Here Comes the Small Arms Treaty Again – Freedom Outpost

Here Comes the Small Arms Treaty Again – Freedom Outpost.

Recently, we witnessed the circus that is the United States Senate completely surrender its constitutional powers to the executive branch. Last November, we went to the polls and handed the Republican establishment the largest majority it has had in decades, only to watch them capitulate to the Obama regime on every single issue. From failing to defund Obamacare, reign in spending, and, most recently, stop the Iran deal, the Republicans have shown themselves to be the traitorous, communist infiltrators they are. What people need to see is that there is a conditioning process taking place, and the events revolving around the Iran nuclear deal are the most recent example. Here, little by little, Mitch McConnell, along with Bob Corker, virtually reworked the treaty provisions in the Constitution. The U.S. Senate is the only congressional body that has treaty-making powers, and they completely reworked the entire process, giving the president nearly all of the advantage. Treaties, under the U.S. constitution, need a two thirds vote from senators for ratification. Under the Corker bill, in order to stop the Iran deal, there would need to be a two thirds vote to stop it from being implemented by the White House. Why would the U.S. Senate surrender such an important aspect of their constitutional authority? Is there another agenda at work? Sadly, the answer to that question is yes. Many argue that the Iran deal is not a treaty but an agreement. The Senate had the authority to make it a treaty. Why didn’t they? It all revolves around a conditioning process designed to get the masses to accept the next big agenda item–The U.N. Small Arms Treaty. Many U.S. Senators have openly stated that they refuse to ratify this traitorous treaty; however, the new process established by the Corker bill may very well have changed the way treaties are passed from here on out.

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the Small Arms Treaty. Many insist that it is international in scope and in no way would affect your right as an American to keep and bear arms. This a foolish assumption motivated by a fear of taking the time to do some research. The text of the treaty is quite clear in its intentions to disarm civilian populations, or people deemed to be “unauthorized recipients” of firearms and ammunition. The language of the treaty can be very misleading, as there are paragraphs that seem to support an individual’s right to own firearms based on the nation state’s own laws and constitutional systems. Take this paragraph from the Annex, concerning the pretext of the treaty, for example:

Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law,

Many people would read that and assume that, because our constitution protects our rights to keep and bear arms, this treaty would not affect us in anyway. The only problem with this assumption is that law makers from many states have changed their gun laws. Semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines are no longer legal to own, in several parts of the country. This changes the term “permitted or protected by law” drastically. States like New York, Oregon and Connecticut have already passed new gun registration laws that have yielded a low success rate of compliance. Situations like this are where the next part of the treaty would be helpful.

Article 16 International Assistance

1. In implementing this Treaty, each State Party may seek assistance including legal or legislative assistance, institutional capacity-building, and technical, material or financial assistance. Such assistance may include stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, model legislation, and effective practices for implementation. Each State Party in a position to do so shall provide such assistance, upon request.

2. Each State Party may request, offer or receive assistance through, inter alia, the United Nations, international, regional, sub regional or national organizations, non-governmental organizations, or on a bilateral basis.

3. A voluntary trust fund shall be established by States Parties to assist requesting States Parties requiring international assistance to implement this Treaty. Each State Party is encouraged to contribute resources to the fund.

President Obama would very much like to get Australian-type gun control laws passed, in which case, there would be very little that is “protected by law” that this treaty could not affect. In the event that people fail to comply with such laws, as they have in New York and other states, the U.N. would have legal authority to come in and assist local governments in disarming efforts. In fact, it is highly likely that the recent racial strife we have witnessed was intentionally fomented in order to push us into conflict; in which case, U.N. peace keepers would also have the authority to disarm conflicting parties under this treaty. The U.N. Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects states the following:

21. To develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, including the effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons, particularly in post-conflict situations, unless another form of disposition or use has been duly authorized and such weapons have been marked and the alternate form of disposition or use has been recorded, and to include, where applicable, specific provisions for these programs in peace agreements.

Many people believe that ratification of this treaty would be an act of treason against the United States constitution that our politicians have sworn to uphold and defend, and, truthfully, it would be. Unfortunately, plans to disarm the United States have been in place for nearly six decades. State Department Publication 7277 describes the objectives of the United States as seeking a world free from war, where all nation states have been disarmed and merged into a system of international control in line with standards set by the United Nations.

DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.

In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:

  • The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
  • The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
  • The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
  • The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.

The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is the culmination of this plan. It is hard to argue that our military is not what it once was. Not only have our forces been reduced to almost nothing, but they have also been psychologically disarmed, as they have become a breeding ground of political correctness and social experiments. Our police forces are also being psychologically disarmed, as they are afraid to do their job, due to the intentional fomenting of racial strife. The disarming of military forces is the first stage of this plan. Stage two would include the establishment of a permanent peacekeeping force within the framework of the United Nations; and stage three would be the destruction of all remaining arms, in order to maintain international order. If you believe, at this point, that our second amendment will mean anything, you are foolish. If they are successful in disarming our military, there is no chance they will allow the civilian population to be armed.

This is high treason on a grand scale. The Obama administration has been involved in numerous scandals which involved gun running operations: Fast and Furious, which was used as a pretext to discredit the second amendment; and Benghazi, which was a gun smuggling operation arming Islamic terrorists for the purpose of taking out Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. President Obama has no right to move forward with this treaty, and doing so is, in fact, an act of treason against the American people. Only a mass movement of noncompliance can stop this.


Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/08/here-comes-the-small-arms-treaty-again/#PK5acTReXWxsWUwo.99

The Plot to Impose a National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax – Freedom Outpost

The Plot to Impose a National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax – Freedom Outpost.

Posted by

A devilish plot is afoot to impose new national taxes on the American People. It is a masterful piece of trickery because the authorization for the new national taxes is buried within Compact for America’s version of a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution.

