Sep 292020
 

Chairman Graham Releases Information from DNI Ratcliffe on FBI’s Handling of Crossfire Hurricane

September 29, 2020

READ PDF: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/09-29-20_Letter to Sen. Graham_Declassification of FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigations_20-00912_U_SIGNED-FINAL.pdf

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today released a letter from Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe. DNI Ratcliffe responded to Graham’s request for intelligence community information regarding the FBI’s handling of Crossfire Hurricane.

 DNI Ratcliffe provided the following declassified information to the committee:

  • “In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”
  • “According to his handwritten notes, former Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan subsequently briefed President Obama and other senior national security officials on the intelligence, including the ‘alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.’”
  • “On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’”

“I appreciate DNI Ratcliffe responding to my request for any information concerning all things Russia in the 2016 campaign, not just alleged Trump-Russia involvement.

“Director Ratcliffe will make this information available in a classified setting. I will try to review the material as early as today.

“This latest information provided by DNI Ratcliffe shows there may have been a double standard by the FBI regarding allegations against the Clinton campaign and Russia. Whether these allegations are accurate is not the question. The question is did the FBI investigate the allegations against Clinton like they did Trump?  If not, why not?  If so, what was the scope of the investigation?  If none, why was that?

“I look forward to speaking with Director Comey about this latest information, and many other topics, at tomorrow’s hearing.”

READ –

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/chairman-graham-releases-information-from-dni-ratcliffe-on-fbis-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane

George Washington’s Farewell Address, 1796

 Comments Off on George Washington’s Farewell Address, 1796
Jul 072020
 
George Washington Praying

Overview: War, Crisis, and Transition

  • Explaining Reluctance to Run
  • Unity and sectionalism
  • The Constitution and political parties
  • Checks and balances and separation of powers
  • Religion, morality, and education
  • Credit and government borrowing
  • Foreign relations and free trade
  • Address’s intentions
  • Defense of the Proclamation of Neutrality
  • Closing thoughts

Explaining Reluctance to Run

Friends and Citizens:

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.

Unity and sectionalism

“The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.”

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.

While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?

The Constitution and political parties

“To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.”

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

“Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.”

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

Checks and balances and separation of powers

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

“It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.”

Religion, morality, and education

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.”

Credit and government borrowing

“As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.”

Foreign relations and free trade

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

This Address’s intentions

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.

How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.

Defense of the Proclamation of Neutrality

In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.

After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.

The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.

The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.

Closing thoughts

The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.

Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.

Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.

Geo. Washington.

(Washington, 1796)

Washington, G. (1796). The Avalon Project. Retrieved September 17, 2015, from Lillian Goldman Law Library: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp

KNOW what the Constitution says concerning the Presidency:

 Comments Off on KNOW what the Constitution says concerning the Presidency:
Feb 152020
 
http://dakotansforhonestyinpolitics.com/

With politicians and talking heads constantly in disagreement concerning the powers and responsibilities of the U.S. President – it is important for voters to know for themselves what the U.S. Constitution actually says concerning the Presidency.

Here is Article II of the U.S. Constitutionfollowed by the amendments pertaining to the Presidency. Ensure you KNOW what it says – not just what people tell you it says…

Article II of the U.S. Constitution:

Section 1.

“The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:

Each state shall appoint, [See the 23rd Amendment (XXIII) ] in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice President. [Procedural change in 1804; See the 12th Amendment (XII) ]

The Congress may determine the time of choosing the electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. [See Section 3 of the 14th Amendment (XIV), as well as the 22nd Amendment (XXII) ].

In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation or inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly, until the disability be removed, or a President shall be elected. [Superseded by the 25th Amendment in 1967 (XXV) ]

The President shall, at stated times, receive for his services, a compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that period any other emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:–“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Section 2.

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session.

Section 3.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper [See the 20th Amendment (XX) ]; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The above, Article II, U.S. Constitution (United States, 1787), is quoted as written with the addition of notes concerning amendments

Note: A portion of Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th Amendment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS that have Affected the Presidency

AMENDMENT XII

  • Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.

The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; — the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. —]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.

*The above starred portion was Superseded by Section 3 of the 20th Amendment (XX).

AMENDMENT XIV, Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

AMENDMENT XX

  • Passed by Congress March 2, 1932. Ratified January 23, 1933.

Section 3.
If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

AMENDMENT XXII

  • Passed by Congress March 21, 1947. Ratified February 27, 1951.

Section 1.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

AMENDMENT XXIII

  • Passed by Congress June 16, 1960. Ratified March 29, 1961.

Section 1.
The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as Congress may direct:

A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

AMENDMENT XXIV – Passed by Congress August 27, 1962. Ratified January 23, 1964, Section 1.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.

AMENDMENT XXV

  • Passed by Congress July 6, 1965. Ratified February 10, 1967, altering Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution.

Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.


Find this and more at:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP

 Comments Off on AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP
Oct 142019
 
President Donald Trump

By Wallace Henley, CP Exclusive – CP VOICES | Friday, October 11, 2019

Dear President Trump:

Along with millions of people of many faiths I thank you for the bold stand you have taken for religious freedom. The eloquent speech you gave at the United Nations was one of your finest moments—in fact, one of the finest of any president.

I have worked in the White House, and I have written about the presidency since the 1970s, but have never seen nor heard a president of the United States so powerfully defend the right of people to choose what they believe about God and to worship freely.

I also join my voice to the millions so grateful to you for your unrelenting defense of the fundamental right to life of the unborn. Your firm stance against the abortion movement that has escalated to shocking levels is crucial. It is unconscionable that there are those in the industry who are willing to take human life almost at the point of birth.

Christians of many denominations and movements, along with many in other religions are thankful for your leadership in these areas.

Nevertheless, many Christians remain troubled by your careless speech. I want to offer two examples.

READ MORE… https://www.christianpost.com/voice/an-open-letter-to-president-trump.html

Mar 132018
 
Trump

HEY, non-Christian liberals – give it a rest.

Do you STILL not get it?  We KNEW Trump’s history when we hired him.  We KNEW he was an ungodly wreck most of his life…that was never a secret!  He made billions off the vices of billions – sex, gambling, and alcohol – YES, everyone knew that!

We hired him anyway.  Do you STILL not understand why?

We aren’t the least bit disturbed that someone just gave Stormy a ton of money to change her story.  You people have been throwing good money after bad, “…doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result…” for almost two years now.

We don’t care about his former sex life.

Did you not see that despite all the faux outrage over that taped conversation with the Bush kid, Trump was elected anyway?  Did you NOT notice that while the liberal elite went around the country, destroying the careers of their randy compatriots in vain effort to set a national standard that would oust Trump…much of America gave a collective yawn?

Trump

That was because of the utter hypocrisy of the media, political elite and Hollywood – the Madonna’s, Miley’s, and more who make their billions off everything from sexual innuendo, scripted wardrobe malfunctions, prostituting themselves on the casting couch, prancing around half-dressed or nude on the big screen – and for the last couple decades – even portraying their nudity and sexual violence on our home screens.  These are the very same fools who are now telling us that we need to let men into women’s bathrooms, shower rooms, school locker rooms, and even girl’s bedrooms if the high school is on an overnight trip.

Now they are feigning piety and wanting us to play along with them.

While we are glad they took down thugs like Weinstein and that anchor from the Hamptons – can’t remember his name – they also caught up several others who simply behaved immature. It was an ill-conceived scheme to somehow draw rage toward Trump, but pretty much only netted other liberal Hollywood, media and political elites.

One has to wonder why there were more liberals caught in that net than conservatives…

At any rate – now you are feigning shock over the potty mouth and the love life of a billionaire casino playboy and wanting us to be shocked as well.

Yeah… you people.

You know so little about your Christian neighbor, that you seriously think this kind of garbage is supposed to send us careening into the streets, smashing windows and demanding impeachment.  You think that because we have taken issue with many sexually addicted politicians over the years, including Clinton when he was having sex with varied women on and under White House tables, we would naturally jump on this as well.

But in the situation with Clinton, you told us it didn’t matter – that it was between him and his wife.  NOW you want us to care about what Trump did years before he was even president?

Like we said – everyone already knows what he did most of his life.  We hired him anyway.

But here is the most important thing you aren’t understanding about Christians.  Many of us believe Trump had a ‘come to Jesus’ moment – and is not the same man he was ten years ago.

We don’t deny that Trump has sinned. We absolutely know he has.

This is what you don’t get…you are trying to tell us something we already know.

We already know that “All have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God.”  That means you, me, our moms, our grandmas, our great aunts that drive 25 mph to church every Sunday, Obama, Trump, Clinton, Ben Carson, Billy Graham – all of us.

Nevertheless, we don’t accept or rationalize sin. We don’t ignore, dismiss, or defend rape. All crime needs to be reported to law enforcement and be dealt with judicially. But we will continue to work with the person if that is what the person sincerely wants us to do – to restore them and help them grow, even if from a prison cell.

We deal with it – because sin has affected all of us.  We do what we can, as fallible human beings, to help each other grow away from it. Christians – those who are serious about being disciples of Christ – work to restore fallen brothers and sisters.  We listen to each other’s confessions, comfort each other, pray with each other, pick each other up, encourage each other to grow and learn – and all the while doing this, we remember where we ourselves came from.  “There but for the Grace of God go I.”

Trump is growing

What many of us know – because we share Christian news reports with each other and gab about it over the kitchen table and such – is that Trump has many strong Christians around him, mentoring him.  We know there is frequent prayer in the oval office, weekly Bible studies at the White House, prayer with his cabinet before meetings, and millions of Christians around the country are holding him up to God on a daily basis. We know Vice President Pence and Secretary Ben Carson, among others, are gentlemen of God, who speak with wisdom and grace.

Knowing all this, we know there are good people talking to him prayerfully about sin – including his impulsive reactions.

Some say that Trump’s behavior is a terrible reflection on Jesus Christ.  That is true in the eyes of those unfamiliar with the myriad stumbling blocks that can mar a Christian’s growth.  It would be nice if President Trump could hurry his walk along a little faster.

Everyone has their own walk, with – or without – God

We hope to see President Trump begin to reflect the Fruits of the Spirit more often as months pass.  Everyone is different and no one walks perfectly with the Spirit 100% of the time – in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control. [Some versions translate a couple words differently, with  ‘meekness and temperance.’]  But growth is evident over time in every true disciple of Jesus Christ.

Every single president and presidential candidate over the last few years – including President Obama and both Clintons – said they were Christians.  Most people took that at face value.  Some say, “well, it was easier to believe previous presidents were Christian, because they were much nicer than Trump. They not only played the role of elegant, articulate leaders – remaining quiet at all the right times – but were better reflections of the way a Christian ‘should be.”

However, as many Americans see it – Obama may have been out there saying all the seemingly right things, but was dishonest and manipulative behind closed doors.  There is increasing evidence that he ignored Russian activity in America, advocated for the destruction of Israel, and gave money and relief to our enemies – even allowing five dangerous men to leave Gitmo under the faux excuse of rescuing a deserter.

He may have even purposely supported ISIS by not going after them as he should have. It took less than a year for Trump to route ISIS.  Obama could have done that a lot easier and a lot earlier when ISIS was smaller.  Yet…he didn’t.

Further, as many Evangelicals see it, Obama may have been a smooth speaker, but was extremely unchristlike in the depth of his terrifying support for the murder of helpless infants as well as destruction of the very building blocks of our society. From common sense laws, community relationships and historical facts, to the core understanding of our souls – our heritage, our God…even causing our small children to question their gender (of all things) and to hate the ‘race’ they were born into. We were no longer allowed to hold firm the very nucleus of who we personally were.

Some of us call that ‘evil.’

Trump is working to repair things Obama destroyed.

We stand with Trump now because he stands for policies that are the exact opposite of Obama’s.

We do NOT believe the spin from NBC, CNN and others that Trump is racist, sexist, or whatever. On the contrary – from what we see, he is foul-mouthed, thin-skinned and quick tempered with those who criticize him – but warm and kind to the varied and diverse groups he meets with when out speaking to people.

Importantly, while the ‘left’ appears to want to apply laws – (meaning, those statutes and rules that have been voted on and added to the code by our democratically elected Congress and State legislators) – discriminately and at times even ignore them completely, President Trump is focused on applying all law justly.

We also understand the real reasons for the laws he wants passed – even if the media feigns not to understand.  After all, he has been GETTING his ideas from us.  He has been listening to us about the laws we need to have passed and why we want them passed, he understands our needs, and appreciates as people.

The media’s attempts to twist and demonize what he is doing is ridiculous and just turns us off from them all the more. Someday, maybe the east coast news media will take time to speak directly to us, in a non-condescending manner, and discover what we know.  They are more than welcome to learn from us as well.

