Category Archives: A Broken System

The Equality Hypocrites are at it again.

6a00e54f08fd1088340154328fe066970c-250wi

You know those hippy throwbacks who think it would be cool if everyone was “equal” like the Constitution guarantees? Just a heads up, the guarantee is for equal access to succeed, not a guarantee for equal success.

This president can’t seem to grasp that truth. He has a hard time grasping many truths. And now, he’s given illegals, yes, the people who came here by breaking the law, a leg up over hard-working, tax-paying Americans.

One of the first in-your-face insults was him pushing states to give in-state tuition to illegals. And once again for clarity… these people are here illegally, breaking the law, and not paying taxes. It just shows his disdain for the American way of life. Veterans can’t even get the same privileges. They have to live in a state for the state’s designated residency period before they are considered a resident who qualifies for in state tuition. Maybe they should renounce their citizenship and run up from south of the border into the arms of California Governor Jerry Brown who recently told all illegals (and anyone thinking about coming to America illegally) to come to California they were welcome here! And Governor Brown won by big numbers in California, they deserve him!

Mr. Obama has opened previously closed military bases (remember, they were too costly to keep open). He flew in medical supplies with staff to treat the recent influx of Illegals coming across the border. This was a “humanitarian act” according to Mr. Obama. Wouldn’t it also have been a humanitarian act to reopen bases to help our vets? But it appears President Obama wouldn’t think of flying in medical personal to help our vets to shorten the time it takes them to get help because of the costs. Really Mr. President? Do you disrespect us that much? I guess you really do believe Americans are stupid.

Mr. Obama, you send Eric Holder into Ferguson to threateningly suggest that there is much more going on there behind the scenes with the police than actually is. How about you send him in to the VA with threats and a guarantee that many will lose their jobs if they don’t get their act together?

Remember when you told us that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) would not pay for abortions? Remember that? Remember you said there was no money in there for illegals to get healthcare? Not to mention all that “keep your doctor,” “cheaper rates,” “better policies,” you know the “Obama bucket-o-lies” bit.

So then we find that there actually is money for abortions in Obamacare in the form of the morning after pill, abortions for “emergency reasons,” “rape and incest.” Mr. Prez, I know you have a word problem, but abortion is abortion. And when the government pays for them that is taxpayer money not yours.

Now you have given 5+ million illegals the ability to take more American jobs and drain the system. Let’s do this at a Sesame Street level so you can understand. You see, once the “illegals” feel free to roam about the country, employers will be able to hire them, and still at a lesser rate than their American counterparts. The jobs they leave open will be back-filled by more people coming over the border because the president will not do anything to secure the borders any more than they are today.

He claims that Republicans wouldn’t sign an immigration bill that included the hiring of over 30 thousand more border patrol personnel. Nice try! Would you have given those new border patrol agents the same “rules of engagement” the current border patrol has? Because if that was the plan, then they would be just as useless as you’ve made the current border patrol. Our poor border patrol agents have their hands tied so badly that even they say they should just stay home.

The president’s claims on “deportation numbers” are bogus. He is counting only those that are caught and released at the border. His numbers are dismal for deporting those here in jail or living in the shadows.

Read more at TheRealSide

It’s Official: Obama Declares America No Longer a Republic

KingObama

“Congress will not act, so I will,” warned President Obama over the past few weeks as he projected the possibility of acting unilaterally on the issue of illegal immigration. And act, he did.

In an announcement Thursday evening, the President granted amnesty to millions of those who have entered the country illegally. Those granted amnesty, are those who have been in the country for at least five years, have children who are citizens or legal residents, who pass a criminal background check, and are willing to pay taxes and register with the government. The impact could include as many as 6 million people.

rickmckeeThe elements of his plan have merit, but to be legal, the proposal must be enacted legislatively, which he could have done easily when his party controlled both chambers of congress during his first term. What he proposes to do is to rewrite U.S. immigration law without the Constitutional or statutory authority to do so.

His actions stand in stark contrast to what he has been saying over the past six years. On March 28, 2011 in a Univision appearance, he declared, “For me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates, would not conform to my appropriate role as president.”

On July 25, 2011, he stated, “I know some people want me to bypass congress and change the laws on my own. But that’s not the way our system works.”

On November 25, 2013, he declared, “If in fact I could solve all these problems without passing laws in congress, then I would do so. But we’re also a nation of laws.”

mexicoOn March 6, 2014, he clarified, “I cannot ignore those laws anymore than I can ignore any of the other laws on the books. What I said in the past remains true. Until congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do.”

On February 14, 2013, he said, “The problem is that, I’m the president of the United States. I’m not the emperor of the United States. My job is to execute the laws that are passed.”

Then, in reference to his 2012 Executive Order where elements of the stalled Senate Dream Act were implemented, he said, “What we have tried to do is administratively reduce the burdens and hardships on families being separated. And what we’ve done is, obviously, pass the deferred action which made sure that the DREAMers, young people who were brought here and think of themselves as Americans, are American except for their papers, that they’re not deported.

“Having said all that, we’ve kind of stretched our administrative flexibility as much as we can. And that’s why making sure we get comprehensive immigration reform done is so important.”

border_crisisAnd on January 30, 2013, he told Univision, “Well, I think it is important to remind everybody that, as I said I think previously, and I’m not a king. I am the head of the executive branch of government. I’m required to follow the law.”

In fact, there are at least 25 times the president has expressed those convictions, and are captured on video. His comments focus on three key areas: 1) we are a nation of laws; 2) as president, he hasn’t the authority to make law, for that’s the role of the legislative branch; and 3) he is not a king or an emperor, i.e. a despot. Clearly, from his speech on Thursday, those convictions have changed. He either feels he is above the law, can now make law, subordinating congress to irrelevancy, or he feels he is now king or emperor.

