The fact America won the War of Independence should have everyone thankful: If Jefferson didn’t dissent, every American would talk like the prissy wanna’-be queen Piers Morgan.

Now that I’ve scared the crap out of conservative-minded readers with that thought, let’s wake up and face facts.

The reality that the government has reverted back in time to British troop tactics by confiscating your personal information on whim should have every American deeply troubled.

Are you free to speak out against your government? The Constitution says yes.

Are you free to embarrass the government and make it accountable for injustices? The Constitution says yes. The IRS, Progressives and Obama say no.

The IRS harasses conservative organizations standing up against the Sixteenth Amendment and Christian organizations feeding and doctoring the poor. It seems the CIA and NSA have been given full authority to wiretap everyone’s phone calls and internet conversations, rather than monitoring enemies only.

NSA and CIA information gathering is not those harmless, annoying pop up ads caused by internet services collecting information on your purchases. Internet services are allowed to share (not to sell your information) to companies looking for customers. Technically that doesn’t confer your personal information since you already gave your phone, address and e-mail to your server provider. Internet services can only share catch phrases and key words from places you shop and share that with companies bearing those words in their titles or descriptions. The most annoying thing that comes from sharing of information is computer pop-ups and ads.

Don’t grab the tin foil people. If you shop on line, your transaction is not completely private, because you are freely, openly shopping with companies. This sharing doesn’t allow internet servers or companies to give IRS information to invade banking records and transactions, tap phone calls and treat Americans like terrorists–rather than actually tracking terrorists before they blow up Boston streets or fly planes into New York and Washington, D.C. buildings.

Unfortunately, that is what the government is forcing some phones and internet services to do: Hand your information over to government.

And you thought powdered wigs went out!

Over two centuries-ago our Founders declared independence against Britain by signing Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. The accomplishment was considered treason against the crown. But technically that undertaking only broke the Divine Right of the King, which was authorized only by kings, not God or the people. King George violated the Magna Carta, therefore, Jefferson and the Founders had every right to dissent and address King George’s infringement against the Rights of Man.

We’ve lived peacefully, respecting the Constitution for centuries, yet government does the opposite to Americans and the Constitution..

The government is less interested in doing its job: Upholding the Constitution and serving the people.Washington is more interested in expanding power and authority over the people.

We are once again under siege by government wielding unwritten rights to impose its will against us. 

This is why Thomas Jefferson drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence: To stand up to government abuses against the rights of man written in the Magna Carta.

We have reentered the era where We The People must stand up in the fashion of Patrick Henry and declare as he did:

This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Americans are well aware  CIA and NSA wire tapping is nothing new. America must be on guard against the enemy, we expect the government to watch and prevent threats.

Before the Patriot Act, America had FISA. Before that, World War II and Cold War era watched enemies within the United States. Why; communists infiltrated the American government: The communists Rosenberg Soviets   sold our Atomic Secrets to the Soviets: 

In 1995, the CIA released ‘the Venona Cables’ [the] decoded Soviet communications that document, along with other espionage doings, the antics of Julius and Ethel. Khrushchev himself mentions the Rosenbergs in his memoirs, identifying them as spies for Russia.

The Rosenbergs got what they deserved, yet conservative Americans are now treated as threats while threats are ignored.

Americans want government to catch the bad guys; yet, the CIA and NSA have failed to prevent  some deadly attacks, because government focuses on Americans purchasing American flags and donating to tea party organizations and demands we tolerate enemies.

Case in point: Mohammad Atta came to America for flying lessons. He learned to fly planes—but not land them—in order to bomb cities by crashing jets into buildings. Flight instructors warned the FBI, but Janet Reno and Operation Able Danger ignored the 1999 findings on Atta.

Reno forbade FBI confiscation of Atta’s lap top: It might violate Atta’s Civil Rights. Reno gave Atta privacy privileges; Atta violated 3000 human rights.

Law-abiding Americans are harassed, not enemies, despite government having legal ways of weeding out enemies. The government despises conservative Americans speaking out against government. The IRS harasses and threatens Tea Party and Christian organizations, but never Islamist living inside America, who all pose threats to this nation: Islam demands liberty be destroyed in favor of Islamic Sharia law and Islamic takeover.

Yet many turn a blind eye, assuming government is supposed to have full authority over our lives. If that’s true, why do Americans demand rights to do as they please with their bodies and possessions? Answer: Natural Rights are instilled at birth.

We ignored government so long; it entered our homes and has become the monster hiding under the bed. 

Patrick Henry warned:

We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?

What else is government doing to us? Should we continue going along blindly, assuming everything is well when we see Americans pleading with Congress against abuses incurred by government agencies targeting anyone taking a stand for liberty and freedom?  We have Fourth Amendment rights, but rights mean nothing to a government that assumes it has unwritten authority and control to make us serve it with a by-your-leave.

The modern day government violates the United States Constitution in every way by overreaching into the states and people’s lives that locked doors and four walls no longer protect. When will we all stand up and declare:

What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

The United States Supreme Court has taken away your Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate and “bear witness” against yourself. The government has been given the right to “compel” your DNA to “indict” you without a “Grand Jury”—even if the arrest is a minor charge!

If you think violent criminals receiving more protection than victims is insane, that’s nothing compared to what the high court has done to citizens—again.

The Supreme Court’s latest 5-4 ruling on Maryland v King, or as I prefer to label the ruling: “Abusive Encroachment of Power by the Government Over the People,” has further violated innocent, law-abiding citizens by giving police power to contravene the Fifth, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth by swabbing the mouths of every arrested American—no matter the reason—for DNA samples that will enter national databank records.

According to Justice Kennedy–never trust anyone with that last name– the ruling allows police to swab violent criminal’s mouths, i.e. rapists and murders such as Alonzo Jay King of Maryland, who’s DNA matched that of a rape victim.

King is a violent criminal, but the court ruling does not protect the public from violent thugs like King.

Not according to Justice Kennedy:

The advent of DNA technology is one of the most significant scientific advancements of our era. The full potential for use of genetic markers in medicine and science is still being explored, but the utility of DNA identification in the criminal justice system is already undisputed. Since the first use of forensic DNA analysis to catch a rapist and murderer in England in 1986…law enforcement, the defense bar, and the courts have acknowledged DNA testing’s ‘unparalleled ability both to exonerate the wrongly convicted and to identify the guilty.’ It has the potential to significantly improve both the criminal justice system and police investigative practices.

Yes, DNA testing has saved the lives of falsely accused and matched DNA to victims. But technology used in violent criminal cases must never invade the lives of private citizens without just cause. Monday’s ruling will flow further into states, giving police power to swab the mouths of all arrested citizens, on any charge, including non-violent crimes.

Justice Kennedy’s statement about DNA collecting is a sham. Yet Kennedy insists:

The Act also limits the information added to a DNA database and how it may be used. Specifically, “[o]nly DNA records that directly relate to the identification of individuals shall be collected and stored.” No purpose other than identification is permissible: “A person may not willfully test a DNA sample for information that does not relate to the identification of indi-viduals as specified in this subtitle.” Tests for familial matches are also prohibited.  (“A person may not perform a search of the statewide DNA data base for the purpose of identification of an offender in connection with a crime for which the offender may be a biological relative of the individual from whom the DNA sample was acquired”). The officers involved in taking and analyzing respondent’s DNA sample complied with the Act in all respects.

With all due respect your Honor, once DNA is placed into national databanks, the government will assume the right to do as it wishes with our identification. And Kennedy admits:  “All 50 States require the collection of DNA from felony convicts,” so this latest ruling is just another way to monitor citizens.

Americans no longer have privacy.

To make the violation sound respectful, Kennedy claims swabbing won’t violate the Fourth, because it’s not as invasive as a blood test: “A buccal swab is a far more gentle process than a venipuncture to draw blood. It involves but a light touch on the inside of the cheek.”

