Amazon Exclusive: A Q&A with Author Peter Schweizer
- About Us
- Region 2020
- Not Yours to Give
- Love the FairTax
- Declaration of independence
- Kentucky Res. 1798
- Ten Conservative Principles
- GOP reps who Favor AMNESTY
- TMLC: Common Core Resource Page
- Pamphlet: Three Stages of Jihad
- Natural Law and the Legitimate Authority of the United States
- SD and Global Gvrnce
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Marco Rubio’s Immigration Scam: “You Dumb Gringos”
Written by Gary North on June 20, 2013
My old friend M. Stanton Evans has written a report on the immigration bill. What he discusses is not being covered by the media. I have decided to share this with my readers.
He recognizes what this really is: a $50 million slush fund for La Raza.
On first appraisal, the amnesty/immigration bill before the Senate looks pretty bad. On a more careful comb-through, clause by clause, it looks much worse – like a complete disaster. It also looks like a massive venture in deception.
Consider the oft-repeated claim that, under the bill, 11 million plus illegal immigrants now in the U.S. won’t get legal status unless and until the border with Mexico is secure. This claim has been incessantly made by backers of the measure who call it “tough, conservative” legislation.
Thus a former official in the second Bush administration flatly tells us, “the bill’s path to citizenship doesn’t open until the border is secured.” The same claim is made in radio/TV ads in conservative media markets, featuring one-time tea party favorite, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the main Republican spokesman for the bill.
These commercials are funded by a Silicon Valley group calling itself “Americans for a Conservative Direction,” though conservatism isn’t evident otherwise in Silicon Valley political projects, which tilt heavily to Obama. One radio spot says of the bill’s approach, “it all begins with border security,” while a TV commercial featuring Rubio states, beneath his picture, “establish border security first.” Similar claims have been made innumerable times in the run-up to Senate voting.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
The 5-4 ruling rewrites a key tool of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which for five decades has given the federal government unprecedented say in everything from how some states draw their congressional maps to where they place polling locations.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/25/court-past-voting-discrimination-no-longer-held/#ixzz2XFcW9sJ2
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
If the video does not show in your viewer, click HERE.
Friday, June 21, 2013
Also, Republican Rep. Wm. Bloomfield cheers her on.
This year in New Hamshire, the people discover the results of this governmental action in the form of the regional plans for New Hampshire Future. See this website.
Key Vote Alert: "No" on False Border Security Amendments
In the coming days, the Senate will vote on “border security” amendments to the Gang of Eight’s amnesty bill. These amendments are simply talking points disguised as policy and don’t contain any actionable solutions. No matter what the new amendments and their supporters promise in terms of increased border security and enforcement, they will almost certainly not require those enhancements before amnesty is granted to 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the country.
Heritage Action opposes any amendment that fails to take a security-first approach. Amnesty before security guarantees only amnesty.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
USAtoday: America should learn from Europe on wind power
Iain Murray | June 13, 2013
Germany and Spain have been hit by the downside of alternative energy.
As the Department of Energy considers a loan guarantee for the Cape Wind Project in Massachusetts, it should learn from Europe's failed wind energy experiments – and from its own troubled experiences with renewable energy projects.
Germany and Spain are waking up to the inevitable truth about renewable energy, especially offshore wind. They are now realizing the projects cannot survive without subsidies and that they make energy much more expensive to households and businesses. In an age of austerity, they are a luxury even Germany, Europe's economic powerhouse, cannot fully afford any more.
Monday, June 17, 2013
BECK: GOVERNMENT ‘DRAGGING’ US INTO A WAR WE ‘WILL NOT SURVIVE’ IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Jun. 17, 2013 8:30pm | Erica Ritz
The full episode of The Glenn Beck Program, along with many other live streaming shows and thousands of hours of on-demand content, is available on just about any digital device. Get it all with a FREE TRIAL.
