ACTION

By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

Whenever something, like what happened last Sunday night in Las Vegas happens, two very predictable things immediately follow, and both of those things involve lunatics.

First…the conspiracy lunatics come crawling out of the woodwork like cockroaches when the lights go out spreading the wildest, most hair-brained notions of how such an event could have taken place.

Let me provide an example that I saw on social media just a couple of days ago…

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE!!!

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who is carrying water for casino-owning billionaire Sheldon Adelson, has announced he will be hosting a press conference tomorrow with former Rep. J.C. Watts (who is also a paid lobbyist for Adelson) and a handful of conservative organizations to push for his nationwide ban on states legalizing online gaming for their residents.  Nearly 25 conservative and liberty-minded groups have come out in opposition to the Chaffetz bill.  This afternoon, the American Conservative Union (ACU) blasted the groups that are selling out constitutional principles.  ACU Executive Director Dan Schneider issued the following statement reminding social conservatives that support for the Constitution must take precedent over their opposition to gambling:

Social conservatives all understand that gambling harms some people.  The only question for us is if the heavy hand of the Federal government should be brought to bear in this instance or whether the 10th Amendment to the Constitution should permit states to exercise their police authority.  

It is deceitful to imply that any bill in Congress would or could ban online gambling. There are already many gambling opportunities which are legal and widely available, but left untouched by the Restoration of America's Wire Act. Fan Dual and Draft Kings are just two examples. Similarly, people have been legally allowed to bet on horse racing for many years, and that wouldn't change under this bill.

As strong supporters of the 10th Amendment, the American Conservative Union does not see the kind of broad-based harm to justify Federal intrusion into the rights of states to govern themselves.  We must never forget that when we grow the power of the Federal government to limit people's freedoms, we also empower it to mandate other aspects of our lives.  From the Little Sisters of the Poor to those who wish to feed the hungry in their communities, Americans are now required to violate their conscience precisely because we have failed to reign in the Federal behemoth.  

Moreover, it does not make sense to allow some types of online betting while prohibiting others.  It’s not Congress’ job to pick winners and losers.  Using the Federal government to target certain competitors may be very good for the profits of some favored businesses, but it is by no means an appropriate way to set policy.

Those who are supporting the latest efforts to bring the Federal government into this arena ignore the inevitable results: gambling will continue online both domestically and on sites run by operators in the Caribbean, China, and Russia.  The Web has become a place where many vices flourish but banning certain US companies from this space cedes market dominance to foreign countries and dubious sites. 

Although we understand the substantial downsides to irresponsible gambling, it is not a proper use of the Federal government to preserve the profits and success of a single company’s business plan. 

Conservatives recognize and understand that each state should set its own policies under the rights guaranteed by 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  Conservatives trust the states to know what is right for each state.  Furthermore, conservatives trust our fellow Americans to understand that all people should be treated equally under the law with favoritism toward none. 

Schneider is spot on.  The Tenth Amendment empowers states to make their own decisions.  Conservatives and libertarians don't have to agree with those decisions but should respect them.  They should also oppose any and all efforts to gut the Bill of Rights -- especially to please a crony businessman who just wants to eliminate one form of competition for his billion dollar empire.  

By Craig Andresen – The National Patriot and Right Side Patriots on cprworldwidemedia.net

Just A couple of weeks ago, on March 3rd, the University of California Irvine student government voted. The tally was 6-4-2 in favor of banning the American flag from a lobby on campus all in the name of “cultural inclusivity.”

These students, in an asylum of higher indoctrination claimed it was offensive to illegal aliens.

“The American flag has been flown in instances of colonialism and imperialism. There were people who were like, ‘the flag triggers me’ – that was their exact wording, too.”

The Executive Leadership of that student government body vetoed the ban but that wasn’t the last word on the topic.

According to the Chancellor of U.C. Irvine…Howard Gillma…“Regardless of your opinion on the display of the American flag, we must be united in protecting the people who make this university a premier institution of higher learning.”

And what of those who are paid by taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate tomorrow’s leaders today? What did the professors, steeped in liberal/socialism for generations have to say regarding this matter???

How did the professors at U.C. Irvine respond to those who voted to BAN our American flag from that campus lobby???

Oh my…

READ THE FULL WEEKEND EDITION HERE!!!

Former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff is warning that efforts to prohibit states from legalizing online gaming is a form of corruption.  Speaking to Human Events, Abramoff warned that legislation pushed by billionaire Las Vegas casino owner Sheldon Adelson is a form of bribery.  Adelson has pledged to "spend whatever it takes" to enact the ban and has hired an army of lobbyists to see it done.  News reports suggest he will write a $100 million check to the GOP over the next few months, money that could help grease the skids to get the legislation passed:

Washington’s most notorious lobbyist told Human Events that the effort by gambling mogul Sheldon Adelson to outlaw online gambling is corruption. Adelson has crossed the line, but he is not alone, said Jack Abramoff, a former Washington operator and author of  “Capitol Punishment: The hard truth about Washington corruption from America’s most notorious lobbyist.” Abramoff served 43 months in federal prison for activities related to his lobbying. In addition to his media and speaking appearances, he comments on Washington events and people at his website: abramoff.com. Adelson is the CEO and chairman of Las Vegas Sands, a $14 billion-a-year gambling conglomerate and a major contributor to the Republican Party.

