop importing cheap foreign products and return to American Made (Americans take pride in their work and make things that LAST!)
  • oust political parties and return the fight for positions back to the individual
  • return education (schools) back to the communities
  • the most important—return God to the forefront of this nation
  • strengthen the rules of political candidates
  • change the citizenship immediately to—they must be at least a two-generation American with no exceptions
  • presidential candidates must have at least four years of military service
  • the age of the president should be increased to 50
  • presidential candidates must have at least 10 years experience in leadership (the actual running or leading of a major organization—city, town, large corporation, etc.); disregarding all congressional time except for two years
  • limiting congressional terms to two
  • cutting congressional pay by 3/4
  • cutting all government vehicles (they can use their own car like we do) and planes except for Air Force One
  • cut totally, except for the president and vice president, all retirement and health benefits paid by the People, including those already retired (we have to pay for ours—let them pay for theirs)

     A reorganization is necessary and it can’t be of anyone’s benefit if it takes years and years to do it. It needs to be done immediately. The American People can handle it. Those that complain and gripe are NOT true Americans and can have the option—either stand behind The United States of America or find another country to call home.
     It’s that simple. You, the American People, make it complicated. Your arguments are hypocritical! You want to be free but you can’t handle what it takes to be free.
     Mitt Romney is not the answer. The cycle will just continue, and the United States of America will cease to exist and you, the American People, will have been the fool.
     These elections are not that important to me. I think we are overlooking the real problem. The U. S. government has gotten too big, and we are just standing by while it continues to grow. We need to return to our beginning. But, I guess, if the People don’t want it, then maybe we should just go ahead and throw in the towel and declare ourselves (as we truly are) a socialist nation and let the government totally tell us what to do. I guess, to most, that is the simplest way to live. After all, anything that is too hard is not worth doing—so if being free is too hard, we might as well give it up right now instead of all this bickering and fighting. It’s getting redundant and quite boring.

Homeless Sign

Can we all get an Amen?

Homeless guy

Epic and Honest Mobile Home Commercial

Epic!

Are You Afraid?

post from David Zanotti, President & CEO, The American Policy Roundtable

[I think Mr. Zanotti is right. We can’t forget Godis on our side. We can’t forget that by standing together, we can make a difference. And we can’t forget that our founding fathers gave us tools to keep our freedoms. We have to make a stand to keep all that was giving to us. Remember the old saying: Freedom isn’t Free!]

Are you afraid? Do you get scared when you look around and see what is happening in America? I do. Maybe presenting some bullet-proof identity would fit better in today’s media-image driven world. Maybe a person of faith shouldn’t be so honest but I’ll tell you plain— sometimes what I see happening and what I see not happening scares me all the same.

The great news is the Bible is filled with constant admonitions that none of us should be afraid. We can’t live in fear, fretting, or worry. (See Psalm 37, Psalm 73 and Matthew 6). There is a good reason we should not be afraid. We are not alone. God† has not abandoned this world, this country, and this very hour. I know the popular culture has taught us that God† left the planet a long time ago and doesn’t really care that much. That is just not true. Here is what He says in His Word in just a few reminders:

  • “The Lord† works righteousness and justice for all the oppressed.” Psalm 103:6
  • “The Lord† has established His throne in heaven and His kingdom rules over all.” Psalm 103:19
  • “My Father is always at His work, to this very day and I too am working.” John 5:7

God† has not left the planet. He is here, He sees, He cares and He has a continued plan and a role for all of us to play. And He cares about the struggle between good and evil right here in daily culture. Yes, He cares about the daily commutes on the freeways and subways. Yes, He sees what happens on Main Street and Wall Street. Yes, He cares about who we elect to public office, and yes, He does see what happens in the NFL. (But let’s not go there right now.)

So let’s get a few things on the table right at the beginning of 2012. First, there is a LOT of baloney going around regarding the Presidential Election. The biggest scam going on in the media to date is the under-reporting on the actual delegate vote counts in the Republican Primary. No one, including FOX is giving you the real score. We are at aproundtable.org. Just check out our latest blogs for the true story.