President Trump is definitely struggling with old habits that aren’t easy to turn around after 70 years and he doesn’t have the smooth appearance people want him to have. But being a Christian isn’t about showing up at a church well-scrubbed.  It is about something happening deep in the heart. President Trump is doing genuine things to protect our freedom of worship, unborn life, family, community, American jobs, Economy – Life, Liberty, Property – the heroes in our military, law enforcement, and Israel.

We happen to like that.

So yeah – we are willing to be patient as he grows in Christ and intend to continue keeping our eyes on what is important.  We have no intention of allowing the left to destroy our nation again – so we will NOT help you – or allow you – to take away the first really good president we’ve had in decades.

And after the Trump term is over, we will find another to take his place.

Stormy, who said a few weeks ago that she had no relationship with Trump and assured everyone that saying this had nothing to do with money – can take the money from whomever offered her more than Trump’s lawyer did – and talk away.  It won’t change a thing.

Hopefully, she – and all those of you on the left who struggle with accepting today’s reality – will connect with a real Christian at some point and have a ‘come to Jesus’ moment as well.

God be with you all, in the Holy Name of Jesus Christ.

 

Stormy Daniels Offers to Pay Back 130g so She Can Talk

 

 

GOP rebuttal to Dem’s ‘FISA Memo’ rebuttal

 Comments Off on GOP rebuttal to Dem’s ‘FISA Memo’ rebuttal
Feb 262018
 
FISA

FEBRUARY FISA MEMO REBUTTALS –

Full House Intelligence Committee GOP rebuttal to Democrat ‘FISA Memo’ rebuttal

THIS is the link to the GOP’s rebuttal – – to the Democrat’s rebuttal – – TO the original GOP FISA memo released in early February concerning what happened in 2016 in FISA court …(5 pages, PDF)

 

FISA Memo, rebuttal, GOP

Silence About Conditions at Pine Ridge Reservation

 Comments Off on Silence About Conditions at Pine Ridge Reservation
Jun 122017
 

by Thomas F. Sullivan

For generations, the residents of the Pine Ridge Reservation have lived with unemployment and poverty rates that have never been seen in the majority community even during the Great Depression.

According to an MSNBC Report on Pine Ridge on May 29, 2014, “Roughly four out of five residents are unemployed and well over half live in deep poverty…… Life expectancy is just 48 years old for men and 52 for women….. About 70 percent of the students will drop out of school before they graduate.”

That last statistic is especially troubling and is inconsistent with the claim frequently stated by tribal leaders that “Our children are sacred”.

According to that same MSNBC Report, “In a startling new draft report, issued in April 2014 by the Bureau of Indian Education which oversees 183 schools on 64 reservations in 23 states, focuses attention on BIE’s inability to deliver a quality education to its students. BIE schools are chronically failing. BIE operates ‘one of the lowest-performing set of schools in the country.’ During the 2012 – 2013 school year, only one out of four BIE-funded schools met state-defined proficiency standards and one out of three were under restructuring due to chronic academic failure…. BIE students performed lower on national assessment tests than students in all but one other major urban school district.”

Given these conditions which have persisted for generations as well as the almost total absence of any economic activity on the reservation, it is not surprising that there is a high level of dysfunction as well. This dysfunction is exemplified by the following health and social welfare measures:

* The infant mortality rate at Pine Ridge is one of the highest in the nation at 3 times the national average;
* The incidence of diabetes is 8 times the national average;
* Eight out of every ten people at Pine Ridge are alcoholics. Given this fact it is highly likely that most newborns on this reservation are born with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), a severe developmental delay. Care of children with FASD requires an extended time commitment, great patience and resilience, none of which is in abundant supply in most reservation homes:
* Drug use and abuse, both prescription and illegal, is rampant;
* The teenage suicide rate is 150 percent of the national average. In the first 8 months of 2015. There were 19 completions by youth between the ages of 9 and 24 and more than 100 attempts by children from the same age group. Within the last week, a 12-year-old girl hanged herself on a tree behind the Sue Anne Big Crow Youth Center. Shortly before a 14-year-old boy recently completed, he was being counseled by one of his teachers. She told him that Lakota tradition teaches that a spirit set free by suicide is doomed to wander the earth in lonely darkness. “You don’t want that, do you?” His response was chilling, “Anything is better than here”.
* The level of domestic violence is at epidemic levels. In CY 2014 the Tribal Department of Public Safety prosecuted 470 cases of domestic violence. During the same period one of the Tribe’s domestic shelters reported they had responded to more than 1,300 cases of domestic violence:
* In CY 2016 there were 17 homicides on Pine Ridge, a rate 4 times the current homicide rate in the city of Chicago:
* For the last several years, the Pine Ridge reservation child protection staff has been investigating, relying on rigorous standards, every case of reported child sexual abuse and confirming, on average, 2 ½ cases per week for every week during each of those years. Considering that most estimates are that 10 percent or less of such abuse is ever reported, the seriousness of this level of child sexual abuse cannot be overstated.
* Research data are clear, children who are sexually abused are 2½ times more likely to attempt and/or complete suicide than children who have not been sexually abused.

On May 1, 2015, in the New York Times Ron Cornelius, the Great Plains Director of the Indian Health Service is quoted as saying, that “the recent suicides were an incredibly sad situation that IHS was committed to working with the tribe to address this heartbreaking problem.” It is not clear to me from the public record available to me just what the IHS has done to fulfill this commitment. At that time I was the ACF Regional Administrator in Denver and heard from friends on and around Pine Ridge, “There are a lot of ‘suits’ traveling to Pine Ridge. They are not meeting with anyone from the Reservation. They spend all of their time in a conference room talking with each other. They seem to make it a point to avoid any tribal members.”

However, former Pine Ridge Tribal Judge Saunie Wilson, in a power point presentation to a west coast conference on youth suicides in early 2017, described the 20 professionals sent to Pine Ridge by IHS to “solve” the reservation suicide epidemic in the following terms, “They had, No background checks, No licenses to work in South Dakota and No knowledge of reservation culture, mores or society.” Unfortunately, this is the same inept approach IHS used when there was a comparable burst of youth suicides on Montana’s Fort Peck Reservation several years earlier. I was invited by the Tribal Chair to sit in on the IHS meetings with Tribal staff as an impartial observer for the Tribe. As a result, I could observe what IHS was doing in response to the youth suicide burst on that Reservation. They were clearly not effective then. How could they believe they would be effective several years later?

On April 5, 2017, at a meeting of the Pine Ridge Tribal Law and Order Committee, the following statement was made by Richard Little Whiteman, a Council member and Chair of this Committee, “I haven’t seen this level of violence since the 1970s”. The Committee also heard reports that the number of law enforcement officers, once numbering more than 100 sworn officers, now was little more than 20, had the impossible task of policing a geographic area comparable in size to the states of Delaware and Rhode Island combined 7 days a week, 24 hours every day.

What is especially puzzling is the deafening silence from both the media, those who by their titles and their government positions have direct responsibility to correct such problems and those who claim they are advocates working on behalf of the welfare of women and children.

For example, if either the city of Cambridge, MA or Berkeley, CA, each with a total population of approximately 100,000, had the same level of youth suicide completions as Pine Ridge, the following would be occurring:

1. There would be youth suicide completions just about daily in each of these communities.
2. There would not be enough curb space to park all of the media trucks providing a direct link to the community for their viewers. After all the media had ignored multiple detailed, factual reports about the dysfunction in these communities and predictions about what would follow from that dysfunction. Recognizing their prior error in not covering all of the dysfunction, media outlets were competing to provide the most offensive coverage. They characterized their coverage as “presenting the facts.”
3. Members of Congress would be convening hearings in these communities in an attempt to elicit some hints as to the cause of such dysfunction even though they had never mentioned these communities until the funerals began to be held when the dysfunction in these communities could no longer be ignored. Based on past experience the best that the local congressional delegation will be able to do is to appoint a study committee charged with reporting back on the cause of all the suicides within three years. No action would have to be taken to assist these communities until the study report was produced.
4. Advocates would be elbowing their way to get in front of any operating TV camera to push their unique solutions to such dysfunction even though they had not only known about the extreme dysfunction in these communities but they had also been silent about it until the funerals began.
5. State, county, and local officials would point at each other, claiming they had little or no responsibility to correct these problems. It was the responsibility of that “other guy” (whoever that unidentified person was) until federal funds were made available. Then the competition would be cut-throat. Each would cite their “expertise” on matters of this kind even though each had just established an extensive written record claiming they knew nothing about such matters in their efforts to avoid any responsibility (political punishment for refusing to deal with the dysfunction in their communities until the funerals began) for what was happening in these communities.
6. Federal officials whose organizations had been widely praised for formally adopting mission statements claiming they were responsible for the well-being of every citizen in their service area would initially deny any responsibility for such dysfunction, pointing at state, county or local officials as the parties responsible for addressing and correcting such behavior. When and if Congress appropriates funds to address and correct these problems, these same federal officials will distribute those funds without first establishing performance measures to determine the effectiveness of how these funds are spent. If the past is any guide, it will be several years before performance measures will be put in place.

If this is the response to the massive dysfunction and resulting epidemic of youthful suicides in communities like Cambridge or Berkeley, can anything better be expected at Pine Ridge?

Pine Ridge is a small, Isolated, rural community with little political power. They have been ignored and will continue to be ignored.

The sexual abuse of American Indian children should have resulted in a high-level commitment to stop the abuse once it had been uncovered years ago.

During the last two Administrations, I brought the twin epidemics of child sexual abuse and child/youthful suicides in Indian Country to the attention of the political leadership of the Administration for Children and Families and the Department of Health and Human Services with multiple, detailed, factual, written presentations. These presentations detailed the pervasive extent of the abuse, the long-term impact on the abused individuals, their families and the community at large and the substantial public cost of such abuse. They had no effect. It was as if they had never been read.

Until one is prepared to focus on and widely and continuously publicize the hypocrisy of those who know the facts and who deny or ignore them, thereby allying themselves with those who abuse children, nothing will be done to correct this barbaric situation. Until those who have chosen silence in the face of widespread child sexual abuse are publicly identified and shamed in all major media outlets for their alliance with sexual predators, attempting to stop the barbarism is a fool’s errand.

Thomas F. Sullivan is a former Regional Administrator for the Administration of Children and Families under the federal HHS.  He was forced out of his job in May, 2016, after defying his DC superiors by repeatedly reporting on child abuse on several reservations. 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

From Elizabeth Morris, Chair of CAICW:

Watch this 20-minute video for more information concerning the ramifications of Native American heritage on Constitutional protections:

Donald Trump’s Contract With The American Voter

 Comments Off on Donald Trump’s Contract With The American Voter
Nov 112016
 

By DONALD TRUMP

October, 22, 2016

What follows is my 100-day action plan to Make America Great Again. It is a contract between myself and the American voter — and begins with restoring honesty, accountability and change to Washington

Therefore, on the first day of my term of office, my administration will immediately pursue the following six measures to clean up the corruption and special interest collusion in Washington, DC:

* FIRST, propose a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress;

* SECOND, a hiring freeze on all federal employees to reduce federal workforce through attrition (exempting military, public safety, and public health);

* THIRD, a requirement that for every new federal regulation, two existing regulations must be eliminated;

* FOURTH, a 5 year-ban on White House and Congressional officials becoming lobbyists after they leave government service;

* FIFTH, a lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government;

* SIXTH, a complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.

On the same day, I will begin taking the following 7 actions to protect American workers:

* FIRST, I will announce my intention to renegotiate NAFTA or withdraw from the deal under Article 2205

* SECOND, I will announce our withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership

* THIRD, I will direct my Secretary of the Treasury to label China a currency manipulator

* FOURTH, I will direct the Secretary of Commerce and U.S. Trade Representative to identify all foreign trading abuses that unfairly impact American workers and direct them to use every tool under American and international law to end those abuses immediately

* FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

* SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward

* SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure

Additionally, on the first day, I will take the following five actions to restore security and the constitutional rule of law:

* FIRST, cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama

* SECOND, begin the process of selecting a replacement for Justice Scalia from one of the 20 judges on my list, who will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States

* THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities

* FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won’t take them back

* FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.