In the 2012 election cycle, Adelson is the man who stepped into keep the presidential campaign of former speaker Newton L. “Newt” Gingrich afloat, enabling him to come back and win the Georgia primary and seriously challenge the eventually nominee former Massachusetts governor W. Mitt Romney. After Romney was the GOP nominee, Adelson supported him, too. In the 2014 election cycle, Adelson has given Republicans notice that if they want his support, they need to pass a ban online gaming. To organize this effort, he created a front group, The Coalition to Stop Internet Gambling, has gathered up a roster of strange bedfellows, such as Republican Texas Gov. Richard J. “Rick” Perry, former Republican New York governor George Pataki, as well as, Democrats, such as Massachusetts Attorney General Martha M. Coakley and former speaker of the California Assembly Willie Brown. The pressure to ban Internet gambling comes as Adelson is getting ready to stroke a massive check to fund the final mile of the GOP’s campaign to win the Senate in November. Some Capitol Hill whisperers put the check at $100 million based on the plans Republican strategists presented to Adelson. The political world is full of similar examples of businesses or industries using politicians to improve their own situation, Abramoff said. “It is a line that everybody is crossing all day,” he said. “Everytime an individual contributes money to a public official and then asks that politician to do something, you have crossed that line—that is the essence of D.C.—it is not just Sheldon Adelson.” Abramoff said he wanted to be careful in his phrasing regarding Adelson. “I don’t know all the details,” he said. “But, in general, if someone is giving money and asking for things back that is crossing that line—and unfortunately it is going on all over the place.” It is bribery. It might not be statuary bribery, but it is bribery, giving a public servant money, he said “I don’t know Sheldon Adelson, I only know what I read about him,” he said.

“But it seems to me that he has been very active politically with significant money before he jumped into this Internet gambling thing,” he said. “I don’t see any reason to believe that this is the reason he got active or gave money in the past,” he said. “I think it was more related to Israel and conservative issues.” The move against online gaming is new turn for Adelson, he said. “Obviously, this relates directly to his business and he is hiring lobbyists to protect his business,” he said. Adelson may profess to have traditional or other reasons to oppose online gaming, he said. “But, this has a major impact on his land-based casinos—or at least, he feels it does.” Then Abramoff was actively operating in the capital, he worked against banning online gamble because he believes the Internet should be free from government control, he said. The former president of the Massachusetts College Republicans said there are two reasons why he opposed the ban. “I didn’t want to see the government regulating the Internet, except for national security reasons,” he said. The second reason was that given that there were already land-based casinos, the real concern was being able to protect children from going to the sites to gamble, he said. The Adelson bid to outlaw online gaming is not really what he considers crony capitalism, he said. “It is different from what we have seen with the Obama administration, where the donors use their political connections to get the government to bail them out, give them loans, give them huge grants, give them contracts, and that kind of thing.” It could be that plying the government to outlaw your competition is a cousin to crony capitalism, he said. “Frankly, it is under the category of corruption.”

After California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein’s legislation introduced in Congress last year, which would have imposed the biggest gun ban in American history failed, you would figure she would have tucked her tail between her hairy thighs and moved on to some other worthless legislation sure to fail. But not this old dog, she is determined to remove the 2^nd Amendment from the American people’s rights.

Feinstein is circulating a letter on Capitol Hill calling once again for a ban on semi-automatic rifles and asking for President Barack Obama to keep his State of the Union promise to make 2014 a “year of action.”

    Dear Mr. President:

    During your State of the Union address, you stated that you want to make 2014 a “year of action.”  We write to urge you to take immediate action to address the significant number of assault weapons that are being imported into the United States in contravention of federal law.  We respectfully request that you take steps to ensure that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) fully enforces the ban on the importation of these military-style firearms.    

    A provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3), prohibits the importation of firearms that are not “generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”  In recent years, however, importers of firearms have taken advantage of ATF’s interpretation of the “sporting purposes” test to evade the import ban.  In 1998, the Department of the Treasury — which then housed ATF — issued guidance that interpreted the import ban to prohibit only semiautomatic rifles that use magazines originally designed for a military rifle.  Many semiautomatic firearms on the market today do not have a military origin but are modeled closely after military firearms.  These military-style firearms are not prohibited under the current import ban, even though they are functionally equivalent to prohibited rifles with a military origin.  In addition, the Treasury Department’s 1998 guidance allows foreign-made firearms to be imported into the United States without military features, even though these firearms have the capacity to fire multiple times in quick succession without the need to reload and can easily have military features attached.