The Executive Order (EO) does not grant the president the authority to do what he said he’d do this week. There are three things the EO can be used for: operational management of the executive branch, operational management of the federal agencies or officials, and implementing statutory or constitutional presidential responsibilities. Executive Orders cannot be used to either create new law, or to annul or reverse existing law. After all, his primary function, according to the Constitution and his oath of office, is to “faithfully execute the office” in enforcement and execution of the laws legally passed by the legislative branch.

Many have cited executive order precedence of prior presidents. Those situations were far different. President Ronald Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986, which granted limited amnesty to some qualified illegal immigrants. He subsequently issued an executive order that included minor children of those specifically covered under the Act.

KingObamaIn 1990, President George Herbert Walker Bush issued an Executive Order related to that Act that broadened the scope to include spouses and children of those granted amnesty under the Simpson-Mazzoli Act. The EO was a logical inclusion not specifically delineated in the Act. Both Reagan’s and Bush’s Executive Orders were supported by the legislative intent of Simpson-Mazzoli, were legal declarations of how Simpson-Mazzoli would be implemented, and were supported by Congress.

What the President did this week establishes a dangerous precedent and arguably creates a constitutional crisis over the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches and the rule of law. As disturbing as it is to have a president so willfully and intentionally exceed his constitutional authority, is the fact that his party leadership is entirely supportive of his illegal actions.

In a few years there will be a Republican president who may, using his “pen and his phone,” rescind the Affordable Care Act, or outlaw abortions altogether, or initiate tax cuts just by Executive Order. Those who have no problem with what the President did this week will have no legal leg to stand on in their denunciation of such future executive actions.

Regardless of which party he hails from, and regardless of the viability of his proposal, President Obama this week declared that we are no longer a nation of laws, and that he is our emperor.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

RE: The US Senate Race in Kansas

voting2

“Independent” Greg Orman, who has so many Democrat Party operative working on his campaign one expects to see Nancy Pelosi’s name on his campaign headquarters door, has stated that he will caucus with whatever party presents the best ideas.

Mr. Orman’s campaign website states:

“If Greg is elected, there’s a reasonable chance that neither party would have a majority in the US Senate. If that is the case, he will work with the other independent Senators to caucus with the party that is most willing to face our country’s difficult problems head on and advance our problem-solving, non-partisan agenda.”

Therein lays the problem, and a perfect example of: a) how constitutionally illiterate our political class has become; b) how constitutionally illiterate our citizenry has become; and c) why the 17th Amendment is the most damaging action ever executed by the Progressive Left throughout US history.

When the Progressives of the early 20th Century marshaled through the 17th Amendment, they did a great damage to the symbiotic set of checks and balanced that achieved protections for both the individual and the individual states, where the power of the federal government was concerned. Under the guise of putting more control of government into the hands of the people, the Progressives, under Woodrow Wilson, literally destroyed the check and balance that protected state sovereignty and, through that erosion, the sovereignty of the individual.

At its inception, the US Constitution mandated, in Article I, Section 3, that:

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote…”

The appointment of senators by the state legislators thwarted political faction on the floor of the US Senate. With each senator held accountable by their respective state legislatures for their votes, alliances and actions, the onus for political survival for the senatorial class was devotion to the well-being of their home states. The political ideology or factional allegiance of the senator was irrelevant for the most part. If a senator chose political party over the needs of his home state, the state legislature could – and would – simply recall him through an act the State House, replacing the senator with someone who held allegiance to his home state – and the constitution of that home state – above national political faction.

Understanding this original intent that the Framers built into the Constitution, the idea of Obamacare, or suffocating national debt, or an aggressive IRS, EPA or NSA, would never have come to be. The unfunded mandates of Obamacare would have seen the 54 senators from the 27 states that refused to establish ACA health insurance exchanges – and most likely more from states that did – voting against the bill in its infancy because the legislation harms the well-being of the individual states and usurps the authority of most every state’s constitution. So too, the national debt would never have been allowed to accumulate because it passes down to the citizens of individual states. The IRS would be little more than a gaggle of accountants, the EPA would not exist and the NSA wouldn’t be allowed to operate on US soil, if at all.

Simply put, there would be no party politics in the US Senate. It would be an assembly of representatives of each state’s government, tasked specifically and exclusively with the protection of the home state and her constitution. The passage of the 17th Amendment killed that protection and facilitated political faction on a national level to metastasize in the US Senate, something Pres. George Washington warned vehemently about in his Farewell Address.

The 17th Amendment mandates:

“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote…”

By tricking – and that’s exactly what the Progressives did – the populace into thinking the popular election of their senators gave them more power over government, it literally established the opposite; delivering great power to national political parties and the federal government, while extinguishing an essential check and balance over said political parties and the federal government. The 17th Amendment took power away from the people and the states, and delivered it to the political parties and the federal government.

So, why is the Senatorial Election in Kansas a perfect example of constitutional illiteracy and Progressive manipulation? Would the 17th Amendment have not been passed Mr. Orman wouldn’t need – or aspire – to caucus with any political faction or party. He would, instead, be carrying out the will of the Kansas State Legislature and, through them, the will of the people of his state. There would be no need – or desire – to “caucus” with those of any particular political “flavor” because the well-being of each state is dictated by the needs of each state and her people, not the leaders of any political party.

To wit, imagine that the 17th Amendment had never passed, or that a smart-thinking Congress repealed it. No longer would we see any – any – legislative gridlock; no longer would we amass unrepayable debt; no longer would we see hyper-partisan or ideological pieces of legislation rammed down our throats; no longer would the American people – and her government – be held hostage to politics…no long would the American people be held hostage to politics.

Still think Progressives are on the side of the people? Yeah, neither do I…I haven’t for a very, very long time.

Good Riddance to a Race-Baiting Divider

Eric Holder

Attorney General Eric Holder, the first Black man to be appointed as United States Attorney General, has resigned. Americans who suffered the slings and arrows of rising above the racial divide since – and before – the enactment of Civil Rights legislation are jubilant in his departure. Never before has an Attorney General belittled the American citizenry as Mr. Holder has in his comments on racism. Never before has an Attorney General abused the power of his office as Mr. Holder has in the pursuit of racial retribution. And never before has an Attorney General overseen such an aggressive division of our citizenry based on race as has Mr, Holder. To put it directly, Mr. Holder, don’t let the door smack you in your racist behind as you leave.