Next, I will work with Congress to introduce the following broader legislative measures and fight for their passage within the first 100 days of my Administration:

  1. Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act. An economic plan designed to grow the economy 4% per year and create at least 25 million new jobs through massive tax reduction and simplification, in combination with trade reform, regulatory relief, and lifting the restrictions on American energy. The largest tax reductions are for the middle class. A middle-class family with 2 children will get a 35% tax cut. The current number of brackets will be reduced from 7 to 3, and tax forms will likewise be greatly simplified. The business rate will be lowered from 35 to 15 percent, and the trillions of dollars of American corporate money overseas can now be brought back at a 10 percent rate.
  2. End The Offshoring Act. Establishes tariffs to discourage companies from laying off their workers in order to relocate in other countries and ship their products back to the U.S. tax-free.
  3. American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral.
  4. School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to give parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.
  5. Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.
  6. Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act. Allows Americans to deduct childcare and elder care from their taxes, incentivizes employers to provide on-side childcare services, and creates tax-free Dependent Care Savings Accounts for both young and elderly dependents, with matching contributions for low-income families.
  7. End Illegal Immigration Act Fully-funds the construction of a wall on our southern border with the full understanding that the country Mexico will be reimbursing the United States for the full cost of such wall; establishes a 2-year mandatory minimum federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S. after a previous deportation, and a 5-year mandatory minimum for illegally re-entering for those with felony convictions, multiple misdemeanor convictions or two or more prior deportations; also reforms visa rules to enhance penalties for overstaying and to ensure open jobs are offered to American workers first.
  8. Restoring Community Safety Act. Reduces surging crime, drugs and violence by creating a Task Force On Violent Crime and increasing funding for programs that train and assist local police; increases resources for federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors to dismantle criminal gangs and put violent offenders behind bars.
  9. Restoring National Security Act. Rebuilds our military by eliminating the defense sequester and expanding military investment; provides Veterans with the ability to receive public VA treatment or attend the private doctor of their choice; protects our vital infrastructure from cyber-attack; establishes new screening procedures for immigration to ensure those who are admitted to our country support our people and our values
  10. Clean up Corruption in Washington Act. Enacts new ethics reforms to Drain the Swamp and reduce the corrupting influence of special interests on our politics.

On November 8th, Americans will be voting for this 100-day plan to restore prosperity to our economy, security to our communities, and honesty to our government.

This is my pledge to you.

And if we follow these steps, we will once more have a government of, by and for the people.

https://assets.donaldjtrump.com/CONTRACT_FOR_THE_VOTER.pdf

Sick, liberal policies were being pushed down our throats. That’s why we voted for Trump. It’s as simple as that.

 Comments Off on Sick, liberal policies were being pushed down our throats. That’s why we voted for Trump. It’s as simple as that.
Nov 102016
 
President Donald Trump

November 10, 2016

Today, I am angry. Thugs rioting in the streets over Trump’s election? Seriously? I mean – what do these foolish protesters think WE went through for the last eight years?

Remember when Conservatives rioted in the streets after Obama was elected?  No?

Don’t assume we didn’t feel like it.  I had a friend contemplate suicide after Obama was elected the second time. But my friend got counseling rather than commit suicide – and we made our way through the years without throwing stones through the White House windows.

Do these big crybabies believe THEY are the only people in the nation who should ever have a say?  Do they honestly believe things are always supposed to go their way?  Apparently.  Look at what the Universities have been coddling for the last couple years.

Most Conservatives are TREMENDOUSLY  relieved by this election.  We are people – U.S. citizens – who did everything by the book for this election.  No stuffing ballots, rigging polls, or sending non-citizens to vote as the Democrats do.

In fact – knowing that the Democrats probably did all that and more – it is all the more amazing Trump pulled this off.

I am so sick and tired of the extreme left liberals in this nation.  So ANGRY at the lot of them – see them ALL as corrupt, yucky, worst of the worst people.  People who demand the right to murder full term babies – babies who, if given a few moments, could be born alive and free of their horrific mothers.  There is NO  – absolutely NO – medical condition that demands a baby be dead prior to delivery – and in fact, the mother would be rid of a full-term baby FASTER if the child is allowed to live, because holding it back in order to kill it takes time.

There is just skin and Baby in womb muscle between a full-term child and the outside world.  LET THE CHILD LIVE.

With no MEDICAL reason for murdering the baby, the ONLY incentive or benefit is for the sale of body parts. THAT IS A FACT.  And it is fact which will be soon more widely understood, now that those who make money off of harvesting children are no longer in control. WATCH –

April, 2016 – Congressman says probe DID show Planned Parenthood ran ‘Amazon.com of baby body parts’

Aug. 19, 2016 – Aborted baby’s heart was beating as we harvested his brains: worker in new Planned Parenthood video

This has become such a sick, dysfunctional society and I am so angry at extreme left liberals expecting us to just sit back and accept every idiotic, perverse thing they suddenly decide they HAVE to have.

You WANT to understand Trump voters?  

Abortion and the Supreme Court were the two primary reasons many voted for Trump. But there are many, many additional reasons beyond those.

Plain and simple: Obama pushed his agenda too far. What did he and other liberals think would happen just nine months ago – when they demanded we women put up with men in our bathrooms?  You don’t think that was a motivation for us to scream and rampage?  WE DIDN’T rampage in the streets because most of us are more mature than the average far-left liberal.  But that doesn’t mean we weren’t rampaging in our hearts and souls – and rampage in our kitchen conversations with each other.

It wasn’t an issue that was talked about in the debates – most candidates were too cowardly to speak bluntly about the stupidity of the policy.  Further, there was WAY too many additional important issues that needed to be talked about. Nevertheless, our feelings about it were never hidden and it was NEVER an issue very far from our minds.  It was one of the first thing many thought of when Hillary said she was going to continue HIS policies.

June 6, 2016 – School stops enforcing Obama’s trans bathroom policy after parents pulled kids out

Poll: Two-thirds of Americans oppose government forcing transgender bathrooms

How could LIBERALS possibly be SO dumb as to think they could push something like this – DURING THE ELECTION EVEN – and believe that we would just SIT AND TAKE IT?

July 2016 – Leaked Emails Show DNC Pushed Narrative Against NC’s Transgender Bathroom Law

LOOK, they said ANY man – whether he was dressed as a woman or not – whether he felt like a man yesterday but felt like a woman today – is FLUID and we just have to accept whatever this poor person wants to do – because we can’t hurt his feelings.  He can be dressed as a man, with no apparent reason for not using the men’s room – but if he wants to use the women’s room, that is his right. High schools must also allow boys to sleep with the girls on high school trips! ONE sick liberal official said our girls ”just have to accept seeing genitals in locker rooms,” and it went on and on – getting sicker and sicker.

Under the Obama administration’s federal guidance:

– School districts must allow biological males and females to spend the night together in the same hotel room on field trips;

– Colleges must let men who say they are transgender be roommates with one or more women; and

– School officials cannot even tell those young women or their parents in advance that their new roommate is a man, without risking a federal lawsuit.

The wording requiring schools to provide transgender students proper “housing” states –

“A school must allow transgender students to access housing consistent with their gender identity,” it states, “and may not require transgender students to stay in single-occupancy accommodations or to disclose personal information when not required of other students.”

Are you KIDDING?

Many women do NOT feel safe with a man in the room – yet their feelings do not matter. Talk about misogyny – it is Obama, Clinton and their supporters who discount the feelings of women, inferring they are just being “overly dramatic” and “homophobic” over this issue.

January 2016 – Female Office Worker Encounters Man Urinating in Ladies’ Room Exposed

Further – we feel our children are being preyed upon by the left with their agenda: 

June 2016 – Washington State to Teach Kindergartners about Transgenderism

ACLU DIRECTOR WHO RESIGNED BECAUSE OF BATHROOM BILL EXPOSES DANGERS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

Don’t even try to tell us it hasn’t hurt women or girls. Many men have been arrested for committing crimes against women and girls in rest rooms over the last nine months. Much of it just isn’t getting reported in most papers. bathrooms-6

May 4, 2016 – Young Girl in Women’s Changing Room at Target sees man taking pictures over the wall with his cell phone….

“The man was in a female dressing room at the Target and was seen by the victim, over the wall with his cell phone, taking photos of the victim.” “…the girl ran and told Target staff who told police.”

Sept 30, 2016 – Target’s Transgender Bathroom Policy Leads to 10 Crimes Targeting Girls Undressing, Says AFA

Hillary Clinton fully supported the murder of full-term children, as well as forcing women to accept men in their bathrooms (Something she wouldn’t have to deal with, as it is doubtful she uses public bathrooms) – yet Clinton wanted us to believe she was the strongest supporter of women, children and families. She was – and continues to be – a liar. 

Frankly – the liberals can take their sick agendas and shove it.  How DARE they say they are offended by TRUMP – when they keep coming up with this sick crap. Clinton has the foulest entertainers on her stage and talks about how much she loves them – while at the same time pretending to be offended by Trump.  Meanwhile.. her husband flies the Lolita express.

WE are sick of it all.  Trump made his millions off of encouraging vice. We KNOW that.  But that’s the point – we KNEW who he was, but he was telling us what he was going to do to protect us from liberal policies and things would improve.  Clinton was LYING about who she was – and telling us things would not only stay the same as they were under Obama, but get worse.

Couple all this with the left’s constant bashing of the Christian Faith, the threat of terrorism, Clinton Cronyism, criminal corruption, crimes reveale through Wikileaks, Benghazi, and more. There were so many reasons to vote against Clinton, they probably can’t all be counted.

YOU REALLY want to pretend this was all about Clinton being a woman??  Please.

Very simply – it was about PROTECTING our children and ourselves from the woman who claimed to champion children and women.  We wanted TRUE concern for children – not Clinton’s faux show of concern – a claim she tried to make fly in the last few months of her campaign.

Safety and Children – Period.  Those two words – Safety and Children – include more than just abortion and bathrooms. It includes issues of immigration, Obamacare, foreign policy, terrorism, law and economy – and Freedom of Religion; issues Donald Trump correctly addressed.

Foolish liberals.

PRAISE GOD for the results of the 2016 election.

And YES – many of us want to see Clinton in prison. We have made that clear. Don’t you dare use the fact that Trump ran against her in the election as an excuse for her to get away with her crimes.

Don’t even go there. We are already mad as heck at the liberal establishment.

Advocating for honesty – while supporting a flawed candidate…

 Comments Off on Advocating for honesty – while supporting a flawed candidate…
Oct 012016
 

We established this org to promote ‘the election of officials who perform their responsibilities with honesty and integrity.’

Ugh.

Well, despite obvious and deeply ingrained corruption within many levels and agencies of our federal government – our goal and hope remains. Just as we said from the beginning (because this level of political dishonesty did not happen over night) – we will continue to push for and promote honesty amongst our politicians.

This does not mean we can only vote for those with impeccable character. That would be impossible – for at this point in time there is none.

But the chances of our nation nominating a person of impeccable character in 2016 were never good.

Good character is so sorely lacking within our society as a whole, and hatred of “Christian” standards is too high.  Members of our society openly celebrate vulgarity and self-indulgence, parading it in the streets and glorifying it in movies, books and games. In this environment, when candidates have even mentioned Biblical standards, they have been vilified.

Godly candidates did not win the nomination for presidency. Period.

Good, honest people did run for office of the presidency.  They were not nominated.

That all said, we, as an organization continue to insist our state and federal governments embody honesty and integrity. We will not stop pushing and praying for honest elected officials.

At this point in time – only one of our presidential candidates has a long history of corruption while in office – and this is where the line must be drawn.  Only ONE of our presidential candidates has manipulated the DOJ, FBI and other entities to cover her corruption. Only ONE has used her position of political power to financially benefit herself.

We stand against this person and will do everything in our limited power to keep her out of office.

The following questions were written by a man named YJ Draiman. We believe these unanswered questions (and many others) need to be asked at the next debate:

Mrs. Clinton:

  • When you left the White House after your husband’s last term as president, why did you steal 200,000.00 worth of furniture, china, and artwork that you were forced to return?
  • Mrs. Clinton, when you were Secretary of State, why did you Solicit contributions from foreign governments for the Clinton foundation after you promised President Obama you would not?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why do you and your husband claim to contribute millions of dollars to charity for a tax write off when it goes to your family foundation that gives out less than 15% of the funds you collect and you use the balance to support yourself tax free?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why are you unable to account for 6 billion dollars of State department funds that seem to have disappeared while you were Secretary of State?
  • Mrs. Clinton, why did you say you were broke when you left the White House, but you purchased a 2 million home, built an addition for the secret service, and charge the tax payers of the Untied States rent in an amount equal to the entire mortgage?
  • Mrs. Clinton, how is it that your daughter, Chelsea, can afford to buy a 10.5 million apartment in New York City shortly after you left the White House?
  • Speaking of Chelsea, how is it that her first paying job, in her late 20’s, was for more than the President of the United States’ salary? Was there a quid pro quo of any sort involved?
  • We would also like to know about METRO CARE HOME SERVICES. Their address is the same as Chelsea’s apartment. What’s the deal with that?
  • Mrs. Clinton why did you lie to the American people about the terrorist attack in Benghazi but managed to tell the truth to your daughter the same night it happened?