- Senate: Farm Bill – Passage
- House: FY 2014 Defense Authorization – Passage
- Senate: U.S. immigration policy
- House: Farm Bill
|Recent Senate Votes|
|Farm Bill – Passage - Vote Passed (66-27, 7 Not Voting)|
The Senate gave overwhelming approval to the five-year reauthorization of farm, conservation, and nutrition programs, setting up a legislative showdown with the House. The final vote, which cleared the measure 66-27, came after two weeks of debate and more than 200 amendments offered on the Senate floor. Seven senators missed the vote because of travel delays. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate bill would cost $18 billion less than the 2008 farm policy law (PL 112-240), which expires Sept. 30. Senators trimmed $4 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food aid to the poor, by requiring that recipients receive a minimum payment of $10 from a heating assistance program to be eligible for SNAP. Nutrition assistance will be a major sticking point with the House version, which cuts SNAP by $20.5 billion. The Senate bill ends $5 billion a year in direct payments made to farmers and landowners, channeling off those funds to create a hybrid of insurance-like plans and other price controls to help farmers protect against steep market drops. It would reduce support for farmers earning more than $750,000 annually, following a study on the effects of implementation. Unlike the House measure, the bill requires subsidized insurance program participants to meet soil and water conservation requirements. It also replaces dairy price support programs with new insurance and a supply management plan to reduce price-depressing supply surpluses. Before passing the bill, the chamber adopted, 48-38, an amendment from Vermont Democrat Patrick J. Leahy that would provide for ultra-high-speed broadband service in a rural Internet pilot program.
Sen. Bill Nelson voted YES
Sen. Marco Rubio voted NO
|Recent House Votes|
|FY 2014 Defense Authorization – Passage - Vote Passed (315-108, 11 Not Voting)|
After voting on a series of amendments, including rejecting one from Adam Smith, D-Wash. to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba by the end of 2014, the House passed this bill authorizing spending on the Defense Department and national security programs for fiscal year 2014. Ignoring the White House administration’s threat to veto the bill, they passed a $638.4 billion measure that includes $85.8 billion for war costs, requirements for the Defense secretary to detail military intervention options in Syria, and new guidelines and harsher penalties for sexual assault in the armed services. Sexual assault amendments from Lois Frankel, D-Fla., and Michael R. Turner, R-Ohio, making it an offense to abuse one’s authority in the chain of command and establishing mandatory minimum sentences of discharge, dismissal and confinement for certain offenses, respectively, were adopted.
Rep. Vern Buchanan voted YES
|U.S. immigration policy - S.744|
This week the Senate will resume consideration of this bill to overhaul the nation’s immigration policy.
Farm Bill - H.R.1947
The House is scheduled to take up its version of the farm bill later this week.
Sunday, June 16, 2013
IMMIGRATION ACTIVISTS MARCH ON KANSAS SECRETARY OF STATE’S HOME, LEAVE BEHIND ‘SHOES OF THE FATHERS THAT HE’S DEPORTED’
Immigration protesters marched on the home of Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach on Saturday, leaving behind a pile of shoes “of the fathers he’s deported.”
Kansas nonprofit Sunflower Community Action said it had 300 activists in front of Kobach’s home, whom they branded the “King of Hate” on Twitter. Kobach was an architect of Arizona’s tough immigration law.
“Every time immigration is tied with Kansas, people automatically think of Kris Kobach, who has made a name for himself and a living off of pushing for self-deportation laws at the national level,” Sulma Arias, executive director of Sunflower Community Action, told the Kansas City Star. “We want the country to know that our values as Kansans move us to common-sense reform with a path to citizenship. Kobach does not represent Kansas values.”
Video posted online showed protesters standing outside the home chanting “Si se puede!” Members of the crowd then filed up to the porch and lined up the shoes.
White House defends high bills for Africa trip
By Dave Boyer-The Washington Times
The White House Friday defended the first family’s upcoming weeklong trip to Africa, which could cost taxpayers up to $100 million, as “great bang for our buck.”
“There will be a great bang for our buck for being in Africa because when you travel to regions like Africa that don’t get a lot of presidential attention, you tend to have very longstanding and long-running impact from the visit,” said Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to President Obama.
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Mark Levin Goes Off on Pro-Amnesty RINO’s Including Jeb Bush, Karl Rove, Others (+video)
Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/06/mark-levin-goes-off-on-pro-amnesty-rinos-including-jeb-bush-karl-rove-marco-rubio-others-video/#ixzz2WOf2voxt
Thursday, June 13, 2013
We are honored to present this introductory message from Martin County's RPOF State Representative, Eric Miller:
The real gang - the PATRIOT 70
Fellow Committee Member:
Below is a story about 70 courageous Republican Patriots. They are standing for truth. As I can tell you from first-hand experience, standing for the truth amongst establishment RINO Republicans can be an exercise that requires all of your will to remain civil. What these men and women are doing is exactly what we expect from our elected leaders. They are forgoing Committee Chairmanships, they are forgoing the possibility of support for legislation they may bring forward. They are actually doing what elected law makers are expected to do, THE RIGHT THING. These Republican leaders need our support.