Next, let’s get this straight: ONE MAN cannot fix America, nor can ONE MAN destroy this nation—unless the majority of us permit that to happen. We have been given the tools of a constitutional republic to keep any ONE MAN from dictating reality for America. So we are going to say it now and until our lips fall off—please America, please thinking people—focus on who gets elected to Congress this year. That is the only way to make certain our worst fears do not become reality. Right thinking leaders in Congress with well-constructed worldviews can make all the difference. And they will if we elect them to office and not get off track.

Next, we have to get our eyes on the truth—not on the personalities and the horse races. The issues facing this nation are huge. Health care alone is a matter of life and death for all of us. This election is the best chance we will ever have to save lives from the inevitable destruction of the plan Congress passed but no one read. This is the issue that matters most. There are others that matter a lot, like the national debt, financial collapse, radical Islamic terrorism, religious liberty and more. But if we lose the opportunity to fix health care—people are going to start dying, and fast.  Scary—but not a good enough reason to be afraid. God† sees, He knows, He cares and He is looking for those who are looking for Him. (2 Chronicles16:9).

So—here’s the plan:

  1. Stay focused first on Him† because He cares more than we do.
  2. Keep our efforts on the critical issues.
  3. Keep our priority on building true leaders to serve in Congress and more.
  4. Use every legal tool at our disposal.
  5. Give every dollar we possibly can toward these objectives.

All of that starts at aproundtable.org. There you’ll find your partners working every single day to get this message out to the nation. Together we are reaching more people than ever before.  This is our first call for financial help of 2012. The sand is falling through the hourglass. We have not one minute to waste. Every dollar you give goes straight into the field and is truly needed right now. Remember, your giving here is fully tax-deductible and you can give unlimited personal, corporate, and foundation checks right here. Every dollar counts. We need your help today. Thanks.

Defy the fear. Do the right thing today. You are not alone.

Newt Gingrich Defends Sarah Palin

Now here is honesty at the core. Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich tells it straight to an MSNBC report.

Newt Gingrich Defends Sara Palin

 

Nullication–Interposition: The Difference

post by Steve Palmer, The Tenth Amendment Center

[The following article clears up the Nullification process. I'm glad I found it. The discussion is very professional and eye opening. Please take the time to read this and visit The Tenth Amendment Center. Education is the key. George Washington said educating our youth about our way of life and our Constitution was the key to our survival. Down here in South Louisiana, Civics is a half-year course, and people wonder why America is like it is.]

One thing I have noticed during my fifteen months working with the Tenth Amendment Center is that when people use the words, nullification and interposition, they don’t always seem to mean the same things.  Even articles by people who agree about these concepts give subtle, contextual clues that we aren’t necessarily thinking of the same ideas when we use these words. On the surface, it’s simple. Nullification is when a State declares a law null, void and invalid. Interposition is when a State inserts itself between the federal government and the State’s citizens on behalf of the citizens. Surprisingly, though, when you think a little more carefully about it, things start getting muddled pretty quickly. For example, are nullification and interposition two words for the same thing? If not, do they overlap? Which branch of government does them?

Matt Spalding, with The Heritage Foundation gives us a great example of this confusion. In his article, rejecting the concept of nullification, he writes, “The important distinction between Madison’s idea of interposition and Calhoun’s theory of nullification should be kept clear and bright, and has practical application in today’s debates…A different approach can be seen in the Firearm Freedom Acts passed in 8 States (proposed in 22 more) cleverly designed to challenge expansive federal claims of regulatory authority under the Commerce Clause. South Carolina is doing the same with the Incandescent Light Bulb Freedom Act. These acts are aggressive State actions that challenge federal laws—but they are not nullification. Nor is it nullification when States refuse to participate in federal programs and mandates, such as the REAL ID Act. (emphasis added)

From these excerpts, it becomes clear that not only do Mr. Spalding and I disagree about the proper role for nullification in the States, but worse, we don’t even agree about what nullification means. To me, when a State refuses to participate in a federal mandate, such as the REAL ID Act, that is just about as close as possible to the textbook meaning of nullification as you can get.

