What IS a Conservative? Or a Liberal?

I am going to share a Couple of dictionary definitions of both Liberal and ConserWhat IS a Conservative? Or a Liberal?

I am going to share a Couple of dictionary definitions of both Liberal and Conservative. WARNING... This is going to surprise most or you so fasten your seat belts!

Wikipedia:

Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others, called reactionaries, oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were"

Free Dictionary.com

Conservatism, in politics, the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order. Conservatives value the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform. Modern political conservatism emerged in the 19th cent. in reaction to the political and social changes associated with the eras of the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution.

I know not too many surprises there, but wait for it. Wait for it...

Wikipedia:
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.

The term Liberal came into being during the French Revolution. Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition.

So you see Thomas Jefferson was a flaming Liberal in his day. All of the founding fathers were and they were so adamant that they were willing to risk their '...liver, fortune and honor...' to set up a new government. They were the traitors of their time, reviled by most nations and their governments. So just this one time I say thank you God for giving us those traitors!

So what happened? Here is what: According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "In the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal program of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies."[11] Consequently in the U.S., the ideas of individualism and laissez-faire economics previously associated with classical liberalism, became the basis for the emerging school of libertarian thought.[12] Today, liberal political parties remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence on many countries (see Liberalism by country).
So when you here that the 'Liberal Party' in England or France wins an election try to remember that is a GOOD thing.

Enough with the back ground. What is today's Conservative and Liberal. That is tougher to define than you might think. There is a gentleman that frequently posts to a Tea Party Face Book page that would have you believe that if you don't agree with him and the Liberty Alliance, you're a liberal. Or at the very least a RINO. The man has never been wrong. Even when called on something his answer is that the other person is a RINO or an out and out Liberal. I know a 'Liberal' that believes wholeheartedly the Democrat's platform, but thinks Obama is a stupid criminal that should be shot after a fair trial and both Pelosi and Reid are just ignorant mouthpieces for that selfsame criminal. So you see it is possible to find areas of agreement with some of the people on the left. :)

I guess I am going to have to offer my definition of these two terms for good or ill. Here goes:
A Conservative is a person that believes the Constitution after a Christian God, is the supreme law of this land and should be followed under a strict constructionist discipline, but recognizes that even that amazing document has developed flaws. Flaws not in its basic principles, rather due to the evolution of society. The founding fathers could never for see where children could not, by government fiat, be punished and did not fall under the discretion of their parents. They could never for see such an anomaly as a professional politician, or a tyrannical president with sycophants ruling the Congress they so carefully set up as a separate power.

What is a Liberal, in my view? A Liberal is that person that believes that the Constitution is an old and antiquated document whose time has passed. It is time for the Government to step in and run things. We need the Government to take care of so many things. The raising of our children and oversee their education. Things like that just can't be left in the hands of educators and, God forbid, the parents. Health care must be mandated whether the simple minded voter wants it or not. The Federal Government must delve into our personal lives in the name of our home land's security. Their can be no privacy. Who knows what plots may be fostered by the people if they continue to function without Government oversight?

Strong Language? Not really. Not if you are truly aware of the situation in this country today. And no, I don't think I have put words into any liberal's mouth. That is just the facts, Mam. OK So some of them won't admit to them in public, but far too many live them.

As usual I have run out of self constraining space for this time. Hope you learned something or at least became involved enough to get angry with me. Or perhaps just nod and smile. Until next we meet.vative. WARNING... This is going to surprise most or you so fasten your seat belts!

Wikipedia:

Conservatism as a political and social philosophy promotes retaining traditional social institutions. A person who follows the philosophies of conservatism is referred to as a traditionalist or conservative. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others, called reactionaries, oppose modernism and seek a return to "the way things were"

Free Dictionary.com

Conservatism, in politics, the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order. Conservatives value the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform. Modern political conservatism emerged in the 19th cent. in reaction to the political and social changes associated with the eras of the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution.

I know not too many surprises there, but wait for it. Wait for it...

Wikipedia:
Liberalism is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.[1] Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property.

The term Liberal came into being during the French Revolution. Liberalism first became a distinct political movement during the Age of Enlightenment, when it became popular among philosophers and economists in the Western world. Liberalism rejected the notions, common at the time, of hereditary, state religion, absolute monarchy, and the Divine Right of Kings. The 17th century philosopher John Locke is often credited with founding liberalism as a distinct philosophical tradition.

So you see Thomas Jefferson was a flaming Liberal in his day. All of the founding fathers were and they were so adamant that they were willing to risk their '...liver, fortune and honor...' to set up a new government. They were the traitors of their time, reviled by most nations and their governments. So just this one time I say thank you God for giving us those traitors!

So what happened? Here is what: According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "In the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal program of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies."[11] Consequently in the U.S., the ideas of individualism and laissez-faire economics previously associated with classical liberalism, became the basis for the emerging school of libertarian thought.[12] Today, liberal political parties remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence on many countries (see Liberalism by country).
So when you here that the 'Liberal Party' in England or France wins an election try to remember that is a GOOD thing.

Enough with the back ground. What is today's Conservative and Liberal. That is tougher to define than you might think. There is a gentleman that frequently posts to a Tea Party Face Book page that would have you believe that if you don't agree with him and the Liberty Alliance, you're a liberal. Or at the very least a RINO. The man has never been wrong. Even when called on something his answer is that the other person is a RINO or an out and out Liberal. I know a 'Liberal' that believes wholeheartedly the Democrat's platform, but thinks Obama is a stupid criminal that should be shot after a fair trial and both Pelosi and Reid are just ignorant mouthpieces for that selfsame criminal. So you see it is possible to find areas of agreement with some of the people on the left. :)

I guess I am going to have to offer my definition of these two terms for good or ill. Here goes:
A Conservative is a person that believes the Constitution after a Christian God, is the supreme law of this land and should be followed under a strict constructionist discipline, but recognizes that even that amazing document has developed flaws. Flaws not in its basic principles, rather due to the evolution of society. The founding fathers could never for see where children could not, by government fiat, be punished and did not fall under the discretion of their parents. They could never for see such an anomaly as a professional politician, or a tyrannical president with sycophants ruling the Congress they so carefully set up as a separate power.

What is a Liberal, in my view? A Liberal is that person that believes that the Constitution is an old and antiquated document whose time has passed. It is time for the Government to step in and run things. We need the Government to take care of so many things. The raising of our children and oversee their education. Things like that just can't be left in the hands of educators and, God forbid, the parents. Health care must be mandated whether the simple minded voter wants it or not. The Federal Government must delve into our personal lives in the name of our home land's security. Their can be no privacy. Who knows what plots may be fostered by the people if they continue to function without Government oversight?

Strong Language? Not really. Not if you are truly aware of the situation in this country today. And no, I don't think I have put words into any liberal's mouth. That is just the facts, Mam. OK So some of them won't admit to them in public, but far too many live them.

As usual I have run out of self constraining space for this time. Hope you learned something or at least became involved enough to get angry with me. Or perhaps just nod and smile. Until next we meet.

The Stupidity of the Impeach Now Movement

Why I have maintained that attempting to impeach the man in the White House is down right stupid is really simple; however, the explanation takes a little time as it involves education. Try to remember that a failure to convict on the articles of impeachment will render it impossible to do so at a later date., for any reason.

Impeachment is not a finding, it is an indictment. After the indictment comes the trail. Impeaching BOH would be easy. The house presents a Articles of Impeachemnt, the votes are counted and he is impeached. Then comes the problem. The trial. That is conducted in the Senate only and the judge is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as mandated in our constitution. Even Dirty Harry cannot refuse to hold that trial and the president can't use an executive order to make it go away. He must be tried if the house impeaches, BUT, and it is a big but, as things stand now the senate would never vote to convict. So we wait. Thank goodness some of the politicians are being smart. Not too many I agree, but there are some.