I am encouraging you to call House Leadership and let them know that you stand with the 70. Let leadership know that the days of business as usual in their little world is over. We are the Party. We are the people. We give the direction, not take it. Let them know that as an elected leader in the Republican Party you will not tolerate the games, lies and thievery that has been occurring on their watch. If we are to win in the midterms and beyond we must stand strong for what is right, not what the media and RINO leadership says we should do. Spread the word, the Republican revolution has begun. It is time to decide what side you are on. This battle is just the beginning.
Yours in service,
Eric D. Miller
RPOF State Committeeman
“A man only carries one name with him for the duration of his life. He need be mindful of what he does to protect it.”
The following is a later story from The Blaze
Courage: 70 House Republicans to push back against immigration bill
Thursday, Jun 13, 2013
This morning, TheBlaze exclusively reported that 70 House Republicans are planning for a showdown with Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) over the immigration bill congressional leadership is trying to push through by July 4.
Seventy House Republicans are planning a politically risky showdown with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to try to force additional debate on an immigration bill they say will mean amnesty for illegal immigrants and have dire consequences for the country.
The 70 members are petitioning for a special Republican conference meeting on the bill, a “highly unusual” move to go head-to-head with the speaker, according to Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), Steve King (Iowa) and Louie Gohmert (Texas), who are serving as spokespersons for the group.
“So today we are going to be releasing the names of 70 Republicans that have – they’re House members that have signed a petition requiring that John Boehner hold a special Republican conference meeting on the amnesty bill,” Glenn said on radio this morning.
This group of Republicans feels there has not been a sufficient conversation about the legislation, and they hope such a conference will allow for a debate of the pros and cons of passing a bill that will most likely lead to amnesty.
Glenn described what will happen on Capitol Hill over the next few weeks:
What’s going to happen in the next few weeks, possibly by July 4th, the Senate will pass the amnesty bill. At the same time the House is going to pass a Trojan horse bill that will sound good and that will secure the borders. The problem with that is they’re both going to be sent to conference committee, where amnesty is going to be added to the Trojan horse bill. The Senate will vote yes on final passage and send it to the House. Led by Nancy Pelosi, the House Democrats will all vote for the bill because it will assure permanent Democratic political majority, and a few Republican committee chairs will provide the final votes needed for passage. That way the president will have amnesty for illegals and the country will be fast‑tracked to permanent progressivism.
In this day and age, it is easy to paint all politicians as politically expedient fools, but the decision of these 70 Republicans to stand up to the majority is one of the most courageous acts we have seen in a long time. This issue is no longer political. It is moral.
“These 70 people are standing up and saying ‘take away all of our power,’” Glenn said. “They know that if they lose, they lose. This is putting all of the chips on the table. You’ve been asking for it. We have been asking for people with a spine. This one is not going to be easy.”
We have been bombarded with story after story about scandals that attack our freedom and liberty. And while it might seem like we are in a fight to protect our own freedom, Glenn explained that the fight is much, much larger. We have gotten to the point where we are defending man’s freedom.
“Because this isn’t about you. This isn’t about your stuff. This isn’t about your freedom,” Glenn said. “This isn’t about us! History may never remember any of our names! History may indeed record our names as villains if we lose. I only want my name in one book. I want my name in the Book of Life. I want my name to be the size of John Hancock. When I get there and the Lord asks me, ‘What did you do for man’s freedom,’ I want you to be able to say, ‘Open your book. That is my name. Written the size of my hand, that is my name!’”
The fear is that we are turning into mice. We recognize the problem, we strive for solutions, but we scurry away when faced with the problem head-on. We no longer have time to sit around waiting for other people to clean up our mess. We must stand.
“Write your name in the Book of Life. Stand,” Glenn said emphatically. “You have asked for heroes. You are given another chance. God opens another window! Will we take this one? Will we stand? Will we support?”
Glenn warned that the immigration debate will quickly be turned into a civil rights issue. But we must remain steadfast in our convictions.
“Is there anything more important than standing up for human dignity, for the rights of all mankind,” Glenn asked. “They are going to try to make this into a civil rights case, and it is not. It is an affront to anyone who understands civil rights.”
“I’m a man. I deserve to be treated like a man. I will treat every illegal in this country like a man or a woman. I will treat you with dignity, I will treat you with respect, but I will not give you special privilege,” Glenn said. “If I break the law, I go to jail. If you break the law, you go to jail. Why did you sneak over here at night? Why didn’t you just walk down the center of the street there at the border crossing and say, ‘I have a right to come into the United States?’ Because it’s against the law. That’s why. You broke the law. And it is not an unjust law.”