Furthermore, the balanced budget amendment does nothing to control federal spending; and transforms our Constitution from one of limited and defined powers to one of general and unlimited powers. 1

Yet this monstrosity is pending in Michigan as SB 306 2 and in North Carolina as HB 366.
3 Legislators in four States, Alaska, Georgia, Mississippi and North Dakota, have already passed it.

Let’s look at Sections 1-6 of Compact for America’s balanced budget amendment:

It does Nothing to Control Federal Spending

Section 1 allows Congress to spend as much as they take from us in taxes and add to the national debt.
That’s a good idea?

Sections 2 and 3 permit Congress to raise the debt whenever 26 States agree.  States are addicted to federal funds. Will 25 States agree not to take more federal funds?

Section 4 is a joke:  Who believes Congress will impeach a President for refusing to “impound” an appropriation made by Congress? Congress won’t even impeach a President for Treason.

How Authorization for the New Taxes is Hidden

Section 5 says:

“No bill that provides for a new or increased general revenue tax shall become law unless approved by a two-thirds roll call vote of the whole number of each House of Congress….” [italics mine]

What is a “general revenue tax“? Section 6 defines it:

“…’general revenue tax’ means any income tax, sales tax, or value-added tax levied by the government of the United States…” [italics mine]

Now go back to Section 5 and substitute the definition of “general revenue tax” for that term:

“No bill that provides for a new or increased income tax, sales tax, or value-added tax levied by the government of the United States shall become law unless approved by a two-thirds roll call vote of the whole number of each House of Congress….”

There it is: All that’s needed is approval of two-thirds of the members of each House and a new national sales tax and/or value added tax is imposed on us. And they can increase it, along with increasing the income tax, whenever they get two-thirds of the members to vote for it.

Section 5 also permits Congress to make laws to impose a new “end user sales tax” 4 which would replace the income tax – this “end user sales tax” is passed by a simple majority of both houses.

So! Compact for America’s balanced budget amendment provides two options to Congress:

  • Two-thirds of the members of both Houses can impose a new sales tax and/or value-added tax in addition to the income tax; or
  • A simple majority of both Houses can impose “a new end user sales tax” which replaces the income tax.

Which option will Congress choose?

Our Constitution Doesn’t Now Authorize a National Sales Tax or Value-added Tax

Article I, §8, clause 1 says:

“The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises…”

Principles of Compact for America say this clause already authorizes a national sales tax or value added tax. Board Vice-President Chip DeMoss said on Feb. 12, 2014:

“a national sales tax would be an “impost” (defined as a tax or similar compulsory payment) that is authorized under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1…” [see comment 19].

We may not properly use DeMoss’ redefinition of “impost”!

We must use the definition of “impost” our Framers used: The Federalist Papers say an “impost” is a tax or duty on imports. Type imposts in the search box [at the link] and the Papers discussing imposts will come up. See for yourself that an “impost” is a tax or duty on imports.

Webster’s 1828 Dictionary defines “impost” as:

“…Any tax or tribute imposed by authority; particularly, a duty or tax laid by government on goods imported, and paid or secured by the importer at the time of importation. Imposts are also called customs.”

Do you see?

National sales taxes and value-added taxes are also not “excise” taxes. Excise taxes are a tax on a unit of goods – such as the infamous whiskey excise tax of 1791 which led to the Whiskey Rebellion. 5 It imposed a flat tax per gallon. The tax was payable for domestic whiskey at the distillery (§17 of the Act) and the casks were numbered and marked to show the tax had been paid (§19 of the Act).

“Taxes” at Art. I, §8, clause 1 refers to the apportioned direct tax provided for at Art. I, §2, clause 3 of our Constitution.

Our Framers were specific about the kinds of taxes Congress is permitted to impose. Congress does not have the power to impose any kind of tax it wants. Our Framers limited Congress’ taxing power to:

  • the apportioned direct taxes at Art. I, §2, clause 3;
  • the duties or imposts on imports at Art. I, §8, clause 1; and
  • the excises at Art. I, §8, clause 1.

A sales tax is none of the above. A sales tax is a percentage of the retail price of goods. A value-added tax is a “turbo-charged national sales tax on goods and services that is applied at each stage of production, not merely on retail transactions” and raises a “gusher of revenue for spendthrift governments worldwide”.

We have never had a national sales tax or value added tax in this Country. Why? Because they are not authorized by the Constitution.

We were manipulated into supporting the 16th Amendment. We were told the income tax would “soak the rich” – and the envious drooled at the prospect.

And so again today, statists are seeking to trick us into supporting a national sales tax or a value added tax: first, by concealing it within the verbiage of the bill; 6 and then, once the trickery was exposed, by claiming the Constitution already authorizes these new types of taxes.

There is a Better Way: Downsize the Federal Government!

Our Constitution limits federal spending to the enumerated powers. The list of objects on which Congress may lawfully spend money is a short list.
See the list HERE.

Most of what the federal government does today is unconstitutional as outside the scope of the powers delegated by the Constitution. Let’s cut federal spending by downsizing the federal government to its enumerated powers and constitutional limits.

Endnotes:

1 Congress’ spending is limited by the enumerated powers: If an object is on the list of enumerated powers (e.g., the patent & copyright office authorized by Art. I, §8, cl. 8), Congress may lawfully spend money on it. That’s how our Constitution already controls federal spending.

All versions of a balanced budget amendment change the constitutional standard for spending FROM whether an object is on the list of enumerated powers TO a limit on total spending where Congress may spend money on whatever they or the President put in the budget. This is what transforms our Constitution FROM one of enumerated powers only TO one of general and unlimited powers. And that is the true purpose of a balanced budget amendment. It has nothing to do with limiting federal spending – the pretended spending limits are fictitious since they may be waived whenever the feds [and 26 of the States] want to waive them.

2 Leon Drolet’s article of July 10, 2015, and Sam Easter’s article of July 8, 2015, about SB 306 pending in Michigan don’t mention the new national taxes.

3 Matthew Burns’ article about the hearing on HB 366 before N. Carolina’s House Judiciary Committee (which passed HB 366) doesn’t mention the new national taxes. Burns quotes the Bill’s sponsor, Rep. Chris Millis, as saying the problem is “Washington is unwilling or unable to limit itself.” So the solution is to massively increase Congress’ taxing powers?

