ACTION

I am considering joining a new gym closer to my home. The gym markets itself as a friendly place for people who simply wish to get into shape, unlike other gyms where overzealous muscle-heads harass, bully and judge them.

In my twenty years at various gyms, I have never witnessed the scenario this gym claims is such a problem. As a matter of fact, working out among serious bodybuilders has proven beneficial. At home, my max bench press was my 110 pound set of weights. Thus, I thought that was the most I could safely bench press. Upon joining a gym, I saw a guy half my size pressing far more which opened my eyes to my potential. Working out where professionals were shooting for the moon helped me to at least land among the stars.

The new gym near my home brilliantly created an enemy and a crisis which does not exist to attract clients.

My fellow Americans, this is the evil modus operandi of our President Obama. To gain public support for him breaking the law, ignoring the Constitution and sidestepping Congress at will, Obama insidiously manufactures a real or nonexistent crisis which he claims poses an immediate danger. He then blames a nonexistent enemy such as obstructive Republicans, Congress and conservatives as the reason he must act unilaterally for the good of the people.

This tactic routinely used by Obama is called creating a straw-man; a fallacy, a sham, a distortion, an exaggeration, a lie.

Obama's most recent use of the straw-man tactic to con the American people is his attempt to make Congress the bad guys in the fiasco at our border. Obama sent the message to parents in non-contiguous countries that if they get their kids to America they can stay. Consequently, illegal children are invading America by the thousands, 90,000 expected by September 30th.

Making Congress the villains in the border mess opens the door for Obama to ride in on his white horse to save the day enacting amnesty by executive order.  He is confident that the MSM will play along with him once again shaming America.

Another Obama Administration straw-man is its absurd “Republican War on Women”. Talk about creating an enemy which does not exist, Democrats are calling the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Hobby Lobby, “gender bigotry”.  What the heck are they talking about. The court simply ruled that the government can not force Hobby Lobby to pay for abortion drugs against their religious faith.

Now get this folks. Even before the Supreme Court ruling, Hobby Lobby provides 16 of the 20 contraceptives mandated in Obamacare. Hobby Lobby only refused to pay for the 4 that kill babies.  Do you see the Obama Administration spin, the distortion, the attempt to sham, the lie?

There is a real war on women and minorities spewing out of the Democratic Party which abuses and exploits women and minorities with impunity.

Here is one example of many. Republican president George W. Bush made Condoleezza Rice the most powerful black woman in America and possibly the world as Secretary of State. Guess who was out there calling Secretary Rice an Aunt Jemima, a house n*****, a traitor to her race and relentlessly tried to destroy her simply for being a black conservative? The answer is the Democratic Party.

An Obama and MSM supported straw-man that I find particularly deplorable and evil is his divisive slander of millions of Americans in the Tea Party. Think about that folks. The first black president exploits his race to demonize and shame Americans into submitting to his fundamental transformation of America. Decent folks who simply love their country have been successfully branded “racist domestic terrorists” in the minds of many.

Past Obama straw-men include banks, the auto industry, insurance companies, small business owners, corporations, the rich and doctors.

What American industry, institution or group will Obama declare is public enemy number one? What will be the next crisis Obama accuses them of creating, causing him to usurp unlawful authority to fix?

Quoting Nancy Reagan, Americans must “just say no!”

Lloyd Marcus, Unhyphenated American

Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

 Murder rate drops as concealed carry permits rise, study claims

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/09/murder-drops-as-concealed-carry-permits-rise-claims-study/

 The study by the Crime Prevention Research Center found that 11.1 million Americans now have permits to carry concealed weapons, up from 4.5 million in 2007. The 146 percent increase has come even as both murder and violent crime rates have dropped by 22 percent.

“When you allow people to carry concealed handguns, you see changes in the behavior of criminals," said the center’s president, John R. Lott, a Fox News contributor. “Some criminals stop committing crimes, others move on to crimes in which they don’t come into contact with victims and others

Anyone wondering why Texas has no border fence? We in Texas know why and I will share it with you.