This is just the tip of the iceberg of questions that must be answered.

http://www.dakotansforhonestyinpolitics.com/

– https://www.facebook.com/DakotansforHonestyinPolitics/

Hillary Clinton says she’ll put Bill ‘in charge’ of fixing economy

 Comments Off on Hillary Clinton says she’ll put Bill ‘in charge’ of fixing economy
May 232016
 

 

Hillary Clinton has been campaigning since 2008 as “the first woman president.”  She has inferred she can not only do just as good a job as any male candidate, but because she’s been both Senator and Secretary of State, she can do a better job than any other candidate.

On the one hand, she wants people to believe she is the woman to prove ‘women can do anything.’  “I am woman, hear me roar.”

On the other hand, she wants people to think her husband will be her co-president  – and told one group that Bill will handle the economy for her because “he is good at that kind of thing.”

So is she capable of running the country on her own, or isn’t she?

She expects all women to rally around her, and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has said any woman who doesn’t help her win can go to hell. …(or, in her more polite language, ‘there is a special place in hell’ for them.)

Yet on Sunday, May 15, she told a crowd in Kentucky “I will put my husband in charge of revitalizing the economy ’cause he knows what he’s doing.”

So…what is she saying – that she doesn’t know what she is doing?

This will be the first President in American history to hand over a major part of the job over to her spouse.  Will the First Husband end up managing all Affairs of State, while Hillary attends State dinners and funerals?  (Well… if that is all she needs to do, then she is qualified… because that is all she did as SOS).

…or…maybe she is playing the good wife’ – stepping aside and letting her husband take the lead as so many women her age have done through the years.

Either way…what kind of example is that for the daughters of feminists?

…Perhaps feminists will say to their daughters, “Don’t worry dear, this was just a baby step.  She is elderly and kind of stuck in old ruts. We’ll have a better candidate next time.”

Come on people. This candidate has just admitted she isn’t up for the job. There are term limits for a reason – and Bill Clinton has already had his turn as president.  I, for one, am not interested in electing Bill Clinton to a third term through the faux candidacy of his wife.

When we elect a woman president, it will be a woman who can hold her own and be a role model for our children.

And not only hold her own, but be a person of honesty, integrity, and humility. There are a lot of people to choose from with intelligence, skills and character.  We do not have to settle for Hillary Clinton.

 

Read Article: If she’s elected president, Hillary Clinton says she’ll appoint her husband, Bill, to oversee the economy.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/16/news/economy/hillary-bill-clinton-economic-job-growth/

 

President Obama, Senator Heitkamp, and Standing Rock

 Comments Off on President Obama, Senator Heitkamp, and Standing Rock
Jun 072014
 

June 7, 2014

Concerning the upcoming event featuring President Obama and Senator Heitkamp at the Standing Rock Reservation on Friday, June 13th:

North Dakotans are a gracious and forgiving people and will politely welcome the president to our wonderful state.

However, before he gives his speech concerning the wonderful “Nation to Nation” relationship he has with tribal leaders and announces what further moneys and authorities he will bestow upon them – he needs to learn facts from those whom his edicts directly affect.

  • According to the last two U.S. censuses, 75% of tribal members DO NOT live in Indian Country – and many have deliberately taken their children and left in order to protect their families from the rampant crime and corruption.
  • The abuses at Spirit Lake here in North Dakota are well known, but it is also known that Spirit Lake is just a microcosm of what’s happening on reservations across the country.
  • These abuses are rampant on many reservations because the U.S. Government has set up a system that allows extensive abuse to occur unchecked and without repercussion.
  • Many, many times more children leave the reservation system in the company of their parents, who have mass exited – than do children who have been taken into foster care or found a home in adoption.  But tribal leaders can’t admit parents are consciously taking their kids out of Indian Country in attempt to get them away from the reservation system and corrupt leaders. It makes a better sound bite to blame it on evil social services

President Obama, please listen to those who do not have a vested financial interest in increasing tribal government power, and learn about the physical, emotional, sexual and financial abuse of tribal members by other tribal members and even many tribal leaders.

STOP supporting corrupt tribal leaders and corrupt systems and pretending all is okay in Indian Country.

Every time power to tribal leaders is increased, tribal members – U.S. citizens – are robbed of civil freedoms under the constitution of the United States.

More power given to tribal leaders means less freedom, safety and constitutional rights for tribal members.

VAWA Protects the Rights of Tribal Govt, NOT the Rights of Women!

 Comments Off on VAWA Protects the Rights of Tribal Govt, NOT the Rights of Women!
Mar 012013
 

March 1, 2013

On February 12, 2013, a horrid violence against women was committed when the ‘Violence against Women Act’ was passed by the U.S. Senate by a 78-22 vote with all amendments intact. Women across the nation were thrown under a bus.

On February 28, 2013, the U.S. House repeated the violence with 87 Republicans joining 199 Democrats to pass the bill 286-138. God only knows if this callous assault on women can be stopped. The measure now heads to Obama’s desk.

Obama said in a statement. “Renewing this bill is an important step towards making sure no one in America is forced to live in fear, and I look forward to signing it into law as soon as it hits my desk.”

Does no one actually read these things? We are discussing women and young girls who have been vulnerable and already victimized – being forced into further victimization. Where is the language in the VAWA that tribal government can only have jurisdiction under informed consent and absent objection of the victim?

If there is none, is this Act protecting the rights of women, or the rights of tribal government?

I asked this question to both Ms. Tracee Sutton and Ms. Gail Hand from Senator Heitkamp’s office. Both were silent in response.

I understand that most of our Congressmen on the Hill have never been in the situation of being a victim within Indian Country. I understand that they might not be aware the ramifications these amendments will have on tribal and non-tribal women. Reading the recent report by Mr. Thomas F. Sullivan, Administration of Children and Families in Denver of the severe corruption and abuse on the Spirit Lake Reservation might shed some light on the problem. If even a portion of what he is saying is true, our Congress has no right for mandating tribal jurisdiction over U.S. citizens.

Never assume that simply because a woman is of tribal heritage, she wants her case to be heard in tribal court. A person does not know the meaning of “Good ol’ Boy’s Club” until one has dealt with some of the tribal courts. On top of this, our government has given all tribal courts full faith and credit, meaning once the case is ruled on in tribal court, the victim can’t go to the county or state for justice.

And while many enrolled women will be upset when told their options have been limited, please realize that multi-racial marriages and relationships are very, very common in Indian Country and non-member women are no small number in domestic violence cases within reservation boundaries.

Further, it is interesting that in the language in section 4(A) below, describing under what conditions in which there would be an exception to tribal jurisdiction, the defendant is addressed more than the victim. It doesn’t matter what heritage the woman is – that isn’t the deciding factor for tribal jurisdiction. The language below addresses the perp’s relationship to Indian Country as the deciding factor.

In fact, under this section, ‘victim’ is defined and limited to only women who have obtained a protective order. In other words, women who DON’T have a protective order would NOT be considered victims under the exception section, and thus, no matter what, are subject to tribal jurisdiction.

FURTHER – the words, “in the Indian country of the participating tribe” are used over and over. Do you know what this means? I will tell you what it doesn’t mean. It DOESN’T mean inside reservation boundaries. But I can’t tell you what it DOES mean as far as how many miles outside the boundaries it extends – because, apparently, that is up the tribal government and BIA.

Yes, friends. A woman, off the reservation, who is assaulted by a person whom she might not even be aware is a tribal member (we talked about multi-heritage relationships, right?) might find herself fighting for justice in a tribal court.

… But trying to read the legalese in section 4, I have to ask, if both the victim and perp are non-Indians, but the victim doesn’t have a protective order…? (Who writes this stuff?)

It appears that the language has been written to protect the defendants, specifically enrolled men, from state and federal jurisdiction. They might come down hard on a non-member, but given the track history of many tribal courts – do not doubt that this bill will end up protecting certain men and further victimizing many women.

This type of language throws women of all heritages under the bus. Not only could enrolled women be forced into a court predominantly run by her ex’s relatives, but non-tribal women, viewed as outsiders no matter how long they have lived in ‘Indian Country’, could be forced to share their horrific story and plea for justice in a room full of potentially hostile relatives and friends of the defendant.

How many women will simply suffer in silence rather than attempt to be heard in tribal court? How do laws like this seriously protect an already victimized woman? What can be done to ensure that victims know they have the option to refuse tribal jurisdiction and seek justice elsewhere?

Further – could you please tell me in what manner women who would be affected by these amendments were consulted? During the discussion of these amendments, what non-tribal entity or organization represented and advocated for needs of women who live within Indian Country?

PLEASE URGE PRESIDENT OBAMA NOT TO SIGN THIS HORRIBLE VERSION OF THE VAWA!

`SEC. 204. TRIBAL JURISDICTION OVER CRIMES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

`(4) EXCEPTIONS-

`(A) VICTIM AND DEFENDANT ARE BOTH NON-INDIANS-

`(i) IN GENERAL- A participating tribe may not exercise special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction over an alleged offense if neither the defendant nor the alleged victim is an Indian.

`(ii) DEFINITION OF VICTIM- In this subparagraph and with respect to a criminal proceeding in which a participating tribe exercises special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction based on a violation of a protection order, the term `victim’ means a person specifically protected by a protection order that the defendant allegedly violated.

`(B) DEFENDANT LACKS TIES TO THE INDIAN TRIBE- A participating tribe may exercise special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction over a defendant only if the defendant–

`(i) resides in the Indian country of the participating tribe;

`(ii) is employed in the Indian country of the participating tribe; or

`(iii) is a spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner of–

`(I) a member of the participating tribe; or

`(II) an Indian who resides in the Indian country of the participating tribe.

Pundits Missed the Forest: Why Obama Won

 Comments Off on Pundits Missed the Forest: Why Obama Won
Nov 252012
 

November, 25, 2012

There are many conservatives across the nation today who are seriously distraught over the election, panicked because the results made no sense and worried sick over what is to come. In the hope of giving some kind of comfort, I want to assure my conservative brethren that the pundits, scrambling to explain the Obama re-election in terms of conventional wisdom, have missed an important factor.  It wasn’t the only factor, but it was a huge one.

You could call this new factor “Unlikely Voters.” I count several of my extended relatives, whom I love but face reality about, among this group:  first-time voters who never bothered nor cared to vote, but did so on Nov. 6 solely out of hope for the loosening of drug laws and moral absolutes and the perception that the change promised will mean easier access to unearned money, food and housing.

Go ahead and call me names for saying it. I really don’t care. Those were their reasons. They weren’t voting about abortion, Libya, Hurricane Sandy—not even the economy. If you were to ask these relatives about Fast and Furious, most of them would think you were referring to a movie.

As a member of a very diverse family I have been privy to disturbing posts on Facebook, like these two the day before the election:

Person 1: do u kno wat romney really wants to do with native americans and our treaties?

Person 2: Those who need rides to vote can call ACLU at 444-2285 :)Good service ACLU!! Thanks for your help!

Later, someone else exalts the fact that all the “hoodie tokers” and “hoes” were watching this election, and that is something ‘no other president had ever done.’

The election now over, they continue with day-to-day conversation.

Person 3:  Cool cool I just got my food stamps… ima walk up 2 the store

Person 4: ur one lucky dude – cuz im one of them peps that dnt get any foodies… gota buy dem from peps, my countys fkd up lol.

[Translation: “You are one lucky dude, because I am one of those people who don’t get food stamps… I have to buy them from people (food money on the card is “sold” for cash to use for drugs/alcohol.)  My county is f….. lol.”]

As this small illustration shows, far more important than gender, age or other conventional distinction was the split between those who see beyond tomorrow and prefer discipline, and those who live for today and prefer pleasure. These ‘unlikely voters’ truly only cared that Obama looks cool, their friends all like him, and they think he will relax repressive laws. It’s probably no coincidence that Colorado, which legalized marijuana, and Maine and Maryland, which legalized gay marriage, also went for Obama.

Some of these are the voters whom the Democratic party went out of the way to get to the polls. They’re not on Dick Morris’ radar because he was using logic, but they weren’t making decisions based on logic. Because their friends believed the street rumor that Romney was going to toss out Indian treaties, they believed it. Because they were told that there was a war on women and minorities, they believed it.  What they were told on the street about Obama was all that mattered and nothing was going to change that.

Remember, conservatives swept the polls in 2010. Those conservative voters did not disappear nor change their minds on the issues. We did well in 2010 because Obama wasn’t running. There was therefore no interest on the part of some ‘unlikely voters’ to get out there and vote. We should be able to count on 2014 to be like 2010.