“What is unjust is the nonsense of allowing people into this country; the endless red tape,” he continued. “And who started that? The same people who now argue for civil rights. They are an affront to man, they are a joke, and we dismiss them. And we do so in the name of Jesus Christ. We dismiss them.”
GDP: I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means
Derek Scissors, Ph.D.June 13, 2013 at 9:00 am
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
We received a detailed response back today from Governor Scott’s office concerning our support for Sheriff Nicholas Lee Finch of Liberty County, who was arrested by agents of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Sheriff Finch was arrested on June 4th on charges of “official misconduct” after he, on March 8, 2013, invalidated the arrest of a citizen who was found by patrol officers in a traffic stop to be in possession of a firearm without a state “Concealed Carry” permit. (The pistol was in the driver’s pocket instead of the glove box and the “offender” was under the “control” of the officer making the stop.)
We can’t have all of the facts and circumstances of this series of events, but as a former law enforcement supervisor (different state), I can speculate on what would motivate a sworn officer to invalidate such an arrest. Subsequent actions by FDLE cannot be explained with anything but political jabberwocky.
When a field officer makes an arrest without a warrant on any charge, the circumstances of the arrest MUST be reviewed by supervision in order to maintain the integrity of the department. Before a mistake goes any further than it should, supervisors are charged with the duty to invalidate an arrest if they find that it does not conform to standards set by law and/or by department policy. Supervisors on duty are responsible for the arrest as much as the arresting officer.
In many cases, a lawful arrest can be invalidated simply because the department policy selects certain offenses to be prioritized. Not every offense results in an arrest. Otherwise, enforcement of every infraction would soon spiral the department into a budgetary nightmare and department policies would then be driven by the lowest rank instead of the chief executive.
Many times, an arrest may be deferred while a report of the incident is forwarded to prosecutors, who may decide on a different route of enforcement (grand jury, arrest warrant, etc.). Other reasons exist for a department head to set policies to enforce some laws or class of laws and to tolerate violations of others. While controversial, the department's policy may not be ignored in the chain of command.
It seems unlikely that any deputy serving under this sheriff would be unaware of Sheriff Finch’s position on the carriage of firearms by otherwise law-abiding persons. I suspect (but don’t know) that his position may have been rendered into official department policy and distributed to all subordinates. If this is so, then we are observing another instance of a subordinate attempting to defy a policy with which he or she disagrees. Such an action would (when reported by subordinates) set the forces of FDLE on an impossible mission to impose state law over this sheriff’s policy.
This event would then encapsulate no less an issue than local control over law enforcement. Can a state law that violates (in my opinion) a key provision of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution force a sheriff, who swore to uphold that Constitution, to deny his Oath of Office?
Please notice that the Sheriff is charged with altering an arrest record. That is the only substance of the “official misconduct,” not the fact that he invalidated an arrest or took a stand on a Second Amendment issue. "Official misconduct" is the leverage that allowed the governor to remove him. The frequent use of the Sheriff’s words “to uphold the Second Amendment” in the affidavit seem to indicate a particular disdain on the part of the affiant.
Firstly, to substantiate the charge, the statute requires that the alteration of the record be accomplished, “with corrupt intent to obtain a benefit for any person or to cause harm to another.” Securing a citizen’s God-given rights, guaranteed by the Second Amendment, is not a “benefit.”
Secondly, if there are not clear and written operating procedures for the common supervisory practice of invalidating an arrest which this accused sheriff is alleged to have disregarded, then the FDLE (IMHO) has no way to prosecute this (otherwise) routine supervisory action. Considering that a cursory reading of the arrest affidavit shows that arrest frequency in Liberty County is relatively low, detailed arrest procedures may be less than stringent.
In any case, the sheriff’s actions, standing alone, bear no relation to the severity of the actions taken by the State. Without this questionable charge, the governor had no legal grounds to suspend and replace Sheriff Finch and the showdown on the Second Amendment starts in Liberty County.
Monday, June 10, 2013
Saturday, June 8, 2013
Did Rick Scott Suspend Sheriff for Defending Second Amendment?
By: ERIC GIUNTA | Posted: June 8, 2013
Rick Scott's conservative base, already disillusioned by a series of steps by the Florida governor toward the political center in recent months in the run-up to a re-election year, has found a new grievance to air against him: his recent suspension of a sheriff who defended the Second Amendment.
