Exodus 18:21  21 "But choose men of ability from all of the people. They must have respect for God. You must be able to trust them. They must not try to get money by cheating others. Appoint them as officials.   

Obama Legacy of Failure:


http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2006-03-16/pdf/CREC-2006-03-16-pt1-PgS2236.pdf         Senator OBAMA. (speaking). Found on page 2 of 6.

March 20, 2006: This was the last stand-alone debt limit vote on which then-Senator Obama voted. He

was one of 48 members to vote against the increase, which passed with 52 votes.i  Obama said: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”ii  ii Sen. Obama, Congressional Record, S.2237-8, 3/16/06 http://www.gpoaccess.gov/crecord/retrieve.html     


At the time, Senator Obama was urging Congress not to tolerate an increase that would bring the debt ceiling to $9 trillion. Thus, Democrats will soon demand that the debt ceiling be raised, lest the sky fall. When they do, they will be asking for a significan­t boost in a ceiling that is already EXTREMELY higher than the one Barack Obama said was “a sign of leadership failure” years ago.”


 http://quadcitysun.com/2011/08/24/obama-version-2008-adding-4-trillion-in-debt-is-unpatriotic/      August 24, 2011 Yesterday the Quad City Sun reported that the national debt has increased $4,247,000,000,000 since President Obama’s inauguration, a new record for the rate of growth.  As Matt Cover at CSNNews.com reports:  “as a presidential candidate in 2008 Obama criticized then-President George W. Bush for adding $4 trillion to the national debt over EIGHT years, saying it was ‘unpatriotic’ and also ‘irresponsible’ to saddle future generations with such a large national debt.

At a campaign event in Fargo, North Dakota on July 3, 2008, Obama declared:

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child.”   Watch & learn…OWEbenedict & his Democraps are   100% more ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘irresponsible’         http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q&feature=player_embedded        


Inexperience, Job killing policies & agencies producing a Jobless "recovery", Skyrocketing energy costs making everything more expensive, Obamanized Greece style big government & accompanying out of control, irresponsible Spending, Debt levels and unemployment.

WORST President Ever goes to Obama, then FDR, Wilson, LBJ then Jimmy Carter.

How can you afford any more years of Obama & his Democrats?  How are you better off than before Obama & his Democrats?  How can you trust Obama & his Democrats?

Do you feel safer than before Obama & his Democrats?  How has Obama & his Democrats secured our borders?  Does the United States have stronger relations with our allies?  Do our enemies still hate us?    Are we more energy independent? 

Do you think the United States is better or worse off than before Obama & his Democrats?  Want more of the same OR real hope and real change for the better? 

Read on to be a better informed voter.  How you vote matters.





Proverbs 22:7  Good News Translation (GNT)   7 Poor people are slaves of the rich. Borrow money and you are the lender's slave.

Proverbs 21:5  Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)   5 The plans of the diligent certainly lead to profit, but anyone who is reckless certainly becomes poor.(A)

http://www.nobankruptcy.com.au/blog/2011/06/01/simple-budgeting-for-lazy-people/      "A budget is telling your money where to go instead of wondering where it went.."  - John Maxwell


Proverbs 21:20 Good News Translation (GNT)   20 Wise people live in wealth and luxury, but stupid people spend their money as fast as they get it.




The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It

( Debt Held by the Public vs. Intragovernmental Holdings )


The inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States took place on Tuesday, January 20, 2009.







Debt Held by the Public

Intragovernmental Holdings

Total Public Debt Outstanding





See information on the Debt Subject to the Limit.


Debt Held by the Public

Intragovernmental Holdings

Total Public Debt Outstanding





Daily History Search Application

To find the total public debt outstanding on a specific day or days, simply select a single date or date range and click on the 'Find History' button.  The data on total public debt outstanding is available daily from 01/04/1993 through 05/22/2012. The debt held by the public versus intragovernmental holdings data is available: 



"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time." -

Copy to Clipboard

  --  Abraham Lincoln




When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”  –Benjamin Franklin

   (+ this is a great warning, but for those who want fundamental change in America, it shows a way to end it..who are the promoters and facilitators of this??..how about the big government statists, politicians and lobbyists??)


I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. — Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor; 29 November 1766

It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income. — Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard’s Almanac, 1758



Luke 22:25-27 (ERV) 25 But Jesus said to them, “The kings of the world rule over their people, and those who have authority over others want to be called ‘the great providers for the people. 26 But you must not be like that. The one with the most authority among you should act as if he is the least important. The one who leads should be like one who serves. 27 Who is more important: the one serving or the one sitting at the table being served? Everyone thinks it’s the one being served, right? But I have been with you as the one who serves.



Exodus 23:1-3  (NIV) Laws of Justice and Mercy  23 “Do not spread false reports.(A) Do not help a guilty person by being a malicious witness.(B)2 “Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice(C) by siding with the crowd,(D) and do not show favoritism(E) to a poor person in a lawsuit.


Isaiah 10:1 (NIV)10       Woe(A) to those who make unjust laws,    to those who issue oppressive decrees,(B)


Isaiah 10:6 (NIV)I send him against a godless(A) nation,  I dispatch(B) him against a people who anger me,(C) to seize loot and snatch plunder,(D)  and to trample(E) them down like mud in the streets.

Isaiah 32:6-8 (NIV)For fools speak folly,(A)   their hearts are bent on evil:(B)
They practice ungodliness(
C)   and spread error(D) concerning the Lord;  the hungry they leave empty(E)   and from the thirsty they withhold water.Scoundrels use wicked methods,(F)  they make up evil schemes(G)to destroy the poor with lies, even when the plea of the needy(H) is just.(I) 8 But the noble make noble plans, and by noble deeds(J) they stand.(K)


Psalm 33:12 (NIV) 12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,(A)  the people he chose(B) for his inheritance.(C)



"Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches - Feed me with the food allotted to me; lest I be full and deny You, and say, "Who is the Lord?" Or lest I be poor and steal, and profane the name of my God," Proverbs 30:8-9 (NKJV).


1) We cannot be great if we are broke, see http://www.usdebtclock.org/  or  http://usadebtclock.com/  2)  We need to cut our unaffordable, greedy, wasteful, fraud-filled, abusive, corrupt, incompetent Fed Gov't at least in half by privatizing what we can, moving to the States what we can and streamlining what little is left through a Convention of States to save our liberty & our country by enacting the Liberty Amendments, which include term limits and a balanced budget, see http://www.conventionofstates.com/3)  Please vote for Ted Cruz for President!  https://www.tedcruz.org/         https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates 4)  The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_45.html   5) The IRS must be abolished & replaced by the FAIR tax that should go through the states as it did before the 16th Amendment, see http://fairtax.org/, plus the EPA along with most other Fed agencies need to be moved down to the state level. 6) Also, all the RHINOs like Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell etc. & all the Democraps, who bankrupt our country financially & morally, need to be primaried/voted out and replaced ASAP; get informed at https://www.conservativereview.com/7)  We need Affordable Gun Ownership with Concealed Carry & defense training for law abiding citizens, see http://www.gunowners.org/ or http://guntalk.com/site30.php  8)  Finally, we need to get back to personal responsibility, self-sufficiency, gratitude and God’s way, see  https://outreachjudaism.org/category/articles/page/2/ .          



 Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 (NIV)  13 Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter:  Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind.  14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.

 Devarim - Deuteronomy - 1: 13,15  13.Prepare for yourselves wise and understanding men, known among your tribes, and I will make them heads over you.   15.So I took the heads of your tribes, men wise and well known, and I made them heads over you, leaders over thousands, leaders over hundreds, leaders over fifties, and leaders over tens, and officers, over your tribes.

 Mishlei - Proverbs – 29:2,4,8   2.When the righteous become great, the people rejoice, but when a wicked man rules, the people sigh.  4.A king establishes the country with justice, but a haughty man tears it down.  8.Scornful men inflame a city, but the wise turn away wrath. 

 Deuteronomy 13:1-5 (NIV)  Worshiping Other Gods  13 [a]If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him.








Is it better to have the Constitution amended de facto by a 5-to-4 vote of the Supreme Court? By the unilateral actions of a president? By administrative rulings by anonymous bureaucrats in federal agencies, to whom federal judges "defer"?
Despite the left's portrayal of themselves as champions of the people, they consistently try to move decisions out of the hands of the general public and into the hands of officials insulated from the voters, such as unelected federal judges and anonymous bureaucrats with iron-clad job protection.


FIVER--ARTICLE V--CONVENTION OF STATES!!!!  On Friday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbot not only joined that movement, but he proposed a specific list of changes immediately that he says should be made.    A group called Convention of States, a project of the Citizens for Self-Government, already has been working on getting the necessary states to agree to such a convention.   The Convention of States website explains that the Founders provided the alternative, through which the states “can stop the federal spending and debt spree, the power grabs of the federal courts, and other misuses of federal power.”


Welcome to the Convention of States Store, your one-stop shop for apparel and promotional products to promote the Convention of States and get the word out!



https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates is sending every candidate that has declared for the GOP nomination a survey to help conservatives understand where candidates stand on important issues.





 2016 Presidential Hopefuls  Worker-Protection Immigration Grade Cards

Assessing immigration stances that affect Americans' jobs & wages by changing supply of workers.


our FRC Action Presidential Voter Guide is out.



 “The way you bring manufacturing back to America is, number one, you lift the regulations. As president, I will repeal ObamaCare, the biggest job-killer in America,” said Cruz.  “I will pull back the federal regulators, the EPA and all the regulators that are killing small businesses and manufacturing.  “And my tax plan, which is a very, very detailed plan on the website https://www.tedcruz.org/issues/, is what’s called border adjustable. We get rid of all the taxes. We get rid of the corporate income tax and the death tax and the ObamaCare taxes and the payroll tax. And we replace it with a 16% business flat tax that is border adjustable, which means all exports are entirely tax-free and all imports pay the 16% business flat tax. That’s a 32% differential.  “What that will do, Chris, is bring millions of manufacturing jobs back to this country, bring the steel industry back to this country, create an environment where, when we compete on a fair and level playing field, American ingenuity can beat anyone. But right now, the federal government isn’t giving us a level playing field.”  It was an eloquent, fact-based, carefully thought out and powerful statement that gets to the heart of who’s been running the U.S. as its establishment, why change is needed and what greatness really means.


 Ted Cruz's victories in Kansas and Maine mark a dramatic turning point in the presidential race. Trump was favored to win both states and his falloff may be a significant indicator that he was badly hurt in Thursday's debate.


 After his best debate of the cycle, Ted's momentum was undeniable where it counts: ballot totals. By night's end, he and Trump were separated by only 234 votes out of the 622,579 cast.  Of course, most experts were curious how Saturday would impact the race given that these were all closed primaries and caucuses -- meaning that only Republicans could vote.


 "Ted Cruz was in a different debate than what everybody else was doing, including [John] Kasich," he added. "Ted Cruz was running rings around everybody — in terms of awareness of the issues, knowledge of the issues, mastering whatever it was that was discussed."


 Actor Chuck Norris will join Sen. Ted Cruz on the campaign trail, multiple sources are reporting.  The “Walker, Texas Ranger” star and famed martial artist will hit the campaign trail for the GOP candidate this weekend, according to an invitation from a pro-Cruz super-PAC.


 Former Republican presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina says she is endorsing Texas Sen. Ted Cruz for president.  Speaking at a rally in Miami Wednesday, Fiorina called Cruz a "leader and reformer... willing to take on the status quo in Washington."  "Ted Cruz has always been a constitutional conservative. He is a fearless fighter and reformer and he didn't much care whether he got invited to the cocktail parties in D.C. We know Ted Cruz is a fearless constitutional conservative because he has fought for our liberties over and over again," she said.  "Ted Cruz has stood up and fought for our right to bear arms. He has fought -- he has fought for our religious liberty. He has fought for your sovereignty. And he has won over and over and over. 


Ted Cruz has been a tireless defender of the Constitution and the founding principles that have made this the greatest country the world has ever known,” said Lee, who, like Cruz, is a former Supreme Court clerk. “Ted is a leader with a proven record of fighting for our conservative values and for the issues that matter most to Americans. He has shown time and again that he is willing to stand up to Washington. Ted is an authentic fighter who will ensure that poverty is temporary instead of tolerable, that hardworking families will have real opportunities to rise and he will put an end to the special perks and privileges for the wealthy and well-connected.  America deserves a president who is principled, positive and proven – I believe that describes Ted Cruz and why I am proud to endorse him for President of the United States.”


 If anything, the fact that Marco Rubio was popular with other Republican Senators may have raised more suspicions about him. The grassroots are in no mood to receive an appointed ruler from the establishment (RINOs, sellouts and backstabbers)  And when we remember Rubio’s involvement in “the gang of eight,” we realize that indeed, his popularity comes from the fact that he sided with the establishment against the Tea Party voters who put him in office.


 Ted Cruz on the other hand, threatens their crony socialism and the current system as it's evolved - big government, big deals, no principles.  He was a “spy” sent to Washington by "We The People" to give us a full report. Did he ever fail in his mission? No.  Do you remember Ted Cruz's Iowa victory? It seems so long ago. He was the only candidate to campaign against their ethanol subsidies - crony socialism, and he won! Additionally, you may or may not know that Sen. Cruz was the first Latino ever to win an American presidential caucus or primary.


 Trump's impromptu approach to public policy suggests that if he were in the driver's seat, he would be guided by nothing but his own whims. Cruz, by contrast, assures us that his map would be the Constitution, and that difference alone makes him clearly preferable to the Republican front-runner.   Cruz, by contrast, is a Harvard Law School graduate who clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist and argued nine cases before the Supreme Court as the solicitor general of Texas. "We will defend the Constitution, every single word of it," he said…Declaring that he wants to "protect the people by rolling back the federal government to the functions the Constitution sets out," he lists four federal departments, one agency, and 25 programs that he would eliminate.

In contrast to Mr. Trump, Ted Cruz
wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on Sunday where he decried the Supreme Court ruling on gay 'marriage' and used it as an example of why the Senate should wait until the people vote for president to consider any nominee to the Court. Cruz has signed NOM's marriage pledge, and he's the author of a proposed constitutional amendment to restore the power to states to define marriage as one man and one woman. Mr. Trump has refused to support this proposed amendment.  Contested elections force people to make choices, and the choice for president if you believe in the truth of marriage and the importance of religious liberty could not be starker: Ted Cruz is a proven marriage champion while Donald Trump has failed the test of leadership.


Trump's debate comments were still unsettling Michelle Malkin and John Miano when Chris and I sat down with them Friday afternoon. They have written a powerful book, "Sold Out," that refutes almost everything that the Silicon Valley titans have claimed about their need for more foreign tech workers.



 I know many of you are fans of Trump, but I just don’t get it. He is a brand, not a businessman.  In fact, if you want to feed your inner narcissist, there are companies out there where you can print custom water bottle labels with your name on them. If you want to live like an insecure billionaire, it’s just a click away.  But then, Trump should be expected to be protective of his brand given that’s all he cares about. Sure, he loves those buildings with his name on them, at least the ones he owns as opposed to those he licenses his name to.   Oh, and everything will be great again…somehow.  Companies don’t leave as much as they are chased; it’s Atlas shrugging on a company-by-company basis.  But it’s important to remember we aren’t on Let’s Make A Deal.


 In addition to going through the absurdity of Trump's current attacks, Levin reminded his listeners of how Trump took a "baseball bat to Carson" back in November. Listen:  Levin reminded the audience that Trump likened Carson to a "child molester" among many other things.  Trump questioned Carson's faith.  It was all in all very nasty. As for the CNN report that started all of this take a look at the actual report, as it appeared 16 minutes before the caucuses started.  Note what CNN host Dana Bash says about Carson and the seriousness of his campaign.  Bash said, "if you want to be President of the United States, you don't go home to Florida."


 Talk radio host Mark Levin argued that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s attacks on fellow candidate Dr. Ben Carson drove his numbers down, not Texas Senator Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)  97% , and that Florida Senator Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 79 was “pushing the same thing” as Cruz about Carson dropping out on Wednesday.  Levin said, “[H]ere’s what really happened to Ben Carson. Ben Carson was number one or number two in Iowa, what happened? I’m going to tell you what happened. November of last year happened. And Donald Trump took a baseball bat to Ben Carson. The Donald Trump today who’s coming to Carson’s defense.” He then played a montage of Trump criticizing Carson, which he introduced by saying, “This is what drove Carson’s numbers down, where he wound up in number four for the last month or so, where he had been number one or number two.” After the playing the montage, Levin continued that “most of us weren’t even aware of” the tweet Trump is basing his fraud accusations on.  (Ben Carson to endorse Hillary donor who called him a child molester. )


 With his brash “anti-PC” persona, and his ability to spin a web of lies that would make even Hillary Clinton blush, Donald Trump has captured the hearts (if not the minds) of the American voter. Apparently, Trump’s charm effect has worked on Ben Carson, who’s decided to throw his weight behind the business mogul.   He compared Carson to a pedophile, and called the voters of Iowa “stupid” for believing the surgeon’s life story.  Now, with the future of the nation at stake in what’s possibly the most significant election of our generation, Carson, the alleged Christian, endorses Donald “POWs are losers” Trump. To say that I’m sickened by Carson’s endorsement of Trump is an understatement that words cannot adequately describe.



 There was another ancient king named Nebuchadnezzar, the Babylonian leader who, decades before Cyrus became king, led his armies to destroy Jerusalem, burn down the temple, and send the Jewish people into exile in 586 BC.  He too was an idol worshiper, yet shockingly, Hashem called him “My servant,” stating plainly, “behold, I will send for all the tribes of the north, declares the LORD, and for Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land [meaning Judah] and its inhabitants, and against all these surrounding nations. I will devote them to destruction, and make them a horror, a hissing, and an everlasting desolation” (Jer 25:9; see also 27:6; 43:10).  So, Cyrus was anointed by God to restore the Jewish people from captivity and to rebuild Jerusalem after Nebuchadnezzar, as a vessel of divine judgment, was called by God to send the Jewish people into exile and to destroy Jerusalem.  Two pagan kings, one raised up to bring judgment and the other raised up to bring restoration.  Is Donald Trump a Cyrus or a Nebuchadnezzar, if either?  Let God be God, and only time will tell.  But while we wait and watch and vote and act, let’s not forget to pray: God, have mercy on America!


 The Barna Group’s research bears this out, largely because it uses a much stronger rubric than the mainstream media. To be considered an “evangelical,” Americans have to hold biblically-based values that correlate with regular church attendance and are evidenced in life choices. Among that population, Senator Ted Cruz continues to hold a powerful lead over the other candidates. Donald Trump, on the other hand, is viewed more unfavorably than anyone.  it’s our responsibility to look beyond our feelings and emotions to values and character and policies. If voters want to undo the mess of the last two terms, it will take a principled leader with a solid record who will work within the limits of the constitution.  For the sake of our nation, read before you vote.



 Trump seems like the Rodney Dangerfield of politics. They likely picture Trump as the late-comedian's iconic character Al Czervik in the 1980 comedy "Caddyshack." In the movie, Dangerfield plays a successful new-to-wealth real estate developer who slings insults at snooty members of an exclusive country club, and ends up in a high-stakes grudge golf match with the club's president.  Of course, Rodney's character prevails only after the groundskeeper, played by Bill Murray, blows up much of the entire golf course, thereby pushing Dangerfield's golf partner's ball into the cup for a last-minute victory.


 Trump's $1.9 billion in free or "earned" media coverage compares to the mere $10 million he spent on paid advertisements. Much of the free coverage was the result of Trump's continued front-runner status as well as propensity to generate controversy.
Here's how the other Republicans and the two Democrats still in the race stacked up in free media coverage:
• Hillary Clinton: $746 million   • Bernie Sanders: $321 million  • Ted Cruz: $313 million  
MediaQuant rates with a score of zero to 100, based on the quantity and quality of exposure. Trump gets at 98, which bests President Barack Obama, but Obama still pulled in more free media in terms of dollars at $2.58 billion.


 We survived Jimmy Carter and we may survive Barack Obama, but there is no guarantee that we can survive an unlimited amount of reckless decisions in a dangerous world.  The dangers are both internal and external. Two of our bitterest enemies -- Iran and North Korea -- are openly declaring their desire to destroy us. And both are developing intercontinental missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.  These and other mortal dangers are a product of the feckless foreign policies carried out by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, as the Obama administration weakened our military forces while our adversaries around the world have been rapidly strengthening theirs.  We will be lucky to survive the damage that has been done already. A third consecutive term of such policies, with Hillary Clinton in the White House, can be suicidal.  As for the Republicans' front-runner, what is there left to say about Donald Trump? Almost daily he demonstrates that he lacks the maturity, the depth and the character required to lead a nation facing a complex range of dangers.  It is not a question of his having flaws, which we all have. But what kind of warped character does someone have at his core who can mock a prisoner of war who was tortured for years by our enemies, mock someone else with a physical defect, reply to questions with gutter-level insults, and offer childish boasts about what he is going to do, instead of specifics about how?   These are not subtle nuances. They are blatant revelations about something fundamentally wrong. Too many people missed similar revelations about Barack Obama. For that we have already paid a price, and we will continue to pay a price, even after he is gone. So will generations yet unborn.



Rather than calling a convention for a specific amendment, Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG) has launched the Convention of the States Project to urge state legislatures to properly use Article V to call a convention for a particular subject—reducing the power of Washington, D.C. It is important to note that a convention for an individual amendment (e.g. a Balanced Budget Amendment) would be limited to that single idea. Requiring a balanced budget is a great idea that CSG fully supports. Congress, however, could comply with a Balanced Budget Amendment by simply raising taxes. We need spending restraints as well. We need restraints on taxation. We need prohibitions against improper federal regulation. We need to stop unfunded mandates.  While the national debt is a crisis of the first magnitude, in many ways it is the symptom rather than the disease. The disease is an improper allocation of power with Washington, D.C., believing its power has no limits. A Convention of the States needs to be called to ensure that we are able to debate and impose a complete package of restraints on the misuse of power by all branches of the federal government.

All existing Article V efforts to reduce the power of Washington, D.C., are aimed at particular amendments. Every one of these ideas would be germane at a Convention of the States under the application that CSG has prepared. Mark Levin, who is not only a well-known talk show host but a fine constitutional scholar as well, has recently begun to advocate the calling of a Convention of the States for a group of amendments that he calls the “Liberty Amendments.” Of his 11 proposed amendments, 10 would be germane at the Convention of the States using the CSG model application.




What do the following five things have in common? The highest corporate-tax rate in the world; high personal and small-business taxes; the Affordable Care Act; an oppressive regulatory atmosphere with intimidation rather than help from the government; and overly aggressive environmental-protection policies.  These five things — along with the devaluing of the U.S. dollar by the constant printing of money backed up by nothing but reputation — are largely responsible for an extremely sluggish economy that has little hope of improvement without a drastic change in economic philosophy.  Detroit is but a harbinger of the fate that will befall our beloved nation if we don’t heed the warnings so vividly placed before us.

Moreover, this toxic business environment is the perfect cultural medium for the growth of victimhood and the entitlement mentality. Political correctness dictates that one should never say such a thing for fear of being labeled heartless.  I not only reject outright such foolishness, but rather I feel very strongly that these measures that suppress economic development also suppress the hopes and dreams of many Americans.  I fear that the secular progressives have been winning lately by succeeding in convincing large portions of the population that they should be more concerned about the benefits they can collect than about the opportunities they lose when their God-given talents for achievement are replaced with dependence on government.  We need to understand the connection between dynamic economic growth and the general welfare of the people. For anyone who does not understand: Robust economic growth creates plenty of jobs and opportunities for everyone and decreases the need for government dependency.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/12/carson-heeding-the-warning-signs-of-decline/?page=1#ixzz2kZBJYIcq    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter





Obama is ending his fifth year in office with the lowest approval ratings at this point in the presidency since President Richard Nixon, according to a new Washington Post/ABC poll released Tuesday.

Obama’s approval rating in the poll stands at 43%. By comparison, President George W. Bush had a 47% approval rating at the end of the fifth year of his presidency. And all other Post-World War II presidents had approval ratings above 50% — with the exception of Nixon, who, amid the Watergate scandal, had a dreadful 29% approval rating.



James 4:2-3  You want things, but you do not have them. So you are ready to kill and are jealous of other people, but you still cannot get what you want. So you argue and fight. You do not get what you want, because you do not ask God. Or when you ask, you do not receive because the reason you ask is wrong. You want things so you can use them for your own pleasures. (NCV)

Luke 11:23 (ERV)   23 “Whoever is not with me is against me. And anyone who does not work with me is working against me.

1 Timothy 6:6-9 (NIV)  But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.

Luke 12:8-9 (NIV)  “I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God.


Acts 5:29 (NIV)  29 Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings!



Have you seen Dr. Carson's latest Washington Times op-ed? He reveals his very first job! More importantly he explains what he learned from his first few jobs and how they helped get him to where he is now. Please click here to view his op-ed.
Once you read his op-ed, I know you will understand why we are working so hard to Draft Ben Carson to run for President in 2016.  Ben Carson is the right choice for America. He will heal, and if he runs, he CAN win. Don’t let the establishment pick the GOP nominee in 2016. I want our America back and I know you do to. Let’s work together on this historic draft effort.
Click here to support Ben Carson and take our America back!   John Philip Sousa, IV   www.RunBenRun.org



Ben Carson:   I held a long list of different types of jobs as I was growing up. I think each of them provided valuable skills that I might not otherwise have acquired. When I worked as a mailroom clerk, I learned the importance of accuracy and speed, as well as organization.  One minor error upstream could have many negative ramifications downstream; meaning, no job is too small and no detail too minor not to require the utmost in attention and devotion.  The job market in America is quite challenging today, and it is well known that in most states, an individual can collect as much if not more from food stamps, housing subsidies and health care subsidies than he can by working a minimum-wage job. If one is only interested in being sustained, accepting many forms of public aid makes a great deal of sense.  However, if the goal is to pursue the American dream, taking even minimum-wage jobs makes even more sense. Between high school and college, I worked as a payroll office clerk receiving barely more than minimum wage, but I learned a great deal about office machines and many of the intricacies of making sure that people were paid on time.  When I worked as a student assistant to the police department while in college, I had the opportunity to meet many distinguished and well-known people from around the world and was exposed to things that I would never have seen otherwise.  When I worked as a supervisor for a highway cleanup crew, I learned a great deal about managing people who were not necessarily eager to work. Also, through relationships that I developed with my supervisors, I was able to obtain a much higher-paying factory job the next summer that eventually led to my dream summer job of driving very fancy, new sports cars off the assembly line.  There were many other jobs and many other opportunities and skills that were acquired, but the main point is that working leads to the acquisition of knowledge, experience, relationships and opportunities to move up, all of which are important components of realizing the American dream.  Some people will say that they agree with all of this, but that it is irrelevant because people cannot find jobs. I can remember people saying that about Detroit in the early 1970s when I would return home and attempt to find a summer job amid exaggerated reports of the paucity of summer jobs for college students.

Most of the students trying to find jobs were looking at want ads and posters with little or no success. I was almost always able to find a job without a great deal of effort by jumping on the bus and just traveling until I reached a location populated with many small businesses.  Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/3/carson-getting-to-the-top-by-starting-at-the-botto/#ixzz2nHtvFUox Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


Actually, no economic system has brought more prosperity to more people than free-market capitalism. Neither socialism nor communism has increased prosperity, and are themselves ruled by tyrants bringing an equality of misery.  We wonder if the pope prefers a dictatorship or oligarchy to the free market. If so, who will run it? Most people, we think Francis will agree, have their hands full taking care of their own lives and families. Where would we find someone capable of also ruling others?  Surely Francis knows the Old Testament story of the prophet Samuel, who warned the Jews that a king they wanted would take their sons and daughters, the best of their vineyards and olive groves, their cattle, their donkeys, their flocks, and a tenth of their grain. "And you yourselves," said Samuel, "will become his slaves."  Before Francis ventured into such utopian territory, he should have first consulted someone who knows about Economics and actual results like Milton Friedman, who offered this famous gem: "In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you're talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade."  

As for those who prefer data, we offer this: From 1999 to 2012, the developing world's economy grew 163%, pulling literally hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, by moving toward free markets.  The inescapable fact is that the free market is consistent with Christianity. It does not rely on coercion, which is needed to eliminate inequality.  It's based on peaceful, voluntary cooperation and fueled by a biblical work ethic. All God's children are welcome to take part, free to make their own decisions, free to better their lives and take care of their families, free of the force of masters who'd make them slaves.  No, the free market isn't Christianity's enemy. It is, rather, a useful — and moral — ally.   Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook


teachings start at 44:25


Isaiah 5:8-25 Quick Review: God gave the Prophet Isaiah a vivid image of the sinful condition of the nation of Judah in Isaiah chapters 1 through 5. Though the nation of Judah was being led by a godly king, Uzziah, the nation had severely lapsed into a state of spiritual and moral decline. Judah had experienced 52 years of godly rule by King Uzziah, which was experienced through wealth, prominence, and military power in the Middle East region. Judah was at its apex of status and power, but because of the 52 years of peace and prosperity, they had neglected to worship God! The Judeans had become arrogant and self-sufficient and no longer sought after God. God shares with His prophet Isaiah His six indictments against Judah. America has been following the same pattern as Judah. Will America fail to learn from history and thus be disciplined by God? Or will America learn from history and turn back to God and restore the broken relationship through repentance and seeking forgiveness?

The six indictments (woes) given by God to the nation of Judah were absolutely true and correct. The 6 woes were indictments against the “bad fruit” the nation had been producing as they continued departing from spiritual truth thus causing them to abandon worshipping God. Evaluate each of the 6 woes and write a brief interpretation in your own words. Evaluate each of the 6 woes; in what way has America followed the history of Judah in replicating these very same offenses? Should America be concerned?   Woe #1 – 5:8-10     Woe #2 – 5:11-17     Woe #3 – 5:18-19   Woe #4 – 5:20    Woe #5 – 5:21    Woe #6 – 5:22

 What was George Washington’s biblical proclamation concerning the United States of America during his inauguration in 1789? Where was the inauguration held? Where did America’s first Congressional prayer meeting happen in 1789? Why is it extremely important for America to worship Jesus Christ alone, and no other gods?


 Why do you believe people in America have attempted to continually push God out of our everyday life, culture and society? Does it seem to you that much of mainstream America is attempting to silence Christians and the name of Jesus? Is this dangerous? Discuss.





The measure is known as the Stop This Overreaching Presidency, or STOP, Act and is sponsored by freshman Rep. Tom Rice, R-S.C. He told WND this is about abiding by the Constitution.  “In the resolution, we list four specific things. One is the waiver of the work requirements under the welfare law. One is the granting of legal work status to illegal immigrants en masse. One is the waiver of the employer mandate under the Affordable Care Act. The fourth is the extension for one year of the ability of the insurance companies to sell ‘substandard insurance policies.’ In this case, substandard means any insurance policy that people actually want to buy,” he said.  The congressman pointed out that the resolution only needs to pass the House, since the House can file or defend a lawsuit as a standalone institution. He said that would carry far more weight in a federal court than a lone member filing suit. He said he didn’t “ask permission” from GOP leaders before filing the bill, and a conversation with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor gives him reason for optimism.

“I have spoken to Cantor about it, and he seems interested in it. I think the chances of it hitting the floor are pretty good,” said Rice, who revealed he has 34 co-sponsors, including three House Judiciary Committee members. He said the ultimate success of the effort will depend upon how vocal the American people are about making sure the president follows the Constitution.

Democrats are expected to label the effort as another attempt by Republicans to scuttle Obamacare because they can’t accept that was passed and signed into law. Rice said that’s not the goal at all.  “I hear that a lot, but they don’t want to enforce what was passed. That’s the problem. They want to enforce the parts that they want.  Let’s enforce exactly what was passed,” he said.

What the president is doing undermines our constitutional protections, the separation of powers. Congress makes the laws. The president enforces the laws, and he’s refusing to do that. He’s not carrying out his constitutional duty and I simply want him to do what he’s required to do by the Constitution,” said Rice.


So far, more than 30 members have cosponosred this bill but we need your help. Call other House Reprenstatives and ask them to cosponsor the STOP Resolution and show your support for by becoming a citizen cosponsor TODAY.  Email stop.resolution@mail.house.gov.    H.Res. 442:  The Stop This Overreaching Presidency (STOP)

To become a citizen cosponsor of the STOP Resolution, please visit https://www.cosponsor.gov/details/hres442-113. From there, you will be able to cosponsor the bill by signing in with your Facebook account. Again, I appreciate your support. For up-to-date information about the STOP Resolution and regular updates on what I am doing in Washington, D.C., please visit my website www.rice.house.gov or follow me on Facebook.



Step one: overturn the law. Step two: demand recognition. Step three: force acceptance.

Ten years ago, Justice Antonin Scalia predicted exactly that in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court decision rolling back sodomy statutes. With prophetic insight, he pointed to the threat to state laws "based on moral choices" against "bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution... adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity." Anyone being intellectually honest knew this was where liberals were pushing America. Of course, the media for years laughed off groups like FRC who warned that the Left's (Democrats’) goal is any kind of marriage.






CBO stuns! 'Rich' pay 106% of income taxes

Refutes ANOTHER  longtime Obama-Democrat LIE that wealthy don't pay 'fair share'

NEW YORK – A new Congressional Budget Office study has torn a hole in yet another one of President Obama’s insistent claims about the way things are.  The Congressional Budget Office study, “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2010, ” shows that the top 40 percent of households, based on pre-tax income, paid a remarkable 106.2 percent of the nation’s income tax in 2010. Meanwhile, households in the bottom 40 percent paid “negative income tax,” receiving an average of $18,950 in government transfer payments while paying no federal income tax.  That fact contradicts the Saul Alinsky-like theme central to President Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign in which he claimed “the rich are not paying their fair share of income taxes.”  The poor in America not only pay no income tax, they receive various government payments drawn from income tax revenues paid by the so-called “rich”



At FreedomWorks University not only will you learn about policy, economics, and history, you’ll also learn how to make a difference.  And as a special bonus, you will learn how to out-debate your progressive family members this Christmas season!

So please, enroll in FreedomWorks University today!




Three months ago, newly coronated Dutch King Willem-Alexander told his country that the "classic welfare state of the second half of the 20th century" was over. It would be replaced by a "participation society" because the "arrangements" the nation was operating under "are unsustainable in their current form."  Among the changes is a requirement that welfare applicants must prove they have actively looked for a job for at least four weeks before they can receive benefits.

"And once they begin to receive benefits they will either have to work or perform volunteer community service," says the Cato Institute's Michael Tanner.  Other savings will be found when youth services, care for the elderly and job retraining are kicked down to the local level, which is better equipped to be more efficient with other people's money.

The king warned that "the necessary reforms" will "take time and demand perseverance." But he assured the nation that they will "lay the basis for creating jobs and restoring confidence."  We don't want a king in this country. But we could use a chief executive who understands the situation as Willem-Alexander apparently does.  Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/122013-683808-netherlands-king-says-no-more-welfare-state-for-dutch.htm#ixzz2obtGrzAb Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook




When the weapons hunters failed to find stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so began one of the greatest slanders on a president in history: "Bush lied, people died."  Never mind that President George W. Bush, in building the case for war, relied on the unanimous opinion of all 16 intelligence agencies.  Never mind that the bipartisan Robb-Silberman commission examined the intelligence on which Bush relied, and unanimously found that "the Intelligence Community did not make or change any analytic judgments in response to political pressure.  " ... We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments."

Never mind that Bush retained the same CIA director, George Tenet, who served under Bill Clinton. Tenet gave Bush the same intelligence assessment: that Saddam Hussein, the dictator of Iraq, possessed WMD is a "slam dunk."  Indeed, according to the Washington Post's Bob Woodward, Bush was initially skeptical. When, on Dec. 21, 2002, Tenet presented the intelligence that purportedly showed the existence of WMD stockpiles, Bush said, "This is the best we've got?"  Never mind that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then a New York senator, was particularly adamant about the threat posed by Hussein: "In the four years since the inspectors left," she said, "intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical- and biological-weapons stock, his missile-delivery capability and his nuclear program. ... If left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Finally, never mind about then-President Bill Clinton's Persian Gulf expert on the National Security Council, Kenneth Pollack. While he opposed the war's timing, Pollack said "no one doubted" Saddam's stockpiles of WMD:

"The intelligence community convinced me and the rest of the Clinton administration that Saddam had reconstituted his WMD programs following the withdrawal of the U.N. inspectors, in 1998, and was only a matter of years away from having a nuclear weapon. ... Other nations' intelligence services were similarly aligned with U.S. views. ... Germany ... Israel, Russia, Britain, China and even France held positions similar to that of the United States. ... In sum, no one doubted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."  "Bush lied, people died" — or some version of it — was uttered at the highest levels in the opposition party.

If Bush is a "liar," having relied in good faith on U.S. intelligence agencies to protect & defend Americans, what do you call President Obama?  (Fast & Furious, Benghazi, NSA, IRS, Justice Dept, Obamacare Scandals et al.) In building the case for ObamaCare, Obama promised: "No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what."  Did Obama "lie"?  Obama's health care team, according to NBC News, knew that more than half of the people who buy their plans on the individual market would lose their plan: "Millions of Americans are getting or are about to get cancellation letters for their health insurance under ObamaCare, say experts, and the Obama administration has known that for at least three years."

NBC News' sources estimated that 50% to 80% of Americans who buy individual insurance will find their policies canceled, because those existing policies don't meet ObamaCare standards. And for many of those — now forced to buy new policies — the price tag will give them "sticker shock."  The Affordable Care Act stated that an insurance policy in effect before March 23, 2010, was to be grandfathered in — provided insurance companies have made no "significant change" to the plan.

But if the plan, say, had a change to the deductible, co-pay or benefits, the plan was no longer eligible to be grandfathered, and the policyholder would have to purchase a new plan.  ObamaCare's July 2010 regulations included an estimate that "40% to 67%" of customers wouldn't be able to keep their policy because of normal annual turnover in the individual insurance market. And, because many policies will have been changed since the March 23, 2010, date, "the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40% to 67% range."  Yet Obama continued to tell Americans that no one would lose his or her plan or doctor, a promise without which ObamaCare would never have passed.  For his part, Obama now says: "What we said was, you can keep it if it hasn't changed since the law passed." A lie is an untruth told with intent to deceive. 

Bush didn't "lie."  Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/110713-678366-left-attacked-bush-but-mum-on-obama.htm#ixzz2l0iuIrbH   Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook





(“So Smart” & Genius” Democrat Obama didn’t know???  Stupidest Prezzie ever goes to Odumbo)

 I've got a montage of all these media people saying Obama didn't know about NSA spying.  Obama didn't know.  He didn't know about the IRS.  He didn't know about Fast and Furious.  He didn't know that Obamacare's website was gonna be a bust. He didn't know anything.  And that's the excuse?  I just saw Gloria Borger on CNN, "Obama didn't know."  As though that's something to be proud of?  That is a legitimate excuse?  The president didn't know that the NSA was spying on foreign leaders, and you want us to give him a pass because he's that out of touch and detached that he didn't know, when the fact of the matter is they're lying to us again.  BS, he didn't know.  How stupid do they think we are?   Obama doesn't know anything about Benghazi.  He doesn't know anything about Fast and Furious.  He didn't know anything about Syria.  He didn't know anything about Obamacare.  Didn't know anything about the NSA or the IRS SCANDALS.  He didn't know anything about Solyndra.  He didn't know anything about how the stimulus was gonna go wrong.  He didn't know diddly-squat. 

(the Sergeant Schultz award goes to Odumbo, so “smart”!)




The structure of bicameral legislatures across the country is broken.  Eric and I agree, now is the time for the granddaddy of all Referendums.  It’s time to obtain petition signatures for a simultaneous referendum in every conservative county demanding a return to equal representation in the State Senate.  Specifically, this referendum should require that all of the political gerrymandering be brought to an end, and every county be represented by exactly two Senators.

In most states, conservatives control the majority of counties.  Success in this endeavor would properly restore control of the Senate to the majority of counties and resurrect the protections intended by our forefathers.  This would enable us to stop the relentless punitive war on rural America being waged by a handful of urban cities and counties across America.  Bad bills that seek to ban septic systems, ban guns, and tax stormwater, would die in state senates as they rightfully deserve.

Congress and the courts have failed us.   Now is the time for local officials to come to the aid of their Constitutional Republic.

Referendum anyone?  Please help me continue to lead the fight by local officials to restore our Republic, by going to www.richardrothschild.org  Our forefathers knew exactly what they were doing when they created both a House and Senate… each with its own unique purpose.   Representation in the House would be based on population, giving urban centers a bigger voice in proportion to their larger populations.

Conversely, representation in the Senate would give each jurisdiction within the Republic exactly two senators, regardless of population.  This would ensure that less populated jurisdictions had an equal or greater voice in at least one chamber.  This wise design was intended to protect rural areas from hyper-democratic processes wherein densely populated cities could simply outvote rural areas on every issue.  But alas, along comes Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186 (1962), and the Supreme Court adopts a seemingly benign one-man one-vote doctrine stating that each vote should count equally.  This opinion had the destructive effect of profoundly corrupting the inherent benefits of a bicameral legislature. It increased urban representation within the senate, and decreased rural representation, thereby completely neutralizing the intentions of our founding fathers when they created a bicameral legislature. For example, in Maryland, the state senate is now simply a parallel clone of the House of Delegates, with urban counties controlling the majority of senate seats.  Urban Prince Georges County now has eight senators, rather than two.  Rural Allegheny County now shares a single senator with another rural county.  This is NOT what our forefathers intended.

Thank you, Supreme Court, for another short-sighted opinion that serves to dismantle the inherent protections built into our bicameral legislature by our forefathers.  Now… back to Eric.  He runs a small business and is not an attorney.  Yet, last year, he wrote and sent his own petition to the high court, demanding a reconsideration of bad redistricting and the pernicious effects it has on our Constitutional protections. Sadly, the petition was unsuccessful.  We need YOUR help asap!




The BIGGEST LIAR goes to OBAMA!!!   Our LIAR in CHIEF ODUMBO!!   In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:  "Now, this debt ceiling -- I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up -- raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy.  All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress.  It's a basic function of making sure that the full faith and credit of the United States is preserved."  Obama went on to suggest that "the average person" mistakenly thinks that raising the debt ceiling means the U.S. is racking up more debt:  "It's always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we're running up our debt, so people don't like to vote on it, and, typically, there's some gamesmanship in terms of making the President's party shoulder the burden of raising the -- taking the vote."  When has the Debt ceiling been raised and debt gone down?  Isn't the fact that the U.S. has hit its debt ceiling "over a hundred times" - and, thus, has had to keep raising it - proof that raising the limit does, in fact, lead to increased debt? 





“An elective despotism is not the government we fought for,” Madison wrote in Federalist 58. A president with the power to borrow and spend at will would be just that.  Sadly, large numbers of Americans are at risk of being bamboozled by the Democrats’ inflammatory accusations and warnings of a government shutdown.  One reason is that shockingly, only a third of Americans can identify the three branches of government (according to a Pew Foundation poll). That’s how gravely our civics education has failed. Madison anticipated this threat to freedom. In Federalist 62, he warned that it will be pointless for Americans to elect a Congress, if it in turn enacts laws “too voluminous to be read,” or if these laws then ” undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow.” That’s ObamaCare.  On last week’s Saturday radio address, Obama again confronted House Republicans, demanding that they fund the government, no questions asked. Obama claimed that “the most basic constitutional duty Congress has is passing a budget.”  Wrong again, Mr. President.  Congress’s most basic duty is to protect and defend the Constitution, and withholding the money is the chief way to do it.






One heroic Congressman Walter Jones (R-NC) has introduced a new bill to repeal the 1954 Johnson Amendment law that encourages the IRS to tax churches and non-profits if their pastors endorse or oppose political candidates for office from the pulpit.   The new "Pulpit Freedom" bill H.R. 3600 would eliminate the (unconstitutional) law that punishes free speech in churches, named for then Senator Lyndon B. Johnson (D-TX) who later became President.  In 1954, LBJ was a liberal in the conservative South, who did not like hearing pastors preach about politics or endorsing his opponents from their pulpits.   So instead of changing churches, Senator Johnson wrote a bad law and got it passed, to silence pastors in churches he didn't like, by giving the IRS power to tax conservative churches who exercise their First Amendment rights.  Finally in 2011, Congressman Jones is trying to defend the Constitution, and restore free speech to conservative pastors.  I've preached in over 100 churches in 27 states since 2006, and this issue is #1 on pastors hearts.  The Johnson law has allowed the IRS to bully pastors into silence for decades. And it works.  Notice how our nation has morally declined since pastors lost their freedom and got gagged by the IRS.  Why were many pastors silent when our military was homosexualized this year?  Why are so few churches involved in protecting the rights of children to be protected from tax-funded abortions?  Why are pastors silent about school prayer, or good and bad political candidates?  They fear the consequences of taking a stand.  Many pastors privately tell me they fear the IRS taxing their churches, if they speak what's really on their mind.  Let's take off their gag, and stand for their freedom.
SELECT HERE TO SIGN PETITION, demanding PULPIT FREEDOM for Pastors and Churches to freely endorse and oppose political candidates, and we will instantly fax all 535 Congressmen and Senators (saving you much time and postage!)
So far the IRS has failed, repeatedly, to enforce the Johnson Amendment, because they themselves admit the law violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The government cannot tax or punish free speech, especially in church.  Religion itself is highly political, because God is God, and the devil wants to rule in His place.  Nowadays the devil uses corrupt politicians to rule society and pass immoral laws.  Throughout America's history, starting with the Revolution, our nation's pastors spoke freely on political and moral issues of their day. It was not only their privilege but their duty to preach truth to power, against immorality and corruption.  Historian James H. Huston wrote of 1776: "Preachers seemed to vie with their brethren in other colonies in arousing their congregations against George III."  Mr. Huston also discovered the House of Representatives sponsored church services in its chambers for the first 100 years.  They only stopped when better transportation took members of Congress home for the weekend.