If we can take control of the senate with just a few votes over a simple majority there MIGHT be a chance. Here is the full process and some comments on that process:
In the Senate
The Articles of Impeachment are received from the House.
The Senate formulates rules and procedures for holding a trial.
A trial will be held. The President will be represented by his lawyers. A select group of House members will serve as "prosecutors." The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (currently John G. Roberts) will preside with all 100 Senators acting as the jury.
The Senate will meet in private session to debate a verdict.
The Senate, in open session, will vote on a verdict. A 2/3 vote of the Senate will result in a conviction. (note: 67 senators have to vote for conviction)
The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.
The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future.
Impeachable Offenses
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." In his report, Independent Counsel, Starr accuses President Clinton of committing eleven acts for which he could be removed from office by impeachment. Are any of those acts "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors?" Well, that's up to the members of the House of Representatives. According to constitutional lawyers, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" are (1) real criminality -- breaking a law; (2) abuses of power; (3) "violation of public trust" as defined by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. In 1970, then Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as "whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." An excellent definition, Mr. Former President. In the past, Congress has issued Articles of Impeachment for acts in three general categories:
Exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office.
Behavior grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office.
Employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.
There are obvious land mines in this process. One of those is when the senate retires to consider it's verdict. The prosecuting attorneys are excluded because they are not senators. How about the defense attorneys? Any defense attorney, selected by the president remember, that is a member of the senate is going to be part of that closed session. Just one reason it has never resulted in conviction. Then there is the seeming fact that one of the things a person serving a full term in the senate seems to misplace is his, or her, conscience. It just seems to get lost, somehow.

So what do we need to impeach and convict this usurper? It appears that we need about 56 conservatives to be elected to the senate. I don't see that happening, do you? However let is be positive. The next session of congress is convened and Dirty Harry is relegated to senate minority leader. The conservatives and the swell of grass roots conservatism convinces a few more liberals that their interest in power is best served by getting BOH out of the White House. Just might happen. Sure can't happen as things stand now.

I haven't posted on this site for some time due to some of the official posts by the mangers of the originating organization; however, I have recently been asked to share one or two of my blogs here once again so here goes nothing.

My blog is located here:  https://wordpress.com/my-blogs/45304343/posts/ ; If anyone would like to see others posted here just let me know in the comments.

Elected Official vs Citizen

There is a power struggle in this country and I believe the Conservatives are fighting the wrong battles. Let us look at the primary concern of the Conservative citizen. It can be stated in a simple phrase – Constitutional Freedom. Then there is the primary concern of the elected official. To be re-elected. To remain in power. We conservatives too often forget that in our strategies. One prevailing definition of the liberal philosophy can be concisely stated as “Moochers electing looters to steal from producers”. Now let’s think about the mind set of of the citizen liberals and how it came about. Those of you over forty or so can probably remember a time when the primary concern of everybody was providing for the family. Even beyond the family. We didn’t go around looking for people to help us, we went around looking for people to help. Being forced to take ‘charity’ was something to shame a family. Helping each other out in times of need was not charity. It was part of the ‘you scratch my back I’ll scratch yours’ philosophy.

I know this began to change when Woodrow Wilson was elected in 1938, but it hadn’t taken a firm hold on the most of the people for a couple of generations. By then we had the Roosevelts with the “New Deal” and so on. But the real rapid change came with the federal government intrusion into the local classroom. The beginning of the indoctrination of children into the idea that the government should provide more for the people. And we have the beginning of the welfare state, but more importantly, the start of the welfare mind set in the lazier of our citizens. This soon began to take over the mind set of many more than just the inherently lazy. The people that saw the government largess going to the undeserving decided they wanted in on the deal.

OK How does all of this tie into the elected official? Those stalwarts saw an opportunity to establish personal fortunes and more importantly grab huge amounts of power. They could assure themselves minimum work, high paying jobs for longer periods by taking from all the people and then giving it back to some of them. Obviously taxes and spending had to go up, but so what? We had the strongest, richest economy in the world! Never mind how we got there, surely it could withstand the federal onslaught of a few extra taxes and just a little more inflation. How about a minimum wage? That would help for a while. At least until the cost of goods rose so the country’s employers could recoup the extra burden placed upon them. Didn’t take all that long for that to happen so every few years the liberals ‘boost the economy with a new minimum wage law. Of course the people would only see that they were taking home more income thanks to those marvelous people they had elected. Why, of course they deserved to vote themselves a pay increase!

Now they (those elected officials) knew they were on to something. Shucks, they couldn’t even begin to understand the growing concern of those stupid Republicans who insisted they were not doing the right thing. Why care about the right thing when the elections were what really mattered. Get more power every time you got reelected! Committee chairmanships! Select committees that got the media’s attention thus got them free advertising. Circulation went up and the media moguls saw the bottom line go up when they supported this stupidity. Who cares about the Constitution when money and power are at stake?

And so the great divide began. We had a division of power in the the very houses of government that were supposed to be unified in obeying the Law of the land, The Constitution of the United States. Now we didn’t just have the two party system we had a four or fice or six party system. There were the normal Democrats and Republicans with the conservatives in both and the liberals in both and now the Ultras on both sides that try to take everything to the extreme.

I began this blog with the suggestion that the conservatives were fighting the wrong battles. Now I that have attempted to explain how we got here let’s see if I can find a way back to fundamental freedom and self reliance that made us the richest most powerful country on this woebegone planet. That is, I admit, a tough job. First we have to understand how our freedoms are being usurped.

With the obvious exception of the pathological narcissist tyrant and his self admitted fascist agenda that sits in the Oval Office, the legislature and the Supreme Court have scrupulously avoided violating the Constitution. Don’t get me wrong there has been some creative interpretation of that sacred document, but no violation. Congress, for the most part, seems content to ignore the violent and constant violation of that tyrant I mentioned, but they have not done anything to violate the constitution. They have tried. I will mention the gun control attempts for example, but that didn’t get very far on the national level. So the Constitution seems to hold up, again for the most part. We do need to plug some holes. The welfare clause needs to be tightened up. Just adding a phrase similar to ‘if the states can do it the feds can’t’ would be sufficient. That would end obamacare, etc. Of course we need to educate the people. Now I mean educate, not rant! We have some very good minds in our midst that could suggest how we circumvent the lame stream media with success. Put ‘em to use.

We already have a single payor insurance system that the government has been running for years. Ask any vet how he/she likes it. But be prepared for a long listening period. What in the hell would allow anyone that is familiar with that snafu to believe the government could run our entire health care system. BUT … the average citizen is not aware of that boondoggle. So educate them. Don’t rant. Raise he minimum wage? Educate about the inflationary costs of that stupidity. It would help the government collect more taxes from the poor.

There are many areas in which the conservative groups are stubbing their own toes. Don’t believe me? Look at the election results and a host of other indicators. I certainly don’t have all of the answers, but I can read critically and make a real try to understand my fellow man.

I try to keep these blogs around 1000 words because I know the attention span is limited for many in this day and I have now gone over that, so let me write a finis to this one. If I get any feed back indicating the desire for more on this subject I will continue with another post.

If true, this story is really frightening, but is in line with Obama's personality profile. I have been able to check only these facts: There was indeed a minor earth quake epicentered off the SC coast at the time indicated in the story; this article did appear in the publication; our own news agencies reported on the firing of the military personnel involved for not being willing to carry out the presidents orders; the response by Russia is confirmed in more than one location. With the Obama policy of not letting the American people know what is going on in the White house no other confirmation could be found after several days of research by this writer.
This is a rather long post, but I believe it to be of the utmost importance to ALL Americans.