That’s akin to a dentist telling patients that having every tooth extracted will prevent the possibility of one ever having to endure painful gum disease.

Justice Kennedy audaciously claims DNA swabbing is equal to “fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

Excuse me Justice, but no it’s not. When I was born, I was foot and finger printed, as are all Americans. My birth certificate records those prints. My mother adores “those sweet little feet” on that certificate. My driver’s license has my photograph—I dare any cop to show that photo to the public and the country will witness a swabbing like it’s never seen! When I came of age, I acquired a Social Security Card. I have school records (I wish I could pull an Obama with my math records!) from kindergarten through college—with more unattractive photos, depending on the year and stage of life— tracking my whereabouts for decades.

The only swabbing record is at my OBGYN, a place the government never wants to enter unless is desires to experience the full-force pain of labor!

So give me a break Justice Kennedy! I’m recorded, processed, filed, photographed, licensed, and documented. How much more does the government need; my blood? No, it wants my DNA if I’m ever arrested for something absurd.

I’m only a threat to my fellow fashion occultists when the hoard of us maneuver into clothing and shoe tug-of-war combat aggression at designer sample sales in New York City. We fashionaholics swab the floor with each other over high end one-of-a-kind luxury pieces of clothing. No cop has ever had the guts to get in the middle of that!

Seriously, it’s bad enough public schools now scan children’s irises without parental consent to monitor school children.

How far will America go with Soviet-style tactics against free born citizens?

Scalia answered that question:  

The Court disguises the vast (and scary) scope of its holding by promising a limitation it cannot deliver…The Court repeatedly says that DNA testing, and entry into a national DNA registry, will not befall thee and me, dear reader, but only those arrested for ‘serious offense[s]…’ At the end of the day, logic will out. When there comes before us the taking of DNA from an arrestee for a traffic violation, the Court will predictably (and quite rightly) say, ‘We can find no significant difference between this case and King.’ Make no mistake about it: As an entirely predictable consequence of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national DNA database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason…Today’s judgment will, to be sure, have the beneficial effect of solving more crimes; then again, so would the taking of DNA samples from anyone who flies on an airplane (surely the Transportation Security Administration needs to know the ‘identity’ of the flying public), applies for a driver’s license, or attends a public school. Perhaps the construction of such a genetic panopticon is wise. But I doubt that the proud men who wrote the charter of our liberties would have been so eager to open their mouths for royal inspection. I therefore dissent, and hope that today’s incursion upon the Fourth Amendment, like an earlier one will someday be repudiated.

This court ruling completely violates the Bill of Rights. The moment any individual’s mouth is swabbed, they lose their rights to the Fifth. Refusal to speak is useless when police can compel your DNA to speak against you, no matter what you do or don’t do, for the rest of your life!

Justice Scalia notes: “Americans despised the British use of so-called ‘general warrants,’” so Americans framed the Constitution with a Bill of Rights to protect us against unreasonable arrests.

Let’s face facts Americans: Swabbing the mouths of all arrested citizens turns America into a “Logan’s Run” society of monitored people.

Welcome to America’s version of the KGB. Now please, open your mouth and spit.

Does it matter that four American men were brutally murdered by Islamists in Libya? Does it matter that two Islamists blew up a Boston street during April’s Boston Marathon? Does it matter Fort Hood, Texas was shot up by a Muslim screaming Allah Akbar as he murdered and maimed U.S. soldiers? How about those Islamic honor slaughters (Honor Killings) taking place around the United States? Should you take note or ignore them? After all, its Islamic custom to execute Muslims who reject Islam, date outside Islam, or become American and Western in thought and dress. Why should that make any difference in the way people view Islam? It’s a peaceful religion right?

I suppose Islam could be defined as peaceful since one is at peace after the knife-wielding lunatic takes one’s head.

If we want to get technical, we might even define the hacking and beheading of a British soldier by two Islamists in London this past week, as putting that innocent infidel at peace, right? 

We could even claim the Islamic Tsarneav brothers gave Boston Marathon runners and spectators a “peaceful” tribute.

To the utterly offended, I’m not joking. Islam massacres non-Muslims—as well as forced marriages of girl children, torturing and murdering adult Muslim women and gay Muslims all over the Middle East and Europe—on a daily basis. But biased, pro-Islam left-wing progressives in D.C. and the media defend these brutal actions by demanding tolerance to Islam.

Never offend Islam’s civil liberties and its human rights.

Islamic Hanging of Gay Muslim Men in Middle East

Tortured Muslim Woman Who tried to Leave Islam

Texas Teen Sisters Honor Murdered by Father and Brother for Dating Outside Islamic Religion

What human rights!

Islam violates the civil and human rights of all who refuse to convert to Islam. Islam commands the execution of Muslims who flee Islam’s violent, political movement of rape, terror, torture–and if one is lucky enough after one has been brutally tortured in the most heinous fashion– death.

Non-Muslims are brainwashed by “Group Think” media progressives and elitists demanding all ignore historical facts and pull a Hillary Clinton by asking “what difference does it make,” as long as we don’t insult Islam?

Here’s an example: The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties has a training manual for the Department of Homeland Security and National Counter terrorism Center (as well as other government agencies and workplaces the Obama Administration and Janet Napolitano demand be followed) used to monitor outspoken conservatives and government employees.

Countering Violent Extremism Training (CVET) states:  

Don’t use programs that venture to deep into the weeds of religious doctrine and history…Don’t use training with political agenda. This is not the time to persuade audiences …on the views about Israel/Palestinian conflict, reformation within Islam, or the proper role of Islam in majority Muslim nations…Don’t use trainers who answer primarily interest groups. For example, trainers who are self-professed ‘Muslim reformers’ may further an interest group instead of delivering generally accepted unbiased information.

In other words, don’t inform DHS employees of Islam’s violent history. Ignore Mohammad’s bloodthirsty, forced conversion by-way-of-the sword. Don’t expose his slaughtering, raping, pillaging and plundering of European churches. And certainly don’t uncover how Mohammad conquered the Middle East and Holy Land: By massacring Christians and Jews. It’s best we ignore truths and turn historical facts against Christian Crusaders, and Christians and Jews in general. Make Christians and Jews the bad guys and Islam the victim.

The progressive “Group Think”  handbook further demands DHS never discuss “war stories” or the “psychological indicators of terrorism.”

I would think “psychological indicators” would be of utmost importance, considering the “Allah Akbar” screaming Islamic Major Nidal Hasan, also a psychologist, taught Islamic soldiers at Fort Hood how to think and act against non-Muslims—wage war, jihad. Hasan’s Islamic conditioning prior to massacring 13 soldiers and wounding 26 at Fort Hood were deep “indicators” he was going to attack Fort Hood…with “workplace violence.”

But hey, what difference does it make?

Apparently none to DHS:

Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent…

This is how the U.S. government proceeds to counter terrorism:  Ignore Koran demands for violence, avoid Sharia Law, because “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.”

Heaven forbid we correlate Islam’s desire to exterminate the non-Muslim portion of the human race with Islam’s Koranic demands to exterminate the non-Muslim segment of the human race.

Whatever you do, don’t expose  what author Daniel Greenfield has the courage to warn:

Every believer in Islam is potentially a sleeper, ready to undergo what the experts call “radicalization”. But radicalization is largely a misnomer. The proper term is religiosity… Every believer in Islam is a potential terrorist. Islam is the ultimate sleeper cell. Terrorism is coded into the ideological DNA of a religion built on war.

Instead, CVET handbook insists the U.S. government forbid counter terrorism agents inside knowledge of Islam’s thinking and plans.

That should keep the homeland safe from another Islamic attack.

Look how safe denying Islam entrance into the UK and tolerating Islam kept Great Britain and a slaughtered soldier.