Under the 68-page opinion of a single judge, that right no longer exists for Sooners. Like New Jersey, New Mexico, and Utah before them, Oklahomans are feeling the deep betrayal of a judicial system overrun by political activists. In a country where lawlessness is more contagious than the common cold, Democrat Clinton appointed U.S. District Judge Terence Kern smothered the votes of 76% of the state and substituted his judgment for that of 1,075,216 Oklahomans.  Kern, a Clinton-appointee, even stuck it to the U.S. Supreme Court in his ruling, implying that the justices dodged the hard questions in their June marriage decision. In reality, the Court couldn't have been clearer: "No one questions the power of the states to define marriage." Unfortunately, that didn't stop Kern from unleashing his warped ideology on one of the most conservative states in the country.  For more on how Weber's federal bill would keep outsiders from trespassing on your state's laws, click over to FRC's Cathy Ruse's new op-ed in the Washington Times.   Then, contact your congressman and ask him to sign on to the State Marriage Defense Act -- and help put an end to Government of the courts, by the courts, and for the courts.  Justice Secretary Eric Holder was already held in contempt of Congress -- but a Supreme Court reprimand may not be far behind. Regardless of where the justices fall on the question of same-sex "marriage," they probably had to pick their jaws up off the floor after the country's chief “law enforcer” put the Court's latest marriage decisions through the paper shredder and promised to validate Utah's same-sex "weddings" after the Court's stay on counterfeit marriages. In plain rebellion to the justices' June ruling, Holder announced that DOJ would take matters into its own hands and offer more than 1,000 federal benefits to couples, who, under state law, aren't even legally married!  This liberal federal judge ruled Tuesday that "Oklahoma's gay marriage ban violates the U.S. Constitution," reports Fox News.  The judge effectively imagined that our founding fathers wrote sodomy into the Constitution as a protected right.  [Dr. Chaps' comment:  There is NO mention of sexual orientation in the Constitution, and any judge who imagines one is a domestic enemy of the Constitution, and should be impeached and removed from office.  We must demand Congress hold the line, and protect the traditional definition of marriage FEDERALLY, like the Oklahoma people did by state.]




The Stop This Overreaching Presidency (STOP) Resolution



H.Res. 411: Impeaching Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.




What the war on poverty was intended to end was mass dependency on government. Kennedy said, "We must find ways of returning far more of our dependent people to independence."  The same theme was repeated endlessly by President Johnson. The purpose of the "war on poverty," he said, was to make "taxpayers out of taxeaters." Its slogan was "Give a hand up, not a handout." When Johnson signed the landmark legislation into law, he declared: "The days of the dole in our country are numbered."  Now, 50 years and trillions of dollars later, it is painfully clear that there is more dependency than ever.  Ironically, dependency on government to raise people above the poverty line had been going down for years before the "war on poverty" began. The hard facts showed that the number of people who lived below the official poverty line had been declining since 1960, and was only half of what it had been in 1950.  On the more fundamental question of dependency, the facts were even clearer. The proportion of people whose earnings put them below the poverty level — without counting government benefits — declined by about one-third from 1950 to 1965.  All this was happening before the "war on poverty" went into effect — and all these trends reversed after it went into effect.  Nor was this pattern unique. Other beneficial social trends that were going on before the 1960s reversed after other bright ideas of that decade were put into effect.  Massive "sex education" programs were put into schools, claiming that this was urgently needed to reduce a "crisis" of teenage pregnancies and venereal diseases. But teenage pregnancies and venereal diseases had both been going down for years.  The rate of infection for gonorrhea, for example, declined every year from 1950 through 1959, and the rate of syphilis infection was, by 1960, less than half of what it had been in 1950. Both trends reversed and skyrocketed after "sex education" became pervasive.  The murder rate had been going down for decades, and in 1960 was only half of what it had been in 1934. That trend suddenly reversed after the liberal changes in criminal laws during the 1960s. By 1974, the murder rate was more than twice as high as it had been in 1961.  While the fact-free liberals celebrate the "war on poverty" and other bright ideas of the 1960s, we are trying to cope with yet another "reform" that has made matters worse, ObamaCare.  Monday: How liberal thinkers through the years have regarded those who disagree with them as being not merely factually wrong but morally repugnant.  Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/012314-687421-50-year-war-on-poverty-a-failure.htm#ixzz2rjYpF2yd Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook


Click here to urge Congress to defund the EPA!

Today, Americans for Limited Government board member Bill Wilson had a piece published at FoxNews.com, "It's time to get rid of the EPA," in which he wrote:   "Any U.S. lawmaker who is serious about creating new jobs, lowering energy costs and preserving our constitutional form of government must make gutting this rogue bureaucracy their top priority."   The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is one of the least transparent federal agencies, is based on faulty science, and creates job killing regulations.  The latest example is a set of regulations that are shutting down 285 coal plants, risking a future of rolling brownouts.  Sadly, incoming EPA administrator Gina McCarthy is continuing to lead this fight.    According to an American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity analysis, the hardest hit states by EPA policy are Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Indiana. Nationwide, the number of actual plant closures is five times greater than EPA predicted would occur because of its regulations.  Higher energy costs affect you as businesses and manufactures pass along higher costs to you the consumer and your home bills are higher too.  Lower costs attract employers, businesses and manufactures that  create JOBS!!!




The Obama administration took forever to admit the obvious: ISIS has been committing wholesale slaughter of Christians. It didn’t want people to connect the dots and blame Obama’s foreign policy.  Secretary of State John Kerry surprised the press corps Thursday with an official State Department admission that the Islamic State is committing genocide against Christians in Iraq and Syria. Kerry cited “Yazidis, Christians and Shia Muslims,” being subject to “crimes against humanity” and “ethnic cleansing” at the hands of the fanatical caliphate that gained control of large parts of Iraq and Syria after President Obama’s withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.  The Knights of Columbus this month issued a heavily-documented 280-page report on the evidence of ISIS’ atrocities.  Obama’s legacy: ISIS and all its barbarism are a consequence of the post-Iraq-war U.S. power vacuum — the real Obama legacy.


"She helped create ISIS. Hillary Clinton could be considered a founding member of ISIS," Giuliani said Wednesday on Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor."   Clinton was part of the Obama administration when it withdrew from Iraq and allowed Nouri al-Maliki to be installed as prime minister and run the country "into the ground," he said.

Former President Bill Clinton unloaded on the Obama administration and Black Lives Matter protesters during a campaign event Thursday for his wife in Pennsylvania.  Clinton took a veiled jab at Obama’s handling of world affairs, saying, “Unlike when I was president, a lot of things are coming apart around the world now. We like to just think about our economic issues, but you have to worry about a collapse in Europe dragging back the American economy. You have to worry about the largest number of refugees since World War II. And all this stuff comes home.”  As WND reported, the Clinton family has been unleashing a barrage of attacks on Obama in recent weeks. On March 21, Bill Clinton publicly lamented the “awful legacy” of the past eight years.



Europe's utopian dream of open borders and coexistence has disappeared, and what's happening there is headed here if we take seriously what ISIS vows to accomplish. It's as if liberals believe their little piece of the world will miraculously remain safe -- if they don't offend the offenders.  Sometimes we just need to cast aside political correctness and call it for what it is. As Confucius said, "The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names." Truth is, the only hope we have is that a smart, strong and principled leader like Sen. Ted Cruz wins. Everyone's attacking Cruz for his comments on CNN after the Brussels attacks, suggesting cop presence be increased in questionable areas of the country. Cruz told Anderson Cooper: "If you have a neighborhood where there's a high level of gang activity, the way to prevent it is you increase the law enforcement presence there and you target the gang members to get them off the streets. I'm talking about any area where there is a higher incidence of radical Islamic terrorism."  As if that's a bad idea? A May 29, 2015 WND.com article, "Minnesota Muslims Brutally Honest: We Want Sharia," highlights that large numbers of Somali immigrants prefer Sharia Law and have little desire to assimilate into American culture. CBS News once reported the Cedar-Riverside neighborhood is a "fertile ground for Islamic terrorist groups recruiting new fighters."  While liberals lecture us on retaining our "American values" in response to ISIS, let's remember what Winston Churchill said: "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be, for without victory, there is no survival." 


Wednesday morning Sens. Marco Rubio and Mark Kirk introduced legislation that “prohibit[s] Iranian access to the U.S. financial system and the use of offshore U.S. dollar clearing, following reports that the Obama Administration plans to help the country illicitly access U.S. dollars.” That the U.S. government is coaching banks and businesses on how to do deals that avoid U.S. sanctions.  After reflecting on the exchange, Levin rhetorically asks: “Is this not treason?”   “Supplying arms and financing to an enemy that says ‘death to America’? Well if that’s not treason what the hell is?”


Why would Iran want to produce the nuclear weapons detonator Octogen, also known as HMX, or “high melting point explosive,” if it doesn’t have its eyes on becoming a nuclear weapons power?  As the New York Times reported regarding the disappearance of hundreds of tons of HMX from the Saddam Hussein regime’s huge al-Qaqaa facility in 2004,” Mr. Hussein’s engineers acquired HMX and RDX (rapid detonation explosive) when they embarked on a crash effort to build an atomic bomb in the late 1980s…The newspaper also pointed out that HMX’s “benign appearance makes it easy to disguise as harmless goods, easily slipped across borders,” and that it is “used in standard nuclear weapons design.”



Lyin' Donald: 101 Of Trump's Greatest Lies

But there's only one truly massive liar in this race: Donald Trump. When Politico attempted to measure how many lies Trump told over the course of 4.6 hours of speeches, they found that he lied, on average, once every five minutes. When Huffington Post catalogued his lies over the course of just one town hall event, they came up with 71 lies.   Which made it relatively easy to come up with this not-even-close-to-complete list of 101 lies from Donald Trump.



People with a modicum of common sense and basic fairness must acknowledge that among the reasons the United States has been uniquely prosperous is its free market system. They must also concede that socialism results in widespread poverty, misery and death. It has been estimated that in the 20th century, communist regimes in China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, North Korea, Eastern Europe and elsewhere killed nearly 100 million people.  Yet our president is gallivanting about the globe telling young people and anyone else who'll listen that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between communism and capitalism.

This kind of pernicious thinking is what is leading to the impoverishment and destruction of the United States, and it must be defeated, which is why in November, we must elect a candidate who clearly understands the relationship among limited government, our liberties and prosperity. The one candidate who believes that our unalienable rights come from God and that they are preserved by the scheme of limited government enshrined in the U.S. Constitution is Sen. Ted Cruz.



have said from the outset that I would vote for Donald Trump if he were chosen as the Republican nominee. I am contemptuous of much of what he does; I don't trust what he says, and I have no reason to believe that he actually holds conservative values. But, if Trump becomes the GOP nominee, he will be the only alternative to the left ruining America for another four years.

Really, though, their ruining could go on for much longer than four years. With two or three more left-wing Supreme Court justices, the left wouldn't need to win the presidency or Congress in order to "fundamentally (transform) the United States of America," as President Barack Obama promised in 2008. With a leftist Supreme Court, the Court will transform America simply by legislating from the bench.  How would Trump respond if an aide asked him, "Donald, do you think that tweet will help convince an undecided voter to vote for you?"   Well, Trump apparently has few or no aides who would ask him such a question.

In fact, Trump has boasted about consulting with himself (at least with regard to foreign policy). As Politico reported: "Asked on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' who he talks with consistently about foreign policy, Trump responded, 'I'm speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I've said a lot of things.'"  In addition to meanness, immaturity and insecurity, the my-wife-is-way-more-beautiful-than-your-wife tweet revealed that Trump is either not very intelligent or lacks intelligent judgment. And the latter is actually more disconcerting than the former.



If Donald Trump fails to get to 1237 delegates, nothing will have been stolen from him. He just plain didn’t earn it.  The Call of the Convention was finalized on November 30, 2015. The call outlined the rules of the primary and caucus season, went through exact delegate allocation, and outlined general guidelines on how each state can select and bind delegates. This was available two months in advance of the first primary.   Because of the large field of candidates at the beginning of the process, many people have been predicting an open convention from the beginning. Some campaigns have been preparing for that as part of their campaign strategy; the Trump campaign was not. They didn’t even hire someone to be in charge of delegates until after they started losing the delegate selection conventions and caucuses. It is almost too late and as the saying goes, piss poor planning prevents proper performance.  While he has decried the rules as being unfair, Trump himself has benefitted from them. He has obtained a greater proportion of delegates than his proportion of votes and up until now the rules have allowed him to do this. Contrary to Trump’s claims, the rules have actually been stacked in his favor. That he has not prepared to take advantage of them is his own fault. Things like running a country and a campaign are complex, involve rules, and require a person to execute on them. Perhaps Trump’s inability to use the rules, which have been stacked in his favor, to win the nomination are a real indicator that he is unready to lead the country.


The Republican primary system is not set up to stop Donald Trump. If anything the system helps him as he has 37% of the popular vote in the primary but has 45% of the delegates. If we are going to play by Trump’s rules then he should return 8% of his delegates to make the process fair.  Later, (once again) Ted Cruz has out organized Donald Trump in Nebraska in collecting delegates. Nobody from the Trump campaign showed up for Nebraska.


The latest, and perhaps biggest, lie -- thus far -- is that Donald Trump was cheated out of delegates in Colorado because the voters did not select the delegates.  If the people who ran the Trump campaign were not aware of what the rules in Colorado were, and Ted Cruz's people were, that is what happens when you hire people who are not up to the challenges of their job.  The success of campaign lies depends ultimately on how willing the public is to be stampeded without bothering to stop and think.


(Billionaire Trump cannot buy the votes he wants? why did he give so much money to Democraps to buy access & influence? Trump was going to have all these “smart” people and his big brain to Make America Great?  —the system works!)  His comments came after Cruz won the remaining 13 delegates at the weekend’s convention, bringing his total for the state to 34, an outcome he described as unfair and just shy of illegal.  “They offer them trips — they offer them all sorts of things, and you’re allowed to do that,” Trump said, of the method by which some woo delegates. “I mean, you’re allowed to offer trips, and you can buy all these votes. What kind of a system is this?


From 1912 – 1988, and 2004 to the present the delegates were not bound by a preferential vote. This year was no different. In Colorado, a caucus is held to elect delegates to county assemblies and the county assemblies elect delegates to state and district assemblies where the delegates to the RNC are chosen. That is how it has worked over the past four presidential cycles, and it is nothing new for this year.  Caucus is a meeting of neighbors, affiliated with a political party, who come together to discuss candidates, issues, ideas, elect leadership and delegates. It’s the basic building block of our Colorado political system. It’s an open door to local political activism. It’s an opportunity for all voices to be heard.


Trump is powerfully illustrating the fraud at the core of his case for the nomination. He claims that because he is a successful businessman he would be much more adept than conventional politicians at mastering the intricacies of problems and processes. He will, he brags, figure out how to deal with challenges in a way that maximizes American interests, assembling the best, most competent people to execute his plans of action. As a result, we are told, American will “win, win, win” with such numbing regularity that we will be bored to tears by all the success.  But look what is happening. The process of choosing a Republican nominee for president, while far from simple, is not as complicated as many of the challenges that cross an American president’s desk. Yet, Trump has been out-organized, out-smarted, and out-worked by the competition – in particular, Ted Cruz, whom I support.


As others have noted, Trump's disarray undercuts two of his central campaign rationales: First, that he's the King of Winning who surrounds himself by -- cough -- the best and brightest (if you can't beat Ted Cruz in a delegate race, how are you supposed to outfox all those foreign leaders whom you so often praise as much smarter than American politicians?), and second, that he's a consummate dealmaking wheeler and dealer (shouldn't cutting deals and locking down delegates be his forte?) who knows how to get things done?  According to a new NBC analysis, however, Trump has benefited far more than Ted Cruz under the party's arcane rules for allocating delegates. Trump now leads the Republican field with 756 delegates — or 45 percent of all delegates awarded to date. Yet he has won about 37 percent of all votes in the primaries, according to the NBC analysis, meaning Trump's delegate support is greater than his actual support from voters In other words, as a matter of Republican Party math, Trump has been awarded a delegate bonus of 22 percent above his raw support from voters. (Trumper tantrum should give them back to be fair.)


But the party announced its rules last August, so everyone running had plenty of time to figure out how to win Colorado’s delegates. And while, by all accounts, Cruz conducted an energetic and disciplined effort to do so, Trump didn’t.  In other words, Trump lost fair and square, by rules that were in place days after he announced his candidacy. Instead of conceding this point, he went on a Twitter tirade.  You could just as easily argue that the delegate selection process has been unfairly tilted in Trump’s favor.  In South Carolina, Trump got less than a third of the vote, but he scored 100% of the state’s pledged delegates. In Florida, 44% of voters cast ballots for someone other than Trump but got zero delegates as a result. Overall, he’s won 37% of all the votes cast but has secured 45% of delegates.  Does anyone recall Trump saying that those Cruz voters “had their vote taken away”? Or, more to the point, does anyone recall Cruz complaining about the unfairness of those winner-takes-all primaries?  In fact, the real story here isn’t that Cruz managed to secure 34 delegates in Colorado but that Trump is, at this point in the nomination


"And knowing the rules inside out and outworking the competition is not cheating. If you happen to be more knowledgeable of how things work and are able to work it to your advantage, that's just hard work.


So let’s set the facts straight, beginning with my own experiences with the caucus system.  After long being an unaffiliated voter, I registered as a Republican voter late last year, in part so that I could participate in Colorado’s Republican caucus system this year. (I plan to remain a Republican, barring an unforeseen major shift in the political scene.) I looked up how to participate in my precinct caucus on March 1, showed up, participated in the meeting, and successfully ran as an alternate delegate to the county convention on March 19 and to the state convention on April 9.  Interestingly, in my precinct, I’m pretty sure that not a single person had participated in the caucus system before. We were all “outsiders.”   Incidentally, according to Wikipedia, Colorado’s caucus system was first instituted in 1912 “as a way to limit the power of party bosses and to attract more grassroots involvement,” then replaced by a primary in 1992, then restored in 2002 through 2004.  To return to my experiences with the caucuses: The woman elected in my precinct as a delegate to the state convention ran on an explicitly anti-Trump platform. She made this very clear, and she was elected by the rest of us with this understanding. Claims that the rest of us were somehow “disenfranchised” are ridiculous; we all got to vote for delegates, and everyone in the room had a chance to run to become a delegate (most didn’t want to). It truly was a grass-roots process. I was elected as the alternate delegate to the state convention, also on an explicitly anti-Trump platform.  The simple fact is that the Republicans at my precinct caucus mostly disfavored Trump, and evidently that is true of most other precincts as well. Trump lost in Colorado because he’s just not very popular here.


In reality, Trump has never gotten a majority of the votes in any state. In other words, "the voice of the people" has been consistently against nominating Trump.


Dwight Eisenhower and Abraham Lincoln never complained about having a contested convention, so why is Donald Trump?


Confident that Seward would not have enough votes to lock up the nomination on the first ballot, Lincoln intended to get the second highest vote count on the first ballot and line up additional votes for the second ballot in order to show increasing strength. He hoped that this strategy--combined with the presence of an enthusiastic band of followers on the floor--would be sufficient to win the nomination on the third or subsequent ballot.   Lincoln’s men left no detail unattended in their pursuit of this strategy.  After the first ballot, Seward, as expected, led with 173 votes. Lincoln was next with 102. Cameron received 50; Chase got 49; Bates 48; and the rest received a handful each.  Lincoln clearly had the momentum. The final tally on the second ballot was 184 for Seward and 181 for Lincoln.  Ballot three began. Lincoln continued to pick up votes…So Lincoln was nominated and would be elected the nation’s 16th president. He appointed Seward secretary of state, Cameron secretary of war, Chase secretary of the Treasury, and Bates attorney general.   Lincoln proved to be a better leader than Seward.


There’s concern that this Republican nomination will be decided in a brokered convention but it’s not the first time it would have happened and won’t be the last time. It happened notably in 1860 which saw President Abraham Lincoln acquire the number of delegates over William Seward to become the Republican nominee and later President. Another was in 1976 that saw President Gerald Ford get the nomination over Ronald Reagan.


Yes, the race for the White House is about winning states, but really it's about winning delegates.  There were debates, handshakes and deals before a final vote that all came down to the state of Mississippi.  "Had Mississippi stayed with us instead of going as a block to Ford on the procedural question that we raised, I think we might have been nominated," says Reagan campaign manager John Sears. "But it was that close."  Ford scraped by with enough votes to win the nomination.  Gerald Ford had won, and went on to lose to Democrat Jimmy Carter. Reagan may have lost the nomination, but went on to define the Republican Party for a generation.



TRUMPONOMICS:  On one hand, he would cut the top marginal individual rate to 25% and reduce the number of brackets to three to encourage productive behavior. However, his plan fails to remove most double taxation of income saved and invested and fails to eliminate many deductions for special interest groups. He would also remove a large number of taxpayers from the tax rolls, exacerbating the illusion that government services are free.  On the corporate tax side, he would cut the rate to 15% because he understands that having the current high tax gives an incentive to businesses to move abroad. But then he would fail to end the punishing and inefficient practice of taxing revenue abroad.  On budget issues, he’s no libertarian either. In June, he said he would impose a one-time 14% tax on the wealthy to pay down national debt. His math doesn’t work — and the impact on the economy would be pretty negative — but at least it shows that he is aware of our gigantic debt. Still, as far as I can tell, his only budget reduction plan is to push some functions, such as education and environmental protection, back to the states and cut some waste. There’s nothing wrong with that, except that it wouldn’t do much to address our growing $19 trillion debt.  Unlike most free market advocates, Trump is adamant that he wouldn’t touch such drivers of our future debt as Social Security and Medicare. Unfortunately, he ignores that protectionism is costly to American consumers while doing nothing to address some of the real unfair trading practices around the world.  Finally, his foreign policy positions are also all over the place.



Along with her support of Trump, her six opponents on the board have cited her opposition to the so-called “Con-Con Movement,” a push to get 34 states to vote for an Article V constitutional convention with the aim of adding a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution.   “I think the leader of the coup is my daughter Anne Cori and her husband at Eagle Forum of Missouri,” Schlafly said. “I think she and her husband want to take over the organization.”  Her son John Schlafly, the treasurer of Eagle Forum and a board member, explained to WND that among the six board members calling the meeting are several “who feel Donald Trump is unacceptable as the GOP presidential candidate in 2016.”  Adams called Schlafly’s endorsement a disappointment, citing statements by Cruz that Trump is taking advantage of supporters, including 91-year-old Schlafly, by making promises he can’t keep.   “If we were going to be asking Ted Cruz about the platform, he would be able to give us a wonderful dissertation on each one of those plans,” Adams told the Dallas paper. “That is the caliber of the man. Where with Donald Trump he says he going to bully people, negotiate with people, he’s going to have good people around him. That’s it. And that is going to make America great? Really?”   


Donald Trump is a stunningly gifted politician. He doesn’t simply tell a lie, he sets up a world in which the falsehood can thrive.


Obama's latest fraud: 'Economic recovery' disproven in just 9 charts; Numbers demonstrate failure of administration's policies

In January 2015, the number of beneficiaries receiving food stamps topped 46 million for 38 straight months, with 14.6 percent of the population and 19.7 percent of all households receiving food stamps. This represents an increase of 1516.96 percent over the 2.9 million Americans participating in the food stamp program in 1969.   At the end of the George W. Bush presidency in January 2009, the federal debt stood at $10.6 trillion. It is projected to exceed $20 trillion by the end of Obama’s presidency in January 2017.    The labor-force participation rate has fallen consistently under the Obama administration as an increasing percentage of those out of work and looking for work simply give up and quit looking  In April 2014, nearly 93 million Americans were considered out of the labor force.  Real median household income in the United States has declined from a height of $57,357 in 2007 under President George W. Bush to $53,657 in 2014 under President Obama.



For those who have been paying attention over the past seven years, it should come as no surprise that Obama envies dictators like the Castro brothers who control the means of production, kill their enemies, and decide how resources should be allocated regardless of the desire of their own people.



Hillary Clinton is proposing massive new tax increases that exceed one trillion dollars over 10 years; this is utter madness. Hillary’s idea is called stealing and is not investment, but robbery. The government already has received a record amount of taxes at $1.48 trillion in 2016 and doesn’t need anymore. Later, the Democrat Party is the party of slavery and the Republican Party was founded to combat slavery in 1856. In present times, the policies of the Democratic Party have done much to destroy the African American culture and family.



“We were ready to step into the strong current of history and answer a new call for our country, but call never came. Instead, of a call to service, we were asked to shop.”


If you didn't know Brussels just suffered a horrific terror attack and one of the suspects was still on the run, you'd think President Obama had nothing better to do than enjoy some recreation overseas. During his visit to Cuba this week, Obama attended a baseball game in Cuba, smiled and did the wave with Cuba's dictator. Then, Wednesday in Argentina, he apparently learned how to tango. 


Obama Parties in Cuba While Brussels Burns:  The split-screen told the story: on one side, images of the terror bombing in Brussels; on the other, Barack Obama doing the wave with Raul Castro at a baseball game in Havana.  On one side, the real world of rising global terrorism. On the other, the Obama fantasy world in which romancing a geopolitically insignificant Cuba — without an ounce of democracy or human rights yielded in return



Cruz also said Trump's approach was similar to Obama's.  "We have seen for 7 years a president that cannot distinguish between our friends and enemies. A president that cannot distinguish between the nation of Israel and Islamic terrorists who seek to murder us, and it would be a mistake to elect another president who buys into the same left-wing moral relativism that equates the terrorist blowing himself you have and murdering innocent civilians to the brave soldiers and law enforcement officers risking everything to keep us safe."


For the first time, Ted Cruz Tuesday surpassed Republican presidential rival Donald Trump nationally in the weekly Reuters tracking poll

Record Wisconsin Turnout Destroys Liberal Argument Voter ID Laws Disenfranchise Voters  According to polling, 70 percent of American support Voter Identification laws and believe they are necessary to prevent fraud.  Now, we will need more than a Driver’s License, since illegal aliens are getting DL’s.


(Owebummer/Democraps’ “so smart” foreign policy)  Seoul and Washington made the already large-scale joint drills bigger than ever this year in response to the North's nuclear test in January and long-range rocket launch a month later.  Menacingly titled "Last Chance", the video released on Saturday shows a submarine-launched nuclear missile laying waste to Washington and concludes with the U.S. flag in flames.



“It is way past time we have a president who will acknowledge this evil and will call it by its name and use the full force and fury to defeat ISIS,” he continued. “Until they are defeated, these attacks will continue. Their target is each and every one of us.”

Cruz, one of five remaining presidential candidates, urged America needs a leader who is not afraid to speak about terrorism in bold terms. “We need a president who sets aside political correctness,” Cruz insisted. “We don’t need another lecture about Islamophobia.”  More than a change in rhetoric, Cruz noted we need a more robust security process. The Brussels attacks, Cruz said, are “the fruit of a failed immigration policy in Europe.”


In its formative first century, Islam conquered the Middle and Near East, North Africa and Spain with sword and slaughter, not persuasion and conversion.  Have the Islamists of al-Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, al-Qaida and ISIS in Syria and Iraq -- who daily die fighting in the name of Islam -- misread their sacred texts? 



Back in 2013, the Bowman Avenue Damn in Rye Brooke, New York was hacked. After a two year long FBI investigation, the Department of Justice has charged seven of individuals working for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard with a series of crimes surrounding the hacking of the damn, in addition to launching cyber attacks on the U.S. financial system.



You would think the moderate Muslims that we are told about, the moderate Muslims who want no part of jihad and who have no inclinations toward jihad whatsoever -- and they're not interested in it, and they don't support it. We are told that the moderate Muslims -- peaceful, peace-loving -- living in neighborhoods all over America, don't like the fact that their religion of peace has been hijacked by the jihadis, the ISIS, the Al-Qaedas, the militant jihadists. The San Bernardino Two, for example.  So why wouldn't they welcome help from law enforcement in keeping their neighborhoods safe? Why wouldn't they welcome law enforcement presence to root out the people who are hijacking their religion of peace? So Cruz comes along and says, "You know, we need added police patrols in Muslim neighborhoods to root out the jihadists who are killing and attacking innocent people and giving the religion of peace a bad name."  Why wouldn't they support this?   This from the Times of Israel website.  "Police Uncover High Explosives in Home of Brussels Terror Suspect."  The cops actually went to the neighborhood?  Wait 'til Obama finds out about this.  Wait 'til the media finds out about this!  The cops went to the neighborhood in Brussels where the bomber lived. "Belgian authorities uncovered 15 kilograms (33 pounds) of high explosives and a mass of bomb-making material at a Brussels apartment shared by bombers of the city’s airport and subway, amid growing suggestions that the attacks were the work of the same Islamic State cell that attacked Paris last year.   I've gotta hit this phoniness with reality.  Associated Press, August 23rd, 2011, five years ago.  Headline:  "With CIA Help, NYPD Moves Covertly in Muslim Areas."  AP, August 23rd, 2011, the CIA, according to AP, helped the NYPD monitor Muslims.  Here is an excerpt from the story.  "A months-long investigation by The Associated Press has revealed that the NYPD operates far outside its borders and targets ethnic communities in ways that would run afoul of civil liberties rules if practiced by the federal government. And it does so with unprecedented help from the CIA in a partnership that has blurred the bright line between foreign and domestic spying."   "Many of these operations were built with help from the CIA, which is prohibited from spying on Americans but was instrumental in transforming the NYPD's intelligence unit."  The AP reported that this started under George W. Bush, but it continued under Obama and it was still going on when the AP discovered it and reported on it in 2011. This is the very program Ted Cruz is referencing.

So all these people are guilty of everything they're accusing Cruz of being.  They did it!  They constructed the program.  They implemented the program.  They administered the program.  They used the CIA to spy on these beloved neighborhoods.  Cruz: “The first obligation of the president as commander-in-chief should be to keep America safe.  I will apologize to nobody for how vigorous I will be as president fighting radical Islamic terrorism, defeating ISIS.”  National Review Online, posted a story back on the 14th of January this year, and the headline is:  "As Terror Threat Rises, de Blasio and Islamists Blind the NYPD."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_policing  In the United States, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 established the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) within the Justice Department to promote community policing.  Community-oriented policing was a cornerstone of the Clinton Administration and gained its funding from the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. The overall assessment of community oriented policing is positive, as officers and community members both attest to its effectiveness in reducing crime and raising the sense of security in a community.[1][2]  Community policing philosophy emphasizes that police officers work closely with local citizens and community agencies in designing and implementing a variety of crime prevention strategies and problem-solving measures.[6][7][8][9]


Why apologize, Mr. President? The incarceration of criminals that followed that 1994 crime bill saved many lives, made marginal neighborhoods livable, and allowed the residents of those neighborhoods to live productive lives. Some of those people could have even started climbing up the rungs of the ladder to the middle class. It was a great day for the Republic! Moreover, you made cities with warring neighborhoods better places to live. Why the retreat, Bill?   You said it yourself. In a speech last Thursday, in response to the protests of a group of Black Lives Matter supporters, you quite accurately stated: "Because of that bill, we had a 25-year low in crime, a 33-year low in the murder rate, and, listen to this, because of that and the background-check law we had a 46-year low in the deaths of people by gun violence." You might have added, for the enlightenment of the galoots, that violent crime had more than tripled in the three decades prior to your bipartisan bill. Cities were dangerous places to live.  The Republican Congress and the Clinton White House have a lot to brag about for their domestic achievements in those days. Yet, some Black Lives Matter activists have completely drowned out these achievements. Last Thursday during his speech, Clinton complained, "I don't know how you would characterize gang leaders who got 13-year-old kids hopped up on crack and sent them out onto the streets to murder other African-American children."


http://www.fairus.org/       United States v. Texas...
A precedent-setting decision from SCOTUS could allow President Obama (and future presidents) to run roughshod over the constitutional separation-of-powers doctrine.
get the facts.



The U.S. issued approximately 680,000 green cards to migrants from 49 Muslim-majority nations, as identified by Pew Research Center, in the five-year period from fiscal years 2009-2013, a figure that should be a red flag to American Jews.  There are only 5.5 million Jews living in America. The Muslim demographic is estimated at about 3 million but is growing much faster due to immigration and the high fertility rates of Muslim women.  In “Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance,” renowned activist Pamela Geller provides the answer, offering proven, practical guidance on how freedom lovers can stop jihadist initiatives in local communities.  By comparison over the same five-year period under President Obama, the U.S. issued only about 270,000 green cards to Europeans. A green card is highly coveted because it allows the holder to access welfare benefits, lifetime residency, work authorization and a fast track to U.S. citizenship.

To get a glimpse of their future, Jewish Americans only need to look across the Atlantic at Europe, where Muslim immigration has led to almost daily attacks on synagogues, Jewish cemeteries, schools and other Jewish properties, not to mention the attacks on Jewish people such as at the massacre at the kosher store in Paris on the day of the Charlie Hebdo attacks last year.
Robert Spencer, author of the Jihad Watch blog at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, said four separate and
independent studies since 1998 have found that 80 percent of mosques in the U.S. preach hatred of Jews and Christians and the need ultimately to impose Shariah law here.



You might be a liberal if you are inclined to define "hate speech" as any speech which offends you. If you think the only free speech is speech which happens to fall in line with what you believe, and you're willing to violently respond in word or deed to those who disagree, you might be a liberal.  If you lock your doors at night while preaching the gospel of open borders, there's a good chance you're a liberal.  If the plight of the whales at Sea World breaks your heart more than the plight of the unborn, odds are, you are a liberal.  If frogs and fish and wetlands are more important to you than human life and you scoff at the idea the Creator has the last say on what goes on with the climate, you might be a liberal.  If you have a problem with the premise of right and wrong or good and evil because it interferes with your lifestyle -- and you ignore historical evidence showing that decadent, Godless societies lacking moral absolutes always fall hard and fast -- you might be a liberal.  If you loathe the U.S. Constitution and the idea of limited government and believe that big government is a good replacement for God, you might be a liberal.

If you think that government somehow relieves you from personal duty and moral obligation and believe what the government defines as "legal" overrides what God's word calls immoral, you might be a liberal.


  1. Bruce Springsteen and Bryan Adams Get to Follow Their Consciences, but the Baker and Florist Don’t?

Many of us think that what these corporate giants are doing is bad for representative democracy and self-government. But they have a right to do it. And yet, they want to deny the rights of bakers, florists, photographers, adoption agencies, and marriage counselors who only want the same liberty to follow their conscience.   Gov. Phil Bryant of Mississippi and Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina have stood up to the bullies and shattered their aura of invincibility.



But unlike other states where the fate of the legislation was left to the governor, in Missouri, lawmakers want the people to decide.  Curtman is the House sponsor of a religious liberty bill known as Senate Joint Resolution 39, which would amend the state’s constitution. In March, after a historic 36-hour filibuster, the state Senate approved the bill. Now the measure is working its way through the House, where, if it passes, it won’t go to the governor’s desk, but rather to a ballot initiative later this year where every Missouri citizen has a chance to weigh in.   We have these business elites who are choosing what states to do business in and the reason they’re choosing what states to do business in is due to their deeply-held beliefs. But when they tell us that they’re not going to do business with us if we pass a bill like this or if the people approve this bill, then what they’re really saying is they want to reserve the right to do business in states based on how they believe, but they don’t want the people of our state to be able to reserve the right to do business based on their deeply-held religious beliefs.  More important than a price tag, Curtman said, are principles.



After almost a year, a bill designed to safeguard religious liberty has gained significant support but little momentum in the House of Representatives.  With 164 cosponsors, the First Amendment Defense Act is a popular piece of legislation in Congress. Still, that popularity hasn’t provided the elevation needed for the bill to advance out of committee, let alone into law.



The website CatholicVote endorsed Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for president today, saying that they feel as though he is the best of all remaining candidates on the issues of life, marriage, and religious liberty.



The only ‘peace’ will come through surrender, but that seems to be the peace that Kasich craves.”   See the Big List of Christian Coercion where Christians already, in the U.S., have been penalized, punished and even fined for nothing more than exercising their constitutional right to live by their faith.



Masin also noted the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen,” as opposed to simply being a U.S. citizen.  The issue has been debated since 2008, when Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton raised the question about whether or not then-Sen. Barack Obama was eligible.  Masin relied heavily on the 1790 Naturalization Act in which Congress stated natural born citizens may be born outside the United States, while acknowledging the law was repealed and replaced by a 1795 law that omitted the phrase “natural-born.”  Masin wrote:  The 1790 Act provided that at birth, a child of a citizen of the United States, even if born outside the limits of the United States, was a “natural-born” citizen of the United States. No process was necessary for them to obtain this citizenship. No barrier stood in their way. Just as a child born within the limits of the United States, these children were “natural-born” citizens.  In his conclusion, Masin acknowledged the final determination of the issue still awaits a Supreme Court decision:



Most other delegates, led by Madison along with John Adams, wanted a republic; none wanted a democracy. Madison, who would become known as the "Father of the Constitution," argued that in a pure democracy, "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual." Delegate Edmund Randolph agreed, saying, "In tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy." Adams added: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." Eleven years earlier, Madison had helped to develop the Virginia Constitution, and it was his Virginia Plan that served as the basis for debate in the development of the U.S. Constitution. Madison, along with Hamilton, argued for a strong but limited central government that could unify the country.  Madison's political genius is mostly seen in his contribution to The Federalist Papers, which were co-authored with Hamilton and John Jay.


we don’t live in a democracy. Article IV, Sec. 4 of the Constitution states, “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government. . . .”



a Washington blue-blood reminds us uncooperative plebeians that we should smile and hold hands and trust our leaders so that they can continue to inspire us with their spectacular and never-ending betrayals – betrayals such as Paul Ryan's ongoing embrace of massive spending, lopsided trade agreements, and troubling immigration policies.  In fact, in light of this week's fresh attacks by radical Islamists in Brussels, Belgium, Ryan's already unpopular stance on immigration is likely growing more so by the minute.



“Who is our nation’s capital named after?” seems like an easy question for any fifth grader to answer correctly.  But a man named Mark Dice went out to the streets of San Diego and asked this question in numerous man- on-the-street interviews, asking that very question. His results can be seen here, and they are shocking.  Many of the adults he spoke to in these Jay Leno-style interviews had no clue. The scary thing about these tip of the iceberg examples of widespread ignorance is that these people vote.   America has poured billions and billions of dollars into our educational system, and this is what we get out of it?



Pablo Antonio Serrano-Vitorino is a Mexican national. He was arrested and deported back to Mexico in 2004. Sometime since that deportation, he illegally returned to the US. Barack Obama’s lax and illegal immigration policy appears to have allowed Vitorino to stay in the US.Now, Vitorino is suspected of shooting and killing four men at a neighbor’s home in Kansas and then killing 49-year-old Randy Nordman in Montgomery County, Missouri.  The blood of these victims is on Obama’s hands!   In 2011, Alabama passed some strong immigration laws. Liberals argued that farmers would be devastated and the state economy ruined. They were surprised to see that the state unemployment rate dropped by 1.1% in just two months from when the laws took effect. Instead of the state’s economy being devastated, it actually improved as thousands of illegals left the state and Alabama residents found jobs.


(OBAMA LIED, PEOPLE DIED)  According to newly released data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 124 illegal immigrant criminals who were released from prison by the Obama administration have been charged with murder since 2010.  In 2014, ICE released a total of 30,558 criminal aliens from its custody. These aliens had already been convicted of 92,347 crimesbeforethey were released by ICE.



As for whether or not a border fence or wall will work, all one has to do is turn to the border system built at Yuma, Arizona. They built a three fence system that has stopped up to 92% of illegal border crossings over 126 miles of border.  The first fence encountered is a 20-foot-high steel fence. If they manage to scale that, illegals will have to cross a 75-yard-wide no man’s land that is monitored by cameras and sensors. Border Patrol agents also patrol the no man’s land in SUVs on a regular basis. If they make it across no man’s land, they will encounter a tightly woven steel fence that is also monitored. If they manage to breach the second fence, they find themselves faced with a cyclone fence topped with barbed wire. Click here to see tour of Yuma border fence.  But what about the cost of building a secure border? How can America afford to extend Yuma’s fence another 1,800 miles?  The solution is simple and I’m surprised that no one has ever mentioned it but me. Use our military.  The greatest cost of most construction projects is labor. We have constructions battalions in our military personnel. They go overseas and build airstrips and military bases. They also help rebuild the infrastructure of cities and communities.  Using our military to build and help patrol a border fence would mean the only real cost would be materials.



Over half of all drivers license issued in California were given to individuals who are here illegally and the state automatically registers those with a driver’s license to vote.    In all fairness to the candidates running for president, and abiding by Federal law, the Federal government simply must prohibit California votes from counting until which time the state can prove that no illegal alien vote was cast in national elections.  No country in the world allows individuals who are non citizens to vote in any election.


(Voter fraud)  Over the past few weeks, we’ve highlighted the growing trend of judicial amnesty for illegal immigrants at the hands of unelected judges.  Among the many stories you won’t read in the mainstream media today is that the Ninth Circuit has just taken judicial amnesty a step further.  It has ratified Obama’s amnesty by forcing Arizona to grant driver’s licenses to recipients of the DACA amnesty – a complete violation of both national and state sovereignty. Illegal aliens, who are to be placed into deportation proceedings pursuant to laws duly passed by Congress, now have an equal “right” to not only remain in the country but receive driver’s licenses. 



(Convert or Die: Religion of “peace” plus more deaths because of weak Democraps..)  Christians who are being publicly raped when they refuse to convert, whose babies are being thrown against walls, who've watched their loved ones being beaten, choked, starved, and beheaded -- they don't have the luxury of time, certainly not the amount this president has wasted addressing this evil. By law, the administration had until this Thursday to make a genocide determination that the rest of the world already has. Now, after even his own party has spoken, Secretary Kerry says the State Department will "likely" miss its deadline. Why? Because he claims "additional evaluation" is required.  "For more than seven years," Jane Clark Scharl points out, "President Obama's foreign policy has been a toxic blend of strong language and weak action. (Remember the 'red line' in Syria? Neither does Assad. Premature retreat from Iraq & AFG.  Libya, Syria & Yemen chaos. Iran nuclear appeasement…) The foreign policy of the Obama administration tends toward talking a big game and then conveniently forgetting to show up. That would be a lot harder to pull off if he called the genocide of Christians by ISIS what it is.

a citizen petition to STOP REFUGEES FROM JIHADIST NATIONS. These are perilous times. Go here to sign and find out more
 ISIS has declared war. We must protect our nation!


The conservative website Hotair noted Friday that Lazar’s hacking makes it hard to imagine the FBI not prosecuting Clinton for violations of 18 U.S. Code 793, which covers rules on gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.



The Fed regulations and money manipulations have displaced an open market of IPOs by an exclusive game of horse trading among "qualified investors" who get rich and leave Main Street out, and fail to create new jobs.  As the great British scholar Matt Ridley explained: "The government monopoly of money leads not just to the suppression of innovation and experiment, not just to inflation and debasement, not just to financial crises, but to inequality, too."


A concrete example was the Bush administration's 8 to 30 percent tariffs in 2002 on several types of imported steel. They were levied in an effort to protect jobs in the ailing U.S. steel industry. Those tariffs caused the domestic price for some steel products, such as hot-rolled steel, to rise by as much as 40 percent. The clear beneficiaries of the steel tariffs were steel industry executives and stockholders and the 1,700 or so steelworkers whose jobs were saved. But there is no such thing as a free lunch or a something-for-nothing machine. Whenever there is a benefit of doing something, there is a guaranteed cost.  A study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, predicted that saving those 1,700 jobs in the steel industry would cost American consumers $800,000 per job, in the form of higher prices. That's just the monetary side of the picture. According to a study commissioned by the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition, steel-using industries -- such as the U.S. auto industry, its suppliers, heavy construction equipment manufacturers and others -- were harmed by higher steel prices. It is estimated that the steel tariffs caused at least 4,500 job losses in no fewer than 16 states, with over 19,000 jobs lost in California, 16,000 in Texas and about 10,000 each in Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. In other words, industries that use steel were forced to pay higher prices, causing them to have to raise prices on what they produced. As a result, they became less competitive in both domestic and international markets and thus had to lay off workers.  Tariff policy beneficiaries are always seen, but its victims are mostly unseen. Politicians love this. The reason is simple. The beneficiaries know for whom to cast their ballots and to whom to give campaign contributions. Most often, the victims do not know whom to blame for their calamity.