POLL: Will Lois Lerner go to jail to protect Obama?

Sen. Feinstein’s diatribe against the 2^nd Amendment continues in a long and nauseating attack that would unfortunately make everyone sick if the entire letter were placed here. In short, she is asking our President to do what he has done some many times before – make an executive order to ban the firearms that keep America safe from an overbearing government.

What amazes me is how this beastly woman can still be in office? Does anyone really listen to what she is saying? In 2013 Feinstein said all veterans have PTSD and should have their Second Amendment stripped. She may be even further left than the President himself!

Even the admittedly liberal newspaper, The Los Angeles Times printed an article by – Columnist Burt Prelutsky, where he may have given the best quote about the Senators from California ever.

“Frankly, I don’t know what it is about California, but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office. I’m not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine, even comes close. When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we’re Number One. There’s no getting around the fact that the last time anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, and Nancy Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on ‘Macbeth’. The four of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift of blab. You don’t know if you should condemn them for their stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words…”

Seriously folks, if the left wing main stream media is ridiculing their own, how are we supposed to take them seriously? 

Every year 50,000 plus people are killed and a great number of those are teenagers. Some people claim they are drinking when it happens, sometimes it is just an accident, suicide or sadly some are premeditated murder. Of course, they are used in crimes and are very dangerous in the wrong hands, especially young people. Regardless, people die and this must stop, RIGHT? If only the trained police or certain professionals were able to use them the streets would be safer, thousands of citizens would not be killed and we could set an example for the world. There is no doubt that they are very dangerous and with daily deaths mounting we should do something!

I am talking about vehicles, cars and trucks! Yes, the same argument holds for vehicles as does for guns. The primary difference is that many more people are killed with or in vehicles. They do save lives and prevent crimes, as do guns in the hands of citizens, but no one ever wants to talk about those details.

The environmental people should support this ban, but I do NOT! It makes no more sense than banning guns. It s the person, not the instrument that kills people. Knifes, hammers, screw drivers, ice picks, box cutters, etc. are all dangerous in the wrong and evil hands.

I regret any loss of life, but I value my freedom and will not give it up for alleged increased security. Our Founding Fathers warned us to never give up freedom for promised security.

When I went to public school every boy had a  pocket knife and there were no gun free zones and in fact some kids had them in the cars. We have a people and a morals problem today and need to address it. Israel schools have armed teachers, surrounded by terrorists and people who would attack their children if they were in a gun free zone. The incident yesterday might have been stopped, if Bill Clinton had not banned guns from military bases in 1993. Ever on duty soldier should wear a side arm, as they did in past wars and that evil sick man would have been stopped VS. a shooting gallery. Just as my example of banning vehicles does not make sense, neither does gun free military bases or schools.

The Navy shooter was using a shotgun and even crazy uncle Joe said he has one of them. Obama and others will use this crisis to push gun bans and they are chasing the wrong issue. We have a people problem.  

            Save America Gun rights advocates rally for Second Amendment in Utah

Round one of the gun control battle on Capitol Hill has been seemingly won by default by the protectors and supporters of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. This win for gun rights advocates became obvious to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) this week. He ordered Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) to pull the so-called assault weapons provision from the bill. This bill had been passed by the Democrat controlled Judiciary Committee.

This comes on the heels of what appeared by many vote counters inside the Washington D.C. Beltway to be headed for total defeat. Even Reid’s own count reportedly indicated the most Democrat votes, that could be mustered to support the assault weapons ban was only 40. This is far less than the 60 votes President Obama needed to prevent a Republican filibuster of the bill. This is a victory for gun rights in the continuing congressional gun control battle

For the hysterical claims and attacks raised by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's in an attempt to strong arm national gun rights supporters with their bluster, it is a bitter defeat. This is also an important set back to the hysterical theatrics that the president displayed as he attempted to use his bully pulpit to force congress to submit to his will after the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.

Despite the facts that demonstrate the shooter Adam Lanza, was suffering from apparent severe mental illness issues, Obama resorted to scare tactics to pin the blame on gun rights. This is where he failed to exercise true presidential leadership. He clearly purposed his focused on fear mongering because it was what the liberal media hysteria machine wanted and craved. After all, who would be able to sustain the withering assaults from the main stream media, he had to reason.

But, Obama and the alphabet soup of media networks underestimated the commitment of gun rights and constitutional advocates who were unwilling to witness nor permit the undoing of those basic rights Americans who dear. When the president felt he was falling back on what he thought was an easy target, gun owners, gun owners and supporters instead locked arms and moved forward!