I see Rick Perry running his lying mouth again and it makes me sick to my stomach I remember his last run for governor and Texas were having a fit for having to pay the bill for his extended stay at a hotel while they built him a new governors mansion. Now this was after Texas was allocated 800 million for a new border fence that he refused to build. Now I am wondering if that is how they managed to build a new governors mansion. We are looking at George the second here.  Can that be looked into, seems that the slime ball is sitting himself for a run at the presidency. Maybe that is why Congress is refusing to impeach Obama. Can someone check this out?

While most of my attention has been to city politics, a ghastly trend has been continuing on the national level. Not only is the federal government ignoring congress and the will of the people, they are creating expensive problems for us to solve.  The advertising of free medical care and free legal service to those in Central America who illegally cross the border is so far out there that it rivals the Twilight Zone for "off the wall" plots.

Can it be that the president loathes Americans so much that he is compelled to destroy everything American? I have seen scandals and wrongdoing in high places, but nothing to compare with the scale of this.  It is apocalyptic in its scale.  One dictator telling congress that they are insignificant, and he will govern without them.  That is not democracy.

Other attacks are equally egregious.  Our tax supported agencies are being used to attack us.  The IRS is used to keep political opponents in check and to stop free speech.  The ATF is used to suppress 2nd amendment rights through invasive attacks on individuals and businesses.  The EPA is used to prevent use of coal which is our main source of electrical generation.  This same EPA is proposing elimination of all wood burning heaters. There is also a push by this agency to control all water rights.  The BLM is used to control land even if it means keeping cattle from getting water. The Bundy Ranch stand off comes to mind.  The office of Eric Holder is protecting administration officials from prosecution while promoting outrageous lawsuits against ordinary law-abiding citizens. Thanks to him we must not refuse to take pictures or bake cakes for any reason. The DHS is protecting illegals from our laws and threatening our citizens who protest their lawless intrusions.

It is almost overwhelming to think that we have fallen to this point in so little time.  Hopefully, there are people in all political parties who can agree on the preservation of our country and the freedoms for which we have paid such a high price.

Each day brings new attacks on basic freedoms.  We must be diligent and demand responsibility from our representatives in government.  Surely we deserve more help than we are getting from Congress. A large number of congressmen are lawyers.  They can pretend to be helpless against the executive branch, but I'm not buying it.

You be the judge...

 Nothing says life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness like violent, oppressive, enslaving Islam... NOT!

 Yeah, some of you voted for this twit. Shame on you.

 National Report White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest announced today that President Obama will be visiting a Washington D.C. area Mosque on the morning of July 4th as a goodwill gesture to Muslim Americans.  The name and location of the Mosque are currently being withheld for security reasons.

The President has long been criticized for being sympathetic towards Muslims and has even been accused of secretly being Muslim himself.  His announcement to visit a Mosque on the morning of America’s most patriotic holiday will likely add to this criticism.

 According to Earnest, following his visit to the Mosque, the President will host the traditional White House July 4th cookout.  Several influential Muslim leaders have been invited to attend the cookout, as a further gesture of goodwill.

American Muslim Ahmed Mohamed Usman, who will be attending the cookout, had nothing but praise for President Obama’s decision.  In an interview this afternoon on NPR, Usman had the following to say:

 America is supposed to be the land of freedom and of tolerance. Finally we are starting to see this. If America has Christian prayer breakfasts, so must it have breakfasts praying to Mecca. If America is to put the 10 Commandments on display, so must she display the Quran. To be welcomed into the highest office of America to celebrate her birth and independence is an honor and is a step for Muslims in America to begin to establish our rights.President Obama is truly opening the door for, Musklims in America - See more at:

http://nationalreport.net/obama-visit-mosque-host-muslim-leaders-july-4th/#sthash.uU7DjWmo.dpuf

By Ralph Peters

 If a soldier who volunteered to serve in the military rapes or murders someone while in uniform, has he served honorably? Has Bradley Manning, who voluntarily joined the military and then betrayed his country by turning over hundreds of thousands of documents to WikiLeaks, served honorably? Did Benedict Arnold, another volunteer, serve with “honor and distinction”?