A trade deficit is when people in one country buy more from another country than the other country's people buy from them. There cannot be a trade deficit in a true economic sense. Let's examine this.  I buy more from my grocer than he buys from me. That means I have a trade deficit with my grocer. My grocer buys more from his wholesaler than his wholesaler buys from him. But there is really no trade imbalance, whether my grocer is down the street, in Canada or, God forbid, in China.  Here is what happens: When I purchase $100 worth of groceries, my goods account (groceries) rises, but my capital account (money) falls by $100. For my grocer, it is the opposite. His goods account falls by $100, but his capital account rises by $100. Looking at only the goods account, we would see trade deficits, but if we included the capital accounts, we would see a trade balance. That is true whether we are talking about domestic trade or we are talking about foreign trade.  The uninformed buys into the mercantilist creed that trade deficits are bad and trade surpluses are good. My George Mason University colleague Donald Boudreaux wrote a blog post titled "If Trade Surpluses are So Great, the 1930s Should Have Been a Booming Decade". The U.S. had a current account trade surplus in nine of the 10 years of the Great Depression, with 1936 being the lone exception. The fact of the matter is that our nation has registered current account deficits throughout most of our history, from 1790 right up to our modern period (http://www.econdataus.com/tradeall.html). Over that interval, we went from being a poor, relatively weak nation to the richest and most powerful nation in the history of mankind.   International trade operates under the same general principles as domestic trade. When we, as consumers, purchase goods from China and the Chinese do not spend a like amount for goods from us, there is a current account deficit. In 2015, Americans purchased $482 billion worth of goods from China. The Chinese purchased only $116 billion worth of goods from us, producing a current account deficit with China of $366 billion.  Now, here is my question to you: Do you think the Chinese are so charmed with green slips of paper with pictures of Benjamin Franklin that they just hoard them? No way. Instead of purchasing tangible goods, the Chinese purchase capital goods -- such as corporate stocks, bonds and U.S. Treasury debt instruments. The Chinese purchase more capital goods from us than we purchase of the same from them. That means the deficit on our current account is matched by the surplus on our capital account.  A large portion of the surplus in our capital account consists of U.S. Treasury debt instruments held by foreigners. As of the first quarter of 2015, the Chinese held nearly $1.2 trillion in U.S. Treasurys.


A large chunk of it comes from the trade deficits the U.S. experiences annually with the rest of the world, which has averaged $539 billion a year since 2000, totaling $8.7 trillion alone, and $10.6 trillion since 1974.  Consider that. 82 percent of trade deficits has been since 2000, right at the same time permanent normal trade relations with China was granted. Those dollars were then reinvested by foreigners into U.S. dollar assets.  This in turn had the effect of devaluing foreign exporter currencies against the U.S. dollar, like the Chinese yuan, making their exports cheaper, and further exacerbating ever larger trade deficits here. This is the essential currency manipulation that made it all work — which U.S. policy makers simply never responded to with any real effect.  How could we have prevented the trade deficits?  Probably by making a concerted move toward energy independence — much of the trade deficit is actually oil — and by counteracting exporting nations that engaged in real currency devaluations against the dollar.


Although Indiana is losing 2,100 jobs to Mexico, over 100,000 Hoosiers who work in manufacturing are employed by foreign-owned companies. Toyota is adding 300 jobs to its Princeton plant, Honda is adding 100 new jobs in Greensburg, and Subaru is adding 1,200 new jobs to its facility in Lafayette.  While Carrier has been called “greedy” for moving to Mexico, no one in Indiana is calling Toyota, Honda, or Subaru greedy for choosing to invest in the United States.  In total, over 2 million American manufacturing workers are employed by foreign-owned companies. And while American companies have invested over $700 billion in foreign production facilities since 2000, foreign-owned companies have invested over $1.3 trillion in the U. S. manufacturing operations during the same time frame.  The result: a $614 billion manufacturing investment “surplus” for the United States from 2000 to 2015. U.S. manufacturing output has never been higher, and foreign investment in the United States is a big reason why.  The United States should strive to attract more job-creating investment, not adopt protectionist policies that could scare it off.


What Mexico does offer Nabisco is a significantly lower corporate tax rate, dramatically lower labor costs and fewer environmental restrictions, while products manufactured there enjoy very low tariff rates to be sold in the U.S. due to NAFTA.  While it may seem extreme, it makes sense for consumers, businesses and workers for the U.S. to eliminate the corporate tax altogether as an effective way to offset the much higher cost of labor faced by companies that make things in America.  What's more, the Obama regulations designed to drive the cost of electricity skyward by forcing the closure of hundreds of coal-fired utility plants should be rescinded.



For me, I’ll take the zero percent corporate tax rate and eliminate one of the main incentives that cause companies to either leave the U.S., or to keep their profits offshore.  Unwittingly, the Panama Papers and WikiLeaks may have done society a favor if a true examination of why people and corporations hide their funds from government’s avaricious hand.  Rather than wringing their hands about these tax avoidance tactics, lawmakers on the left and right should come together and do what is in the United States’ interest and significantly lower if not outright eliminate the corporate income tax.  This simple, yet radical, proposal would have the important effect of attracting capital investment into the now tax free haven creating economic growth that benefits the entire economy. 



At issue, in Pollock v. Farmers Loan Trust Co., was whether the federal income tax was a direct tax or an indirect tax. And the general reduction of tariffs included in the bill in question, was enacted without President Grover Cleveland’s signature.  Up to that point, the federal government had levied indirect taxes (on carriages, whiskey, and other productsIn a 5-4 vote, the Court ruled that the income tax was a direct tax, making the law void.  Based on the writings of the Framers, Adam Smith’s writings on tax, the states’ ratification debates, and arguments made by former justices, Fuller argued, “all taxes on real estate or personal property or the rents or income thereof were regarded as direct taxes.”  Because direct taxes must be apportioned by state population under the Constitution, the 1894 law was void.  Justices Edward White and John Harlan, dissenting, repeatedly disparaged “the views of economists” urged the Court to Congress on its own powers of taxation.  The case was reheard– and on May 20, 1895, the Court reissued opinions that expanded taxation parameters beyond solely rental property income to income from bonds and stocks, which effectively killed the entire law.  The Court’s rulings caused an uproar, especially since the 1894 law had been a hard-fought compromise to reduce tariffs and impose an income tax. This ruling helped expand even more taxation efforts: the creation of the federal inheritance tax (1898), the corporate income tax (1909), and ultimately, the Sixteenth Amendment (1913), which defined the income tax is a direct tax and removed the constitutional requirement for population apportionment.


People who are willing to consider virtually any conceivable excuse for criminals' acts cut no slack at all for decisions that police have to make in a split second, at the risk of their lives. For some people, it is not enough that cops put themselves at risk to protect the rest of us. 

At last we have reached the point where we can say, "Next year this time, Obama will not be president." But the disasters he leaves behind will plague us for years to come. And some of those disasters may strike even before he is gone.

                Historians of the future, when they look back on our times, may be completely baffled when trying to understand how Western civilization welcomed vast numbers of people hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization, people who had been taught that they have a right to kill those who do not share their beliefs.



Perspective: Fast Food Workers in CA Will Now Earn More Than Army Privates  When one considers that an Army E1 Private has a base salary of $18,378, which amounts to roughly $8.84 per hour, Brown’s argument seemingly falls apart. It seems morally wrong to offer more pay to someone flipping burgers than to a member of the military willing to put his or her life on the line in service to this nation.  It’s curious, then, that rarely is the case made for raising the wage of America’s finest. 



While in Havana yesterday president Obama carefully arranged a photo-op with the huge mural of Che Guevara as backdrop. If the phrase “carefully arranged” strikes you as rhetorically “pushing the envelope,” I invite you to watch this brief video for proof.  “Better” still, this mural—the biggest of the celebrated (by many liberals) mass-murderer, racist and warmonger-- adorns the headquarters for Cuba’s Ministry of the Interior, which is to say: the headquarters for Cuba's KGB and STASI trained secret police. In 1959, with the help of Soviet GRU agents, the man President Obama felt a burning need to arrange as his backdrop helped found, train and indoctrinate Cuba’s secret police. Che Guevara instructed the Castro regime’s torturers. You see, amigos: Che Guevara and Raul Castro founded a regime that jailed more of its subjects than did Stalin’s and murdered more of its subjects in its first three years in power than did Hitler’s in its first six. (Full-documentation provided here.)  "Executions?" Che Guevara exclaimed while addressing the hallowed halls of the U.N. General Assembly on December 9, 1964. "Certainly we execute!" he declared, to the claps and cheers of that august body. "And we will continue executing as long as it is necessary! This is a war to the death against the revolution’s enemies!" According to the Black Book of Communism, those firing-squad executions had reached 16,000 by the end of the 60s, the equivalent, given the relative populations, of over 3 million executions in the U.S.   The late Mr Penalver, along with many other black Cubans qualify as the longest suffering black political prisoners in modern history. You see amigos: many more blacks have been jailed and tortured –and for longer periods-- by the (internationally-beloved and funded) lily-white Castro regime than by the (internationally-blacklisted-and-reviled) South African apartheid regime.  Indeed, this week President Barack “Black Lives Matter” Obama was honoring the jailers and torturers of the most and longest suffering black political prisoners in the modern history of the western hemisphere.



Bankruptcy’s not the answer. Congress needs to show Puerto Rico some tough love by imposing a financial control board that will curb the island’s profligate spending and cut its bloated government payroll.  Puerto Rico’s pols have flunked civics. The island is mired in cronyism and corruption. Allowing the island to weasel out of its debts will encourage more irresponsibility. Last Christmas, the island’s governor doled out $120 million in bonuses to employees, just before defaulting on millions in debt. The island is a socialist paradise where only 40% of adults work, but those who do are guaranteed paid vacations and other perks.  A control board turned around New York City in the 1970s and the District of Columbia in the 1990s without resorting to bankruptcy.



Garry Kasparov, chess grandmaster and former citizen of the Soviet Union knows what life is like under socialism and he’s not feeling it.  He’s not “Feelin’ the Bern” that young people are claiming in the United States and he posted a dire warning to fanatics of Bernie Sanders and his brand of socialism:  I’m enjoying the irony of American Sanders supporters lecturing me, a former Soviet citizen, on the glories of Socialism… Posted by Garry Kasparov on Tuesday, March 1, 2016  I’m enjoying the irony of American Sanders supporters lecturing me, a former Soviet citizen, on the glories of Socialism and what it really means! Socialism sounds great in speech soundbites and on Facebook, but please keep it there. In practice, it corrodes not only the economy but the human spirit itself, and the ambition and achievement that made modern capitalism possible and brought billions of people out of poverty. Talking about Socialism is a huge luxury, a luxury that was paid for by the successes of capitalism. Income inequality is a huge problem, absolutely. But the idea that the solution is more government, more regulation, more debt, and less risk is dangerously absurd.



(Democraps=Socialism/Marxism=Economic suicide)  But on taxes, you heard right, a heavy-duty socialist had just embraced supply-side economics as a proven means of reviving economic growth.  The country isn’t just experiencing a bad recession. It’s heading for what qualifies as a depression — a third year of economic contraction, with another negative 3.66% of GDP forecast in 2016. Inflation has topped 10% and unemployment is above 18%. Both huge industries and small businesses have gone belly-up. More than half of Brazil’s 95 million consumer credit accounts are delinquent, and sovereign debt has been cut to junk.  Meanwhile, a political  corruption scandal involving looted oil earnings and stolen elections has triggered the largest protests in Brazil’s history. President Dilma herself is facing impeachment while Lula has been detained as a suspect for corruption. According to the Tax Foundation’s William McBride, citing an aggregation of 26 studies, 26 tax hikes slashed economic growth in all but three instances, while cutting taxes consistently sets the stage for economic growth.  McBride also found that the most powerful impact comes from cutting the corporate tax, which mainly affects investment and capital formation, the very thing Lula said Brazil needs.  Corporate tax cuts also fuel startups and entrepreneurial activity. 



(Democraps & handouts)  What can my country do for me; what can it give me????


(JFK would be a Republican today)  the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God…. Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.  This much we pledge — and more…. We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed…. And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.   My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.  Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.



Free At Last?: How Bernie Sanders Supports Black Genocide

Senator Bernie Sanders loves free stuff. Zo asks whether taxpayers have a choice in whether to pay for it.


1981 New York Times item quotes Democratic Party presidential candidate Bernie Sanders as saying he doesn’t “believe in charities,” an outlook that one expert says is common in socialism and would destroy civil society.  Loconte said Americans have always understood instinctively that neighbor helping neighbor builds better communities than relying on the government to solve problems.


The first thing to know is that Scandinavia is inhabited by Scandinavians, a hardworking, responsible people who have had high levels of social trust and cohesion for a very long time.   Sweden was such a free-market success story that Republicans should be citing it in their debates. It started as a poor country in the late 19th century, then achieved takeoff under a dynamic capitalist system into the middle of the 20th century. Its boom coincided with the time when its taxes were lower than in the U.S. and the rest of Europe.  The socialist golden years weren’t so golden for economic performance. Entrepreneurship plummeted. Job creation and wages sputtered. The Scandinavian story the past few decades has been a turn against socialism.   

To get around the apples-to-oranges GDP per capita comparisons due to the differences in the cost of living between nations, the World Bank has created a GDP Purchasing Power Parity scale, in which GDP is “converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity rates.”  “An international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as the U.S. dollar has in the United States,” under the World Bank’s calculations.  Using this system, Sweden and Denmark would fall between the 38th-ranked state — Missouri — and the 39th-ranked state — New Mexico. That’s right. Americans in 38 states are better off than the citizens of Sweden and Denmark, while only 12 states are worse off. So if Sanders had his way, a lot of Americans, including the many in populous states such as  New York, California, Texas, Florida and Illinois, would be worse off.  This sound appealing to you?  It does to Sanders. He’d rather that most Americans become poorer if it meant there’d be more of that delusional equality that the Democrats are continually agitating for.

In Venezuela, a relatively well off, oil-fueled democracy where voters installed the democratic socialist administration of Hugo Chavez in 1999, there are now toilet paper shortages, rampant inflation, social unrest and other telltale signs of economic calamity.  In the name of equality, bureaucrats looted the nation’s wealth and confiscated whole industries. The press has been effectively muzzled.



At one time, Sweden, a small nation, had the fourth-largest economy in the world. That was in 1970. Twenty-five years later, the economy had tumbled to 14th and the private sector stopped creating jobs, according to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data. This wasn’t caused by Sanders’ demonic duo of capitalism and free markets. It was caused by the very policies he idolizes.  “Sweden got rich first with free trade and an open economy, before we had the big government,” Swedish economist Johan Norberg explains in a new YouTube video.  “In the 1950s, Sweden was already one of the world’s richest countries, and back then, taxes were lower in Sweden than in the United States.”  It was only after that, says Norberg, “did we start expanding the government dramatically.”  “And do you know what happened then? We started losing,” says Norberg.

“It all ended in a terrible crisis.”  As we have noted before, Sweden has been repealing its welfare state post-crisis. Norberg says the country has become “successful again, but only after a new reform period, with more deregulation and free trade than in other countries.” Taxes have been cut, school vouchers allocated, and the pension system partially privatized as Sweden distances itself from its welfare-state past.



three caveats on this point: (1) There may be a Democratic Senate starting in 2017, independent of the presidential results, and that hypothetical outcome might impact the next president's selection calculus. (2) Even if Republicans retain their upper chamber majority, they'd need to be prepared to encounter a Democratic filibuster. (3) While, say, President Cruz's pick would be superb, President Trump's pick would be a total wild card in light of his penchant for nepotismunstable ideology and -- shall we say -- questionable brain trust.  But what if Hillary wins?  There's a very real chance that happens -- especially if Trump's the Republican nominee, for reasons we've outlined on several occasions.  Then what?  



The Hill – When Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he would no longer abide by a pledge he signed to support the party’s nominee, he may have cost his campaign at least 50 delegates, according to a Time report.

The Republican Party in South Carolina, whose entire 50 delegates were awarded to Trump for his victory in February, required candidates to make the pledge in order to be on the state’s primary ballot. Now that Trump has said he would break his promise, state party officials are exploring a legal challenge to withhold delegates from him.



If Kanye West’s personal finances have you worried, take a closer look at the federal budget.  When West announced in February that he was $53 million in personal debt, he took to Twitter to ask for help from his followers, specifically soliciting $1 billion from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.  Unfortunately, the federal government seems to operate within West’s economic ideology.  Most Americans can’t turn to the Internet to fix financial mistakes. Instead, families work hard to save and spend responsibly so that they are not overcome with debt. Unfortunately, the federal government seems to operate within West’s economic ideology—spend what you can, and keep asking for more.  If a typical American family ran their household how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars, they would spend their entire yearly income without saving a cent and then put $7,000 on their credit card.  On top of that, this family would be $260,000 in debt. Mind you, this is simply debt, not a mortgage or business investment. Neither would this family have a plan to pay off its debt.  Put in that light, it’s obvious that federal spending and borrowing habits are irresponsible and unsustainable.  Large and growing deficits and debts are a result of out-of-control spending. Congress should prioritize among various budgetary needs and eliminate unnecessary spending just as their constituents have to.  Budgets should prioritize among competing spending needs, limit borrowing, and aim for balance.



If you compare the average increase per year of the number of people on food stamps during the Bush administration (1.5 million) versus the average increase per year during the Obama administration (5.5 million) – food stamps have increased nearly 4 times more per year under Obama than under Bush.  The food stamp program, known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program doled out $50.36 billion in benefits in 2009; $64.7 billion in 2010; and $71.81 billion in 2011.  The most the benefits doled out in any given year under Bush’s presidency was $34.6 billion in 2008. The lowest amount was $15.5 billion in 2001.  http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap             



(they should mandate Career planning information, # of jobs & pay along with aptitude/interest testing to assist in better choices) Women in the U.S. earn about 20 percent less than men, on average, mostly because they choose different occupations and tend to work fewer hours and years. Pundits and policymakers should not judge people’s individual decisions.  Example:  She has a scholarship that requires maintaining a B average, so majoring in chemistry might cost her money, and her grades are telling her—incorrectly—that she’s better at English than chemistry. Wellesley College mandated that freshman- and sophomore-level classes give grades averaging a B+ at most. In departments where average grades had been higher than a B+, the new policy reduced the number of majors by 30 percent. Those students moved instead to economics and the sciences, majors associated with much higher lifetime earnings.



If a person can’t get a job because he doesn’t have the skills or the skills he does have don’t meet the job requirements, he won’t be employed. For the unemployed, the minimum wage is $0 per hour. At this point in time, governments can’t force companies to hire people, but that day may come.  Because governments pass laws that employers must pay a minimum salary, people with lower skills can’t compete for jobs by offering to do the job for less in order to acquire skills and experience.  Gains made in wages will be passed on to prices for goods and services.  ‘Maybe’ we’ll fire some folks and the people who keep their jobs will have to be more efficient.”  Inexperienced young people are the first to suffer when the minimum wage goes up.  Get the government out of the minimum wage business and you’ll see the economy grow, prices fall, and wages that will keep up with expenses. The best workers will get the best jobs at the best prices.



(Engaged Parents, Yes we can!  What is going on in your Gov’t “school”?)  The site of the latest LGBT controversy shouldn't surprise you (suburban San Francisco) -- but the opposition might! Not everyone living near Rep. Nancy Pelosi's (D) district supports her radical sexual agenda. At Windmere Ranch Middle School, parents are threatening to pull their children out if administrators don't reconsider their LGBTQ "acceptance week."  The event, which was expanded to five days from one, has been a political hot potato since the district announced it earlier this year. Moms and dads have since launched an online petition demanding that the lessons, which kick off next Monday, change to reflect the views of the schools families.  "We are highly concerned about the extended promotion of LGBTQ by the acceptance week curriculum, which appears to indoctrinate our children, undermine parental guidance and humiliate those with religious, cultural, and personal convictions not in agreement or acceptance with the promotional campaign," more than 650 signers agree.


Florida parents are livid at a Spanish teacher who assigned middle-school students a form titled “How privileged are you?” during class.   Seventh- and eighth-grade students at Monroe Middle School in Tampa were asked questions about race, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities, and religion during a Spanish lesson.



the CDC warns, "indicate that an average of half of men who have sex with men who have syphilis are also infected with HIV." Sadly, the worst outbreak is among young men, 13-19 years old, who make up as many as 93% of all diagnosed HIV infections that were from male-to-male sexual contact.  Now, faced with yet another crisis of the sexually unrestrained, the medical community is asking for another $8.1 million in federal funding to fight back. Instead of ignoring the problem, it's time for liberals to join conservatives in urging America to stop engaging in risky sex. How many more will we spend ignoring the real solution: restraint?



Does PayPal believe that providing LGBT Americans “equal rights under the law” requires allowing people who are biologically male to use women’s bathrooms?  What is PayPal’s response to sexual assault survivors like Janine Simon, a Washington state resident who talked with The Daily Signal about Washington’s new bathroom regulations that permitted people to enter bathrooms of sex he or she identifies with, not biological sex? She said: “I’ve had my first panic attack in 10 years now knowing in my state there are only certain bathrooms that I will be able to enter safely.”  What is PayPal’s response to Kaley Triller, another sexual assault survivor, who wrote in The Federalist last year: “Don’t they know that one out of every four little girls will be sexually abused during childhood, and that’s without giving predators free access to them while they shower?”  What kinds of discrimination does PayPal oppose, and does it include discrimination that people of faith face in America?


In an act of extraordinary hypocrisy, PayPal, which last month announced its plans to expand into Cuba, has decided not to expand into North Carolina because the state is determined to keep its public bathrooms and locker rooms safe. PayPal has now sent a loud and clear message to America: The common sense values of conservative Americans should be scorned; the destructive values of Cuban Communists, including decades of human rights abuses that continue to this hour, should be embraced.  How, pray tell, does Cuba treat its LGBT population?   And who was stopping PayPal from setting up whatever standards it wanted in its own buildings and among its own employees?  Yet PayPal wants to defend the “rights” of the gender-confused male rather than protect more than 99% of the population that does not identify as transgender.


Based on their annual "Rich States, Poor States," the areas with the brightest economic future "are all solidly Republican or leaning that way.  By comparing things like income tax rates, property taxes, minimum wage, state and local debt and other factors, conservative states blew away the competition. In case you're wondering where North Carolina ranks on the list, try #2!  And while ALEC's focus was market freedom, the correlation with religious freedom is tough to ignore. The twin liberties have always been the driving forces of a healthy economy. That's why the Wall Street Journal warned Big Business earlier this week of the short-sightedness of their position. "The private economy would be foolish to reject America's heritage of liberty, which has powered the greatest engine of economic success in history.



I would liken the religion of climate change, not to Christianity or Judaism, but more akin to radical Islam. There can be no global warming atheists or even agnostics. All must believe – all must convert – or pay the price.  It’s not about the climate or saving the planet from evil-doers. It’s about the money. It’s what it’s always been about with the rabid left – redistribution of wealth.   Watermelon men and women – green on the outside and red on the inside. They, like all communists, think of the affluent West as the Bourgeoisie and the rest of the world as the Proletariat. It’s not fair that we have and they don’t, so it is job of the warmist warriors to spread the misery equally – but of course, like a kind of climate Politburo, exempting themselves from said misery.



In 5 Charts, How Obamacare Has “Worked” the Past 6 Years



SAT and ACT examinations originated in the 1920s and 1960s, respectively, as meritocratic ways to allow applicants from less prestigious high schools and from minority groups to be assessed on their aptitude for college — without the old-boy, establishment prejudices of class, gender and race.  Would such blind exams also work in reverse as national college exit tests? Could bachelor’s degrees be predicated on certifying that graduates possess a minimum level of common knowledge?  Lawyers with degrees can practice only after passing bar exams. Doctors cannot practice medicine upon the completion of M.D. degrees unless they are board certified. Why can’t undergraduate degrees likewise be certified?   Would schools then cut back on the number of administrators, “studies” courses or lavish recreational facilities to help ensure that students first and foremost mastered a classical body of common knowledge?  Each school should publicize the percentage of its students who found employment in their particular area of studies — and after how long and at what salary.  Universities should post the average pay associated with a particular major.  Shouldn’t campus diversity also be defined far more broadly?  The country is divided 50/50 on most hot-button issues, not 95/5 as it is so often on campus. Life after college is about hearing and tolerating views that one doesn’t agree with — not about shouting down dissenting viewpoints in adolescent fashion or demanding to feel always reaffirmed rather than occasionally uncomfortable.  Why make campuses exempt from realities commonly found elsewhere?



Neither does the prospect of a temporary eight-member Court raise concern.  For example, during the Court’s 2010-2011 term, the Court decided over 30 cases with eight or fewer justices, almost entirely as a result of recusals arising from Justice Kagan’s nomination.  Similarly, following the retirement of Justice Powell in 1987, the Court acted on 80 cases with eight or fewer justices.  In short, the sky does not fall when the Court comprises only eight justices. 


The president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court ….” That’s all Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution says about the confirmation process for justices to the Supreme Court of the United States.  The Senate can, if it so chooses, “do its job” by withholding its consent and advising the president that it will not consider any nominee to fill this vacancy until after the forthcoming election.  Then Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., had no doubt that the Senate could “do its job” by refusing to consider a nominee for the Supreme Court.  He made that point crystal-clear in 1992 when President George H.W. Bush was in office when he said:


the "advice and consent" provision of the Constitution is a restriction on the President's power, not an imposition of a duty on the Senate. It says nothing about the Senate's having a duty to hold hearings, or vote, on any Presidential nominee, whether for the Supreme Court or for any other federal institution. The power to consent is the power to refuse to consent, and for many years no hearings were held, whether the Senate consented or did not consent.  If judges confined themselves to acting like judges, instead of legislating from the bench, creating new "rights" out of thin air that are nowhere to be found in the Constitution, maybe Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominees would not be such bitter and ugly ideological battles.   When judges act like whores, they can hardly expect to be treated like nuns.  Politicians, journalists and judges should all spare us pious hypocrisy.


So far we’ve sent over a MILLION messages, but if we’re going to break through the liberal media’s spin, we need to send a million more. That’s why I’m asking you to send the Senate Republicans a message today and tell them to oppose any Supreme Court nominee while Obama’s in office.



There are, like all the powers granted by the U.S. Constitution, specific powers delineated to the Supreme Court. There are listed in Article III Section 2, fourteen distinct types of cases that the court is to hear and judge. And they have on a regular basis ignored these specifics and now judge all cases alike.

Article III.   Section. 1.  The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.  The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;–to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;–to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;–to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;–to Controversies between two or more States;– between a State and Citizens of another State,–between Citizens of different States,–between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.



Finally, there are numerous cases where a fifth vote caused the Court to either rule the wrong way, rewrite a law, or to create a non-existent right.



To be sure, the Obergefell decision stated that for some individuals ‘personal identity’ may come from a person’s intimate sexual orientation and the court then ruled accordingly,” they wrote. “The court’s ruling clearly comprehends that an individual’s ‘personal identity’ could come from the person’s intimate religious faith orientation, i.e., his or her ‘beliefs.'”  That means, they explained, that the Supreme Court “determined that this new fundamental constitutional liberty right of personal identity is found in, and protected by, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

 “In effect, in addition to any First Amendment religious protections that exist, a person now has an additional, new, fundamental constitutional right to his or her religious self-identity, and is therefore entitled to have these constitutional rights protected under the 14th Amendment.”



Desperate to open the region to its web-based schemes, it seems Google had been heavily pressuring Clinton to overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad.  "Please keep close hold," Google's Jared Cohen emailed to Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns in 2012, "but my team is planning to launch a tool ... that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from." In messages forwarded on to Clinton, Cohen goes on to explain, "Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria."  The internet heavyweight wanted to encourage the Syrian uprising and track defections. Not only was Google lobbying the Secretary of State to topple Assad, but it was doing so because it would be good for business.



He observed liberals once opposed loyalty oaths designed to weed out communists. Now, however, liberals have become the people who demand loyalty oaths in order to eliminate ideological dissidents.



(Media bias) Less than a year ago, ABC's George Stephanopoulos admitted that he had made $75,000 of undisclosed contributions to the charitable foundation/campaign operation of his former employers, Bill and Hillary Clinton.  They even allow him to conduct softball interviews with Hillary Clinton, and won't even insist on reminding viewers of his substantial financial support of the woman he's interviewing.  Certainly, a former Clinton spokesman could attempt objective journalism. But Stephanopoulos never does. This was merely the latest proof that Disney-owned ABC runs a Mickey Mouse "news" operation. (this support/conflict of interest should be required labeling for all in TV, radio and print, so we know their slant.)


(Media favoritism, know their slant)  Talk-radio superstar Michael Savage embraced Donald Trump’s campaign early, when his competition was either sitting on the sidelines or backing others.  But then came the National Enquirer scandal story about Ted Cruz.  Something didn’t sit well with Savage, who threatened on the air to withdraw his support for the front-runner in the GOP presidential sweepstakes.  America’s future hangs in the balance. Either we elect a candidate who puts America first or we slide down the socialist path to a weakened, diluted nation, unable to defend itself from enemies external and internal – becoming a big Belgium crying out for someone to save her.”


Savage is a strong supporter of GOP front-runner Donald Trump, who has been a regular guest on “The Savage Nation.”

"And knowing the rules inside out and outworking the competition is not cheating. If you happen to be more knowledgeable of how things work and are able to work it to your advantage, that's just hard work.   "If Trump wins Pennsylvania by 75 percent, he likely will only get 17 of the 60 or 70 delegates, because only 17 are pledged and bound to whoever wins the state primary," he said. "Well, Trump has not been working any of these delegates. Why? Who knows. It could be that he didn't think he had to. It could be he didn't even know. It could be he had nobody on his staff that really knows how this works."


Colorado’s delegate allocation was fair and there really was no controversy at all. Colorado has been awarding their delegates essentially the same exact way since 1912. This was not an effort to undermine the people but an effort to give them a voice. Now Donald Trump and his surrogates are claiming that it is unfair for Colorado not to hold a vote. Colorado is yet another state being smeared for not buckling to Trump.


Reagan, the newspaper reported, said through a spokesman that although “Merle Haggard’s music is now the heart and soul of America,” the pardon was “routine” and had simply “come up through the system.”   “I had a chance to thank him personally for the pardon and meet Nancy and have dinner with him. I sat on the right-hand chair next to the president, so I felt really honored. He treated me like royalty,” Haggard said years later in the CMT interview.  He described Reagan as “the epitome of everything we would want a president to be.”  “I think they ought to put his face on Mount Rushmore. I think he’s done that much. He’s the president of the century.”



the state of Michigan has the resources to address the crisis in Flint. The state has an almost $600 million surplus from its 2015 budget and over $380 million in an emergency “rainy day” fund.  All that madness aside, how about the fact that the Flint crisis is a local and state issue?  Is the federal government supposed to bail out every town, city, county, and state that mismanages its affairs – whether it be public utilities, infrastructure, pensions or budgets?  If so, there will be a long line of government bureaucrats and elected officials at the local and state level ready, happy and willing to pass off their corruption and fiscal irresponsibility to the American taxpayers.  Such thinking is why we have a $19 trillion debt & counting.



Lance Toland realizes this fact and decided to take the right steps to protect his employees. Toland is the owner of Lance Toland Associates, an Atlantic based company that provides aviation insurance for companies all over the world. He has offices in Griffin, St. Simons Island and Atlanta and most of his employees are women.  Toland decided the best way to protect his employees is to arm them so he issued a mandate requiring all employees to obtain a conceal carry license. Upon obtaining their license, Toland provided every employ with a personal protection handgun known as a judge.  There are a number of models and makes of a judge handgun, but basically, they are a handgun that fires .410 shotgun ammunition. They are designed for close range use in self-protection. The video below demonstrates how they work and just how lethal they can be.



According to Ball, this new study also puts the lie to the climate-change premise that temperature is the most important factor when examining where the climate is trending.  “Temperature variation is an issue, but it has to change quite a bit before it comes difficult,” Ball said. “For example, they talk about a two-degree Celsius warming. All you’ve got to do is look at a city that’s just south of you that’s two degrees warmer, and they get along very nicely, thank you.”  He said precipitation is far more important.  “But when you get precipitation change, that impacts flora and fauna and humans tremendously,” he explained.  They said with global warming, there’ll be more droughts, but that’s counter-intuitive. If you’ve got warmer temperatures, you’ve got more evaporation, more water in the air, therefore fewer droughts,” he said. “Again that illustrates how wrong their thinking is.”   “Instead of correcting their science, they changed from global warming to climate change,” Ball said. “This is what they constantly do. They try to blunt the evidence and deflect the evidence because it’s not fitting with their political agenda.”  It’s also apparently not fitting with their financial agenda. Ball contends so many scientists swear by man-caused climate change simply to keep the research dollars pouring in.  “These people, I guarantee you we’ll find out, are very heavily funded by government in this research,” Ball said. “Of course, if you look at Paris and how much money was put into the Green Climate Fund. It’s all driven by money, not by science and the truth.”   He said this was proven by the Australian government in recent years.  “What the Australian government said was, ‘You’re telling us the science is settled. Well fine. We’ll cut off all the funding to the research.’ Of course everybody scrambled, ‘Oh, no no no. Hold on a minute here,'” Ball said.


(God Made Climate Change)  By changing the winds, El Niños keep all the chilly water under the surface.  As a result, global temperatures often show a profound peak when El Niño rages.  The wind reversal tends to peter out after about a year, and then all the cold water that should have surfaced appears with a vengeance, and average global temperature tanks, often to values lower than before the event began. That situation is called La Niña, which tends to associate with particularly nasty winters in eastern North America.  The current El Niño is about as strong as one gets, comparable the big one that peaked in 1998, and a look at the lower atmospheric satellite data may be revealing what is about to happen.  You can find it here.


(Follow the taxpayers’ money & Man made up Climate change scam bilking millions from taxpayers)  A federal science agency is “seriously” interested in reviewing tens of millions in taxpayer-funded grants awarded to a university professor who wants President Obama to prosecute those who don’t share the administration’s view that mankind is changing the world’s climate.  Shukla, a professor at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., led the charge by 20 college professors to urge a federal investigation aimed at scientific skeptics who differ with their views on climate change.  At the same time, Shukla, his wife, and his research center were awash in taxpayers’ money, according to an internal audit by the university on which The Daily Signal previously reported.  Shukla, who specializes in atmospheric, oceanic, and earth studies at George Mason University, is also the founder and president of the Rockville, Md.-based Institute of Global Environment and Society, or IGES, a nonprofit outfit that is now a focus of scrutiny by Smith’s committee.  IGES has apparently received $63 million from taxpayer-funded grants since 2001, comprising over 98 percent of its total revenue. These grants were awarded by the [National Science Foundation], the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Since 2001, as president of IGES, Dr. Shukla appears to have paid himself and his wife a total of $5.6 million in compensation–an excessive amount for a nonprofit relying on taxpayer money.  Agencies such as NOAA, NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the science agency itself, he said, “get the ‘findings’ they want, and the universities and nonprofits get the money they want.”  Cohen added: “The system is thoroughly corrupt.”


Beginning in 1478, the Spanish Inquisition systematically silenced any citizen who held views that did not align with the king’s. Using the powerful arm of the government, the grand inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada, and his henchmen sought out all those who held religious, scientific, or moral views that conflicted with the monarch’s, punishing the “heretics” with jail sentences; property confiscation; fines; and in severe cases, torture and execution.  One of the lasting results of the Spanish Inquisition was a stifling of speech, thought, and scientific debate throughout Spain. By treating one set of scientific views as absolute, infallible, and above critique, Spain silenced many brilliant individuals and stopped the development of new ideas and technological innovations. Spain became a scientific backwater.  As an old adage says, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.   The coalition of 17 inquisitors are calling themselves “AGs United for Clean Power.”   This comes on top of U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitting that the Justice Department is discussing the possibility of pursing civil actions against climate change deniers, and that she has already “referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which” federal law enforcement could take action.


“Going forward we should expect less warming from future greenhouse gas emissions than climate models are projecting,” write climate scientists Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger with the libertarian Cato Institute, adding that this study could be a “death blow” to global warming hysteria.  Lewis revised his findings based on the Max Planck aerosol study and found something astounding: climate sensitivity drops dramatically.


Crushing legal action and punitive lawsuits are one way the Left (Democraps) punishes those who refuse to recant their faith. Death threats and harassment are other tactics the Left employs to make you care.  Progressives use the force of government to take money from those who work to give it to those who refuse to do so.   It must use the force of government to fund abortion, because if progressives came to your door selling “I kill babies and sell their spare parts” T-shirts, you probably wouldn’t buy one. The Left must use the force of gov­ernment to withhold water from the farmers of California’s central valley, turning what was once America’s breadbasket into a dust bowl. No one in his or her right mind would ever do such a thing.  The use of force is standard operating procedure for philosophies that lack the moral and logical fortitude to stand on their own. If you can’t con­vince someone through persuasive arguments and sound reason, apply pressure.


Organizations like the Equality And Justice for All, Voice of the Voiceless, and the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity advocate that counseling can be an effective means of resolving unwanted SSA. Indeed, Christopher’s story is one of many that the World Psychiatric Association has completely discounted in their condemnation of all counseling that helps resolve unwanted SSA.  The World Psychiatric Association has bought into the lie that same-sex attractions must always be embraced, regardless of one’s religious beliefs, family life, or other desires. They want to rob people who deal with unwanted same-sex attractions of the opportunity to participate in counseling.  Please join us in defending the benefits of counseling by asking the World Psychiatric Association to rescind their statement.  Sign here: http://www.citizengo.org/en/fm/33819-sign-here-worlds-largest-psychiatric-organization-condemns-counseling-unwanted-same-sex  When you sign this petition, a letter will be sent directly to the World Psychiatric Association. United, our voices will be heard by the Association and will hopefully cause them to reconsider.  Thank you for standing with us in support of this important counseling option and against the politicization of the World Psychiatric Association.



Women have real choices when it comes to finding health care—they don't need Planned Parenthood. It's time to defund the abortion giant and redirect taxpayer dollars to better options for women. Click on your state


It's time to stand up against these atrocities! On April 23, you can do exactly that by joining #ProtestPP -- the first annual nationwide protest at Planned Parenthood facilities nationwide. For more details, check out the website.




George Washington said, "I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it." Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, Patrick Henry and others were highly critical of slavery, describing it as a "disease of ignorance," "an inconsistency not to be excused" and a "lamentable evil." George Mason said, "The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind." James Madison, in a speech at the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, declared, "We have seen the mere distinction of color made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man." Benjamin Rush said: "Domestic slavery is repugnant to the principles of Christianity. ... It is rebellion against the authority of a common Father."  Convention delegate James Wilson offered a compromise whereby each slave would be counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of determining the number of representatives a state would have in the House. This rule applied only to slaves. Freemen, whether black or white, would be counted as whole people. Another compromise was to set 1808 as the year to abolish the slave trade.  Contrary to what academic hustlers teach, the Three-Fifths Compromise was not a statement about human worth; it was an attempt to reduce the pro-slavery representation in Congress. By including only three-fifths of the total number of slaves in congressional calculations, Southern states were actually being denied a greater number of representatives in Congress and hence electoral votes for selecting a president.


Hillary and Obama inspire breaking all 10 Commandments?

The Ten Commandments have been around for millennia defining what is right and wrong in the eyes of God.
But now, the biggest names on the political left in America are allegedly inspiring people to break them all, with this sordid result

Read the latest now on WND.com.



A jury convicted Philadelphia abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell of killing three babies born alive after abortions. In addition, he was convicted of 21 counts of violating Pennsylvania late-term abortion law. Do Clinton and Sanders believe that Gosnell was unfairly charged, that even an abortion committed past 24 weeks should not have been a crime?  In fact, most Americans, while opposing a total ban on abortion, find late-term abortion morally objectionable and want it outlawed. (The information should be made very public, how many total unborn babies killed, what sex, what color, what age, how much profit is made?)


Big Science and Big Media lean to the left, where there is no need to be consistent. Whenever abortion or its products come up in the media—baby body parts and embryos—reporters only think it is odd if you oppose free access to killing the unborn.  Embryos as Playthings  Another area where science leans left is in embryonic tinkering. Some worry that experimentation with human embryos could lean to “designer babies” and a new round of eugenics.



Liberals (Democraps) are constantly saying that people should have freedom regardless of "who they love." But what if that person is God?  From bakers and sportscasters to firefighters and florists, Christians are finding out the hard way that their government isn't interested in real tolerance -- but a one-way street that paves the way for punishment and censorship. FRC has been telling their stories on websites like FreeToBelieve.com, hoping to draw attention to the greatest threat of religious liberty in the modern age.  That's why Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) took the lead on a measure called the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA). It says that the federal government can't retaliate against people like Kelvin for sharing civilization's view that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. That's common sense, but it's not common practice. Urge your senators to change that by supporting FADA!


The liberal (democrap) policies of the Obama administration have created unprecedented problems for America. Economic uncertainty, strained foreign policy, new terrorist threats, an immigration crisis, and a rapidly expanding federal government have all ensued following Obama’s time in office. This book has the solutions to these problems. The team of over 100 policy experts at the Heritage Foundation, America’s most broadly supported conservative policy organization, has crafted solutions to America’s biggest issues including: ·  Growing the economy ·  Protecting the borders and national security ·  Limiting the federal government ·  and many more  This same 258 page book has already been delivered to every member of Congress, and it can be yours today free by clicking here.



When Kimberly Corban was a 20-year-old student at the University of Northern Colorado, a man broke into her Greeley, Colo., apartment and sexually assaulted her for nearly two hours. Now, nearly 10 years later, Corban not only works with other sexual assault survivors, but also has become an advocate for the Second Amendment.


If the Democrats feel as strongly against guns as they contend, then Clinton and Sanders should have their security details disarm. There should be absolutely no guns at the Democratic Convention.


strict gun control laws and government disarmament get single women killed and put them at severe risk, not "lax" gun laws.   Amanda Collins, who attended the University of Nevada-Reno, was raped at gun point in a "gun-free" parking garage just 100 feet from the campus police station after a night class in 2007. At the time of the attack, she was carrying her concealed weapons permit, but not her weapon due to strict gun control policies on campus. Her attacker, James Biela, went on to rape two other women and killed one of them.  Collins told me in an interview for my book Assault and Flattery: The Truth About The Left and Their War on Women. "If I had been carrying that night, two other rapes would have been prevented and a young life would have been saved," Collins said.


Democrats in the Missouri State House protested against freedom for 39 straight hours, trying but failing to force Christians to celebrate homosexual "wedding" ceremonies.  "Republicans in the Missouri Senate have passed a constitutional amendment protecting religious individuals and businesses who do not want to service same-sex wedding ceremonies, bringing to end a 39-hour filibuster over the measure by Senate Democrats," reports The Washington Times.  "A rarely used procedure known as the 'previous question' rule was used to cut off debate on Wednesday morning, after which Senate Joint Resolution 39 passed by a 23-9 vote.  "In the wake of the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, striking down state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage, the amendment would prevent the government from punishing wedding-service vendors — such as florists, bakers and churches — who conscientiously object to taking part in same-sex weddings.


(these Sodom & Gomorrah companies need to be respectfully rebuked)  More than 400 businesses in Georgia have joined a coalition called “Georgia Prospers” (Sodom & Gomorrah style) to fight what advocates call a religious liberty bill protecting First Amendment rights.. “It’s important to note that Salesforce does business in Singapore and India,” McKoon said last month from the well of the Senate, adding:  The laws of Singapore and India are that they make homosexuality a crime punishable by imprisonment. It appears he [Benioff] has absolutely no problem doing business in and making money from countries where homosexuality is a crime. So let’s spare us all the political antics around this issue.



"Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse," they write in a statement released yesterday. In an eight-point dismantling of the trans-movement, they remind Americans that gender confusion is a "mental disorder" -- a fact, ACP points out, that has never been disproven.  "When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such," they write. No one, the pediatricians explain, "is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one.  Instead of helping these children and adults, we're sentencing them to a miserable life because we refuse to address the underlying issues. Even in places that embrace this alternate gender universe, people still stuffer. "Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT-affirming countries," the pediatricians note. "What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?"



An influential 1916 best-seller, "The Passing of the Great Race" -- celebrating Nordic Europeans -- was written by Madison Grant, a staunch activist for Progressive causes such as endangered species, municipal reform, conservation and the creation of national parks.  He was a member of an exclusive social club founded by Progressive Theodore Roosevelt, and Grant and Democrap Franklin D. Roosevelt became friends in the 1920s, addressing one another in letters as "My dear Frank" and "My dear Madison." Grant's book was translated into German, and Adolf Hitler called it his Bible.  Progressives spearheaded the eugenics movement, dedicated to reducing the reproduction of supposedly "inferior" individuals and races. The eugenics movement spawned Planned Parenthood, among other groups. In academia, there were 376 courses devoted to eugenics in 1920.   Southern segregationists who railed against blacks were often also Progressives who railed against Wall Street. Back in those days, blacks voted for Republicans as automatically as they vote for Democrats today.  Where the Democrats' President Woodrow Wilson introduced racial segregation into those government agencies in Washington where it did not exist at the time, Republican President Calvin Coolidge's wife invited the wives of black Congressmen to the White House. As late as 1957, civil rights legislation was sponsored in Congress by Republicans and opposed by Democrats.  Later, when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was sponsored by Democrats, a higher percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for it than did Congressional Democrats. Revisionist histories tell a different story. But, as Casey Stengel used to say, "You could look it up" -- in the Congressional Record, in this case.   The biggest difference between the left and right today, when it comes to racial issues, is that liberals tend to take the side of those blacks who are doing the wrong things -- hoodlums the left depicts as martyrs, while the right defends those blacks more likely to be the victims of those hoodlums.  Rudolph Giuliani, when he was the Republican mayor of New York, probably saved more black lives than any other human being, by promoting aggressive policing against hoodlums, which brought the murder rate down to a fraction of what it was before.



The 1924 Democratic National Convention in New York City, often referred to as the “Klanbake” because of the active presence of the Ku Klux Klan in support of one of the candidates, was a chaotic mess much like that to which the GOP now is careening with Trump fighting to maintain a grip on the steering wheel. At that “brokered” convention nearly a century ago, it took 103 ballots before a nominee was chosen – not one of the front-runners going in, but a lesser-known individual who initially polled at a mere 2.8 percent, and eventually emerged to become the Party’s “compromise” candidate.  Not surprising, the Democratic Party brand was so tarnished and torn by that convention melee that its eventual nominee lost in a general election landslide to the Republican nominee (Calvin Coolidge).