A 20 minute hacking and beheading of a British soldier by Islamic immigrants to Great Britain and their repugnant reasons to the press informs us of the difference Islam is making in the West:

We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you until you leave us alone. Your people will never be safe. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying by British soldiers every day. We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. I apologise that women had to witness this today but in our lands our women have to see the same. You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don’t care about you. Do you think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? Do you think your politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we, so you can all live in peace.

That horror, as well as the never-look-at-Islam reaction via media “Group Think,” and Obama’s refusal to call the barbaric slaughter Islam, is theoretically nothing more than “Hey, it’s vindication-by-justification of Islam.” This is the difference being made: Brainwashing non-Muslims into compliance.

Here’s some subtle, well-mannered toleration in the face of jihad: The Conservative MP Col. Patrick Mercer told Great Britain “All the signs indicated this is a terrorist attack. If that is the case it’s a very carefully thought-through thing. It’s obviously carefully planned.”

“If that is the case!” What kind of “carefully thought-through” sign does the MP need to declare Islam’s violence butchery?

The terrorist admitted the attack is Islamic!

Prime Minister Cameron delicately stated: “Of course we need to be careful about similar attacks happening in the future…Police are urgently seeking the full facts about this case but there are strong indications it is a terrorist incident.”

Good grief! Can we possibly find another way to apologize without giving the UK the full Neville Chamberlain!

No doubt Obama will discover a way to deem this Islamic carnage as a multicultural street altercation.

The only way to be “careful” is deny immigration status to Islam !

The UK slaughter is terrorism, Boston was an act of Islamic jihad, let’s identify this brutality as Islam and stop it with the “Downton Abbey” tea-time manners!

How about admitting Islam demands submission and war. The beheading and Boston Bombings were done by Islam, Muslims, not the Vienna Choir Boys.

Islam is terror, not peace…unless one is dead.

If leaders and the media admitted the truth, Islam would no longer be welcomed into the West. But then what would we all do without a good conquering invasion by everything that stands against liberty, freedom, and life?

Thank heavens we have civil liberties handbooks to steer us away from wisdom and sense.

But who needs common sense when you don’t have a head?

After all, what difference does it make as long as infidels cater to violence, bow down to extremism that is Islam and allow Islam to invade and conquer our culture, Constitution, and violate our Bill of Rights?

Never mind Islam uses the Constitution’s Bill of Rights and First Amendment against America as a weapon to incur violence against humanity, Americans are to shut up and take the jihad against us with an apology before we get the peace job to the neck.

It’s getting to the point where the difference will be made on the homeland: We won’t have to go overseas to fight Islam if we don’t reject and deny it further entrance into America. Americans will simply go to battle against Islam on American shores…But arent we already doing that while progressives demand: “What difference does it make, as long as we don’t insult Islam!”

If I owed money to both the IRS and the Borgias, and had a choice between which got the money, I would pay off the IRS and leave my fate to the cloak-and-dagger Borgias. A slit throat by the murderous Borgias would be far less painful than the way the IRS punishes law-abiding Americans. You knew what was coming with those crazy monarchs. The IRS is more destructive: The suit-and-pen approach spies, takes everything you own, jails you, and destroys your entire life and reputation (you spend years trying repair often to no avail), making your name pond scum if you make one, single mistake on tax forms, or heaven forbid, forget to pay an extra one cent in your taxes.

The IRS is America’s Borgia clan— lying, thieving, whores stealing your earnings and property.

The IRS is unconstitutional, because it is administrative government: It makes rules by whim (think Great Britain) Americans are forbidden knowledge of until it’s too late. There’s no vote or say in what the IRS does. By-the-way, I just described the American government since Woodrow Wilson took office, ushering the United States toward Progressivism, i.e. statism, administrative government, ignoring the Constitution in favor of government control by elitists.

The latest IRS scandal and Friday’s “I don’t know the answer” hearing is further proof  the IRS and Sixteenth Amendment fully violate not only Article I, Sec. 8—the 17 Enumerated Powers of Congress–but the entire Constitution and its Bill of Rights. 

Article I, Section 8. clearly states: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States: But all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”

Since Article I’s Section 8 was never removed from the Constitution, it continues to stand as Congressional taxation laws, despite Congress signing off on those laws and forgetting what the Seventeen Enumerated Powers are.

Congress abdicates its powers so often, we should rename all undeclared wars and abdicated laws a “Wallis Simpson.”

Congress gave away it’s taxing powers, allowing the administrative IRS to act like the Borgias against the people. But to what extent is Congressional abdication in violation of the Constitution? Thomas F. Eagleton notes that Congress has gone beyond

‘original Intent’ and given away so much power to presidents, which they use to act on whim rather than law. Congress is to ‘provide for the common defense,’ but when it abdicates power over to the Executive, it places the people in jeopardy, because the 17 Powers are now in the hands of the president, who does not hold the power of law-making. So, ‘Has Congress abdicated its power—is an unqualified YES. Congress has in effect, written itself out of the Constitution.’

Government abuses incurred go against the will and rights of the people to know what the elected-by-the-people government–that must act in accordance with the people– is doing. Thanks to Woodrow Wilson and 1913′s sell-out Congress and Senate the people no longer possess any say in taxation matters, because the IRS is not an elected group of people. It is an appointed government entity completely unaccountable to the people, whom it targets and harasses. 

Look what the IRS does to law-abiding citizens.

According to the Washington Post:

[On] June 29, 2011, IRS staffers held a briefing with senior agency official Lois G. Lerner [that woman who's "not very good at math"] in which they described giving special attention to instances where ‘statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run…’ [and then] On Jan. 15, 2012 the agency decided to target ‘political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding Government, educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, social economic reform movement.’”

What I am writing here–exposing the IRS and government– is grounds for the IRS to harass me. Why? Read below.

According to the American Center for Law and Justice, the IRS targeted conservative groups (here is the IRS “criteria” target list obtained by the Inspector General), Tea Party organizations, anyone standing for smaller, limited government, Constitutional taxation versus the IRS, as well as the Reverend Franklin Graham, who criticized Obama’s tactics and spoke out against Islam’s violent beliefs. Rev. Graham says his charities were targeted by the IRS “for political reasons” because Graham told North Carolina voters to vote for the presidential candidate whose morals and principles are biblical based. 

Any organization that refused to vote for Obama and defended constitutional government got the Borgia treatment by the suit-and-pen.

Again, I prefer cloak-and-dagger.

Administrative form of government is nothing more than monarchy, Democrat, British in every sense: Ruling Americans. The IRS is everything our Founders fought to break free from— tyranny.

Now look at the IRS’ Disclosure And Privacy Law Reference Guide admitting it’s filthy. The IRS admits Americans were angry during the pre-IRS government publishing of income tax records:

The history of tax information confidentiality may be traced to the Civil War Income Tax Act of 1862, when tax information was posted on courthouse doors. Act of July 1, 1862…Ambiguities in that provision regarding public inspection led Congress, in 1864, to explicitly permit public inspection of the assessment list: It shall be the duty of the assessor . . . to submit the proceedings of the assessors . . . and the annual lists taken and returned as aforesaid, to the inspection of any and all persons who may apply for that purpose… and sometimes published in newspapers to promote taxpayer surveillance of neighbors. For the next 70 years, there was debate in Congress as to the effect of public disclosure on the tax system and to societal interests in general.

“Promoting taxpayer surveillance of neighbors’ is in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment, as well as the First, Eighth–excessive fines–Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

We have rights that cannot be “disparaged” by government, we have rights to assemble, speak freely without fear that our exercised  rights will not incur government wrath.

States have rights the Sixteenth Amendment overreaches. What people do with their money is their business, not others, not even the government. Americans have rights to keep 100% of their paychecks, as well as land, without having it taxed to the point of forced sale or foreclosure, because one cannot afford excessive property taxes put in place to enrich the government and prevent private wealth.