We’re never going to be able to agree about the proper role for nullification if we can’t even agree on what it means. Apparently, Mr. Spalding is on board with all these legislative examples he lists, but rejects some nebulous concept known as “Calhoun’s theory of nullification.” While it would also be useful to address some of the other points in Mr. Spalding’s article, that will have to wait for another day. The point of this article is simply to propose a way of organizing the concepts of nullification and interposition so that when we discuss them, we are at least thinking of the same ideas.

Proposing a Framework—To this end, I decided to try to draw a diagram to organize my own thoughts on these concepts.  It turned out to be more difficult than I thought, but here is what I came up with (so far).

Describing the Diagram—In this diagram, nullification is a subset of interposition. That is, nullification is interposition, but interposition is not necessarily nullification. Nullification and interposition themselves are not seen as specific actions, but rather as categories into which actions fit. The various ovals in the diagram are color-coded to represent the strength of the measure and positioned within the lines to reflect the branch of State government which can execute them. The royal blue ovals represent forms of interposition which are not nullification. The turquoise ovals are passive forms of nullification where the State declares a federal action invalid, but doesn’t actively resist federal efforts at enforcement or implementation. The red ovals are the confrontational forms of nullification where the State says that a federal action is invalid and the State will prevent the federal government from enforcing or implementing its program.

It should be noted that all of these actions can, theoretically, be applied before or after a Supreme Court ruling. The position of the Tenth Amendment Center is that the State has the final authority to interpret the Constitution for itself. Unfortunately, that opinion is not yet held by everyone. Before a Supreme Court ruling, however, none of the actions in this diagram should be controversial.

Interposition—In this model, I included three forms of interposition—1.) Resolutions by the State legislature, 2.) litigation by the State’s executive branch and 3.) nullification by one or more branches of the State government.

Examples of legislative resolutions include the Tenth Amendment Resolutionswhich have passed or are presently under consideration in many States. Another example is Pennsylvania’s 1811 Resolution Against the Bank. An example of interposition in the form of litigation by the executive branch comes to us in the form of the lawsuits by 28 States, including Pennsylvania, against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I do not consider these State actions to be nullification because neither one effects the functioning of the federal law which it targets. Instead, both depend upon further action by another branch or level of government in order to restore the Constitution. The stay and injunction by the judicial branch also come to mind as possible forms of interposition, but I couldn’t think of any specific examples off the top of my head, so I did not include them.

Nullification—And that brings us to nullification. In this framework, nullification can be performed individually by any of the branches of State government or by multiple branches in conjunction.

Executive Branch—One form of nullification comes when the executive branch refuses, without prompting by the State legislature, to implement or enforce a federal program. Examples can be seen in the States of Florida and Alaska, both of whom have announced their refusal to implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act. Even the Supreme Court agrees that the executive branch of the State may refuse to enforce or implement a federal program, writing in the case of Mack/Printz v. USA—”We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State’s officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivision, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

In other words, the federal government cannot require any State official to enforce or implement a federal program. End of discussion. Sheriff DeMeo took nullification into the red zone by actively preventing the Federal Bureau of Land Management from enforcing their program. It is interesting to note that Nye County, NV joined Sheriff DeMeo, interposing by passing a resolution. While this article focuses on nullification and interposition by the State, it happens at other levels, too.

Judicial Branch—A State’s judicial branch can nullify a federal law by simply declaring it unconstitutional. This was done, for example, in the instance of Joshua Glover, when the Wisconsin Supreme Court declared the Federal Fugitive Slave Act to be unconstitutional.

Legislative Branch and Collaboration—When the legislative branch passes a law which is in conflict with a federal law, that branch of government is acting to nullify the federal law. There are numerous examples of this form of nullification, including State medical marijuana laws,Real ID non-compliance measures and firearm freedom acts. Legislative measures of this sort are more effective when they are also supported by the actions of the executive  branch and the decisions of the courts. As we see in California, where LAPD and LA County Sheriff department members joined federal officials on a recent raid of a medical marijuana dispensary, the other branches of State government do not always collaborate.

Pennsylvania’s Personal Freedom Law, which made it kidnapping when a bounty hunter attempted to return an escaped slave to his State of origin, was an example of a legislative measure which had escalated into the red zone of our diagram. Proposed TSA limiting laws in PennsylvaniaNew Jersey, New Hampshire and Texas which consider unconstitutional strip searches and aggressive pat downs to be assault are modern examples.