According to the logic of our national-security adviser, Susan Rice, they all did. Merely because they volunteered in the first place. Lieutenant Calley of My Lai Massacre fame? “Honor and distinction.”

Ms. Rice is aggressively stupid, immaculately clueless, and a disgrace to our system of government, but one does have to admire her tenacity. Late last week, Rice tried to extract herself from her effort to sell Private Bowe Bergdahl as a hero who served, as she had put in on ABC’s This Week, “with honor and distinction.” (The rank of private is correct, in that his promotions were phony.) In her attempted walkback, Rice claimed that anyone who ever signed on the dotted line had served honorably: “What I was referring to was the fact that this was a young man who volunteered to serve his country in uniform at a time of war. That, in and of itself, is a very honorable thing.”

If this administration cannot embrace our military, might it not at least stop insulting those in uniform? No soldier is finally judged to have served “with honor and distinction” until his or her service is complete. There’s a glaringly obvious reason for that.

Of course, we’ve heard a series of increasingly ugly comments from White House staffers as their lionization of Bergdahl has collapsed. Administration hacks who have never served our country in any useful capacity stage-whispered that right-wing activists were “swiftboating” the reputed deserter. In fact, it was the other way around: The real character assassinations were launched from the White House, and they targeted soldiers from Bergdahl’s platoon who had, indeed, served with honor and distinction. Those courageous young men stood up for justice, refusing to allow the administration’s blithe betrayal of military values to prevail. In response, White House loyalists insinuated that Bergdahl’s comrades in arms might be psychopathic. This is Chicago politics leveled against truly honorable soldiers — yet more evidence of this president’s disdain for those in uniform.

Then, on Sunday, the New York Times front page — once again indistinguishable from its self-abusing editorial pages — snarked that Bergdahl’s unit was “known for its troubles” and that (Lord preserve us!) the soldiers in Bergdahl’s battalion, on dangerous duty at a harsh outpost, weren’t always properly attired. Well, ending the draft was great for our military, but dreadful for the country. Anyone who had served even a couple of months as a private at Fort Hood would grasp that soldiers sweating on sunbaked ground in eastern Afghanistan generally do not display the spit and polish of the Old Guard drill team performing in Washington, D.C.

And perhaps those bold reporters from the New York Times would like to criticize the imperfect field uniforms of SEAL Team Six or our Special Forces? To their faces?

Doubling down on its shamelessness, the same front page applauded Obama for personally ending a failed strategy in Afghanistan — without bothering to mention that the truly catastrophic, troop-killing “strategy” was Obama’s own. The revisionism is worthy of the heyday of Chairman Mao.

When it comes to Bergdahl, though, the administration does have a strategy. No one in the White House gives a damn about Bergdahl now. He’s a liability. But the rule is that Obama is never wrong. Apologies are out of the question; instead, the White House is determined to tough it out, as it has through myriad scandals. And the tactics to protect the president are clear.

 First, the White House will pressure the military to deem Bergdahl unfit to stand trial. That stage is already being set. After doctors treating him declared Bergdahl physically fit to return home (guess he wasn’t dying, after all), they’ve kept him secluded in Germany, making it known that he is in their view mentally unprepared to return to the States. The administration is going to go with the defense that Bergdahl is unbalanced, was unbalanced, and will be unbalanced.

 If military doctors refuse to play along, “impartial civilian experts” will be called in. If that doesn’t work and the “too crazy to court martial” defense flops, the next step will be to strong-arm the Pentagon to reduce any charge to the comparatively minor Absent Without Leave, or AWOL (although overwhelming evidence exists that Bergdahl deserted). Then Bergdahl’s lawyers could plead him out, retain some benefits (perhaps all of them) for him, and the administration can claim, “See! He wasn’t a deserter after all.”

 If some unexpectedly ethical general refuses to play along and the case goes to a court-martial, the administration’s fallback will be to insist on a “thorough” reinvestigation that pushes any court-martial past Obama’s 2017 departure from office (one suspects that Team Obama would love to dump this in Mrs. Clinton’s lap).