I was raised in the 1960s and 1970s. My parents taught me, in no uncertain terms, to consider individuals through a lens that evaluated their character, not their skin color. When I didn’t, my attitude was “adjusted” and I am thankful for their unyielding insistence on that issue.

I remember all too clearly the evening when my Father returned home from his office the day he found one of his best friends – a Black man – dead on the office floor. He was devastated. Eddie Cain was more than an employee to my Father. Each day as he arrived at his fledgling business – a new and struggling metal manufacturing company – he was greeted by Mr. Cain. Each morning they took the time to have a cup of coffee, or two, and discuss family, life, and current events. It was irrelevant that my Father was the boss and Mr. Cain was the custodian. Both men looked upon each other with respect, as family men both struggling to achieve so as to take care of their respective families. They were men of equal honor talking like the friends that they were.

Many times, my Father would confer with his friend on business realities that weighed heavily on my Father’s mind. Many times the common sense advice that Mr. Cain offered my Father – as a friend – was advice that helped to ease my Father’s mind. I like to think that it was out of the catalyst of their friendship that my Father was moved to institute a profit sharing plan that included all of his employees. Mind you, this was in a day and age when such things were considered revolutionary. The harder everyone worked – from the custodian to the CEO – the more everyone would financially benefit; capitalism at its purest; everyone has “skin in the game.”

On the day that my Father arrived home from the office after having found Mr. Cain dead on the floor from a heart attack – the water for their morning pot of coffee together spilled across the floor – I could see, even at my young age, the heartbreak a man feels for the loss of a great friend. He was devastated and at a loss. He made arrangements for Mr. Cain’s family to be provided for and lumbered through the grieving process; a process which not only took a long time to complete (if it ever did), but one that taught my Sister and I an important lesson. Skin color doesn’t matter. Character matters.

I carry that experience with me today as I travel the road that is my life. I have had the pleasure to have performed with some of the most talented and revered jazz musicians the art form has to offer, most of them Black. I have worked, played, entertained, debated and counseled with Blacks, Latinos, Europeans, Asians, Indians and American Indians, many of whom have been very dear to me, not because of a superficial tally of acquired racial diversity, but because of the elevated level of character I demand of myself in choosing who I call friend. In each instance the idea of skin color was non-existent. We appreciated each other for our talents, our character, our knowledge, our counsel and our developing friendships. Over the years I have been graced to have been able to call many of these old friends “family,” if only in the extended definition.

So, pardon me if I believe that Eric Holder and his race-baiting, activist agenda have harmed the United States; have done an incredible disservice to the multiple generations who have already risen above the stain of racism. I find it pathetic and unintelligent that Mr. Holder is so stained by the inequities of eras past; so stained in the blood of racism that no longer exists in mainstream America (but for the corners of our society where it will never be expunged), that he wears racism like a birthmark; never to be removed, always an identifier to who he is. Sadly, or perhaps ironically, it is the very racism of Mr. Holder and his ilk that feeds the racism that exists in the extreme corners of our country. One would think an educated person like Mr. Holder would understand this. Or, perhaps he does understand this and rising above racism was never his true agenda…perhaps.

So, as the Progressives amongst us celebrate the end of the tenure of our first Black Attorney General, I weep for our nation and the American culture. Mr. Holder and his racist, biased, activist pals have set race relations back almost 50 years, and for what, retribution? Payback? So another generation can “feel the pain”?

To all of those who have existed on this planet blind to racism and acutely dedicated to evaluating a person by their character over their skin color, I say stay the course; teach your children; be the example that would serve to influence all generations to come. Condemn thuggish behavior from all who exhibit it – regardless of the color of their skin, and hold dear to you people of good character, loyalty and friendship, like my Father held dear to Eddie Cain.

As for Eric Holder and his gaggle of race-baiting dividers, it is they who are the real cowards. Goodbye and good riddance. May our culture heal from your poisons.

‘If They Rear Their Ugly Heads, We’ll Send Them To Hell!’ – Texas Sheriff’s Message To ISIS

sheriffgary

sheriffgary

Hey ISIS, don’t mess with Texas.

Midland County Sheriff Gary Painter brought his ten-gallon cowboy hat to an interview with the elitists at CNN, and he explained why he believes that ISIS operatives are already in the United States, and what he’s prepared to do about it.

This ‘good old boy’ is full of common sense and came across very well despite a bit of baiting by the CNN hosts. CNN may have thought they were going to have a bit of sport with some flyover country, redneck, rumor-mongering and scare-tactic peddling country bumpkin. But in short order he turned the tables and the short but riveting interview became a damning indictment of the pathetic security conditions on the Southern border with a bonus, surprise revelation that the government is currently warning Texas sheriffs about ISIS activity in border areas.

What a perfect interview on his part. He came across as informed, logical, and professional while outlining the various threats a porous and poorly guarded border presents to the nation. It turns out Sheriff Gary Painter is finishing up his seventh term in office, has been in law enforcement since 1970, distinguished himself on the battlefield while serving two tours in Vietnam as a Marine, and has been honored by the Texas legislature as a “highly respected Texas peace officer.”

I have no doubts that Sheriff Painter would act swiftly and competently against any black pajama wearing foreign fighters that may pop up in his area of operations. He’d be happy to make them a martyr for their Islamofascist cause. We need more like him in positions of authority who share the view that “If They Rear Their Ugly Heads, We’ll Send Them To Hell!”

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

Obama’s “JV” Terrorists

isis-beheads-america-journalist-james-wright-foley-message-to-obama-islamic-state

It is not uncommon to find inconsistencies and even contradictions in U.S. foreign policy. Usually a few years of separation are required to reveal our inconsistency, as in the case of Iran. Rarely do we see such striking contradictions in real time as we do today in the Middle East policies of the Obama administration.

isis-iraq-war-crimes.siISIS occupies the center stage of our current iteration of contradictory policy. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which subsequently changed their name to the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL), apparently now wants to be known simply as The Islamic State (IS). This is the militaristic group that has emerged out of Syria, Al-Nusra, and merged with Al Qaeda of Iraq, to take over significant portions of eastern Syria and northern Iraq.