4 “End user sales tax” is not defined in the balanced budget amendment.

5 Apparently, the practice of tarring & feathering “revenuers” began with the Whiskey Excise Tax.

6 The trickery was exposed over a year ago HERE. Since then, they have claimed the Constitution already authorizes the new taxes. Are we too gullible to be free? PH

Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising

Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising.

By / 17 August 2015

“Hi!  I’m from the government, and I’m here to help!”  —Ronald Reagan, citing what he thought were the Ten Most Dangerous Words in the English Language

 

A Big-Government Scandal

It looks like an Environment Protection Agency bureaucrat, to make the EPA more important in the minds of Americans, recently created an ecological catastrophe in New Mexico.  A New Mexico resident with 47 years of relevant experience warned the EPA what would happen if they did not change what they were doing, but the decision was made to do it anyway.  So the EPA’s shenanigans were on purpose!

Had there been no EPA, and local authorities had had oversight, this disaster would never have occurred.  It is far-away central planners—disconnected from local communities—who so often choose to be negligent, since they are free from any local accountability.  (Read about the latest EPA scandal here.)

 

Creating a Monster

The US government was created by the sovereign states, not the other way around.  Therefore, the federal government is there to do the bidding of the states, and of the people, rather than dictating to them.  There were three co-equal branches upon the nation’s founding, but there are, today, so many executive-branch departments—all of them massive in size and in the scope of their powers—that an imperial executive has been allowed to evolve.  America has, indeed, created a Leviathan.

 

The Road to Hell . . .

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/constitution-300×300.jpg

purpose of constitutionThe original intent of creating an executive department is to help our chief executive—the president—to enforce the laws passed by Congress.  But each department has ended up hiring its own army of bureaucrats to “help.”  And the result has been that each one has created rules that carry the force of law.  And none of these rules has ever been given the consent of the governed.  Many rules have even been scandalously written by lobbyists from the very organizations the departments were created to regulate.  Hundreds of thousands of rules—known collectively as “administrative law”—have been instituted, regardless of the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution that lends legitimacy to most of these.  So, good intentions are never enough; the proverbial road to hell is paved with good intentions.  

Cutting the Executive Down to Size

The best alternative to reform the problem of tempting a potentially scofflaw executive—who might make end-runs around the Congress simply by having department heads make new rules—is to rid the government of its tyrannical departments.  Rather than having so many executive departments, the enforcement mechanism for these laws should be the sovereign states themselves.  If a state is not complying with a legitimate federal law—one falling within the scope of the Enumerated Powers Clause (see here) the Department of Justice could always sue the state to force compliance.

 

Washington’s Original Concept of a Cabinet of Advisors

When George Washington took office, he created four governmental departments: the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of War (now the Department of Defense).  Any other departments should be eliminated.  Some of them have functions that could be taken over by the four departments that remain.  Others should have their functions subsumed by the states.  The states should run all departments and programs not authorized in the Enumerated Powers Clause.

 

Nullification of Un-Constitutional Laws

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Jefferson-and-nullification-e1439761226280.jpg

Jefferson and nullificationThe other thing that the sovereign states should do is to refuse to follow any federal law or mandate not within the federal government’s constitutional power to create.  (And, it goes without saying, unconstitutional executive orders, executive memos, and other such executive creations should be treated the same way.)  A federal law creating a welfare program should be nullified by the states, since such programs find no support in the Constitution.  (The General Welfare Clause is a reference to public goods that are created for the protection or use of all the people equally, such as the US military or a public road.)  Of course, a state could create welfare programs on its own, if it chose to do so.  

Nullification of Un-Constitutional Court Rulings

The Supreme Court has made rulings that are unconstitutional.  It is not the Court’s job to rewrite the Constitution.  The power of judicial review does not render the Supreme Court capable of writing law, on its own, independent of the means that are constitutionally mandated for amending the Constitution or passing laws in the Congress.  The Court’s only legitimate role is to rule on the laws as written.

States should ignore—and, therefore, nullify—decisions that are clearly not within the bounds of the Constitution.  If states were to do this, the jurists on the Court would take great pains, in their opinions, to reference what parts of the Constitution authorize them to rule the way they do.  This would mean the Court never could have ruled the way it did in Kelo v. City of New London.  (Read about Kelo here.)

 

Falling in Love with the Constitution Again

In addition to implementing a policy reducing the executive branch and nullifying unconstitutional decisions by the Supreme Court—or any federal court, for that matter—the states should make sure that they themselves are not infringing the rights of Americans under the Constitution.  Of course, the federal check on this kind of behavior would be a suit brought against a state by the Department of Justice.

Americans have lived under the Incorporation Doctrine for so long that it has become, without much ado, standard practice for each state to apply the federal Constitution locally.  (Before the Incorporation Doctrine, the federal Constitution used to be applied only to areas of federal jurisdiction.)  There needs to be a level playing field, to ensure that everyone is applying the rules fairly.  And for this to happen, the people and their elected officials—if they have not done so already—need to take care to fall in love with the Constitution once again.

Health Tip: The Next Time Government Gives You Dietary Advice, Do the Opposite

Health Tip: The Next Time Government Gives You Dietary Advice, Do the Opposite.

Print
By David Harsanyi
Friday, August 14 2015
We already know that government recommendations regarding health are often driven by a bunch of Chicken Littles.

In “Sleeper,” Woody Allen plays Miles Monroe, a cryogenically frozen owner of a Greenwich Village health food store who, when defrosted in the year 2173, finds himself in an authoritarian state filled with giant vegetables, android butlers and Diane Keaton. When an unnerved Miles is first unfrozen, Space Age doctors try to calm him down:

Doctor: “He’s ranting. We’d better tranquilize him.”

Miles: “I knew it was too good to be true. I parked right near the hospital.”