 But won’t the brass stand up for fairness, military discipline, and justice? The bitter truth is that they haven’t thus far. Our generals knew within days of Bergdahl’s abandonment of his post that the evidence was overwhelming that he had deserted (ask them, under oath). But they made the decision to keep it quiet. The initial reason General Petraeus gave to me just days after Bergdahl walked off was that the military wished to shield Bergdahl’s parents.

 Here’s where it gets interesting and ugly. The “noble POW” story took off politically. Commander after commander played along (as did Congress). Worse, the Army itself tried to beatify Bergdahl as some sort of hero-martyr to the troops, printing up solidarity posters and even creating life-size pasteboard cutouts of Bergdahl. Naturally, the troops knew it was BS (you can’t fool Private Snuffy very long, and word soon gets around). The agitprop was amateurish but outrageous (majors put up the posters, and sergeants rolled their eyes). Every officer involved in that effort should be relieved of duty.

 It’s time for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, to man up. He inherited this Big Lie, but he shouldn’t pass it on. It’s his duty to follow the legal orders of our commander-in-chief, but it’s not his duty to provide cover for the president’s political shenanigans. As for Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, he’s clearly a lost cause on this case, with his claim that you can’t prove that any soldiers died because of Bergdahl, even though they were killed while the massive search for Bergdahl was underway and they died where they otherwise would not have been. (Dear Secretary Hagel: From one former sergeant to another former sergeant, show a glimmer of decency. You’re acting like some damned officer.)

 As for President Obama himself, there’s far more news to tell. For all his pretensions about his regard for the troops, this man has lavished vastly more attention on the family of a deserter than any other military family has ever received from him (just as Bergdahl is getting more intensive medical attention than a genuine hero would). And you’re thinking, “Rose Garden,” right? But this has gone on for years, with a full colonel or brigadier general ordered to report to the Bergdahl family every three to six months with an update about their son. Has the White House taken so great an interest in the families of those who’ve been gravely wounded in the line of duty? Or of those who died? No, it has not. The White House fell in love with a family clearly several raisins short of a full bowl of granola. Not despite their son’s desertion, but because of it.

 Mr. and Mrs. Bergdahl, too, have been Obama’s pawns. Our outrage should aim at the president, not them.

Of course, Private Bergdahl himself is the perfect soldier for those whose concept of our military was formed by Oliver Stone movies. Reportedly disillusioned with the war, he just walks away, a model of nobility, to seek out the enemy and find common ground. Bergdahl is a hero — for everyone on the left who despises our military. It’s a shame Sean Penn’s too old to play the role.

 Meanwhile, with a straight face, Obama and his fellow travelers in the White House and media caution us not to “pre-judge” Bergdahl. That would have been a more credible plea before the president and his advisers pre-judged Bergdahl as a hero.

 In closing, let me paraphrase the words of a fine U.S. Army lawyer from the past: “Mr. President, have you no shame?”

 — Ralph Peters is a retired Army officer, a former enlisted man, and Fox News Strategic Analyst.

The odds of winning the Florida lottery,

 1 in 22,957,480

The odds of winning the Powerball lottery,

1 in 175,223,510

The odds of winning Mega Millions lottery,

1 in 258,890,850

The odds of a disk drive failing in any given month, are roughly 

 1 in 36.

 The odds of 2 different drives failing in the same month. are roughly 

 1 in 36 squared, or 1 in about 1,300.

 The odds of 3 different drives failing in the same month. is 36 cubed.

or about1 in 46,656.

The odds of 7 different drives failing in the same month  (like what happened at the IRS when they received a letter asking about emails

 Targeting Conservative and pro Israeli groups) is (37 to the 7th power)

about 1 in 78,664,164,096. (78 Billion to 1)

 In other words, the odds are greater you will Win the Florida Lottery 342

Times than having those seven IRS hard drives crashing in the same month!!!

While watching yet another news show this morning about the lack of Obama's actions on just about every important issue facing the United States of America I suddenly realized WHY.

President Obama is AFRAID.  Mr. Obama has bitten off far more than he can chew with his presidency and he knows it. He may have been successful locally while being a Senator but he was far too inexperienced to take on the role as leader of the most powerful country in the world.