Threatening to violently take over all of Iraq and Syria, establishing an Islamic caliphate that would eventually cover the world, they have mercilessly spread their destruction from city to city. They behead or conduct mass executions against whoever opposes them (including American journalists), kidnap for ransoms to fund their operations, and have vowed to raise the ISIS flag over the White House. They are well funded from bank robberies, selling oil on the black market, and from kidnap ransoms. They are well trained, militant, and are well armed, predominantly with U.S. equipment.

rightThis is the Al Qaeda-linked group of terrorists that Obama referred to as “JV” (junior varsity) just a few months ago. In an interview with New Yorker magazine in January, the president applied a metaphor, saying of ISIS, that putting on a “Laker’s uniform doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.” That “JV” group of militants, now figured to be 10,000 strong (including some westerners and as many as 300 Americans) is now perceived to be the greatest terrorist threat in the world.

During the 2012 presidential campaign, more than 32 times the president claimed Al Qaeda was “decimated” or “defeated.” To acknowledge their resurgence just two years later would not fit with his narrative as slayer of Osama bin Laden and vanquisher of his terrorist group. Consequently, their emerging threat had to be minimized.

But that’s just the tip of the ISIS iceberg for the administration. We have to realize that for the past few years the president has been actively engaged in toppling Middle Eastern regimes; Khadafy in Libya, Mubarak in Egypt, and Assad in Syria. In fact, just over a year ago the president was requesting $500 million to help the “freedom fighters” in Syria topple the Assad regime. The majority of those “freedom fighters” now go by the name ISIS, and the president was poised to fund them.

050913_ObamaBenghaziCoverUp_UFSCOLOREven worse, according to CNN last August, CIA sources have revealed that the Benghazi consulate attack of 9/11/12 was directly linked to a clandestine administration operation providing arms to the rebels in Syria. It wasn’t just the consulate compound in Benghazi that was demolished by the marauding jihadists, but the CIA facility two kilometers away, that housed the cash and weapons caches being smuggled into Syria. Jihadists got all of it.

This clarifies the need of the administration to fabricate a story about a YouTube video causing the “spontaneous demonstration” leading to the assassination of Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others in Benghazi. In light of recent developments with ISIS, clearly the administration was displaying their naiveté, or, worse yet, intentionally downplaying the effects of surging jihadist groups, by willfully arming and funding them in their effort to displace Assad.

Clarifying the nature and ideological alignment of ISIS, last week Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that ISIS and Hamas are “branches of the same tree.” He explained, “Hamas is ISIS, ISIS is Hamas. They’re the enemies of peace. They’re the enemies of Israel. They’re the enemies of all civilized countries.”

RAMclr-062514-attack-IBD-COLOR-FINAL.gif.cmsThis brings us to current events, with the president now authorizing bombing of ISIS targets in Iraq, and leaving the door open to possible raids even into Syria. So now he’s bombing the same militants that he sought to legally fund through congress, was actively arming and funding through clandestine CIA operations in Benghazi, Libya, and that he has characterized as being “JV” terrorists. And let’s not forget that by leaving Iraq so hastily without a Status of Forces agreement, the administration created the vacuum facilitating the successful march of ISIS across northern Iraq.

Last week Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said, “I think evidence is pretty clear when we look at what they did to Mr. Foley [the American journalist James Foley, beheaded last week by ISIS], what they threaten to do to all Americans and Europeans, what they are doing now, the — I don’t know any other way to describe it other than barbaric. 

They have no standard of decency, of responsible human behavior. And I think the record is pretty clear on that. So, yes, they are an imminent threat to every interest we have, whether it’s in Iraq or anywhere else.” He concluded, “We’ve never seen anything like it before.”

"We are in your state. We are in your cities. We are in your streets."

“We are in your state.
We are in your cities.
We are in your streets.”

Those who maintain that the U.S. should embrace a non-interventionist foreign policy would have us believe that this is not a concern to us. In social media and elsewhere they promulgate an attitude of, “let them kill each other off.”

It could already be too late for that. Last week Texas Governor Rick Perry said, “There’s the obvious great concern that because of the condition of the border from the standpoint of it not being secure and us not knowing who is penetrating across, that individuals from ISIS or other terrorist states could be [crossing the border] — and I think there is a very real possibility that they may have already used that.” Our southern border is not secure, and clearly anyone of means or resources could easily breach it.

There are signs that they have already done so. ISIS has posted and tweeted photographs of their flag flying in Washington, D.C. and Chicago, with the message, “We are in your cities.” Just this week, the United Kingdom raised their terrorist threat assessment from “substantial” to “severe” in response to the rising danger ISIS poses globally.

In the 1990’s, Al Qaeda declared war on the U.S. We didn’t take it seriously and dealt with terrorist attacks as incidents for law enforcement. We all remember what that led to. And according to Secretary Hagel, this threat is greater. Attorney General Eric Holder announced this week that the FBI would investigate the beheading of journalist James Foley. Is history repeating itself, due to incompetence and an ideologically driven approach to assessing and addressing our exogenous threats? Regrettably, it appears so.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

Travis County Goes After Texas Governor shortly after strong border position

Truth is stranger than fiction -> Texas Gov. Rick Perry sent the National Guard to help defend the border between Texas and Mexico yesterday. Today, an Austin area grand jury indicted the Governor for having pressured a drunk D.A. to resign.

District Attorney Rosemary Lehmburg was arrested for drunken driving while Perry was governor and the governor felt that such dangerous actions were subject to loss of job. Afterall, if you can’t follow the law, how could you prosecute it?

Many in the community disagreed and decided to create the case against the governor.