I don’t know if the Dems will find someone as “cool” to get the attention of the gang crowd in 2016. I doubt it. It could be that once Obama is done, we will be back to normal. Hillary isn’t cool enough to excite some of my relatives to get out and vote—and neither is Biden. But whether or not these relatives and others ever vote again, we do need to deal somehow with an immoral bent in our country, a very unhealthy element that is growing.

We were surprised and broken-hearted Nov. 6 because we thought that Romney was doing so well, making so much sense, and there was so much that was against Obama. Romney did do well, and there was much against Obama. But it was all beside the point. It never mattered to some voters what Romney did or didn’t do. They weren’t even listening.

Paul Ryan Wins VP Debate as Biden Yells, Interrupts, and Bullies

 Comments Off on Paul Ryan Wins VP Debate as Biden Yells, Interrupts, and Bullies
Oct 122012
 

October 12, 2012

Talking heads can say what they want in their attempts to pretend that Joe Biden did well,  looked presidential, or behaved (as one has already said) “passionately” but maturely during the debate between the Vice Presidents tonight, Thursday, October 11th.

The bottom line is that Joe Biden was rude,  condescending, arrogant, and simply over the top in his behavior throughout the entire debate; so much so that his behavior was the primary topic of discussion on all the social networks.  Little can be remembered about what he actually said – but a lot will be remembered about how he behaved.  Over and over during the debate, people commented about how irritating and obnoxious he was.

Here is just a sampling of tweets reflecting the average voter’s thoughts during the debate, beginning with Libya and then moving on.  Tweets equating Biden with the rear of a donkey have been omitted –

_______________________

RT @poliquest: #Biden already sounding stupid. The men that did it were in the pics! Ur pres apologized for US! #VPDebate

RT @LessaT: Oh, but Joe you & the Dem’s mistake cost 3 men’s lives

RT @lonelycon: Ryan comes out swinging, diplomat in Paris has Marine guard but not Benghazi? #VPDebate

RT @Lilleth71: Good job @PaulRyanVP … Not letting Biden weasel out of #BengaziGate

RT @RichardUSA: Biden didn’t answer the first question. Debate is over.

RT @ChuckNellis: Biden’s face is turning red already. Do you think his head might blow up on live TV?

RT @Dataaide: What is Biden talking about? Is this ‘opposite day’ in junior high school? #debate #tcot

RT @TJMcCormack: Same intelligence community that told us WMD, Joe? #debates

RT @funkyconserv: Biden is getting defensive! LOL

RT @DavidLimbaugh: Bull you weren[t told they wanted more security. #VPDebate

RT @Aijadaina: #vpdebate Wow, Ryan is hitting right between the eyes. Unraveling of Obama foreign policy. We should not project weakness …

RT @RightKlik Biden “We weren’t told that they needed more security” *TIP: Stop skipping intelligence briefings #VPDebate #tcot

RT @MelissaTweets: Is anyone buying what Biden is selling? He’s like a used car salesman.

RT @cicecandy: Is this a joke what the he’ll is Biden grinning about

RT @indyrallen Is it just me or is Biden coming off as a jerk? #VPDebate

RT @fuzislippers: Slow Joe needs to stop giggling like a lunatic, it’s off-putting and strange. #VPDebate

RT @torreymspears: Biden has to stop laughing. #VPDebate #tcot #p2

RT @RalstonReports: Ryan’s answer on Iran is strong, focused, tough. Biden: “It’s incredible.”

RT @themick1962: “We should not be apologizing for standing up for our values” Paul Ryan #Amen #VPDebate

RT @fr33dm4us: Slow Joe @VP, left his Respect at the door with his brain! #CSPAN2012

RT @NolteNC: What is Biden doing laughing like this?

RT @nogirlemen: Is English a 2nd language for Biden?? He makes no sense #VPdebate

RT @Mkber5: Wow can clearly see moderator is siding with uncle Joe. #vpdebate

RT @hughhewitt: Iran is a good way away? What? #debate

RT @AlinskyDefeater: They’re a good way away. Thanks for pinning that down Joe. #ocra #tcot

RT @DickMorrisTweet: #debates Biden looks weak on Iran. nobody believes that they are not close to a weapon.

RT @TXCupCake: I’m sickened by Joe Biden… And he doesn’t even have to say anything. It’s the fact that he is chuckling during this top …

RT @ObotNot: Biden: “This is just a bunch of STUFF!” kinda like your brain, Joe… #VPDebate

RT @Shavaun66: #VPdebates did the moderator blow off the fact that the Obama Administration #LIED about the Libyan Embassy attack? #Orga …

RT @jeffemanuel: RT @jstrevino: Bibi Netanyahu was 24 in 1973, when Biden says their friendship formed, leading commando teams into Syria.

RT @djohnsUSA: Someone needs to tell Bibi Obama talks to him all the time because he doesn’t seem to know that. #VPdebate

RT @BrianFaughnan: Biden: all options on the table, but war is worse than an Iranian nuclear weapon.

RT @TerriGreenUSA: “@schmidtkevinall: Is Joe Biden really trying to criticize Romney and Ryan for Gaffes? Pot this is Kettle, do you re …

RT @DavidLimbaugh: So Joe, you are on a hit assignment now to be insulting to Romney and Ryan tonight. You squirrel. #VPDebate

RT @redsteeze: I’m sure glad Joe Biden thinks this is all funny. Chris Stevens isn’t laughing #VPDebate

RT @fitethegoodfite: RT @chrisrbarron: Biden is totally blowing this… unbelievable… 2 disasters in a row for them

RT@Dataaide: Wow. What a blowhard Biden is. Ryan responds beautifully, and then Biden tries to interrupt again, and then laughs like a schoolboy…

RT @TeriChristoph: Biden’s cackling is tailor-made for an SNL skit.

RT @cbierzonski: Point scored on Scranton for Ryan! #debate

RT @StevenErtelt: Not sure how much longer Biden thinks he can interrupt Ryan without looking like a jerk.

RT @SwiftRead: Biden Lied! Tax rate lowered for ALL, allowing US economy to grow & collect more income/sales tax = revenue http://t. …

RT @zanieladie: ZING…Ryan: 1 Biden: 0

RT @southsalem: RT @DLoesch: “I think the vice president very well knows that sometimes words don’t come out the right way.” Ryan #vpdeb …

RT @Shavaun66: Your rambling JOE #VPdebates

RT @Dataaide: Thank you for interrupting Biden’s banter and allowing Ryan to speak some substance! #debate #tcot

RT @EyeOnPolitics: Biden asking Ryan to “show me a policy”… I have a feeling Ryan is about to show him several. #VPdebate #debates

RT @Jarjarbug: SHOW ME A #Budget Joe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #VPDebate

RT @Miz_Eisenhower: Biden is totally obnoxious.

RT @kerpen: Detroit DID go bankrupt after Bush and Obama flushed bailout money in a futile attempt to avoid bankruptcy. http://t.co/Xr914UM5

RT @readmylipstick: Every time Biden laughs that nasty smirky laugh I like him a little less… #vpdebates

RT @sdo1: Bingo. React to the guy. RT @LegInsurrection: Ryan needs to stop Biden from talking over him

RT @RedAlert: Ryan asks if it was a good idea to borrow money from China, and Biden giggles.

RT  @Dataaide:”Every VP dabate I hear this stuff about panels” – wasn’t a funny statement, Biden. It was dumb. #debate #tcot

RT @BiasedGirl Sounds like it. “@JessaNaomi: Did Biden just say that 4% of the green jobs didn’t go under? #VPdebate” #debate #tcot

RT @cgpb: Biden’s gaffes, inventions & hyperboles will go on tonight in d world’s book of debating records!

RT @brandootr: I used to kinda like Joe, but he is showing his inner a–hole tonight #vpdebate

RT @sanuzis: Biden is being just OBNOXIOUS as hell continuously interrupting Ryan –

RT @FoxNewsInsider: Chris Wallace: Never seen a candidate as ‘openly disrespectful of the other as [Joe] Biden was to Paul Ryan’ http:// …

______________________________

Just Sayin.  The talking heads can spin it if they want, but this is what people actually thought during the debate.

Of course it is the issues that matter most – but it was hard to hear the actual discussion with all VP Biden’s interruptions. Which was perhaps the purpose.

Why does it matter how he acted, other than the fact that in doing so, he prevented us from fully hearing Ryan’s answers?  The man who wins this seat is just one heart beat away from the presidency. I pray it isn’t Biden.

Is the Obama Administration fanning the flames of a Race War?

 Comments Off on Is the Obama Administration fanning the flames of a Race War?
Sep 232010
 

September, 23, 2010

Let’s see, we had Black Panthers, La Raza, NAACP, and Mrs. Obama all talking “us against them.” Now we have President Obama, himself, telling black lawmakers, “

I need everybody here to go back to your neighborhoods, and your workplaces, to your churches, and barbershops, and beauty shops. Tell them we have more work to do. Tell them we can’t wait to organize. Tell them that the time for action is now.”

As many know, in late 2008, the Department of Justice, under President Bush, filed a lawsuit alleging that the ‘New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense’ (NBPPSD) and two of its members had intimidated Philadelphia voters during the Nov. 4, 2008 general election.

According to the complaint, two members of the NBPPSD were stationed at the entrance to a Philadelphia polling station. They wore their uniforms and one carried a “police-style baton weapon.” Two witnesses testified that at least three voters, after seeing the two men in front of the door, turned away without voting and that a black poll watcher was harassed, called a race traitor, and told that if he stepped outside, there would be ‘hell to pay.’

Later the Black Panthers admitted that they had ‘deployed’ members to polling locations nationwide and these two men were part of that deployment.

But soon after Obama took over the presidency, the case was dropped. Apparently, career prosecutors at the DOJ wanted to proceed with the case, but Obama appointees did not. The Obama administration, it was said, won.

According to whistleblower J. Christian Adams, attorney of 18 years and until a few months ago, Department of Justice employee, dropping the case was about ‘race,’ not fidelity to the law.

Hans von Spakovsky, a former career Counsel to the Assistant AG for Civil Rights, thinks this action by the Justice Department is unprecedented and says the DOJ has failed its duty to enforce voting laws. He told The Bulletin that the dismissal by the DOJ, with no notice on the Justice Department press site, particularly against an organization listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, is a horrible miscarriage of justice.

Having heard of Mr. Adams sworn testimony, why didn’t President Obama push for justice in the matter?

Later, one of the NBPPSD members who was at the Philly polling place was video taped at an event, yelling at the crowd that black people have to get with it and ”Kill Some Crackers and Their Babies!”

It is clearly obvious that the Tea Party is multiracial in both leadership and membership, while the Black Panthers are not. And yet, it is the ‘Tea Party’ that Obama’s followers, including the NAACP, are accusing of racism. In truth, who are the ones creating issues over race, i.e. racists?

Last month, the NAACP voted on a Resolution concerning the ‘Tea Party. Although the NAACP refuses to release the language of the Resolution until October, ABC reported that it says

“Tea Party members have used “racial epithets,” have verbally abused black members of Congress and threatened them, and protesters have engaged in “explicitly racist behavior” and “displayed signs and posters intended to degrade people of color generally and President Barack Obama specifically.”

To this date, no one has come forward with any video or audio of Tea Party participants engaging in any of the behavior described – other than displaying signs and posters concerning the misguided politics of President Barack Obama. But no one has supplied evidence of a poster intended to specifically degrade people “of color” on account of their “color.”

Despite the lack of any evidence, the President of the NAACP went on with his claims:

“For more than a year we’ve watched as Tea Party members have called congressmen the N-word, have called congressmen the F-word. We see them carry racist signs and whenever it happens, the membership tries to shirk responsibility,” NAACP President Ben Jealous (an apt surname) said in an interview with ABC News. “If the Tea Party wants to be respected and wants to be part of the mainstream in this country, they have to take responsibility.”

The NAACP unanimously passed this resolution, purportedly calling on Tea Party members to ‘repudiate’ what the NAACP calls “ultra-nationalist and racist factions within the organization.”

Okay…back up. Now they have thrown the word “Ultra-nationalist” into the mix? What’s that supposed to mean? Is that what the left now calls Patriotism? So now Patriotism is a bad thing, inherently associated with racism?  They have no evidence of racism, so they must be going after Patriotism because its the only thing there’s lots of evidence of within the Tea Party!

Yet, there is plenty of footage of the Black Panthers using direct, deliberate racist language towards non-blacks. Has Mr. Jealous taken responsibility and repudiated that clear, undeniable racism – racism from who Mrs. Obama has for some reason called “African” Americans?