Russia Responds To Obama Terror Nuke With ABM Missile Killer
Posted: 14 Oct 2013 10:23 AM PDT
A chilling Ministry of Defense (MoD) report circulating in the Kremlin today confirms that the Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) sudden, unannounced and successful firing of a Topol ballistic missile into the Sary-Shagan testing ground in Kazakhstan last Thursday (10 October) was in “direct response” to President Barack Obama’s attempt to destroy Charleston, South Carolina in what military intelligence analysts state was an attempted “ false flag attack.”
As we had previously reported, the SMF notified both President Putin and the General Staff this past Tuesday (8 October) that at 01:58:11 GMT/UTC an atomic device was exploded in the seabed off the US Atlantic Ocean, barely 1,000 km (620 miles) from Charleston, causing a 4.5 magnitude earthquake measurement that SMF experts equate to being a 1-kiloton yield, which is equal to the power of 1,000 tons of TNT.
Previous warnings about Obama’s planned false flag attack on Charleston had been leaked to numerous global organizations including Infowars.com, France’s highly respected dedefensa.org, and caused US Senator Lindsey Graham to cryptically tell his fellow South Carolinians that they were under the threat of a “terrorist nuclear attack.”
Obama’s response to his militaries failure to carry out this false flag attack, the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) reported, was his immediate dismissal of Americans top two military nuclear commanders, US Navy Vice Admiral Tim Giardina and US Air Force Major General Michael Carey, and two of the US Marines top officers, Major General Charles M. Gurganus and Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant.
The US military in kind, this new MoD report says, responded to Obama’s attack against their officers by rapidly returning to America over 500 troops belonging to their elite Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force (SP-MAGTF) that had been stationed in Libya, Italy, Spain and Africa.
The American military does, indeed, now fear Obama, this report continues, as he has become the first President in US history to fire 9 of his most senior officers who refuse to go along with his “master plan” for radically changing his country into a socialist dictatorship.
Even worse, and as we had previously reported on in our reports Pentagon Warns To Expect “Radical” Change In US Government Soon and Obama Retreats To Secret Bunker As “Big Event” Draws Near, the plan Obama envisioned to the American people on 2 July 2008 when as a Presidential candidate he called for the creation and establishment of a “Civilian National Security Force” he promised would be “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as the US Military” has now been achieved, this MoD report says.
To how well equipped Obama’s new National Security Force is we can read as reported by Forbes magazine in their article titled 1.6 Billion Rounds Of Ammo For Homeland Security? It’s Time For A National Conversation, and which, in part, says:

“The Denver Post, on February 15th, ran an Associated Press article entitled Homeland Security aims to buy 1.6b rounds of ammo, so far to little notice. It confirmed that the Department of Homeland Security has issued an open purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition.
As reported elsewhere, some of this purchase order is for hollow-point rounds, forbidden by international law for use in war, along with a frightening amount specialized for snipers. Also reported elsewhere, at the height of the Iraq War the Army was expending less than 6 million rounds a month. Therefore 1.6 billion rounds would be enough to sustain a hot war for 20+ years. In America.
Add to this perplexing outré purchase of ammo, DHS now is showing off its acquisition of heavily armored personnel carriers, repatriated from the Iraqi and Afghani theaters of operation. As observed by “paramilblogger” Ken Jorgustin last September:
“The Department of Homeland Security is apparently taking delivery (apparently through the Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico VA, via the manufacturer – Navistar Defense LLC) of an undetermined number of the recently retrofitted 2,717 ‘Mine Resistant Protected’ MaxxPro MRAP vehicles for service on the streets of the United States.”
Regardless of the exact number of MRAP’s being delivered to DHS (and evidently some to POLICE via DHS, as has been observed), why would they need such over-the-top vehicles on U.S. streets to withstand IEDs, mine blasts, and 50 caliber hits to bullet-proof glass? In a war zone… yes, definitely. Let’s protect our men and women. On the streets of America… ?”

To vast majority of the American people themselves not knowing of Obama’s “master plan” to destroy their country, this report says, has been fully explained in the grim report issued last week by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) that concluded that far from fulfilling his campaign promise to improve transparency, the President has instead presided over an unprecedented campaign to contain leaks and to control media coverage of government operations.
Even the popular American science fiction writer Orson Scott Card has now begun openly warning against Obama by stating: “Obama is, by character and preference, a dictator. He hates the very idea of compromise; he demonizes his critics and despises even his own toadies in the liberal press. He circumvented Congress as soon as he got into office by appointing “czars” who didn’t need Senate approval. His own party hasn’t passed a budget ever in the Senate.
In other words, Obama already acts as if the Constitution were just for show. Like Augustus, he pretends to govern within its framework, but in fact he treats it with contempt.”
And, surprisingly, one of America’s top radio broadcasters, Michael Savage, has now joined the global call for the Obama regime to account for the other missing nuclear weapons planned to be used in the upcoming false flag event meant to throw the United States into civil war.
As to Russia’s response to this growing American crisis, this MoD report concludes, last weeks SMF firing of the Topol ICBM that can pierce any anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system, combined with the nuclear submarines now patrolling the Southern Seas for the first time since the Soviet era, have now given the Obama regime a “stark warning” that should their civil war begin to impact the Motherland, a “strong and immediate” response should very well be expected.
Source
Related Posts:

Obama Ousts Top Officers After Nuke Explodes In Ocean Instead Of Charleston

My original title for this post was the declaration “No More Politics!” However, Politics is not a bad thing it is a necessary thing. It becomes a bad thing when it is a profession. It is the Reids, Pelosis, Boxers and yes, the Boehners, McCarthys, McCains and Cantors that make politics ‘a bad thing’.
An understanding of the Federalist Papers and the Constitution of the United States makes it plain that this was to be a nation of individuals. Even John Jay, a member of the Continental Congress, writer of five of the Federalist Papers, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court and the original “Liberal” was devoted to the individual; his rights and his freedoms.
It has been said many times and in many ways that where the people fear their government there is tyranny; where the government fears the people there is liberty.
OK, enough preamble what is the solution? The solution is cradled in a thing called a Convention of States or, more popularly a COS. A COS is a convention in each state called by the people of that state and voted on in each states legislature to propose amendments to the constitution. Prohibition was repealed by such a COS.
It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, or ratification. This point is clear in Article 5.
The COS I am talking about here has never been used by the American people, but it is time it is used. We need to have a concerted effort by the PEOPLE to reign in the power mad DC elite. This country was founded with the idea of ‘citizen legislators’ as outlined, again, in the Federalist Papers. There is a growing movement to do just that. I refer you to the Citizens for Self Governance at www.SelfGovern.com. This is a movement and a web site that was initiated by lawyers and American Patriots to get this job done and it, WE, need your help to fulfill this dream for America. The site is in the organizational stages for the convention and need all kinds of volunteers. Remember each state has to be in on the effort. Approval by three fourths of the states is needed for enactment.
Think for a minute about a nation where the elected officials are limited in the length of service, unable to exempt themselves out of any laws, and required to be elected by citizens that can prove they are citizens each time they vote. Can you say “Voter ID”? Case in point regarding that last one: Harry Reid, after his first election to the senate from Nevada has gone into election day a serious underdog and arose the next morning as the top dog, I keep wondering how that happens.
Think about being a part of such an historical effort.
This is a movement that can make the changes we were looking for when BOH promised changes and delivered a nightmare. It needs all kinds of help from state directors and public speakers; district captains and people to help with the coffee for meetings. If you believe in the need for real grassroots change back to a government “… of the people, for the people and by the people.” Please at least take a look at that web sight and then decide to put in your two cents worth.

                                                        Educating the Uneducated

Obamacare is revealing just how unaffordable the ‘Affordable Care Act’ is and the Democrats are STILL not willing to negotiate. Obama knows the midterm election hangs on this one issue. The people are learning that this abomination is going to cost them much more than most can afford and he remains intransigent. The question is why?

It all goes back to the man’s personality profile. He is a pathological narcissist as declared by a minimum of four world class psychologists and psychiatrists of which I am aware. So just what is a pathological narcissist? The best definition I have found reads: Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder in which the individual is described as being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity. This condition affects one percent of the population. First formulated in 1968, it was historically called megalomania, and is severe egocentrism.
You see he actually believes, like Stalin and Hitler, that he cannot be wrong and there is no amount of evidence that can change that.

The undereducated voter is now learning what that means to their personal financial well being. One lady on the government’s face book page had this to say and I quote from a Tea Party news post: A single mother of two said she is in school and working full-time while living “75% below the poverty level.” She said she was shocked to learn she did not qualify for a healthcare subsidy. “Are you F’ing kidding me????” she wrote on the government’s Obamacare Facebook page. “Where the HELL am I supposed to get $3,000 more a year to pay for this ‘bronze’ health insurance plan!?!??? And I DO NOT EVEN WANT INSURANCE to begin with!! This is frightening,” she wrote. End quote.