Mr. Obama's rose-colored glasses have taken on the deepest rose to the point where he is completely blinded by what is really happening all around him and those glasses now have blinders on them as an additional hindrance to what he doesn't want to see.

This man is afraid.

We all know another major 9/11 type terrorist attack is going to occur.  And probably soon.

I am certain that President Obama is going to call in sick on that day.  And Biden will probably catch the same illness as Obama.

At this point in time, we have no one running our country.  Instead, we have a leader who is running from his sworn responsibilities.

I propose that when that unfortunate but likely time comes, the House of Representatives take over.

Benghazi After-Action Report by Walt Harper

                In lieu of an official After Action Report by the US Congress and in keeping with military traditions of honoring our War Dead, I submit my After Action Report in order to reveal heinous events that not only aggravated a potentially defensible assault on an American Embassy but also insulted the integrity of the US Government. Under the current administration, acceptance of responsibility and feeble attempts to conceal arms trafficking to enemies of the United States through the American Embassy at Benghazi preclude official reporting of fault so I offer it here.

                More to the point, a concise report of the September 11, 2012 Attack on the American Embassy in Benghazi can be had here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack- and this is closer to a personal rant about rampant disregard for accountability by the Federal Government.

                Ambassador S. Christopher Stevens was killed by Islamic militants affiliated with Ansar-al-Sharia who were in turn affiliated with Libyan Security Forces and local police. Ironically and with conflicting accounts, Ansar-al Sharia transported Ambassador Stevens to their hospital and tired for more than an hour to revive him without success.

                Sean Smith was killed was killed by Islamic militants affiliated with Ansar-al-Sharia who were in turn affiliated with Libyan Security Forces and local police. Sean Smith died alongside Ambassador Stevens inside the American Embassy at Benghazi. His body was recovered by CIA operatives before the next attack began at the CIA Annex 1.2 miles away.

                At great personal risk, Glen Doherty left Tripoli to assist in defending the CIA Annex in Benghazi and to effect the evacuation of 30 Americans. He met his friend Tyrone Banks there early in the morning of September 12^th, 2012 and they both fell in combat after being struck by mortar rounds but not before the safe evacuation of 30 Americans was made possible.

                Despite the fact that the loss of four American lives cannot be mitigated by any glorious claim of American Diplomacy or other assertion, it most certainly cannot be summarily dismissed by the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she forcefully uttered, “At this point, what difference does it make?”.  Thankfully, her public display of callousness towards the gallantry of the fallen heroes was delayed a few days as she recovered from a head injury that occurred after she stumbled and fell.

                Throughout all American History, the U.S. Secretary to the United Nations has been a position that served discreetly in international affairs. In the Benghazi Incident, UN Secretary Susan Rice was drummed up to report in place of the Secretary of State and to parrot a wildly incredulous fable that the Embassy was attacked in retaliation for an Anti-Islamic movie called “Innocence of Muslims”. Coincidences, such as the attack occurring on September 11^th and the involvement of Ansar-al –Sharia, were willfully negated as mere coincidences. Both actions of both women were disgraceful and insulting to common American intelligence.

                The representation of facts pertaining to the Benghazi Incident were rabidly and emphatically dispensed, so much so that, that absence of a final authority-the President of the United States of America-became glaringly obvious. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did when she acquiesced her bid for the Presidency to Senator Barrack H. Obama at the DNC in 2007, she also acquiesced her integrity as a government official when she denied responsibility for the safety of diplomats but admitted to “security lapses”. Any inept Captain of any ship who admitted to knowing of a leak in the ship but not accepting the sinking of the ship would be as obvious as an inept Secretary of State.

                Similarly throughout American History, the location and actions of the President of the United States of America during times of crises have always been known, with the exception of the Benghazi Incident. Weak or completely missing details about President Obama’s reactions to, or even knowledge of, the Benghazi Incident, have been as pardoned as the actions of the two women who shielded him.

                A Standard Operating Procedure-SOP-is universal to all organized military forces. Mysteriously and for the first time in recorded American military history, the SOP for an attack on Americans was overruled. High ranking military officers involved in the Benghazi Incident and commissioned to initiate SOPs were reassigned. Although it is evident to all military personnel where a “stand down” order must originate from, very little (no) significance is given to this single factor of the Benghazi Incident. Speculatively, had the body count been higher, this single factor might have been sufficient to justify Articles of Impeachment.