Somehow the NAACP’s complaints smell more political than anything else. This isn’t an organization devoted to supporting a people group, it’s an organization devoted to supporting a political party,

Fortunately, not every US citizen of African heritage thinks the NAACP is correct. ABC reports that the Rev. C.L. Bryant, former president of NAACP’s Garland, Texas, chapter and now a leading Tea Party activist, said;

“The idea that the Tea Party is racist or is trying to instigate a racist climate is “simply a lie.”

But the NAACP isn’t alone. Organizations such as the National Urban League, Acorn, and Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Push Coalition all appear to see non- “African” American people in this country as a stumbling block to their political objective.

The Rev. Jim Wallis, founder of the Washington-based social-justice group Sojourners, former leader of the Michigan Students for a Democratic Society (associated with Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground) and a key member of Obama’s faith council, wrote on May 27 that, “There is something wrong with a political movement like the Tea Party which is almost all white…” and claimed that an undercurrent of white resentment is part of the tea party ethos. Apparently not having heard or understood anything that has been said by Conservatives over the last year, he also asked whether the Tea party would even exist if the president of the United States weren’t the first black man to occupy that office.

Willis’ group, Sojourners, BTW, had actively lobbied for communist regimes that seized power in Latin America in the late 1970s, and is currently advocating for the controversial Imam and Mosque in New York.
The left’s constant invective that everyone else in America is racist appears to be a shallow effort to provoke young, minority voters nationwide to rise up and save the Democratic Party over these next two election cycles.

And it appears that Michelle Obama is assisting in that effort. Are we being too hard on her?

First Lady Obama, who wrote in her 1985 undergraduate thesis at Princeton, “I will always be black first and a student second,” and “Princeton made me more aware of my blackness than ever before,” spoke to the NAACP prior to their vote on the Tea Party Resolution. ABC News, as expected, commended her speech in their report headlined, “Michelle Obama Rouses NAACP Before Vote Condemning ‘Racist’ Elements of Tea Party”

Her speech had to do with childhood obesity, but her community focus was very narrow. Many felt her speech was incendiary and race baiting. Her statement that “African American communities are still hit harder than just about anywhere by this economic downturn…” was very hard for someone of a different heritage to hear while struggling to keep the electric bill paid and food on the table. The entire speech was focused on the idea that the “African American” community struggles harder than any other. President Obama has made similar statements.

The Obama’s, like so many in their inner circle, appear to be blind to people of other heritages. Does she honestly believe that the ‘African American’ community has been hit harder by this economy than the Native American community? Does she have statistics to back that up? And is it really hit harder by childhood obesity than the ‘Caucasian’ community, or ‘Latino’ community?

Mrs. Obama went on to say, “African American” children “won’t be in any shape to continue the work begun by the founders of this great organization (NAACP).”

Again…back up. Is that the point of teaching the children good nutrition? So that they will be in good condition to work for the NAACP? I certainly hope that was simply poor speech writing, and not the true goal. Incidentally, what is the work that she is hoping these children will do? And why does Mrs. Obama, the NAACP, and their followers continue to call American citizens with darker skin tones “African” Americans? Why the continual, purposeful pointing out of centuries ‘past’ heritage?

And why the persistent attacks on “America?” Why does the left appear to be continually, purposefully, blaming and riling people? Were initial concerns about the Obama’s twenty-year relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright well-founded?

Listening to Sermons such as this one:

The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing “God Bless America.” No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme. ~ Jeremiah Wright (2003 sermon)

Which brings us to one of his more recent ones: an anti-Semitic Palm Sunday Sermon

This is no fluke in thought or sermon. On Palm Sunday, 2010, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, pastor Emeritus of Trinity United Church of Christ, Chicago, Ill., whose church Barack and Michelle Obama attended for 20 years, gave the following sermon at a Church in Detroit:

Based on 2 Kings 6:8-17, Rev. Wright spoke on “What You Can’t See.”  The passage related how the Prophet Elisha saw God’s invisible host of Angels standing ready to protect him against the King of Syria. Pastor Wright stressed, “Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them…”

Ellis Washington, former editor of the Michigan Law Review and law clerk at The Rutherford Institute was a witness to this sermon and later stated,

“Despite the thunderous shouts of Amen! Praise the Lord! Hallelujah! and hysterical laughter in response to Rev. Wright’s sermon, I knew in my heart that this man standing before me in the pulpit was deceitful to core; a false prophet perverting the word of God like no other person I had ever witnessed.”
“For example, I heard Rev. Wright read the well-known biblical passage …but the political spin he put on it was quite outrageous…

  • Syria-Israel War = America-Iraq War;
    • King of Syria = President George W. Bush;
    • Operation Capture Elisha = Operation Desert Storm;
    • Prophet Elisha = Saddam Hussein (an innocent man with no WMDs);
    • Syrian Army = U.S. military (i.e., an evil pagan army hell-bent on capturing the man of God);
    • Syria’s servants = President George Bush military and political advisers;
    • Elisha’s servants = black Americans whose eyes needed to be open about how evil and irredeemable the US of KKKA is.

Okay, Rev. Wright…so where do the other American minorities fit in? As far as the Tea Party is concerned, they fit in right next to the rest of us. But where do they fit in with the NAACP, and Wrights version of America?

Because, you know, their human and want to fit in somewhere…

A few months ago, Ron Gochez, a LA Unified School District Teacher, railed against conservative Caucasian capitalists at a small Los Angeles rally and called for a Communist Progressive revolution in America. This liberal Revolution would involve killing people in the United States.

On Cinco de Mayo, May 5, 2010, Robert Rodriguez released an “illegal” trailer on Ain’t It Cool News. The trailer implied that the film would be about Machete leading a revolt against conservative anti-immigration politicians and citizens. Very unfunny – and an excellent reason to boycott the movie.

Do Obama and his administration truly believe that Fanning the Flames of Race War will help them win in 2010 and 2012? Are they honestly willing to push America to the edge in order to obtain their goals?

In August, 2010, a man went on a shooting rampage at his former workplace. After shooting 10 co-workers, killing eight, Omar Thornton told the 911 operator,

“This place is a racist place. They treat me bad over here. They treat all the black employees bad over here, too. So I took into my own hands and handled the problem,” he said. “I wish I could have got more of the people.”

Unfortunately, while most people continue to rise above the rhetoric and remember who we are as a country, angry, racial rhetoric is now rising from all sides and heritages. Two years ago, many were not angry and did not say such things as they are saying now. People are growing more frightened of each other; unsure what the other person might be thinking or where they stand. It’s always a relief when one finds out that despite the difference in heritage, the other person still thinks just like you do. Despite the wedge that the left is trying to force between everyone, most of us still want to be neighbors.

This was supposed to be a “post” racial presidency. Why is our leadership fanning these flames?

On September 18, 2010, President Barack Obama , in a speech to just the black lawmakers said, ”

I need everybody here to go back to your neighborhoods, and your workplaces, to your churches, and barbershops, and beauty shops. Tell them we have more work to do. Tell them we can’t wait to organize. Tell them that the time for action is now.”

Why was this message given to only part of the liberal Congress members? Why weren’t non-black lawmakers included?

The president, in effort to secure their support, repeated the First Lady’s claim, saying the recession had struck “with a particular vengeance on African-American communities” and implied that opposition to his policies is based on racism.

Members of “the other side,” Obama said, “want to take us backward. We want to move America forward.”

The caucus dinner with the lawmakers capped a concentrated week of outreach to minority groups. On Monday there was a White House reception for black college officials. On Wednesday there were speeches by the president to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and by first lady to a black caucus legislative conference. Obama told the Hispanic group he is committed to an immigration overhaul, even though it has stalled in Congress. He blamed GOP opposition and said Hispanic voters should keep that in mind.  Obama was also interviewed on “The Tom Joyner Show” radio program last week, which has a large black audience.

I was raised in the DFL, amongst many people that seriously believed that liberal policies would help people. I wonder what some of those older people I grew up around; Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, Don Frazer and Rudy Perpich would be thinking, or are thinking, about the Democratic Party now. They seemed so honest while I was growing up. I have a hard time believing they would support the current administration.

But I’ve also realized for years that it is the liberal mindset that keeps people separated and angry, salting wounds. Having had lots of experience living in very low income communities and on reservations, I began to see how the liberal policies were doing much more harm than good. More recently, I have begun to wonder if that is their real purpose. I still believe the people I grew up around were sincere, but the Democratic Party, at the top, as near as I can tell, is now the party of elite wanting power over the poor.

I see the Democrats today as more closely aligned with the Communists of 60 – 80 years ago, who professed to be for the poor while they terrorized and subjugated them.

You can hear it in their angry words – the venom, rudeness, and hate with which they treat their political opponents. In Blog comments and on twitter, they have been attacking the elderly, vets, and young mothers with disdain and the foulest language. Why? That kind of behavior certainly doesn’t endear them to anyone. It only pushes people farther away from the Democratic Party. People that attack brutely rather than debate maturely are scary people. I do not want them leading us; they are the type that hit when they aren’t obeyed.  However it appears this is the type of people we now have in the White House.

We can not let this small group of ultra-liberals push us into race war.

Not only is race is irrelevant in any context, (including in the U.S. census), race doesn’t even exist. According to Genome Project, there is no such thing as race. There is no gene for race. There are only genes for familial differences, such as facial cheekbones, shade of skin, and texture of hair. Those aren’t race differences; they are family differences. Human genes have been traced back to just one family. (The genome project stopped short of saying that all humans descended from one couple. Too touchy of a statement, I would guess.)

Commenting on current racial tensions, Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, “The NAACP is slamming the Tea Party for racism, as all the while the NAACP supports Planned Parenthood, the most racist arm of genocide in America today. Add to this melee the most recent attack by the Pro-abortion Movement on the Pro-Life Prayer Movement that is sweeping the nation. As the games play out, one thing is apparent. The concept of separate races and consequently racism are a lie.”

“What people need to do is to read the Bible, or at least read my Uncle Martin’s book Strength to Love,” said Dr. King. “Human dignity, bringing love and respect for each other as human beings, not considering ourselves as separate races is the answer to this puzzle.”

Rep. King, Obama IS a Racist

 Comments Off on Rep. King, Obama IS a Racist
Jun 172010
 

Finally – someone has had the guts to say something.

Iowa Congressman Steve King, in a June 16, 2010, FOX article by Cristina Corbinon, reaffirmed his belief that President Obama has “a default mechanism that breaks down on the side of the minority.”

While he stopped short of calling the president a racist, saying “I don’t know if I want to go so far as to make that allegation,” King ”made no apologies for his comments about Obama favoring Minorities.”

The Iowa Representative meant exactly what he said on G. Gordon Liddy’s radio show Monday: that President Obama favors blacks over whites and “needs to be called to task on that.” He felt he is performing a public service by stating that the President obviously favors blacks over whites.

YES – he had done a public service!  President Obama, Eric Holder, and the extremely large number of people in our country that are doing the same thing DO need to be called on it.  They MUST be called on it, because to continue this ridiculous facade is seriously harming us all.

One of King’s examples was the July 2009 Cambridge, MA, brouhaha where white police officer Sgt. James Crowley arrested black Prof. Henry Louis Gates Jr. outside his home. Before knowing the facts, Obama said the officer had acted “stupidly” by arresting Gates.  Under severe criticism, Obama later ate his words and pretended to make it all better at a White House ”beer summit,” where he and Gates continued their assault on the varied motivations of law enforcement.  (One thing that was noticeable in the press photos of their walk to the table was Crowley’s kind attention in assisting Gates, who uses a cane, while Obama lumbered ahead, oblivious to them both.) 

King said Obama’s initial statement on the incident “brought up race in the beginning” and “concluded with race.”

King went on to cite Obama’s criticism of Arizona’s immigration law and Eric Holders decision to drop the 2008 voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.  Two members of that party had been standing at the door of a Philedelphia voting center in election day, waving sticks.

Democrats are feigning outrage over King’s remarks, and even some republicans have run hiding.  Never mind he’s speaking to an issue that many of us had been aware of, or have become aware of, over the last year.

While King stops short of calling the president a racist, I have no such hesitancy.

It is beyond me how my husband, who was 100% Native American, was called a racist by the Montana Human Rights Commission simply because he politically opposed what tribal leaders are doing to people of Indian heritage.  Yet, he never showed disdain for the tribe. In fact, everything he did was because he loved his family and friends and hated to see them continue to be hurt by destructive federal Indian policy.  His only crime?  He was taking the same side on the issues as many conservative white people. Therefore, because the left labeled those white people as racist, they labeled him as a racist as well.  In fact, the Montana Human Rights Network claimed that ANYONE who opposed tribal government decisions was inherently a racist.