As the BBC article says, “In the 1970s, scientists had thought that DNA was a stable molecule, but Prof. Lindahl demonstrated that it decays at a surprisingly fast rate.” This led him and then the others to look for repair mechanisms, and the researchers found several (hence the three recipients of the prize).  The article speaks of the repair mechanisms as “essential processes”. Indeed, without the repair mechanisms, DNA falls apart “at a surprisingly fast rate”. Once an organism dies, the repair mechanisms no longer operate and DNA decays. This means that fossils that are supposedly millions of years old should not have any intact DNA; but they often do, including dinosaur fossils.2


While dinosaur bones do contain some DNA, the bone known as the medullary bone that grows in female dinosaurs during pregnancy will contain a lot more DNA.  Lindsay Zanno, assistant research professor of biological sciences at North Carolina State University, said that it “is possible” that the dinosaur and its egg contains the necessary DNA – which is the building blocks for life – to take scientists a step closer to reintroducing dinosaurs to the world.



Origin of life theorists face a much higher “Mount Improbable” seeing a minimal cell with 473 genes.  Craig Venter’s team has published results of their latest attempt to strip down a living cell to bare essentials (the organism must be free-living, not parasitic). They’re calling it “Syn 3.0.” After years determining what a version of Mycoplasma mycoides bacterium could do without, they came up with a “synthetic” cell containing 473 genes deemed essential. The could not find the function for 149 of the genes.  It’s the talk of the town in science news circles, because Syn 3.0 is much more complex than any proposed protocell emerging from a chemical soup. On his blog Darwin’s God, Cornelius Hunter remarks, “Mycoplasma mycoides Just Destroyed Evolution.”   “The big news is we failed,” Venter says. “I was surprised.” Neither chromosome produced a living microbe. It’s clear, Venter says, that “our current knowledge of biology is not sufficient to sit down and design a living organism and build it.”  They started over with a “top-down” approach. Beginning with Syn 1.0, they systematically stripped out anything the bacterium could live without. They got it down to 473 genes, about half the size of their Syn 1.0 organism.


But there is another reason they spent twenty years on this project. It’s an attempt to answer a basic question. What’s the minimum amount of genetic information needed to get a functioning cell?



A galaxy of stars this mature so close to the beginning of the universe was not predicted by big bangers, Space.com says: However, the discovery also raises many new questions as the existence of such a bright and large galaxy is not predicted by theory. The big bangers did not predict this galaxy or the BOSS Great Wall. It was a great surprise. The GN-z11 galaxy should not exist, but it does. The big bangers admit that their knowledge about the early Universe is still very restricted, after decades of research. Such objects are a mystery to them. Their cosmological theories cannot explain them. And yet they get to keep their jobs? Sounds like government workers.



It did not go well for Dawkins. Dawkins is a good writer and speaks very well, but neither of these attributes can hide some of the absurdities that come out of his mouth. The naked emperor gains a false sense of superiority as long as he surrounds himself with people who want his favor by always agreeing with him no matter how absurd.  One of the first thing students learn in science class is that something does not arise from nothing. In fact, something does not even arise from some other things. For a long time, alchemists tried to turn lead into gold. At least the alchemists had the lead to start with. But, alas, they couldn’t turn lead into gold.   How many times have you heard atheists argue that they can’t believe in an invisible God? But it’s OK for atheists to argue that the cosmos came into existence out of nothing. “A physicist said it. I believe it. That settles it.”



Scientists have used adult stem cells to cure blindness, providing what may be a splendid treatment for cataracts as well. From the Telegraph story:  If this breakthrough had occurred with embryonic stem cells, front-page stories would have screamed around the world. But it was adult stem cells and so the reporting is muted.



Probably the best-known characteristics of the hummingbird are its extremely rapid wing-beat (50-80 beats per second) and its amazing ability to manoeuvre. It can hover, it can fly backwards and sideways, and it can fly at speeds of more than 90 km/h an hour (55 mph). In a courtship dive it can reach 100 km/h (60 mph), swooping down and back again in a U-shaped dive. (This bird’s a real show-off!)



Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!" — Patrick Henry, 1775

9) "I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country." — Nathan Hale before being hung by the British

16) "I'll tell you what war is about, you've got to kill people, and when you've killed enough they stop fighting." — U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay

22) "Today we did what we had to do. They counted on America to be passive. They counted wrong." — Ronald Reagan after bombing Libya

3) "Are you guys ready? Let's roll." -- Todd Beamer's last words

“Ritualistic Baal worship, in sum, looked a little like this: Adults would gather around the altar of Baal. Infants would then be burned alive as a sacrificial offering to the deity. Amid horrific screams and the stench of charred human flesh, congregants – men and women alike – would engage in bisexual orgies. The ritual of convenience was intended to produce economic prosperity by prompting Baal to bring rain for the fertility of “mother earth.”  “The natural consequences of such behavior – pregnancy and childbirth – and the associated financial burdens of “unplanned parenthood” were easily offset. One could either choose to engage in homosexual conduct or – with child sacrifice available on demand – could simply take part in another fertility ceremony to ‘terminate’ the unwanted child.”  Geoffrey Grider, writing in “Now the End Begins,” said bringing the Temple of Baal to New York City was quite fitting.   Child sacrifice via burnt offering has been updated, ever so slightly, to become child sacrifice by way of abortion. The ritualistic promotion, practice and celebration of both heterosexual and homosexual immorality and promiscuity have been carefully whitewashed – yet wholeheartedly embraced – by the cults of radical feminism, militant “gay rights” and “comprehensive sex education.” And, the pantheistic worship of “mother earth” has been substituted – in name only – for radical environmentalism.”

             Take the Quiz!!  Determine Who You Should Support For President.    Please look at their profiles, their answers and their stances and become an educated, informed voter!!


 2012 Values Voter Presidential Voter Guide


 Take Action:  It's estimated that of the nearly 60 million Christians in America, half do not vote. With your help, we can change that.  Unfortunately, many of these like-minded believers aren't even registered to cast a ballot. This presents Values Voters with a significant opportunity to educate and to encourage like-minded believers to get registered and to cast an informed vote on Election Day.



Obama in his own words and his own record.  Actions speak louder than words….A must see BEFORE you vote!







Pat Caddell who was also on Justice with Judge Jeanine on Saturday night on Fox. 

Pat Caddell, a former pollster for the Democrats and for Jimmy Carter.  She said, "It just comes out, Pat, that the CIA operative on the ground asked for help three times.  The New York Times doesn't cover it.  A front page from yesterday, and a front page from today, and they don't even mention it, Pat." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsz5iZX9Db4&feature=player_embedded           


CADDELL:  I am appalled right now.  This White House, this president, this vice president, the secretary of state, all of them are willing apparently to dishonor themselves and this country for the cheap prospect of getting reelected, willing to cover up and lie, and the worst thing is, the very people who are supposed to protect the American people and the truth, the leading mainstream media, they have become a threat, a fundamental threat to American democracy and the enemies of the American people.  What I saw with Ty Woods' father and family and the outrage I feel for my country and the shame that these people have no honor, and when will people finally say it?  Cover-up is too nice a word, and the media is the one that it's worse on.

RUSH:  Pat Caddell, talking about the media.  They've become a threat, a fundamental threat to American democracy. They are the enemies of the American people.  You shoulda seen him.  He was practically crying, describing what he had seen with Tyrone Woods' father and family, the outrage he feels for his country.  He wasn't finished.

CADDELL:  This president didn't care enough to stay in the White House and, quote, "find out what was going on" the next day.  Now I know why he didn't meet with his national security adviser. And why he got on a plane and went to a fundraiser, an act, if any president, Democrat or Republican, prior to this had done while the consulate was smoldering, would have been crucified. 



 http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979873073       On Friday the credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s, downgraded America’s credit rating for the first time in our nation’s history. http://www.impeachobamacampaign.com/u-s-credit-downgrade-another-obama-first/        The United States earned the top rating the moment such rankings began in 1917 — which means we maintained our AAA rating through the Great Depression, stagflation, malaise, and the 1982 recession. Thirty months of Barack Obama, and it is gone for the first time in history. Change we can believe in???  Today Let Freedom Ring is launching THE OBAMA DOWNGRADE.COM to educate the public that President Obama owns this downgrade for his irresponsible spending and his failed leadership to reduce the deficit by seriously cutting spending. Make sure the American people know that President Obama owns this downgrade. Check out our new web video “The Obama Downgrade” vote, and share it with friends.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbe8e1tIqxQ&feature=player_embedded        What would have averted the credit rating downgrade?? Precisely the spending cuts advocated by the Tea Party!!Obama, the Democratic Party and its members of Congress have spent years blaming former President George W. Bush for the nation’s current economic woes, which is akin to blaming the bank’s tellers for a bank robbery, or for the dishonesty of their bosses, the bank’s executives who were looting the till. Nobody in the liberal dominated media bothers to note that in the last years of the Bush presidency Democrats controlled the Congress and thus had a death grip on the nation’s economy, having complete control over the purse strings. They spent (and spent, and spent) the yet, uncollected taxes of future generations  as well as our own,  as if there were no tomorrow. It wasn’t a Bush Congress that jammed the incredible costs of ObamaCare down the throats of the American people and their children and grandchildren!  It was our spendthrift president and his allies on Capitol Hill doing their classic imitation of the legendary drunken sailors on shore leave. AFTER CREDIT DOWNGRADE TEA PARTY MUST DUMP OBAMA

The United States earned the top rating the moment such rankings began in 1917 — which means we maintained our AAA rating through the Great Depression, stagflation, malaise, and the 1982 recession. Change we can believe in???



Voting Guides


   www.Judeo-ChristianVoterGuide.com  link to an appropriate non-partisan voter guide

The pro-family organizations listed below provide voters resources for most states. Click on the organizations’ links to get more information.




Know the Candidates and Issues
Click here to track Federal legislation and find out how your Congressman and Senators are voting.

Sites like Vote Your Faith, On The Issues, and iVoteValues provide a wealth of non-partisan information on voting and candidates (including biographies, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and interest group ratings).

For instructions on viewing candidates interest group ratings, commonly called "Scorecards," click here.

 http://visiontoamerica.org/6666/are-you-better-off-than-you-were-four-years-ago/                            Still, the unemployment rate stands at an unhealthy 8.6%, and few analysts think it will drop fast enough to reach the 7.4% rate that prevailed when Ronald Reagan won re-election in 1984, or even the 7.5% when Jimmy Carter lost his re-election bid in 1980. Not since Franklin Roosevelt won re-election in 1936 has a president faced a worse jobless situation.  Obama followed FDR-like policies with his Obamanomics that have recreated the economic sufferings of FDR's Great Depression.

More broadly, Mr. Reagan set the modern standard for gauging the economic mood of voters in an election year in that 1980 race, when he unseated Mr. Carter in large measure by asking voters simply: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"  If the coming election is determined by that maxim, or by most traditional measures, President Obama would seem to face bleak prospects. Consider just a few snapshots of leading economic and political indicators:1.    Unemployment, the economic statistic that packs the most political punch, has risen to 8.6% now from 7.8% the month Mr. Obama took office. It topped 10% briefly in 2009.2.    The misery index—the combination of the unemployment and inflation rates—has risen to about 12 now from 7.83 when he took office.3.    Median family income fell in the first two years of the Obama term, after rising the previous four years.4.    As of September, 12.6% of U.S. mortgage borrowers had missed at least one payment on their mortgage or were in foreclosure, down from a peak of about 15% but still well above the normal range of 5% to 7% in the last two decades, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.5.    In large measure because of a decline in home values, household net worth dropped 1.7% over the last year; under every president since 1948, it rose in the year preceding the election. 6.    Mr. Obama's job approval stands at 46% in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, below the levels George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan had a year before they were re-elected, and below where George H.W. Bush stood a year before he lost his re-election bid.7.    Approval of Mr. Obama's handling of the economy is even lower; it stands at 39%.  


Energy: When gas prices hit $4 a gallon in 2008, candidate Barack Obama said it was due to previous failed energy policies. Now that prices are heading still higher, President Obama calls it progress. Already, pump prices are higher than they've been in previous years, suggesting they will top $4 soon and possibly reach an unprecedented $5 this summer.

President Obama is starting to notice the political implications. "Progress" isn't exactly how Obama described the country's energy picture in 2008, when gas prices were closing in on $4 a gallon. Then, it was a clear sign of "Washington's failure to lead on energy," which was "turning the middle-class squeeze into a devastating vise-grip for millions of Americans."  "For the well-off in this country," Obama said in May 2008, "high gas prices are mostly an annoyance, but to most Americans they're a huge problem, bordering on a crisis."  In August that year, he declared rising energy costs to be "one of the most dangerous and urgent threats this nation has ever faced" and that gas prices "are wiping out paychecks and straining businesses."

While Gibbs is right that domestic production has climbed in the past three years, Obama's policies had nothing whatsoever to do with it. Oil coming from offshore wells was in the pipeline, so to speak, during the Clinton and Bush years, when those permits were issued. And the oil pouring out of North Dakota is the result of drilling on private lands.  Obama, in fact, has made it clear for years that he has no real interest in boosting domestic production.  When President Bush announced plans in 2008 to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling, Obama dismissed it, saying "it would merely prolong the failed energy policies we have seen from Washington for 30 years."  "Offshore drilling," he said, "would not lower gas prices today, it would not lower gas prices next year and it would not lower gas prices five years from now."  In a big energy speech he gave in August 2008, Obama argued that "if we opened up and drilled on every single square inch of our land and our shores, we would still find only 3% of the world's oil reserves."

And while in office, Obama's done everything he can to limit production (Obama…have you heard of Supply vs. Demand???) — slow-walking offshore permits, killing the Keystone XL pipeline, making it even harder to get oil out of federal lands.


http://news.investors.com/article/600809/201202101833/obama-budget-does-nothing-to-end-fiscal-crisis.htm?Ntt=another-year-another-farce              The president's failure will be compounded by the do-nothing Senate Democrats. Majority Leader Harry Reid has not passed a regular budget in three years. And he has already said he has no intention of doing anything with the budget this year either. That is no way to run a lemonade stand, let alone a government.  It's time Washington learned something about fiscal responsibility by looking outside the Beltway.

In my home state of Wyoming, Monday is the day our legislature opens its session to set a two-year budget for 2013 and 2014. That session will last only 20 days, and at the end of it we will have a balanced budget.  Like most states, Wyoming first calculates how much money it expects to take in, then sets its spending to match its income — not the other way around. That's the way families across America do it. They look at how much money they've got coming in and decide whether they can afford a new car, a vacation or even a trip to the movies. They don't schedule a vacation and then tell their boss they need a raise to pay for it.  the simple truth understood by responsible states and families everywhere — you don't spend money you don't have. The record shows that Obama has never been serious about responsible budgeting in the past. American voters will have an opportunity in November to replace him with someone committed to getting our fiscal house in order.




Really?  Let's consult the raw data: 

Unemployment: 7.8% then, 8.3% now

Median income: $54,983 then, $50,964 now

Gas prices: $1.85 per gallon then, $3.78 now

National debt: $10.6 trillion then, $15.9 trillion now (with the debt hitting the magic $16 Trillion mark tonight, appropriately)

Half of all Americans are now considered "poor" or "low income."

One out of every six Americans is living in poverty -- an increase of millions since Obama took office.

Food stamp usage has increased by 45 percent under this president.

Average family health care premium costs have increased to roughly $15,000 per year.
But remember, friends, the president's team insists that you're better off in 2012 -- "by any measure."  Obama's defenders will argue that he inherited a very difficult situation, and that things were extraordinarily ugly when he took office.  That's true.  But he campaigned promising to fix things.  We're now enduring the slowest economic 'recovery' since the Great Depression.  Obama sold his healthcare debacle by pledging that premiums would drop, deficits would drop, overall federal healthcare spending would drop, and no one would be displaced from their current plan, "no matter what."  These were all false claims.  He also used lofty promises to push through a $825 Billion borrowed "stimulus" package.  How's that going?


Newsweek magazine is targeting its latest controversial cover at the Obama administration. It’s part of a devastating story written by esteemed British historian Niall Ferguson telling President Obama that it’s time to go and that the only team that can possibly turn the country around is the Romney-Ryan ticket.
“In his inaugural address, Obama promised ‘not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.’” Ferguson writes in the cover story, “Hit the Road, Barack: Why We Need a New President.”

“He promised to ‘build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.’ He promised to ‘restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.’” wrote Ferguson, who made some of the same arguments
in a March 2012 Newsmax cover story, "Decision Time." “And he promised to ‘transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.’ Unfortunately the president’s scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.”
Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit,” Ferguson writes. “We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.”  Read more on Newsmax.com:
Newsweek Cover: Hit the Road Barack


At the National Prayer Breakfast, broadcast live on C-SPAN2, Dr. Ben Carson said he didn’t want to “offend” anyone, but his words nonetheless were likely to have made one distinguished guest in attendance – President Barack Obama – squirm in his seat.

Carson is director of the pediatric neurosurgery division at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Md. His inspiring story of growing up the son of an illiterate, single black woman to becoming one of America’s most esteemed doctors has been detailed in the book “Gifted Hands” and the movie of the same name.

At Thursday’s prayer breakfast, Carson took aim at a number of topics that may have caused the man seated two chairs to his right a bit of indigestion, including class-warfare economics.

“Some people say, they say, ‘Well, that’s not fair because it doesn’t hurt the guy who made $10 billion as much as the guy who made 10,’” Carson said. “[But] where does it say you have to hurt the guy? He just put a billion dollars in the pot!  “We don’t need to hurt him,” Carson continued. “It’s that kind of thinking that has resulted in 602 banks in the Cayman Islands. That money needs to be back here, building our infrastructure and creating jobs.”

On his top-rated radio program, host Rush Limbaugh praised Carson’s speech as “plain English, simple, rational, understandable, straight to the point, minces no words.”

“He’s basically saying, ‘Obama, you keep talking wanting to hurt people who’ve already put money in the bank. You hurt the producers. No wonder they take money out of the country,’” Limbaugh summarized.

Carson further took aim at the swelling national debt, increasing bureaucracy and political correctness, which he called “dangerous” because it “muzzles” people and “keeps people from discussing important issues while the fabric of their society is being changed.”

 “Here’s my solution,” Dr. Carson said of America’s health-care woes. “When a person is born, give him a birth certificate, an electronic medical record and a health savings account [or HSA] to which money can be contributed – pretax – from the time you’re born ’til the time you die. When you die, you can pass it on to your family members, so that when you’re 85 years old and you got six diseases, you’re not trying to spend up everything. You’re happy to pass it on, and there’s nobody talking about death panels.

“And also, for the people who were indigent who don’t have any money,” Carson continued, “we can make contributions to their HSA each month, because we already have this huge pot of money. Instead of sending it to some bureaucracy, let’s put it in their HSAs. Now they have some control over their own health care.”

“Dr. Carson said the one thing that Obama and the Democrats do not want to hear,” Limbaugh explained. “In this case, we have an ideal replacement for Obamacare that is much better, that promotes the health-care industry, that promotes cost savings, that promotes competition and it gets everybody covered.”




Since his sensational speech last week at the National Prayer Breakfast, Dr. Benjamin Carson has been on a media tour. Today he talked to CNBC's Larry Kudlow about everything from the Founding Fathers, to tax rates to running for president. 


Doctor Explains Why He Spoke Out Against The President’s Policies At Prayer Breakfast


TheBlaze was the only TV network to carry Senator Paul’s response last night, in which Rand proposed a 5-year balanced budget plan which would introduce a 17% flat tax and cuts to regulations on American businesses. The Senator explained to Glenn that would of the motivations behind his plan is the idea that “revenue neutral” tax reform will somehow benefit the economy.

“Revenue neutral does nothing for the economy,” he explained. “It means one person will pay less and another person will pay more.”  He went on to explain that if you really want to stimulate the economy, you have to leave more money in the economy.   “If you really want to stimulate the economy, you need to do some dramatic things. Because money goes where it’s welcome, and it’s not welcome in the U.S., so it’s going to other countries,” the Senator added.  Rand Paul went on the address where he stands on immigration reform. Much to the surprise of the mainstream media, Paul sees immigrants as assets to the country. He is looking to work with the plan being put together in Congress to add an amendment called “trust but verify.” This would allow the reforms to take place over a 5 year period in steps — but they only continue if each year Congress votes for border security.

“I do need your prayers,” Sen. Paul told Glenn’s radio audience. “And I do need the strength to go on with this because it isn’t always easy. But really…I think our country’s problems are deeper than political. We need spiritual leaders to come forward. We need something beyond just the politics of the day. I see it everywhere — something really depraved is rising in the country. We need something bigger than any politician at this point.”




Tonight, the President told the nation he disagrees. President Obama believes government is the solution: More government, more taxes, more debt.  What the President fails to grasp is that the American system that rewards hard work is what made America so prosperous.  What America needs is NOT Robin Hood but Adam Smith. In the year we won our independence, Adam Smith described what creates the Wealth of Nations.  He described a limited government that largely did not interfere with individuals and their pursuit of happiness.  All that we are, all that we wish to be is now threatened by the notion that you can have something for nothing, that you can have your cake and eat it too, that you can spend a trillion dollars every year that you don’t have. 

The President does a big “woe is me” over the $1.2 trillion sequester that he endorsed and signed into law. Some Republicans are joining him. Few people understand that the sequester doesn’t even cut any spending. It just slows the rate of growth. Even with the sequester, government will grow over $7 trillion over the next decade.  Only in Washington could an increase of $7 trillion in spending over a decade be called a cut.  So, what is the President’s answer? Over the past four years he has added over $6 trillion in new debt and may well do the same in a second term. What solutions does he offer? He takes entitlement reform off the table and seeks to squeeze more money out of the private sector.  He says he wants a balanced approach.  What the country really needs is a balanced budget.  Washington acts in a way that your family never could – they spend money they do not have, they borrow from future generations, and then they blame each other for never fixing the problem.

Tonight I urge you to demand a new course.  Demand Washington change their ways, or be sent home.

To begin with, we absolutely must pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution!  The amendment must include strict tax and spending limitations.  Liberals complain that the budget can’t be balanced but if you cut just one penny from each dollar we currently spend, the budget would balance within six or seven years.  The Penny Plan has been crafted into a bill that millions of conservatives across the country support.  Both parties have been guilty of spending too much, of protecting their sacred cows, of backroom deals in which everyone up here wins, but every taxpayer loses.

It is time for a new bipartisan consensus.  It is time Democrats admit that not every dollar spent on domestic programs is sacred. And it is time Republicans realize that military spending is not immune to waste and fraud.  Where would we cut spending; well, we could start with ending all foreign aid to countries that are burning our flag and chanting death to America.  The President could begin by stopping the F-16s and Abrams tanks being given to the radical Islamic government of Egypt.

Not only should the sequester stand, many pundits say the sequester really needs to be at least $4 trillion to avoid another downgrade of America’s credit rating.  Both parties will have to agree to cut, or we will never fix our fiscal mess.  Bipartisanship is not what is missing in Washington. Common sense is.

Trillion-dollar deficits hurt us all.  Printing more money to feed the never-ending appetite for spending hurts us all.  We pay higher prices every time we go to the supermarket or the gas pump. The value of the dollar shrinks with each new day.  Contrary to what the President claims, big government and debt are not a friend to the poor and the elderly. Big-government debt keeps the poor poor and saps the savings of the elderly.  This massive expansion of the debt destroys savings and steals the value of your wages.  Big government makes it more expensive to put food on the table. Big government is not your friend. The President offers you free stuff but his policies keep you poor.

Under President Obama, the ranks of America’s poor swelled to almost 1 in 6 people last year, reaching a new high as long-term unemployment left millions of Americans struggling and out of work.

The cycle must be broken.  The willpower to do this will not come from Congress. It must come from the American people.  Next month, I will propose a five-year balanced budget, a budget that last year was endorsed by taxpayer groups across the country for its boldness, and for actually solving the problem.  I will work with anyone on either side of the aisle who wants to cut spending.  But in recent years, there has been no one to work with.  The President’s massive tax hikes and spending increases have caused his budgets to get ZERO votes in both houses of Congress. Not a single Democrat voted for the President’s budget!  But at least he tried.  Senate Democrats have not even produced a budget in the time I have been in office, a shameful display of incompetence that illustrates their lack of seriousness.  This year, they say they will have a budget, but after just recently imposing hundreds of billions in new taxes, they now say they will include more tax hikes in their budget.

We must stand firm. We must say NO to any MORE tax hikes!  Only through lower taxes, less regulation and more freedom will the economy begin to grow again.

Our party is the party of growth, jobs and prosperity, and we will boldly lead on these issues.

Under the Obama economy, 12 million people are out of work. During the President’s first term 800,000 construction workers lost their jobs and another 800,000 simply gave up on looking for work.

With my five-year budget, millions of jobs would be created by cutting the corporate income tax in half, by creating a flat personal income tax of 17%, and by cutting the regulations that are strangling American businesses.

The only stimulus ever proven to work is leaving more money in the hands of those who earned it!

For those who are struggling we want to you to have something infinitely more valuable than a free phone, we want you to have a job and pathway to success.

We are the party that embraces hard work and ingenuity, therefore we must be the party that embraces the immigrant who wants to come to America for a better future.  We must be the party who sees immigrants as assets, not liabilities.  We must be the party that says, “If you want to work, if you want to become an American, we welcome you.” For those striving to climb the ladder of success we must fix our schools.  America’s educational system is leaving behind anyone who starts with disadvantages.

We have cut classroom size in half and tripled spending on education and still we lag behind much of the world.  A great education needs to be available for everyone, whether you live on country club lane or in government housing.  This will only happen when we allow school choice for everyone, rich or poor, white, brown, or black.  Let the taxes you pay for education follow each and every student to the school of your choice.  Competition has made America the richest nation in history. Competition can make our educational system the envy of the world.  The status quo traps poor children in a crumbling system of hopelessness.  When every child can, like the President’s kids, go to the school of their choice, then will the dreams of our children come true!  Washington could also use a good dose of transparency, which is why we should fight back against middle of the night deals that end with massive bills no one has read.  We must continue to fight for legislation that forces Congress to read the bills!  We must continue to object when Congress sticks special interest riders on bills in the dead of night!  And if Congress refuses to obey its own rules, if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say:  Sweep the place clean. Limit their terms and send them home!

I have seen the inner sanctum of Congress and believe me there is no monopoly on knowledge there.

If they will not listen, if they will not balance the budget, then we should limit their terms.

We are the party that adheres to the Constitution. We will not let the liberals tread on the Second Amendment!  We will fight to defend the entire Bill of Rights from the right to trial by jury to the right to be free from unlawful searches.  We will stand up against excessive government power wherever we see it.

We cannot and will not allow any President to act as if he were a king.  We will not let any President use executive orders to impinge on the Second Amendment.  We will not tolerate secret lists of American citizens who can be killed without trial.  Montesquieu wrote that there can be no liberty when the executive branch and the legislative branch are combined. Separation of powers is a bedrock principle of our Constitution.  We took the President to court over his unconstitutional recess appointments and won.  If necessary, we will take him to court again if he attempts to legislate by executive order.

Congress must reassert its authority as the protector of these rights, and stand up for them, no matter which party is in power.  Congress must stand as a check to the power of the executive, and it must stand as it was intended, as the voice of the people.  The people are crying out for change. They are asking for us to hear their voices, to fix our broken system, to right our economy and to restore their liberty.  Let us tonight let them know that we hear their voices. That we can and must work together, that we can and must re-chart our course toward a better future.  America has much greatness left in her. We will begin to thrive again when we begin to believe in ourselves again, when we regain our respect for our founding documents, when we balance our budget, when we understand that capitalism and free markets and free individuals are what creates our nation’s prosperity.  Thank you and God Bless America.





America is exceptional because we believe that every life, at every stage, is precious, and that everyone everywhere has a God-given right to go as far as their talents and hard work will take them.  Like most Americans, for me this ideal is personal. My parents immigrated here in pursuit of the opportunity to improve their life and give their children the chance at an even better one. They made it to the middle class, my dad working as a bartender and my mother as a cashier and a maid. I didn't inherit any money from them. But I inherited something far better - the real opportunity to accomplish my dreams.

This opportunity - to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life - it isn't bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.  Presidents in both parties - from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan - have known that our free enterprise economy is the source of our middle class prosperity.

But President Obama? He believes it's the cause of our problems. That the economic downturn happened because our government didn't tax enough, spend enough and control enough. And, therefore, as you heard tonight, his solution to virtually every problem we face is for Washington to tax more, borrow more and spend more.

This idea - that our problems were caused by a government that was too small - it's just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies.

And the idea that more taxes and more government spending is the best way to help hardworking middle class taxpayers - that's an old idea that's failed every time it's been tried.  More government isn't going to help you get ahead. It's going to hold you back.  More government isn't going to create more opportunities. It's going to limit them.

And more government isn't going to inspire new ideas, new businesses and new private sector jobs. It's going to create uncertainty.  Because more government breeds complicated rules and laws that a small business can't afford to follow.  Because more government raises taxes on employers who then pass the costs on to their employees through fewer hours, lower pay and even layoffs.

And because many government programs that claim to help the middle class, often end up hurting them instead.

For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle class Americans afford health insurance. But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with. And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren't hiring. Not only that; they're being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.

Now does this mean there's no role for government? Of course not. It plays a crucial part in keeping us safe, enforcing rules, and providing some security against the risks of modern life. But government's role is wisely limited by the Constitution.  When we point out that no matter how many job-killing laws we pass, our government can't control the weather - he accuses us of wanting dirty water and dirty air.  When we suggest we strengthen our safety net programs by giving states more flexibility to manage them - he accuses us of wanting to leave the elderly and disabled to fend for themselves.  And tonight, he even criticized us for refusing to raise taxes to delay military cuts - cuts that were his idea in the first place.

But his favorite attack of all is that those who don't agree with him - they only care about rich people.

Mr. President, I still live in the same working class neighborhood I grew up in. My neighbors aren't millionaires. They're retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. They're workers who have to get up early tomorrow morning and go to work to pay the bills. They're immigrants, who came here because they were stuck in poverty in countries where the government dominated the economy.  The tax increases and the deficit spending you propose will hurt middle class families. It will cost them their raises. It will cost them their benefits. It may even cost some of them their jobs.  And it will hurt seniors because it does nothing to save Medicare and Social Security.  So Mr. President, I don't oppose your plans because I want to protect the rich. I oppose your plans because I want to protect my neighbors.  Hard-working middle class Americans who don't need us to come up with a plan to grow the government. They want a plan to grow the middle class.  Economic growth is the best way to help the middle class. Unfortunately, our economy actually shrank during the last three months of 2012.

But if we can get the economy to grow at just 4 percent a year, it would create millions of middle class jobs. And it could reduce our deficits by almost $4 trillion dollars over the next decade.

Tax increases can't do this. Raising taxes won't create private sector jobs. And there's no realistic tax increase that could lower our deficits by almost $4 trillion. That's why I hope the President will abandon his obsession with raising taxes and instead work with us to achieve real growth in our economy.

Every dollar our government borrows is money that isn't being invested to create jobs. And the uncertainty created by the debt is one reason why many businesses aren't hiring.  The President loves to blame the debt on President Bush. But President Obama created more debt in four years than his predecessor did in eight.

The real cause of our debt is that our government has been spending 1 trillion dollars more than it takes in every year. That's why we need a balanced budget amendment.

The biggest obstacles to balancing the budget are programs where spending is already locked in. One of these programs, Medicare, is especially important to me. It provided my father the care he needed to battle cancer and ultimately die with dignity. And it pays for the care my mother receives now.  I would never support any changes to Medicare that would hurt seniors like my mother. But anyone who is in favor of leaving Medicare exactly the way it is right now, is in favor of bankrupting it.  Republicans have offered a detailed and credible plan that helps save Medicare without hurting today's retirees. Instead of playing politics with Medicare, when is the President going to offer his plan to save it?   And the truth is every problem can't be solved by government. Many are caused by the moral breakdown in our society. And the answers to those challenges lie primarily in our families and our faiths, not our politicians.






Rubio has said that Obama has an “obsession” with tax increases, and the president in his address spoke again about the need for higher taxes.  Rubio comments: “It’s pretty clear he wants tax increases as much as he can get them. For him, every solution to every problem is either a tax increase or a spending program.  “The problem is, as I outlined last night, there is no tax increase out there that’s going to create private sector jobs and there’s no realistic tax increase that can generate enough revenue to pay down the debt. The only solution to our problem is the combination of spending disciplines in the future and rapid economic growth, and that’s what we should be having a debate on.
“I hope the president will once and for all give up on his obsession with raising taxes and instead engage us in a conversation about how we can grow our economy the fastest way possible so we can grow our middle class and create more taxpayers, not more taxes.”
“I just don’t think the government can change the weather,” he declares. “America’s not a planet, it’s a country.  “To the extent that manmade activity is contributing to some changes in our climate, that’s global. That’s not just the United States. We can’t control what China does, what India does, and other developing countries are doing.  “On the other hand, we can do a lot to destroy our economy, which is what cap and trade and things like that will do. It will raise the cost of energy, raise the cost of everybody’s electric bills, and raise the cost of everything from your food to the cost of products that you buy. It will make manufacturing unsustainable in America. It’s just a terrible idea. It will do nothing to improve our environment and it will destroy our economy, destroy jobs.”


State Of The Union: President Obama says his State of the Union speech will be "focused on job creation." Seems as though we've heard this song before from Obama. And we already know how it ends.

In a preview of his State of the Union speech to Democrats, Obama promised that after four years of historically weak economic growth and an unemployment rate that's been stuck at or near 8% since he took office, he's going to turn his attention to job growth.

But he's made the same promise many times over the past four years.

So many times, in fact, that even the Obama-loving Huffington Post at one point put together a mocking "Pivot to Jobs Deja Vu" reel.  Here's just a sampling from Obama's first term:

• January 2009: "My economic agenda ... begins with jobs."

• November 2009: "This is my administration's overriding focus."

• January 2010: "We are going to have a sustained and relentless focus over the next several months on accelerating the pace of job creation, because that's priority No. 1."

• September 2010: "Our No. 1 focus has to be jobs, jobs, jobs."

• December 2010: "My singular focus over the next two years is ... jump-starting the economy so that we actually start making a dent in the unemployment rate."

• January 2011: "My principal focus, my No. 1 focus, is going be making sure that we are ... creating jobs not just now but well into the future."

• November 2012: "Our top priority has to be jobs and growth."

This time around, Obama says he has a "growth agenda." But from what he told his fellow Democrats, he's not only going to recycle his jobs promise Tuesday night, but also offer up the same tired FAILED liberal economic policies he's been pushing for the past four years.  Throw more taxpayer money at green energy while sticking it to the oil and gas industry, spend (sorry, "invest") more on education and roads, raise taxes still higher on the rich in the name of fairness, and yammer on about growing the economy from "the middle out."

These FAILED policies have already produced the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. In fact, had Obama's recovery been merely average, the GDP would be $1.2 trillion bigger today, and there'd be 7.5 million more people with jobs.  Under Obama, middle-class families have seen their incomes decline. Millions have fallen into poverty. The income gap is widening.  So why should we expect different results now?


one would be foolish not at least to wonder whether Mr. Obama’s goal from the start was to wreck capitalism; redistribute wealth by punishing, penalizing and demonizing the wealthy; force Americans to their knees to beg for help from big government; and then in response to those pleas, put government in control over every aspect of our lives.  Examine the state of the union and the world under Mr. Obama. Judge for yourselves whether we are in a state of Obamageddon.  The United States is broke. Bankrupt. Insolvent.



The Republican National Committee has President Obama dead to rights on his breathtaking hypocrisy and demagoguery regarding the impending automatic "sequestration" cuts that he's now trying to attribute to the GOP.  This video doesn't break any new ground on substance, but its stark juxtaposition of Obama's 2011 veto threat and this week's attempt at blame shift is absolutely damning:

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus couples this clip with a statement slamming Obama's duplicity and taking Democrats to task for their serial debt denialism:
 "In 2011, President Obama proposed the devastating sequestration cuts and stood by them. Now the Democrats continue saying Washington doesn’t have a spending problem, showing just out of touch the Democrats are with the American people. House Republicans have passed two bills that provide common-sense solutions that would reduce spending and preserve and strengthen our safety net for future generations. Instead of admitting we have a problem, Obama and the Democrats would rather find more tax increases. Our nation’s problem is spending and it’s time the president realizes that."Having first proposed and demanded the sequester, it would make sense that the president lead the effort to replace it. Unfortunately, he has put forth no detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Senate—controlled by his Democratic allies—hasn't even voted on a solution, let alone passed one. By contrast, House Republicans have twice passed plans to replace the sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect national security. The president has repeatedly called for even more tax revenue, but the American people don't support trading spending cuts for higher taxes. They understand that the tax debate is now closed. The president got his higher taxes—$600 billion from higher earners, with no spending cuts—at the end of 2012. He also got higher taxes via ObamaCare.

Don't believe Boehner (or Bob Woodward) on the origins of the sequester?  Have a listen to Montana Democrat Sen. Max Baucus' rendering of the relevant timeline:




How much is to be “cut”? $85 billion authority, likely only $44 billion reduced spending on a budget of $3.6 trillion (with overspending of more than a trillion). That’s 2.4%. As of August household income was down 8.2% under Obama and the country had to make do. Now Obama tries to tell us that government can’t do with 2.4% less? Seriously?  Obama has been lying about the sequester since the debates. The sequester was Obama’s team’s idea:  Page 326 (July 26):  At 2:30 p.m., [White House Budget director Jack] Lew and [White House legislative affairs director Rob] Nabors went to the Senate to meet with [Senator Majority Leader Harry] Reid and his chief of staff, David Krone.  “We have an idea for a trigger,” Lew said.  “What’s the idea,” Reid asked skeptically.  “Sequestration.”


Obama ‘sequester’ mess. Here’s what he won’t be telling you:

This is President Obama’s sequester. “The idea for sequestration did come from the White House, as news accounts made clear at the time,” reports the New York Times. As Speaker Boehner wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “it is a product of the president's own failed leadership.”

Republicans passed a bill with smarter spending cuts (twice), but the president’s Senate hasn’t passed it (or any other replacement bill). Senate Democrats haven’t passed a budget in four years either. The House voted to replace the president’s sequester in May 2012 and again last December. Each bill targeted waste and fraud, and would help put us on a path to balance the budget in 10 years.


Today must be the day we stop stealing from our children. President Obama and congressional Democrats continue to ignore reality. They are offering up future generations as collateral for their unchecked spending and borrowing. It has to stop.

We must not raise our nation's statutory debt limit unless Congress passes and the President signs into law real reforms and immediate spending reductions that place America on a path to balance within 10 years without raising taxes.

>> SIGN THE PETITION: Enough is enough. We must be on a path to balance.

Since President Obama secured a massive $2.1 trillion debt ceiling increase in August 2011, our nation has racked up $47,000 in debt every second. Unless immediate action is taken, our future is destined to be either that of Greek-style implosion or the slow managed decline of Western Europe. Neither option is acceptable.

Thank you for signing the petition and telling Washington to balance the budget.





Gun Control? How about Spending Control Bumper Sticker



The Ensuring the Full Faith and Credit of the US and Protecting America's Soldiers and Seniors Act (HR 247)
To require that the US Government prioritize all obligations on the debt held by the public, Social Security benefits, and military pay in the event that the debt limit is reached.
Send a message to your Representative:




Take a look at some of the promises Obama made back in 2009 during his first State of the Union.
“I pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.”
During his first State of the Union, newly inaugurated President Obama vowed to
cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Instead, Obama has averaged deficits nearly three times that of his predecessor.   For those who were concerned with President George W. Bush’s $4 trillion national debt, this pledge may have seemed like the “hope and change” the American people voted for in 2008. However, the reality of America’s additional debt over the past four years under the Obama Administration is staggering—almost $6 trillion of Obama Democrat Debt in four years, on track to triple the amount Bush accumulated over his eight years as President. Now that Obama is heading into his second term, we’ve seen quite a change from the Barack Obama who thought $4 trillion in debt was “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic.”
“Over the next two years, this [stimulus] plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs.”
The President promised great things from the stimulus plan, but as Heritage’s J.D. Foster has said, we have to
look at his record. He may have promised 3.5 million new jobs, but he’s 7.7 million jobs in the hole instead.



Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “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.”

This powerful legislative check on executive and judicial wrongdoing is reserved for the most egregious offenses against the U.S. Constitution and the republic.

During the debates of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, James Madison explained the requirement for impeachment: “[S]ome provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers.”

In the Federalist Papers (No. 65), Alexander Hamilton wrote that a president should be impeached for “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.”

WND assembled a bipartisan panel of top constitutional experts to evaluate 12 popular arguments for impeaching Obama.

You asked for it! Sign the petition urging Congress to impeach President Barack Obama.

Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’, Illegally conducting war against Libya, Benghazi-gate, Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act  etc…



Fortunately, under the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012, OMB did prepare a line-by-line preliminary estimate of how sequester will affect every single agency. Read it for yourself and decide.

As taxpayers you are entitled to know the truth, and to have a ready means of verifying some of the White House’s assertions.  Perhaps their biggest fear is that if this mere 2.4 percent cut to the budget actually is allowed to go into effect — nobody will notice.  Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2013/02/understanding-obamas-sequester-bombshell/#ixzz2KiRbrvdP





Congress Taking Week Off Before March 1 Sequester Deadline: “A divided Congress will take next week off and then return to a familiar conflict: a looming, self-inflicted budget deadline that threatens economic stability with no resolution in sight on how to resolve it.” (Susan Davis, “Congress has no clear path to avoid broad budget cuts,” USA Today, 2/13/13)

FLASHBACK: Pelosi: No Vacation Until We Deal With Sequester: “The House should not recess and Members of Congress should not go home until we finish our work, reach an agreement, and avert this crisis.” (Igor Bobic, “Pelosi To Boehner: No Recess Until We Replace Sequester,” Talking Points Memo, 2/11/13)

Obama Off To Palm Beach. “President Obama will be enjoying a little R and R — and no doubt some golf — this weekend during a vacation in West Palm Beach.”(Donovan Slack, “Obama to vacation in Palm Beach,” POLITICO, 2/13/13)





What is FRED? Short for Federal Reserve Economic Data, FRED is an online database of more than 45,000 economic data time series from over 40 national, international, public, and private sources. FRED, created and maintained by Research Department at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, goes far beyond simply providing data: It combines data with a powerful mix of tools that help the user understand, interact with, display, and disseminate the data. In essence, FRED helps users tell their data stories. The purpose of this article is to guide the potential (or current) FRED user through the various aspects and tools of the database


God’s judgment on a people who have turned away from Him and His ways and from everything for which our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.  The nation is divided like never before – intentionally so. That has been Obama’s game plan from the beginning – to build a constituency of special-interest groups that truly believe their salvation is found in bigger government, more programs, irresponsible spending and unconstitutional policies.

This election could very well represent the beginning of the end of the American Dream, American exceptionalism, the American way.  But it’s no time to give up – to throw up our hands in disgust and walk away from politics. Neither is it time to surrender to the radical social agenda Obama has championed to win his victory.

It’s time to prepare for the worst – economically, militarily, socially, culturally. Most of all, it’s time for collective repentance.  Only a miracle can save us – and we need to humble ourselves before God and pray hard for one.


in support of Mitt Romney and his candidacy.  I would hope that all who love the Scriptures would agree that we should not vote for President Obama. There are compelling reasons why a Christian should be distressed with the current administration. The President’s unqualified support of abortion goes beyond anything we saw from previous Democratic leaders like President Clinton. His public endorsement of same-sex marriage is well known. His fiscal policy has launched the federal government into reckless spending which runs up our deficit at a rate of more than a trillion dollars per year—that is, more than $3250 of additional debt per year for every one of our 312 million people. At present, our government is in debt more than $51,000 for every person living in our nation. People have documented his socialist agenda for the government to use its coercive power to steal wealth from some in order to redistribute it to others as its officials see fit.  When one considers what the Bible says about the unborn child (Ps. 139:13–14), homosexuality (Rom. 1:26–27), debt (Prov. 22:7), and stealing (Ex. 20:15), including taking from the rich to favor the poor (Ex. 23:3), those committed to biblical truth cannot but groan over the policies that presently rule our nation. To vote for President Obama is to vote for the advancement of moral evil, intolerance against biblical teaching, financial bondage, and political tyranny. As citizens of a democratic republic, we have the grave responsibility to use our vote to end this administration before it does more harm to the people of our land.



Conservatism in my humble opinion did not lose last night. It’s just very difficult to beat Santa Claus. People are not going to vote against Santa Claus, especially when the alternative is being your own Santa Claus,” he continued. “In a country of children where the option is Santa Claus  or  work,  What wins?”

“Every Obama voter may not be religious, but they believe in Santa Claus. And you know what else they believe about Santa Claus? That Santa Claus doesn’t judge anybody. You’re gonna get your stuff no matter how you behave. You’re gonna get your stuff whether you’re a good guy, bad guy, or a non-entity. Santa Claus isn’t judgmental. In fact, Santa Claus loves you because you have the deck stacked against you.”

Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly proffered a similar comment “Because it’s a changing country. The demographics are changing,” O’Reilly said. “It’s not a traditional America anymore. And there are 50 percent of the voting public who want STUFF. They want THINGS. And who is going to give them things? President Obama. He knows it and he ran on it. The voters, many of them, feel that the economic system is stacked against them, and they want STUFF. … People feel that they are entitled to things, and which candidate between the two is going to give them things.”