Now look at today’s tax code written in the Nixon era:

Except for a few periods in our history, taxpayers’ tax information generally has not been available to the public – disclosure has been restricted. Congress has used two basic approaches in determining whether, and under what circumstances, tax information could be disclosed. Under the first approach, taken prior to 1977, tax information was considered a “public record,” but was only open to inspection under Treasury regulations approved by the President or under presidential order. Under this scheme, the Executive Branch essentially created all the rules regarding disclosure…By the mid 1970s, there was increased congressional and public concern about the widespread use of tax information by government agencies for purposes unrelated to tax administration. This concern culminated with the enactment of section 6103, passed as part of the Tax Reform Act of 1976… Congress eliminated much of the executive discretion concerning the disclosure of returns or return information…Congress established a new statutory scheme under which returns and return information are confidential and not subject to disclosure except to the extent explicitly provided by the Internal Revenue Code…the basic statutory scheme established in 1976 remains in place today.

Obama apologists keep placing Obama scandals at the altar of Nixon, claiming Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the IRS, and now the Associated Press scandal, are all equal to Watergate. Okay, I’ll accept that: Obama is doing a bang-up job following in the footsteps of the paranoid spy-in-Chief Richard Nixon, whose “enemies list” was used as a weapon, via the IRS, against everyone Nixon disliked and wanted silenced.

However, the Nixon-era tax code put in place a penalty for IRS thugs and any group, or president, authorizing harassment of the people:

Criminal penalties, including a felony for the willful unauthorized disclosure of returns.” But read further into the handbook and you find 1997 went further in this protection by stating the IRS “[C]reated a misdemeanor for the unauthorized inspection of returns or return information (section 7213A). In addition, in 1996, Public Law 104-294 provided that the unauthorized access of returns or return information in government computer files is a felony under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)(B). Pub. L. No. 104-294, 110 Stat. 3488 (1996).

Obama forgets Nixon’s lies and cover-ups destroyed Nixon. Presidents cannot misuse laws to grow power and assume corruption will stay hidden. Yet Obama and his corrupt Marxist administration continues getting away with murder while Obama tells the people he has no knowledge of anything.  And now the IRS appears to be aiding and abetting Obama’s cover-ups for its power it now has over Obamacare.

I would rather deal with cloak hidden daggers versus suits with pens. A slit throat is less painful than a trashed life and everything you earned and own stolen by thug bureaucrats because the IRS decided it owns your life.

If you ask your average American who Jodi Arias is, they will not only tell you who the slice and dice “Boyfriend Murderer” is, most Americans can relate every, single detail of the Arias murder trial and Jodi Arias’ life. But whatever you do, don’t ask too many Americans to enlighten you with the details of who, what, and where Benghazi is, you’ll most likely receive a blank stare. That’s because the slaughter of four brave American men–ignored by the Hillary Clinton’s U.S. State Department and Barry Obama’s White House during real time calls pleading for help–doesn’t compare to a blonde sexpot (suddenly turned dowdy four-eyed brunette spinster librarian) who shot her lover in the face before stabbing him 27 times and slitting his throat from ear-to-ear “in self defense.”

Just a note to all of you Jodi Arias aficionados; Benghazi is not a leg-breaker for hire from Brooklyn, New York or that really kool Japanese hibachi restaurant.

The above is not hyperbole, it’s a sad fact. The majority of Americans know who Jodi Arias is. So many Americans are preoccupied with her murder trial, that Arias has become the reigning queen daytime TV. Jodi Arias is a star and consumed more often at every dinner and dinner party discussion than our in-trouble-country.

Jodi Arias has been turned into a celebrity by TV, magazines, newspapers, pop culture and gossip. I wouldn’t be surprised if Arias has been the 2012-2013 colleges and universities leading lectures in every pre-law and law school classes versus the U.S. Constitution, vital history-changing Supreme Court cases, and Magna Carta.

If Jodi Arias gets off on self-defense for her violent act, America definitely owes Saddam Hussein an apology for calling his vicious style of torture, rape, and murder violent brutality.

Benghazi on the other hand has been turned into, as White House Press Secretary Jay Carney incongruously phrases it: “Let’s be clear, Benghazi happened a long time-ago.” In other words, old news.

Actually Carney, Pearl Harbor happened a long time ago, but that generation has never lost the horrible memory of what Japan did to America’s naval fleet, our brave men in uniform, or Hawaii’s maimed and murdered civilians.

The point is, for most Americans, Benghazi never happened, and not because Americans lack care, but for the reasons that the mainstream media ignored the slaughter in Libya in order to cover Obama’s butt in the weeks leading up to the November 2012 election. Heaven forbid voters might discover the president possibly ignored men being slaughtered. Those voters may not have reelected President Obama.

Worse yet, a Democrat White House scandal involving the murder of what happened to our men in women on the front lines is simply not as important as the murder trial of a tight-skirted, over-sexed knife-wielding loser bar-fly, or heaven forbid, missing an episode of Dancing With The Stars.

Jodi Arias is more important than the many economical and national security threats altering our nation, our lives, and the future of America.

Ask yourself this: How many times has important news regarding our troops overseas, national security threats caused by the failing U.S. economy, America’s failing education system, poor jobs numbers,  $2.2 trillion in entitlement spending bankrupting America, the $16.7 trillion and counting deficit in which “three-quarters of the deficit was financed by the Federal Reserve,”  Ben Bernanke over printing money and buying up more assets while the Dow Jones Industrial Average rises (creating unstable fiat-backed paper bubble that will burst into a Weimar and crash the markets if Ben doesn’t stop) for the live courtroom drama of Jodi Arias? How often is news concerning Obama’s preventing the much-needed pipeline, drilling on and off America shores for oil, coal and natural gas, and excessive borrowing from China, whom our government fawns over, and subsidizing questionable left-wing “Green” companies ignored for Jodi Arias’ trial?  What about the ignoring of the $6.3 trillion cost that will be added to the deficit if Marco Rubio’s “Gang of 8” amnesty bill goes through and provides 12 million illegals (I find it hard to believe that number is not 30-40 million after 30 years of amnesty bills) welfare and other tax-funded benefits that will pull the economy down further in order for TV cameras to focus on how Jodi Arias murdered her boyfriend? The answer is daily.

Furthermore, how many Americans can describe for you the blonde Jodi look versus the brunette Jodi look, but those same people are unable to illustrate the details Ty Woods experienced in order to try and save the U.S. Consulate Ambassador and his aides, as well the particulars of the four men being slaughtered by Muslim militants as they begged the State Department for support? How many Americans know who Ty Woods, Ambassador Stevens, Sean smith and Glen Doherty were? I’ve no doubt many Americans do know the name Ty Woods and Ambassador Stevens, but sadly that is as far as the knowledge extends.

I’m not even sure how many American high school and college kids, not to mention their dimwit parents, are aware that Susan Rice is not a brand you find in Isle Four of your super market.

More people know endless details about Jodi Arias’ life and trial than they know their own blood type.

Jodi Arias and her sensationalized trial are more important to Americans than every crisis we Americans are facing. If Jodi Arias gets off on self-defense, America owes Saddam Hussein an apology for calling his vicious style of torture, rape, and murder brutality.

Jodi Arias faces death (death most likely being 20 years of life sitting in prison cell thinking about how perhaps she should have only stabbed her boyfriend three times after blowing his head off) while America is facing the life and death of the Republic our Founders fought and many died for so we could have liberty.

Arias’ sentence is set to be handed down this week. But I say the judge should give Arias one act of community service Americans would be happy to agree to: Let Jodi Arias nurse the Boston Bomber before his trial since Arias is quite enthusiastic about taking care of gunshot wounds.