Yet Obama, Jackson, Sharpton, Rev. Wright, and the like , (I’m referring to ideology here), can behave as they have toward whites – not with simple political opposition, but with constant hate mongering in the form of  false  accusations about the motivations of Caucasians.  And no one is supposed to say anything.

What’s honestly behind the huge outcry against the Arizona law – the one that reflects and upholds federal law?  The only ones making this a racial issue are the ones who are calling the law racist and inferring that Arizonans are as well.  That would be Obama, Holder, Napolitano, and the Mayor of LA… to name just a few.

While the state was forced to enact the law because federal government wasn’t doing its job concerning gang members and drug runners crossing the border in greater numbers, Arizona law enforcement personnel are not idiots, nor are they all racists. For Obama, Holder, various mayors and pandering politicians from the left to accuse them as such is racism in itself.

Arizona Law Enforcement personnel are trained professionals and they deserve respect.  They have arrested criminals of every size, shape, color and persuasion in the past and will continue to do so in the future. While jerks exist in any and every group, (including the White House) Arizona policemen do not intend to eyeball only Latinos for suspicious activity and arrest and let everyone else go on about their crimes.

Further,  the need for a secure border and strict law isn’t only about Latinos! So pretending that Latinos are the only issue – the only ones crossing the border illegally and the only ones to be affected by the bill …is racist.

In case not everyone has heard, we were attacked in 2001, and not one of the attackers was Latino.  Further, on an Arizona reservation just last month, a Pakistani was picked up after crossing the border illegally.

It has also been known for quite awhile that Al-Qaeda has been recruiting Caucasians in Britain to commit terrorist acts. In 2008, a Scotland paper wrote,

“As many as 1,500 white Britons are believed to have converted to Islam for the purpose of funding, planning and carrying out surprise terror attacks inside the UK.”

In Israel, terrorists are now coming in every shape, size, gender, and color.

So let’s get real. We can’t play games with our border, no matter who feels offended and pouts. This is about crime, not race.

Further, quoting Dr. William B. Allen, former Chair of the US Comm. on Civil Rights and Dean Emeritus, Political Science, MSU

(The Arizona Law) …addresses individuals who have broken the law, and looks for ordinary social indications in order to determine who such persons are. … So, in the case of immigration laws, … the laws operate universally, to protect those who enter legally and to condemn those who enter illegally.  It is the individual, personal decision to enter legally that identifies the person as subject to the law, and not the person’s race or ethnicity.

So why does Obama and other keep making it about race?  Who are the real racists?

Obama’s comments and behavior consistently reek racism and even anti-Semitism.  (He couldn’t even bring himself to dine with or have his picture taken with Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel.) 

Some argue Obama can’t be racist because of his mother and grandmother. The fact that Obama’s mother was white is irrelevant. As a Berkeley psychotherapist noted, “His mother disregarded his basic needs, dragged him all over the place, and ultimately abandoned him.” She also wrote that “Barack Sr. was an abusive, alcoholic bigamist.”  But Obama subsequently wrote a book praising his father.

It’s time for the whole ‘racism’ game to stop. Many of us refuse to play anymore.

This is a country full of varied individuals.  Our multi-racial family refuses to even answer questions about ‘race’ posed by the census, school documents, and the like.  Race doesn’t matter!!  It’s liberals who keep trying to make it an issue.  We didn’t answer it on the 1990, 2000, or 2010 census.   We encourage everyone – of every heritage – to stop answering that racist, immaterial question no matter what document it comes on.

They will tell you that the question is only for funding purposes – but that’s part of the problem!  Why is the federal government allocating funds based upon question of race?  It’s way past time for all this garbage to stop!

Obama Blames Congress for Borders, but sat on it like Bush/Clinton

 Comments Off on Obama Blames Congress for Borders, but sat on it like Bush/Clinton
May 192010
 

Obama, in yet another speech last Friday, failed to apologize for not having been any better than his predecessors in taking action to protect the border, and blamed Congress – who he had forced into a year long pre-occupation with health care – for failing to enact ‘comprehensive reform.’  He then made another ‘promise’ that if Congress continues to waste its time (pandering to his agenda) ”We will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country.”

In Fact, it was Obama himself that said on April 28, 2010, that he didn’t want to force an immigration bill through Congress at this time. “We’ve gone though a very tough year and I’ve been working Congress very hard, so I know there may not be an appetite immediately to dive into another controversial issue,” the president told reporters, although that sentiment hadn’t stopped him from pushing additional stimulus packages and sneaky legislation concerning student loans …and even Puerto Rican statehood.

He ended his blame of Congress by insulting the people of Arizona yet again, saying that the absence of a federal resolution opens the door to irresponsibility by “others,” ie “the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans.”

TODAY – in continued oblivion toward the thoughts, feelings and needs of his countrymen, President Obama stood with Mexican President Felipe Calderon to chastise Arizona for its new immigration law, insinuating that the Arizona police Force is racist, mean-spirited, …and not very bright.

Obama said the immigration law – which is simply an enforcement of Federal law and makes it a State crime to be in the U.S. illegally –  is a “misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system.”  He failed again to mention why his White House has made no effort to address and fix the system.

However, he DID say,

“We’re examining any implications especially for civil rights because in the United States of America, no law abiding person — be they an American citizen, illegal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like.”

So I guess you could say he’s doing something, although there is nothing in the law that says it has anything to do with what a person looks like.

You see, believe it or not, (bearing in mind there are always going to be loose cannons in any group) the Arizona police force is professional.  Most have lived in Arizona for a long time, lived with Latino neighbors all their lives, and some – hold on to your chairs – are even Latino themselves.  Further, they, like everyone else, know that an act of terrorism can come at the hand of anyone – any size, shape, gender or color.  They have been trained to watch everyone.  White people rob convenience stores, too.  They aren’t looking for illegals.  They are looking for crime, and when they find it, they are supposed to check the person’s ID.  This is something they do at every traffic stop with every person already.  Plain and simple.  They also all know that there are harsh ramifications if they mess with people without cause.  They all know the whole world is watching.  Does our President think they are idiots?

…Well, we already know he didn’t think too highly of the Cambridge police force.

Calderon, claiming that the Arizona law forces “our people to face discrimination,” doesn’t seem to think very highly of the Arizona police force, either.  He asked that the two countries work together to design an immigration policy that is more to his liking.  I’m sure Obama will accommodate him.

Calderon waxed poetic, saying;

“We can do so if we create a safer border — a border that will unite us instead of dividing us….We can do so with a community that will promote a dignified life in an orderly way for both our countries, who are some of them still living here in the shadows…If we are divided we cannot overcome these problems. We can only do this if we actually face our mutual problems.”

Calderon also waxed Self-Righteous, saying,

“My government cannot and will not remain indifferent when these kinds of policies go against human rights.”

Who is he kidding?  Did Obama think to ask the President of Mexico if he planned on doing the same thing with HIS southern border?  I wonder how the people of Panama and Guatemala feel about all this?

Right – this from Mexico. Up until 2008, illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico. Anyone arrested in violation of Immigration law could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported.  Which country has the record for going against Human Rights, Mr. President?  Officials in Mexico have been known to take bribes to keep suspects out of jail.

The law against illegal immigration in Mexico today is a civil violation, but just like Arizona, Police are “required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues.”

The law requires the same – but the behavior of Law Enforcement is not the same. Mexico has been cited repeatedly by human rights groups for abusing or ignoring the abuse of migrants from Central America. Just a few weeks ago, Amnesty International issued a report stating illegal immigrants in Mexico are abused, raped and kidnapped.  Mexican police don’t do much to stop it.  Is this why President Calderón thinks Arizona police are crooked?  That may be his excuse, but what is our President Obama’s?  And why are Americans supposed to stomach hypocrisy from President Calderón?

Well, why has Obama expected us to swallow any of the hypocrisy that he’s dished out?

“Illegal immigration is down, not up,” Obama asserted, “And we will continue to do whatever is necessary to secure our shared border…Today I want every American to know my administration has devoted unprecedented resources in personnel and technology to securing our border.”

When did he do that?  Yesterday?

By the way,  the U.S. has given Mexico about $1.3 billion to fight the drug war.  This includes special equipment meant to help capture drug runners as well as protect Mexican police and judges. According to Washington Post Reporter, William Booth, the equipment included “Black Hawk helicopters, night-vision goggles and armored cars and trains.” Obama wants to give Mexico 310 million more in 2011.

Mexican President’s Hypocrisy

Truth Meter: Obama’s Feigned Concern over the Dangers of Ipods

 Comments Off on Truth Meter: Obama’s Feigned Concern over the Dangers of Ipods
May 112010
 

In a May 9 commencement speech to graduates at Hampton University, Hampton, Virginia, President Obama claimed that modern technology and social media are “putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.”

Great! Many HOPE that to be true, as both our country and democracy have been needing a new pressure – a pressure that would cause people to wake up and “smell the coffee” (as one of my old teachers would have put it).  Our democracy has been spiraling out of control with Democrats and Republicans both having made decisions that put us on a financial train wreck.  Modern technology and social media bring pressure by providing a level of transparency and public discourse never before possible in history.  Many thank God for it.

Not so President Obama, although he made great use of modern technology and social media throughout his 2008 campaign.  He told the graduates on Sunday,

“…meanwhile, you’re coming of age in a 24/7 media environment that bombards us with all kinds of content and exposes us to all kinds of arguments, some of which don’t always rank that high on the truth meter.”

Let’s stop here. Truth meter?  Obama is going to lecture US about truth?  Does he sincerely believe that most of America still thinks he’s honest?

He goes on,

“And with iPods and iPads; and Xboxes and PlayStations – none of which I know how to work – (laughter) – information becomes a distraction, a diversion, a form of entertainment, rather than a tool of empowerment, rather than the means of emancipation. So all of this is not only putting pressure on you; it’s putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy.”

WHAT?

– OK, first, he’s talking about a Truth meter, and inferring that that Truth is important…and then goes ahead and lies about his use of this horrid technology.  CNN.com’s SciTech blog, John D. Sutter writes that during the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama told Rolling Stone his iPod contained songs by Bob Dylan, Jay-Z and cellist Yo-Yo Ma. He also told the AP he has all Michael Jackson music “on my iPod.” He’s even given the Queen Elizabeth an Ipod (With…can you believe this?… his speeches programmed in. Talk about arrogant…) And his administration uses social media to push their agenda constantly. His Press Secretary made a big show of starting to use Twitter.

– Second…most of us feel that yes, indeed, modern technology HAS been a huge tool for empowerment and emancipation!  Call Twitter, Blogs and other non-traditional media what you want, but I and many others are GRATEFUL for the ability to get news without having to depend on NBC, ABC or CBS.

– But third …wait, most of what he mentioned in the above list ARE …primarily tools used for…entertainment, right? Not information?  So…what’s he talking about?  Tools for entertainment aren’t putting pressure on the democracy…are they?   Wait…there’s an ipod in England loaded with his speeches….right; an entertainment ipod which contains distracting information that doesn’t rank that high on the truth meter… exists.

No, this feigned concern over the dangers of ipods, etc. was a farce.  He campaigned using social media, and his administration continues to use it heavily.  This wasn’t about the dangers of modern technology.  This was about the lamest attempt to quash dissent ever recorded.  Obama can control a few of the major news sources, but he hasn’t been able to control what we text, tweet, and blog each other.  And that’s what he hates, just as much as he hates the Tea Party.

Some think that this was his first volley in an attempt to control the Internet as well as dissenting news media.  If it was, it was a very weak and ineffective volley.  Needless to say, any attempt to circumvent the constitution and prevent people from freely communicating would only anger the public further. No matter what, they would continue to communicate by any means possible.

He might have wanted to give the appearance that he was trying to ”warn” America’s youth about the dangers of new technology, but for many of us, the actual warning we received is that he’s trying – ineffectively – to dampen trust in the myriad news sources that he can’t control.

Obama Swipes at Media, Says ‘Information’ Onslaught Pressuring ‘Democracy’

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/10/obama-targets-ipods-video-games-commencement-address/

ObamaCare: Don’t make me Sick

 Comments Off on ObamaCare: Don’t make me Sick
Mar 222010
 

Thieves!  I don’t have much money, but what little I have – Keep your hands off!

My Representative, Earl Pomeroy, voted FOR the passage of the Senate’s massive health insurance overhaul Sunday night. Among many of the onerous provisions that our country can’t afford:

– Children will be able to remain under their parents health coverage until they are 26.

– Insurance companies who participate in the government-run exchange will be allowed to provide for abortions. Many prolife orgs, including the National Right to Life, say that federal funds will be used for some of those abortions.

– In all, there will be a half a trillion in new taxes.