Conclusion—While it may not be important that everyone adopts this particular framework when talking about nullification and interposition, it is tremendously important that we know what framework is being used when we talk to each other about these concepts. When confronted with someone who opposes the concepts of nullification and interposition, before arguing about the validity and proper uses for nullification, perhaps the starting point should be to seek common ground on the definitions of the words. It may turn out that by agreeing on what the words mean, we may find that we have more in common than we knew. Also, organizing the instances of nullification and interposition using a framework like this may illuminate some tactical understandings that aren’t as easily discerned through verbal descriptions.

Erase the Hypocrisy, Please!

post by k. e. leger

You know I’m so sick and tired of the phrases conservative movement and grass roots. The United States of America was founded on Christian values that once upon a time took morals, values, and loyalty to their country very serious. Radical liberals were not accepted. In my opinion, whoever came up with these phrases are not true Americans in any since of the word. With that said, on with the 2012 campaign.

Ridiculous. The only word for it.

Conference in Louisiana after Oil Spill. Notice there's no flags. No U.S. President has ever forgotten the flags!

Candidate (so-sure-of-himself) #1—As anyone who reads my opinions here knows, the puppet shouldn’t even be in the Oval Office. He should have never been elected, but since he has (or placed), he should have been impeached that first year. My argument is strong here. Just read this site and you will understand the footing on which I stand.

Like many others I was floored after the November 2010 election. We called for impeachment but nothing happened. But then things cleared up, for me anyway. If you paid attention to who got elected, you would have noticed that many seats were incumbents (meaning, of course, that they were reelected—furthering their careers as politicians which should be a no, no since we taxpayers fit the bill.)

These incumbents were the ones (including the puppet) who signed the stimulus package of 2008. Remember that? It doesn’t seem like many people paid much attention to who was getting the money. AIG was one. Did you know that? Well, did you also know that AIG supports the Islamic world-destructive views? No, well, just do a little research and you will find that this company refuses to do business with Christians or any company or person associated with Christianity. That’s right! Okay, put a little sense in that one and you get the United States Congress giving money to support terrorism. That’s a big assumption but yet if they don’t do business with Christians, then who are they doing business with and who owns them? Check out what Insurance Journey and The Voice Magazine has to say about this issue.

So, I would assume that none of these Congress members who signed this package would want to face treason charges; and, since we have a president who is highly questionable in every aspect of his life, it would be right to assume there was some blackmail going on behind closed doors. “Impeach me and I’ll make sure everyone knows what you did!” I would not put it pass this puppet master because he lacks any kind of character.

Another question I keep asking myself is—should a president of the United States be campaigning 1 1/2 years before an election? Shouldn’t he be running the country instead? Shouldn’t he be protecting the country? Just wondering because I think it lacks a considerable amount of character to be doing what the puppet is doing.

For the other contenders. Here’s where my comment above about conservative movement comes into play. Humm.

How many times has he been married? A liar, a cheater, a traitor.

Candidate Prospect #2—Shouldn’t Trump be running on the Democratic ticket since he so proudly announced how he made more money on one transaction, that of renting American soil to a dictator who supports terrorism, than he did all year? Then he tried to cover his a…

As reported by Ryan Witt on examiner.com—”Donald Trump tried to justify his relative recent business dealings with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.  Yesterday, Donald Trump boasted about how he screwed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in some business dealings.  Critics questioned whether Trump should be profiting at all off of a known supporter of terrorism who has since become infamous for his brutal rule over his own people. …[A] CNN interviewer then asks if he gave Gaddafi’s money to charity. Trump goes on to claim that he did, in fact, donate the money he made off of Gaddafi to charity.”

Then he changed his story stating to Timothy Christopher of Mediate that he  “made it impossible for Gaddafi to rent the property, but instead it was local government officials.” Then he states that he didn’t know who he was renting the property to—”Trump claimed that he did not know it was Gaddafi who was renting the property. At the time, Trump claimed he thought the property was being leased to the United Arab Emirates, with no connection to Gaddafi.”