Mr. Obama won a clear victory but less decisively than other re-elected presidents. He garnered just 50 percent of the popular vote, three percentage points lower than in 2008 and a sign of just how divided the country remains over his leadership. His margin in the Electoral College was stronger, but even if he wins Florida, which remained too close to call, he will be the first president since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win a second term with fewer electoral votes than his first election, suggesting the narrowing of his coalition.

But the bottom-line scorecard left Washington as divided as ever, with no resolution of most of the fundamental issues at stake. The profound debate that has raged over the size and role of government, the balance between stimulus spending and austerity and the proper level of taxation has not been settled in the least. The next two years could easily duplicate the last two as the parties battle it out.




this is not the time to try to be mini-Democrats, this is the time to go to basic principles and figure out how to get these principles across to people and the policies that derive from those principles across to people.

our only hope of killing off Obamacare, making Obama’s lame-duck second-term a nightmare (for him, that is) and actually moving Washington toward a return to limited constitutional government.   And all it takes to do it is the cooperation of the House Republican majority. After Republicans took control of the House in 2010, I began thinking about what a party with control of only one house could do to challenge the president and the other house of Congress. It turns out there’s something very profound that party can do – if it has the will.   That’s where the people come in – the 50 percent of the country that rejected Obama and understands what a danger his agenda represents to America’s future.   My plan has been around ever since. It’s called the "No More Red Ink" campaign – and it’s quite simple. There’s no point in writing to your congressman if he or she is a Democrat. You are not going to convince any Democrats to buck the Obama tide. That’s obvious. But, if the "other 50 percenters" were to join the "No More Red Ink" campaign in lobbying just House Republicans disapprove of any hike in the debt limit, Obama and Senate Democrats would be hamstrung in implementing Obamacare. It would spell the end to many other outrageous spending programs. It would force $1 trillion cuts in Washington’s annual spending. It would eliminate Planned Parenthood funding, the Department of Education, the National Endowment for the Arts, PBS and NPR subsidies and actually balance the budget overnight – if there were a budget.

You can show America and the media that conservatives won't allow the President to claim a mandate by signing our Conservative Principles Pledge today.  Even though Mitt Romney lost, conservatives were returned to the House of Representatives and made gains in certain state elections and ballot initiatives. We must build on this. Even The New York Times announced that, "most of the nation shifted to the right in Tuesday's vote."  You can show America and the media that conservatives won't allow the President to claim a mandate by signing our Conservative Principles Pledge today.  Even though Mitt Romney lost, conservatives were returned to the House of Representatives and made gains in certain state elections and ballot initiatives. We must build on this. Even The New York Times announced that, "most of the nation shifted to the right in Tuesday's vote." We must stop our national binge of spending, taxing, and borrowing.  We must insist that the present House of Representatives holds the line over the next two lame duck months and refuse to sign on to even more spending and higher taxes.  We must reform all entitlements, strengthen national defense and improve our energy policies.  The president does not have a mandate. His marginal victory is proof of that.


“I explained to them a month ago that if Obama gets in office that the regulations for Obamacare are gonna hurt our business, and I’m gonna have to make provisions to make sure I have enough money to cover the payroll taxes, the additional health care I’m gonna have to do, and I explained that to them and I said you do what you feel like in your heart you need to do, but I’m just letting you know as a warning this is things I have to think of as a business owner.  EXPECT more firings and cut in hours, downgrades to healthcare provided at work as that’s what was voted for.  Expect less…. less jobs, less hours, less pay, less healthcare coverage….& Expect more…more taxes, more regulations, more debt, more borrowing, more expensive gas, groceries, goods & services….Atlas is shrugging.  “Forward” to the Obama Layoffs           



On Wednesday, I added up Obama’s margin in a few key states, to get a sense of just how agonizingly short the Romney campaign finished from 270 electoral votes.

Some of those straggling precincts have reported, and so here is an updated set of numbers, according to the results this morning on the New York Timesresults map:

Florida: 73,858

Ohio: 103,481

Virginia: 115,910

Colorado: 113,099

Those four states, with a collective margin of, 406,348 for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes.

Had Romney won only 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.

Obama’s margin in some other key states:

Nevada: 66,379

Iowa: 88,501

New Hampshire: 40,659




Look at the counties-- this is a common sense oriented country.  We are being hijacked and we being self destructive.  We need to return to Biblical God pleasing living spiritually, financially, physically, intellectually and emotionally…in all living.






“I just wanted to thank so many on the other side after all these years, for finally acknowledging publicly that ninety-eight percent of the Bush tax cuts helped the middle class.” 
~Representative Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) 

Democrats made the Bush tax cuts permanent for approximately 99% of Americans. 

To reinforce the point, note that higher tax rates were set to automatically take effect on January 1.  Accordingly, if Obama and fellow Democrats had done nothing, the Bush tax cuts that they’ve spent the past decade demonizing would vanish at the stroke of midnight. 

By way of contrast, back in May 2003 Congress enacted the cuts by the slimmest of margins, 50 to 50 in the Senate (with Vice President Dick Cheney casting the tiebreaking vote) and 231 to 200 in the House.  Among Democrats, the Senate ratio was 46 to 2 against, while the House ratio was 198 to 7 against.  Ten years later, despite an election that improved their party balance in both the Senate and House, as well as a re-elected President and a Republican party in disarray, Democrats sought only a tax hike on a tiny portion of Americans.   Thus, ten years of supposed liberal ascendancy has come to mean almost complete permanence of Bush tax cuts that originally faced nearly unanimous Democratic opposition. 

Events in Syria provide additional vindication for President Bush. 

Alarmed by the sudden possibility that Syrian dictator Bashar Assad might use chemical weapons, Obama warned, “If you make the tragic mistake of using these weapons, there will be consequences, and you will be held accountable.”  Considering that Assad already faces brutal execution from his own officials if he attempts to flee Syria, and from opponents should they topple his regime, Obama’s weak admonition probably doesn’t top his list of concerns. 

Nevertheless, as Foreign Policy Initiative Executive Director Jamie Fly observed this week in The Wall Street Journal, Obama’s “lead from behind” manner has left the U.S. reactive rather than proactive toward the sudden Syrian WMD threat: 

“When the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi fell last year … thousands of conventional weapons proliferated because of American and European unwillingness to back an external stabilization force.  The Obama Administration, failing to learn the lessons of Libya, is reportedly planning for a light-footprint approach should the Assad regime fall.” 

As a result, according to Fly, the threat lies not in use by Assad, but by other agents if he falls.  In other words, precisely the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, who had used WMD on multiple occasions against domestic and external foe alike. 

So far, however, there is little ridicule of Obama for assuming the presence and potential threat of Syrian WMD.  Weapons, by the way, that may have arrived via Iraq.  Accordingly, ominous threats in that theater provide a new context through which events ten years ago are viewed. 

Of course, Obama’s vindication of Bush hardly ends there.  Guantanamo Bay remains open.  The Patriot Act was recently extended.  The Iraq troop surge was repeated in Afghanistan.  Budget deficits that Obama labeled “unpatriotic” while campaigning in 2007-2008 have been quintupled.  And so on.   Meanwhile, Bush’s public likability rating continues to ascend. Expect that to sustain as Obama’s second term proceeds. 




Those temporary rates were enacted in 2001, when only 28 House Democrats supported them, and in 2003, when only seven did.  But with the "American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012" — did liberals think about that title? — 172 House Democrats voted to make the Bush income-tax rates permanent for all but 0.7% of taxpayers — individuals earning more than $400,000 and couples earning more than $450,000.


Turn to Pages 411-413 of his 2012 Economic Report of the President, published by the Council of Economic Advisers. They show that "the math," as Obama is wont to say, in fact does add up for tax cuts.  http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-of-the-President

After President Bush in late May 2003 signed the largest tax cut since President Reagan — including dropping the top marginal rate to 35% from 39.6% — government receipts from individual income taxes rose from $793.7 billion to a peak of $1.16 trillion in 2007, when the mortgage crisis began, a 47% jump.

Stronger economic growth expanded the tax base and brought in so much revenue that Bush more than halved the deficit over that period. The budget gap plunged to $160.7 billion from $377.6 billion, according to the president's report.  (even with the war on terror in AFG & IRAQ)

Perhaps the most impressive statistic appears on Page 412, one that undercuts Obama's core argument against continuing the Bush tax cuts.

The post-tax-cut surge in economic growth and tax revenues helped drive down the deficit from 3.5% of gross domestic product in 2004 to 2.6% in 2005, to 1.9% in 2006 and to a manageable 1.2% in 2007.  Based on Bush fiscal policies, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected budget deficits of 0.7% to 1.5% of GDP for the years 2008 through 2011. The CBO even predicted surpluses for the subsequent years through 2018.  What derailed the forecast was the subprime mortgage crisis of 2008.  This financial anomaly threw the economy into a deep recession, beginning in December 2007, and forced a collapse in federal tax revenues.

As a result, the deficit-to-GDP ratio shot up to 10% in 2009 and has remained around that level, thanks to record Obama & his Democrats overspending.  (The recession technically ended in June 2009.)



check out the Whitehouse 2012 report esp. pages 411-413 and you will see that the 2003 “Bush” tax cuts allowing people to keep more of their own money actually brought in more money/revenues to the treasury also, so tax cuts work and bring in more money for the government.  They do NOT cost the government anything.  However it wasn’t enough to keep up with the Democrat’s OVERSPENDING.  Conversely, tax hikes work in opposite fashion.  It is all about the irresponsible, wasteful and profligate spending and greediness of career big government statists.




According to Mark Zandi at Moody’s Analytics – and Zandi is a big Obama supporter, by the way – ObamaCare is going to have a negative impact on job creation in 2013 because companies who have 50 full-time employees or more are going to be forced to provide health coverage for everyone who works more than 30 hours a week, or pay a fine.

What do companies do if they can’t afford the health coverage? They keep their employment level under 50. Or they don’t give workers 30 hours a week. The law also allows companies to exclude the first 30 employees when calculating the cost of their fines. So how do you avoid fines? Don’t hire more than 30 people!

Democrats do not understand business very well. They don’t understand that when you pass a law that imposes new costs on businesses, those businesses will do what they can to mitigate the effects of those costs. When you make it more costly to hire people, there will not be as many people hired.

The fact that these real-world impacts are now being announced, as if no one anticipated them, is both entertaining and highly disturbing. We are being governed by Democrats who don’t understand the impacts of their policies, Democrats who think they can simply mandate anything and it will happen with no unintended consequences. I hope their ignorance doesn’t cost you your job. 





Boehner told Obama, “Clearly we have a health-care problem, which is about to get worse with Obamacare. But, Mr. President, we have a very serious spending problem.”

Obama eventually replied, “I’m getting tired of hearing you say that.”

Obama may be tired of hearing Boehner talk about a spending problem, particularly when Obama has been re-elected on the basis of ignoring government spending. Nonetheless, America does have a spending problem, which Obama is steadfastly ignoring. “He’s so ideological himself,” Boehner explained, “and he’s unwilling to take on the left of his own party.” That’s why Obama refused to raise the retirement age for Medicare after agreeing to it. “He admitted in meetings that he couldn’t sell things to his own members,” said Boehner. “But he didn’t even want to try … We could never get Obama to step up.”




At a campaign rally, Obama said Romney is "just churning out the same ideas that we saw in the decade before I took office . . . the same tax cuts and deregulation agenda that helped get us into this mess in the first place."  It's a standard Obama, Liar in Chief talking point. But it's not true. Bush's tax cuts did not cause the last recession.  In fact, once they were fully in effect in 2003, they sparked stronger growth — generating more than 8 million new jobs over the next four years, and GDP growth averaging close to 3%.  Those tax cuts didn't explode the deficit, either, as Obama frequently claims. Deficits steadily declined after 2003, until the recession hit.  Nor was Bush a deregulator. Conservative Heritage Foundation's regulation expert James Gattuso concluded, after reviewing Bush's record, that "regulation grew substantially during the Bush years."  Even the Washington Post's fact-checker, Glenn Kessler, gave Obama's claim three out of four "Pinocchios," saying "it is time for the Obama campaign to retire this talking point, no matter how much it seems to resonate with voters."  What did cause the economic crisis? The housing bubble. And that, in turn, was the result of a determined federal government effort to boost homeownership by, among other things, pressuring banks to lower lending standards.






The historical tables in the back of the latest "Economic Report of the President" show that the Bush tax cuts generated more, not less, federal revenues — a phenomenon that also held true for Presidents Clinton, Reagan and Kennedy.  All four leaders, two Republicans and two Democrats, slashed taxes for top individual earners or investors. And once these rate reductions took effect and began stimulating economic activity, record individual income-tax receipts poured into the U.S. Treasury. (See the charts above.) Revenues increased even after adjusting for inflation and population growth.



These 66 pages are a must see.  Obama’s Fiscal commission  that he completely ignored.

Our challenge is clear and inescapable: America cannot be great if we go broke. Our businesses will not be able to grow and create jobs, and our workers will not be able to compete successfully for the jobs of the future without a plan to get this crushing debt burden off our backs.
As members of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, we spent the past eight months studying the same cold, hard facts. Together, we have reached these unavoidable conclusions: The problem is real. The solution will be painful. There is no easy way out. Everything must be on the table. And Washington must lead.

Our nation is on an unsustainable fiscal path. Spending is rising and revenues are falling short, requiring the government to borrow huge sums each year to make up the difference. We face staggering deficits. In 2010, federal spending was nearly 24 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the value of all goods and services produced in the economy. Only during World War II was federal spending a larger part of the economy. Tax revenues stood at 15 percent of GDP this year, the lowest level since 1950. The gap between spending and revenue – the budget deficit – was just under nine percent of GDP.

Since the last time our budget was balanced in 2001, the federal debt has increased dramatically, rising from 33 percent of GDP to 62 percent of GDP in 2010. The escalation was driven in large part by two wars and a slew of fiscally irresponsible policies, along with a deep economic downturn. We have arrived at the moment of truth, and neither political party is without blame.

Economic recovery will improve the deficit situation in the short run because revenues will rise as people go back to work, and money spent on the social safety net will decline as fewer people are forced to rely on it. But even after the economy recovers, federal spending is projected to increase faster than revenues, so the government will have to continue borrowing money to spend. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects if we continue on our current course, deficits will remain high throughout the rest of this decade and beyond, and debt will spiral ever higher, reaching 90 percent of GDP in 2020.

Over the long run, as the baby boomers retire and health care costs continue to grow, the situation will become far worse. By 2025 revenue will be able to finance only interest payments, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Every other federal government activity – from national defense and homeland security to transportation and energy – will have to be paid for with borrowed money. Debt held by the public will outstrip the entire American economy, growing to as much as 185 percent of GDP by 2035. Interest on the debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion by 2020. These mandatory payments – which buy absolutely no goods or services – will squeeze out funding for all other priorities.

Federal debt this high is unsustainable. It will drive up interest rates for all borrowers – businesses and individuals – and curtail economic growth by crowding out private investment. By making it more expensive for entrepreneurs and businesses to raise capital, innovate, and create jobs, rising debt could reduce per-capita GDP, each American’s share of the nation’s economy, by as much as 15 percent by 2035.

Rising debt will also hamstring the government, depriving it of the resources needed to respond to future crises and invest in other priorities. Deficit spending is often used to respond to short-term financial “emergency” needs such as wars or recessions. If our national debt grows higher, the federal government may even have difficulty borrowing funds at an affordable interest rate, preventing it from effectively responding.

Large debt will put America at risk by exposing it to foreign creditors. They currently own more than half our public debt, and the interest we pay them reduces our own standard of living. The single largest foreign holder of our debt is China, a nation that may not share our country’s aspirations and strategic interests. In a worst-case scenario, investors could lose confidence that our nation is able or willing to repay its loans – possibly triggering a debt crisis that would force the government to implement the most stringent of austerity measures.

Cut spending we cannot afford – no exceptions. We must end redundant, wasteful, and ineffective federal spending, wherever we find it. We should cut all excess spending – including defense, domestic programs, entitlement spending, and spending in the tax code.

Demand productivity and effectiveness from Washington. We must use fiscal restraint to promote reforms and efficiencies that force government to produce better results and save money. We should insist on consistent productivity growth in our government.

Reform and simplify the tax code. The tax code is rife with inefficiencies, loopholes, incentives, tax earmarks, and baffling complexity. We need to lower tax rates, broaden the base, simplify the tax code, and bring down the deficit. We need to reform the corporate tax system to make America the best place to start and grow a business and create jobs.

Don’t make promises we can’t keep. Our country has tough choices to make. We need to be willing to tell Americans the truth: We cannot afford to continue spending more than we take in, and we cannot continue to make promises we know full well we cannot keep.

The problem is real, and the solution will be painful. We must stabilize and then reduce the national debt, or we could spend $1 trillion a year in interest alone by 2020. There is no easy way out of our debt problem, so everything must be on the table. A sensible, realistic plan requires shared sacrifice – and Washington must lead the way and tighten its belt.

We propose a six-part plan to put our nation back on a path to fiscal health, promote economic growth, and protect the most vulnerable among us. Taken as a whole, the plan will:

• Achieve nearly $4 trillion in deficit reduction through 2020, more than any effort in the nation’s history.

• Reduce the deficit to 2.3% of GDP by 2015 (2.4% excluding Social Security reform), exceeding President’s goal of primary balance (about 3% of GDP).2

• Sharply reduce tax rates, abolish the AMT, and cut backdoor spending in the tax code.

• Cap revenue at 21% of GDP and get spending below 22% and eventually to 21%.

• Ensure lasting Social Security solvency, prevent the projected 22% cuts to come in 2037, reduce elderly poverty, and distribute the burden fairly.

• Stabilize debt by 2014 and reduce debt to 60% of GDP by 2023 and 40% by 2035.






For these, and other offenses which constitute high crimes and misdemeanors, including perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming and refusal to obey a lawful order, we call for the immediate impeachment of Barack H. Obama.

Impeachment Clauses in the Constitution





Reid, Durbin, Schumer, and Murray — voted against raising the nation’s debt ceiling just seven years ago.  On March 16, 2006, the Senate held a vote on a measure to raise the debt ceiling by $781 billion — the fourth such vote of George W. Bush’s presidency.  Republicans controlled the Senate, and Democrats spent much of the debate railing against Bush’s spending.  “When it comes to deficits, this president owns all the records,” said Reid.  “The three largest deficits in our nation’s history have all occurred under this administration’s watch.”

Declaring themselves outraged by such spending, Reid, Durbin, Schumer, and Murray all voted against raising the debt limit.  So did every other Democrat — including Sen. Barack Obama.  But now on Friday, the four “super hypocrites” urged now-President Obama not only to raise the ceiling but to do it in a constitutionally risky fashion by going over the head of Congress.





On that particular DEBT CEILING VOTE in March 2006, 44 Democrats voted "nay," including 31 senators who are still in office. They are Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Barbara Boxer of California, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Tom Carper of Delaware, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, John Kerry of Massachusetts, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Carl Levin of Michigan, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, Patty Murray of Washington, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Harry Reid of Nevada, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, Chuck Schumer of New York, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, and Ron Wyden of Oregon. In addition, three members of Obama's cabinet voted the same way: Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar.  At the time, Ben Nelson had this to say (emphasis mine)  Hypocrites & two faced liars all..






This morning, The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker,” Glenn Kessler, revisits then-Senator Obama’s 2006 speech arguing against raising the debt ceiling. Kessler contrasts Obama then with Obama now: On Monday, at a news conference, he urged lawmakers to boost the debt limit without conditions

>>> See the Congressional Record where Obama spoke against raising the debt limit in 2006

What does it mean to raise the debt ceiling? Watch this humorous video that puts it in perspective.  The U.S. is not going to default on its interest payments, Foster said, and “this assurance rests not on congressional action to raise the debt ceiling, but on the simple fact that the Treasury has far more than enough funds to pay all interest as it comes due.”  Facts have been slim in the Liar in Chief’s rhetoric on the debt ceiling.


Senator OBAMA. (speaking). Found on page 2 of 6.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is ‘‘trillion’’ with a ‘‘T.’’ That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust  fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion. Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America. And the cost of our debt is one of the  fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on. Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans—a debt tax that Washington doesn’t want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies. But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators CONRAD and FEINGOLD, the Senate continues to  reject a return to the commonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and  to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues. Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the  past and can work again. Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to  remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours.  Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally.  Leadership means that ‘‘the buck stops here.’’ Instead, Washington is shifting  the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problemnand a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.



President Obama used the final press conference of his first term to again warn congressional Republicans that he will not negotiate with them over the debt ceiling, saying that Washington must increase the limit to pay its bills and such brinksmanship would be “absurd” and “irresponsible.”

“The issue here is whether Washington will pay its bills,” Obama said. “We are not a deadbeat nation.”

The president’s comments opened the White House event that included a range of questions, including the topic of likely gun-control legislation.




Because of baseline budgeting, Congress already does not get to vote on about 60 percent of the budget — the so-called “mandatory” spending which includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, food stamps and every other untouchable program.

The only time Congress has any say, really, on whether to finance these programs or not is the periodic vote on the debt ceiling. Otherwise, when was the last time Congress voted on the Social Security budget? Or the Medicare budget?

If Republicans want to touch those, they would need 60 seats in the Senate to change law regarding the eligibility requirements for these programs. Except Republicans have never had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Ever. Not once in the 96 years since Rule 22 was adopted.  And if that’s what the GOP is holding out for to actually rein in spending, it seems likely the Treasury will go bankrupt before then.


Click here to tell the House to take Obama's phony default threat off the table! And embed the alert on your blog using the following code: 

<iframe src="http://www.capwiz.com/libertyleaders/issues/alert/?alertid=62340116" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="2650"></iframe>

Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson recently joined with 38 other free market and limited government organizations in urging action by the House to tie a vote to increase the $16.394 trillion debt ceiling to a 10-year pathway to a balanced budget without any tax increases and passage of the "Full Faith and Credit Act." 

"With the $16.4 trillion national debt growing disproportionately larger than the economy, the American people are rapidly running out of time to get Washington, D.C.'s spending and borrowing addiction under control," said Wilson. 

Wilson added that tying a balanced budget and the "Full Faith Credit Act" to the vote was "absolutely necessary to take President Obama's threat of default off the table. Never again should any president be allowed to demand a blank check from Congress by threatening default, when there is more than enough revenue to pay our creditors on time and in full." 

The "Full Faith and Credit Act" would prioritize payments on interest, Social Security, Medicare, defense, and veterans' benefits out of revenue in the event the debt ceiling is reached.

 Out of the $2.8 trillion of annual revenue the White House expects in 2013, only about $360 billion, or $30 billion monthly, will go to paying gross interest on the debt.  

"That means even if the debt ceiling was reached, the government could still refinance existing debt up to the limit, and would have ample revenue to pay interest out. So, there would be no need to default," Wilson explained. 

"There would even be enough revenue to pay out Social Security ($820 billion), Medicare ($564 billion), defense ($700 billion), and veterans' benefits ($79.5 billion). And if the White House's 2013 revenue estimate is anywhere near correct, there could be as much as $600 billion left over to pay for other essential items," Wilson added. 

The August 2011 increase of the debt ceiling had been accompanied by $65 billion of sequestration cuts, which Wilson said needed to be kept in place. 

Congressional Democrats, along with the Obama Administration, have threatened to eliminate the national debt ceiling from law, which would allow the White House to borrow at will without any congressional authorization.  

"This could be the last chance the House has to use the debt ceiling to achieve a balanced budget," Wilson noted, concluding, "It is time to stop stealing from our children and grandchildren."




If you think George W. Bush adding $4 trillion to the National debt in eight years was an embarrassment, a travesty and a disgrace but you have no problem adding $6 trillion to the National debt in only four years, you might be a socialist — and a world-class hypocrite, too.

If you actually said “You didn’t build that” to business owners because you think bridges, roads, highways, airports, schools and hospitals led to their success but you don’t understand that business owners and taxpayers paid all the taxes that paid for government to build all those things in the first place and government ought to be thanking us, you might be a socialist.

If you call yourself a “champion of small business” while you demonize small-business owners in every speech and media interview, try desperately to raise their taxes and eliminate their tax deductions, and in just your first four years as President passed more than 60,000 new rules, regulations and mandates that make it impossible to run a lemonade stand in America anymore, you might be a socialist.

If you think the “White House party crashers” are terrible people because they crashed your White House state dinner without an invitation but you want to give instant citizenship to millions of uninvited “illegal immigrants” who crashed our border, you might be a socialist.   

If you think it’s terrible that a college or law student has to pay $9 per month for her own contraception but you see no problem with colleges and law schools — run by your most loyal leftist intellectual supporters — charging that same student $50,000 per year to attend that school so ultra-liberal professors can be paid $250,000 per year for teaching one course per week, you might be a socialist.

If you think anyone who doesn’t read The New York Times is dumb and ignorant but think it’s OK that the Democratic-controlled Congress passed a 2,000-page healthcare bill without reading it, you might be a socialist.




Remember when Obama said, “I just want to spread the wealth around”? If income redistribution works, if tax-and-spend is a model for America, why are Greece and Spain bankrupt basket cases threatening to bring down the entire European Union? Greece and Spain have both been led by Socialist Party politicians. They both have big taxes, big spending, big unions, big governments — just like Obama wants. Yet both Greece and Spain have unemployment rates above 26 percent and youth unemployment above 56 percent.

With that record of devastating failure, why did Obama just raise U.S. income tax rates to the levels of Greece and Spain? Greece’s income tax rate is 40 percent. Spain’s top rate ranges from 40 percent to 50 percent. In America we just raised the top rate to about 40 percent, plus add in Obamacare taxes, plus add in State and local taxes, and, of course, Obama took away deductions, too. Can you even imagine? We chose to emulate Greece and Spain right at the moment of disaster, at the moment of devastation, at the moment of 26 percent and 56 percent unemployment — right as they are headed into economic oblivion. With Obama’s re-election AND his Democrats we chose Greece and Spain.

By the way, with high income taxes and value added taxes (a national sales tax), why are Greece and Spain both bankrupt and insolvent? Why would Obama want higher taxes for America, when Greece and Spain prove the model doesn’t work? Each country is going through a national nightmare. Thousands of trees are missing… because citizens can no longer afford to pay for electricity or fuel to heat their homes, so each night they go into parks and forests to cut down trees for firewood. Families are digging through dumpsters for food. Government employees go unpaid for months. This is what socialism and high taxes get you. And we chose Obama for another four years? Maybe we should check whether American voters are as smart as a 5th grader.

All those Greek voters elected socialist politicians because they promised fat pensions, free healthcare and lavish early retirement. Does that sound familiar? Now, they face unimaginable poverty for years to come. This proves that when politicians promise chocolate cake with no calories, they should be put in prison for fraud.

Cuba has been a Marxist state since before I was born. Its leader, Raul Castro, is a proud communist. Yet Cuba recently passed the most sweeping reforms in its history. Castro is slashing more than 1 million government jobs, cutting entitlements, encouraging more private sector entrepreneurship, giving more power to private companies and reducing state spending.

One of the trademark features of Cuba’s socialist system — the universal monthly food ration — will be phased out. Castro said the ration given all Cubans since 1963 had become an “unsupportable burden” for Cuba’s bankrupt and crumbling government.

So get this: A Cuban communist leader is cutting 1 million government jobs and eliminating Cuba’s version of food stamps. Meanwhile, Obama keeps adding government jobs and food stamp use is setting all-time records in America; 47.7 million Americans are on food stamps. Tell me again: Who’s the communist and who’s the capitalist?

Even Russia’s Vladimir Putin (then serving as prime minister) seemed to have learned a common 5th grade history lesson on socialism, when during a 2008 speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, he stated: “In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state role absolute… In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly.”

Putin and Castro have learned their lessons from experience. But Obama AND his Democrats? It sounds like he needs to attend re-education camp. Or at least do over the 5th grade.




By jacking up taxes on the most successful 3% of small businesses, Obama will destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs, shrink U.S. output and force companies to raise prices.

As usual, the data tell the story.  America has some 34.8 million small businesses, according to a recent Treasury Department study. Sounds like a lot, until you consider that 30 million of them employ no one other than the owner.

Of the remaining 4.8 million that do employ workers, 1.2 million have incomes above $200,000 — where Obama's tax hikes kick in.  Here's the rub: Those 1.2 million small businesses that will be hit by Obama's small-business tax are the nation's most prolific job creators, accounting for 54% of all private-sector positions — or 77.6 million in all.  And while they make up just 3% of all small businesses, they earn 91% — or $341 billion — of all profits reported by the small businesses with workers. "They are the most successful and therefore the biggest job creators," as the Heritage Foundation recently pointed out.  They also pay 44% of all federal business taxes.

Yet, the president's talking point about his tax increases affecting only "the rich" so they pay their "fair share" is repeated by the mainstream media as if it were true.

Maybe the media aren't aware of the Small Business Administration's estimate that, since the 1970s, small businesses have accounted for 66% of all net new jobs in the U.S.  By slamming small businesses, therefore, Obama's "tax on the rich" in fact turns out to be a tax on jobs, pure and simple.



a Republican Congress led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich produced welfare reform, killed the precursor to cap and trade — Bill Clinton's BTU tax — and stopped ObamaCare's predecessor, HillaryCare, dead in its tracks.
Of course, President Clinton benefited from President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts, which unleashed the dot-com boom and a period of unparalleled technological creativity and development.  During this boom, the economy grew by one-third and tax receipts doubled as we added the equivalent of the West German economy to our own.

Clearly tax cuts combined with spending cuts work, as does encouraging and rewarding entrepreneurship and not punishing and demonizing success. When government sucks all the economic oxygen out of the room, it becomes hard for real job creators to breathe.

Obama has been very selective in his admiration of the Clinton era. Adopt the spending levels and restraint,Mr. President, not the tax rates.


Even the liberal press is exposing Obama's disingenuousness. The New York Times noted on Wednesday that Obama "has barely discussed how he would pare back federal spending, focusing instead on the aspect of his plan that plays to his liberal base."

The Los Angeles Times on Thursday observed Obama "hasn't said anything publicly about his targets for entitlement savings or cuts in discretionary spending. Instead, he's tacitly stuck with the proposals in his fiscal 2013 budget, which Congress has already rejected."

Obama touts what he calls a "balanced approach" in which Republicans raise tax rates, and he promised during the campaign this year to "cut 2-1/2 dollars" in spending "for every dollar in increased revenue."  But now, with signs that Republicans will agree to increase taxes, the L.A. Times reports that "Democrats seem to have become more entrenched in their resistance to the other half of Obama's formula."  Extending the "middle class" part of the Bush tax cuts averts only a third of the coming tax increases, as the Brookings/Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center warns, and those at the middle and even lower incomes would still pay some of what's left. Hitting the top 2% also generates little more than $50 billion a year out of the $4 trillion over the decade needed to tackle the debt.



Federal government revenue rose from $1.7 trillion to $2.4 trillion from fiscal 1998 to 2012, slightly exceeding inflation. Revenue growth averaged 2.9% annually, despite two recessions, bear markets — and tax cuts.

But federal spending rose nearly twice as fast — 5.7% per year — surging from $1.6 trillion to $3.5 trillion over that same span.

The spending spike also exceeds growth in the population.

Some of the spending surge came during the Bush administration — the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, increases in non-defense discretionary spending and the creation of the Medicare prescription drug entitlement.

Limiting spending to increases in inflation and population growth over 1998-2012 (an annual average of about 3.3%) would have given dramatically different results. The U.S. would have spent $2.6 trillion in FY 12, about $900 billion less than what it actually did. The latest deficit would be $157 billion, a fraction of the actual $1.089 trillion.

The government ran up $6.7 trillion in national debt from FY 1998-'12. Yet if spending had just risen with inflation and population, the U.S. would have reduced the debt by $177 billion.

While a spending cap would help, some analysts contend that it would need to be coupled with entitlement reform.

"If you don't reform Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, you'll have a hard time staying within the cap," said Veronique de Rugy, senior research fellow at the libertarian Mercatus Center. http://news.investors.com/photopopup.aspx?path=WEBspend1219.gif&docId=637656&xmpSource=&width=800&height=490&caption=




Every dollar the government takes is another dollar used unproductively. Every dollar removed from the private sector and wasted in the hands of bureaucrats is a dollar that will not be used to purchase goods, to pay for services or to meet a payroll.

Every dollar the government ever takes — today, tomorrow and forever — is an attack on jobs and the economy.  Instead of sitting around trying to think of new ways to vote away someone else's money, Washington leaders should finally begin to address the real crisis that has threatened us long before the current handwringing: spending.  With a $16 trillion national debt and well over $1 trillion annually in deficits, we barreled over the edge of fiscal insolvency long before this month.


The House will also vote to require President Obama to submit a balanced budget. “We are giving the president a chance to kick his habit of submitting budgets that spend, tax, and borrow too much,” said Speaker Boehner. “Given that the president’s budget will be late, it may as well be right.” President Obama has submitted his budget late four out of five times.

“Republicans want to replace the president’s ‘sequester’ … with better, thoughtful, common-sense cuts and reforms,” says Rep. Brooks. The White House proposed and insisted on the ‘sequester’ in the 2011 debt limit deal. House Republicans have voted to replace it – twice – but Democrats haven’t taken action or offered a replacement plan of their own.



Budgeting has never been at the top of President Obama’s list of priorities. For the fourth time in five years, the White House missed the statutory deadline Monday for submitting its annual spending blueprint to Congress. Mr. Obama isn’t in a rush to let the world know that his intention is to keep spending the country into bankruptcy.  The Republican House lit a fire under the Nevada Democrat by threatening to take away his paycheck. A provision was added to the short-term debt limit increase that withholds the Democrat controlled Senate pay if it fails to pass a budget by April 15. Mr. Obama signed the measure into law on Monday.



President Obama blames the surprise fourth-quarter drop in economic output on Hurricane Sandy and political factors.  But new evidence shows Obama & his Democrats’ own policies may be responsible for the first real GDP contraction since the Great Recession.  While it's no secret ObamaCare and sweeping new financial regulations have set corporate America and small businesses on edge, the level of anxiety and its impact on the economy have been hard to quantify.  However, a valuable new economic indicator measures both.

The latest data from the U.S. Economic Policy Uncertainty Index, http://www.policyuncertainty.com/  assembled by University of Chicago and Stanford economists, reveal business angst over government action at "extremely elevated levels" compared with recent history.

And it's costing the economy trillions of dollars in growth and millions of new jobs.

A surge in the index, which tracks policy uncertainty back to 1985, typically foreshadows a decline in business investment and economic growth and employment.  Scott R. Baker, a Stanford Ph.D. economist and researcher who helps run the index with economics professors Nick Bloom and Steven J. Davis, explains that U.S. companies are increasingly wary of new tax and regulatory policies coming out of Washington and are shelving expansion plans.  He says there's been a "structural shift" in uncertainty under the Obama administration.  "We've definitely seen a big increase in uncertainty about health care and financial regulatory regimes and energy and climate regulations," Baker told IBD during a recent interview in Palo Alto, Calif. "And this certainly is harmful to a recovery."  Bankers hit by new Dodd-Frank rules complain the financial crisis has been replaced with a "regulatory crisis" that's frozen capital for all industries.  "The regulatory agencies have hundreds of major new rules to write," American Bankers Association President Frank Keating complained in a letter to the White House. "With so much uncertainty, no bank in America today can develop a rational business plan."  He added, "We are being frozen in place by increasingly dangerous regulatory minefields."


There is a better way, as demonstrated by Maine and Nebraska, which allocate electoral college votes based on which presidential candidate wins a majority in each congressional district. This is not only a fair way to allocate electors, but it will result in the presidential candidates campaigning in many more states where congressional districts are competitive, making the presidential campaign truly national in scope.

While Maine and Nebraska award the electors representing the two U.S. senators to the presidential candidate garnering the highest popular vote, it would be even more powerful — and force the presidential candidates to campaign in each state — if the electors representing the senators were allocated to the presidential candidate winning a majority of congressional districts in that state.

The U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1) establishes the electoral "college" as the method of selecting a president. But it is neutral on the method of allocating electoral votes, stating that electors shall be appointed by each state ... in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct ..."

Other states which have Republican legislatures and governors — and could have influenced the presidential outcome this time — should enact congressional district elector allocation.  In Virginia, Sen. Charles W. Carrico, Sr., a Grayson (Southwest Virginia) Republican, has introduced similar elector allocation legislation, saying "People in my district feel discouraged because their votes don't count.

But under a congressional district allocation system they know their vote counts, instead of a winner take all. I don't feel the electoral college right now is a fair system."




There are limited resources and deep down we all realize this. We all make choices about how to deal with it: how to find help. It’s why we join with larger groups – for defense, for support, or so that we can accomplish larger more complicated things.
 The choice we ultimately have is where we get the major part of this help. Do we turn to government? Or, do we turn to private relationships; family, friends, private business, and charity.
 The trouble with the government as helper is that the assistance must be taken (taxed) from someone else
, who then has an incentive to object. Moreover, people end up competing (and advertising) to see who has the greatest “need” or is the worst “victim.” And with limited resources, there are fights about who gets them and before you know it, government provides “drive through delivery” services so that it can use more resources elsewhere. And when government tries to do too much, it “crowds out” private assistance, weakening those other institutions through taxation and regulation. That’s why we find it so remarkable to see free market capitalism derided as a system that supposedly tells people you are “on your own.” 
The genius of capitalism is that it harnesses self-interest to get people to cooperate in incredible ways. Most observers, including us, describe capitalism as a system of competition.  
But on a day-in, day-out basis, this competition is not direct hand-to-hand combat to find a victor; it’s a race to see who can provide the best products at the best price. It’s about service to others, not finding ways to force others to bow to our will. More importantly, we work in cooperative effort with others (our co-workers, family members, and friends) to accomplish these tasks. 
Government has a role, but economic growth is always strongest where it governs least. 
Given a choice, people have always flocked to those countries where they could take care of each other with less government help, not more. 





Zo is not surprised that President Obama won reelection. He is surprised that the Republicans cannot field a winning a candidate. Hear more as AlfonZo Rachel discusses Gov. Mitt Romney, Herman Cain and the future of conservatism and the Republican party.









music star Ray Stevens posted this music video “Mr. President” over a year ago, but Obama’s same old tired failed policies make it just as (if not more) relevant today.


This short video shows the severity of the problem facing our country in stark contrast to Obama’s proposed ‘solution.’






  • A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have. Gerald Ford
  • When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.
  • The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.€
  • It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.€
  • "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
  • "My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."
  • "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
  • "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
  • "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
  • "To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
  • "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."  EXAMPLE: The Federal Reserve Bank (The FED) " Thomas Jefferson in 1802:






+As we go the route of bankruptcy, we will need to restructure to salvage what we can.

This website is designed to help policymakers and the public understand where federal funds are being spent and how to reform each government department. It describes the failings of federal agencies and identifies specific programs to cut. It also discusses the systematic reasons why government programs are often obsolete, mismanaged, or otherwise dysfunctional.






Our plan saves the main federal entitlement programs as they are unsustainable as is - Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid –transforming them into real insurance programs. We provide financial security to retirees, guarantee assistance to people who need it, and reduce government payments to those who are truly prosperous.

Obamacare is repealed and replaced with a system that gives consumers affordable choices among private, competing health care plans, much as federal employees have long enjoyed.

The tax system is made simple and fair, with a single rate for all. Our reforms encourage businesses to invest, fueling economic growth. Complementing the aims of reforming entitlement programs (Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid), our tax plan helps Americans to save throughout their working years and achieve economic security so they won't have to depend on government in retirement.

Our plan permanently balances the budget within 10 years. By immediately reducing government benefits to the wealthiest Americans, our reforms immediately begin reducing deficits that threaten the economy. We reduce government where it has exceeded the powers authorized by the Constitution. And we responsibly address ruinous public debt that will otherwise overwhelm not only ourselves but also our children and grandchildren.






Writing in today’s Wall Street Journal, former Senator Phil Gramm and budgetary expert Mike Solon compare the current recovery to the post-war average as well as to what happened under Reagan.

If in this “recovery” our economy had grown and generated jobs at only the average rate achieved following the 10 previous postwar recessions, GDP per person would be $4,528 higher and 13.7 million more Americans would be working today. …if we had President Ronald Reagan’s policies that ignited a recovery so powerful that if it were being repeated today, real per capita GDP would be $5,694 higher than it is now—an extra $22,776 for a family of four. Some 16.9 million more Americans would have jobs.





Real World:  Isn’t Obama and his Democrats supposed to be so smart???  Why can’t we see his grades, his transcripts or his college papers???   Any economic classes and what grades if so???

Hope Obama and his Democrats read this…

In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.   This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income tax shortly before the last general election.   The figures have been seized upon by the Conservatives to claim that increasing the highest rate of tax actually led to a loss in revenues for the Government.   It is believed that rich Britons moved abroad or took steps to avoid paying the new levy by reducing their taxable incomes.





This country has an employment problem right now, and tax rates aren’t even as high as Buffett wants. The tax increases President Obama champions would hit small businesses that create jobs. According to Treasury figures, 1.2 million Americans who employ people are paying their taxes through the individual income tax, and they would be hit head-on. The amount that their taxes would go up could be roughly equivalent to one employee’s salary, meaning that’s one person they can’t hire in the new year. A study by Ernst and Young estimates that these tax hikes would kill 710,000 jobs.

Let’s think about what taxes are intended to do. The cigarette tax is intended to curb smoking. Proponents of a carbon tax want to curb the amount of carbon emissions we are producing. In Washington, D.C., a plastic bag tax is intended to curb the number of plastic bags people use.

When you tax something more, people do less of it. This is how taxes work. It doesn’t change because the behavior being taxed is investing rather than smoking. (capital gains tax, dividend tax, income tax)

3. Buffett says the wealthy aren’t even paying a minimum tax.

Fact: We already have an Alternative Minimum Tax.

Buffett says, “Our government’s goal should be to bring in revenues of 18.5 percent of [gross domestic product] and spend about 21 percent of G.D.P.”  (if you spend more than you take in, how long before you go bankrupt???  Looks like we have a spending problem….What is Buffett smoking???)

Revenues are lower now today than normal, not because of tax rates, but because of the slow-growing economy. As the economy recovers, so will revenues. And they will continue to grow as the economy thrives. Why? Because more people are investing, saving, working, and enjoying higher wages. The nifty little benefit for the government of a strong, growing economy is that people pay more in taxes.




Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.  Winston Churchill


“The reason that we as Republicans don’t want anyone’s taxes going up is that we understand if you raise taxes on the poor, it hurts the poor. If you raise taxes on the rich, that too hurts to the poor,” Lee said. “Ernst & Young has predicted that even if you raise income taxes on the top two rate brackets, we will lose 700,000 jobs. And those are not 700,000 CEO jobs. They’re not 700,000 top one-percenter jobs. Those are Americans who are, by and large, working paycheck to paycheck and who are least able to absorb the loss of their job and the income associated with it.”

Lee said the same principles he fought for during the debt-ceiling debate – when he bucked GOP leaders and opposed the deal that led to the cliff and sequestration – will work for America now.  “I’m going to continue to be a champion of the Cut, Cap & Balance approach,” he said. “I was the sponsor of the Cut, Cap & Balance Act the last time around. I’ve introduced a new, update version of it this time around. The basic gist of the ‘Cut, Cap & Balance’ approach is to say that, ‘We may need to raise the debt limit, but we’re not going to do it. We shouldn’t do it. We won’t do it until Congress adopts permanent, structural spending reform. That would include some kind of a budget plan that will bring us to balance within a few years and would also require Congress to pass a balanced budget amendment and submit it to the states for ratification.”

Utah Sen. Mike Lee is closely involved in both debates and is appalled by Democratic tactics across the board.

When it comes to the filibuster, Lee told WND’s Greg Corombos the GOP resorts to the filibuster because of the heavy-handed rules Harry Reid already employs.  “He’s abusing rules of the Senate by repeatedly denying the Republicans in the Senate the opportunity to present their own amendments,” Lee said. “To the extent the filibuster rule has been utilized more by Republicans, it’s been largely in response to that abuse.”  Lee said Reid uses one tactic in particular that shuts down free and open debate.

“He has utilized a procedure known as ‘filling the tree,’ whereby the majority leader may in some circumstances restrict the ability of other members to file amendments, to propose legislation,” he said. “This is a critical part of the debate process. This is part of what makes the Senate – and has historically made it – the world’s greatest deliberative legislative body. So he’s got to stop filling the tree and denying our right to file amendments.  That’s really the problem.”



House Speaker John Boehner escalated a battle in the Senate this week to make rules more favorable to the Democrats in charge by issuing a threat to block all future bills passed under Reid/Democrat’s new filibuster procedures.  “Any bill that reaches a Republican-led House based on Senate Democrats’ heavy-handed power play would be dead on arrival,” said Boehner, Ohio Republican.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is working to eliminate the minority party’s opportunity to filibuster legislation, bucking tradition the party out of power often uses to block or amend controversial bills.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is leading the opposition to the rules change, arguing it would alienate the constituents Republicans have been elected to represent.





How bad things are for students under Obama, his Democrats and their failed policies.





One bright spot of Barack Obama’s re-election was knowing that unemployment rates were about to soar for the precise groups that voted for him and his Democrat policies – young people, unskilled workers and single women with degrees in gender studies. But now Obama & the Senate Democrats are sullying my silver lining by forcing house Republicans to block an utterly pointless tax-raising scheme in order to blame the coming economic Armageddon on them.  Democrats are proposing to reinstate the Bush tax cuts for everyone … except “the rich.” (Why do only tax cuts come with an expiration date? Why not tax increases? Why not Obamacare? How about New York City’s “temporary” rent control measures intended for veterans returning from World War II?)

