Some unanswered questions and thoughts of a former journalist

Let’s see if I understand this correctly: I can own a private enterprise that is quite profitable and makes lots of money for me; those who choose to invest in my company and my employees. I can play by the rules and still get hauled before a bunch of self-important, pious egotists masquerading as esteemed Senators to defend my business acumen because somehow, somewhere, the premise was proffered that my legal business, which pays millions of dollars in taxes to support these government hacks, is somehow evil.

Meanwhile, the same government hacks that I support with the taxes generated from my private business, can support programs that run guns across international borders so that foreign agents can then execute a war against the country that my taxes support, but when I ask my congressman why he won’t assume his constitutional authority to declare war against the people firing at my neighbors from across the same international border, I’m laughed at as if my suggestion is ludicrous. Imagine if we’d had the same attitude on Dec. 7, 1941.

Some more questions and observations:

• What’s the difference between what Bernie Madoff did to private investors and what the United States government is doing to its citizens via Social Security?
• When George W. Bush sent troops to the Middle East to fight a war the media called him a warmonger and wanted to drag him to his death.
• When Barrack Hussein Obama sent troops to the Middle East to fight a war the media called him brave.
• The George W. Bush tax cuts were gifts to corporate cronies and the rich until Obama was given the choice to let them expire, then they were the right thing to do.
• Exxon is chastised for not paying its “fair share” of taxes while General Electric can pay no taxes on billions in profits and its CEO receives presidential treatment and access.
• The same communist regimes that we once touted as our enemies are more profitable, more capitalistic and run their governments with lower tax rates than we do? Did you know that Russia has a flat tax and collects more money than it ever did because of it, or that China regularly visits American businesses in order to learn how to replicate our capitalistic successes?
• How did health care become a right and the ownership of firearms by free citizens become outlawed? What constitutional amendment covers health care?
• Who decided that it was more important to pay people to literally dig through the trash of a former governor than it was to dig into the past of the man who would soon become President of the United States? Why weren’t more people alarmed when two veteran news journalists openly admitted that they knew nothing about the background of Barack Hussein Obama, or what his thoughts and motivations were?

Related articles

• Unanswered question – What about the Wall St. meeting? (politico.com)

Obama extends middle finger at America

Regardless of your position on same-sex marriage, Obama’s decision earlier this week on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is yet another middle finger gesture by the President of the United States at the US Constitution, and a clear and present danger to the very fabric of the United States.

The irony in his decision is thicker and juicier than the meat on the ribs Michelle ate recently while vacationing in Aspen, although you wouldn’t know it from the headline on the story, which chose instead to highlight the vegetables she also apparently ate; but I digress.

The US Constitution explicitly outlines the duties and responsibilities of Congress (Article 1); the President (Article 2); and the Judiciary (Article 3). Nevertheless, Obama apparently chooses not to recognize these clear delineations in legal authority by declaring a duly signed law unconstitutional. Obama clearly and unconstitutionally inserts himself in Article 3 by assuming the powers authorized only by the judiciary. At least his Liberal friend in the Senate, Dianne Feinstein, is attempting a constitutional remedy to the Defense of Marriage Act by introducing legislation to repeal the Clinton-era law.

Meanwhile, the autocrat in chief has boldly declared DOMA unconstitutional, citing “the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment.”

I thought Obama saw the Constitution as a “charter of negative liberties” and therefore he didn’t believe in it at all? He certainly doesn’t think very highly of the constitutional citations given by Judge Roger Vinson in his ruling that declares ObamaCare unconstitutional.

Related Articles

• Diane Feinstein to Seek Repeal of Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (nowpublic.com)
• Senate Dem to Introduce Repeal of “Defense of Marriage Act … (politics.blogs.foxnews.com)

Did Rush fail or did we truly doubt doubt him?

Image via Wikipedia

Shortly after Obama was inaugurated the state media in the United States picked up and ran with Rush Limbaugh’s hopes that Obama would fail in what he wanted to do to the United States. I say “to” and not “for” because Obama himself actually used that verbiage in his defense of why he believes the US “Constitution is a charter of negative liberties” in that it “says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you.”

Two years later we can see where Rush’s hopes, along with the hopes and desires of most of America were dashed by passage of Obama Care and several other egregious acts foisted upon the people by a Congress bent on its will and not the public’s. It certainly can be said that Obama succeeded in his first two years; the argument isn’t that, but what was at the root of his actions. Was Obama simply a tool for Liberals who’ve wanted for decades to nationalize health care in America, or is he worse, someone with truly despotic ideas and goals for America based on what we already know about him through his speeches and writings?