The joke’s on us. Of course, American politics has become a joke all around the world. We can easily be manipulated and deceived. Oh, and taken advantage of . Is Trump just playing around with us, too? South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, a Republican, says to NewsMax—“Anybody that thinks he’s doing this for name recognition—that’s just not true. He’s very serious about it and he’s convinced he can win.” Now remember that he rented American property to a terrorist and dictator. Was there a deal made under the table? Think about it. Trump proudly announced that he made more money in that one transaction then in a whole year! Trump’s a very rich man. Does anyone know how much he made last year? It is reported that he is worth $2.9 billion.

So, better yet, should he be running for the President of the United States at all? He’s rich. Okay. And? That’s all that I see. Sure he built himself an empire in business. Oh, boo-hoo. That doesn’t make him worthy of being an American President. Did he hold any public service office? I mean maybe the public would vote for him since the puppet got in office with hardly any public service experience along with having friendships with Islamic terrorist criminals. Maybe Americans just don’t care to be free anymore.

Another point about Trump is—Just because he stirred up mess about the puppet’s birth certificate doesn’t makes him credible. The people should have taken care of that from the start. No, take that back, the United States Judicial system should have done this. And, once they failed to do their job, then the people should have stepped up to the plate and called for recalls across the board. That’s how it is suppose to be done. Now they are looking up to a traitor because he’s got enough money to do so? How absurd!

If she runs and if she does what she did for Alaska, America would say farewell to all those who want to destroy her because she would regain her power.

Presumed Candidate #3—Tell me Sarah Palin doesn’t have experience and you’d be a liar. She has a lot of experience. What she did for Alaska is amazing. Why wouldn’t she make a good candidate? Because she is a strong Christian? Oh, yeah, the moslums in Washington wouldn’t like that one because she would interrupt their take-over plans! That’s the only reason I see that would be anyone’s reason to not support her. After all, there’s no one else willing to step up to the plate that’s worthy enough. Isn’t that true?

But still there’s still mess. NewsMax reports “a battery of recent polls that suggest her once sky-high popularity is plummeting on many key fronts—among Republicans and independents, for example, as well as Alaskans.” Very interesting. I guess these poll takers didn’t read her books. I did. Maybe Palin should create her own ticket. After what she witnessed during the 2008 campaign, I doubt that either party—Republicans and Democrats—value the Constitution much anymore. George Washington was right on the mark when he said that parties bring only corruption and separation. I mean no one seems to be questioning why Americans aren’t voting for people who really care about our ways and our laws; instead, they are voting (or something else) people in office that really hate this wonderful country!

Career Politician!

Candidate #4—And who’s Rep. Michele Bachmann? Here’s what NewsMax had to say, “Somewhat surprisingly, Bachmann may be the trio’s most serious candidate—at least, her recent fundraising suggests she is. The three-term congresswoman raised $2.2 million in the first quarter of 2011, according to her newly released Federal Election Commission filings. Of that total, $1.7 million came from her congressional committee, and $500,000 from her political action committee. She even outpaced former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who’s noted for his fundraising strengths and is viewed by many as the party’s 2012 frontrunner. Romney raised $1.9 million in the first quarter of this year…Indeed, political insiders say Bachmann has distinguished herself from Palin and other GOP candidates by walking the walk with tea party activists. “She’s got so much money, and she’s a true believer. And she’s beaten the odds, repeatedly,” Sabato said. “She’s egged on by the media in a different way than Palin. Palin gets irritated, while Bachmann gets even. And she gets even by running.””

Let’s not keep making mistakes. First, a 3-term congresswoman? Power. That’s all I see. While the American people are continuously financing her life style, she’s gaining power and living high on the hog. Aren’t we tired of this? Weren’t Republicans trying to limit congressional terms to 2, and yet, they are supporting a 3-term candidate? Do you see the hypocrisy?

That’s the candidates. So far I haven’t seen any democrats stepping up to take on the hate-Americans agenda puppet.

The plot thickens. Now, there’s all this BS about the tea parties. As NewsMax stated “all three would-be candidates are forcing tea party activists to make some important decisions as they try to grow into a more enduring force in American politics.”