My research, which is far from complete shows that there are now more than 3 million people in this country that have had their work hours reduced in direct response to the coming of this law. Several companies have closed their doors and I have read the comments of five business owners that were in the process of expanding their businesses who actually cut back and is today even smaller, not larger. Why? They found out the cost of the insurance they would be forced to buy would be prohibitive. One of these is a lady in SC that had dug herself out of poverty and off the welfare roles with a small business that had grown to the point of providing incomes for her own and fifty one other families. She was elated to learn that she had been approved for a loan to expand and located a new location so that she could double her employees and probably her own income. Then she found out the cost of The Affordable Care Act and its effect on her plans. She was forced to not only forgo her expansion, but actually to reduce her work force by two to get under the act’s trigger point and save her existing business. Gee, thanks all you democrats.
I took a look at the Facebook page mentioned above and the reviews are somewhat more mixed than that one, but the trend seems to be those who can afford their health care now will be getting a better deal while those that are at poverty level or below will be slammed very hard. If they don’t sign up they will be charged a tax they can’t afford to pay. If they don’t pay they can be subject to fines, interest, penalties and fees plus, after three years of this increasing debt they can’t afford, they could see a tax lien on their house, bank accounts, saving including, but not limited to their retirement accounts.

Last week a poll was released that stated the majority of Americans were opposed to “Obamacare”, but were in favor of “the Affordable Care Act!” Wait a minute … They are one and the same thing! But NOW they are learning. We need to keep up the tutoring.

One Question

      I have a question. One to which I would really appreciate an intelligent answer. Not, I repeat NOT a rant.
The question is how does passing a new law prevent a criminal from breaking the law? Yes, it is a serious question. Just to give a few examples, there are, according to one report, twenty seven federal laws and tens of thousands of state and local laws against prostitution. In Nevada prostitution is legal in much of the state except in Clark County, the home of Las Vegas. Where are the most prostitutes per capita? Right! Clark County. Yep, I lived there for almost twenty years and can attest to that one. There are so many examples of laws that don’t stop anyone except the good citizen from doing anything that a litany of them here would be superfluous.
       So here comes the people that want to abuse the second amendment and take guns from the good people claiming that it will save lives and prevent gun violence. Where are the most gun violent crimes committed? In places like Chicago, New York and Washington D.C. where there are strict gun laws. Sure. A criminal intent on murder is going to tremble at the thought of breaking the no gun law. Just like the Sandy Hook shooter did when he saw the “Gun Free Zone” sign at the school. I’m sure he thought twice about shooting people when he saw that sign. More likely he felt more like he could achieve his goals because there were not going to be anyone but him with a gun.
       One of the sponsors of the limited magazine law said in public (I paraphrase but this is the essence of it) … once those are shot they can’t use them any more …! She actually thinks a magazine is BULLETS! I suppose we have to allow for ignorance in people who have to make a living as public officials.
I had a friend in Las Vegas, a good guy who made a mistake in his younger years and learned his lesson, that wanted to have a hunting rifle, but the law said he couldn’t. He was and is a convicted felon. Never mind that he had been a good citizen for over twenty years since then. He couldn’t go into a store and buy one so he bought one on the street. A really nice semi-automatic hunting rifle. His had an extended clip. If memory serves it held twenty rounds, but that might be wrong. He actually paid less than he would have at Wall Mart for the same rifle. He ended up buying two .357 Colts for him and his wife. The three of us spent many a pleasant afternoon plinking away at rocks and trash thrown away by those law abiding citizens that littered the desert with their trash for us to use as targets.
       So now many in Congress want to abrogate our second amendment rights and pass gun “control” laws. My question stands. The question is how does passing a new law prevent a criminal from breaking the law?
I will be happy to read and respond to any intelligent comments.

The short answer to the question in the title of this missive is yes. Let us look at how I arrived at this.
     We start with a quote from the Federalist Papers specifically No. 78: “No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
     Further in the 1886 Supreme Court decision Norton v. Shelby County: “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties, affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
     Far from undermining the rule of law, the local police and county officials taking these stands are actually supporting constitutional law and fulfilling their oaths to defend the founding document.
     Want more corroboration? OK. Back we go to the Federalist Papers. Remember the Federalist papers were written by the people who drafted the Constitution and were published to aid in letting the people know what that Constitution would mean to them. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers (#78): There is a misconception in our time that the court somehow is the arbiter of what is constitutional; that’s not true! Every official that raises their right hand and says they’re going to adhere to the constitution, seek to protect it to the best of their ability, ‘so help me God’ – that’s something that they’re all obligated to do.”
     If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the people to substitute their WILL to that of their constituents. It is far more rational to suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.(The emphasis is mine) (end of quote)
     Even if the Constitution of the United States is ignored by our legislators, these sheriffs have the constitutional and oath driven obligations to take a stand and follow the Constitution and the ruling of the Supreme Court. If it is an unconstitutional law, it has no affect on the citizenry and should not be enforced; not by local sheriffs or police – not by the FBI nor the NSA. It certainly should not be adhered to by any citizen.

                                                                       MYOB

     It is the wee hours in this small hick town nestled in the heart of Appalachia. The streets are empty, save for the occasional police car making its rounds and a semi trundling by every hour or so. As I sit hear in the quiet of my lonely apartment I found myself thinking of the mess this country is in with all of the incursions on our freedoms of late. I was trying to think of some way the common people could assert their independence in a sane legal manner when I thought of a story written way back in 1951 by a Science Fiction writer named Eric Frank Russell entitled … And Then There Were None. I think I might have given it the title The Gands though nobody asked my opinion then or since.

     This Hall of Fame story concerns the difficulty the people of Earth have in contacting the ‘leaders’ of a planet the had been settled by humans three hundred years before, but out of contact with that species known far and wide as Earthers since that time.
     You see the home planet had come to bring these poor benighted souls all of the advantages of modern Earth society. They were from the government and just wanted to help. Those bureaucrats had only one problem with their efforts in contacting those so called leaders. Whomever they approached to ask to be taken to those leaders received the cryptic response “MYOB” and the locals just went on with whatever they were doing. It didn’t matter who they sent as their envoys – Peacockishly attired military or somewhat less splendiferous ships crew or even nattily attired minor diplomats- each and every one was met with MYOB.

     Finally an exasperated Ambassador sent one of the ships crew, a fellow with a bicycle of all things, as his emissary. This fellow was a bit more curious and friendly sort who wanted to get to know these strange off spring of mother Earth, so he began by just attempting to engage them in conversation. After a lot of confusion caused by some evolutionary language difficulties, he did have some interesting talks. He learned that these people weren’t the least bit intimidated by the huge ship that had plowed a mile long trench upon landing outside their town. You see they had developed what they called the perfect weapon to ward off intrusive outsiders. It had developed out of their love of freedom, but it was an extremely effective weapon none-the-less.
      When the ship’s engineering crewman asked about it he was given a little plaque upon which was inscribed F - I.W. and told that it contained the entire secret of this magnificent weapon. He was even informed that the weapon had been discovered on Earth many centuries before the great diaspora. By a humble man named Gandhi. He also learned that the MYOB they kept hearing was an acronym for Mind Your Own Business. The placard’s meaning? Freedom – I Won’t. You see Gandhi was a man from the then country of India who believed in peaceful civil disobedience. His disobedience took the form of him simply saying “I Won’t” to those intrusive bureaucrats that thought they had the right to infringe on his liberties.
The government says register your guns? I Won’t. The government says you must use their insurance? I won’t. The government says you must permit them to spy on you “for you own good”? I won’t.
     The name they gave their planet? Gand and the people were the Gands.

Is Obama Impeachable?

Just what makes a president impeachable?  The Constitution states very plainly that a president may be impeached for “… high crimes and misdemeanors…”.  Can he be impeached for lying about the Bengazi attack?  Nope.  If Lying were an impeachable offense every president since at LEAST Buchannan should have been impeached.  Lying is immoral, but it is not a crime.  Now if that lie obstructed justice in some way that would be a crime; however I have no idea how we could prove that one unless we could come up with something in writing.  We certainly can’t expect either Hilary or Holter to fill us in.  They have both been caught lying to congress.

Did the President authorize the stand down o our forces when the diplomatic mission in Bengazi asked for help or did some ground commander accept Hilary’s orders. 

I recently read a blog on a Tea Party site that listed 100 reasons he is impeachable.  Guess what?   Maybe three of those one hundred reasons are actually impeachable offenses!