Raising taxes only on the top 2 percent of income earners will do nothing to reduce the deficit. There’s not enough money there – even assuming, contrary to all known history, that the top 2 percent won’t find ways to reduce their taxable income or that the imaginary increased government revenue would be applied to deficit reduction, anyway.

Apart from Obamacare, it’s difficult to think of a more effective method of destroying jobs than raising taxes on “the rich.” This isn’t a wealth tax on useless gigolos like John Kerry – it’s an income tax on people who are currently engaged in some profitable enterprise. Their business profits, which could have been used to hire more employees, will instead be used to pay the government.

But Republicans are over a barrel. Unless Republicans and Democrats reach an agreement, the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year. By pushing to extend the tax cuts for everyone except “the rich,” Democrats get to look like champions of middle class tax cuts and Republicans can be portrayed as caring only about the rich.

And when the economy tanks, the Non-Fox Media will blame Republicans.

The economy will tank because, as you will recall, Obama is still president. Government rules, regulations, restrictions, forms and inspections are about to drown the productive sector. Obamacare is descending on job creators like a fly swatter on a gnat. Obama has already managed to produce the only “recovery” that is worse than the preceding recession since the Great Depression. And he says, “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”

The coming economic collapse is written in the stars, but if Republicans “obstruct” the Democrats by blocking tax hikes on top income earners, they’re going to take 100 percent of the blame for the Obama economy.

You think not? The Non-Fox Media managed to persuade a majority of voters that the last four years of jobless misery was George W. Bush’s fault, having nothing whatsoever to do with Obama.

The media have also managed to brand Republicans as the party of the rich, even as eight of the 10 richest counties voted for Obama. And that doesn’t include pockets of vast wealth in cities – Nob Hill in San Francisco, the North Shore of Chicago, the Upper East Side of Manhattan and the Back Bay of Boston – whose residents invariably vote like welfare recipients. Seven of the 10 richest senators are Democrats. The very richest is the useless gigolo.





There are two components to this supposed disaster. The first is the “draconian cuts” to government spending built into the Budget Control Act of 2011. . . .WHO voted for this????  Which Democrats, which Republicans???

There is only one problem. Even if Congress fails to make a deal, nothing is being cut from the federal budget.

Let me repeat that. Nothing is being cut.

What the government is calling “spending cuts” are actually only decreases to future increases in spending.

That means that if Federal Program A is budgeted for $1 billion in 2012 and projected to go up to $1.1 billion in 2013, a “$50 million cut” to Program A won’t result in the program spending less than $1 billion in 2013. It will spend more. .

Along with the phony cuts to spending, the fiscal cliff triggers sunset of the Bush tax cuts and an end to the payroll tax “holiday.” That means that the tax rate on the top earners moves from 35% back to 39% and all Americans will have to resume paying the full tax rates for Social Security and Medicare that still don’t underwrite future liabilities.

Now, some might argue that any tax increase during tough economic times is harmful. Therein lies the rub. This whole phony crisis is about exactly that: raising taxes. With an approval rating at subterranean levels, the government wants the people to support tax hikes while continuing the gravy train for government employees and special interests.  Logic dictates that this is the only result that can occur. If the fiscal cliff actually represents federal spending increasing less, and that’s supposed to be “draconian,” then any deal made by Congress must increase federal spending more. So, anything the Republicans and Democrats agree to will be worse than the fiscal cliff in terms of spending.  As for taxes, the only debate currently underway is whether the Republicans will agree to overt tax increases. They’ve already stated that they are open to eliminating deductions. That’s a tax increase. The Democrats want to eliminate deductions and raise rates. Either way, taxes are going up. Anything the Republicans and Democrats agree to will be worse than the fiscal cliff in terms of tax increases.




Low-income households are disproportionately affected by these regulations since they have little to no extra money to spend on higher costs imposed by the regulations. More importantly, these regulations have redistributive effects, which shift wealth from the poor to the middle class and the rich.

Regulations tend to drive up the price of many goods and lower wages of workers in regulated industries.





While a small majority of the American people continue to celebrate the re-election of the worst and most corrupt president in US history, the rest of the world is mocking our stupidity.  Looking from the outside, they see how Obama has constantly lied to the American people.  They also see him for what he really is, a communist.  And they see him repeating the same mistakes that other communist leaders made in the past.  Yet, the 62 million Americans that voted for Obama are blind to what is happening to them.

Pravda is the most popular Russian newspaper in their country.  In a recent article, it stated:

“Putin in 2009 outlined his strategy for economic success. Alas, poor Obama did the opposite but nevertheless was re-elected. Bye, bye Miss American Pie. The Communists have won in America with Obama but failed miserably in Russia with Zyuganov who only received 17% of the vote. Vladimir Putin was re-elected as President keeping the NWO order out of Russia while America continues to repeat the Soviet mistake.”

“After Obama was elected in his first term as president the then Prime Minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January of 2009. Ignored by the West as usual, Putin gave insightful and helpful advice to help the world economy and saying the world should avoid the Soviet mistake.”

Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them. He gives speeches of peace and love in the world while he promotes wars as he did in Egypt, Libya and Syria. He plans his next war is with Iran as he fires or demotes his generals who get in the way.”

“O’bomber even keeps the war going along the Mexican border with projects like ‘fast and furious’ and there is still no sign of ending it.  He is a Communist without question promoting the Communist Manifesto without calling it so. How shrewd he is in America. His cult of personality mesmerizes those who cannot go beyond their ignorance. They will continue to follow him like those fools who still praise Lenin and Stalin in Russia.  Obama’s fools and Stalin’s fools share the same drink of illusion.”

President Vladimir Putin could never have imagined anyone so ignorant or so willing to destroy their people like Obama much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama. They read history in America don’t they? Alas, the schools in the U.S. were conquered by the Communists long ago and history was revised thus paving the way for their Communist presidents. Obama has bailed out those businesses that voted for him and increased the debt to over 16 trillion with an ever increasing unemployment rate especially among blacks and other minorities. All the while promoting his agenda.”

“Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America?  Their suffering has only begun. Bye bye Miss American Pie!”

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/11/obama-re-elected-by-illiterate-society-says-russian-newspaper/#ixzz2DRRNucW5




As quantified, and explained by Alexander, “the single mom is better off earning gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.”

The two “D’s,” debt and dependency, are taking America down the path towards bankruptcy & doom. You already know about the debt-bankruptcy, but you may not have realized quite how bad the dependency has gotten.













+Coming to the USA soon…Thanks all to Obama, his Democrats and their voters.

MADRID/LISBON (Reuters) - Police and protesters clashed in Spain, Italy and Portugal on Wednesday as millions of workers went on strike in organised labour's biggest Europe-wide challenge to austerity policies since the euro zone debt crisis erupted three years ago.  Hundreds of flights were cancelled, schools were shut, factories were at a standstill and trains barely ran in Spain and Portugal where unions held their first joint general strike. Stoppages in Belgium interrupted international rail services.

Workers also protested in Greece and France against austerity policies that have taken a heavy economic toll and aggravated mass unemployment.

But the demonstrations organised by the European Trade Union Confederation seemed unlikely to force hard-pressed governments to change their cost-cutting strategies.







WE HAVE TO CUT SPENDING: “We have to cut spending,” says former Clinton Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles. Bowles told Face the Nation that even if the president got his tax rate hikes, we’d still have trillion-dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. Raising tax rates won’t solve our debt problem.



Many in the class envy crowd will be outraged to learn that Google used “loopholes” in order to keep $2 billion of its own money. They will say that Google should pay its “fair share.”

No one can explain what a “fair share” is, how it is determined or who has the moral authority to declare what it is. People just know there is one and that “the evil rich” should pay it.

Next spring, those same people will go to their tax preparer — if they pay taxes — and expect him or her to use all available “loopholes” in order to receive the largest refund possible. They don’t mind paying their “fair share” or even know what it is, but they believe it is as little as possible.

Right now, President Barack Obama and Weeper of the House John Boehner are negotiating your loopholes away. Your loopholes include charitable contribution credits, childcare credits, child credits, education expense credits and mortgage deductions. They are not discussing cutting out corporate or farm welfare or reducing the military budget or individual welfare reform or reducing the size of government — at least in any meaningful way. In fact, Obama is proposing more spending for his cronies and favored industries (including more failed “green” technologies) and higher taxes to pay for it.

Governments always want more money. Governments never cut spending. They are a gang of thieves. They will plunder until there is nothing left. We are nearing that time.




how focused your legislators are on promoting economic freedom. AFP will release its scorecard to Congressional members and the public tomorrow. See The Grade Your Representative Earned 

In this brand-new edition, we tallied the most critical votes of the 112thCongress - repealing President Obama’s job-killing health care law, disapproving of EPA’s overreach to regulate greenhouse gases, supporting Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget, stopping “green” ethanol subsidies, and many others. 

Tomorrow AFP is also launching a brand new online home for the scorecard. This interactive website will make it even easier for AFP activists like you to keep an eye on Congress and see how your elected officials are voting on critical issues.  With so many anti-free market damaging policies coming out of Washington, it is more important than ever to watch how our lawmakers are voting. You didn’t send them to Congress to hike your taxes and restrict your economic freedom. Elected officials must be held accountable and now you can see their votes easier than ever.






Among his opponents are 14 retired U.S. admirals and generals, including high-profile names such as Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin and Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely. Hagel has endorsed subjecting the U.S. to the U.N.’s International Criminal Court, and he’s sat on the board of numerous globalist groups promoting U.S. funding for the Third World.

He recently was endorsed by Iran for the post, and another endorser was the Communist Party USA.

But an issue that has yet to be raised has been sitting in plain sight ever since Harper’s documented it in a report about the time of Obama’s re-election.

The report charged the GOP “aims to paint the country red” under the headline “How to Rig an Election.”

It was Harper’s that actually credited Hagel with symbolically inaugurating an era of questions about election fraud.  “Hagel, an unknown millionaire who ran for one of Nebraska’s U.S. Senate seats in 1996 … trailed the popular Democratic governor, Ben Nelson, who had been elected in a landslide two years earlier. Three days before the election, however, a poll conducted by the Omaha World-Herald showed a dead heat, with 47 percent of respondents favoring each candidate. David Moore, who was then managing editor of the Gallup Poll, told the paper, ‘We can’t predict the outcome,’” Harpers said.

“Hagel’s victory in the general election, invariably referred to as an ‘upset,’ handed the seat to the G.O.P. for the first time in 18 years. Hagel trounced Nelson by 15 points. Even for those who had factored in the governor’s deteriorating numbers and a last-minute barrage of negative ads, this divergence from pre-election polling was enough to raise eyebrows across the nation,” Harpers continued.

“Few Americans knew that until shortly before the election, Hagel had been chairman of the company whose computerized voting machines would soon count his own votes: Election Systems & Software (then called American Information Systems). Hagel stepped down from his post just two weeks before announcing his candidacy. Yet he retained millions of dollars in stock in the McCarthy Group, which owned ES&S. And Michael McCarthy, the parent company’s founder, was Hagel’s campaign treasurer,” the report said.  The report said: “Whether Hagel’s relationship to ES&S ensured his victory is open to speculation. But the surprising scale of his win awakened a new fear among voting-rights activists and raised a disturbing question: Who controls the new technology of Election Night?”  In the next election, a relatively unknown Democrat ran against Hagel, but he collected only 70,000 votes from the 400,000 registered Democrats. His demands for an investigation of the vote-counting were unsuccessful, the report said.

Sign WND’s petition urging Congress to investigate fraud and abuse in America’s election system!   WND’s own analysis of the 2012 election concluded vote fraud took place.

The analysis found that the fraud was enough to steal the election.




President Obama didn’t make any phone calls the night of the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, the White House said in a letter to Congress released Thursday.

“During the entire attack, the president of the United States never picked up the phone to put the weight of his office in the mix,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, who had held up Mr. Obama’s defense secretary nominee to force the information to be released.




Clinton was not asked, and did not address, dozens of key issues about the tragedy, including:

  • Why did Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy withdraw from Libya’s capital a 16-member special operations forces detachment that was assisting with security, a decision which was made two weeks prior to the Benghazi attack?
    ·  Were Obama and Clinton informed at the time the attack was unfolding? If so, what orders did Clinton give to seek to secure the facility?
  •   Was Clinton in direct contact at any time with the Secretary of Defense to determine what Special Forces were available to lend assistance? Was she also in contact with the director of the Central Intelligence Agency to ascertain whether he had any assets in the area to rush to the assistance of the beleaguered facility?
    ·  Why was the FBI barred for 24 days from going to the consulate to secure evidence when reporters were given ready access and had obtained sensitive information which was later turned over to U.S. authorities?




On Thursday's Mark Levin Show: We now know from testimony from Leon Panetta and General Dempsey that Obama didn't do anything the night of the Benghazi attacks. He didn't infer or question what was happening, he didn't want more details, and he didn't send any military help to protect the Americans over there. Instead, there was no communication amongst the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State and the President as people were being killed in Benghazi. Mark says this would be huge if the American people would actually pay attention to the severity and enormity of this cover-up. Mark says he wants to know where and what Obama was doing between 6pm and midnight the night of the attacks and why he didn't act. Finally, Congressman Steve King calls in and talks about Karl Rove bashing conservatives in the Republican Party.


Right Scoop
Both Hillary and Obama awol during Benghazi attack

You Tube
CO Interview: Obama Pressed On Lack Of Answers On Benghazi Attack (October 26, 2012)

Weekly Standard
No Military Assets Were Deployed to Defend Benghazi Consulate

Weekly Standard
General on Benghazi: 'We Never Received a Request for Support from the State Department'






In sum: President Obama did nothing to save Americans under attack from terrorists. His Secretary of Defense did nothing. His Secretary of State did nothing. The Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did nothing. His Deputy National Security Adviser defended doing “nothing” to help bring the perpetrators to justice. And the entire administration participated in an effort to cover up the truth. Because there was an election to be won.



Failed Commander-in Chief. Obama's Dereliction of Duty

When Defense Secretary Panetta and CJCS General Dempsey took the stand yesterday about Benghazi, we expected them to continue the Administration's bunk lines and obfuscation. But we did actually learn one new and very telling piece of information:  The President was completely and inexplicably AWOL on the night of the Benghazi attack.  He answered their original, pre-planned call at roughly 5 PM, but the President never called to check back in.
That means that while one of our ambassadors was being murdered by Islamist terrorists – in what they knew to be a planned attack – neither the President nor Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called to check on the situation with DoD or try to coordinate any type of response.
President Obama simply waved his hand and told them to do as they thought best, and ostensibly went on his way that night – and to a Vegas fundraiser the next morning.
They can talk about how that is some kind of standard procedure all they want, but it is completely absurd to say that the President should be expected to stay detached from such a critical situation and let his staff run the show without any input or care as an American Ambassador and three others are killed by an Islamist mob.
Beyond that disgusting admission, the Panetta story either left numerous other questions virtually unanswered or opened up their actions and inactions to deeper scrutiny.
Less than an hour into the attack, the CIA identified the attack as a coordinated terrorist effort of al-Qaeda sympathizers. Why did the Administration continue to lie to the American people for weeks about the true nature of our Ambassador's murder?

8 Key Questions that MUST be answered by President Obama







Federal, non-military agencies, noted radio host Mark Levin last week, have purchased enough ammunition recently to not only shoot every American five times, but also engage in a prolonged, domestic war.  The numbers are based on recent reports that put the total federal ammunition buy in the last 10 months at approaching two billion rounds.

“To provide some perspective,” Levin noted, “experts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [Department of Homeland Security] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war!”

What do federal agencies need with all that ammunition?



Neither Obama nor Panetta has ever served in combat, nor has most of Congress. But worse, none of the current military leadership has had any serious combat (in the trenches) experience, and it is beginning to show.  World War II was won by combat veterans from World War I. In Korea we had the veterans of World War II, and in Vietnam the combat veterans of both World War II and Korea. The Vietnam veteran won Desert Storm. All those warriors and their leadership are gone, and we see a military with dismal leadership resulting in unprecedented rates of suicide, PTSD and security breaches.

My rule in the battalion was standards, not gender-governed, except where they were already assigned, i.e., medics and mechanics. This was during the ’70s, a tough time for drugs and discipline in the military. Here is what I found. As a result of competition, my driver and our color guard, highly contested duty, were women. The women had less disciplinary problems than the men. In administrative jobs, they were at least equal to men. But most could not carry their load physically – loading litters in choppers, carrying wounded to safety, even lifting tool chests. As a result the men covered for them, often causing us to use two people when one should have done the job – all of which effected readiness. They were not good in the field and became less functional when issues of hygiene, and feminine hygiene, literally knocked them out and we had to jerry-rig showers, wasting valuable time.

And they got pregnant, which took out key jobs at critical times. Other sexual distractions, favoritisms, fraternization and assault are also readiness disruptions and follow women throughout the military, even in our military academies. I had serious problems with wives whose husbands shared standby shacks with women overnight. This would go on for weeks in direct combat units; think tank crews. Male bonding, immeasurable to success in combat, would be damaged. All in all, the women pose an insane burden on readiness.  My conclusion, which I passed to my division commander at his request, was that I would not want females with me working the battlefield let alone in direct combat. I told him I would not want my daughters in a unit of half women going bayonet to bayonet with an enemy unit 100 percent men. Those comments almost cost me my career because my immediate superior disagreed, which may explain some of the obsequiousness and cowering of military leaders today on this issue and a quad-sexual military.

I have said, and many men agree with me, that Adam’s rib was the greatest investment in human history. Why? Because God then gave man woman, a different creature, who complemented him. God did it on purpose, and we are privileged to live with the differences. Feminists et al., get over it. It is not discrimination to accommodate God’s design; it is acknowledging His will – it is wisdom.

Despite “Kill Bill” and other Hollywood visuals of females pummeling men, women for the most part are not designed to kill. And they will not be good at it. God designed them to produce life and nurture it, not destroy it. They don’t belong in the trenches of the NFL or in the octagon in Ultimate Fighting; combat is the ultimate Ultimate Fighting – and they don’t belong there, either.

It is difficult to teach some men to kill, but they have no choice. Imagine a draft and a nation forcing our women into killing units. Visualize what will happen to women POWs, not to mention homosexuals, captured by our most likely enemies. We have heard of the man who sent his wife downstairs to check on a possible burglar (I actually knew such a man). We are becoming a nation like that man, a girlie nation. There will always be burglars, (international thugs), most of whom are male, and they should be confronted by males.


This open letter is a must-read -- not only for the case it lays out, but because of its author's personal history (click through for the full, unedited missive):
 Mr. President, As a student who was shot and wounded during the Columbine massacre, I have a few thoughts on the current gun debate. In regards to your gun control initiatives:  

I’ve heard you ask, “why does someone need 30 bullets to kill a deer?” Let me ask you this: Why would you prefer criminals to have the ability to out-gun law-abiding citizens? Under this policy, criminals will still have their 30-round magazines, but the average American will not. Whose side are you on?  Mr. President, these are your words: “And finally, Congress needs to help, rather than hinder, law enforcement as it does its job. We should get tougher on people who buy guns with the express purpose of turning around and selling them to criminals. And we should severely punish anybody who helps them do this.” Why don’t we start with Eric Holder and thoroughly investigate the Fast and Furious program? Furthermore, the vast majority of these mass murderers bought their weapons legally and jumped through all the hoops — because they were determined to murder. Adding more hoops and red tape will not stop these types of people. It doesn’t now — so what makes you think it will in the future? Criminals who cannot buy guns legally just resort to the black market. Criminals and murderers will always find a way...  Mr. President, do the right thing, restore freedom, and save lives. Show the American people that you stand with them and not with thugs and criminals.
Severely Concerned Citizen, Evan M. Todd




Rob Young, now a California police officer, defied political correctness and said he supports the Second Amendment.  It was on Jan. 17, 1989, when Young was shot in his right foot and on the left side of his chest by Patrick Purdy, who killed five children in his attack on an elementary school in Stockton, Calif. It was the worst elementary school shooting at the time.  At 7 years old, Young said, he realized the “cold hard reality that” life can be taken at any minute.  “You might be hearing my story, and thinking to yourself ‘more gun control’ is what needs to happen,” he said. “But let me be the one to tell you, gun control is not the answer. Gun control would not have saved me or any of my classmates that day.”

Young attributes the source of the violence not to the firearms but to the attacker, who he says “was the only person to blame that day.”  Excessive gun control laws and “minimum staffing levels,” Young believes, leads police forces to be “reactive” rather than “pro-active” so that police officers often feel more like “coroners” rather than officers of the law.

Despite what gun control advocates want, he said, more regulations do not produce less crime.

He said in his own testimony, “In the nine years of active law enforcement I have made several arrests of people who stray from the law and choose to unlawfully carry a firearm.”

He rhetorically asked in response, “What makes you think that a single gun ban would change this?”

Acting on support for the Second Amendment, Young said he endorses H.R. 35, introduced by U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, dubbed the “Safe Schools Bill.” It repeals gun-free zones on school campuses.  Young said that though the police are dedicated to their work, “We cannot be everywhere at once.”  He added that “it is very likely that the officer will arrive after the incident has taken place.”  This situation ironically was the case at Young’s elementary school in 1989 when the police arrived after the shooting had already occurred.  At the conference, Gun Owners of America President Larry Pratt declared his support for H.R.35.  “We’ve got to get rid of gun-free zones,” he said.

He described gun-free schools as “a magnet for dirtbags to come harm people.”




“We need a cultural change,” he said. “Too many of our major cities have the same kind of violence.”  Of the victims of murder in Chicago from 2003 to 2011, an average of 77 percent had a prior arrest history, with a high of 79 percent of the 436 murdered in Chicago in 2010 having arrest histories.

For the same 2003-2011 period, blacks were the victims of 75 percent of 4,265 murders. Blacks also were the offenders in 75 percent of the murders.

According to 2010 U.S. Census information, Chicago has a population of 2,695,598 people. The city is 33 percent black, 32 percent white (not Hispanic) and 30 percent Hispanic or Latino in origin.

For the 2003-2011 period, whites were nearly 6 percent of the victims and accused of carrying out 4 percent of the murders. For the 2003-2011 period, Hispanics or Latinos were 19 percent of the victims and 20 percent of the offenders. Between 2003 and 2011, 4,265 people were murdered in the city of Chicago. In 2012 alone, 512 people were murdered in the city.

Operation Enduring Freedom, the name for the war in Afghanistan, which started Oct. 7, 2001, has seen a total of 2,166 killed. The war has been ongoing for 11 years, 3 months and one week.

Operation Iraqi Freedom, the name for the war in Iraq, which started March 20, 2003, and ended Dec. 15, 2011, saw a total of 4,422 killed.

In a city with some of the toughest gun control laws in America, where a handgun cannot be purchased, Fox News reported that Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy “acknowledged aiming at assault weapons misses the mark when dealing with Chicago’s gang violence.”

“The weapon used is generally a handgun, and rarely is it purchased through legal channels,” he said.



Gun Control has racist roots.  According to the George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal Vol. 2 (1991): 67 titled Gun Control & Racism:
    The history of gun control in America possesses an ugly component: discrimination and oppression of blacks, other racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, and other "unwanted elements," including union organizers and agrarian reformers. Firearms laws were often enacted to disarm and facilitate repressive action against these groups.
    The first gun control laws were enacted in the ante-bellum South forbidding blacks, whether free or slave, to possess arms, in order to maintain blacks in their servile status. After the Civil War, the South continued to pass restrictive firearms laws in order to deprive the newly freed blacks from exercising their rights of citizenship.
    Another old American prejudice supported such gun control efforts, then as it does now: the idea that poor people, and especially the black poor, are not to be trusted with firearms.
It is unconscionable that in 2013, so-called progressives are quietly permitting laws to stand that disproportionately diminish the rights of minorities. The late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was blocked by segregationists when he tried to get his concealed carry permit, because they knew equal strength to defend oneself leads to societal equality. Sadly, gun control advocates today are de facto fighting for that same inequality.  And as you can see in our short video, African-Americans and other minorities are still the primary victims of gun control legislation in America.

Tell President Obama, Mayors Bloomberg and Emanuel & Congress to END RACIST GUN CONTROL LAWS & DEMAND EQUAL GUN RIGHTS for EVERY AMERICAN.
Watch the Video & Sign the Equal Gun Rights Petition Today





It is well known that the first colonials arrived on these shores following the settlement of Jamestown by the Virginia Company in 1607. Perhaps what is not so well known is the fact that following the Thirty Years’ War, the European economy was extremely depressed. Consequently, many skilled and unskilled laborers there were without work, and the New World offered hope and a chance for a new future.

According to some reports, one-half to two-thirds of the immigrants who came to the American colonies arrived as indentured servants, and this included some Africans, who arrived in Jamestown in 1619. This distinction is critical; indentured servants were not slaves.

The first blacks to arrive in America were not slaves but indentured servants.

In 1619, all indentured servants (white or black) had specified periods of servitude ranging from four to seven years and received precisely the same treatment and rewards. At the conclusion of their respective periods of servitude, each was entitled to freedom, citizenship and a land grant of 25 to 50 acres. Throughout the early colonial period when all land was held in trust for the king, the basis of land disposition were grants, dispensed by the local government in accordance with the king’s wishes.

Land grants in Virginia were issued in accordance with a particular system. Under this system, every person who paid his own way to Virginia would be entitled to 50 acres of land, known as a “headright.” There was no stigma attached, and all families, black or white, subsequently enjoyed all the rights and privileges of other citizens in the community. A father could indenture a family of four, and since each family member was entitled to 50 acres at the conclusion of the period of servitude, they were given their freedom and the family would qualify for a parcel of 200 acres.  Using this method, one colonist, Anthony Johnson, by indenturing his own family members, was able to secure 250 acres of land. His sons, utilizing the same strategy, gained an additional 650 acres. The Johnsons settled on “Pungoteague Creek” on the Eastern Shore of Virginia and thrived for almost 40 years.

For the indentureds, there were both economic and civic benefits associated with this practice: British law protected the rights of the individual, the master’s power over his indentured servants was limited, and a specific skill must have been taught.  The Virginia Company, however, changed the rules. They would now allow anyone to pay a person’s transportation to the colony in exchange for a period of indentured servitude, subject to certain caveats. Under the new rules, knowledge of a skill of any kind was not included in this contract and whoever paid the cost of passage would receive the 50 acres of land for each passage purchased. Indentured servants would now get nothing but a trip and often found themselves without rights or freedom. As one white indentured servant, Thomas Best, wrote from Virginia in 1623, “My master Atkins hath sold me for 150 pounds sterling like a damned slave.”

Indentured servants, especially whites, could (and often did) slip away, become part of another settlement and simply disappear. A permanent, economically beneficial solution for the elites was sought and implemented.  Remember the aforementioned Anthony Johnson? He raised livestock, prospered and as was customary with prosperous landowners, indenturing one black and several white servants. Johnson had sued in court and won several cases, but one case in particular would set the stage for a dramatic shift in the workforce. There are several reports as to the origin of this landmark case, which would indelibly change the American cultural landscape and impact relationships between blacks and whites for centuries.

One report says John Casor, a black indentured servant, “swindled” Johnson out of the remainder of his servitude. Another says the family convinced Johnson to free Casor. Still another says Casor “convinced” a white neighbor, Robert Parker, that he was being illegally detained. Whatever the reason, Johnson was not satisfied with the status quo and took Casor and Parker to court, alleging that Casor had not been obtained as a servant, but as a slave.

Understand the true significance of this case. Johnson was not suing to have John Casor fulfill some measure of a debt of servitude. Instead, he insisted the court grant his petition that “he had ye Negro for his life.” He was claiming the services of John Casor for the remainder of Casor’s natural life. To my knowledge, there is no earlier record of judicial support given to slavery in Virginia except as a punishment for crime. Anthony Johnson was asking the court to award him John Casor (who had committed no crime) as a slave.

Parker and one other influential landowner, both white, sided with Casor. However, the court ruled for Johnson. In the original language taken from the original documents is the decision of the county court:

“Court of Northampton; Eight Mar, Anno1654:
Whereas complaint was this daye made to ye court by ye humble peticion of Anth. Johnson Negro ag[ains]t Mr. Robert Parker…”  I needed to read it slowly and in modern English:

“Whereas complaint was this day made to the court by the humble petition of Anthony Johnson, Negro, against Mr. Robert Parker that he detains one John Casor, a Negro, the plaintiff’s servant under pretense that the said John Casor is a freeman. The court seriously considering and maturely weighing the premises do find that the said Mr. Robert Parker most unrightly keeps the said Negro John Casor from his rightful master Anthony Johnson, as it appears by the Deposition of Capt. Samuel Goldsmith and many probable circumstances. Be it therefore the Judgment of the court and ordered that said John Casor, Negro, shall forthwith be turned into the service of his said master, Anthony Johnson, and that the said Mr. Robert Parker make payment of all charges in the suit and execution. (Eighth March, Year 1654)”

This is apparently the first legal sanction of slavery (not for a crime) in the New World.

Johnson – who had himself been captured in Angola and brought to America as an indentured servant – was a black man.  From evidence found in the earliest legal documents, Anthony Johnson must be recognized as the nation’s first official legal slaveholder.

The father of legalized slavery in America was a black man.



Slavery in Angola existed since the late 15th century when Portugal established contacts with the peoples living in what is the Northwest of de present country, and founded several trade posts on the coast. A number of those peoples, like the Imbangala[1] and the Mbundu,[2] were active slave traders for centuries (see African slave trade).

For several decades, slave trade with the Portuguese colony of Brazil was important in Portuguese Angola; Brazilian ships were the most numerous in the ports of Luanda and Benguela. This slave trade also involved local black merchants and warriors who profited from the trade.[11] In the 17th century, the Imbangala became the main rivals of the Mbundu in supplying slaves to the Luanda market. In the 1750s the Portuguese sold 5,000 to 10,000 slaves annually, devastating the Mbundu economy and population.[12] The Portuguese gave guns to Imbangala soldiers in return for slaves. Armed with superior weapons, Imbangala soldiers captured and sold natives on a far larger scale as every new slave translated into a better-armed force of aggressors. A combined force of Portuguese and Imbangala soldiers attacked and conquered the Kingdom of Ndongo from 1618 to 1619, laying siege to the Ndongo capital of Kabasa. The Portuguese sold thousands of Kabasa residents with 36 ships leaving the port of Luanda in 1619, setting a new record, destined for slave plantations abroad.[13]



Amity Shlaes, the author of the new book, "Coolidge", is an all-time favorite author with an innate ability to root through folklore and preconceived notions in search of a more accurate truth. In her 2007 bestseller, "The Forgotten Man", she gave an expert depiction of what the New Deal did and didn't do, turning conventional wisdom about the Great Depression on its head.   
For her new book, "
Coolidge", Shlaes chooses a man who personifies the pillars of pre-World War II economics… respect for the investor, respect for contract, concern about inflation, and especially, the budget.   
We know there were different economics prior to World War II, and the economics worked. Prior to the 1930's we had little debt and strong growth. Many of Coolidge's meetings were well-documented and are available online. I primarily used the Forbes Library in Northampton, Massachusetts, Amherst College, and The Vermont State Library of Barre.   
For instance, a new budget law was passed in the 1920's which gave the Executive, President Coolidge, more power to cut the budget. From the time this was passed, the Executive branch (consisting of the cabinet members and staff) attended semi-annual meetings, and those meetings were hilarious. They were like big pep rallies where a "reward and shame" approach that wouldn't be well received today was used to force the departments to keep lean budgets.  President Coolidge really liked these meetings… The cabinet members and staff convened in Memorial Continental Hall to get yelled at by their boss, who was the Director of
The Bureau of the Budget (the frontrunner to today's OMB director).   Coolidge also had the power to sequester and he used it. This is germane to now. It is worth looking at this.   After Coolidge left office and Herbert Hoover went in, the budget meetings ceased and the budget went up.  


In April 2001, Palast obtained leaked World Bank documents that outlined a four step process on how to loot nations of their wealth and infrastructure, placing control of resources into the hands of the banking elite.  One of the final steps of the process, the “IMF riot,” detailed how the elite would plan for mass civil unrest ahead of time that would have the effect of scaring off investors and causing government bankruptcies.  “This economic arson has its bright side – for foreigners, who can then pick off remaining assets at fire sale prices,” writes Palast, adding, “A pattern emerges. There are lots of losers but the clear winners seem to be the western banks and US Treasury.”

In other words, the banking elite creates the very economic environment – soaring interest rates, spiraling food prices, poverty, lower standards of living – that precipitates civil unrest – and then like a vulture swoops down to devour what remains of the country’s assets on the cheap.

We have already seen this process unfold in places like Bolivia, Ecuador, Indonesia, Greece and Argentina. Next on the chopping block are Spain, Italy, Britain and France – all of which have seen widespread riots over the last two years


Upcoming triple-A blockbuster, Bioshock: Infinite is bursting at the seams with spiritual content! This is the third game in the highly acclaimed Bioshock series. The original won numerous “Game of the Year” awards and Infinite (set for release March 26th) is an early favorite to do the same. In this documentary preview, we break down the some of the references in the pre-release demos, and test them against the word of God! (1 Thess. 5:21

Even in these few minutes of released footage we see references to:

-       the fear of God-       the Trinity-       the Ten Commandments-       the Garden of Eden
-       purification from sin-       Sodom and Gomorrah-       the Promised Land
-       Judgment Day-       Noah and the Ark-       God’s forgiveness

… and, believe it or not, much MORE! What is behind the inclusion of these references? What messages are taught by the game? The Bible is our best tool in extracting what is true, and what is not.




With our economy in shambles, and our national debt approaching $17 trillion, taxpayers can ill-afford to fund another Obama handout that last year topped out at $80.4 billion.   That’s why Grassfire is launching a national petition calling for an end to taxpayer dollars being used to recruit more food-stamp recipients. We’re also urging Congress to act in the best interests of our nation and its citizens, by enacting meaningful and comprehensive SNAP reform. 
Go here now add your name to our national “Stop the Food-Stamp Madness” petition:

+ + Killing The “Can Do” American Spirit… Thomas Jefferson once said that “a wise and frugal government … shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”  All welfare should be at the local level & they should have to work/volunteer for any of it after Family and friends have done what they can.





The amendment's sponsor, Republican State Senator Margaret Sitte, said she intended the measure to serve as “a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, since [Supreme Court Justice Antonin] Scalia said that the Supreme Court is waiting for states to raise a case. By passage of this amendment, the people of North Dakota are asking government to recognize what science already defined.”

In 2009 and 2011 the personhood proposal was passed by the state House of Representatives but died each time in the Senate. This time, predicted Jennifer Mason of Personhood USA, a group that lobbies for personhood bills around the nation, the bill has a good chance of making it all the way to the the 2014 state ballot, where she believes voters would overwhelmingly approve it. “We just need the North Dakota House of Representatives to stay strong and vote as they did before,” she said, “and we’ll see this pass for the first time in the United States.”



In North Dakota, people have jobs. That state led the nation in job creation last year, and its unemployment rate is only 3.2 percent (compared to the national rate of 7.9 percent). Why?
One word: energy.  the fact remains that hydraulic fracturing, also called fracking, is being done responsibly and is revitalizing local economies like
Williston, North Dakota.
>>> Watch our video about the people who are flocking to North Dakota for work
Loris notes that the United States has more than a century’s worth of natural gas beneath its soil at current consumption rates. With more than 12 million Americans out of work, you would think that an economic boom like this would be welcomed—but once again, the federal government is standing in the way.




Those who contribute $50 or more will get an autographed copy of Judge Roy Moore’s autobiographical, “So Help Me God,” the story of his battle to keep the Ten Commandments in the Alabama Supreme Court.






God’s comic:  Sign up for Brad's free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop on his latest articles and upcoming shows.  As an added bonus, sign up today and we'll send you a PDF of the first chapter of Brad's book, Being a Christian Without Being an Idiot. Read more or just sign up below.

The God Experience

A live performance that demonstrates not only that God must exist in a rational world, but also shows how to defend your faith. More →




Survivalism is not about taking on a new identity; it is about being prepared. It is not about paranoia and fear. It is about awareness, responsibility and common sense.  A survivalist understands that until he is self-reliant, he cannot help others. His life is his own. If he fails to protect it, he has only himself to blame.




This house is protected by God and a gun. Come in uninvited and you will meet them both.




Let America know your "To Do List:"

Pray. Vote. Buy More Ammo. Printed on the front of a white t-shirt.

We need to ask God to forgive us for turning our backs on Him. Then, we need to vote out the liberal crooks. Finally, we need to stock up on guns and ammo before the Democrats take away our guns and let all the illegals cross our borders!





When a devotee of private property, free market, limited government principles states his position, he is inevitably confronted with a barrage of socialistic clichés. Failure to answer these has effectively silenced many a spokesman for freedom.
Countering dozens of liberal arguments with logic and tact, How to Argue With a Liberal and Win is a crash course on defending the principles of liberty from her enemies, and gives realistic, educated answers to some of the most persistent “Clichés of Socialism.”


Though produced primarily for the New York battle over ratification, supporters of Federalism raved over the essays in many states. Hamilton and Madison then decided to create a “veritable debater’s handbook for advocates of the Constitution.”[14] They enlarged their original designs for the essays and began to address each article of the proposed Constitution point-by-point. The result came to be titled The Federalist Papers.  This lengthy serial publication helped sustain the long argumentative delay Hamilton and Madison wished for. They began the project in October 1787, and the final eight of the 85 essays appeared in book form on May 28, 1788, although these last also appeared in newspapers through the middle of August. New York continued debate; but with Virginia finally succumbing on June 25, 1788, the war was all but over. New York would not desire to stand alone outside the union of twelve. A mere month later, New York followed in ratification by a close margin of 30 for and 27 against.




Take California, where state Senator Ed Hernandez says there will not be enough doctors to treat new patients.  Sen. Hernandez has made proposals that seek to redefine who can provide coverage.

The new proposal would allow physician assistants to treat more patients, nurse practitioners to set up independent practices and pharmacists, and optometrists to act as primary care providers.

Hernandez's proposed changes would shake up the medical establishment in California and could affect the success of the ACA in California.  The National Conference of State Legislatures says that since January 1, more than 50 proposals have been launched in 24 states that alter what health professionals are licensed to do.  The new proposals join the more than 350 laws that have already been enacted in the last two years.  Just 16 of California's 58 counties have the federal government's recommended supply of primary care physicians, with more than 30 percent of the state's doctors nearing retirement.

It takes more than a decade to train a physician and the pace of expected graduates will not keep up with the expansion in patients needing care.  Doctors say physician assistants and other midlevel professionals are best deployed in doctor-led teams and that allowing these health workers to set up independent agencies would create voids in the clinics, hospitals and offices that they currently work in.  Whether or not these midlevel professionals are granted new responsibilities that are within their training, the fundamental problem of not having enough doctors to treat the growing number of patients in the U.S. health care system still exists.

Source: Michael Mishak, "State Lacks Doctors to Meet Demand of National Health Care Law," Los Angeles Times, February 9, 2013.





It wasn’t a “tough” decision for Eisenhower to send troops to Little Rock in 1957.

In the presidential campaign the year before, the Republican platform had expressly endorsed the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. The Democratic platform did not.

To the contrary, that year, 99 members of Congress signed the “Southern Manifesto” denouncing the court’s ruling in Brown. Two were Republicans. Ninety-seven were Democrats.

Republican President Eisenhower pushed through the 1957 Civil Rights Act and the 1960 Civil Rights Act. He established the Civil Rights Commission. It was Eisenhower, not Truman, who fully desegregated the military.

Meanwhile, the Brown decision was being openly defied by the Democratic governor of Arkansas (and Bill Clinton pal), Orval Faubus, who refused to admit black students to Little Rock Central High School.

Every single segregationist in the Senate was a Democrat. Only one of them ever became a Republican: Strom Thurmond.
As Democrat LBJ explained to fellow Democrats after doing a 180-flip on civil rights as president and pushing the 1964 Civil Rights Act (which resembled the 1957 Civil Rights Act he had gutted as a senator): “I’ll have them niggers voting Democratic for two hundred years.” That’s according to a steward on Air Force One, who overhead him say it.


ACTION:  Urge your Senators to vote against the Motion to Proceed to any gun control bill reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee.  This bill cannot be allowed to get to the Senate floor, or Harry Reid will then have a free-hand to start his “let’s make a deal” game.

CLICK THROUGH to use GOA’s system to send a message to your Senators.

Better yet, call them or write them directly yourself.







While it is true that smallpox has been eradicated in the wild, it is not gone. As smallpox came under some control, samples from the disease were given to the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta and to Biopreparat/Vector in the Soviet Union. Just as Oppenheimer thought it would be a more stable world if both sides had nuclear bombs, the World Health Organization thought it was only fair that both the democratic U.S. and the totalitarian Soviets should have samples of the world’s deadliest disease.

We know for a fact, however, that when Nixon signed the treaty with the Soviets in the early 1970s that was to have halted all offensive bioweapons research and deployment, the Russians went right home and created the largest bioweapons program known to mankind.

According to Ken Alibek (his Americanized name), himself a defector and the No. 2 man at “Vector,” the Soviet Union had vats filled with over 20 tons of India-11 smallpox prepared for delivery in warheads. Our intelligence services had witnessed testing of ICBM reentry vehicles with nose-cone cooling, something only needed for bioagents. And we know that at the fall of the Soviet empire the bioweaponeers disappeared, along with their agents – presumably to the highest bidder.

So here is the scenario in a nutshell. Smallpox virus survives in freezers all over the world – not just in friendly hands. The virus that was manufactured by the Soviets was about 60 percent lethal, and the amount to start a world wide contagion may be stored in a single chicken egg.

Whereas before, disease containment was possible because 1) much of the developed world was vaccinated, 2) there were teams trained to handle outbreaks standing by for ready deployment worldwide, 3) vaccine was stashed in accessible depots all over the world, 4) populations were less mobile and 5) people knew not to go to hospitals during smallpox outbreaks and allowed a system of quarantine. Today, we have none of these things, and additionally, since the 1970s, we have the scientific wherewithal to genetically modify (weaponize) the virus.  I served in the military and have had a number of smallpox vaccinations. Unfortunately, these probably only last 15 years.  As a trauma surgeon and emergency responder, I tried to be voluntarily vaccinated, but was turned down. At that time, Janet Napolitano was governor of Arizona, and she was worried that voluntary vaccination of hospital personnel might result in workman’s compensation claims. How do you spell “shortsighted”?  The only people in my county now and then that have been vaccinated are the public health nurses. None of the emergency-room personnel are vaccinated. Does this make any sense, really? When is the last time that a seriously ill person walked into the county health office?



A favorite of campers, the $129 BioLite CampStove uses heat to generate electricity. You don’t need special fuel to use it – which means you can just use leaves and twigs around the campsite instead of lugging petroleum-based fuel. Once you’ve built a little fire in the canister, you can plug in your small electronics via a high-heat USB cable and start charging. The CampStove weighs 33 ounces and will charge an iPhone in about 20 minutes.
Biolite also is developing a HomeStove that is a low-cost biomass cook stove for the home that reduces smoke emissions by 95% and has the ability to charge small electronics. Right now its being tested for use in developing nations but the finished functionality is sure to make a few preppers happy. http://shop.biolitestove.com/index.html




Making an electric generator is a good way of learning the principles of generators. It also is an exciting science project. 




The Tinderbox is a Woodstove powered generator. The principles are well understood, but until now, no-one has made a practical commercial device which you could simply buy, install and start generating virtually free power in useful amounts. The Tinderbox does just this. It will produce at least twenty watts, which is plenty to light a boat, caravan, studio or whatever using LED Lighting, as well as charging a battery bank. It will also of course provide warmth and heat for cooking.

Base kits are now available, prices start at £300, which includes all the major components except the hoses and radiators. Special cooling blocks are available for mobile applications. All other components can be supplied on request and I am always happy to to provide assistance in building a system tailor made to individual needs. Radiators are not supplied as standard as they are readily available off the shelf or even second hand. Supplying them with the Tinderbox would needlessly add to the cost and limit options unnecessarily. Installation is straightforward and should take no more than an hour or two, depending on required layout.



We are sorry our 500 watt Mini GenSets are out of production.
We will produce it again if we get enough demand (We need Min, 5 units to start)

For more information or to place an order, please contact us either via EMail
or give us a call at 918-520-7711




One potent remedy ignored by mainstream press is graviola (also known as soursop, guanaba, and numerous other names.)  This South American fruit is green and heart shaped, and about 6 to 8 inches in diameter.  In addition to South America, the tree is found on various tropical islands and grows best in rainforest climates.   Research demonstrates that powerful substances in graviola--called annonaceous acetogenins--may arrest cancer tumor growth and may even protect your body from developing cancer cells.  Study results have been highly promising: In one laboratory study published in the November 2010 issue of Molecules, graviola's Annonaceous acetogenins slowed the spread of lung cancer and cancer of the laryngeal cells. In a 2001 study published in the Journal of Natural Products, a compound extracted from graviola seeds killed liver cancer cells without harming healthy cells.
     However, as promising as these results are, graviola is no match for the bark of an even lesser-known North American fruit treeThat's because extracts of this North American fruit tree bark contain double-ringed acetogenins that have proven in laboratory studies to be a million times more effective than some chemo drugs.   A Million Times Stronger Than Chemo Drugs--with No Harmful Side Effects  The bark of this North American fruit tree is exceedingly more powerful than graviola as an effective cancer treatment, according to results of a $5 million study funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI).  It was in this NCI-funded study that this fruit tree was shown to be a million times more effective than chemo drugs, without toxic effects on healthy cells.