I don’t think you can force anyone to do anything. The tea party Americans are for what this country is suppose to be about—loyalty to God†, loyalty to the country, less taxes, and freedom. So, why is there so much hype about them? After all, we are all suppose to be Americans. After all, everyone living here claiming their citizenship by birth or other are enjoying all that America stands for. Shouldn’t everyone be fighting for the same thing?

My point is that when ideas like those the tea party goers had when they first began change radically, I begin to wonder who’s telling the truth. Newsmax reports that “early polls suggest that Trump is dominating the GOP field—among Tea Party activists and more mainstream Republican voters. A new PPP poll showed Trump leading his nearest GOP competitor by 9 points. (That’s likely a result of Trump’s towering name recognition; according to a Pew Research Center survey released Wednesday, 39 percent of Republicans named him as the potential candidate they’ve heard the most about lately. That was more than all other candidates—combined).”

Who’s giving and taking these polls? You mean to tell me that the very people who rallied for the Constitution are going to support a man who rented American land to a terrorist? I don’t believe that one for a second. I see the press pushing their agenda on innocent people. Again!

After all, the press pushed the puppet. They made him look like a saint while bashing a true, Christian (honest) candidate. They even went as far as turning the State of Alaska against her. Is this jealousy? Then the press made the puppet look like he was the next best thing to the invention of bread while bashing a war hero who honored America enough to suffer torture instead of giving up secrets! The press is known for supporting the release of secret information as they did during the Bush years after 9/11 putting the United States citizens at risk, not even thinking or caring about their actions. So, why do Americans even trust them anymore? They are not sticking to the ethics of true journalism. I bet over half of them don’t know what the word objectivity means. It’s all about fame and money!

I’m disappointed to say the least. We, as Americans, should have already recalled over half of the judicial branch and most of congress, and we should have forced the impeachment of the puppet. But no one is doing anything! My own family hates the fact that I write about politics and refuses to hear me when I talk about it. That says a lot to me.

We have lost the meaning of being an American. We have forgotten those who sacrificed for the freedoms we have. We are willing to give up the Constitution and our freedom so we don’t have to struggle with making decisions. “Oh, let someone else do it!” is the mind-set of today’s American. Oh, what a sad, sad world this is.

It’s time to step up to the plate. Put fear behind us and just do it! It’s now or never. Have American anyone?

Obama’s Libyan Operations are Unconstitutional

post by Rob Natelson on The Tenth Amendment

You can sympathize with the humanitarian motives of our Libyan intervention while still doubting its constitutionality.

The Constitution prescribes the rules about how the United States is to enter a war, and the puppet administration has violated those rules. The administration argues that the hostilities, because limited, do not rise to the level of war, as the Constitution uses that word. But that position is almost surely wrong—Founding-Era dictionaries and other sources, both legal and lay, tell us that when the Constitution was approved, war consisted of any hostilities initiated by a sovereign over opposition. A very typical dictionary definition was, “the exercise of violence under sovereign command against such as oppose.” (Barlow, 1772-73). I have found no suggestion in any contemporaneous source that operations of the kind the U.S. is conducting were anything but war.

The Founders’ favorite authority on international law, Vattel, divided wars into three principal categories—defensive wars, offensive just wars, and offensive unjust wars. A nation fought a defensive war when it responded to an invasion. It fought a just offensive war when it responded to an infringement of its rights short of invasion. It fought an unjust offensive war if it attacked another country even though that other country had not infringed its rights. Examples of unjust offensive wars were those fought for conquest or to limit an innocent neighbor’s power. A defensive war did not require a declaration. A just offensive war did require one, although it might be called something other than declaration of war. The declaration triggered certain consequences under international law, but Vattel says its principal purpose was to give the other country a last chance to correct the injury it was inflicting. Because unjust wars were those launched by a country that had not suffered legal injury, it follows that declarations of war issued by an aggressor were at least partially defective.