After the drunken driving arrest, Perry requested that Lehmburg step down after having failed a basic test of voter trust. Lehmburg refused and Perry pressured further by saying that he would refuse funds to Lehmburg’s office unless she resigned – a promise he carried out by carrying out a line veto against a state appropriations bill.

In Texas, line item veto is a tool the Governor uses to check off-the-hook officials and offices. While the Governor isn’t as strong as the Lieutenant Governor in Texas politics, he still has tools to use when officials abuse the public trust. In the case of Gov. Perry,did he over-step his authority or is he taking heat for his decision to defend the border President Obama has chosen to abandon?

 

I Told You It Wasn’t a Woman’s Health Issue !

BabyFinger

I have been saying, to the irritant of my friends on the Left, that abortion has nothing to do with women’s health.

One of the original questions the Supreme Court had to deal with in the seventies when they approved this “slaughter law” was, when does life begin. Well, all the academics and doctors that were willing to take some money and testify said life did not start until the third trimester.

Remember, this was a time when cancer was almost always fatal. AIDS was a death sentence, and, in some cases, people still died from the flu.

Medicine has come a long way since then. And now, many agree, scientists and doctors alike, that life begins at conception or shortly thereafter.

Dr. Bill Fifer, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, said, “Everything that a newborn baby does, a fetus has pretty much done already.” He went on to say “We know that a baby’s tiny heart is beating as early as 18 days after sperm-egg fusion. Brain waves are detectable by 6 weeks and babies can experience dream (REM) sleep by 17 weeks. Substantial medical and scientific evidence has demonstrated that unborn children are capable of feeling pain by 20 weeks, if not earlier.”

Not Joe Messina’s opinion, but science. This is now the understanding of many in the medical field. However, I am still perplexed. You see, the Left continually beats on Right-wing, conservative, Bible-thumping Republicans (like myself) for not believing in science but rather the fairy tales of the Bible.

But when confronted by science and facts (not theories like, let’s say, evolution) that don’t line up with their way of thinking they ignore them and tell us that we hate women (in the case of our abortion stance.) Why? Because is easier than discussing the facts.

So, if at 18 days that little blob of cells has a heartbeat, what can we call it? What will it eventually be? A canine? A fish? A tree? Nope. Simply, a human. Its only potential outcome is that it is a developing human!

Now with science we can see with sonograms and 3-D imagery what the baby looks like. We can’t run from that truth. Our youth are seeing it more and more and are changing the way they view abortion.

So then… it is a life! But what about the argument for years from the Left and the pro-abortion groups that it’s not a life? As of late, some of the abortion proponents are saying that life begins when the mother says it does, that the unborn blob of cells can be snuffed out even up to the time it’s exiting the birth canal. Wow! That’s a stretch!

But wait! Jodi Jacobson, Editor in Chief of RH Reality Check, a Reproductive and Sexual Health and Justice blog says it was never when life beings because “life begins at conception.” Huh?

OMG! Wasn’t the abortion debate all about women having access to clean safe medical facilities so that when they were seeking this “medical procedure” the mother’s health would not be at risk? The fetus, or as it’s been called “blob of cells,” needed to be removed to save the mother.

You were duped!


Read more at http://therealside.com/2014/08/i-told-you-it-wasnt-a-womans-health-issue/#L9t6j1vAXCU2XaUl.99

No Longer the World’s Policeman, We’re Now the World’s Social Worker.

ObamaUSbordersignIt’s 9AM late July and already the day is shot to hell. The temperature is over 80 and the humidity would wilt a Puritan’s collar.

You’re supposed to be taking Migra, your Mexican Water Spaniel, on a 400–hundred-mile car trip. The dog’s 14–years–old if he’s a day, and who knows if he’ll live long enough to be reunited with the rest of your family. Plus, you can’t just motor out the driveway because that’s not a good idea where you live.

It’s one of those ‘transitional neighborhoods’ that you thought was transitioning into a community where people worry about their carbon footprint, but after the real estate crash it became an area where you worry about footsteps after midnight.

That’s why it’s never a good idea for the neighbors to know you’re leaving and taking the dog with you.

So you hide him under a blanket and as you back out of the driveway you’re waving vigorously to a wife that’s not home either. Ready to hit the open road, you remember about breakfast. But that’s why 7/11 was invented.

You drive up, crack a window and tell Migra to stay on the blanket and stop barking.

Inside the store you’re confronted with time–consuming decisions. At the counter you consider taking the slowly rotating trans–fat stick. Or will you settle for the dubious breakfast pastry that looks like it covered in scorched Play–Doh? Then it’s back to the coffee bar. What size, what flavor and will ‘Irish Cream’ dilution fluid clash with Sumatra Surprise coffee?

Meanwhile, back in the parking lot, some busybody in a Prius sees Migra licking the window. That’s what dogs do. Migra washes the inside and you wash the outside. Only she thinks it’s a cry for help from a dog dying of heat prostration.

So she runs into the street and flags down a passing patrol car.

But you’re still inside visiting the new bathroom; not knowing the extra minutes are digging you deeper in the hole. By the time you get back to the car the rear window has been smashed by Fire & Rescue, the busybody is wailing about abuse as the cop is issuing a summons and telling you the dog is going to be a guest of the county, until authorities determine whether or not you are fit to be an animal parent.

So much for white privilege.

By way of contrast if you were an enterprising parent in El Salvador and decided it’s high time to find out what your relatives are doing in El Norte, it’s only natural to deputize your 14–year–old and send him north on an 1,110 mile trek to Laredo, TX.

Pedro might go by foot, by coyote or by Mexican Death Train. He might be robbed, raped, sold into sex slavery, recruited into a gang or killed. But the important thing is he memorizes the magic words that will cause the government drone in Texas to consider him for asylum.

If he makes it to the border, after being helped northward by those nice government officials in Mexico, his free enterprise traveling days are over. Now he’s on Uncle Sugar’s tab. When Migra got to the pound the first thing the staff did was check his tags, check for disease and check his shots.