For more than two decades Rush has succeeded in airing the opinions of people who previously had no voice in media and government in America. Yet I’m here today to suggest that Rush has also failed.

While Rush suggests that he’s not going away until everyone in America agrees with him that liberalism is a fatal disease, it’s been the actions of Liberals such as Obama and Nancy Pelosi and their former majority in the House of Representatives, not Limbaugh’s articulate arguments, that have apparently affected positive change in America. Limbaugh almost admitted such in his radio program, but in a subtle way.

Rush recently argued that Americans aren’t buying Liberal arguments anymore because we can’t afford it, particularly when we make less than half, on average, than public sector union members for doing similar jobs. And it’s “We the People” who are paying for these public sector jobs! It’s our money coming out of our paychecks through increased taxes that is going to grease the pockets of these union members and their fat cat bosses. Meanwhile, Obama lectures us from the teleprompter that “We the People” must sacrifice at a time of economic stress in America, yet government and the public sector unions that own them refuse to sacrifice.

So in that sense it seems that for all the articulate arguments of Limbaugh to paint Liberalism as pure evil and detrimental to human liberty and freedom, it’s been the force feeding of Liberalism over the past two years by Obama and his despots, and not Limbaugh’s words over the past two decades, that have succeeded in showing Americans just how Liberalism’s true goal is not to usher in a utopian environment where nobody suffers, but an authoritarian type of regime where EVERYONE but government suffers.

Then again, maybe Rush is right. As he like’s to say: “Don’t doubt me.”

 

The Obama Reich Ministry exposed?

Reichsminister for Propaganda and National Enlightenment, Joseph Goebbels. Image via Wikipedia

Here’s some frightening stuff — especially for us conservative Facebook junkies — that would make Joseph Goebbels jump for joy.

Examiner.com is reporting that the US Government — you know, the criminals we employ to do little things like “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty,” are engaged in a propaganda mission against their subjects (that would be you and me, boys and girls!).

While some are claiming this story to be totally bogus, it’s still certainly plausible, given the nature and practices of the regime currently occupying the White House to employ such tactics against American citizens.

An erie comparison or careful propaganda?

Watch yourselves. If nothing else this story is making me a bit skeptical of Facebook. Then again, could that be part of the propaganda ploy of Obama’s Reich Ministry? Should we start whispering to only our most trusted and closest friends?

I am the Infidel (that your Imam warned about)

“Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition” and “Sliding down the slippery slope/put your own neck in the rope” are just two of the great lines from this anthem by a good friend of mine, Joe Dan Gorman.

Political correctness has placed us on a dangerous slippery slope as Islam becomes the religion du jour in America. Already children in public schools are being taught the religious Pillars of Islam and are given assignments to test their sensitivity to the so-called religion of peace. Yet because of the twisted opinions of a few, what people like to trumpet as the “separation of church and state” prohibits teaching the Beatitudes and 10 Commandments in those same schools. Both are religions — Islam and Christianity — yet one is prohibited, even though our nation was founded on it and most of the state constitutions in America directly cite God in their preambles.

Sharia Law is certainly not something that Jesus or his disciples taught, yet it’s something that is coming to America unless We the People in this “one nation under God” get on our knees to pray, then stand up and oppose America’s forced conversion to Islam!

Sen. Schumer fails US Civics on CNN

“We have three branches of the government: we have a House, we have a Senate and we have a President…”

No, Senator Schumer, we have a Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch. It’s right there in the US Constitution under Articles 1, 2 and 3.

How is it that “We the People” are smarter than our elected officials when it comes to Constitutional matters? Yet, we’re told we’re too stupid to participate in self government!

Related Articles

• Chuck Schumer, Constitutional Scholar (treeofmamre.wordpress.com)
• US Civics Quiz (http://www.civicsquiz.com/50-question-civics-quiz/)

Arizona rancher fails 3-S principle

One of the hallmarks of American liberty is private property rights, or so it used to be. For as long as there has been a United States people have sought to have their own piece of property to call home.

American law recognizes private property rights and generally protects the property owner from intrusion by uninvited guests. That is apparently, unless you happen to own property along our sovereign border with Mexico and the intruders are Mexican nationals illegally crossing into the United States.

In Arizona a rancher is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who illegally crossed into the United States and trespassed on his property in 2004. The Mexican nationals charged the rancher with violating their civil rights.

This case should never have been given standing in US courts!