Doctor: “Now here, you smoke this, and be sure you get the smoke deep down into your lungs.”

Miles: “I don’t smoke.”

Doctor: “It’s tobacco. It’s one of the healthiest things for your body. Now go ahead. You need all the strength you can get.”

Pointing out the always-changing guidelines of salubrious living is a long-running joke in America. It’s worth remembering, though, that any self-corrections we make — and we make them all the time in real life using common sense — are far more difficult when government puts its imprimatur on pseudoscience, which it also does all the time.

In the Dietary Guidelines for Americans — the federal government’s advice manual for citizens — we are warned that “not eating breakfast has been associated with excess body weight.” But when researchers from Columbia University decided to test this notion, they found nothing of the sort: “In overweight individuals, skipping breakfast daily for 4 weeks leads to a reduction in body weight,” the study’s authors note. Other researchers did the same and came to similar conclusions. How many parents and overweight Americans took this advice as gospel when they could have been losing weight by skipping buttermilk pancake breakfasts?

We already know that government recommendations regarding health are often driven by a bunch of Chicken Littles. The leading organ of American scaremongering, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has gotten so much wrong over the years. There was the outrageous contention that 400,000 Americans were dropping dead from obesity every year. (They weren’t.) And then there were all the over-the-top warnings about the alleged risks of secondhand smoke. (They don’t really exist.)

Earlier this year, the bureaucrats behind the government’s dietary guidelines finally admitted there was “no appreciable relationship” between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol. After years of warning Americans that high-cholesterol foods would kill them — eggs, shrimp and so on — the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee will no longer list cholesterol among its “nutrients of concern” for overconsumption. Now some scientists argue that the state’s obsession with scaring citizens about fat may actually have made our health worse.

The popularity of partially hydrogenated vegetable oils — which government absurdly banned earlier this year — was driven in large part by government scaremongering about the evils of cooking with lard. But when contemporary researchers looked at the 1970s-era data underlying the dietary fat guidelines, they came to the conclusion that the data did not support the idea that eating less fat would translate to fewer cases of heart disease or that it would save lives. And studies show it hasn’t.

Nina Teicholz, author of “The Big Fat Surprise,” wrote this in The New York Times earlier this year:

“How did experts get it so wrong? Certainly, the food industry has muddied the waters through its lobbying. But the primary problem is that nutrition policy has long relied on a very weak kind of science: epidemiological, or ‘observational,’ studies in which researchers follow large groups of people over many years. But even the most rigorous epidemiological studies suffer from a fundamental limitation. At best they can show only association, not causation. Epidemiological data can be used to suggest hypotheses but not to prove them.”

For instance, the government has been telling us we’ve been eating too much salt for years. The Food and Drug Administration claimed that lowering salt intake would save tens of thousands of us every year. Overbearing nanny-state groups lobbied the government to regulate salt as they now do trans fats, and Americans turned to low-sodium diets in huge numbers.

One of America’s leading advocates of spurious science, New York’s Michael Bloomberg, persuaded more than 20 companies to drop salt levels voluntarily. Yet according to studies published in recent years, our salt intake wasn’t dangerous at all. Even the CDC has been forced to admit that it was wrong. And the low levels of salt recommended by the government not only were unnecessary but also have been dangerous for our health.

“There is no longer any valid basis for the current salt guidelines,” said Andrew Mente, one of the authors of a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine. “So why are we still scaring people about salt?”

Well, because that’s what government does best.

—————————————————————————————————————————————-

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of “The People Have Spoken (and They Are Wrong): The Case Against Democracy.” Copyright © 2015 Creators.com

Thank God Mr Cruz is in Washington – Tea Party Nation

Thank God Mr Cruz is in Washington – Tea Party Nation.

My email account was on fire, everyone excited about Sen Ted Cruz calling Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell a liar on the Senate floor. Cruz cited each of Obama’s unprecedented unlawful power grabs and repeals of our freedoms that the GOP promised to block, only to stab us (We the People/Tea Party) in the back.  Immediately, I thought, “Thank God Ted Cruz is in Washington.”

Before I go on, I wish to address a guy whom I will call Ned. Whenever I praise a conservative, Ned emails to correct me, claiming the conservative is a deceitful traitor. When I share reasons for optimism, Ned vehemently disagrees, even seeming a bit angry that I would think our efforts could possibly make a difference in America’s corrupt political environment. Ned always sees the glass less than half empty. I guess we need people like Ned to keep us balanced. Although, I am not quite sure about that.

Sure enough, in response to patriots’ giving Cruz rave reviews for speaking truth to Washington power, Ned ripped into Cruz about questionable votes. Folks, I realize Ted Cruz is not perfect. But then, which presidential candidate is? Jesus is not running for president in 2016.

As a member of the Tea Party since it began, Cruz going down the list of GOP betrayals brought back memories. Remember how we fought and worked our butts off to give the GOP the House, then the Senate? We worked to elect Republicans to stop Obama from rolling out the welcome mat to illegals.

Over a million of us showed up in DC to protest Obamacare.

I thought of all the travel miles, funds, blood, sweat and tears sacrificed by Tea Party Americans; patriots who simply want lawful Constitutional government.

I thought about how Obama sent out his liberal mainstream media air force to bomb us with accusations of racism against the first black president; hoping to soften and diminish our ranks. The Tea Party is not racist, nor do we hate anybody.

In his speech, Cruz did two things that were quite remarkable. First – Cruz exposed the good-cop, bad-cop personal and corporate enrichment scam both parties have been playing on the American people. Second – Cruz spoke with unprecedented clarity. He did not say McConnell misspoke or McConnell was disingenuous. Cruz said McConnell lied.

Cruz has been on a roll speaking the truth, making mincemeat of Obama minions and Leftist ideologues.  He really exposes DC insider political corruption in his book, “A Time For Truth.”

It was refreshing that when pressed by the liberal bias media, Cruz refused to jump on the destroy Donald Trump bandwagon. This tells me that Cruz has backbone and will not automatically play by the Left’s rules of engagement.