WHITE HOUSE CLAIM DEBUNKED: The White House claims the “math” on the GOP plan doesn’t work. But that’s not what the president was saying in 2011. Here’s a look at the president’s ever-shifting views on tax reform.  +isn’t Obama and his Democrats supposed to be so smart, so was he lying or just incompetent or is he now lying or incompetent?




On July 22, 2011 President Obama offered raising the debt ceiling last summer by closing loopholes and not raising taxes.
OBAMA: What we said was give us $1.2 trillion in additional revenues, which could be accomplished without hiking tax rates. It could simply be accomplished by eliminating loopholes, eliminating some deductions and engaging in a tax reform process that could lower rates generally while broadening the base.                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fN3iZjN3F0







A new Gallup survey out today shows a strong majority of Americans favor simplifying the tax code by lowering rates and closing loopholes (70%), saving our biggest entitlement programs (88%), and making needed spending cuts (72%). This is the framework for averting the fiscal cliff outlined by Speaker John Boehner and supported by a growing number of people on both sides of the aisle.  Less than half (47%) view the president’s call for raising tax rates – which will hurt small businesses and destroy jobs – as a top priority. That’s likely because the economy remains Americans’ top concern.




Aren’t monopolies supposed to be BAD???  Why then grow our government to bigger, stronger, greedier and more destructive???  Government does not have to be big, dumb and destructive..

Up until 1913, combined peacetime spending of federal and state government, never exceeded 5 percent of GDP, and government always returned to its antebellum size after the war was wrapped up.

The 17th Amendment was only one part of enabling the monopoly government.  It gave DC eventual authority over all of American politics (at least they think they have this power).  Another part of the puzzle also fell into place in 1913 – the Federal Reserve Act.  With this act, the feds gave themselves freedom from another check upon their power – the power to print money.  Until the Federal Reserve, the U.S. never had a paper money standard for any length of time.  Although it would take until Nixon to sever the last control on federal spending, the Federal Reserve set up a fractional reserve banking system that would guarantee that politicians could always find unlimited funding for their projects.  

Today, the Federal Reserve prints unlimited amounts of money to buy federal bonds to fund unlimited federal spending that is paid for by devaluing the savings of the entire nation.  This has resulted in a deterioration of the dollar of around 97 percent when compared to gold, and even more when compared with silver.


put in a date to see what things used to cost and this will help you understand devaluation of the dollar, inflation and purchasing power.





A Congressional Budget Office study published in January found that the federal retirement package was 2.7 times more generous than what is paid by large private-sector firms. Federal workers also receive more paid vacation and sick days. Even if they endured a salary penalty of 35 percent, their benefits would make up much of the difference.

But federal salaries are not 35 percent below private-sector levels. All five outside studies reviewed this year by the Government Accountability Office found that federal pay is equal to or higher than those of comparable private-sector workers. This is consistent with three decades of academic research.





The old CPI concept of measuring the changing costs of maintaining a constant standard of living by tracking the costs of a fixed basket of goods and services was how government estimated inflation “going back to at least the 1700s,” said Williams, “and prior to 1945, the fixed-basket CPI tracked by the U.S. government actually was known as the Cost of Living Index.”

But during the first half of the 20th century, academics came up with a brand-new concept – that of a “constant level of satisfaction” – to gauge the “true cost of living.” Thus, if people were willing to substitute less expensive goods – like hamburger in place of the steak they previously ate

As MyMoneyBlog.com explains it, there are plenty of good reasons, at least from the government’s point of view:

Payouts on inflation-protected investments like TIPS (Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities) and Series I bonds are indexed directly to the CPI.

Social Security payments, pensions and inflation-indexed annuities all rely on CPI data to determine their annual adjustments.

The size of individual income tax brackets, personal exemptions and the standard deduction are tied to movements in the CPI.

Low inflation numbers (especially when they are much less than GDP growth) make the economy seem healthy.

So, how did government change the definition of inflation? Once upon a time, determining consumer inflation was accomplished by measuring the cost of maintaining a constant standard of living, as measured by a “fixed basket of goods” that everybody needed and purchased. Makes sense, right?

Remember, today’s “dollar bill” purchases what 3 cents would buy in 1913 when the Federal Reserve was created to “stabilize” our money system.




But consider that although Mitt Romney’s Get-Out-the-Vote software failed, he fell short by only 334,000 votes in the key battleground states of Florida, Virgina, Ohio, and New Hampshire. Of the total number who voted, some slightly more than 118 million voters, this vote margin in the swing states represents .28% of the total electorate.  That’s as close to a 50-50 proposition, to use Bill Whittle’s phrase, as you get (even accounting for Obama’s 332-206 electoral college victory). Now, let’s consider the extremely high vote totals in minority-populated urban areas of Ohio and Pennsylvania, where Republicans apparently didn’t even bother to make an argument. In 44 districts in Ohio, President Obama’s vote totals were upwards of 99% at 14,686 to 23 (not enough to turn the election) and in 59 districts in Pennsylvania Romney received exactly zero votes — a feat that would make a North Korean despot proud.




Virginia state Sen. Charles W. Carrico, Sr., Grayson Republican, has introduced a bill that would award one electoral vote to the winner of each of the state’s 11 congressional districts, and the state’s two at-large votes to the candidate that wins the majority of the districts.  Mr. Carrico cited the results in the southwestern 9th Congessional District — where Mitt Romney won 63 percent of the vote — as part of the reason he introduced the bill.

“People in my district — they feel discouraged by coming out because their votes don’t mean anything if they’re outvoted in metropolitan districts,” Mr. Carrico said. “It can go either way — it doesn’t necessarily mean that one political party is going to be favored over another. When they come out to vote, they know their vote counts instead of a winner-take-all. I’d love to see other states to do this because I don’t feel the Electoral College right now is a fair system.”





There was a time when blacks stood on solid religious grounds to uplift our race, even when that entailed overcrowding pews to take on the national Democratic Party and Southern Democrats who crowed, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”






Did you know that even after the "spending cuts" in the sequester, total government spending will be $1.6 trillion HIGHER ten years from now? These aren't spending cuts as you and I think about them for our personal budgets. In the fantasy land of Washington spending cuts are merely cutting the amount they are going to increase spending!  It's crazy, and that's why Let Freedom Ring has come up with a new campaign to point out just how crazy it is. We're asking that Washington do one simple thing to  start getting our fiscal house in order: Just commit to spending ONE DOLLAR LESS next year.               Will you click here to join us in signing the "One Dollar Less Petition" to your Representatives, and even better, send them a one dollar bill in the mail with a letter asking them: Can you spend THIS much LESS each year?  Most days we walk around with one dollar bills in our pocket. It's a small amount of money and yet today Washington is incapable of spending just that small amount less! "One Dollar Less" won't solve our deficit problem by itself, but it would be a symbolic first step. If Congress won't commit to taking this small step, it's proof that they're just not serious about getting federal spending under control.  Who can bailout the brokest nation in the world..the USA???

Will you join us in signing the petition and mailing your Representatives a one dollar bill and asking them: Can you spend just ONE DOLLAR LESS each year?  Check out the chart to see what's set to happen with government spending if we don't demand they spend One Dollar Less each year:



We’ve invested billions in our great think tanks but little in the task of translating that work into stories the average American will care about. Yes, we have Fox News and political talk radio — important outlets, but outlets that narrowcast to the conservative base and are driven by politics and opinion, not storytelling.

What we don’t have is an alternative to NPR. Or The Daily Show. Or 60 Minutes. Or The Charlie Rose Show. Or Frontline. Or Ken Burns etc…. Content that doesn’t scream its politics at the audience but that lures America in with great storylines, not lectures.  Conservatives have a profound storytelling deficit, yet all we do is whine and complain about it. It’s part of our DNA, our whining about the culture, as if we’re incapable of reverse-engineering the Left’s success.




More than 100 conservative leaders from across the nation have dispatched a letter to GOP members in Congress encouraging them to “negotiate from a position of strength” with Democrats regarding the trillions of dollars in tax increases Barack Obama is demanding.

“It’s in the interest of the country and in your personal interest for you to use the power you unquestionably have now to stand firm and not surrender your conservative principles, no matter how loud the clamor of people whose central interests is to advance the left’s agenda,” says the letter.

The letter from conservative leaders isn’t as specific but addresses GOP members of both the House and Senate, warning that they will be tested. “In the House, the nation elected in 2012 one of the largest Republican majorities in the past 100 years. You have a mandate to fight for conservative principles that is arguably much broader than the one that narrowly reelected President Barack Obama claims to have for his leftist agenda,” the letter continues.





With the staff, special forces, local police presence and equipment, the President's visit adds up annually to at least a $4 million vacation courtesy of the Hawaii and federal taxpayers.  While the President and his friends pay for their own rental homes, taxpayers pick up the cost of security and waterfront housing for the Secret Service, Navy Seals and Coast Guard as well as staff accommodations at a plush beachfront Waikiki hotel.  President Barack Obama and First Family vacation with their friends every year since 2008 were alerted on Monday to some specifics of the Obamas' holiday vacation plans. $4M x 8 yrs= $32,000,000 for only this one vacation each year.  What could you have done w/ that much money, that we do not have???




this is how capitalism works.  You need capital from investors to fund ideas and inventions for new goods and services which can create jobs.

 Where does the capital come from?  Investors.  Where do investors get it?  Tax income and capital and you won’t have the funds that can bring you jobs, new products and services, wealth…







This is only ONE way the “rich” will never pay their “fair” share of taxes to fund government spending as they will use charitable loopholes &/or deductions to shelter their wealth and fund their “causes”:

Of the $17.6 million that the Buffett Foundation donated in the fiscal year ended June 30, 1999, nearly $3.8 million went to Planned Parenthood, among its top contributors. It also involves itself directly at the clinic level.

International Projects Assistance Services (IPAS), based in Carrboro, N.C., manufactures a handheld suction pump used in developing countries to initiate abortions. The Buffett Foundation has backed IPAS for years. Its 1999 contribution of $2.5 million is part of a five-year, $20 million commitment that will enable IPAS to double its capacity.[3]

Currently, the Foundation provides grants to a large range of US and a few international organisations, including the Willows Foundation in Turket (€2.3 million), the World Food Programme in Italy (€800,000), Marie Stopes International in the UK (€571,000); and Grupo de Informacion en Reproduccion Elegida in Mexico (€196,000).[4]

By 2008, the Foundation had nearly $4 billion in assets. In 2007, Omaha's Building Bright Futures initiative promised financial support to low-income students in the area who wanted to attend college. But the Buffett program is offering help across Nebraska. For years, the foundation capped the scholarship at about 100 students. Starting with the 2007-08 school year, the foundation lifted that cap. 770 students—including 400 new recipients this fall—held a Buffett scholarship. The foundation granted nearly $2.4 million during the 2007-08 year. Susie Buffett said she hopes the number of scholarship recipients, particularly students from the Omaha area, increases significantly next year.[5]

[edit] Gates Foundation  His intention was originally to leave 99% of his estate to the Buffett Foundation, but in June 2006 he announced that he would give 85% of his wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation instead.  Why isn’t Buffett leaving this to the government to back up his big talk about rich people should pay more in taxes to the government???  Actions speak louder than BS Buffett stated that he changed his mind because he has grown to admire Gates's foundation over the years; he believed that the Gates Foundation would be able to use his money effectively because it was already scaled-up.[6]  "Susan's Foundation" is to receive a bequest of about $3 billion over a span of many years.




Taxes matter – to Buffett.

Harvard’s Economic Department chairman, Greg Mankiw, writes that “Mr. Buffett never mentions doing anything to eliminate the tax-avoidance strategies that he uses most aggressively. In particular:

“1. His company, Berkshire Hathaway, never pays a dividend but instead retains all earnings. So the return on this investment is entirely in the form of capital gains. By not paying dividends, he saves his investors (including himself) from having to immediately pay income tax on this income.

“2. Mr. Buffett is a long-term investor, so he rarely sells and realizes a capital gain. His unrealized capital gains are untaxed.

“3. He is giving away much of his wealth to charity. He gets a deduction at the full market value of the stock he donates, most of which is unrealized (and therefore untaxed) capital gains.

“4. When he dies, his heirs will get a stepped-up basis. The income tax will never collect any revenue from the substantial unrealized capital gains he has been accumulating.

“To be sure, there are pros and cons of changing the provisions of the tax code of which Mr. Buffett takes advantage. Tax policy always involves difficult tradeoffs. But it seems odd to me that whenever Mr. Buffett talks about taxing the rich more, the ‘loopholes’,  deductions he uses or a wealth tax or a sales tax never seem to enter into the conversation.”

Guess who else thinks Buffett should pay more in taxes: the IRS.


  1. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has been fighting the IRS over the $1 billion in taxes the government claims it is owed, dating as far back as 2002. Last year, one of Berkshire Hathaway’s companies, NetJets, sued the IRS, demanding that the feds return $642.7 million in already paid taxes. And this year, the IRS sued NetJets, claiming it is owed $366.3 million in unpaid taxes.


Meanwhile, scientists at the National Institutes of Health are working feverishly to develop a cure, vaccine or treatment for this disease – that appears to afflict guilty/super-wealthy liberals – known in medical circles as “Buffettitis.” It’s early, and one risks being premature. But NIH just may have produced a workable solution: “Mr. Buffett, whip out your checkbook, and cut the U.S. Treasury a check.






“The Conservative Movement doesn’t realize we only need 16 House votes to block Boehner from becoming Speaker,” Ryun said. “House rules demand nominees for speaker to receive a majority—at least 218 votes—to win election. If 16 members abstain, Boehner only has 217 votes.”  “We only need 16 votes to get conservatives on the path to actually reducing our $16 trillion debt,” AMA Virginia Director Matt Robbins added. “If conservatives want to tackle our biggest challenges, we need competent leaders—and frankly—new leaders.”

AMA staff members have launched the Twitter hashtag, #FireBoehner, which has already received more than 1,600 tweets. AMA is asking its activists to call conservative members of the House to encourage them to abstain from the House vote for speaker, which will occur during the first week in January.






Even before Election Day, Farah and WND filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission charging the Obama campaign with knowingly accepting foreign contributions without even a modicum of scrutiny.

To prove that the Obama campaign was willingly accepting cash contributions from foreigners, WND went to great lengths – using a proxy server in Pakistan, staffers placed small donations using a disposable credit card under the name Osama bin Laden, occupation “deceased terrorist.” His company was listed as “al-Qaida.”

Every red flag we could conceive of was used to ensure that the contributions would be rejected. They were not.

“Something tells me this was the tip of the iceberg,” said Farah. “Obama accepted foreign contributions in 2008, as we had proven then. And he did it again in 2012, without any fallout.”

If you want to help ensure that travesties like this are punished, corrected and such abuses never occur again in America’s future elections, please support this fund to see this challenge through.  It has already cost thousands of dollars in legal fees just to file the complaint.

Across Philadelphia, GOP poll inspectors were forcibly (and illegally) removed from polling locations. Coincidentally (or not), Obama received "astronomical" numbers in those very same regions, including locations where he received "over 99 percent" of the vote. Ward 4, which also had a poll watcher dressed in Obama attire, went massively for Obama. Obama received 99.5 percent of the vote, defeating Romney 9,955 to 55.
Obama also won 99.8 percent of the vote in 44 Cleveland districts. In another Ohio county, Obama won with 108 percent of the voters registered.
Obama received 10 million fewer votes than he did in 2008. Romney received 3 million fewer votes than McCain. Obama won in the four critical swing states by a grand total of 500,000 votes.  Some 5 million independents changed their votes from Obama to Romney in 2012. So Romney started the day 2.5 million votes ahead of where McCain was in 2008, as Jack Wheeler points out. This means that 5.5 million Republican voters are not accounted for. Either they didn't show up at the polls or their votes were not counted. Does anyone believe there was less enthusiasm by Republicans about this election than for the one in 2008?


The FEC complaint notes that stories about Obama’s acceptance of donations from foreigners arose during the 2008 election, when Newsweek, the Washington Post and ABC News all cited such claims.





I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. This commentary is about what went wrong with Mitt Romney — and my prediction.  I predicted Romney would win big. What went wrong? I’ve been asked nonstop since Election Day, “Was your prediction based on hope or bias?”  My prediction was based on a combination of scientific evidence and common sense.

First, it was based on common sense that no President could possibly be re-elected with the worst economy of our lifetimes, with an economy that has produced more months above 8 percent unemployment (43 months) than produced by all the Presidents between Harry Truman and George W. Bush combined (39 months). People just don’t vote for the guy that brings you misery, malaise, foreclosures and bankruptcies, record unemployment, and inflation at the gas pump and grocery store. This election should have been, 100 out of 100 times, a repeat of Ronald Reagan’s landslide over Jimmy Carter.

Secondly, my prediction was based on common sense that turnout, enthusiasm and the makeup of the electorate would be far different than 2008. Obama’s coalition of single women, minorities and young people were the groups most hurt by Obama Democrat policies on our economy. They are the ones without jobs. They are the ones suffering: 14.3 percent black unemployment, 53 percent under-employment for college grads. Logic dictated these groups would not come out in record numbers again.

No one is such a glutton for punishment he’d return and ask for a second helping of misery, malaise and despair, right?  Well, I was wrong. The 2012 electorate looked almost identical to 2008. Obama’s supporters didn’t just come for a second helping of misery; they came out enthusiastically and cheered for more misery.

Lastly, my prediction was based on science. The University of Colorado’s predictive model had never failed. It worked to perfection in the Presidential elections of 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008. It predicted a Romney landslide based on scientific facts and historical precedent.  This combination of science and common sense would tell you that in this economy, no President could be re-elected — unless Obama is more an American idol and messiah than a politician and his followers ignore logic, facts and the misery they are experiencing.  Unless we have reached the tipping point that Thomas Jefferson warned about, where a majority now gets checks from government and realizes they can vote for the guy who promises to keep the checks coming.  Obama’s re-election proves that bribery as a campaign tactic is validated. Promise enough free stuff and you win votes, even if the end result is no jobs, no hope and a lifetime dependent on government. You wouldn’t believe this could be true. Not in America. That’s why my prediction went wrong.

Why else did Romney lose? Romney did plenty of his own damage.  Romney picked the wrong Vice President. The GOP has to reach out to women and Latinos. In May, I predicted a Romney landslide if he picked Marco Rubio as his running mate. If Romney picked Rubio, he would have locked down Florida and made deep inroads with Latino voters. With an electorate divided almost exactly 50/50, the Latino vote is the missing link for the GOP. Attract even 5 percent more of the Latino vote and you win. Attract 10 percent more and you win in a landslide.

Paul Ryan added nothing. He reinforced the image of the GOP as an elite club of rich white men. In a diverse country, this choice said “diversity is unimportant.”  Worst of all, Ryan’s views on abortion reinforced that the GOP wanted to take away women’s sexual freedom and rights. Ryan supports no exceptions for abortion, including rape, incest or a women’s life in danger. Men and conservatives didn’t notice. But Obama’s campaign team made sure women noticed. Millions of female voters ignored the awful economy and record unemployment and voted for Obama based on women’s rights.  How does the GOP solve that problem? Simple. The next time any GOP candidate mentions abortion and rape in the same sentence, gag him, hog-tie him and put him in the basement until the election is over.






So if our goal is to excite the conservative base while having some hope of expanding it, here is a to-do list that we can work on as the days unfold.   First, we reject the notion that we must somehow soften our views or cave on core beliefs. Any vote we would attract from the middle would be outweighed by votes we would deserve to lose on the right.

But we do have the choice on what to emphasize and what to phrase differently.   If social conservatism freaks some people out, make it clear that our candidates will stand for the unborn and man/woman marriage, but that ultimately those decisions are best left to the states. People who want fiscal sanity and strong defense can vote for us, and save their energies on abortion, contraception and gay rights for their state legislatures.

If we need to appeal to the nurturing instinct of women, we should describe how government is the worst purveyor of real care-- health or otherwise-- that truly helps people. Then we describe the protective value of fighting terrorism.

If we need to attract people of color, we hold events where they are-- lots of them. Goodwill breeds goodwill, even if it takes a long time. And remember, for 2016 “goodwill” might be defined as simply as 15 percent of the black vote and 40 percent of Hispanics. Regarding Latinos, I refuse to believe they are unanimously desirous of soft borders and amnesty. I know many proud Hispanics who are consistently chafed at waves of people seeking illegal access to a country they entered legally-- and many of them are Democrats. The GOP challenge with Hispanics is the same as the challenge with blacks, which is the same challenge we face with single women: we need to skillfully, caringly, compellingly persuade them that the expansionist welfare state they seek is not good for them or the country. This takes time, and it takes talent.

So as we look toward to voting at last for Obama’s successor-- and make no mistake, campaigns on both sides will fire up right after the midterms in 2014-- we need to get very picky. No more flights of fancy with candidates with interesting life stories but no elected experience. No flirtations with candidates who can pump up a Tea Party rally but repel potential crossover votes with needlessly incendiary rhetorical excess. And no more experiments with people of admittedly good heart and solid values who are simply not good at debating and answering challenging questions on the fly. As a final filter, like it or not, we probably rule out anyone with a net worth greater than eight figures. Even after that process, when we are left with a field of worthy prospects, we may need some sacrificial behavior from within that number.

I already hear the mumurings of fear that four or five true conservatives will enter the race, all attracting their 12 percent of the primary vote while a moderate more palatable to party power brokers and the Georgetown cocktail community shoots through that crowd to the nomination.

I don’t care where they meet in the Summer of 2014, but if we are blessed with the ambitions of Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Susanna Martinez, Bobby Jindal, Mitch Daniels, Nikki Haley and a few others I could mention, they need to meet somewhere over a weekend.





A native of Pennsylvania, Santorum went to bat for conservatives who didn’t feel their voice was being represented in the GOP primary. His grass-roots approach to campaigning – including visiting every one of Iowa’s 99 counties and his stunning victory in the Iowa caucuses – put him in front-runner status where he ultimately won 11 states and 3 million votes during the Republican primary process.

In June of this year, Santorum launched Patriot Voices, http://www.patriotvoices.com/act_now   a grass-roots and online community of Americans committed to promoting faith, family, freedom and opportunity. With a goal of recruiting 1 million members, Patriot Voices hopes to transform the political landscape of America.

Rick and his wife of 22 years, Karen, are the parents of seven children: Elizabeth, John, Daniel, Sarah Maria, Peter, Patrick and Isabella. During his run for president, Santorum spoke about his belief that strong families help produce a strong economy. He shared his views that opportunities for all Americans must be expanded by encouraging incentives for marriage, children and free enterprise.

Santorum was also an author and floor manager of the landmark Welfare Reform Act, which passed in 1996.

He wrote and championed legislation that outlawed partial-birth abortion as well as the “Born Alive Infants Protection Act,” the “Unborn Victims of Violence Act,” and the “Combating Autism Act.”

Santorum penned the 2005 New York Times best-seller “It Takes a Family.”






The Dutch employment figures are generally high, and have consistently performed better than the United States since 1998. The Netherlands also outperforms the United States in tax revenue collection. As a matter of fact, it has collected more than the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development average until very recently.  This is especially surprising considering that the corporate tax rate has been lowered from 35 percent in 2001 to 25 percent.  http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=22602&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD        

Source: "Canada's Experience with Territorial Taxation," Tax Foundation, November 12, 2012.

Source: "The United Kingdom's Move to Territorial Taxation," Tax Foundation, November 13, 2012.






Reuters reports that Hostess Brands is going bankrupt. This is not the “let’s reschedule our payments” kind of bankruptcy, but the “sell every piece of hardware we have to whoever will bid for it” kind of bankruptcy.

So the corporate greed of Hostess Brands is now ending. No longer will they want to make money. No longer will they heartlessly buy ingredients at the lowest price they can get to make sugar snacks and white bread at a price point where consumers will buy them. No longer will they fight with their unionized workers to get them to accept lower pay or lower benefits.

This disaster shows that saying there is no more “greed” is another way of saying there is no longer anything to attract a profit motive. Which is another way of saying, consumers will have to go elsewhere to get what they want. Unjustifiable pensions and other burdens have led to the point that the company can no longer make a profit. As a result, there is no Hostess Brands to hire people or buy from suppliers to provide bread to consumers. Are the unionized “workers” better off now?  This is also the future of our State workers’ pensions AND Federal Government workers’ pensions AND welfare recipients plus programs like Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare as unfunded and unsustainable…. 

Finally, raise taxes too much like any other benefit/compensation and it will have dire consequences, when there needs to be prioritization, cost/benefit analysis, then spending & cost cuts.















Robert Jeffress, senior pastor at the First Baptist Church in Dallas, made remarks on Sunday before the election that should Obama win, his victory would lead to the reign of the Antichrist.

"I want you to hear me tonight, I am not saying that President Obama is the Antichrist, I am not saying that at all. One reason I know he's not the Antichrist is the Antichrist is going to have much higher poll numbers when he comes," said Jeffress.

"President Obama is not the Antichrist. But what I am saying is this: the course he is choosing to lead our nation is paving the way for the future reign of the Antichrist."

Jeffress would go on to say that "it is time for Christians to stand up and to push back against this evil that is overtaking our nation" and to do so via "the ballot box ."


Democrat Voter Fraud???   The vote count has been marked by controversy. Poll watchers accuse local election officials of incompetence, intimidation and possible fraud. The latest twist is that in some precincts of St. Lucie County there appear to be dozens more ballots being counted than the number of voters. The West campaign is demanding St. Lucie County Supervisor of Elections Gertrude Walker release the voter poll books that show how many voters actually showed up on Election Day to validate the count. “What we are saying is, open your books!” a source close to the West campaign told The Washington Times.

Questions also persist regarding the military absentee ballots in Palm Beach County. Observers were banned without explanation from watching the ballots being opened. They were permitted to observe the counting process, however there was no way to know whether the absentee ballots that were produced were the same ones that were opened, or if all the ballots were produced. Lacking a transparent chain of custody of the military ballots it is impossible to validate that the votes cast by servicemen and women overseas are fairly and accurately being counted




Let’s face it. Obama won the election. Just like Putin and Ahmadinejad did theirs. The only difference is that unlike Iranians and Russians, Americans won’t be gathering in the streets to protest their disenfranchisement at the hands of the corrupt Democratic Party machine.

First, he received over 99% of the vote in districts where GOP inspectors were illegally removed. Next, he won 100% of the vote in 21 districts in Cleveland. Well, he’s gotten another lucky break!  Mr. Obama won Wood County in Ohio this year. That’s right, Mr. Obama won the majority of Wood County’s 108% of registered voters. That’s not a typo.

In 2012, 106,258 people in Wood County are registered to vote out of an eligible 98,213.



Only one precinct had less than 113% turnout. The unofficial vote count is 175,554 registered voters 247,713 vote cards cast (141.10% ). The National SEAL Museum, a St. Lucie county polling place, had 158.85% voter turn out, the highest in the county.  When asked about the 141% Supervisor of Elections Gertrude Walker stated, “They may have had something like that in Palm Beach County, but we’ve never seen that here.”



A New Chapter for America--Chapter 11










One again, Blacks voted for Obama in “mass quantities.” Some put the number at 95 percent, although I’ve seen a number around 92 percent. The Black vote in the Philadelphia wards was off the charts. One article carried this headline, “Vote was astronomical for Obama in some Philadelphia wards,” even though another article reported in September of this year that “[p]overty rose significantly in Philadelphia and its surrounding counties over the last two years, while the city’s median household income in 2011 ranked second-worst among the nation’s 25 largest cities.”  These areas are deeply affected by policies that are championed by the Democrats.   When you have time, read the article “Philadelphia’s Poverty Problem” that was published online in PhillyMag in 2010. It’s heart wrenching:

More than a third of the city’s kids don’t graduate from high school . . . . Sixty percent of the city’s children are born out of wedlock. A third grow up in poverty. Philadelphia, recent stats say, is America’s poorest big city.  Consider the problems just on a practical level: It’s tough to attract new business to the city when so much of it is dangerous, when we lack an educated workforce. We lose out on tax revenue. We end up spending more — billions more — on prisons and services trying to resurrect our poorest people than we would in tackling some of their problems head-on.
Conde Pallen’s “utopian” novel Crucible Island depicts what happens when the State takes on the attributes of a benefactor.



He said the lesson on Romney’s loss to President Obama on Tuesday is that the GOP must “never again” nominate a “a big government establishment for president.”  Tea Party groups said Romney failed to make the kind of strong case for conservatism that would have won the election.  They described Romney as a “weak, moderate candidate hand-picked by the country club elite Republican establishment.”  “They didn’t see a clear distinction so they went with what they know.”  “It should have been a landslide if Romney had run as a true conservative,” said Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center.  “Romney took all the right stances, no question. The problem was not communicating them on the national stage with President Obama,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, the head of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List.  There was no repudiation of the Tea Party by the electorate because Tea Party values were not firmly articulated.  “Tea Partiers will take over the Republican party in the next four years,” Viguerie said.  In the meantime, conservatives will work to ensure that congressional Republicans do not compromise their principles in fiscal talks with Obama, he said.  “Conservatives and Tea Partiers are just sick and tired of Republican leaders compromising on the state and national level with Democrats that grow the size of government,” Viguerie said. “We are going to hold their feet to the fire.”


Obama did not win a single state that fully requires photo IDs to vote, although he was victorious in four states that accept non-photo identification – Washington, Colorado, Ohio and Virginia. Those states accept as legitimate identification current utility bills, bank statements and paychecks.

In Colorado for example, where non-photo identification is accepted, a review by RedState.com showed irregular voting patterns, finding that 10 counties had a total registration ranging between 104 to 140 percent of the respective populationsThe Brennan Center for Justice, heavily funded by billionaire activist George Soros, has been at the center of providing data claiming voter ID laws will disenfranchise minorities.

However, WND reported the very voter ID data used by Brennan has been called into question by experts and has been contradicted by other credible studies and even by the group’s own footnotes in the one study it conducted.

Besides receiving a reported $7.4 million from Soros’ Open Society Institute since 2000, the Brennan Center was also the recipient of grants from

the Joyce Foundation from 2000 to 2003. President Obama served on the Joyce board from 1994 through 2002.


America Votes, "whose mission is to build a permanent progressive campaign infrastructure," donated $100,000 to OVOF. Dollars flowed in from every conceivable activist group in the country, including AARP, SEIU, AFL-CIO, ACLU, Education Minnesota, Planned Parenthood, and the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits.

Of course, all the donors had one thing in common -- they want something from the taxpayer. And that's worth preserving -- even if it means the most lax election laws in the nation. Yes, you need an ID to buy Sudafed, but to vote in Minnesota, a close "friend" can merely vouch for up to 15 people on election day.

As John Fund and Hans Von Spakovsky chronicle in their new book "Who's Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk," Democratic get-out-the-vote groups in Minneapolis apparently vouched for persons they didn't know in 2010. In fact, when one felon who voted illegally for Al Franken in 2008 was asked if she thought it helped, her reply was, "I don't know, but I hope it did.

Groups such as the League of Woman Voters, Common Cause and the ACLU (which sought unsuccessfully to block Minnesotans from even voting on the measure)



Maybe that’s why in 2008 the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision written by liberal lion Justice John Paul Stevens, upheld Indiana’s voter ID requirement for the simple reason that the law “is amply justified by the valid interests in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.’ ”

On election night 2008, Minnesota’s Senate race had Norm Coleman the victor by some 726 votes. By the time county officials, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, the State Canvassing Board and a Ramsey County District Court all took a closer look, Al Franken was up by roughly 312. The thousand-vote swing required nearly every new tally — fought over duplicate ballots, missing votes and absentee rejections — to break in favor of Franken.

Assuming the Minnesota DFL just got lucky, it is nevertheless easy to see (especially since Franken’s victory allowed a filibuster-proof Democratic majority to pass President Obama’s controversial agenda) how even a small amount of voter fraud in elections this close can and do make a difference.



Election Day Registrants=EDRs: In the 2008 presidential election over 545,000 EDRs voted, about 20% of the actual number of voters. After the election the State could not verify if over 48,000 EDRs actually were eligible to vote on that previous election day. It happened again in the 2010 non-presidential election. The State claims no duty to verify EDRs.  In the controversial 2008 election where Al Franken defeated Norm Coleman for a seat in the U.S. Senate by 312 votes, as previously mentioned, the State reported 542,257 EDRs that were unconfirmed on election day when their ballots were counted.37 For each of the 312 votes counted as the margin of victory, there were 1,738 unconfirmed EDRs. After the election, the State and counties attempted to confirm all reported EDRs. Public records reveal that as a result of the post-election confirmation process, the State and counties were unable to confirm 48,545 EDRs or 155 EDRs for each of the 312 votes counted as the margin of victory.38

In a similar vein, through a study of government records completed by Minnesota Majority, http://minnesotamajority.org/       the organization submitted to authorities from the 2008 election 2,803 suspected ineligible voters for investigation.47 The study found that while some ineligible felon voters registered before the election, “the overwhelming majority who evaded detection used Election Day Registration, which currently has no mechanism to detect and prevent ineligible voters48 from voting on election day and having their ballots counted before their eligibility to vote is confirmed.





Jesus is intervening and interceding!  Experiences of several Muslims who came to faith in Jesus through a dream or vision:  A radical Egyptian terrorist changed from a murderous “Saul” to a forgiving “Paul” after Jesus Christ visited him in a soul-penetrating dream. This hater of both Christians and Jews set out to discredit the Bible, but instead, he was transformed when Jesus appeared to him and changed his heart.  We are still God’s eyes, hands and feet needing to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ to save the souls of anyone we love and care about.









Mitt Romney had a huge advantage with voters in areas that should force the President to rethink his in-your-face strategy. In several of those exit poll questions, voters gave Romney a double-digit edge over the President in categories like "shares my values," (55-42%), "is a strong leader" (61-38%) and "has a vision for the future" (54-45%). Americans also thought Mitt was more qualified to handle the economy (49-48%) and the deficit (49-47%).

As disappointing as the election outcome was, it wasn't a mandate. A little more than two million votes separate the two candidates in the popular vote, and, as John Podhoretz points out, they aren't even done counting. "It's a little noticed fact that in two weeks following every presidential election, votes will continue to be reported... by the millions." A lot of these are military, provisional, and absentee ballots that could break the Governor's way. So the idea that waging a close and bitter campaign that divides the country somehow gives the President a blank check is ridiculous.   Michael Barone hinted at this on Tuesday in his column, "America Is Two Countries, Not on Speaking Terms." "One America tends to be traditionally religious, personally charitable, appreciative of entrepreneurs, and suspicious of government. The other tends to be secular or only mildly religious, less charitable on average, skeptical of business, and supportive of government as an instrument to advance liberal causes... Now the two Americas disagree, sharply." And for four years, President Obama's administration has done more to widen the gulf than bridge it. He spent his first term as the leader of one America--and chief antagonist of the other. So, as far as I'm concerned, this election isn't a mandate--it's a second chance. Unfortunately for Mitt Romney, it still wasn't enough to overcome the massive turnout by Democratic Hispanics, African-Americans, and young people. "Of white evangelicals specifically," Ed Morrissey writes, "turnout was steady at 26% of the electorate from four years ago and Romney took 78% of the vote compared to just 74% for McCain." Apart from how people self-identify (as either Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, etc.), weekly church attendance was another key statistic. Forty-two percent of this year's voters worship weekly (compared to 40% in 2008) with Romney capturing 59% of that vote compared to John McCain's 55%.   For FRC and FRC Action, those numbers help validate all the work and miles we logged to increase values voter turnout.


Noah Webster on the Right and Responsibility to Vote:

When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, "just men who will rule in the fear of God." The preservation of government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws.  Noah Webster, 1758-1843, Advisor to the Founding Fathers, statesman, educator, lexicographer and author of Webster's Dictionary. History of the United States (New Haven: Durrie & Peck, 1832), pp. 336-337, 349.




The late Reverend Richard Wurmbrand spent 14 years as a prisoner of the Communist government in Romania , where he was persecuted for his faith in Jesus Christ. His experience led him to spend further years researching Karl Marx and the Communist doctrines he developed. While Communism portrays itself as a noble endeavor for the good of mankind, and claims an Atheistic view, Wurmbrand exposes its true roots, revealing that Karl Marx and the fathers of the modern Communist/Socialist movements were inspired by the powers of darkness.  By examining the confessions, writings, and poetry of Marx and his followers, the author demonstrates how the "prince of darkness" gave these men the "sword" by which they have terrorized the nations. Wurmbrand proves that this movement is not simply the work of greedy men, hungry for wealth and power, but is "after the working of Satan" with the intent of destroying mankind.


Moses Hess, original name Moritz Hess    (born January 21, 1812, Bonn [Germany]—died April 6, 1875, Paris, France), German journalist and socialist who influenced Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels





a group of the world's elite who meet once a year at a luxury hotel and decide how they will run the world. It's believed they plan to thin out the population through disease and vaccines. Jesse Ventura infiltrates the Bilderberg Group.
Jesse is hot on the trail of The Bilderberg Group, a collection of the world's elite who meet every year to, as the theory goes, decide how it will run the world. As Ventura tries to infiltrate this secret society he discovers a plot against him, but he is not the only one they are after. Jesse exposes some of the cabal's most well-known and powerful members, and you'll find out how both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are involved.  Their current alleged sinister plot is to dramatically thin out the world's population. Ventura and his team will reveal the cunning methods, involving disease and vaccinations, The Bilderberg Group may use to enact their "soft kill" plan. If you're wondering why you've never even heard of this secret society, it's because the people who control the mainstream media are heavily involved.




Jesus Daily” maintains the number one spot for a second week in a row, with “The Bible” close behind at second




Barack Obama has been re-elected for a second term. Right about now, Republicans need to ask themselves, “What went wrong?” How could Obama have won? His track record was abysmal. The economy is tanking, unemployment continues to rise, civil government debt has reached a level from which we will probably never be able to recover, foreign relations in the Middle East have only become more treacherous… On almost every issue upon which Obama campaigned, he has proven worse than his predecessor. Yet he has been elected for a second term. Why?

Let’s look at the numbers. The race was almost split 50/50. Obama got less than one percent of the votes more than Mitt Romney. Of interest, libertarian Gary Johnson got right at one percent. Gary who? Right. How did a guy with almost no presence during the primaries get one percent of the votes? The only other Libertarian to get this much traction was Ed Clark in 1980 with 1.1 percent. But this wasn’t so much a victory for the Libertarian Party as it was a loss for the GOP. How did Gary Johnson get so many votes? Ron Paul. Sorry, but that’s just the truth.

Most disillusioned Ron Paul supporters chose either to not vote, to vote for Gary Johnson, or to write in Ron Paul even though such a vote would be largely symbolic. But before you start talking about how lame Ron Paul fans are, let’s really assess this issue.  Tea Party candidates in the Senate lost big this election. Joe Walsh, Allen West, and Michele Bachmann lost their seats in the Senate. Akin and Mourdock, as expected (or ensured), also lost. Almost all the members of the GOP who operated on a principled conservative Republican “Tea Party” platform did poorly this election. Why? Because the party establishment abandoned them. The Tea Party didn’t cause the split. The Tea Party represents the majority of active grassroots Republicans. The GOP power brokers caused the split. And they added insult to injury by pretending like they didn’t need the Tea Partiers any more. Say what you will, but the GOP is going through a major identity crisis. And I think it’s choosing to become Mr. Hyde. Romney wasn’t the voters’ first choice. He was the GOP establishment’s first choice. Let’s not kid ourselves on that one. And this is the same group that gave us McCain. Remember that guy? He was “electable” too. When will we ever learn?



Let the gridlock continue.  A 50/50 Nation voted to tack two more years of gridlock onto the two we’ve just endured by sending the undocumented White House usurper back to the White House along with a divided legislative branch.  The margin was a razor-thin 1.5 million votes out of more than 110 million cast. In his victory speech, Obama doubled down on his vacuous and Marxist-inspired slogan: “Forward.” Why anyone wants to continue forward with unemployment above 20 percent, rising food stamp rolls, inflation, a bottom-bouncing housing market, money printing and drone wars is beyond me.

Of course, when you consider the alternative was essentially a clone of the incumbent, why not stay with the horse you’re familiar with?

Republicans pinned their hopes on a disgruntled Democratic electorate and an “anybody-but-Obama” mindset. But putting a progressive candidate up against another progressive was not a winning strategy in 2008. It wasn’t this time either.  Already, the talking heads are laughingly blaming Romney’s conservatism. The Tea Party/conservative wing is blaming his liberalism.

Conservative voters — duped by the neocons into supporting Pax Americana and subverting American foreign policy to Israel — no longer have a home. Their ideas are rejected by the GOP, and they reject the libertarians and anti-imperialist, sound-money conservatives.

Meanwhile, the entitlement class grows. Obamacare has been set in stone. Several States, including my home State of Alabama, voted to nullify it. But as the U.S. Supreme Court has as little regard for the Constitution as the political class, there is little chance that any efforts to stand up to Federal overreach will succeed.

So here’s what’s next: sequestration, the fiscal cliff and the debt limit must be dealt with by a lame-duck Congress. That means tax increases or default (neither Democrats nor Republicans will cut spending). Then Obamacare taxes kick in in 2014.

Obamacare will lead to job losses. Physicians are saying they’ll have to close their doors. Employers are saying they will cut workers’ hours rather than pay the additional taxes.

The war on coal, oil and natural gas will continue. Obama’s EPA will continue its unfettered assault on fossil fuels.

Green crony capitalism will continue. Obama will continue to pump money into doomed green industries, ignoring that wind will not power the millions of gasoline engines tooling down the Nation’s highways.

Drone wars will continue. Obama has made it clear Congress is irrelevant. The anti-war left is silent.

It will be interesting to watch what the GOP does with Obama scandals Fast and Furious and Benghazi, Libya. Obama and his Attorney Criminal Eric Holder have clearly lied to Congress and the American people about these two scandals. People died and Obama lied.




“Obama’s victory demonstrates that the state of Israel must take care of its own interests,” Danon said. “We cannot rely on anyone but ourselves. Obama has hurt the United States by his naïve leadership in foreign policy, which prefers the Arab world over the Western world, along with Israel. The state of Israel will not capitulate before Obama.”









the GOP's finger-pointing at social conservatives has already begun.

Despite the devastation, there is no reason to apologize, back away from, or rethink what we stand for. If anything, this election emphasizes our mission and what FRC has said all along: the way to renew our nation's commitment to those founding principles is through the church's transformation of hearts and minds. That requires us standing as salt and light through some of the bleakest times in our nation. Despite being outspent 8-to-1 in some of the most liberal states in the country, we witnessed record-setting petition efforts that crossed every racial, party, and socioeconomic divide. And while homosexuals may be celebrating an end to our movement's perfect record, they still have a long way to go to match the 32 states where Americans voted overwhelmingly to protect the union of a man and woman. And that includes North Carolina, where President Obama's endorsement of same-sex "marriage" likely cost him the state's electoral votes.

In a glimmer of good news on the marriage front, the support for marriage in these four states actually out-polled Mitt Romney, who won 48% of the popular vote. In the weeks and months ahead, we're confident that as voters see and experience the consequences of redefining marriage, many will reconsider their support. How can I be so certain? Forty years after Roe v. Wade, the nation is more pro-life, and the abortion issue is far from settled. As with same-sex "marriage," the Left can make it legal, but they can never make it right.

Hopefully, part of that reevaluation will include a renewed focus on the party's conservative core. Most of Tuesday's brightest spots were victories by principled, pro-family leaders like Senator-elect Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Senator-elect Deb Fisher (R-Nebr.), Congressman-elect Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), Steve King (R-Iowa), and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)--all of whom were championed by the FRC Action PAC. In two years, there will be a political opportunity to embolden and provide allies for these who stand for life, marriage, religious liberty, and limited government.

Until then, our mission is as critical as ever. It's time to get up, dust ourselves off, and trust in God's ability to work in dire situations. "Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation," writes the Psalmist, "When his breath departs he returns to earth; on that very day his plans perish. Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord ..." (146:3-5). We do not serve victory; we serve God. And to Him, in these anxious times, we turn.




Where's the mandate?

In this year's campaign, Obama didn't do much to establish a policy mandate for his victory. Instead, he and his allies focused in large part on undermining Romney, depicting him as a heartless corporate raider with little empathy for the lives of most Americans.  It worked. In surveys of voters as they left polling places, one in five voters said the most important quality in determining their vote was that the candidate "care about people like me;" they broke by 4-1 for Obama. Three in 10 said the most important quality was having "a vision for the future;" a majority of those supported Romney.

"It is not as though the president announced an ambitious second-term agenda," says William Galston, a former White House domestic-policy adviser to President Clinton. "He may have one in mind, but he has not done much to share it with the American people."

Second terms have been notoriously unkind to modern presidents.  After George W. Bush won a second term in 2004, the public turned against the Iraq war and derided his administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina; he saw the economy sink into a crisis. Bill Clinton's second term was defined by the Monica Lewinsky scandal that led to his impeachment. Ronald Reagan managed to push through a tax overhaul in his second term, but he also became enmeshed in Iran-contra.




We have learned that if you put $1 billion behind a campaign of cynicism, racial division, class warfare, and extreme pettiness an incumbent with one of the worst records in modern times can barely squeak into a second term.  And with such a narrow and demeaning “win,” what exactly does Barack Obama think he has achieved?

Well, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, he gets nice public housing for another four years.  And, of course, there will be plenty of golf and parties and trips.  But what does he hope to achieve for the American people, what does he think this campaign of small-things gets him?

The answer, oddly enough, is not in his hands.  Under normal circumstances, a re-elected President can direct the debate.  He has set out an agenda or has done so well in the first term that the country simply wants “more of the same.”  Nobody – and I mean nobody – wants four more years of the same inane, vapid socialism of Obama’s first term.  But, if Obama cannot determine the course we take, who does?  That answer is yet to be decided.  The reason the issue is in doubt is because we do not yet know what the Republicans in Congress will do.  They have a very real choice.  The Republicans can surrender to Obama, collaborate with his regime and institutionalize his radical, leftist agenda.