How about Fast and Furious?  Sorry you can’t impeach for the actions of a subordinate.  Now if there is PROOF that he personally authorized that then just maybe that is a crime.  But first you have to prove that the law was in fact violated and that the whole thing wasn’t a case of really bad judgment.  If the goal was to put guns in the hands of known criminals, then yes that is a felony.  I believe Holter did do that, but who is going to prosecute him.  He is the nation’s chief prosecutor!  Is there anyway to prove to the senate that Obama did in fact have prior knowledge that this crime was to be committed and either overtly or tacitly authorized it?  I doubt it.  Once again we know Holter isn’t afraid of congress or of blatantly lying to them.  He was convicted of contempt of congress for that and just laughed it off.  Again who is going to prosecute?

Spying in many ways with many of the agencies he controls on average American Citizens without due process?  Impeachable and we can prove it.  He has admitted it openly.

Ignoring the Constitution by consistently violating the second, fourth, fifth tenth and fourteenth amendments?  Impeachable because it violates his sacred oath.  Violation of a sworn oath is a misdemeanor and in this case, probably a felony.

He has disclosed secret grand jury material by exposing the existence of a sealed indictment of one of the Benghazi attackers in violation of Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that clearly states: “… no person may disclose the indictment’s existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons.’’

It is said that he has thwarted Congress by (1) failing to enforce all or parts of laws duly enacted by Congress, including the Defense of Marriage Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the Affordable Care Act; and (2) after Congress refused to pass his Dream Act, unilaterally issuing an executive order directing immigration officers to no longer deport an entire class of illegal immigrants who came here as children, regardless of individual circumstances, and to give them work-authorization permits.  Impeachable.  No President is above the law.  But that one is on very shaky ground.  Law enforcement agencies have use their own discretion when enforcing laws for literally centuries in this country.  Otherwise you should be arrested in South Dakota for drinking a malt on Sunday or taking a drink of alcohol on Sunday in some southern states.

 He has violated the Constitution when, on January 4, 2012, (1) he bypassed the U. S. Senate to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, actions that were ruled unconstitutional by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which affirmed previous decisions by the Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit and the Third Circuit; and (2) he bypassed the U. S. Senate to appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

These last three are direct quotes from the articles of impeachment offered to the house by The Black Republicans Association.  These articles are well thought out and I recommend reading all of their Articles of Impeachment at
http://godfatherpolitics.com/12154/blacks-file-articles-of-impeachment-against-president-obama/#CYGEY4TrqmQ5cLaU.99

So OK, he is indeed impeachable and the House of Representatives can do that with a clear conscience; however, once impeached by the House he must be tried by the Senate.  The Senate is controlled by the democrats and led by a fervently anti-constitutionalist senior senator from Nevada known as Harry Reid.  Just how far do you think that trial would go?  Even as far as Slick Willy’s?  Probably not.

Bad Time To Impeach

The Tea Party wants to impeach Obama now.  I don’t think that is wise, either for the Tea Party or America and I will try to explain in simple language.

I will begin by saying that he is in deed guilty of several impeachable offenses and the American people really need to get him out of office.  BUT.  Now is not the time.  The house could pass a Bill of Impeachment.  The senate would not run a real trial and he would stay in office.

Consider the impeachment as proposed.  If, by some miracle the senate should act in a just manner, something it hasn’t done in over four years, we would end up with a nitwit for president anyway.  Do you really want Biden to run the executive branch?  When we do it we should get both of them at the same time.

A failed impeachment would bring out more liberal and deceased voters in 2014 by an enraged or scared Democratic party.

A failed impeachment proceeding would further split the country and degrade the Tea Party’s advances in the past couple of years.  Probably to a greater extent that the Clinton impeachment proceedings did. We need the Tea Party to continue to gain influence, folks.  It is important.

Ok then, if not now, when?  After the 2014 elections.  We have a n admittedly small chance to take back the senate while maintaining our majority in the house.  (That alone would jolt some of those RINOS out there)  If we do that we might just succeed in an impeachment attempt.  I would still urge careful thought in how that Bill of Impeachment is worded, but even if we don’t pick up more than a seat or two in the senate, I still believe that would be the time to draft it.  We would have nothing to lose at that point and there is a really long shot hope of success.  Miniscule, but extant.

For this moment it is my considered opinion that the current push to impeach Obama at any cost is both poorly conceived and badly timed.

I am going to append this short missive with what I feel, are the salient crimes our fraudulent President has perpetrated on the American people and its constitution.

Let’s look at just some of his crimes.  This a rather long list of them as proposed by the Republican Black Caucus. I agree with every one of them and I believe you will too.

 Quote:

            “ARTICLE 1 He has covered up, delayed, impeded and obstructed the investigation of the Benghazi Battle….

 ARTICLE 2 He has disclosed secret grand jury material by exposing the existence of a sealed indictment of one of the Benghazi attackers in violation of Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure that clearly states: “… no person may disclose the indictment’s existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons.’’ ARTICLE 3 He has authorized and permitted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a division of the Justice Department, to conduct Operation Fast and Furious, wherein guns were sold to Mexican drug trafficking organizations that were used to kill innocent Mexican civilians and two rifles sold to a smuggler in January 2010 ended up at the scene of the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010.

ARTICLE 4 He has authorized and permitted confidential income tax returns information from the Internal Revenue Service to be provided to unauthorized individuals, organizations and agencies.

ARTICLE 5 He has caused investigations and audits to be initiated or conducted by the Internal Revenue Service in a discriminatory manner, including harassment and intimidation of conservative, evangelical and Tea Party groups applying for non-profit status between 2010 and 2012….

ARTICLE 6 He has (1) authorized and permitted the National Security Agency to conduct or continue electronic surveillance of over 300 million average Americans; (2) given access to National Security Agency surveillance data to other intelligence units within the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Secret Service, the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security in violation of the law; and (3) conducted the surveillance of average Americans unconstrained by Congress, the United States Supreme Court or the US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court which has, to this date, functioned as a rubber stamp, having approved every request made of it in 2012 and rejecting only two of the 8,591 requests submitted between 2008 and 2012. ARTICLE 7 He has authorized and permitted the Department of Justice to wiretap and secretly obtain two months of telephone and e-mail records of Fox News Reporter James Rosen and over one hundred Associated Press journalists.

ARTICLE 8 He has thwarted Congress by (1) failing to enforce all or parts of laws duly enacted by Congress, including the Defense of Marriage Act, the No Child Left Behind Act, and the Affordable Care Act; and (2) after Congress refused to pass his Dream Act, unilaterally issuing an executive order directing immigration officers to no longer deport an entire class of illegal immigrants who came here as children, regardless of individual circumstances, and to give them work-authorization permits.

ARTICLE 9 He has violated the Constitution when, on January 4, 2012, (1) he bypassed the U. S. Senate to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, actions that were ruled unconstitutional by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which affirmed previous decisions by the Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit and the Third Circuit; and (2) he bypassed the U. S. Senate to appoint Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

ARTICLE 10 He has intimidated whistleblowers and brought twice as many prosecutions against whistleblowers as all prior presidents combined. Egregiously, while refusing to prosecute anyone for actual torture, he prosecuted former Central Intelligence Agency employee John Kiriakou for disclosing the torture program.

One hundred and ninety nine years ago during the War of 1812, an American lawyer was a prisoner aboard a British war ship in Boston harbor looking at a huge American flag that had been raised over the walls of Ft. McHenry.  He wrote a poem about the battle that ensued and that flag.  The last line of the first stanza of that Francis Scott Key poem reads “Oh say can you see by the dawn’s early light, does that banner yet wave oer the land of the free and the home of the brave?”  You see the British Admiral had promised that if that Flag were to be lowered he would stop the shelling of Ft. McHenry.  It was still flying proudly in the morning.  It had been hit many times and the staff broken.  It should have fallen.  But when the dawn came there, around its base, were the bodies of the men who had given their lives to hold the pole up right.  You see when it was about to fall a group of men ran to its base and held it upright and as they died others rushed to take their place and keep that banner aloft. Oh, it was severely canted and, but the flag still answered the vagaries of the wind and the undaunted spirit of the defenders of that fort and our country.  It was, in deed, the “… home of the free and the land of the brave.”