On Tuesday, Scott suspended (without pay) Sheriff Nicholas Finch of Liberty County, after inspectors from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement obtained an arrest warrant for Finch, alleging “that [he] destroyed or removed official arrest documents from the Liberty County Jail, making it appear as though an arrest never occurred.”
Friday, June 7, 2013
Governor Scott Attacked by Challenger on Sheriff’s Arrest
Libertarian Gubernatorial candidate Adrian Wyllie has been critical of his opponent Governor Rick Scott before, but speaking from the campaign trail in Seminole County Thursday, he didn’t mince words.
Wyllie says Rick Scott’s actions are bordering on treason and must be held accountable, referring to Scott’s decision to remove and arrest Liberty County Sheriff Nicholas Finch.
The controversy started when Sheriff Finch refused to book a suspect who was arrested for carrying a firearm without a permit. Sheriff Finch told his deputies, “I believe in the Second Amendment, and we’re not going to charge him,” before releasing the suspect.
On Tuesday, the FDLE investigated the matter, and ultimately arrested Sheriff Finch for “official misconduct.” Governor Scott removed him from office and appointed FDLE agent Carl Causey as sheriff.
Wyllie believes this is politically motivated and it’s an example of abuse of power by Governor Scott and wants Scott to reinstate Finch immediately.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
by Phyllis SchlaflyJune 5, 2013 | June 5, 2013
The Gang of Eight bill doesn’t make any pretense of securing the border first. S.744 gives us only promises, promises and pie-in-the-sky plans but no reason to believe any of them because all our government’s promises about border security, implementation of an entry-exit system, and workplace verification of employee identity have been repeatedly and flagrantly broken. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on us.
The Gang of Eight bill allows the Obama Administration to decide which laws to enforce. Every S.744 provision allows Obama bureaucrats to issue waivers to avoid enforcement, a wrinkle that fits perfectly with Obama’s governing style, i.e., rule by executive-branch regulations instead of by constitutional legislation.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
WHAT EVERY TAXPAYER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THE “FARM BILL”
RUSS VOUGHT | MAY 9, 2013
Please read this analysis of these bills to see how the deception never stops in D.C.
Ad war over immigration bill heats up
BY JOHN LANTIGUA - PALM BEACH POST STAFF WRITER
The YouTube cartoon stars U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, but he is depicted with a Pinocchio nose.
The video is entitled “Amnesty Man” and was posted by Floridians for Immigration Enforcement, or FLIMEN, a group that opposes the Senate immigration reform bill Rubio co-wrote. It accuses him of providing amnesty for 11 million undocumented persons in the United States by allowing them to apply for legalization without leaving the U.S.
The group says that Rubio, during his 2010 Senate campaign, promised to oppose “blanket amnesty” legislation and they are saying that turned out to be a lie. Hence the long nose.
Rubio also has been cast as a hero for his support of immigration reform in other national television ads, including one produced by Americans for a Conservative Direction, founded by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. That ad, which began running on the Fox network in late April, is aimed at conservatives and emphasizes the toughness of the bill.
Saturday, June 1, 2013
GOP senators want IG probe of Sebelius’ ‘Obamacare’ fundraising
by Susan Crabtree - Washington Times
Senior Republican senators on Thursday asked the Health and Human Services’ inspector general to investigate Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ fundraising drive to promote the new health care law — a practice ethics specialists have said is anything from a legal stretch to a shakedown for cash.
In a letter to Inspector General Daniel R. Levinson, the top GOP senators on three influential committees asked if Mrs. Sebelius broke any laws or violated ethics guidelines by soliciting insurance companies and other health care industry entities to contribute to a nonprofit that says it will educate Americans about the health law.
Comment: Perhaps we should start calling this "ObamaScare."
Smithfield Foods Sale to Chinese Outfit Unsettling
By: NANCY SMITH | Posted: May 31, 2013
This sale of American pork giant Smithfield Foods to massive Chinese meat producer Shuanghai is just a little bit creepy, don't you think?
At the least it's a frightening reminder of the trend toward a globalized trade in the food we eat.
At the most it's an out-and-out national security risk.
Allegations of maggots, excessive bacteria and illegal additives have plagued Shuanghui, China's biggest meat products company, since at least 2011, according to a series of reports by China's state-run media.
The Wall Street Journal reports that both buyer and seller are so sure this week's $4.7 billion deal isn't scary that they opted for it to be reviewed by CFIUS, the government’s foreign investment review committee. Pork and bacon a threat to national security? Don't be ridiculous, say these food behemoths.