Let’s just stop all the PC nonsense and bull and state the truth: If the two Islamic terrorist scumbags were not Islamists, but “Mazel Tov” cheering Jews or Bible-bearing Christians, the living bomber and his terror-supporting cohorts would have been placed before a firing squad by now on the grounds of racism, hate, terror, and intolerable biblical religious beliefs!

The fact the terrorists are Islamists makes them poster boys for apologetic “tolerance” toward Islam and its violent threat to the world.

Because both Boston terrorists were Islamists is further grounds for President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to demand Americans ignore reality:  Islamists and Islam is violent, and demand Americans not view an entirely violent religion as violent.

The fact these two Islamic brothers blew up a Boston street full of people they maimed and murdered is not grounds for Obama or Holder to call for the death penalty. After all, it’s not as if these two brothers were obnoxious Israel-supporting Jews who assume Jews have some right to live peacefully on this earth.

Let’s face it, if the 9/11 terrorists had been Jews screaming “Mazel Tov” as they flew planes into buildings, murdering thousands, the Left would have demanded America ban all Jewish holidays and Jews in America. And Israel would have been wiped off the map. Because Islam attacked America, we infidels are to tolerate our slaughters, while asking forgiveness because America asked for it, so “Mazel Tov!”

Even if the surviving Boston Bomber is given the death penalty–which I suspect that is highly unlikely,because he is Islamist, not Jewish or Christian, and America needs more college professors now that Black Panthers, cop killers, and Washington, D.C. bombers are entering retiring age–I wouldn’t be surprised if  Dzhokar Tsarnaev spends 20 years in a prison (10 years for good behavior) that would make Martha Stewart envious, before Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn set up a scholarship fund in the name of the brutal conqueror Tamerlane (the dead terrorist was named for the brutal 14^th century warlord) to get the thug Islamist a PhD and tenure at an Ivy League college.   

The reality is this kid is not just a terrorist, he’s an Islamic terrorist, and that detail alone says he is untouchable not only to slander, but the death penalty—even if that verdict is handed down. Hey, we don’t want to insult the religion of violence massacring mankind! We must never forget its Israel and Jews we are to loathe and blame—after we have crucified Christianity and its repugnant teachings of love and peace.

Then we have the Tsarneav’s cohorts: They will probably get five to10 years in prison, no doubt shortened because of good behavior. That good behavior being the three college kids knew their patriotic duty: Aid terrorists blowing up America.

Those actions should gain the three cohorts the opportunity to become Hollywood filmmakers.

Now, if these were college kids supporting and raising money for Israel and impoverished Russian Jews, they would be considered vile enemies of mankind. Those who slaughter Jews and Christians are viewed as heroes; they should have poems and music written in their honor.

If Israel tries to make peace with her enemies, those Jews are described as blood-thirsty conquerors victimizing everyone else hurling bombs at Israel, the freest nation for any people in the Middle East.

Then there are those nasty Christians who dare say the name of Jesus, or worse, hold Bible studies in their homes and feed and clothe the poor! Those Christians are racist proselytizers shoving the bomb-filled Bibles down everyone’s throat!

Now that’s terrorism!

You won’t hear Obama demanding America stop tolerating those who want to destroy our nation. You won’t hear Eric Holder declare Islam violent and terror something Americans must not put up with. After all, Eric Holder is the man who ignored the New Black Panther’s voter fraud and threats against white voters during the 2008 election, Holder pardoned Marc Rich, as well as pardoning Weather Underground terrorists and terrorist organization FALN after it bombed New York City, Washington and Chicago and “killed six people—including the Chilean ambassador to the United States—and wounded at least 80 others.”  

Furthermore, why should Obama, the man mentored by communist Frank Marshal Davis condemn Islam? Obama was, after all, raised Muslim, though “These days, I look in the mirror and I have to admit, I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be,” while he defends Islam with apologies for America’s cultures, people, and values every chance he gets.

If anyone assumes Obama, who actually admitted the Boston bombing is act of terrorism, will deem this Chechen terrorist, who sided with Chechnya as an enemy against America, a threat to America, and demand he be tried as an enemy combatant, forget it. The thug already received Miranda Rights; he’s no longer an enemy combatant, he’s just your every day ordinary criminal.  

In other words, Dzhokar Tsarnaev’s actions are no different than the loser who held up the local 7-eleven—who “will die for Islam!”

Given Obama and Holder’s track record for ignoring terror and siding with the enemy—think Benghazi and Fast and Furious–the only way this Islamist snot will get executed is if he converts to Judaism or Christianity.

Tolerance toward Islam has turned into an apology crusade that is helping Islam inflict terror on America.

Day after day, year after year since 9/11, we have been advised by the Left that there is a “moderate Islam” and a “radical Islam.” Really; that’s like saying there was moderate Japanese torture against the Chinese versus the brutal version.  And how about those “moderate” concentration camps Hitler used against Jews: You know, the ones with less gas for echo-friendly purposes. Of course I’ve always been a fan of Stalin’s “moderate” Gulags opposed to those nasty, filthy ones.

Since 9/11 Americans have been told do not to refer to Islam as violent or evil, despite Islam’s 1400 year history of brutal violence inflicted upon the world. And never mind Islam demands take over and control the world, America must apologize for Islam’s aggressive history and every brutish act it incurs upon mankind. After all, America made Islam sadistic, not Mohammad and his followers!

Furthermore, since 9/11 more people have been brainwashed into believing Christianity has a radical, forceful side that brutalized the world. Those people either believe the Borgias invented Christianity, or these self-loathing apologists are simply looking for any excuse to demean Christianity because Christ’s redemption is too soppy and the Ten Commandments accountability really sucks for occupying leftists.

Of course when it comes to defending Islam, it never hurts to inflict whitewashed Crusade history into the Islam versus Christianity argument. This always helps make Islam appear tolerant. Islam may have stormed the West, conquered Spain, North Africa and Middle East, terrorized the world for 400 years with its Holy Wars while Christians turned the other cheek–before realizing self-defense is actually justified–but we must ignore facts and make sure defensive Crusaders look like pillaging, plundering, blood-thirsty brutes that savaged Islam and forced all Muslims to convert to Christianity.

If that were true, Mohammad’s waged war for expansion through forced conversion by the sword would have failed while he was alive. If the above were true, Islam would have ceased to exist and the Middle East today would be Jewish and Christian.And Caftans would be mini dresses!

The fact is Islam demands all people living under its rule convert to Islam, not live and worship as they choose.

But facts are to be ignored in lieu of blaming Christians and America for everything wrong in the world.

That leads us to “tolerance,” the one word that is permitting Islamic terror to infiltrate the United States, as it has in Europe, and spread its political terror and death.

Americans are told by leaders and leftist media warriors that we must “tolerate” Islam, be “tolerant” toward Muslims, or be designated racists and an Islamophobes. The problem is, as we continue tolerating Islam and its militant teachings further, we are inviting more Boston and Fort Hood bombings and shootings, as well as another 9/11.

Tolerance is giving a free pass to a violent, political movement whose goal is death, not peace. 

As Islam expert Dr. Robert Spencer explains: 

Christians today are being kidnapped, imprisoned, wrongly arrested, beaten, and murdered — not because of anything they have done, but because they have dared to believe…beliefs that are considered blasphemous in authoritative Islam. And it is hardly better elsewhere in the Islamic world: nowhere in majority-Muslim countries today do people who believe these things enjoy full equality of rights with Muslims…We see jihadists attacking Christians with increasing fury. We also see the world largely yawning and indifferent as all this goes on… Muslims, by contrast, are in the daily mainstream media playlets always cast as non-Western, nonwhite, poor, and oppressed, but wise and serene in their victimization.

This is why it is imperative we relish paintings of Christ made out of urine and feces and “tolerate” the execution of anyone who dares publish cartoons of Mohammad.