A majority of Americans chose the path of 18th century Frenchmen and 1930 Germans last night. A majority chose to vote for “revenge,” for redistribution of wealth, for abortion on demand, for abandoning Israel and for “leaning forward” in front of Dan Savage and Vladimir Putin. A majority of Americans chose to steal from their neighbors, their neighbor’s children and their own children (if they haven’t aborted them) to pay for their condoms, Skippy Peanut Butter, lottery tickets and Band-Aids. A majority turned a deaf ear to the cries from Benghazi. A majority closed the drapes on Israel and those Russian nuclear subs off our coast. A spatter of blue paint on a mostly red country shows where the cancer has spread and the metropolitan areas have opted-out of arduous freedom for the ease of complacent servitude.

There are certain realities that can’t be ignored, among them is that America’s new fiscal policy will be “eat the rich” and “there will be blood.” Liberals project their sins on their enemies so the constant harping on Nixon’s enemies list will play out in the threats of Valerie Jarrett that after the election: “it will be payback time.” The IRS will bludgeon the President’s enemies and threat of constant audit will mute his enemies.

The patriot’s creed is God, family, and country … we still have God and family and those are the foundations that we begin with. God reserves his choicest warriors for the gravest of battles and he has chosen us to stand fast on His hallowed ground in the most critical battle in American History and quite possibly in world history. I ask all of my brothers and sisters to remember that God has one message for the believer whether we are in adversity or prosperity, in freedom or in bondage – “The Just Shall Live By Faith!” The question is no longer “can America survive,” the new question is “can the righteous survive America?”





1. Paul Ryan? A good conservative, Ryan was unqualified for the job of vice president, (even though Joe Biden is???) and therefore the job of president. A sitting member of Congress, he held no leadership position on the Hill.   With his VP pick Romney had the opportunity to show he was willing to reach out to middle voters and break out of the GOP's demographic box (think Rubio, West, Nevada's Brian Sandoval, or New Mexico's Susana Martinez) or pick a Republican heavyweight who exuded gravitas while potentially giving him a state (think Rob Portman? or Tim Pawlenty?).
2. The Ryan Plan? Romney had endorsed Ryan's plan for Medicare even before he tapped him as a running mate. But by selecting Ryan, he was nailing the odious plan to the masthead of his campaign.  Ryan's plan, which first called for abolishing federal Medicare in 10 years and later for a substitute voucher program, proved to be disastrous for Romney and other Republican candidates.   As far as I could see, the Ryan plan was the No. 1 policy focus of Obama's and other Democratic attack ads against the GOP. (even though the Democrats have NO plan to save Medicare, Social Security etc.., We were unable to attack back w/ What’s your plan???  Was Trump right about keeping this under wraps until after elected, keep the focus on the other party’s plan &/or lack thereof??)
3. The Myth of a “Base Election.” Romney totally bought into the notion that this was an election about energizing the conservative base. He seems to have ignored the fact that the base was already highly energized because of its dislike of Barack Obama.  This election was just like every other one in modern times — about winning middle, swing voters. We used to call them Reagan Democrats but the better label today is Clinton Democrats.   Romney did much to annoy them (like backing the Ryan plan) and almost nothing to reach out to them, "triangulating" so to speak with ideas that showed the GOP cared about them.
4. The Plan.
Along the lines of triangulating, Romney needed to espouse several simple ideas that explained what he would do if elected president AND how that benefits them.  The five point plan AND HOW that benefits voters.

 5. Crushing Optimism. When, in 1980, Ronald Reagan put the GOP on the path of optimism and economic growth, he not only won two landslide elections, he also changed the political landscape for three decades.  When Romney did offer a plan, it was about "hard truths," such as tackling the deficit, cutting the debt, cutting the budget (killing Big Bird), and cutting Medicare.  We needed more of his 5 point plan and how that would help voters and the people they care about.
6. Poor Campaign Staff. Considering that Romney's presidential quest was the best funded Republican race in history, his campaign staff was certainly not the best money could buy.  The Romney staff was insular and arrogant, and his campaign strategy team led by Stu Stevens and Russ Schriefer was simply abysmal.
7. No “Gingrich” Ads Against Obama. Residing in a battleground state, Florida, I had a front-row seat to Romney's ad war on Obama. I was shocked how few ads the campaign was airing over the summer and how many Obama’s campaign was.
Meanwhile, Obama's ads were nasty, negative ones, while Romney's were of the kinder, gentler, country-club Republican variety.   I asked a high-level Romney operative why the Republicans were spending $2.5 million to build a wooden stage for the Tampa convention and not putting the money into ads.   The answer: The Romney camp believe people don't remember ads until close to the election. The sea of Romney ads never did emerge that September.  I thought perhaps this was just the Florida strategy. But then I read a shocking report in Broadcasting & Cable, the respected TV industry publication.   By late September Romney's campaign had not even run a single TV ad in several key markets in swing state Ohio! And the magazine reported that because Romney's campaign was not planning its ad buys properly, they were often paying five to 10 times more than Obama was paying for the same ad spot.


I think it's Providential that we're just weeks away from the release of the strongest pro-marriage argument ever written, praised by the likes of Rick Warren and Cardinal Dolan!   What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense, written by NOM co-founder and Princeton professor Robert P. George along with Sherif Girgis and Ryan T. Anderson, is the best short, accessible argument for marriage as a union of man and woman. Their 2010 article on marriage was an instant international success, cited worldwide as the toughest, most eloquent pro-marriage argument out there. They've expanded and enhanced it for this book, further developing key arguments and responding to critics.

The book offers a devastating critique of all the pro-gay marriage arguments, which no one has been able to answer. Use it to challenge friends and coworkers who think "history is on their side."  Finally, it demolishes the usual objections to our cause—points about infertility, interracial marriage, equality, freedom, same-sex couples' practical needs, separation of Church and state, and much more.

And it's very affordable—just $9.92 on Amazon! Buy it now, "like" its Facebook page, and invite your friends and family to do the same.




Rep. Michele Bachmann, a Tea Party favorite who ran for the GOP presidential nomination, survived her toughest race yet, beating Democrat Jim Graves to earn her fourth term in the U.S. House.  Bachmann, faced a tougher-than-expected challenge in Minnesota's 6th District from Graves, a millionaire hotel executive



Saratoga Springs Mayor and rising star in the Republican Party Mia Love lost her bid for a Utah seat in the House of Representatives to Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) in highly contested race.

Matheson defeated Love by less than 3,000 votes, but was able to edge out his opponent with 49 percent of the vote.  Love, who is an African-American Mormon, burst into the national spotlight after her fiery speech at the Republican National Convention in August. She was hoping to become the first female African-American GOP congresswoman and was favored by many to win.







The former CEO should welcome the opportunity to compare his record in venture capitalism (starting and saving businesses, creating tens of thousands of net jobs, and delivering "superb" profits for Bain's investors -- including public pension funds and education endowments) with Obama's record in what Jim DeMint calls venture socialism. 

Obama borrowed $825 Billion from China and future US taxpayers to fund a stimulus program that has failed on the very criteria he established to measure its success.  One major flop was Solyndra, a misadventure that is particularly offensive for its cronyism, lawlessness, waste, and eventual pitiful attempts at blame shift. 

Mitt Romney excelled at managing and investing the money that other people voluntarily entrusted to him.  Barack Obama has proven himself to be a truly horrendous steward of the money people are compelled by law to fork over to the government he runs.  Rising unemployment, and $5 Trillion in new debt -- with no plan to handle the crisis.  Staples vs. Solyndra.  A pillar of private sector enterprise vs. a $535 million consequence of the bloated, unaccountable, corrupt public sector. 




The statement and its signatories are available at www.EconomistsforRomney.com. The statement begins, “We enthusiastically endorse Governor Mitt Romney’s economic plan to create jobs and restore economic growth while returning America to its tradition of economic freedom.”  The Economists for Romney statement concludes, “In sum, Governor Romney’s economic plan is far superior for creating economic growth and jobs than the actions and interventions President Obama has taken or plans to take in the future. This November, voters will make a fundamental choice between differing visions of America’s economic future.”  Economists for Romney enjoys wide support. Many of the economists signing the statement have received the profession’s highest honors for their academic work. http://economistsforromney.com/            




Leno continued, “A new survey out today shows how much time we waste every day in our lives. For example, we waste seven minutes in line every time we go to get coffee, 28 minutes getting through airport security, four years waiting for Obama to do something about the economy. Every year, we waste a lot. We wasted a lot of time.”






Paul Ryan’s speech at the Republican National Convention: “Without a change in “leadership”, why would the next four years be any different from the last four years?”



Do newspaper endorsements mean what they used to?  Maybe not.  But Mitt Romney has over one hundred of them, which is an impressive feat for a Republican.  However, Romney’s ability to convert editorial board’s away from their decisions to endorse President Obama four years ago is truly impressive.

To date, twenty-eight large newspapers have decided to drop their endorsement record with President Obama and put their chips all in on Romney.  The blunt explanations for their decisions often gives way to some blistering critiques of President Obama, leaving the reader no doubt why these papers lost their faith over the last four years.  According to Editor & Publisher, Republican Mitt Romney is stunning the newspaper world, earning 112 endorsements from editorial boards around the country compared to the President’s 84.  Most large market newspapers like the The New York Times and The Washington Post have stuck with Obama, but have ran less than glowing assessments of his accomplishments.  So while a newspaper endorsement may not mean what it once did,  these conversions could be telling of a national trend.



Dick Morris: Stop Obama's 'Photo Op' Presidency










Blame Shifter in Chief.







Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in Peru saying the buck in all this stops with her. (Note: We suggested this back on September 18 -- when we called for the Secretary's resignation.)   The issue: Funding Sharia .

There on Al Jazeera (now posted in three parts on YouTube here, here, and here) sits one Musa Ismail Obama, the Kenyan cousin of the President of the United States, calmly telling the interviewer in fluent Arabic (English translation gracing the screen) that Barack Obama's "Granny Sarah" is using the Obama name to raise money to fund Sharia educations. 

Sharia (alternately spelled with and without the last "h"), described thusly by the Center for Security Policy (in its study Shariah: The Threat to America -- An Exercise in Competitive Analysis) as a "totalitarian socio-political doctrine" and by Conrad Black as "Islam's totalitarian legal system." In shorthand, this is the religious doctrine of Islam. Relentlessly demanded by the Muslim Brotherhood and now governing both Iran and Saudi Arabia while closing in on Egypt -- Sharia is far more than a religious doctrine. It tells non-Muslims they have three choices:


  1. Convert to Islam
  2. Submit to Sharia as second-class citizens
  3. Be killed.









If you believe God puts rulers into power, you’re correct, but He uses people in order to do that. The reason Christianity-attacking Democrats win elections is because Christians don’t vote in as large of a number as they ought to. It is not God Who gives us the notion that we should not vote, but the Devil. If you’re a Christian, it’s your duty to vote.
A vote for anybody but Romney is a giant leap away from Libertarianism, because if Obama wins, kiss Libertarianism goodbye for good; Obamacare will be here to stay.





"But I am saying that you need to think and pray very carefully about your vote, because a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy."

CHICAGO — Joining the chorus of Roman Catholic clergy in Illinois criticizing President Barack Obama before next week's election, Peoria Bishop Daniel Jenky ordered priests to read a letter to parishioners on Sunday before the presidential election, explaining that politicians who support abortion rights also reject Jesus.  In the letter, Jenky cautions parishioners that Obama and a majority of U.S. senators will not reconsider the mandate that would require employers, including religious groups, to provide free birth control coverage in their health care plans. "This assault upon our religious freedom is simply without precedent in the American political and legal system," Jenky wrote.






Pro Choice on light bulbs, salt, food, ultra sounds, schools, right to work…?????


















Cougar Town - The difference between Democrats and Republicans





GM “success” story???





http://www.dailypaul.com/172403/ron-paul-freeze-the-budget-and-stop-plundering-the-american-people          A balanced budget is similarly simple and within reach if Washington had just a tiny amount of fiscal common sense. Our revenues currently stand at approximately $2.2 trillion a year and are likely to remain stagnant as the recession continues. Our outlays are $3.7 trillion and projected to grow every year. Yet we only have to go back to 2004 for federal outlays of $2.2 trillion, and the government was far from small that year. If we simply referred to that year’s spending levels, which would hardly do us fear, we would have a balanced budget right now. If we held the line on spending and the economy actually did grow as estimated, the budget would balance on its own by 2015 with no cuts whatsoever.We pay 35% more for our military today than we did 10 years ago for the exact same capabilities. The same could be said for the rest of the government. Why has our budget doubled in 10 years? This country doesn’t have double the population or double the land area or double anything that would require the federal government to grow by such an obscene amount.In Washington terms a simple freeze in spending would be a much bigger cut than any plan being discussed. If politicians simply cannot bear to implement actual cuts to actual spending, just freezing the budget would give the economy the best chance to catch its breath, recover and grow.
 http://wildervisions.com/2011/07/former-virginia-governor-put-the-people-first/     Former Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder, Democrat, didn’t raise taxes and had to cut services in a way that did not affect the poor.  This is what experience with real Hope and Change sounds and looks like. 





NBC’s Matt Lauer on Feb. 1, 2009, just days after hispresidency began --Obama said it was up to him to turn the economy around in three years, and if not, he doesn’t deserve a second term. Here’s the transcript of the relevant portion:
Lauer: "At some point will you say,`Wait a minute. We've spent this amount of money, we're not seeing the results.We've got to change course dramatically.’ "
Obama: "Yeah, look, I'm at the start of my administration.One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I've got four years and...
Lauer: "You're going to know quicklyhow people feel about what's happened."
Obama: "That's exactly right. Andyou know, a year from now I think people are going to see that we're starting tomake some progress. But there's still going to be some pain out there.If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition."
Obama’s last phrase -- "there's going to be aone-term proposition" -- is a little awkward, but we don’t think there’s muchdoubt about his meaning.We understand his comment to mean that if theeconomy isn’t better in three years, the voters might make him a one-termpresident.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/29/michele-bachmann/michele-bachmann-uses-barack-obamas-one-term-presi/Things aren't going great for Obama right now, but thatcan always change -- as Obama himself noted in thatABCinterview of early 2010."When your poll numbers drop, you are an idiot," Obama said then.

Proverbs29:16(Contemporary English Version)16 Crime increases when crooks are in power, but law-abiding citizens will see them fall.http://www.grassfire.com/http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/



POPVOX verifies, aggregates, and simplifies communication with Congress on an open and trusted (and nonpartisan) common ground. Advocacy organizations, trade associations, unions and other groups send their members to POPVOX to take action on bills pending before Congress. Congressional staff and lawmakers log into POPVOX to measure the pulse of their district. POPVOX provides a curating interface for anyone — including Congressional staff, the public and the media — to access and understand the voice of the people.         https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/sconres44



At ActRight we work every day to make it possible foryou to support your favorite conservative candidates and causes. Our goal hasalways been to lift you up and make your voice heard. ActRight means that youdon't need to be blessed with great wealth or power to make a difference. Allyou need is a computer. We never tell you what to care about or who to support.We put the decision in your hands and amplify your voice. Today we have excitingnews to share with you -- we have launched theActRightAction Center!Starting now, you havea single place where you canfind all thetop conservative action alerts and petitions. We willcontinually gather these actions from all over the conservative world and putthem at your fingertips. Everyday, in five minutes you can make a hugedifference on a number of issues. You can even add actions for others to pluginto.Check it outand let us know what youthink.

and let us know what youthink.



Tell Congress: Less Welfare, More Work! Tell Your Senator: Stop the EPA's War on Jobs  More Jobs, Not Onerous Regulations

More Action items-Be Represented!



My colleagues and I understood that we needed to do something major to win the media war against liberals.   That's why we created the Saunders Center with the goal of moving American public opinion to understand and support conservative principles and reject bankrupt big-government, liberal policies. Click here to find out how the Saunders Center will help restore conservative principles to America and what role you can play.

 http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46239 Comedian Jon Stewart (Democrat tendenciesaside) suprisingly brought Obama's Solyndra scandal to hisDailyShowaudience yesterday, and did a fine job ofexplaining it to a sizable audience that might have been hearing the details forthe first time. Every now and then, you hear stories about how a shockingnumber of young people get their news from theDaily Show. Stewart’slagging a few days behind high-information observers of the political scene, buthe just helped quite a few people catch up, and produced a really funny segmentin the bargain.The best comedy is funny in different ways, when viewedfrom different angles. When Stewart talks about Solyndra as a “tailor-madescandal,” he’s zinging Obama critics, but delivering a far sharper jab to thePresident for living down to the lowest expectations of hisdetractors.Using this example, now you know why Obama and theDemocrats’ $800 Billion plus supposed “Stimulus” did not work, except to linethe pockets of unions and billionaire businessmen who support Democrats. Maybethe time for blaming Bush and the Republicans for the Obama and Democratfailures are over??

Deuteronomy 16:18-20 (New International Reader's Version)  Appoint Judges and Officials  18 Appoint judges and officials for each of your towns. Do it in every town the Lord your God is giving you. They must judge the people fairly. 19 Do what is right. Treat everyone the same. Don't take money from people who want special favors. It makes those who are wise close their eyes to the truth. It twists the words of those who do what is right. 20 Follow only what is right. If you do, you will live. You will take over the land the Lord your God is giving you.


2 Thessalonians 3:8



  nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you



Live & Practice your biblical values:  vote every election




            Romney Humorously Roasts Obama at Annual Al Smith Foundation Dinner                       









National Taxpayers Union 2012 General Election Ballot Guide: Introduction



Criticism of Barack Obama came from a surprising source Sunday.  Appearing on Meet the Press, former NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw said the President “is going to have to answer for” the explosion in the federal budget deficit that “happened on his watch” (video follows with transcript and commentary):

TOM BROKAW: You know, I think that both campaigns have failed to say to the American public, “This is going to be hard. This is a real crisis in America.” You look at the IMF projections about where the global economy is now. They're saying you have to get your act together. We could be in another recession next year at this time. They've got to level with the American people about everyone's going to have to give something. And there is going to have to be some revenue raised at some point as well. I do think that the governor is right, and we'll expect to hear Governor Romney go after President Obama this time about, “I want more details about your plan. You keep harping on me. I haven't heard the details in your plan as well.” 

(+ What is your plan, Oh Great Obama???  More of the same disastrous plans of your last four years???)
I looked at that debate we that talked about a moment ago, it was playing last night on C-SPAN, and governor [sic], now President Obama was saying, “Look, we've got a deficit of half a trillion dollars. I'm going to get that under control.” Well, this week, that deficit is $1.1 trillion and it happened on his watch. (+ a Trillion dollars plus borrowed and overspent EACH year for Obama..isn’t Obama great???)  He is going to have to answer for that.



Benghazi-gate Cover up: 

Obama & his Democrats LIED-Americans DIED



E-mails: White House knew of extremist claims in Benghazi attack

By Elise Labott, CNN Foreign Affairs Reporter   updated 9:44 AM EDT, Wed October 24, 2012

Washington (CNN) -- Two hours after the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the White House, the State Department and the FBI were told that an Islamist group had claimed credit, government e-mails obtained by CNN show.

One of the e-mails -- sent from a State Department address to various government agencies -- specifically identifies Ansar al-Sharia as claiming responsibility for the attack on its Facebook page and on Twitter.  The e-mails raise further questions about the seeming confusion on the part of the Obama administration to determine the nature of the September attack and those who planned it.


Father of Slain SEAL: Who Made the Decision Not to Save My Son?



“But now we have beginning of the truth on Benghazi. Five days into the Benghazi scandal when no one was saying anything, I presented a theory. It was a Monday. It was the Monday after. It was six days, the Monday after the attack. And I got on the air and I told you exactly what was happening. I told you that this ambassador was involved in running guns, and he was running guns to Al‑Qaeda in Libya. And he was running guns through Turkey into Syria. And whether it was a deal that went bad, I don’t know. But that’s what happened. And the White House knew. That was six days into it.”  “We continued to further the story, and as everyone else is still arguing about whether it was the videotape or not, we have been furthering the story. Today we have evidence that is staggering. We now have a memo posted from TheBlaze. We now have a memo to the White House two hours after the attacks began. Last night on the TV show I laid it out again on exactly the timeline, exactly what happened when. At 1:00 or 12:54 in the afternoon on September 11th, the White House was warned that there was somebody watching the Benghazi safe house. So you know, do not let any member of the press get away with calling this an embassy safe house. It is not. It was a CIA safe house. Now why, in the most dangerous place, in one of the most dangerous parts of the world on September 11th, when the ambassador knows he’s under attack, the documents now show he wrote the night before and said, “Help me, there’s trouble,” why would he be at a CIA safe house? What was he doing there? I kept asking the question, “What is he doing there. What was he doing there.” We now know he was having dinner with the general counsel of Turkey. Remember that President Obama is good friends with the Turkish ambassador. The Turkish ‑‑ I’m sorry, the Turkish prime minister. Turkey is ‑‑ fancies itself the head of the Caliphate. The Turkish ambassador and Barack Obama, it has been widely reported that that’s really his only real friend in foreign policy. That is the guy he called first when he won the presidency. Not England, not Israel, but the Turkish ambassador. This guy’s ‑‑ this guy’s a Sharia law guy. Not a good guy.”



committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and subcommittee chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, write. “In addition, multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washington.”  The letter outlines 13 security threats over the six months prior to the attack:  (link below…How incompetent are Obama, Clinton and the rest of the Democrat Administration?  What if a Republican had done this? )


“Put together, these events indicated a clear pattern of security threats that could only be reasonably interpreted to justify increased security for U.S. personnel and facilities in Benghazi,” the chairmen write.  The Committee indicated it intends to convene a hearing in Washington on Wednesday October 10, 2012, on the security failures that preceded the attack.



THE PRESIDENT:  Good morning.  Every day, all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation.  Often, they are away from their families.  Sometimes, they brave great danger.

Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi.  Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith.  We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed.  And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.

The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack.  We're working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats.  I've also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world.  And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.

Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths.  We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.  But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence.  None.  The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts. Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya.  Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans.  Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died.

It's especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save.  At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi.  With characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries, and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya.  When the Qaddafi regime came to an end, Chris was there to serve as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support this young democracy, and I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there.  He was a role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who aspire to walk in his footsteps. Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is still striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. Today, the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on.  I have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who love them back home. Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacksWe mourned with the families who were lost on that day.  I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed

And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.  As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it.  Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.  Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America.  We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act.  And make no mistake, justice will be done. But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers.  These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity.  They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity. We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children. Thank you.  May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America. END 10:48 A.M. EDT



As the United Nations contemplates international blasphemy laws, responding to the "anti-Mohammed" video and the violence it has supposedly provoked, it is worth noting that the conviction of the punk group Pussy Riot in Russia a few weeks earlier was accompanied by angry denunciations of blasphemy on account of the group's performance in the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Of course the conviction of Pussy Riot was not just about religious outrage, and the violent anti-Americanism manifested in Muslim countries, including the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Libya, was not suddenly created and called forth by a single video. Blasphemy and blasphemy laws have a long history, which is worth considering right now. One of the reasons to be wary of blasphemy laws, besides the limits that they place on freedom of speech, is that they tend to concede the legitimacy of religious outrage in all its fanatical fury, even though the charge of blasphemy has too often been manipulated for political motives.



It does not explain why the White House sent surrogates Jay Carney and UN Ambassdor Susan Rice out repeatedly to insist the attack was a spontaneous reaction to a YouTube video.  On September 14th alone, White House Press secretary mentioned the video more than a dozen times. He was pointedly asked three times if he meant to connect the video to the Benghazi attack and said (the third time): “We have no evidence at this time to suggest otherwise, that there was a pre-planned or ulterior instigation behind that unrest.





Liar in Chief:  Obama’s (Lack Of An) Answer To The Benghazi Question

First, I’m still amazed at what this guy gets away with (would a Republican?). One question was, essentially: was our consulate in Benghazi denied additional security when requested and if so, why? For an answer Obama might as well have given his grandma’s recipe for corn muffins. The President never came close to even attempting an answer to the question asked. What he did say was that he appreciated all of our wonderful ambassadors around the world, which I’m sure was very heartening to everyone.   Neither Romney, nor moderator Candy Crowley, nor any of the commentators afterward were impolite enough to mention the lack of a response. It’s as if this kind of evasive gambit has come to be expected. (Transparency anyone???  Tired of being lied to over and over again???)   And before I totally lose it, will someone point out in a debate that Obama’s entire economic position is based on a patently false assumption: that all we need to do is enact a few Obama spending cuts and tax the rich “a little more” and we can balance the budget and “invest “ more in education, green energy and infrastructure? And that his “millionaires and billionaires” include couples who make $125,000 each? If Obama’s fondest tax fantasies were passed, they would cover only about 5% of the deficit. And was anyone else surprised to learn that he is now a big supporter of coal and oil drilling on federal land?



Glenn could not understand why the White House stuck to the YoutTube excuse for the attacks, nor did he know why a Quick Response Force was not deployed from our base in Sicily to help the attacked Americans or from elsewhere??? He also didn’t understand why Stevens was in Libya to begin with if it was so volatile.  Glenn also reviewed the timeline for the attacks, showing the ample time the military had to not only help once the attack began but to know better than to send the ambassador over there to begin with.  Glenn said that mounting evidence supports a theory he presented on September 17th: That the United States and Ambassador Stevens were providing weaponry to the Libyan rebels to overthrow Ghadaffi. Those guns then fell into the hands of the same radicals who launched the attack on the American embassy in Benghazi. Glenn said there are too many unanswered questions emerging as we get further and further away from the attacks in Libya. Why was Stevens in Libya? Why was he not helped by American troops? Where was President Obama when the attacks were happening? Was he given the e-mails reporting on the attacks? If not, why? Why did the administration continue to push the YouTube story? Why was Hillary the one to take the fall for the attacks? Why has an Islamist sympathizer tied to Iran and CAIR appointed to investigate the Libyan situation? And where is the press holding President Obama accountable?  “I started the show today from the Oval Office because you have to know if you’re President is a crook. You have to know what our President is up to,” Glenn said.  The President of the United States is telling callous, cold, and calculated lies.”




This dwarfs Iran-Contra, about which the media spent three solid years trying to take out Ronald Reagan. The latest shoe to drop in the Benghazi disaster is the news that the State Department was e-mailing about the attack on the consulate and the terrorists who they thought were behind it within two hours, and the e-mails went to the Situation Room of the White House. Obama knew.”  For weeks after the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Obama and his surrogates proffered that the violence was merely an improptu response to an anti-Muslim video.  But reports today from several agencies including Reuters and CBS News reveal the administration knew precisely what was going on almost immediately, courtesy of emails.

“They lied, folks “They knew exactly what happened and who was responsible for it and they knew what was happening. They knew it was not a video, they knew it was not a protest that had gotten out of hand … . It was a preplanned terror attack. There was real-time video of it.”  Limbaugh also scorched Obama for not sending in U.S. military to help the Americans at the consulate:  “The president may not have been aware that he had aircraft carriers in the region that planes land on and take off from and they go out and complete missions and they come back and they land. And we got these things they call submarines. They go under the water so the bad guys can’t see ‘em. They’re in the region, too. We got some naval assets in that region that could have been used.  “They could have been authorized to take action to save the lives of Americans. Remember: Four dead in a seven-hour attack, two of them died in the final hours. This government made not one move, with full knowledge of what was going on, to protect those Americans. We had hundreds of people watching in real time, folks, as 30 Americans were being attacked for seven hours. Nobody rode to their rescue.”  Limbaugh says most of the national media is now ignoring the revelations from the emails.  “What we’re watching here today is the equivalent of Woodward and Bernstein helping Nixon cover up Watergate,” he said. “The mainstream media is Woodward and Bernstein. Watergate is Benghazi.  (NO ONE died in Watergate & the President resigned.) Except this time, Woodward and Bernstein are helping Nixon cover it up.”


Earlier today, Charles Woods, father of Ty Woods, called the White House's explanations for events in Benghazi a "pack of lies" and implied that those in the administration who could have helped, but refused, were guilty of "murder." He added:

My son violated his orders in order to protect the lives of at least 30 people. He risked his life to be a hero. I wish that the leadership in the White House had the same moral courage that my son displayed with his life.

Bombshell: Benghazi Targets Painted, Air Support Overhead - Obama Calls Off Strike




As voters learn more about this fiasco, they are outraged.

Voters are bothered by the fact that the Consulate in Benghazi did not have adequate protection. Voters are bothered that the Ambassador and the consulate personnel did not have a properly functioning security force and safe room. Voters are bothered that the president and his administration did not respond appropriately to the attack and calls for help. Voters are bothered that Obama went to bed on the evening of the attack and got up the next day and conducted business as usual – a short inappropriate speech from the Rose Garden – two days of campaigning in Las Vegas and Colorado – a  fund-raiser in NY City sponsored by Jay-Z and Beyonce – and an appearance on the David Letterman show.  Voters are bothered that the President did not stay at his desk or in the situation room at the White House providing appropriate analysis, leadership and encouragement.

Voters are bothered by the Obama  administration’s attempt to cover-up the Benghazi atrocity and its mismanaged preparation and response. Voters are especially bothered by the arrogance of President Obama during the second debate – looking Governor Romney and the TV cameras in the eye and stating that he was offended by the accusations that he and anyone in his administration were misleading the American people about the cause of the Benghazi attack.



Obama's Benghazi investigator tied to Hamas, Soros


In an astonishing display of media malpractice, CBS News quietly released proof--two days before the election, far too late to reach the media and the public--that President Barack Obama lied to the public about the Benghazi attack, as well as about his later claim to have called the attack "terrorism" from the beginning. CBS unveiled additional footage from its 60 Minutes interview with President Obama, conducted on Sep. 12 immediately after Obama had made his statement about the attacks in the Rose Garden, in which Obama quite clearly refuses to call the Benghazi an act of terror when asked a direct question by reporter Steve Kroft:  Why did CBS release a clip that appeared to back up Obama's claim in the second debate on Oct. 19, a few days before the foreign policy debate, and not release the rest of that interview at the beginning?  

Why on the Sunday before the election, almost six weeks after the attack, at 6 p.m. does an obscure online timeline posted on CBS.com contain the additional "60 Minutes" interview material from Sept. 12?  

Why wasn't it news after the president said what he said in the second debate, knowing what they had in that "60 Minutes" tape -- why didn't they use it then? And why is it taking Fox News to spur other media organizations to take the Benghazi story seriously?  

CBS News, in an effort to assist President Obama's re-election campaign, corruptly concealed information about two critical issues--namely, a terror attack and the president's dishonesty about it. When the players in the Libya scandal face investigation, so, too, should CBS News and those in the mainstream media who have wantonly assisted the administration's shameless lies.







according to Zeifman, they feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.  The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.




Even 60 Minutes legal analyst Andrew Cohen had to admit in the Atlantic, "At Supreme Court, Gay Marriage Foes Make Their Strongest Case Yet."  These brilliant legal minds make a particularly strong case against President Obama's divisive claim that support for our traditional understanding of marriage is like support for racism.  You can read both the DOMA brief and the Prop 8 brief at Prop8Case.com which we've re-launched to keep track of this most important legal fight. Check in frequently for important updates!  In Paul Clement's DOMA brief, the impressive case against President Obama's framing begins on page 49.




During her Senate testimony, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that approximately 25 Americans who were on the ground or who witnessed the terrorist attack in Benghazi were immediately evacuated. Secretary Clinton also revealed that neither she, nor her senior people, debriefed or spoke with those people immediately after the attack, or for months afterward, to understand what happened. When I questioned her about the misinformation disseminated for days by the administration, most notably by Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice on Sunday news programs five days after the attack, Hillary Clinton asked, "What difference does it make?"  If you don't expeditiously debrief the people who witnessed the attack, how can you understand who initiated it, what weapons they used and who may have been involved? How do you initiate a proper response if you don't know what transpired? How do you move properly to protect other American assets and people in the region? How do you know what failures occurred, so that you can immediately correct them, if you have not debriefed the very victims of those failures? And lastly, how do you tell the truth to the American people if you don't know the facts?

Our diplomatic forces in Benghazi were denied the security they repeatedly requested for many months before Sept. 11, 2012. Secretary Clinton stated that she was not told of those desperate requests in the most dangerous region in the world. As a result, our people in Benghazi were ill-prepared to repel or avoid that attack, and four Americans were murdered. For many days after the event, the American people were also misinformed as to the nature and perpetrators of that attack.

In truth, Benghazi is a failure of leadership — before, during and after the terrorist attack.

To answer Secretary Clinton, it does make a difference. It matters enormously for the American public to know whether or not their president and members of his administration are on top of a crisis and telling them the truth.




Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky grills Secretary of State Hilary Clinton on her lapse of leadership resulting in the terrorist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya which resulted in the death of Ambassador Stevens and 3 other Americans.  Deceit, lies, Dereliction of duty. Incompetence.


The exchange on the subject took place with Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

Paul asked Clinton: “Is the U. S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?

“To Turkey?” Clinton asked. “I will have to take that question for the record. Nobody has ever raised that with me.”

Continued Paul: “It’s been in news reports that ships have been leaving from Libya and that may have weapons, and what I’d like to know is the annex that was close by, were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons being transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”

Clinton replied, “Well, senator, you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex. I will see what information is available.”  “You’re saying you don’t know?” asked Paul.  “I do not know,” Clinton said. “I don’t have any information on that.”





fears of another "Blackhawk down" incident as in Somalia under President Clinton or a repeat of the Desert One mission that crashed and burned in the Iranian desert in a failed attempt to rescue our hostages in Tehran in 1980.  After all, according to Richard Miniter's book "Leading From Behind: The Reluctant President and the Advisors Who Decide for Him,"

former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were still fighting six hours into the attack, were "painted" with a laser targeting device as the two repeatedly requested backup support from an AC-130 Specter gunship. AC-130s are commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to support Special Operations teams involved in intense firefights. They are deadly accurate, with little risk of harm to civilians.  The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours, more than enough time for any planes based at Sigonella Air Base in Italy, just 480 miles away, to arrive. According to Fox News, two separate Tier One Special Ops forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators. So who told them to wait?   At least President Carter tried to send help. You didn't. Why? And we don't need some lame excuse about faulty intelligence.



'What troubles me so much is the Benghazi attack in many ways echoes the attacks on both embassies in 1998, when Susan Rice was head of the African region for our State Department," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Wednesday after two hours with our U.N. ambassador. "In both cases, the ambassador begged for additional security."  In both cases, Susan Rice was involved more than she would like to admit.  In the spring of 1998, Prudence Bushnell, the U.S. ambassador to Kenya, sent an emotional letter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright begging for a more secure embassy in the face of mounting terrorist threats and a warning that she was the target of an assassination plot.

The State Department had repeatedly denied her request, citing a lack of money. But that kind of response, she wrote Albright, was "endangering the lives of embassy personnel."

A matter of months later, on Aug. 7, 1998, the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were simultaneously attacked with car bombs. In Kenya, 12 American diplomats and more than 200 Africans were killed.  As in Benghazi, requests for more security were denied, warnings were issued, prior incidents were ignored and Susan Rice went on TV to explain it all.  Within 24 hours, Rice, then assistant secretary of state for African affairs, went on PBS as spokesperson for the administration — just as she was regarding Benghazi when she parroted the administration's false narrative on five Sunday talk shows on Sept. 16, 2012, that Benghazi was caused by a flash mob enraged by an Internet video. Then, as now, she worked for a Clinton.  ( I thought Democrats were so smart?  Can’t they learn from history?)




Even MSNBC calls out Obama lie, but Obama doubles down: Obama is getting hammered by everyone for falsely calling out Mitt Romney on auto-makers and bankruptcy. Obama (LIAR in CHIEF) defiantly called Romney a liar but the facts are on Romney’s side — even David Letterman admitted it.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/10/24/letterman-sore-over-obama-gm-lie    Even Letterman couldn't stomach the lies Obama peddled about Romney during the most recent presidential debate. He even used valuable air time to discuss them with Queen Obama Apologist Rachel Maddow.  DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST: Here's what upset me last night, this playing fast and loose with facts. And the President Obama cites the op-ed piece that Romney wrote about Detroit, “Let them go bankrupt, let them go bankrupt,” and last night he brings it up again. “Oh, no, Governor, you said let them go bankrupt, blah blah blah, let them go bankrupt.” And Mitt said, “No, no, check the thing, check the thing, check the thing.”  Now, I don't care whether you're Republican or Democrat, you want your president to be telling the truth; you want the contender to be lying. And so what we found out today or soon thereafter that, in fact, the President Obama was not telling the truth (LYING) about what was excerpted from that op-ed piece. I felt discouraged.  LETTERMAN: Well, the fact the President is invoking it and swearing that he was right and that Romney was wrong and I thought, well, he's the president of course he's right. Well, it turned out no, he was taking liberties with that.  (LYING once again, Obama’s Standard Operating Procedure…LIES and More LIES..)  Is Letterman getting mentally prepared for a Romney administration? Why bring up the topic with an MSNBC personality in the first place? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/10/24/letterman-upset-and-discouraged-obama-lied-about-romney-wanting-detro           

Instead of backtracking, Obama uses the lie again on the stump – WATCH.  MSNBC brought in Lori Robertson from FactCheck.org and she said Barack Obama was wrong (LIED once again) when he said that Romney did not say the government would provide help to G.M. in a managed bankruptcy. But that hasn’t stopped Obama from repeating the lie at every opportunity.  In his op-ed, Romney wrote this.   

Obamanesia???..No, just more lies from the LIAR in CHIEF.






Billionaire Donald Trump today offered Barack Obama a check for $5 million for his choice of charities if he would produce his college and passport records.  In an announcement that had been promoted on social media for days, Trump released the above video with the offer.

“We know very little about our president,” he said. “I have a deal for the president.”  “If Barack Obama opens up and gives his college records and applications, and if he gives his passport applications and records, I will give to a charity of his choice – inner city children in Chicago, American Cancer Society, AIDS research – anything he wants a check immediately for $5 million,” he said.  Trump set a deadline of 5 p.m. on Oct. 31.  The release, he said, “will end the question and indeed the anger of many Americans. They will know something about their president. Obama will become transparent, like other presidents. So all he has to do to get $5 million for a charity or charities of his choice, is get his colleges to immediately give his applications and records and also to release his passport records.”  Trump said, “When he does that to my satisfaction, if it’s complete, this check is delivered immediately. A lot of people will be very, very happy to see this happen. Frankly, it’s a check I very much want to write.”  “Once caveat: the records must be given by Oct. 31 at 5 o’clock in the afternoon. Mr. President, not only will I be happy, and totally satisfied, but the American people will be happy.”  In a statement that also was posted online, Trump explained Obama is the “least transparent” president ever.













Women: Would you like       a). free birth control        or       b). a job where you could afford your own Trojans?

Vote your lady smarts not your lady parts


https://www.nrlvictoryfund.org/54reasons/           54 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama & his Democrats.







television ads to run nationwide that will counter the Democrat attacks, including our latest punch "Obama Hasn't Built Anything!" This ad will appeal to independent voters, and moderate Democrats -- and expose the facts as to why Obama has failed to fix the economy.

Obama: Romney Is A 'BSer', But 'I Believe My Own BS'




Not everyone will be as aware of the book or movie titled Logan’s Run. It is a good sci-fi story that also, like Atlas Shrugged, contains some prophetic themes that we can currently identify in our culture. Allow me to share a brief synopsis of each of these unique books in order to make some points about our current state of the union.   Atlas Shrugged is about a society that is so “fair minded” and heavily regulated that it becomes increasingly difficult and finally impossible for producers to be successful. In the story, Congress levels the playing field in a way that would make Obama proud. Redistribution is almost a holy word. By law, wealthy, successful people are forced to share what they have worked so hard to acquire. The elected officials went so far as to limit the number of businesses a person could own to only one. Business owners were forced to give up any additional businesses in their portfolio. Congress continued to pass additional legislation in the spirit of fairness and to redistribute whatever the successful people owned. As these measures continued society began to fall apart. Decay set in everywhere.  Finally, society’s producers, led by John Galt, go on strike and begin to disappear. Where they go no one knows. As Galt and his followers bow out, society continues to crumble at an increasing rate. Eventually, everything comes to a grinding halt. 

This book is wordy, but very well written. For those who cannot conquer a tome of this size I recommend they watch the Atlas Shrugged movies. Part one was released in 2011. Part two was recently released and part three is scheduled for release sometime in 2013. There is also the Cliff Notes which is as long as some novels, 133 pages. 

Logan’s Run, written by A.M. Putnam, is a book and film that depicts another future society. It was written in 1967.  In this story, that takes place in the year 2274, society is almost perfect. Citizens live in a domed city, isolated from all that is outside. In fact, no one really knows what is outside. People work little and enjoy all the pleasures of life. There is one little hitch though. Life ends at 30. That’s the bad news. The good news is that Social Security isn’t an issue. 

The main elements of both these futuristic novels are finding uncanny fulfillment in 2012. We have a government that heavily regulates every area of society and the regulations are coming out at a growing rate. In 1936 there were only about 3,000 new regulations issued. In 2011 there were over 80,000 new regulations.  Like in Atlas Shrugged the flood of regulations and massive government regulatory agencies monitoring us, cause us to lose more and more freedom each year. Businesses find it increasingly hard to be profitable while they try to comply with all the red tape. Today’s producers are already holding back and in some cases cutting back as they prepare for higher taxes and Obamacare. In Atlas Shrugged, at the end of the book, the lights of New York go out. There is little motivation for people to try any more. The over regulation and oppressive legislation has taken its toll. Basically, the society is destroyed. Those who could save it are nowhere to be found. John Galt and friends lay low. 

Likewise, today producers are really good guys even though our government, the media, and many brainwashed citizens see them as villainous, greedy, evil people. This attitude, if it continues, will eventually usher in our own pervasive stagnation as it did in Rand’s novel. Whether you personally like them or not, our country needs the Donald Trumps, Steve Wynns, and Steve Jobs. They are our John Galts.  It is likely that because of these people or people like them that you and I have a job. Someone has to take the risks and invest the capital. We should be thankful that they still do. 

Socialism or Communism does not appeal to those of us who know what this country can offer. Who of us wanted to move to the “workers paradise” in the Soviet Union or to Cuba or other communist countries?
Read more:





5 million individuals who should have entered the labor force in the past four years — Obama’s lost generation. It is an appalling state of affairs, and a trend that will not easily be reversed no matter who wins the White House in November.



In fact, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution was not implemented in order that colonials could enjoy their hunting and skeet shooting. Far from it. The Second Amendment came about so that free men could constrain a government bent on tyranny. These Founders knew the heart of man, and they knew that even this Republic would go down the road of despotism eventually. Thomas Jefferson stated that "the tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."  In fact, in 1788 Alexander Hamilton stated:

[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude[,] that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.

Our Founders clearly understood the intent of the Second Amendment, and while I was gladdened to hear Governor Mitt Romney counter in the second debate that we had enough laws in place and that we needed to focus on enforcing those laws, not making new ones, I have to say that American and world history have shown that even the most benign government will soon turn to tyranny. It's a principle of entropy that is proven time and time again.

A people who insist on security to the detriment of liberty deserve neither liberty nor security, according to Benjamin Franklin. Our very own revolutionary war began over the issue of gun confiscation. In 1775, General Gage sent in 700 armed troops to Concord, Massachusetts to confiscate the weapons of the colonists. Seventy armed men stood fast and faced down the British army. It was the shot heard round the world.

We can never legislate ourselves into permanent security. Patriots must ever be on guard for those government intrusions designed to take away our basic rights. Just in the 20th century, history is replete with government confiscation of guns and the results of that confiscation. http://myloc.gov/Exhibitions/CreatingtheUS/interactives/bill_of_rights/HTML/beararms/index.html

An armed citizenry was seen as a bulwark against tyranny. Moreover, Americans undoubtedly were familiar with British efforts to restrict gun ownership in England, Scotland, and particularly Ireland. Where did this idea come from? »

Fourthly. That in article 1st, section 9, between clauses 3 and 4, be inserted these clauses, to wit: . . . "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians were rounded up and slaughtered.
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents were rounded up and slaughtered.
In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were rounded up and slaughtered.



WASHINGTON – A pre-programmed cruise missile not too different from a drone has been proven to be capable of blasting out an EMP-type microwave that was able to destroy personal computers and electrical systems inside a building over which it was flying.

The U.S. Air Force and its contractor Boeing have created the High-powered Microwave Advanced Missile Project, or CHAMP, which was just tested over a Utah desert.  It’s a project of Boeing’s Phantom Works team and the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory Directed Energy Directorate, along with Raytheon Ktech, which supplied the high power microwave, or HPM.  The action of the high power microwave has the same effect as an electromagnetic pulse, or EMP, from either a high-altitude exploded nuclear weapon or a massive solar storm, but not with their intensity.  The cruise missile, which was launched from a U.S. bomber, was pre-programmed to fly over a target and shoot a burst of high power microwaves at a two-story building. It knocked out rows of personal computers and electrical systems which were shown in a video taken of the test.  Following the first target, the cruise missile then was guided to six other targets, resulting in knocking out all electronics.

“In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy’s electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive,” according to Keith Coleman, the CHAMP program manager of Boeing’s Phantom Works.

The weapons are getting more sophisticated. How will you protect your family. Have you considered a hardened structure?

The cruise missile is equipped with a powerful magnetron that produces a massive pulse of microwave radiation. The magnetron is a high-p