How is it that an American citizen, protecting his own property from theft and his family from death or other physical harm, is in violation of any law? If anything he showed incredible restraint by not killing the trespassers (something the Obama Regime should give him a military award for) and leaving their bodies in the desert to rot and become coyote bait!

America has a national security crisis and it’s walking across our southern border every day. When is Congress going to assume its constitutional duty and defend our borders from the criminals and terrorists who are daily infiltrating our nation?

While the rancher should be lauded for turning over approximately 12,000 illegal aliens to US Border Patrol since 1998, his epic failure remains that he violated the 3-S principle: shoot, shovel and shut up.

Related Articles

• The Minuteman Vigilante’s Arizona Murder Trial (thedailybeast.com)
• You: U.S. border official vows to ‘finish the job’ started by slain agent in Arizona (latimes.com)

Ceding America’s sovereignty through food policy

American sovereignty is probably in no greater danger than now as Congress moves to cede decisions on agricultural production and policy to the World Trade Organization and labyrinth of unelected government officials within the United States, including the Department of Homeland Security.

Section 404 of the Food Safety Modernization Act: Declares that nothing in this Act shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization or any other treaty or international agreement to which the United States is a party.

Why add language like this unless it’s the goal of Congress to cede control of our food supply to a nefarious body of despots? But I’m not the only one asking these questions. Check out this video and its assorted links. Even more information can be found at the Food Freedom blog.

 

America's sovereignty has always been anchored in our ability to be agriculturally self-sufficient. A bill in Congress would strip that ability from us.

The Food Safety Modernization Act will arguably establish suffocating layers of regulation upon American agriculture, to the point that American agriculture will cease to exist. As I’ve written in the past, American agriculture is truly our last bastion of sovereignty. When we lose the ability to sovereignly control our own food supply we will no longer be able to control our political destiny. Those who set our agricultural policy and ultimately provide us with our food will have complete control over us. Given that ours is a world of despotic power it’s not entirely unreasonable that our food supply could ultimately be controlled by the same kind of cartels that already control our oil and energy supplies.

Speaking of the word “reasonable,” S510 uses this word three times as it cedes czar powers to the various department secretaries within the US government. For example:

Section 101 -

Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to expand the authority of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to inspect records related to food, including to: (1) allow the inspection of records of food that the Secretary reasonably believes is likely to be affected in a similar manner as an adulterated food; and (2) require that each person (excluding farms and restaurants) who manufactures, processes, packs, distributes, receives, holds, or imports an article of food permit inspection of his or her records if the Secretary believes that there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to such food will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.

Section 102 -

Authorizes the Secretary to suspend the registration of a food facility if the food manufactured, processed, packed, or held by a facility has a reasonable probability of causing serious adverse health consequences or death to humans or animals.

Section 305 -

Requires the Secretary to determine whether a country can provide reasonable assurances that the food supply of the country meets or exceeds the safety of food manufactured, processed, packed, or held in the United States.

What is “reasonable” to our government officials? It seems that nothing in government is “reasonable” anymore given their track record to overstep constitutional authority.

Lest we forget that government is in the business to grow its size and control over our lives, this measure outlines the implementation of numerous yet-to-be-determined taxes upon our lives. Let’s take a look:

Section 107 -

Directs the Secretary to assess and collect fees related to: (1) food facility reinspection; (2) food recalls; (3) the voluntary qualified importer program; and (4) importer reinspection. Applies export certification provisions to food.

Section 401 –

Authorizes appropriations for FY2010-FY2014 for the activities of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the Center for Veterinary Medicine, and related field activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs of the FDA. Directs the HHS Secretary to increase the field staff of such Centers and Office.

When has government not ever mandated something that it first didn’t make “voluntary?” This is another dangerous idea on a slippery slope towards despotism.

Section 112 -

Requires the Secretary to develop and make available to local educational agencies, schools, early childhood education programs, and interested entities and individuals guidelines for developing plans for individuals to manage the risk of food allergy and anaphylaxis in schools and early childhood education programs, to be implemented on a voluntary basis. Sets forth issues for such guidelines to address, including: (1) parental obligation to provide documentation of their child’s food allergy; (2) the creation of an individual plan for food allergy management; (3) communication strategies between schools or childhood education programs and providers of emergency medical services; and (4) strategies to reduce the risk of exposure to anaphylactic causative agents in classrooms and common school or early childhood education program areas, such as cafeterias. Allows the Secretary to award matching grants to assist local educational agencies in implementing such food allergy and anaphylaxis management guidelines.