Today however, I fear that this land is the home of the political heretic and the land of the apathetic.  We are ruled by a class of cowards who are much more concerned about their power and keeping that power than any call to freedom for a once great nation.  It is being led by a man born god only knows where, of muslim parents, who refuses to allow a background check on himself while he seeks the destruction of our freedoms, the basic morals of its history and the very constitution upon which it was founded.

Concomitant with all of the above is their attack on the Constitution, including the second amendment.  You might want to recall the words of the Japanese military commander during WWII when his staff proposed that they strike the American west coast after their success at Pearl Harbor.  His response (paraphrased) was “Impossible.  We would encounter a gun behind every blade of grass.  That is an armed nation.”  Well, it used to be anyway.

The liberal mantra is “Let us help you.”   Why won’t those conservatives let us help you, All we want to do is help you.  Give you free food, free housing, free health care, free cell phones, free … you fill in the blank.  Let us help you.  All we want in return is all of your work, all of your energy and all of your freedoms.  Let us help you. 

Four Americans dead and many more injured because Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton refused to answer the call to send help. A border patrol agent killed with guns provided by Barack Obama and Eric Holder to criminals in Mexico in their botched gun running operation. Americans targeted, harassed and intimidated by the Internal Revenue Service because they hold a different political ideology than Barack Obama.  Land of the Free?  The Department of Homeland Security has declared the fourth amendment to be null and void in a zone 100 miles from every U.S. border and ocean.  They say they can legally search and seize whatever they deem necessary without benefit or either w a warrant or reasonable ‘probable cause’.  To quote Benjamin Franklin:  ”Those who would surrender their freedom for security deserve neither freedom nor security.”

A massive 1,131 individuals renounced their US citizenship last quarter. That number is more than the total number of people that chose to live other than under the yoke this country’s collectivistic regime in the past year.  Compared to the same quarter last year in which 188 people renounced their US citizenship, this year's number is over SIX TIMES higher.  This brings the total number of citizenship renunciations so far this year to 1,810. Try to fix in your mind that in the last six months one thousand eight hundred ten of our citizens have made the decision that it would be better to give up their life long homes and the citizenship that was their birth right rather than live in the tyranny that is today’s United States.

 America.  The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. 

How the Tea Party Will Lose The 2014 Election

Yes, I do believe that conservatives will wake up in November 2014 to find that they have lost the senate and maybe the house; though I will admit we just might retain the house.  Maybe.

All because there really is no Tea Party.  There are the Tea Parties, plural and they don’t talk to each other.  They each have their own agenda.  They don’t even agree on their basic tenets.  There is the “Tea Party Patriots” with a web site here that states their mission as being simply …to restore America's founding principles of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.

Then there is the Tea Party Command Center with a web site here with 15 ‘basic tenets’.

And of course the Tea Party express with six points in their mission statement.  Their web site is here.

On each page if you want to see their mission statements for yourself just click on the ‘about’ link at the top of their home pages.

There are others but I think you get the point.  Each of these has their own agenda and each goes after their own political ogres.  And I am sure each will have their own favorite candidates to endorse.  There is no focus within this hodgepodge of political theologies.  They can’t even focus enough to get very detrimental Presidential appointees disapproved!  Thomas Perez as Secretary of Labor???  WOW.  If he has his way, forced unionism will be a federal law that will supposedly override any and all state laws, the tenth amendment not-with-standing.  How about Obama’s socialist bed mate Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services overseeing the dreaded Obamacare. 

Ok.  OK.  I’ll get back to the point.

With this much diversity among the so called Tea Parties, they accomplish nothing.  The speaker of the house, a republican in name only (RINO) is touting the immigration reform acts as they come down from his new bosses in the senate.  Who would have thought that a Speaker would go on national TV and call himself a “facilitator”.  Gee I thought he was supposed to be the Leader of the majority party.  I guess with the mind set of our esteemed politicians that just ain’t true anymore.  He has other leadership issues and broken promises, but I said I would try to get back to the point of this blog.

The next point about the fractious Tea Parties is the local organizations.  They, for the most part, are far from local in their focus.  They want to be on the main stage so they go after national issues.  The Tea Party in my own county even refuses to endorse candidates for public offices claiming that they are ‘educational and therefore can’t do that.  I have some news for them.  There are basically only two entities that can’t endorse political candidates.  Any registered religious group due to the separation of church and state and any organization that receives the bulk of their funding from the tax payers such as PUBLIC schools.  Private non religious educational organizations that don’t receive funding from the tax payers are completely free to do so.  The local groups really need to focus on getting local issues made into laws.  Want to take back the senate?  Get behind a good conservative candidate and PUSH!  Want to stop the amnesty?  Deluge your own states senators and representatives with faxes, phone calls and letters telling them to represent their constituents.  Now there’s a revolutionary idea.  An elected representative representing.   I would like to start a new Tea Party in my county.  One dedicated to the two items of interest to our population.  Political education of the issues of local interest and the backing of conservative candidates.  We might call it the Local Tea Party, or some such.

It is up to us, the people that provide the Tea Party leaders with their incomes to make our individual voices heard and demand and accounting.  Why can’t they sit down with the leaders of all of the national Tea Parties and work out a concerted effort on one or two issues and a bunch of national conservative candidates then FOCUS or lose yet another election and perhaps an entire nation.  Let’s face it folks, WE THE PEOPLE pay these people too and they should reflect our needs not their own.

A Little Knowledge Is a Dangerous

Allow me to begin by explaining a few things about myself.  I am most politically incorrect.  I hold a few things as tenets of my American citizenship.

One:    This is and was intended to be a Christian nation. 

Two:    Muslims and the muslim religion are something to be feared and distrusted.

Three:  This country was founded on the principles of freedom and individual  responsibility.

Four:    An ignorant electorate is a very dangerous thing.

Now let’s take a look at those tenets in order

This country was founded and by Christians.  Yes they wrote into that marvelous document we know as our Constitution.  Yes they wrote into the first ten amendments, better known as the Bill of Rights, and into the very first of them these words: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …” but there is no way they intended that to be interpreted as the outlawing of governmentally sponsored and approved religious symbolism or practices on or near governmentally supported institutions. Thomas Jefferson ,our third president and author of the Declaration of Independence and founding father certainly knew of that amendment when he began holding church services in the White House after he was elected.  A tradition that lasted for fifty years..  Nor were they ignorant of them when they inscribed out money with “In GOD We Trust” and placing various references to God on many of our government buildings in Washington DC.  I am of the firm opinion that the Supreme Court was way out of bounds in declaring school prayer unconstitutional.

The Muslim religion has as one of their tenets that infidels that cannot be converted must be killed.  I cannot be converted.  I have reason to distrust and fear any and all Muslims.  AND I do.  This says nothing of the fact that the largest of the muslim sects- The Shiites - has formally declared a “jihad” against America which is tantamount to a declaration of war.

The first Amendment to the Constitution states in full “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.”  I take that to mean I am allowed to write this blog and say what I choose or to give a speech on any topic and on any street corner of these United States without government interference.  Were you aware that a man and his wife were detained, in handcuffs, inside a national park, Liberty Park ironically, for the act of handing out pamphlets regarding the Constitution of this country?  It is true.  Look it up.

And the last point regarding an uninformed electorate.  One minor example I’ll give you is the recent “Overpass” rallies held by many Tea Party organizations around this nation.  The county I live in doesn’t have an overpass so the local Tea Party held theirs by the side of one of the major highways in the county.  That organization received this post on it’s Face Book page.  "Your display on Route 19 today is an embarrassment to the state. I hope those unfortunate enough to have seen it don't think the entire community shares your hatred for the President of the United States."  She is apparently unaware that one poll shows that fifty seven pct. of AMERICAN voters disapprove of that president and a growing faction (Hovering near the 50% level) believe he has committed crimes deserving of impeachment.  She is unaware that a majority of her fellow citizens in West (By God) Virginia feel that way.  Then there are the people who get their information about the state of this country only from the mainstream media.  Even true idiots don’t limit themselves to one source of information.  Gad woman, WAKE UP.