Always be intolerant of Christians and Jews, but never poke fun at Islam, it might insult Islam!

What about the fact Islam persecutes its own people through violent honor killings called for by the Koran and Sharia Law? What about Islam’s raping and beating Muslim women (leftists will argue non-Muslims beat their wives and rape women as well, but the Bible and Christianity does NOT commend violence against humanity) as well as torturing and murdering gay Muslims, because homosexuality must be extinguished in Islam?

Forget it; never assume “Muslim extremists” represent Islam despite what the Koran states. The Left won’t hear of it.

Islam is aided by the Left, which adores Islam for the fact that Islam is out to destroy the world and all non-Muslims, especially Christians and Jews, whom the Left and anti-Catholic Christians seeking to use the Church as a punching bag, have always hated.

But Islam is an extreme ideology seeking destruction of all non-Muslims, i.e. infidels—and that includes leftists prostrating themselves to an enemy that will kill those useful idiots unless they convert to Islam.

According to ex-Muslim and author of The Pigman Bosch Fawstin:

Islam is a political religion; the idea of a separation of Mosque and State is unheard of in the Muslim world. Islam has a doctrine of warfare, Jihad, which is fought in order to establish Islamic (“Sharia”) Law, which is, by nature, totalitarian. Sharia Law calls for, among other things: the dehumanization of women; the flogging/stoning/killing of adulterers; and the killing of homosexuals, apostates and critics of Islam. All of this is part of orthodox Islam, not some “extremist” form of it. If jihadists were actually “perverting a great religion,” Muslims would have been able to discredit them on Islamic grounds and they would have done so by now. The reason they can’t is because jihadists are acting according to the words of Allah, the Muslim God. From the Koran:“Slay the idolators wherever you find them…” Chapter 9, verse 5 “When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads until you have made a great slaughter among them….” Ch. 47:4″

Everything about Islam violates Natures Laws and the Constitution’s Bill of Rights which upholds every individual’s human rights given to all people by birthright.

Nothing in Islam or the Koran conveys love everyone or there would not be calls for killing all non-Muslims. Christ commanded “love your enemy” and “love your neighbor as yourself,” Mohammad commanded kill all the unbelievers. Christ said “follow me,” not follow me or I’ll kill you, so believing in Christ is a free-will choice for each individual. It doesn’t work that way in Islam where everyone must submit or die.

Also, Christ never carried a sword or murdered anyone as Mohammad did as he violently slaughtered his way across the globe, making people die for him.

No matter how many facts are placed before the Left, who adores destructive extremists, Islam must be the victim and America and Christianity the racist extremists. It’s the only way to level the field of liberty—literally.

Refusing to call Islam the enemy empowers Islamic terror. Objecting to identifying Islam as what it is—a movement of political violence against the world—empowers and enables Islamic violence seeking world takeover.

If 20 pregnant women and 20 pregnant dogs were lined up before a firing squad and fired on, which group’s potential murder would the Left be most horrified over; dogs or human beings?

By the way the Left is ignoring Dr. Kermit B. Gosnell’s torturous murders of born children in his abortion clinic; I have to assume the Left’s horror only extends to the killing of animals and not human beings—unless of course it’s the killing of an Islamic terrorist, then all hell will break loose and we’ll see riots in the streets for the dead terrorist.

Maybe that’s why the Left is ignoring Kermit Gosnell: He’s a medical terrorist who performed abortions in the most heinous manner imaginable.

Dr. Kermit B. Gosnell regularly delivered live babies and murdered them. This news is not important to the left wing, pro-abortion mainstream media, because Dr. Gosnell did not slaughter kittens and puppies.

Gosnell “catered to women” who could not get abortions legally, because they were 20 weeks to six months or more into their pregnancies.

Gosnell’s abortion procedures went beyond anything conceived of. Anyone who reads the “Report Of The Grand Jury” will think they are reading the script to a violent horror movie:

This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.

Making things worse, Gosnell’s employees were not nurses or doctors; they pretended to be licensed medical practitioners, making diagnoses and performing medical procedures only licensed, schooled medical doctors or nurses can perform.

Despite screams of pain from mothers and birthed babies being tortured to death, these so-called “doctors” ignored it all. The horrific style was part of “Gosnell’s approach…,” “keep volume high, expenses low – and break the law.”

According the Grand Jury:

“Gosnell’s approach, whenever possible, was to force full labor and delivery of premature infants on ill-informed women. The women would check in during the day, make payment, and take labor-inducing drugs. The doctor wouldn’t appear until evening, often 8:00, 9:00, or 10:00 p.m., and only then deal with any of the women who were ready to deliver.”

If that wasn’t enough:

Many of them gave birth before he even got there. By maximizing the pain and danger for his patients, he minimized the work, and cost, for himself and his staff. The policy, in effect, was labor without labor. There remained, however, a final difficulty. When you perform late-term ‘abortions’ by inducing labor, you get babies. Live, breathing, squirming babies. By 24 weeks, most babies born prematurely will survive if they receive appropriate medical care. But that was not what the Women’s Medical Society was about. Gosnell had a simple solution for the unwanted babies he delivered: he killed them. He didn’t call it that. He called it “ensuring fetal demise.” The way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking scissors into the back of the baby’s neck and cutting the spinal cord. He called that “snipping.’

Just imagine veterinarians performing such vile procedures on animals. Animals rights activists already scream bloody murder over pet shops and “puppy mills,” but never put their efforts against abuse into fighting the murder of human beings, specifically babies born in abortion clinics where doctors order their murders.

According to investigators:

Medical equipment – such as the defibrillator, the EKG, the pulse oximeter, the blood pressure cuff – was generally broken; even when it worked, it wasn’t used. The emergency exit was padlocked shut. And scattered throughout, in cabinets, in the basement, in a freezer, in jars and bags and plastic jugs, were fetal remains. It was a baby charnel house.

Imagine veterinarians joking about killing animals the way Dr. Gosnell joked about murdering born babies:

[One baby boy] was breathing and moving when Dr. Gosnell severed his spine and put the body in a plastic shoebox for disposal. The doctor joked that this baby was so big he could ‘walk me to the bus stop.’

PETA and the Left would march on Gosnell’s home no doubt calling for his “disposal.” But then again, Gosnell is an animal, so don’t look for the Left to stand up against him.

At Gosnell’s clinic, there was “Another, Baby Boy B, whose body was found at the clinic frozen in a one-gallon spring-water bottle, was at least 28 weeks of gestational age when he was killed. Baby C was moving and breathing for 20 minutes before an assistant came in and cut the spinal cord, just the way she had seen Gosnell do it so many times.”

Gosnell’s “nurse” watched her boss, who never hid his violent practice, murder babies born six months old and up daily, never once dialing 911 or going to police, begging they raid Gosner to prevent murder. She too is on trial for murder and faces life in prison.

The Grand Jury Report states Gosnell induced labor on every woman, causing as much pain as possible to mother and child, tearing open cervix’s, colons, puncturing uterus’s, ripping intestines, leaving parts of fetuses inside mothers, procedures so painful and cheap (Gosnell liked cheap procedures) they caused convulsive seizures, causing women to fall of operating tables onto their heads, never receiving care, and much more.

Gosnell’s staff said he found the screams of mothers and children annoying.

There is another side to Gosnell’s eugenics horrors the media ignores: Gosnell is black man who purposely mistreated impoverished black women in the most heinous fashion possible. Yet, when one white patient entered his clinic, he used the utmost care. 

The only reason Gosnell was caught is because police raided his clinic for selling illegal prescriptions: Money flowed into the clinic via “fake prescriptions that brought in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.” Otherwise the racist Gosnell and his “doctors” would still be torturing poor black women and their birthed babies.