It is fair game for GOP presidential contenders to express their disapproval of Trump’s style and tactics. However, when a GOP presidential contender joins the MSM in its evil attempt to brand Trump a racist for simply addressing illegal immigration, red flags go up regarding the character of that contender.

It tells me the contender will say whatever necessary to win. I call that “soulless” politicking.

Such behavior has the awful stench of what happened in Mississippi. In the primary, Republican Thad Cochran’s camp joined Democrats in branding the Tea Party racist. To beat the Tea Party conservative, Cochran’s people despicably made lying phone calls to black voters saying the Tea Party candidate would turn back the clock on racial progress. This is the kind of deplorable evil divisive totally self-serving politicking Cruz exposes in his book.

The GOP presidential field is rich with honorable contenders. I ask myself the following question.

When I lay my head on my pillow at night which candidate winning the WH will cause me to sleep the most peacefully? Who is most likely to remain true to their promises to We the People; fight to repeal Obamacare, end the invasion of our borders, defend life and traditional values?

Who believes in Conservatism enough to throw a lifeline of inspiration to those drowning in the treacherous deep dark sea of Obama’s welfare state America? Who will pray as the song says, “Lord lift us up where we belong” as Americans?

Currently, I believe that candidate is Sen Ted Cruz.

Realizing the fruitlessness of trying to instill a bit of hope/sunshine into Ned, I delete his emails without opening them. Ned has gotten creative. After lunch the waiter brought the check and my fortune cookie. The message inside said, “Ted Cruz sucks! – Ned” (Just kidding)

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman, Conservative Campaign Committee

The Washington Post epitomizes this nation political ignorance! – Tea Party Nation

The Washington Post epitomizes this nation political ignorance! – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Dan Short

There is no such thing as ambivalent.

What we have in this nation is the politically, economic, and historical illiterate, and those who are finally after taking a sabbatical from what is important, following the insanity of Antonio Gramsci’s scheme to destroy this nation, of not speaking about money, politics, and religion.

There are none who are ambivalent. If cognitive, as many are finally becoming, realities are finally penetrating some. It is not the press, not the journalist, not the bureaucracy or the government, but the actual citizens of this nation, who are realizing that this nation is at war. That war is against our nation’s very fundamental foundations, and the ‘fundamental transformation’ into a central planning society of slaves, of socialism, and its result communism.

For anyone to not make this distinction is beyond comprehension. Once that is made, then the choice is obvious that both political parties, except for so few are in coercion for this nation’s destruction.

History has the record of the 300 Spartans at Thermopylae. Yesterday in the Senate floor, stood but three Republicans attempting to bring reason to the senate, and as the Spartans overwhelmed by the hordes of the Persians, the crony-capitalist, self-serving, reprobates of the Republican Party’s elected disgraceful representatives, the hell with the American citizens, overran them.

Socrates individually was condemned by the ‘STATE’ for speaking the truth. Today we are experiencing the same scenario, those who speak truth are being condemned when standing for the stance our citizens are asking!   

Political Ignorance

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-importance-of-the-yes-but-voter/2015/07/26/8496324e-323c-11e5-8f36-18d1d501920d_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

The Green Con Job — Billionaires Build Empires on Alarmism – Tea Party Nation

The Green Con Job — Billionaires Build Empires on Alarmism – Tea Party Nation.

 

A cottage industry of green cronyism has been created due to government subsidies and tax incentives that is making billionaires like Nat Simons, Tom Steyer and Elon Musk even richer while it bankrupts the rest of us.  Paul Driessen and Tom Tamarkin takes us down this crony road of phony alarmism and hyped-up climate disasters:

Elon Musk and his fellow barons of Climate Crisis, Inc. recently got a huge boost from Pope Francis. Musk et al. say fossil fuels are causing unprecedented warming and weather disasters. The Pope agrees and says Catholics must “ask God for a positive outcome” to negotiations over another UN climate treaty.

It matters not that the predicted calamities are not happening. There has been no warming in 19 years, no category 3-5 hurricanes making US landfall for a record 9-1/2 years, indeed none of the over-hyped climate disasters occurring in the real world outside the alarmists’ windows. In fact, poor nations support the treaty mostly because it promises some $100 billion per year in adaptation, mitigation and compensation money from FRCs: Formerly Rich Countries that have shackled their own job creation, economic growth and living standards in the name of stabilizing Earth’s perpetually fluctuating climate.

Any money that is transferred will end up in the pockets of governing elites. Poor families will get little or no cash – and will be told their dreams of better lives must be limited to jobs and living standards that can be supported by solar panels on their huts and a few wind turbines near their villages.

Simply put, the Musk-Obama-Pope-Climate Crisis schemes will save humanity from exaggerated and fabricated climate disasters decades from now – by impoverishing billions and killing millions tomorrow.

For the catechism of climate cataclysm coalition, the essential thing is that we believe the hysterical assertions and computer models – and support endless renewable energy mandates and subsidies.

Musk and his Tesla and SolarCity companies have already pocketed $4.9 billion in taxpayer-financed subsidies, and even long-elusive profitability has not ended the handouts. Now he claims a small “blue square” on a map represents the “very little” land required to “get rid of all fossil fuel electricity generation” in the USA and prevent a non-existent climate cataclysm. We just need rooftop solar panels linked to wall-mounted battery packs – a mere 160 million Tesla Powerwalls – to eliminate the need for all coal and natural gas electricity generation in the United States, he insists.

Hogwash (from pork barrel political pig farms). As this careful and extensive analysisdemonstrates, even without considering the monumental electricity demand required to convert America’s vehicles to electric-battery versions, providing today’s baseload and peak demand electricity would require 29.3 billion one-square-meter solar panels. Assuming adequate yearlong daily sunlight, that’s 29,333 square kilometers of active solar panel surface area: 7.2 million acres – or nearly all of Maryland and Delaware!