When Pedro hit the border he has no tags, no shot records and, of course, no parent. But that’s no problem! The US government is here to Pander & Serve! Instead of sending him back across the border to make his way home, Uncle Social Worker takes whatever vague family history and location for relatives that Pedro gives him and prepares to reunite the boy with the same people that had no problem dispatching him on a journey that would get a gringo arrested.

And that’s another contrast. When you go to get Migra at the pound you have to show photo ID and plenty of contrition for roasting your poor dog in the parking lot while you gamboled about in 7/11. When someone shows up for Pedro there’s no ID check, no criminal check, no fingerprint check and certainly no citizenship check. Uncle Social just aids and abets the original border offense.

The staff considers itself fortunate if Pedro doesn’t join the rest of his ‘relatives’ outside and participate in the ‘No Deportations’ rally.

This entire farce just emphasizes the only people who are ignored and actually living in the shadows here are the citizens of the United States.

Two particular items stand out in this latest crisis. The Mainstream Media is focusing on the children and the human tragedy, but no one asks what kind of parents use their children for pawns, other than the Kardashians? The second is the claim that the children are fleeing dangerous neighborhoods.

Well okay, but when you are frightened do you normally flee 1,200 miles? Most of us stop running when the get out of the bad guy’s range. And isn’t it convenient they only feel safe in the new Obama welfare state?

The other is the MSM continuing chronology problem. All teenagers aren’t children, unless you fit into a leftist talking point. Many of these ‘unaccompanied minors’ are tattooed gang members that know a scam and easy pickings when they see it.

It’s also interesting how the left never quotes the Bible when discussing homosexual marriage or abortion, but let an illegal appear on the horizon and it’s instant theology class. We Christians are told by people who I doubt even own a Bible that Christ told us to welcome the stranger and alien.

Which only proves that both the devil and the leftist can quote scripture. They just don’t quote it all. Exodus and Numbers on more than one occasion discuss how the alien should be treated and sure enough it is with equality and generosity. BUT and it’s a big but, Numbers 15:15 plainly states, “The community is to have the same rules for you and for the foreigner residing among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the foreigner shall be the same before the Lord.”

So it’s clear the foreigner residing among us is to be held to the same rules or law as we are. When one’s first action in joining a community is to break the law, it would seem to me that the proper Biblical response would not be a warm welcome.

Obama now wants $3.7 billion to deal with the crisis he created, but only (!) $400 million of the total is to be spent on border–strengthening measures. The rest of the money will go to hire an army illegal alien facilitators, caretakers and expand the federal government.

The great Oklahoma senator and patriot Tom Coburn points out that it would be cheaper to fly the entire alien families home in a first class seat, than to let Obama sprinkle them around the country and create government jobs that cater to lawbreakers.

He’s right. It’s the sensible and Christian action to take.

Obama’s Man-Made Disaster – Our Southern Border Invasion

dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls

It’s impossible to avoid the coverage of the “immigration crisis” on our southern border. The media’s pervasive use of disinformation terminology and appeals to morality of a sentient populace is employed to shape public perception on the humanitarian tragedy unfolding daily in the news. The problems are manifold, but the creation of the crisis is causally singular. And the solution, at least to the cause, could be equally simple.

dt.common.streams.StreamServer.clsJust since October of last year, there have been nearly 60,000 children taken into custody for entering our country illegally. The majority of them are from Central America and unaccompanied by an adult.

The media report this as an “immigration crisis.” It is not. The government’s own definition of an immigrant is very precise: “persons admitted as legal permanent residents (LPRs) of the United States.” It would be more accurately described as an invasion, which is an “incursion by a large number of people.” As a friend sent me this past week, “Sneaking into a country doesn’t make you an ‘immigrant’ any more than breaking into a house makes you ‘part of the family.’”

Secondarily, the crisis with the children is man-made, and there is one man who is most responsible for it. Starting as early as August 2011, the administration started using “prosecutorial discretion” in applying the law against those who enter the country illegally. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano issued a communiqué stating that removing illegal aliens was not an “enforcement priority” of the Obama administration.

article-2694606-1FB0BDB600000578-269_634x415Almost immediately after that initial statement, DHS memos evidence an even less subtle approach; a broader “administrative amnesty,” would be applied especially for young people who would have benefited from the DREAM Act, which was never passed by congress. One such DHS memo to the director of United States Citizen and Immigration Services, indicated, “In the absence of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, CIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations.”

Internal memos clearly identify the motive behind such moves to be political. One such internal memo, uncovered by Pro Publica, stated, “The Secretary would face criticism that she is abdicating her charge to enforce the immigration laws,” but expressed hope she would “be viewed as breaking through the Washington gridlock in an effort to solve tough problems at a time when providing Latino voters with something they can support will be a win-win for us all.”

Then for the icing on the cake, just five months before the 2012 presidential election, “Obama announced that he would stop deportations for a half a million people who were brought to the United States as children. For this, he was rewarded with more than 70 percent of the Hispanic vote,” as reported by Nationalinterest.org.

BsmLwovIEAAa0ioEach of these official and unofficial announcements have yielded the administration’s apparently desired effect of escalating the invasion of our southern border. News regarding the relaxation of U.S. restrictions against illegal entry into the country travels like wildfire especially through the “coyote” grapevine, those who transport people across the border illegally.

This relaxation of deportation and border security laws is borne out by the data. According to the Los Angeles Times, “the number of immigrants younger than 18 who were deported or turned away from ports of entry declined from 8,143 in 2008 to 1,669 last year. There were 95 minors deported from the entire interior of the country last year. At the same time, the number of unaccompanied alien children arriving from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras exploded from less than 4,000 several years ago to over 40,000 since last October.”

Last weekend Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX), along with several other congressmen, met with President of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernandez and President of Guatemala Otto Pérez Molina and their wives. According to Granger, the leaders “want their children back.”

“We found out that the president and the first ladies of Guatemala and Honduras want their children back and they’re willing to cooperate with us to send their children back as quickly as possible,” she said.