– The House “fixes” on the Senate bill raise taxes $50 Billion dollars more, as well as cut Medicare spending $66 billion more for a total of $523 billion.

– The $523 billion of money taken from Medicare will be used to pay for this new government program, including subsidies to help families with incomes up to $75,000 a year buy health insurance. $75,000 is NOT low income.  I, for one, do not want my health needs to come before those of my elders – in particular, the vets who fought for our country and their wives.

– Estimates are that this legislation will expand the deficit by more than $660 billion dollars.  So, not only are we neglecting the needs our elders, but we’ll be leaving our grandchildren with an impossible debt.

– The above are facts. There are rumors of much more to be frightened of.

Thanks Earl Pomeroy. I for one, will be voting for your opponent.  You, too, Obama. You are no hero of mine.

The campaigns against all those that voted for this horrendous legislation must begin today, whether or not they even have an opponent yet.

I write this as a low income widow that has lived many years without Insurance.  Having lived seven years in Canada and witnessed their abysmal care, I would rather have no insurance than to have our country and health care system ruined by Canadian style Obamacare.

These last few weeks, even listening to Obama go on and on with his rhetoric makes me sick to my stomach.  Is it just me, or does he talk now with a sing song in his voice, as if he’s a Television Evangelist?  Someone please tell him to stop.  Please.  It’s truly nauseating.

Michelle Obama and her News-Free Zone

 Comments Off on Michelle Obama and her News-Free Zone
Feb 202010
 

Are you kidding me?  In an interview with Mike Huckabee, Michelle Obama said she stays away from news because she wants to formulate her own opinions based on her “experiences.”  Obama said she reads news clips from the headlines, “but I tend and I try to keep home kind of news-free zone.”

At this unusual time in American history – when more Americans are waking up to what’s going on in their government and getting involved, Queen Obama announces that her family home is a “News-Free” zone, because she prefers her own “experience” to those of her fellow citizens.  She has no need for factual events going on with anyone else.

We teach our kids in school to stay on top of current events and we hold discussions with them in classrooms and at our dinner-tables.  Adults gather at watercoolers, lunch tables, and townhall meetings to discuss news.   Many turn to Twitter, Facebook, and other social media to stay informed.  And wait – didn’t liberals mock Sarah Palin when she didn’t answer Katie Couric’s question about magazines she reads?

But not Michelle Obama.  Forget about gathering information and researching facts.  Her home is a “News-Free” zone and her personal experience is all that she needs.

Heaven knows that any news about what the country is actually thinking, doing, or saying is the last thing she wants to hear about.

“Let them eat cake” she may as well have said.

Never mind if her personal experience has been limited to Chicago, and she knows nothing about the experience of rural, non-black, or “less than elite” Americans.

Has she ever been on welfare?  Has she ever slept in the projects?  No?

What about an understanding of middle class America?  She’s been living on the high end for a long time; enjoying the pay-offs that come with her husband’s social and political positions.  Does she have any understanding of what it is like to work your fingers to the bone and still not be able to make ends meet?  Or what it is like to keep a small family business in the black with today’s economy and taxes?  No?  Lived and worked in the rural bread basket of America; known people who gather for coffee in a small town cafe?

I’ve had experience with all those things, and it amazes me that Michelle Obama assumes she can have any understanding of what I or most other Americans are about.  She’ll never understand the Tea Party if she’s going to depend solely on her personal “experiences” to formulate her opinions.  But…maybe she doesn’t want to understand the Tea Party.

But what can we expect.  This is no different then what any of the “progressive” elite are doing.  They really don’t give a rip about the poor or middle class.  Just like John Edwards, they don’t even like being around them.  They feign concern, wailing about “all the poor that can’t afford Health insurance” simply because it makes good sound bites and gives an excuse for their dominating agenda.

But heaven forbid they spend any real time getting their hands dirty.  You won’t see John Edwards or Michelle Obama wiping saliva off the chins of elderly with dementia, much less take the time to really hear what “Tea Partiers” are trying to say.

Lastly, as can be seen on twitter and other social sites – Americans react to news as a group. It’s actually part of who we are.  Before the day is out, most of us know if someone of importance had passed away that day, or if there was a major tragedy a few states away.  We talk about it with people at school, work and home.  Part of the feeling of being “slapped” by her statement is …well, it’s the elitist attitude.  Not only does it seem that she doesn’t care about facts, but it seems she doesn’t care to share in our community news, whether it be national joy or national agnst.   We’re just not important to her.

Obama, Tireless Campaigner, Hires Plouffe to Snow Us Some More

 Comments Off on Obama, Tireless Campaigner, Hires Plouffe to Snow Us Some More
Jan 252010
 

Excuse me? Obama is in trouble for lying to the country, taking over banks and car companies, trying to push legislation down the people’s throats, mocking regular people for speaking up, staffing the White House with socialists and communists, and causing the Democratic Party to take a nose dive – and he responds, not by changing his direction, apologizing, or bringing in new, non-communist people to take crucial lead positions in the administration; he brings in his old campaign manager, David Plouffe.  A political consultant? Are you kidding me?

Remember when it was noted that he was a master campaigner, but wouldn’t know how to run the country? So what is he doing now but continuing to campaign rather than run the country.  That’s all he knows how to do – campaign – and that was noted long ago, as he’d gone from one campaign to another, climbing up the political ladder without ever accomplishing anything; barely spending a year in the US Senate before beginning his campaign for the presidency.

Now, again, it appears that the plan is to do some more campaigning rather than lead the country.  It appears that he’s going to fix all his troubles by getting his campaign manager to come up with a plan to try to snow us – to tell us what they think we want to hear, rather than getting a crew around him that can devise an agenda that will work with our country and our people.

Why?  Why would they respond to the Massachusetts election by hiring David Plouffe?  Because they don’t plan on changing their current agenda.  They plan to change how we perceive their agenda.  Thus begins a new campaign.  Brace yourselves for some fresh propaganda.

White House Tells Artists to Tell Country “What to do”

 Comments Off on White House Tells Artists to Tell Country “What to do”
Sep 222009
 

You are the thought leaders,” the artists were told. “You are the ones that, if you create a piece of art or promote a piece of art or create a campaign for a company, and tell our country and our young people sort of what to do and what to be in to; and what’s cool and what’s not cool. And so I’m hoping that through this group and the goal of all this and the goal of this phone call, is through this group that we can create a stronger community amongst ourselves to get involved in things that we’re passionate about as we did during the campaign but continue to get involved in those things, to support some of the president’s initiatives, but also to do things that we are passionate about and to push the president and push his administration.” This from Michael Skolnik, political director for a hip-hop mogul.

“We’re going to need your help, and we’re going to come at you with some specific ‘asks’ here,” added Buffy Wicks, deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement. “But we know that you guys are ready for it and eager to participate, so one we want to thank you, and two, I hope you guys are ready.”  The White House Office of Public Engagement, together with the NEA and “United We Serve,” an initiative created by President Obama, held this telephone conference in August with hand-picked artists from across the country.

They are the “thought leaders,” according to the White House, being directed to change our minds.  They are the thought leaders, whose jobs are to tell us what to do and think. 

How offensive is that?  Who does this administration think they are: first telling hundreds of thousands of the American public – the elderly, veterans, young families, from all walks of life – that they are a “mob,” “astro-turf,” and “racists,” for speaking their minds, and now telling rappers and painters that the public is also so stupid that they will let artists tell them what they are supposed to think?  And at our own (tax-payer) expense?

This administration appears to have no understanding of the American public.  They seem to assume that Americans are lemmings, and any lemming that doesn’t follow must have something wrong with him.

This administration is way off in “left” field.  Art inspires, but only when it touches what is already in the heart.  In other words, the art that becomes popular only becomes so because it is reflecting what people are feeling.  It is public passion that inspires art, not the other way around.

So in the current political climate, on a grass roots level, did you notice how quickly the picture of the President as a joker took off? Or the t-shirts with the words, “RIP Constitution”? Or the “I am the Mob” logos on twitter?   Wow. Artists creating popular political art without the help or instruction of the government.  Have you seen anything from the liberal side catch on like that recently on a grass roots level?   Sure, during the campaign there were things that were meant to inspire the public, but there they were created as campaign tools and died as soon as the campaign was over.  Heard any classrooms singing Obama songs lately?

AND for goodness sake – get off the bandwagon that any news station or host is leading the public.  It is the public that is leading Fox News! Fox News is merely the megaphone for the thoughts and feelings of millions of Americans. It is currently the only station listening to the public and giving them the news they are looking for.  I’ve EVEN heard people say that Bill O”reilly is becoming too soft!  And yes – we know that Beck is a little silly – but he’s offering us documented information that no one else is willing to discuss.  We don’t all draw his same conclusions, but we appreciate the information. When will it occur to the left that people choose to watch programs that reflect what’s already on their hearts – not the other way around?  They are leaving MSM in droves because they know much NBC and ABC are only reporting what they are told to report.

The left is imbedded in the concept that they are able to bend minds.  Thus the efforts to control what is taught in schools, push the “Fairness Doctrine,” and coax artists to support their agenda.  What they forget is that throughout history, other countries attempting to control the thoughts and lives of their citizens have eventually failed at the effort.  People push back. People inherently want freedom and independence. Ever heard of Solzhenitsyn?  Or the underground churches in China?  There were rebels even in Nazi Germany.   It was for rebels like that that leaders created, at best, the re-education camps, at horrific worst, Gulags and even death camps.  No! I’m not suggesting that’s where we are headed.  All I am saying is that when the effort to bend people’s minds’ fails, a government must either push harder, or come to the realization that it just doesn’t work.  So realize it right now.  It doesn’t matter to me what you pay a rapper to sing, a painter to paint, a troll to twitter, or even how well articulated an Obama speech is.  My experience and knowledge tell me it is wrong.Lisa Blogs at http://whitetrashvote.blogspot.com/

Cash for Clunkers Hurts Poor People

 Comments Off on Cash for Clunkers Hurts Poor People
Aug 012009
 

August 1st, 2009

The Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association has predicted that there will be a backlash to the “Cash for Clunkers” program.  I agree, only it will come too late.   “Cash for Clunkers” hurts lower income people, but no one has thought much about that yet – including the lower income people that voted for Obama.

Although I drive a 1994 Suburban, I wasn’t planning on doing the  “Cash for Clunkers”. Gas guzzler that the Suburban is, it’s actually been nice for our size family, who are all too big to be sitting in the back seat of small five-seater cars anymore.  And I can carry and move things.

But even if I wanted to get a more fuel efficient minivan, I can’t afford to participate in  “Cash for Clunkers” program (more officially known as the CAR Allowance Rebate System or the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act of 2009.)   

To participate, a person has to be buying a new car.  Sure you get up to $4500 in a rebate, but you still have to have quite a bit of actual money in order to afford a new car.  People of lower income don’t have the kind of money. But more importantly, because  “Cash for Clunkers” merely replaces your trade-in value, the benefit of the program isn’t as great as many anticipate, and for the American taxpayer, it’s another program that they can’t afford.  As nice as free money (ie: the rebate) sounds, American taxpayers can’t afford to be giving this money away.  And low-income people, most especially, can’t afford to be helping pay for any more bailouts.So I just figured I’d hang onto my car for another dozen or more years, until it becomes valuable as an antique, because there won’t be any other cars of this time period around.  Most will have been crushed.  Maybe we’d fix it up and drive it in the parades!

But here’s when I realized the AAIA is right.  Junk yards that crush the CARS program cars aren’t allowed to pull engines or certain other parts before they are crushed.  Earlier this month, I made use of a junk yard twice – once for a radiator and once for an engine.   I still need to put in an alternator.  Will certain parts for older cars become harder – and more expensive – to get?When all is said and done  –  “Cash for Clunkers” benefits New Car Dealerships primarily, by increasing sales, and the upper and middle class possibly, but giving them an extra few hundred dollars.  But it’s not good news at all for lower income people.   We can’t afford a new car, and we won’t be able to continue fixing our older cars at an affordable price, if we can find the parts at all.  This isn’t good.  In fact, the Obama administration knew they were taking away our options to keep our vehicles running.  They want our cars off the road, and they really don’t care how it affects those of us with very little money.   The little guy isn’t a priority.  Obama pretended to champion the little guy in order to get their vote, but it’s becoming more and more obvious that special interest – those that have received the bailout money and those industries he is choosing to socialize – are what he really champions.  Politics as usual.

I’ll bet many of the people that voted for Obama haven’t even thought of this particular ramification yet.  They’re still waiting for him to pay their mortgages and health insurance.  The  “Cash for Clunkers” program will be all done and over with, with most of the cars crushed, before the little guy realizes that the price of his used part just went up a whole lot.