The analysis is technical, beyond the ability of most voters, journalists, politicians and regulators to comprehend fully. Read it anyway, if only to understand the enormity of financing, raw materials, mining, manufacturing and electricity required to make and ship the panels (some 40 million per year), battery packs and inverters (to convert low-voltage solar electricity to 120 or 240 Volt alternating current).

We are clearly dealing with an unprecedented green mirage and con job. It will drive average retail electricity prices from the 8-9 cents per kilowatt-hour in coal and gas-reliant states, to the 15-17 cents per kWh in California, Connecticut and New York – or even the 36-40 cents in Germany and Denmark, where unsubsidized rates are 70-80 cents per kWh! The impact of such prices on people’s jobs, living standards, health and welfare would be devastating. But Musk and his “clean” energy friends ignore this.

Musk has a BS in physics – and obviously holds advanced BS degrees in lobbying and con-artistry about climate disasters and renewable energy solutions, mandated by government decrees and financed by endless billions in subsidies. He has made numerous personal visits to legislative offices in Sacramento and Washington, to promote more such schemes, and aligns his efforts with those of Eric Schmidt, Nat Simons, Tom Steyer, Al Gore and members of the Clean Tech Syndicate: eleven secretive families with total wealth of over $60 billion, who want to get even richer off taxpayers and consumers.

They assume (demand) that bogus climate cataclysms will continue to bring them billions in climate cash payouts from Washington and state capitals, along with more exemptions from endangered species and environmental cleanup laws and regulations that are applied with a vengeance to fossil fuel projects.

Google scientists finally admitted that existing and near-term renewable energy technologies simply do not work as advertised and cannot meet their political or climate promises. The technologies are all hat, no cattle. However, the Climate Crisis and Clean Tech industries are determined to push ahead – using our money, risking little of their own, and getting reimbursed by us when their investments turn sour.

Google and NRG now want a $539-million federal grant to bail them out of $1.6 billion in taxpayer loans for the bird-roasting Ivanpah concentrated solar power project in California, because it does not work and needs so much natural gas to keep its water hot that it doesn’t meet state renewable energy standards. Other Obama “greenbacks” energy “investments” have also drowned in red ink, leaving taxpayers to pay the tab: Solyndra, Abound Solar, Solar Trust, Ener1, Beacon Power, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Musk is nevertheless lobbying for SB-350, which would require that 50% of California’s electricity be produced via “renewable” sources, such as wind, solar, biofuels and politicians’ hot air. Meanwhile, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt’s family and corporate foundations give millions to alarmist climate scientists, the ultra-green Energy Foundation, and rabid anti-fracking groups like the World Wildlife Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council. NRDC also gets millions from EPA, to promote the agency’s anti-fossil fuel agenda and place 33 of its employees on 21 EPA “advisory” committees.

Schmidt and Warren Buffett also support the secretive far-left Tides Foundation, which has given millions to groups opposed to coal and hydraulic fracturing, the Keystone XL and Sandpiper pipeline projects, and countless other job-creating hydrocarbon programs. Canadian researcher Cory Morningstar accurately describes Tides as a “magical, money-funneling machine of epic proportions.”

Billionaire Nat Simons and his Sea Change Foundation spend tens of millions annually promoting and lobbying for “renewable” energy policies, mandates and subsidies; investing in wind, solar and biofuel companies; supporting environmentalist pressure groups; and contributing to Democrat politicians who perpetuate the crony corporatist arrangements. Simons, his wife and various Vladimir Putin cronies (via Klein, Ltd. and the shadowy Bermuda Wakefield Quin law firm) are the only contributors to Sea Change.

We often rail against Third World corruption. Our American (and European) environmental corruption is simply more subtle and sophisticated. It is legalized deception and theft – a massive wealth transfer from poor and middle class consumers and taxpayers to billionaires who are raking in still more billions, thanks to brilliantly crafted alarmist campaigns. And let’s not forget Al Gore, Mike Mann, Tom Steyer, James Hansen and all the others who likewise profit immensely from these arrangements – and the constant vilification of scientists who question climate catastrophe mantras.

Pressure groups and governing elites used to argue that we are running out of oil and natural gas. That ploy no longer works. While fossil fuels may eventually prove finite, fracking has given us vast new supplies of petroleum – and huge coal, oil and gas deposits have been placed off limits by government decree. We have at least a century to develop alternative energy sources that actually work – that create real jobs, actual revenues, lower energy prices and true prosperity – without the mandates, subsidies, deception, fraud and corruption that are the hallmark of “green” energy schemes.

No wonder the “clean tech” crowd is financing anti-hydrocarbon and climate chaos campaigns. But despite the Pope’s belated rescue attempt, the pseudo-science of “dangerous manmade global warming” is slowly succumbing to climate reality. And any new UN climate treaty will founder once poor nations realize the promised hundreds of billions a year will not materialize.

Those still impoverished nations should not do what rich countries are doing now that they are rich. They should do what rich countries did to become rich.

America’s Growing Multicultural Quagmire – Tea Party Nation

America’s Growing Multicultural Quagmire – Tea Party Nation.

By Frosty Wooldridge

Last week sickened our nation with the shooting deaths of nine innocent worshipers in a Bible study class. White against Black! At the Boston Marathon two years ago, Muslims bombed Americans! We read in local newspapers of multiple killings in the past week of Blacks killing Blacks in Chicago, New York, Atlanta and many other cities. In Chicago last July 4th, no less than 50 gun fights of Blacks shooting Blacks.

Just announced last week: 121 illegal aliens released by Obama through his amnesty committed murders of Americans as reported by the Washington Times, “A total of 121 illegal immigrations whom Obama released back into the community went on to be charged with subsequent killings, according to government data released Monday that raises more questions about whether immigration authorities are doing enough to detail illegal immigrants awaiting deportation.”

In the past three months, Obama quietly oversaw the importation of thousands of Syrian Muslims from that wore-torn country that will number in excess of 75,000 when the refugee resettlement program finishes. None of them vetted as to terrorism! Ironically, federal authorities brag about the terrorist threats they neutralized with Muslims already inside our country. Because of Muslims in America, Pam Geller and Hersi Ali must be guarded 24/7 from death threats. Minnesota Somalia Muslims fly out of our country to fight with ISIS.