Now—The federal government has only those powers the Constitution grants it.  The Constitution grants the federal government authority to begin and wage a defensive war—“The United States shall…protect each [state] against Invasion” (IV-4). (Protection of U.S. territories is impliedly authorized as well—IV-3-2) But the Constitution grants only Congress-authority to initiate a just offensive war—that is, an American attack to vindicate our legitimate rights—“The Congress shall have Power…To declare War.” (I-8-11). It can be inferred from the document that the government has no constitutional power to wage an unjust war.

The Constitution entrusts Congress with creating the means for waging war—“To raise and support Armies” (I-8-12), “To provide and maintain a Navy” (I-8-13), and “To provide for calling forth the Militia to…repel Invasions” (I-8-15). It grants the President authority to serve as Commander-in-Chief (II-2-1). Under the latter provision, the President can oppose an invader (engage in defensive war) without prior congressional authorization, since “The United States [not just Congress] shall…protect each [state] against Invasion” (IV-4). But there is no enumerated power authorizing the President to launch an offensive war without a congressional resolution that qualifies in substance as a declaration.

Many quotations from key Founders show that is was their understanding as well. For example, James Wilson, one of the greatest Founders, told the Pennsylvania ratifying convention—

  • This system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress; for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large—this declaration must be made with the concurrence of the House of Representatives…(This quote is only one of several.)

Nevertheless, many well-meaning people have sought to find a presidential power to wage undeclared war.  In part they rely on practice arising decades, even centuries, after the Founding. As I point out in The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant, such evidence is too remote to be a reliable source of original understanding. The fact that the President sometimes has acted unconstitutionally does not render those acts constitutional. The most sophisticated presidential defenders make the following argument—

  • What determines constitutional force is not how the ratifiers understood the document, but its objective “original public meaning” to the larger public;
  • the Constitution grants the President the “executive Power” (II-1-1);
  • although the Constitution does not mention undeclared wars, based on the practice of the British Crown the President’s “executive Power” included authority to initiate them.

Unfortunately for this argument, recent scholarship has largely destroyed the view that the phrase the executive Power conferred the King of England’s power on the President.  The most comprehensive study of the subject is Curtis A. Bradley & Martin S. Flaherty’s  article,Executive Power Essentialism and Foreign Affairs, 102 Mich. L. Rev. 545 (2004).  In addition, my own published investigation of Founding-Era legal drafting practices discovered that those practices were completely inconsistent with the conclusion that the phrase executive Power conferred any authority.

As for the claim that the Constitution’s “original public meaning” trumps what the ratifiers understood, to my knowledge no one has contested the conclusions of my excruciatingly-footnoted 2007 study of Founding-Era interpretative methods. It concluded that the Constitution was to be interpreted by the ratifiers’ understanding, with “original public meaning” being consulted only when a coherent understanding could not be found.  In the case of the war power, though, the ratifiers’ understanding is pretty clear. So even if the puppet administration’s Libya operations qualify as a constitutionally-authorized “just war” (which is doubtful), launching those operations without prior congressional consent violated the Constitution.



End of America

The following presentation is long and at the end the Stansberry Research group wants you to purchase a few things. You’re not obligated to do so and that’s not the reason I’ve posted it. What Porter Stansberry has to say is the reason why I’ve posted it.

America, we have fallen to trying times. If we don’t act now, we will destroy ourselves from the inside. You have to see the gray between the black and white. All this printing of money, all this government intrusion into private industry, all this government intrusion into our health systems, all this government blocking of producing our own energy, all this “American” support for foreign oil and our enemies should alert some bells, should alert a LOT of bells.

What is the matter with all of you? Don’t you enjoy your freedoms? Don’t you want your children and grandchildren to enjoy the right to be free? We are all about to be really poor. I hope those of you who have never been on a farm or in the country can survive. If you don’t pray, now is the time.

9/11–Veteran Mural

The following pictures were taken by my daughter. It’s on the side of a building on Hwy 1 in Houma, Louisiana, towards the old part of Houma (where the hospital is). There are quite a few murals popping up there but this one caught our breath.

 

It was hard to get a really good picture because of the street, but this is the entire wall.

A close up starting from the right of the above picture.

Obviously, these are names of soldiers that have been lost.

Notice how the artist used the vent on the building as the tower.

The last part of the Mural. May God bless the one who did this.