This one fact leads us to a very dangerous situation for Americans.  Obamacare is so feared by the informed public that even agencies of the federal government are protesting being covered by it.  Just as an aside I have a good friend in the corporate world whose insurance premium has already doubled and they are looking at more increases every few months.  All because of Obamacare.  My personal physician has opted out of the Medicare system because of it and now sees only privately insured or cash customers.  I am one of those people covered by Medicare so I don’t get to see a Dr. very often these days.  Just can’t afford it. I could go on about the liberal overreach and destruction of freedoms as well as the encroachment on our Constitution, but I will save that for another day.

That ends the rant for today.  If you want to comment or take exception to these words, my email address is here for your enjoyment.

Government Corruption

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Yeah, it is an old adage; that doesn’t make it any less true.  Webster defines corruption as: a : impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle :depravity  b : decay, decomposition  c : inducement to wrong by improper or unlawful means (as bribery)  d : a departure from the original or from what is pure or correct.

All of these seem to fit our present day politicians.  Is it possible that ‘C’ might be the case when it comes to winning elections?  Is it really possible that Harry Reid wins his elections “properly and lawfully” when he has go into the polling booth behind by several points including the exit poles in each of his elections except his first one without several questionable votes being cast?  The walking dead maybe?  There are several examples of this, including Barack Obama himself. 

It would seem to me that the act of enforcing your will on an unsuspecting public at the expense of the constitution and the moral principles of that self same electorate simply because you can is a pretty good definition of corruption.

Let us look at some of the nonsensical laws they propose.

The so called Amnesty Bill:  There have been two separate polls conducted among Latinos by two diverse pollsters in two different states and in each case they said no to the amnesty bill.  THEY DON”T WANT IT PASSED! 

Gun Control:  The second amendment, as we all know by now says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.  Now they want to tell us that allowing people to own guns IF they pass a background check is not an infringement.  I sure wish I could get a hold of their dictionary.  It must have some really good flexible definitions.  The senator from my own state is hawking this bill.  Joe Manchin.  He absolutely refuses to represent his own electorate in the hope of gaining enough powerful friends to have the dead rise up and vote for him too!  If he doesn’t he will be retired and he knows it.  It’s not the paycheck folks.  He now gets that for life.

The DHS:  This little infringement on our security and freedom now targets more Americans than foreigners.  It defines its own limitations to the extent of defining what part of the constitution applies to their department.  For instance: The first and fourth amendments do not apply within one hundred miles of any US border, be it land or sea border. It also defines what laws it will enforce and which it will not. Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of the DHS testified before congress that because of the large scope of that departments responsibilities it had to be able to pick and choose which laws to “concentrate on” and it would do so.  By the way, the DOH is now the second largest police force on the planet.  The largest?  The NSA.  It’s true and you can look it up.

The DOJ:   Eric Holder was confirmed to office by the Senate on February 2, 2009 and has since then been on a rampage attempting to negate the constitution as well as the moral fiber of our country.  He found it necessary to openly state that the right to own guns is NOT guaranteed by the constitution.  He found it necessary to aver that the right of the people to use the word ‘God’ is illegal and withdrew funds from a law enforcement agency that hold meetings for a U.S. Marine group that invokes God in their meeting saying to them – “Remove the word God from your meetings and the money will be restored”.  One of his U.S. Attorneys, in Kentucky, stated blatantly that speaking against Muslims is a prosecutable violation of the law.  He gave a ‘legal’ opinion that the use of drones to spy on the American public is legal.  He has been cited for contempt of Congress.  Unfortunately to press those charges, which carry a jail term, would mean that he would be prosecuting himself.  Somehow I don’t think that will happen.  He has removed the right of several states to have all voters vetted as Citizens of the U.S. Yeah, that was a goody!  You don’t need to be a citizen to vote.

Should I go on?  I think you get the idea.  Corruption is rampant in our Government and I believe it is obvious to everyone that follows any reliable news service.  What can we do about it?  It is my opinion that the first step is to insist upon Voter IDs for ALL voters.  State issued voter IDs showing the citizenship status of every voter. I will post another blog regarding other remedies in the near future.  This one is long enough.

The people of the muslim faith have declared a jihad and holy war against the United States of America and since that is true I am defiantly against the muslim people and their religion.  The United States Attorney for the western district of Kentucky has stated that my saying these things is a violation of the law.  My exercise of my first amendment rights is a violation of the law.  Imagine that.

A muslim near the end of 2012, stood in an outdoor forum in the Capitol of Texas and stated openly that a true muslim did not have to obey any country’s laws or any laws except sharia law.  Just as an aside, it is the quran that states “…and eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth…” and they are Mohammad’s words in his sharia law. These are laws fo the muslims and they are enforced literally throughout islam today.   I do not know of any passage in the bible that states this.  My word processor keeps insisting that I capitalize many words that I absolutely refuse to give that honorific.

It is my belief and true feeling that we of the American people should be overtly fighting any muslims that invade this country,  It is my further belief that this is not a violation of the first amendment guarantee of religious freedom as I am not advocating against allowing them to worship as they please.  I am advocating that any one or any group or any nation that declares war on me should be met with war.  I have had the pleasure of destroying a copy of the Quran that I purchased for the purpose and posted that on another blog several months ago.  If I were to have my way we would be burying pigs in all muslim owned property and advertising the fact.

Ok Enough of that.  Now I am going to prove to at least one American elected congresswoman that I am a racist.  I am against Obamacare. Yep,  That is all it takes to make me a racist.  But then Obamacare costs too much and has so many regulations attached to it that it will cost WAY too much and is impossible to administer as absolutely no one can administer over 5000 pages of laws and regulations, many of which are self contradicting.  As one of the original authors of the bill has stated publicly, “it is a train wreck waiting to happen.”

I will violate the law again and become a traitor to my country, at least according to one high ranking official of the DOJ by stating that I think Erick Holder is a liar and has violated our First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights on his own whim.  I also believe and the evidence backs me up, that BO was not legally elected to his office due to the massive amount of voter fraud evinced since his so called election.

Yep, I am one evil dude.  I believe that the Constitution is the supreme law of this land and that no member of the administration, no group of legislators, no judicial authority has the right to decide otherwise.

The Obama Legacy

Barack Hussein Obama has a different kind of legacy.  Let’s take a look at this presidency.

It has: Instituted the largest tax increase of any president;  Increased the national debt by more than any three previous administrations;  Has orchestrated the introduction of more laws that have been challenged due to their unconstitutionality; Has had more death threats than any other president;  Has spent more tax dollars on vacations and time off than any president in history;  Has hired, at taxpayers expense, more staff than any president (his wife also has the largest personal staff of any first lady in history and her First Lady Staff is also the largest); Has hired avowed enemies of our way of life to work in various agencies and in the white house itself (he actually has a muslim Imam as his “Shiria” Czar, believe it or not. His name is Imam Mohamed Magid.  Look him up.)

The definition of an IMAM?  1: the prayer leader of a mosque 2: a Muslim leader of the line of Ali held by Shiites to be the divinely appointed, sinless, infallible successors of Muhammad  3: any of various rulers that claim descent from Muhammad and exercise spiritual and temporal leadership over a Muslim region.) 

 Here are some more names and their positions in the government:  Arif Alikhan - Assistant Secretary for Policy Development  for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Mohammed Elibiary - Homeland Security Adviser:  Rashad Hussain - Special Envoy to the (OIC) Organization of the Islamic Conference

Salam al-Marayati - Obama Adviser – founder Muslim Public Affairs Council and its current executive director:   Eboo Patel - Advisory Council on Faith-Based

Neighborhood Partnerships to name a few of the more visible ones.  All of these are self proclaimed Muslims and some are self proclaimed "Mujahid" (one who carries out a jihad)

The first president since Abraham Lincoln that has made so many people mad and scared of his tyrannical policies that roughly one third (The poles range from 29% to 36%) of Americans now feel that armed revolt will be the only way out.  Think about that.  An American President so scary that his own people fear it will lead to civil war in our life time.

He has stated that the constitution does not apply in many cases in this country:  ie: The first and fourth amendments do not apply within one hundred miles of any shore line or foreign border;  no warrants needed to read and intercept private emails and messages on the internet and telephone calls in violation of the 4^th amendment; believes that the second amendment does not really mean “shall not be infringed” in many cases;  Has repeatedly tried to shut down the conservative voices in the media in contravention of the first amendment.