                When I was much younger, the evening news always reported the Human casualties of the Viet Nam Police Action. I reveled in my naiveté about the greater number of enemy killed and that the war would soon be won. With that upbringing, I am (somewhat) satisfied that the kill ratio that fateful night was 1:33 and it was completed without artillery or air support.  Our valiant warriors who fought and died deserve better respect than what was meted out by the Secretary of State, UN Secretary, and the President of the United States of America.

Lest we forget!

My fellow Americans, we are all bit players in the making of a metaphoric slasher movie, “Obama Unchained” starring Barack Hussein Obama.

Here is a summary of the movie. It is a heartwarming tale about how the mainstream media and Democratic Party suckered America into electing their extreme far-left dream president; a Trojan Horse in the form of a black man.

Once in the Oval Office, Obama began incrementally implementing his socialist/progressive agenda and iron-fist pressure on Americans to conform. Everyone, including a 175 year old order of elderly Catholic nuns were forced to comply to Obama's decreed anti-biblical new moral standards or face termination. Only donors, labor unions and favored friends of his royal Obamaness totaling over 2000 are unlawfully granted exemptions from his tyrannical overreaches hidden in Obamacare.

Unchained from pretending to be a moderate to get reelected, Obama is releasing his judgment and rage upon America; wielding his executive pen sword, causing a bloody massacre of our economy, national security, world standing, freedoms, liberty and culture.

Now totally unrestrained, with lawless abandonment, Obama dishes out what he believes is well-deserved revenge on America for her crimes against the rest of the world. Obama is delivering the retribution spoken of by his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright who said, “America's chickens have come home to roost.”

Pundits say Obama is merely incompetent. They site highly unfavorable approval polling to conclude that Obama's presidency is in deep trouble.  Political analysts believe dismal poll numbers will force Obama to back away from his intensely focused savage attack on America as founded; his vowed fundamental transformation of America. These sycophant, apologist or naive talking heads are missing the point. Obama does not give a rat's you know what about polling. Nor does he fear lawsuits, Congress, impeachment or anything else.

Remember Michael Jackson's famous line, “I'm not like other guys”? Obama believes he is not like other presidents. I am Barack Obama, the first black president. I can do whatever I please and no one is going to stop me. Period!

“Obama Unchained”, the movie, is directed by Unknown Socialists/Progressives.

Obama's supporting cast includes Eric (cited in criminal and civil contempt of Congress) Holder as the corrupt partisan head of the DOJ.  Lois (Wicked Witch of America) Lerner as the corrupt, vindictive and evil IRS enforcer. Kathleen (Yes, you will fund abortions against your faith) Sebelius as the totally incompetent head of the botched Obamacare roll-out.  Jay (please don't make me go out there and lie again with a straight face) Carney as Obama's Press Secretary. This just in, Carney has been replaced by understudy liar, Josh Ernest.

If the metaphoric Socialists/Progressive's movie were to snag a Best Song nomination, their song would be titled, “I Believe I Can Lie” performed by Barack Obama. A real trailblazer, Obama is the first U.S. President awarded,“Liar of the Year”.

In my metaphoric scenario, the buzz in DC would declare “Obama Unchained” a shoe in for Best Picture. However, the sentimental payback favorite for Best Picture would be “Sixty-Six Years A Liberal” starring Hilary (don't asked me about Benghazi) Clinton.

Folks, while I have taken a humorous approach to describing Obama's Revenge War on America, the situation is extremely serious. The solution is quite simple. It is push back, push back, push back politically. While the Tea Party remains fully engaged, what strong courageous conservative will emerge to lead the charge?

We who love America are metaphorically in the process of producing our own movie titled, “November 4, 2014: Independence Day”.

Lloyd Marcus, Unhyphenated American

Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

By Craig Andresen on July 7, 2014 at 4:44 am

When it comes to the next two elections, November 2014 and November 2016, we…as Conservatives, MUST get our priorities in line or we will not only lose those elections…we’ll lose this country.