Why isn’t this racist, murderous Gosnell making left wing media headlines? He’s a black abortionist who murdered poor black babies.

Why doesn’t the Left care about that racism? Because Gosnell was accomplishing the century long progressives plan: Population control to eliminate poor children from society, furthering Margaret Sanger’s Negro Project to exterminate the black race, and allowing only the fittest and wealthiest among us to survive.

If Dr. Kermit Gosnell was a veterinarian who slaughtered animals, the Left would demand his life. But he murdered black children, so he did the world a favor.

In last week’s column I discussed the 2010 Supreme Court ruling (McDONALD ET AL, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS) upholding the  Second Amendment. The ruling doesn’t matter to leftists, neither do statistics proving law-abiding citizens with guns deter crime.  The Left is determined to shoot the Second Amendment and let innocents become victims to those who will always be able to obtain guns illegally if guns are banned.

What about the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms? According the the Court, the Second Amendment stands as written: We have gun rights.

In 2010, Justice Thomas declared this: “[T]he Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms…recognized in District of Columbia v Heller …fully applicable to the states…” and “The Court is correct in describing the Second Amendment right as ‘fundamental’ to the American scheme of ordered liberty…and deeply rooted in this nation’s history and traditions…” going on to state the “due process” clause in the Fourteenth Amendment “only speaks of process”… “Rather, the right to keep and bear arms is enforceable is against the States because it is a privilege of American citizenship recognized by the Fourteenth Amendment which provides inter alia: “No State shall make or enforce which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”

Thomas said Constitution Amendments are written in such a plainspoken way, all citizens can understand the law.  There is no argument, except by those who do not favor upholding the Constitution.

Justice Alito said of murder rates by violent criminals with guns versus victims without:

Chicago Police Department statistics, we are told, reveal that the City’s handgun murder rate has actually increased since the ban was enacted and that Chicago residents now face one of the highest murder rates in the country and rates or other violent crimes that exceed the average in comparable cities.

Justice Stevens dissented with typical mental leftism:

The decision to keep a loaded handgun in the house is often motivated by the desire to protect life, liberty, and property.  It is comparable…to decisions about…education and upbringing of one’s children.  For it is the kind of decision that may have profound consequences for every member of the family, and…the world beyond…that may result in death or serious injury…that claim borders on the frivolous.  Petitioners make no effort to demonstrate that the requirements are unreasonable or that they impose a severe burden on the underlying right they have asserted…

That belief falls in line with Bill Clinton’s anti-gun presidency and Attorney General Janet Reno making the idiotic declaration: “I think it should be at least as hard to get a license to possess a gun as it is to drive an automobile.”

Only progressives consider protecting one’s self and family from harm so frivolous and unreasonable, they place their jackboots in their own mouths by moronically comparing owning guns to something every American is allowed to do by age 21: Drive an automobile!

This so-called reasoning was discussed in 1993 by Time Magazine, which said Australia and Great Britain placed such tough standards on purchasing guns, violent gun crimes were only 22 in the UK and 10 in Australia compared to 10, 567 in the United States. Never mind that in Australia, only business owners and gun club members are allowed to own firearms.  Time claimed strict gun enforcement created low death-by-gun crime rates in both countries.

Time’s data was false.  UK firearms prevention of non-gun club members has not prevented violent crimes.

According to Dave Workman of the Examiner: in June of 2010, an active British gun club member went on a mass murdering shooting spree, killing “dozens” with “…a sporting shotgun and .22-caliber rifle.”  Police investigations reports the man “may have illegally owned those guns…” he used to murder. CCRKB Chairman Alan Gottlieb of Bellevue notes:

American gun prohibitionists have frequently held up the gun laws of Great Britain as their model.  They have created the impression that English-style gun laws would prevent outrages in this country.  Today’s shooting spree, which apparently left victims in 30 different locations, should forever put the lie to this argument.

English-style gun laws are the reason Americans enacted a Second Amendment:  English laws allow the right of self-defense to few, the rest must suffer their victimization. In a law-abiding manner of course!

And progressives never want citizens considering this: If gun restrictions and bans ware removed and all Americans easily own firearms, would criminals think twice before committing crimes against innocents?  If criminals knew victims might be armed and on an equal level to attackers, would criminals be willing to commit crimes knowing they might encounter equal resistance?

That question was answered in the 1998 book by Scholar John R. Lott titled More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control.  Lott told Chicago University School of Law:

Criminals are deterred by higher penalties.  Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent. Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves

Ah, victims in better positions to defend themselves. What an unreasonable and frivolous assumption! Why that would “impose a severe burden on the underlying” entitlement violent criminals assert against whining victims!

As to schools and gun violence, whenever American schools are held hostage by armed, crazed lunatics shooting classmates and teachers, more gun bans are demanded.  Yet students involved in violent gun crimes violate every gun restriction:

The Columbine Killers,” Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold illegally purchased 20 firearms.  The two teenagers did what all criminals do—purchase weapons without entering gun stores and applying for gun permits.  In fact, the two murdered fellow students with one illegally purchased TEC-9 handgun and two shotguns purchased by a girlfriend, with no prior criminal record, who was able to pass all background checks, proving austere gun laws do not preclude violent crimes.

Anti-gun advocates argue against this claim, insisting gun bans will end gun crimes.  Not true.

Cato Institute produced research data evidencing waiting periods have been useless—before and after the 1993 enactment of the Brady Bill. Murder and robbery rates have not declined due to wait-listing and background checks.  As demonstrated with the Columbine murders, anyone can illegally purchase firearms through any means if so desired.

Gun laws never prevent crimes. Anti-gun laws and severe purchasing restrictions lead to skyrocketing sales of illegal guns as well as aiding and abetting violent crime. The fact is crime is lower in countries where citizens are allowed to own firearms.

Gary Lampo of the Cato Institute notes that statistics asserting other nations have lower gun crime rates is false.  Switzerland and Israel offer guns and licenses to all citizens on demand without waiting periods and guns are “easily obtainable in both nations,” where carrying concealed weapons is permitted to all.  As a result, Cato reports violent crime is low in both nations where “home firearm ownership… [is]…at least as high as those in the United States.”

Preventing law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves against criminals escalates violence.

Violent crime and gun bans in the District of Columbia led to the high court ruling for Chicago that forced the Supreme Court to uphold the Second Amendment as the right of the citizens. Never mind, facts will not prevent progressives from assaulting the Second Amendment in order to ban American’s from our right to keep and bear arms.

It’s  dangerous for vulnerable women to carry guns, especially if there are rapists in the vicinity!  Frightened women might prevent rapes from happening by shooting rapists, and then where will society be!

Women only need rape whistles to fight off rapists!

The above statement is not hyperbole, it’s the ludicrous thinking of the Left, who claim to champion women’s rights but do not want women protecting themselves against violent attackers, who, more often than not, don’t stop at rape but end the violent crime with bloodshed.

If however, you survive rape and have the nerve to complain that a gun would have stopped your attacker—had you been allowed to carry it on the college campus you attend— you will be attacked in a war against women by leftists who disgustingly assume the ONLY rights women should have to protect  their bodies must be limited ONLY to birth control and abortion.

Case in point: Gun-owning Colorado college student Amanda Collins was raped on the Colorado college campus she attends because the university has a “Gun Free Zone” policy prohibiting students from carrying firearms. Miss Collins’ gun was locked in her car when she was violently assaulted.  When the discussion of rape on campus was brought to a debate at the Colorado Legislature, Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar had the audacity to tell American women:

There are some gender inequities on college campuses, this is true. And universities have been faced with that situation for a long time, that’s why we have call boxes; it’s why we have safe zones, that’s why we have the whistles, because you just don’t know who you’re going to be shooting at.

In that case, rape whistles are nothing more than Christmas bells for violent criminals: Every time you hear a rape whistle, another rapist gets his way!