He is a president that insists that anyone that purchases or owns or trades or acquires in any manner a weapon for self defense should be required to submit to a background check and the information thus obtained be kept a part of a government record so they will know where those guns are and yet refuses to submit to any background checks on his own personal history that might bring into question his qualifications to hold the office of president.  Even such basic information as his birth certificate and college records!  Sorry, but that being accepted by the American people is just incredible.

OK, this could go on for many pages.  I hope this makes the point, but I will be coming back to this in the future.

Who is the American Anarchist

Let’s take a look at the left side of the aisle with some hard facts. 

Janet “Big Sister” Napolitano testified before the people that make the laws for our nation that she has the right to choose which laws to enforce and which to ignore. She has unilaterally declared that the first and fourth amendments are null and void within one hundred miles of any border of the United States.  And she brags about it.  She has purchased enough ammunition to wage a war for twenty years and supply her agents with one thousand times the ammunition allocated to soldiers in a combat zone.  She has purchased armored vehicles to be used on American soil.  She has declared to congress that she will not answer any question she doesn’t want to answer about the operation of her department nor give any reason for her actions even to the senate oversight committee to which she is supposed to be answerable.

Barack H. Obama, Harry Reid , Nancy Pelosi, et al have stated that the government determining which, if any, arms the people may bear is not an ‘infringement’ of our second amendment rights.  West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin has gone against his own position, stated repeatedly during his campaign, and actually sponsored a bill that would drastically reduce the power and effectiveness of the second amendment.  B. Obama demands that each person that owns or purchases or even borrows a gun of any nature submit to a background check to which he refuses to submit himself.

The Left has stated that they know a gun control law would not reduce crime, but they want the law abiding citizens disarmed anyway.  Of course the criminals will still ignore such a law leaving the law abiding citizens at their mercy.  One criminal called the police to complain that he was afraid the owner of the house he had broken into was armed with a gun!  It made the news folks. 

Harry Reid has stated publicly that an organization that has the stated purpose of defending and protecting the constitution of our country, The Tea Party, are a bunch of anarchists.

The only really amazing thing about all of these truths is the number of voters that still support these power hungry, constitutions destroying people.

It is my belief that we are headed for a bloody and life destroying civil war.  Well, If it must come I know which side I will avail myself of my second amendment right to support.  I once took an oath to uphold that constitution and I will until the day I die of am killed doing just that.

Deadliest Jihadist – Hidden in Plain Sight

Guess Who:

He was raised in a muslim family and attended both primary and secondary muslim schools.  He was trained as a jihadist from age five by both his father and the Indonesian school system.  He attended classes in the US that were taught by known Marxists and attended a church headed by an avowed Marxist and American hater.  He has welcomed the muslim brotherhood into his administration and primary advisory staff. 

Let’s take a quick look at one part of that organization.  They have publicly stated that all true believers of the muslim ‘faith’ are not subject to the laws of ANY land.  They believe that sharia law is the only law they are required to follow and demand that the American justice system recognize that they can kill their wives whenever they deem it time to do so, to cite only one of many abominations.  Their so called holy book states in no uncertain terms that a true follower cannot have any friends that are not of ‘the faith’ and that all unconvertable infidels MUST be killed.  By the way, just so you’ll know, our founding fathers were all ‘infidels’ and so am I.

He has fought for laws within the United States that attack all Christian values from abortion to universal birth control.  He has repeatedly attacked the American family and seeks to institute the destruction of the traditional and Christian family via gay marriage and telling the people that their children do not belong to them, but belongs to the ‘community’.

Has consistently fought to undermine the Constitution of this country via the destruction of the second amendment in obvious ways; has refused to submit to a reasonable personal background check but insists the rest of us must be forced to undergo one without our consent; will not produce even the most basic documentation proving he is Constitutionally qualified to hold his public elected office; has consistently attacked the first amendment by attempting to restrict and even abolish conservative media; has openly declared that one of the largest terrorist threats to our country are the veterans that fought for it; declared there is a one hundred mile ‘border area’ where the fourth amendment has no meaning and anyone may be searched and personal physical and mental property may be seized without warrants; has create and armed a national police force without submitting it to the review of the congress and requires his appointees to refuse to submit to the lawful demands of that body for detailed information on their operation.

So we see a president that welcomes jihadists into his personal fold while attempting to deny the citizens of the country, (whose Constitution he has vowed to “… preserve, protect and defend ..."), the arms to defend itself.

Welcome to the new Amerika.  Are we supposed to say Heil Obama and pray to allah now?

I absolutely refuse, as usual, to capitalize words or ideas that are inherently inimical to my way of life.

How To Obliterate The Constitution

What is the most effective way to get rid of the Constitution?  It is really simple, my friends.  You simply ignore it and then depend upon the laziness of the people to do nothing about it.  It was the father of modern conservatism Edmund Burke who is credited with the famous line, “All that it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

Allow me to site the perfect scenario of the destruction of the American experiment in freedom for you.

The first step, of course, is to get elected.  You don’t really have to be a citizen to do this, because no one is going to insist that you prove who you are.  After all you have a social security number (several, in fact) and a drivers license.  You have lived here for years, even been educated in our schools, never mind where, you can just deny the public access to any of your records. Of course it makes absolutely no difference that you received your primary AND secondary education in a school in Indonesia that was admittedly a Muslim institution that proudly supported Jihad against the U.S. and taught that a true Muslim is above the law of the land.  Any land, any country. Allow these Jihadists to gin a significant foothold in many different ways, but avoid offending them at all costs.  You can offend all other segments of the populous, but not the people that have sworn to destroy this land and all of its people. After all you are dealing with a people that are motivated more by greed than by the preservation of the culture that brought this country to the peak of wealth and living standards.  They know that isn’t going to change.  Of course not.  This is AMERICA!  They believe the government will look out for them.

Next you need some really rich and powerful friends along with a few that are neither, but don’t mind getting their hands dirty with a lot of illegal activities.  Of course you have to believe that you are above the law to start.  It really helps to be a pathological Narcissist as three separate renowned psychiatrists have adjudicated Obama to be.  A pathological  Narcissist.  Ok I wanted to know what that really meant so I looked it up on several sites.  The most agreed upon definition I found is this one:

            narcissistic personality disorder

[när′sisis′tik]

a psychiatric diagnosis characterized by an exaggerated sense of self-importance and uniqueness, an abnormal need for attention and admiration, preoccupation with grandiose fantasies concerning the self, and disturbances in interpersonal relationships, usually involving the exploitation of others and a lack of empathy.

Sound familiar?  Yeah, to me too.

Now you need a way to control those idiots that actually think their constitution and desire for adherence to it.  OK  Simple.  You just create a civilian national security force.  As Obama said in a campaign speech in Colorado “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Now you need to know where the guns are.  In a free society that is willing and able to defend itself against tyranny,  One way to do this is to create the fiction of a  great gun grab as a diversion.  Then you simply offer a compromise solution.  How about we just do background checks on every gun purchase in the land?  That gives the government the name, location, type of gun, reason for purchase and social security number of every gun owner.  Now al you need to do is go pick them up.  You can use a government agency that is under the direct control of the executive branch of government to do this.  No need to bother congress with trivia.

Now that is REALLY scary!  So now we have the DHS with something like 2500 armored personnel carriers and over a billion and a half rounds of ammunition of all types.  I’ve lost count of the number of “assault” weapons they have purchased including the fully automatic kind.  That number seems to be going up daily.  They have put on several thousand new personnel according to many reports.  To me, one sinister aspect of this is they absolutely refuse to explain these purchases even to the congressional oversight committee to which they are responsible.

The final steps are a little more insidious.  You attack the moral fiber of the nation.  You must pick one or two moral issues that have some slight basis in reality.  How about homosexuality?  There is a good choice.  It goes against the holy tenets of the largest group of people, yet can be presented in a “reasonable” light.  Now you have them.  They are morally destroyed and unarmed.  You have violated two or three sections of their beloved constitution blood stained by countless heroes and can do anything you want.

Mission accomplished.