Flood-Gates-590-LAIn spite of claims the children are fleeing violence in their home countries, a new report indicates they’re coming primarily for amnesty. Two weeks ago the El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC), which is led by the DEA with cooperation from Homeland Security, reported, “Of the 230 migrants interviewed, 219 cited the primary reason for migrating to the United States was the perception of U.S. immigration laws granting free passes or permisos to UAC (unaccompanied children) and adult females OTMs (other than Mexicans) traveling with minors,” the report said.

Clearly the administration has created this humanitarian crisis by its own policies. If they wanted to stop the illegal migration, it wouldn’t take much effort. Rep. Granger indicated that the Central American presidents she met with said it would be “very helpful” if the president would reverse his stance. They said a great start would be for the president to simply state, “Don’t send your children to the United States illegally because we will send them back, they will not complete their journey.”

The president had a perfect opportunity to send such a message when he was visiting Texas discussing the issue with Governor Rick Perry. He created the crisis with administration policies, and he could end it, if he wanted to.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

Migrant Children – Pawns in an Insidious “Game”

Never could I have imagined that an authority of our government would dare to suggest that children be used to further political gain.  Clearly, the children crossing illegally into our country don’t have the capacity to understand how they are being used to perpetrate a 21st century “slavery” scam.

These children will become wards of the state.  The government will control what they receive in terms of entitlements; they will control where they will live, they will control who will raise them, what they will learn in school – and perhaps most importantly what they will learn about their new country, they will control how they will vote, who they will marry – the list is endless.

The plethora of obvious questions now must come to any sane and reasonable mind.

Who will take care of these children?

Will an open door exist for unlimited and unaccompanied children to pass through? It’s ludicrous.  I guess if the goal is to create a new generation of “slaves” of the government then the notion is not so ludicrous; just morally bereft.

Who will manage this elaborate $3.5 billion scam?  Is “Homeland for Migrant Children” now to become another department of our increasingly oppressive government?

What of American citizens who are presently seeking to adopt children from other countries?  Will all of those processes now stop in favor of our government telling them to take in illegal children?  And what of the countless dollars and red tape spent by anxious couples hoping to adopt – will those funds be reimbursed?

What happens when our citizenry, not looking to adopt, is told they must?

Has our “regime” now chosen a new demographic and protected class for which taxpayers must “foot the bill?”

What is to become of the biological parents of these children who will most certainly attempt to make a claim against our government for their own welfare?  Won’t these children become de facto citizens who can then bring their relatives here?

These initial questions only scratch the surface of what should be a more thorough understanding of the dire consequences of this latest action.

The most disturbing question that should be asked is:

Will we tolerate our authorities to use children for political gain?”

This latest maneuver is diabolical, deceitful and insidious.  And it is all being done on purpose.

Our government has put us in “Check”. We need to wake up before they say, “Check Mate”.

Reinventing the Founders, or: A Response to Jill Lepore on July 4th, 2014

brian0

While sipping my tea this wonderful July 4th, I came across an article on Bill Moyers’ site where the author stated that the Founders would not recognize the Tea Party or their ideas; in fact, they would be appalled by them. Jill Lepore, the author of the piece, seems to know her subject, and she brings up some good points regarding how the Right Wing in general and Evangelical Christians in particular view the Founders. You can read her remarks here, but I’m going to provide a summary of her opinion with my response to follow.

Basically, the Founders are no help to us today. They wrote and said so much to so many, in some cases contradicting each other and themselves as time went on, that to strictly interpret their words and our Constitution is moot. We’re on our own in interpreting their words for our time and following the spirit of their efforts to shape America into what she should be, and that means the Founding Documents must evolve too. They aren’t written in stone, after all, but paper that degrades over time. The Founders didn’t create a perfect union; they created a flawed one, and it’s up to us to get it right. They weren’t the faithfully religious Christians the Evangelicals would like you to believe, so presenting them as such is also an error, and we cannot rightfully claim that the U.S. was built on any kind of Biblical or moral foundation because their recorded remarks simply don’t back that up. In other words, they just ain’t the guys you want to hold up as a standard-bearer. In fact, they got it so wrong the first time that we had to fight a Civil War to make corrections.

I think she’s right on a few things. Christians and conservatives have built the Founders into Saints, and they don’t belong there. They were men of their time, following the passions and ideas of their time, and if they were here today….well, I don’t think the Church would approve, certainly not of Ben Franklin and his dalliances with French ladies. Jefferson’s pantheism would send conservative Christians into furious rage.

I will go on record as saying that the experiment in self-governance that the Founders initiated was simply that. They read some books and considered some ideas and were able to take advantage of a situation in which to stir up a rebellion. They were in the minority. Plenty of Colonists were perfectly happy living under British rule, but the Founders were passionate enough to try. In other words, they weren’t fighting for the freedom of you or me. They were fighting for their own freedom, a chance to see if self-governance could work. Did they have future generations in mind? Surely they at least considered it. Some of them, like Jefferson and Franklin, didn’t think we could keep this Republic going. In the end I don’t think they looked further ahead than their own lives, and they lived long enough to see America grow as a free nation. When the last of the Founders passed, that was the end of their involvement in this experiment. It was a success, and left to the rest of us to carry on, if we could keep it.

While, philosophically speaking, man should be free to govern his own affairs, the fact is that only a small percentage of man is capable of doing that. The rest want a “safety net” and somebody to look after them should a problem arise; even more want a king to tell them what to do because life is tough, and it’s tougher when you’re stupid.

Man’s natural state is to live on his knees. He wants somebody to rule over him, not necessarily violently, but he certainly wants control over his life because of the chaotic state which is life’s way of doing business, assuming, if we must, that “life” is sentient. Because sentient life is out of control, we need some sort of man-made control to weather the storm. When you look at other governments around the globe, none are like ours. Progressives love to point out that because we don’t have some of the programs and ideas that other governments have, it means we’re less civilized. There are people who not only want to live in shackles, they indeed race to the front of the line to get their shackles before anybody else. It’s a badge of honor.