When I say ‘priorities’ I mean our platform.

Simply put, we win on policy and we WILL lose on social issues.

I know there are some Conservatives out there reading this who will say I’m off base and that’s okay…they’re dead wrong.  They are entitled to their opinions but if they want to take this country back…back from liberals and their warped ideology of socialism leading to communism and back from the abyss of big government control of our lives and businesses and back from the brink of global disaster…They need to understand exactly what the real problems this nation faces ARE.

Right now, our southern border is wide open. Illegal aliens are flooding in by the hundreds of thousands and tens of thousands of those illegal aliens are children. Tens of thousands of them are infested with contagious diseases and Obama has our military acting as baby sitters while our agencies, originally put in place to protect our border are being tasked with being the taxi service that disperses these illegal aliens throughout OUR country rather than sending them back to THEIR countries.

It’s illegal. It’s human trafficking being carried out by our own government and it is a gross violation of our Constitution.

This is not a social issue…

READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE!!!

More than just the birthday of our nation, the 4th of July commemorates something we as a country have all but forgotten. The 4th of July represents a celebration for it was, is, and always will be the only true philosophical revolution in all history. Distinctly American, ours was a revolution that changed the very concept of government.

On July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was signed by our founding fathers as they denounced our separation and “absolved from all Allegiance to the British crown”. In doing so, the United States of America was created and with it a new concept emerged as a government under the people declared their freedom and independence.

This concept of government was uniquely American as it served as,”only a convenience created and managed by the people,with no powers of its own except those voluntarily granted to it by the people” stated Ronald Reagan.

The government we see today is no longer of mere convenience as Americans, more evident than ever before, relinquish their consent in acceptance of absolute despotism.

The long train of abuses and usurpations by the government have increased under the Obama adminstration to a point in which there “evinces a Design” to reduce us under “absolute despotism”.

The establishment of absolute tyranny appears to be surging into inevitability as the President sets a defiant tone in asserting that he will act “with or without congress“. In his 2014 State of the Union address, Barack Obama promised a “year of action” as he stated his intent to unilaterally act “wherever and whenever” he can without legislation.

Thus the President confirms his transformation into taking actions that are akin to a king.

John Locke wrote of this transformation under his Second Treatise of Government stating, “Whereas usurpation is the exercise of power to which someone else has a right, tyranny is the exercise of power to which nobody can have a right”.

Furthermore, “It is what happens when a governor, however entitled he is to govern, is guided not by the law but by his own wants, and his commands and actions are directed not to preserving his subjects’ properties but to satisfying his own ambition, revenge, covetousness, or any other irregular passion”.

Currently our President has shown nothing but sheer contempt for those who remain against his ideology. He is guided not by laws but by his own wants and commands directed at satisfying his own ambition to fundamentally transform the United States of America.

With Locke’s notion of tyranny in mind, one must only look towards the Declaration of Independence, specifically with an eye towards the founders description of the king, in comparing the similarities of Obama’s increasingly imperial presidency.

The Declaration states that the king, “has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly Firmness his invasions on the Rights of people…He has erected a Multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people…He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good”.

The President has dissolved the “Representative Houses” in acting “with or without congress”, most notably in his multiple unilateral actions of delaying and implementing Obamacare. He has used the Government, particularly the IRS, to harass Tea Party groups, which continues to this day. He has refused acceptance of our laws, most recently in refusing to protect our borders as illegal immigrants swarm into the country without fear of deportation.

Feel free to Read the Rest of My Article By Clicking Here PoliticallyShort.com

The narrator would roll over in his grave if he knew what our present administration looks like.This is an incredibly great video.  Humbles you right down to your toes.

 It is one of the best "America Tributes!"

 https://www.youtube.com/embed/rKsW6c_CgFY?feature=player_detailpage

From a woman who was there.