Does anyone connect the dots as to our country’s multicultural quagmire? When you import religions that foment terror, you witness terror in your own country. You witnessed Paris, France; you watched Sydney, Australia; you noticed the beheadings in London, England. You saw the killings in Ottawa, Canada, all by Muslims. This week, Muslims killed and/or beheaded dozens in Tunisia and Europe.

Exactly what do the 535 Congressional critters not understand about mass immigration from worn-torn poverty-stricken cultures dominated by violence? Am I missing something? If you inject 100,000 Somalian immigrants from Somalia into Minnesota, you see drug gangs, honor killings, female genital mutilation, Sharia Law and female subjugation.

When you release 121 Mexican illegal alien criminals back into our communities, you witness 121 killings of someone in American families. It’s not enough that illegal aliens overrun our borders with no chance of being stopped because Obama refuses to enforce our immigration laws—but to watch the wholesale killing of our citizens at the hands of 121 criminal aliens that Obama released completely makes no sense.

The Times continued, “Critics who have been pushing for stiffer immigration enforcement said the violence rate for released immigrants is much higher and that the 121 charged are only those who got caught.”

Don Rosenberg, the father of a son killed in a traffic accident by a drunken illegal alien with no license said, “Obama refuses to deport people. Those people can and should be deported. I guess until somebody who has the responsibility to make these decisions has one of their loved ones killed, it’s going to continue.”

It’s time to enforce our laws on our books. It’s time for a total immigration shutdown now. It’s time, way past time, that Congress stands up for Americans and our laws. It’s time for a national referendum to quit bringing endless third world refugees into America. They all thrive on welfare and we all live poorer and deadlier lives because of it.

But this scenario hasn’t changed in the past 30 years because American citizens refuse to take a stand. They continue electing representatives to Congress who refuse to enforce our employment, transport and landlord laws that specifically administer severe fines for anyone who employs, transports and houses illegal aliens.

As Ann Coulter stated in her book, we see our country deforming into a third world hellhole. It will get worse and then, it will worsen more and more until we no longer enjoy a country ruled by order and civility—but instead, multicultural chaos. Just watch as the Muslim numbers grow. America will resemble Lebanon. Actually, it already does in Ferguson, MO; Baltimore, MD and Charleston, South Carolina.

Definition of slogan: “Immigration Shutdown Now means the American people want all legal immigration dropped to less than 20,000 annually with compatible immigrants that fit our ethos and want to become Americans, and only those who benefit our country and/or they marry an American and speak English. That means we want all illegal immigration stopped by arresting, prosecuting and jailing employers of illegal aliens. We deport all illegal aliens by taking their jobs away and as we catch them. We want English mandated as our national language. We demand a cessation of Muslim immigration in order to protect our culture, language and way of life. We can’t save the world but we can save destroy our civilization. We demand a stable population that allows everyone to live, work and thrive into the 21st century. Especially our children.” FHW

That’s why you need to take action. Send this series to everyone in your network. Educate them. Urge them to take action by joining these websites to become faxers of prewritten letters and phone callers. We must force Congress into an “Immigration Shutdown Now.”

Share these videos all over America:

In a five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates the impact of overpopulation. Take five minutes to see for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE&feature=player_embedded

“Immigration by the numbers—off the chart” by Roy Beck
This 10 minute demonstration shows Americans the results of unending mass immigration on the quality of life and sustainability for future generations: in a few words, “Mind boggling!” www.NumbersUSA.org

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muw22wTePqQ

The Gay Pride House is Obama’s house

The Gay Pride House is Obama’s house.

The Gay Pride House is Obama’s house

Just the other day during a Gay Pride Event at the White House, after an illegal transgender named Jennicet Gutiérrez demanded that Obama release LGBTQ illegals being held for deportation, Obama reprimanded the disrupter by announcing that the people’s house is his house. 

An irritated president told the confused GetEQUAL male activist in the red dress:

Listen, you’re in my house. You’re not gonna get a good response from me by interrupting me like this. I’m sorry. No, no, no, no, no. Shame on you. You shouldn’t be doing this.

The hoopla came in the midst of SCOTUScare (emphasis on scare) being firmly ensconced into law by a chief justice who, the following day, contradicted his pro-Obamacare opinion with an anti-gay-marriage opinion.

Nonetheless, the lovely and vivacious Mr. Gutiérrez was present in the White House registering his demands just prior to #LOVEWINS officially becoming legal in “57 states,” including “one left to go,” Alaska and Hawaii. 

Jennicet was in Obama’s face right before the president penned a eulogy abjuring the Confederate flag, which he delivered with a side dish of racial rancor at a memorial for a murdered South Carolina A.M.E. pastor who preached Jesus even as he supported abortion.

And as if all this #LOVEWINS/SCOTUSCARE/illegal transgender/pro-choice pastor stuff weren’t confusing enough, at the Pinckney memorial, Obama, who must have lost his head and thought he was in the Apollo Theatre again, said that by “taking down the Confederate flag, we express God’s grace,” an issue he then proceeded to address in song.

Demeaning the symbol of Southern heritage, Obama’s unspoken implication was that a flag might be a motivating factor for the racism that inspired Dylann Roof to shoot nine church people to death, among whom was Pastor Clementa Pinckney, the state senator the president was there to eulogize.

Appealing to the greater angels within the hearts of the Southern people, Obama said that although opinions differ on the true meaning of the Confederate flag, at a difficult time such as this, to exhibit kindliness toward the ongoing effects of America’s “original sin” of slavery, a flag that holds special meaning to so many people should be rejected.

In other words, although Americans disagree on the symbolism of the Confederate flag, Obama was requesting that polite deference based on strong differences be exhibited via elimination of the flag.