The authority that Congress grants the various department secretaries is tantamount to the unconstitutional authority granted the treasury secretary to set and enforce financial policy of America. Congress is ceding control to unelected officials who, by default, become czars of their respective agencies, able to rule by edict absent constitutional controls. What’s wrong with our current system that this HAS to take place?

Just in case there wasn’t enough government control written into the act, read this:

Section 210 -

Requires the Secretary to set standards and administer training and education programs for the employees of state, local, territorial, and tribal food safety officials relating to the regulatory responsibilities and policies established by this Act. Authorizes and encourages the Secretary to conduct examinations, testing, and investigations for the purposes of determining compliance with the food safety provisions of this Act through the officers and employees of such state, local, territorial, or tribal agency.

What does this mean? Don’t we have grocery stores even in rural areas? This can’t be good! Take a look at this:

Section 406 -

Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to study the transportation of food for consumption in the United States, including an examination of the unique needs of rural and frontier areas with regard to the delivery of safe food.

Why do we need any government agency studying how food is transported to rural areas unless the goal is to cut off those rural regions from the rest of the country? It can’t be to improve efficiencies because we know government is incapable of that. We already have a network of highways and railroad routes capable of transporting goods around America. Aren’t these sufficient to get groceries to the rural regions of the United States?

While this plan is arguably aimed at food safety, America already has the highest standards for food safety in the world. We merely need to enforce those standards and ensure that the food we import meets those same high standards. This is not an issue of food safety for the sake of food safety; it’s really an issue of granting control to an international organization whose board of directors is reminiscent of the Star Wars bar scene, and whose members do not have the best interest of the United States as its core beliefs and desire.

14th Amendment was never intended for this

The original intent of the 14th Amendment was never to grant “anchor baby” or “birthright” status to illegal aliens bent on gaming the system here in America. Unfortunately, that’s how the liberals have interpreted it and thus allowed the system to be misused.

Don’t believe me? Read this from http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html:

In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14^thAmendment by stating:

“Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”

This understanding was reaffirmed by Senator Edward Cowan, who stated:

“[A foreigner in the United States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word…”

It’s disgusting to watch the continued and willful perversion of the Constitution and other founding documents by Liberals at all levels of government. Our republic cannot continue to stand under this oppression.

Obama’s racial double-standard

Where’s the national outrage against the Black Panther Party’s racist tomes and its call to kill white people? Where’s the national leadership from our President, who’s very ascendency to the nation’s top office was supposed to forever close the racial divide in America? Why aren’t more people outraged at this kind of incitement of violence and call for civil war? And what about the action of the federal Department of Justice to drop charges against the Black Panthers for voter intimidation during the election that seated Obama to the White House? That case was apparently open-and-shut until Attorney General Eric Holder apparently ordered his deputies to drop all charges.

Ironic isn’t it… Obama living in a house named for a skin color that the Black Panthers want to obliterate from our streets. But I digress.

Meanwhile, if you listen closely to the Obama Administration you’d think that white folks in Arizona are standing on the street corners of Phoenix and elsewhere in Arizona, dressed in white sheets and burning crosses while calling for the death of all Mexicans. How else can you explain Obama’s lawsuit against the State of Arizona and the idiotic calls by some states and local jurisdictions to boycott Arizona over its passage of a law that merely mirrors federal law? Why are the media playing this up as racist, yet they ignore King Samir Shabazz, the Philadephia Black Panther leader, as he openly calls for the assassination of people simply because of their skin color. Wasn’t the election of Obama supposed to eliminate the racial divide in America? Seems to me that it’s done nothing but create an ever larger chasm with those who share his skin color and political views spurring all of this division. I’d like to hear from the nation’s two biggest race pimps — the Rev. Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton — on this one.

Why is it racist for law enforcement officers in Arizona to ask people caught in the commission of another crime for proof of their immigration status, but it’s not racist for a black man to yell racial epithets and call for the murder of all white people?

Is this the civil war that Barack Hussein Obama has been planning? Is this the division he seeks while hiding behind a cloak of secret service protection?

Why aren’t the Black Panthers angry at Obama? After all, he picked a “cracker” as his vice president and just nominated another “cracker” to serve on the Supreme Court. If Obama was being true to the “home boys” who helped cinch his election he would not have named a “cracker” to be his chief of staff, or a white woman (gasp!) to be Secretary of State. After all, naming a woman to any position of authority ought to fly against the Muslim traditions that he bows to.