"West Point Class of 2014"

May 30, 2014

The West Point graduating class of 2014 "spoke" volumes as their commencement speaker, Barak Obama, used the speech NOT to laud them for their accomplishments and their sacrifice to serve in the U.S. Military, no, instead he chose to use that precious time to tell them how effective his foreign policy has been, how the military role in foreign policy going forward (paraphrasing) "ain't what it used to be" and is no longer a leading line of defense. At times he stumbled over the words on the teleprompter to the point of embarrassment but he didn't seem to be in the least bothered by it.

To top off his narcissistic ramblings in which he claimed successes in Syria and Ukraine for God's Sake and bragged about ending the war in Iraq (and as every cadet sitting there knew, his actions of pulling all troops on a date certain, handed Iraq right back to Al Qaeda linked terrorist groups as if the for sacrifices our military made was of no consequence and stood nothing). Believe me, every one of those intelligent, well informed cadets knew the sacrifice this president flushed down the toilet and for what; political gain.

As if that wasn't bad enough, he then lectured the cadets that they must focus on the progressive social policy of GLOBAL WARMING! He told them they must be prepared to help the government enforce the legislation. The looks on the cadets' faces said it all!!! I could read their minds. "Since when has ANY of our military been used to enforce social policy? How 'bout NEVER! And for good reason, Mr. president, that kind of use of the military only happens under DICTATORS, you ass. We studied long and hard to learn how to lead troops to defend our country from enemies both foreign and domestic, not enforce domestic and social policy at a president's whim!"The cadets, as is the custom, were prompted to applaud at designated intervals throughout the speech. At first, the majority of the cadets clapped on cue (out of respect for the office I would imagine) but there was no enthusiasm in it. Not even at the beginning. As the speech progressed, fewer and fewer cadets clapped. Many chose to stare at the ground. By the end there were only five or six clapping when prompted. Did the president seem to notice the cadets' silent protest? Oh hell no. He was so enthralled by the sound of his own voice he stood there and beamed like the cat that swallowed the canary.

Here's the topper; as the president handed out the diplomas to the West Point cadets; each one very accomplished, intelligent, highly trained and dedicated to serving their country, their Commander-in-Chief BOPPED AROUND on the stage CHEWING GUM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Disrespectful? Yeah, I'd say. He is clueless six years in to his presidency. There again, the expressions on the cadets faces told it all. Contrasts don't get much more stark than that.

Mary Wood

Semper Fi!

Let’s pray for unity - 7-6-14        http://anticorruptionact.org/

Father we pray for unity, give us the wisdom to acknowledge that praying for our salvation it is not enough, we have become isolated and removed from contact with non-Christians and some of the pressing social questions of today, we have often been quite content to sing about going to heaven, but show very little concern for the sick and the poor, the lonely, the old and the miserable of our world. Father show us the way to do your will, Isaiah 58 is a ringing condemnation of such attitude as Christians, Father help us to be faithful to you my Lord and let us be concerned and open our eyes and earns to take action and dare not neglect these that need our love and support and as Christians show this manifestation of Christian love that we have tended greatly to neglect.

Father, you made us a family, let us open our hearth to all the people and minister not only one segment of our society but include all people, all classes, and all colors, without distinction. Father we need you, help us be obedient to your command to offer love, friendship, forgiveness, and grace to all people without regard to class, color, background, or heredity help us to follow your example, you was the one who called us and who Himself was the friend of sinners of all kinds. Lord We are honest and admit that this has been the weak spot in our life, we ask to forgive us. Father, open my eyes that I might see the people around me as people whom you created and whom you have placed in my path for a purpose. Teach me that I am my brother's keeper.  Father we are your disciples and responsible stewards of all yours creation your gifts to all the people, for the good of humanity and the whole world.  Father, help us to be one family with you my Lord, now and in the world to come. AMEN

I just started a petition on the White House Petitions site, We the 
People.  Will you sign it? http://wh.gov/lFXqo

Lets get something straight - we already have laws, and the law passed is that the border would be built - PERIOD!

Now here we are 27 years later and still no border.  Solution:  the Democrats want the illegal aliens here so badly then let them pay for them!  NOT ALL AMERICA ---  Fine every Democrat Senator and Congressman 100,000 per each and every illegal alien they let stay!  These illegals need to reside in the counties where these Democrats live!

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.