The Founders and those that inspired them refuted that, and it doesn’t matter if their own words contradict each other. Let’s go to the basics of what inspired them: Man should be free. What did they do? Create a government in the best way they knew how to ensure that man could be free. What happened instead? Those unable to take care of themselves, over time, made enough noise so that they could have the government take care of them, and since we are all our brother’s keepers, we must all contribute to the welfare of those who are unable to help themselves. Those same people exploited the flaws in the personal lives of the Founders to discredit their ideas and cast doubt on this great experiment.

And as for putting these men on a pedestal….well, that’s what man does, too, going well back to the golden calf. Man not only wants to live on his knees, he wants to worship what he can see. For all the talk the Church makes of not worshiping idols, we sure have a lot of them. It puts a burden on the Founders they were never meant to have, and gives ammunition to the progressives who gleefully point out that they can’t measure up to their Sainthood.

The Founders, though, are partially responsible for where we put them. Their recorded words still resonate; they have resonated with future generations that agreed, yes, man should be free, and those future generations have done everything possible to keep their ideas alive, because they are worthy ideas.

Instead of worshiping the men, however, what we should look to instead is the spirit of their ideas, and to the writers and philosophers of the Enlightenment who inspired them, to see how we too can be inspired today. The idea is more important than the man who communicates it.

Man should be free. Man should not oppress other men. Man should be allowed to forge his own way with as little restrictions as possible considering he must coexist with other Men. That means compromise, which is now a dirty word that neither the left nor the right will admit exists in our vocabulary.

In a perfect world, that’s what we would have. Instead we have strife. Man vs. Man. Conflict. Each side thinks it knows best and works to subdue the other side. Because my enemy rises against me, I must smite him because I was meant to be free. Today I use words same as Thomas Paine, though certainly he was far more eloquent. Perhaps someday I will use a rifle as those many nameless Revolutionary soldiers were forced to do, so many years ago, because the enemy refused to allow their freedom. As far as this nation has fallen, I’m frankly surprised I’m not writing this from a trench somewhere in the middle of America with enemy guns over the horizon as we march toward Washington for a final battle, because still we fight for an experiment that is by far the most worthy experiment ever devised.

Jill Lepore is wrong. In trying to discredit the Founders, she has shown her own bias and continues to fan the flames of a conflict we cannot afford. We can indeed look to the Founders for how we should govern ourselves today. They laid it all out in great detail; problem is, the progressives think we must all live as a Collective, with their own ideas of “mild” oppression, and here I am being kind. Conservatives have their own “mild” oppression on the agenda, too, which is equally repugnant. Examples will occur to you.

If we are to truly honor the ideas of the Founders, none of the above can happen here. Does that make me a pariah for not toeing the party line? Does that make me a Communist? I don’t think so, but plenty will accuse me of exactly that. So be it. My bullets will go wherever I aim them. Because the more I examine the ideas of the Founders, the more I am absolutely forced to toss religion and the “party” out of the discussion, the more I have to admit that there is a lot we haven’t done right, and if we truly believe in this experiment of self-governance than we need to stop fighting and forge the perfect union that has so far eluded us. Am I making Lepore’s point? Absolutely not, because I’m not arguing from the side of the Collective; nor is she truly arguing from the side of the ideas expressed by the Founders. She advocates her own progressive interpretation, which is wrong. I also don’t think I’m arguing for the conservative side. I want to get back to basics, to the original, uncorrupted ideas, which is what we need to do in order to keep this Republic. Unfortunately, we have dug so deeply into our parties and our “sides”, I do not believe that kind of compromise is possible.

 

BRIAN DRAKE’s new novel is The Rogue Gentleman: Mine to Avenge, available at Amazon.Com.

I.C.E. Now Deems Illegal Alien Children ‘Unaccompanied’

U.S. southern border sign

U.S. southern border signNothing like semantics to confuse the masses. According to reports, I.C.E. is no longer using the term “Unaccompanied Alien Children” to refer to the stream of minor illegal aliens flooding across the Southern border.

The children have commonly been referred to as “unaccompanied alien children,” or “UACs.” With the new directive, laid out in a June 4 email, both terms will be dropped and replaced with “unaccompanied children.”

How harmless and sad it seems if one were to come across an unaccompanied child.  It brings images of lost children in grocery stores or kids lost in the woods. Who wouldn’t want to take them in and help them find their parents?

Americans, by and large, would like to do the same for these kids. Find their parents and send their children back to them – in the countries they came from. In fact, 2-out-of-3 Americans polled disapprove of Obama’s handling of the alien child flood.

Why take “alien” out of the classification? Will children found without adults be given the same treatment as children crossing the border without parents? Distinction and definition is important.

Had the parents applied for American citizenship and gone through the standard process, they would likely be receiving their citizenship like those in the ceremony that Obama attended today. Their children would not have had to risk their lives to go it alone.

Obama’s failure to lead on the issue is putting lives at risk and creating a national security nightmare. Simply re-classifying the problem does not make it go away.

I wonder…

Hmmm, I wonder what will happen when a culture that has been made afraid of its traditions, guns, speaking up, standing up, and making a stand because anyone who does will be attacked and jailed. A society that has been made afraid of its government and what has become a ruling class. A society that has been torn apart and put at each others throats for trivial slights and offenses against each other. A society that from cradle-to-grave is being taught to only trust in government to make all their decisions in life and defense. Even while the same government opens the country’s borders to all comers from the 3rd World and refuses to name the marching toward conquest Enemy as an enemy. A society that is disarmed and unable to defend themselves from petty thieves or grand politicians schemes of self-serving grandeur—

Comes into direct contact with…

—Another society where the people have been taught from cradle-to-grave to hate all Outsiders. To demand that all other people and religions are to bow down and obey- to submit. A society where death is the way to paradise and that killing non-believers is justified. Anyone who speaks out is to die. Anyone else who stands in their way is to be massacred. There is to be no quarter until all are conquered. A society that worships guns, death, killing, murder in the name of their cause for World Domination.

What would happen if such a thing were to ever happen?

Hmmm…

« Older Entries