Speaking of flags, while in Charleston, the president avoided mentioning what he was crowing about in the Rose Garden that same morning:  the passage of same-sex marriage rights.  After all, Obama the chameleon was well aware that he was in the company of black pastors who, by and large, along with the black community in general, abhor homosexuality and disapprove of the #LOVEWINS legalization that many African-Americans view as sodomy.

But as usual, the company Barack keeps and his liberal proclivities determine his level of sensitivity toward the feelings of others. 

President Obama is so diverse and eclectic in how he grants compassionate regard that he can host LGBTQ pride events in the same White House where he hosts Iftar dinners for Muslims who, had Jennicet Gutiérrez not been thrown out of the East Room, would likely approve of throwing him off the White House roof.

That’s why, quickly changing gears, just hours after 3% of the population determined the legal definition of marriage for a nation of 310 million people, and after encouraging the removal of the Confederate flag from South Carolina’s state capitol, Obama spitefully used taxpayer money to send a message by lighting up “his house” to look like a flag that offends 40% of the American population.

What started out as harmless fun when Michelle Obama dyed the water in the fountain on the South Lawn green for St. Patrick’s Day has devolved seven years later into Obama using multi-colored lights to alienate those who still hold traditional marriage near and dear and who loathe the downward moral spiral the nation is currently experiencing.  

All this on the same day Obama suggested that on behalf of racial sensitivity, America should consider banishing the Confederate flag from the annals of history.

And what is most disturbing about that suggestion is the fact that the thoughtfulness Obama continually demands be extended toward those with whom he sympathizes goes right out the window when it comes to what offends those who oppose what he supports. 

So, after lecturing America about insensitive flags, Barack Obama turned around and sent a subtle but shrewd message to his detractors – by converting the people’s house into a Gay Pride flag.  The taunt made an in-your-face point and in the process managed to reinforce the original contention the president expressed to an illegal transgender about the White House being “his house.”

In a week that set new records in constitutional misapplication, by purposely transforming the White House into a rainbow-emblazoned emblem supporting same-sex marriage, Barack Obama sent America the message that, like it or not, the whole damned country is “his house.”

Jeannie hosts a blog at www.jeannie-ology.com.

You’re on the Front Line of the Islamic War – Tea Party Nation

You’re on the Front Line of the Islamic War – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

 

Does anyone remember what happened on September 11, 2001? Or is it just “ancient history” at this point? Some three thousand totally innocent Americans were murdered by a sneak attack on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. Who did it? The same murderous Islamists who attacked an event in Garland, Texas to focus attention on the insanity that passes for one of the world’s great “religions.”

 

Islam is not a religion. It is a cult around the so-called prophet Mohammad and his assertion that the Koran was the word of Allah. The name Islam means “submission” and the purpose of Islam is the tyrannical control over the entire world’s population. Within this alleged holy faith, two sects, Shiites and Sunnis, have been at war almost from its inception, never failing to kill one another.

 

The turmoil in the Middle East is the direct result of this murderous cult and those Muslims who oppose the killing that flows from Islam must keep their silence or become its victims. Jews and Christians can speak out and debate about aspects of their faiths, but Muslim risk death when they do so. For those Jews in Christians living in Middle Eastern nations, death is always a prospect for no other reason than not being Muslim.

 

Americans have not yet fully embraced the fact that they are on the front lines along with other Western nations in a global war with Islam.

 

Will it take another 9/11? Surely the recent attack by two Islamists on May 3rd in Garland, Texas, was another wake up call. They arrived intent on killing as many of those attending the American Freedom Defense Initiative event.  A Garland police officer killed both before anyone  had to die in the name of the Bill of Rights.

 

But why Garland, Texas? Because, as my friend Amil Imani noted in a recent commentary, “The venue was chosen as a defiant response to a Muslim group that had held a conference entitled ‘Stand With the Prophet Against Terror and Hate.”’ Ironic, eh?  Their response to the event that invited cartoons of Muhammed as to want to kill the participants. If that is not war, I do not know what is.

 

If Muslims feel hatred, they have earned it here in the United States and elsewhere they have attacked any criticism or defiance, from Charlie Hebdo in France to the countless attacks around the world from Mumbai, India to Bali. A website, the Religion of Peace, com, posts news of the daily assaults by Muslim on both other Muslims and those they call “infidels”, unbelievers.

 

Pamela Geller who leads the American Freedom Defense Initiative has been widely assailed for her event that was intended to respond to the earlier one in Garland that Amil Amani noted “was convened to eliminate free speech or any expression, verbal and/or artwork depicting the Islamic prophet Mohammad in a negative light.”

 

“As a life-long expert on the subject of Islam, I felt that this event—more than anything else Pamela could have done—would be the target of a violence terrorist attack in the name of the religion of peace, either real and explosive or on social media at the very least.” It was real.

 

The Garland police were taking it seriously. Amani said “I was astonished at the large police presence already there. Some of the cops were dressed in tactical gear and carrying AR-15s. The security was ubiquitous, almost as if something untoward had already happened.”

 

Speaking in an interview with Sean Hannity on May 6, Geller noted that neither the FBI nor the Department of Homeland Security has yet to have contacted her about the thwarted attack. “This is a serious threat” said Hannity. “Basically a Fatwah, a death threat, has now been issued.” Geller noted the lack of interest or concern expressed by those in our government one might expect to at the least make an inquiry, adding that “I have a team now, private security, and NYPD counterterror has been in touch with me.”

 

Now I call that a level of courage for which Pamela Geller should be praised, but I heard too many criticisms that she was being “provocative.” 

 

“Provocative”?????

 

When are Americans going to realize that the Islamists do not need any provocation? When are we going to start acting like we are at war? A good first step would be to stop inviting Muslims to immigrate to America. The Obama administration has been importing as many as possible. The next step is to understand that it is Obama and his administration that are part of the Islamic war.

 

It is the Pamela Geller’s that are crying out to us. We need to listen. We need to support them. We need to arm ourselves if we have not done so already. Then we need to secure “concealed carry” laws in every State of the Union. We are at war.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,470 other followers