Even former astronaut Mark Kelly’s recent cheap trick to spur on support against gun owners did not prevail. He tried to resurrect the legitimate sincere sympathy Americans felt over the attack upon his wife, former congresswoman Gabby Giffords. She had survived a vicious attack in an armed assault against her which resulted in the tragic deaths of six victims in Tucson, Arizona in January 2011.

Kelly tried in vain, in March to dramatize that the legal buying of an AR-15 style weapon was somehow a national news story special bulletin about the evils of assault style weapons. It fell flat, because Kelly had purchased the gun legally and had gone through the proper legal guidelines to register the weapon. So where was the story and where was the news if everything he did was legal?

( click to read more )

Vice President Biden prepares to submit presidential  task force strict gun control measures to Obama

There is a sickening aroma in the air that is beginning to permeate the very soul of independent freedom embracing Americans. It began to originate long before the shooting at Aurora, Colorado, or recently in Newtown, Connecticut. Its rancid fragrance seeps into the fabric of the U.S. Constitution and is emitted by the control terrorists who manipulate the facts and perceptions of Americans who watch the news. These purveyors of stricter gun control measures seek to erode your defenses so that in your weakened state you will accept their sweet smelling tyranny.

The nation that was represented as a symbolic shining city on a hill that President Ronald Reagan spoke about over 30 years ago is now becoming a broken mud hole of shattered dreams. America’s morning that has dawned over the nation is now bearing witness to the shredding of constitutional protections which have safe guarded families since the infancy of the republic. Obama has given the order to Vice President Biden: full steam ahead to obliterate gun rights in your town. You and your family are the targets and what will you do?

The reaction by gun owners and even prospective gun owners to Obama’s desperate executive order zeal is to hurry up and buy up all the potential guns and now legal weapons. The worry is that these legal weapons might be taken by edict or by force by the government. That may be a logical solution, but it is only a temporary one.

Once Obama’s federal government has quenched its thirst on stripping away gun rights, it will not hesitate to take the next step to criminalize actual possession of legally held banned weapons!

Then what will you do?

What is the response to a government that embraces tyrannical rule over the constitutional guarantees and protections contained within the U.S. Constitution?

What are you, the father, the mother, the son or the daughter prepared to do when, the government official, acting on direct orders from a new commission set up by President Obama to confiscate your guns, comes to your home’s door?

Where are the defenders of the U.S. Constitution who are elected in Congress? Are you absolutely certain they will not give in, and knuckle under Obama’s determination which is aided by the mainstream media talking heads?

Remember these are the same talking heads that avoided Obama’s dismissive behavior in not enforcing congressional legislation. This is the same mainstream media that buried the White House Benghazi murder cover up as if it never happened. Think about your choices when seeking to rely upon the once independent fourth estate, which has been rendered a useless patsy for the Obama administration.

Do you really believe that once your guns are banned, and the weapons that were grandfathered in and off limits from government seizure, will not be taken in the second round of gun control legislation?

(Click - to read more)

Are you ready to wake up in an America where your family is defenseless against enemies foreign or domestic? This reality is right around the corner. A day after his reelection, Barack Obama signaled the United Nations that he is ready to sign an Arms Treaty to strip you of your U.S. Second Amendment Constitutional right to bear arms.

This is not new. The United Nations made earlier attempts during the administration of former President George W. Bush. But, President Bush soundly rejected the measure. Now, President Obama, fresh off of this presidential win, feels emboldened to go forward with his design to unilaterally dismember the guaranteed constitutional protections citizens of this nation are entitled to.

Do you feel comfortable with the idea that the U.S. State Department under the control of either Ambassador Hillary Clinton will truly represent your interest? What about her possible replacement nominee, America’s United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice. This is the same Ambassador Rice’s who went on five television network shows to cover up the truth of what happened to four Americans murdered on 9/11 in Benghazi, Libya.

Where does that leave Americans?

The real question is what are you prepared to do in order to defend your right to defend your family? Will you wait to see what happens? Or will you take the necessary steps to make certain that you will not have to wait and see if United Nations gun control officials knock at your door, demanding, and “Gun license and registration, please!”

The right to control your guns is not open for debate or for negotiation. It is a sovereign right that no foreign organization, including the United Nations has the right or the authority to undertake, because a president gives the go ahead.

When any president decides to destroy the nation’s U.S. Constitutional rights afforded its citizens, which he has sworn to uphold, he no longer has the authority to represent the nation’s citizens. He must be impeached!

The U.S. Constitution says with great clarity in Article II, Section 4:
"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."

Your signed petitions should be forwarded to John Boehner, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives.

The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives according to Article I, Section 2: "The House of Representatives . . . shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."

You do not need the permission of the White House nor do you need the permission of the mainstream media to determine your course of action to demand the impeachment of Barack Obama. Develop a list of particulars that petitioners in all fifty states will sign. The secessionist movement has already gotten the ball rolling.

( click to read more )