As to Amanda Collins, she had a very good idea of whom she would be shooting: A rapist!

Rape whistles and call boxes did not save Amanda Collins from rape. Had Collins been allowed to carry her locked-in-a-car firearm on campus, she certainly would have had all odds in her favor to ward off the violent attack she must live with for the rest of her life.

Salazar went on to tell women:

And you [women with guns] don’t know if you feel like you’re going to be raped, or you feel like someone’s been following you around, or that you feel like you’re in trouble, or when you may actually not be, but you pop out that gun and you pop a round at somebody…

In other words, women do not have rights to assume that a strange man following them is a rapist or murderer. Also, we women are idiots whenever we claim we are being followed by a stranger or stalked by a crazy ex-husband or ex-boyfriend.

Ladies, it’s simply our over-active female minds telling us violent men exist and seek to physically harm women despite overwhelming rape statistics.

We over-sensitive women should follow Ebony’s  Zerlina Maxwell’s  advice–train rapist to stop raping:

I don’t think that we should be telling women anything. I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there…If you train men not to grow up to become rapists, you prevent rape.

Give me a break! The best way to train rapists not to rape is women with firearms.

Of course we women have no right to pull guns on strange men following us, demanding they get the hell away when trying to grab us and push us into cars or drag us into a dark allies to rape us and possibly end that violent crime with murder. No, we must ask thugs: “Would you please hold off your attack for one moment while I retrieve my rape whistle from my purse?”

Perhaps we women should ask the rapist/murder to hold our purses while we retrieve the cell phone to dial 9-11. Hey, I’m sure some rapists are happy to accommodate before the violent act.

As to Salazar’s bogus claims about gun safety, economist and author of More Guns, Less Crime  John Lott writes that U.S. states with conceal and carry laws have had

[L]arge drops in overall violent crime, murder, rape, and aggravated assault that begin right after the right to carry laws have gone into effect. In all those crime categories, the crime rates consistently stay much lower than they were before the law. The murder rate for these right to carry states fell consistently every year relative to non-right-to-carry states.

Leftists could care less about facts; they are more concerned with distorting the truth in order to protect violent criminals against victims.

What is disgusting about this entire women and guns debate is Democrats are the instigators of the “War on Women.” Democrats insist women are not treated equally, they insist women are victims of a male-dominated society, yet Democrats do not want women fighting off violent men.

More proof: A female Democrat further violated Amanda Collins by claiming her gun never would have stopped the rapist and she is better off for having her firearm locked in her car.

Colorado State Senator Evie Hudak told Collins, a skilled martial artist who could not overpower the large brute with her physical skills that:

Statistics are not on your side even if you had had a gun…And chances are that if you had had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly uses it against you

A shocked Collins responded to the female legislator saying:

Respectfully Senator, you weren’t there. Had I been carrying a gun, he wouldn’t have known that I had my weapon. I know without a doubt in my mind, at some point I would have been able to stop my attack by using my firearm.

Progressives scream “War on Women” when it comes to birth control not being doled out freely to every woman, yet these government programers don’t want women owning guns, shooting rapists and would-be murderers, and preventing crimes against women.

Rapists have waged war on women for thousands of years, but American Leftists are in fact defending rapists when they tell women that guns won’t protect women, rape whistles will.

Hudak and Salazar’s heartless answers are typical of the anti-gun fascists. I’m surprised they didn’t tell Miss Collins the best thing we women can do is to make sure we receive free birth control, that way if we are raped, we won’t get pregnant after rapists physically and mentally ravage our lives.

My favorite is the one that stumbles over himself at the 38 second mark.

Rep. Darrell Issa

The Congressman sent a letter to acting Treasury Secretary Neal S. Wolin, seeking information about a relationship between an unnamed IRS employee and the owner of Signet Computers Inc., Braulio Castillo. Throughout the letter sent by the Committee Chairman, the name of the IRS employee in question is blacked out.

The document also alleges that Signet Computers may have lied to the Small Business Administration (SBA), as well, in order to make it easier for the company to get federal contracts. Also, in 2012, Issa writes that the company changed its name multiple times, potentially to avoid additional scrutiny from the SBA. Investigators have determined from witnesses that Signet Computers, Inc. is also known as Strong Castle, Inc. and Strong Castle, LLC; all owned by Castillo and sharing the same business address and website.

The Committee is requesting a series of documents to be turned over by 5:00pm on March 6th. These include the following:

According to the letter, a whistleblower contacted the Office of The Treasury Inspector General in August of 2012 with evidence that the unnamed IRS employee improperly awarded contracts to Mr. Castillo and Signet Computers Inc. The whistleblower’s evidence also showed that Signet Computers also obtained various certifications in an improper manner. Chairman Issa’s letter also states that a second whistleblower contacted the SBA in January of 2013 with the same concerns that were highlighted in August of 2012.

Issa states in the letter that “At best we have a conflict of interest”, but also highlights the alternative by saying, “At worst, the IRS may have a situation in which a contracting official is awarding sole source contracts based on false justifications or receiving kickbacks in exchange for government contracts.”

To read the full Issa Letter Sent To The IRS by Representative Issa, click here. (PDF)

___

If you murder children with guns, the world will regard you as a monster; if you shoot cops you will become a cult hero to the Left.

When 20 year-old psycho Adam Lanza went on a gun-killing spree, murdering 20 children and seven adults, he became the most hated man in America and the propaganda mug for anti-gun leftists desperate for mass-murder-buy-guns in order to promote the anti-second Amendment cause.

When former cop-turned-cop-killer Chris Dorner unleashed his guns against police, Dorner became the latest cop-killer cult hero to anti-gun race-baters and left-wing media anchors.

There are only two differences between Lanza and Dorner: Lanza massacred children, Dorner massacred police officers.  Lanza did not murder cops in revenge for the criminal, drug addicted, alcoholic, wife-beating thug Rodney King, Dorner did.  Thus, Lanza is hated and Dorner is adored.

King’s beating and arrest by cops, who had to defend themselves against King’s violent attacks,  automatically made police racist in the eyes of leftists and media whores promoting all things anti-American and racist–including Chris Dorner.

Adam Lanza’s violence, on the other hand, gave the Left everything it’s been searching for in order to disarm citizens: Children murdered by guns. Now guns truly are assault weapons, dangerous, and the real cause of all deaths in America.

If guns are banned—or at least regulated to the point that citizens are only allowed to purchase one bullet at a time–ala Barney Fife—crime and murder will disappear. Unless necessary–to kill cops.

Necessary murder in the eyes of left-wingers is shooting any American who appallingly wears a uniform.

The Left’s newest darling provided 11,000 reasons for the Left to adore him in a so-called manifesto:

In the end, I hope that you will realize that the small arms I utilize should not be accessed with the ease that I obtained them. Who in there right mind needs a (expletive) silencer!!! who needs a freaking SBR AR15? No one. No more Virginia Tech, Columbine HS, Wisconsin temple, Aurora theatre, Portland malls, Tucson rally, Newtown Sandy Hook. Whether by executive order or thru a bi-partisan congress an assault weapons ban needs to be re-instituted. Period!!! Mia Farrow said it best. ‘Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.’ Sen. Feinstein, you are doing the right thing in leading the re-institution of a national AWB. Never again should any public official state that their prayers and thoughts are with the family.

Lanza destroyed all evidence and records for his psychotic rampage. But that shouldn’t matter. Murder is murder. Or is it?

Dorner’s racist, unintelligent, self-styled manifesto further states: “I know I will be vilified by the LAPD and the media.”

Wrong. Dorner has not been denigrated or maligned by the media. He’s been heralded with praise for his violence.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews shivered with tingles over Dorner’s manifesto admiration of Matthews: “keep up the great work and follow Cronkite’s lead. I hold many of you [journalists, including Matthews] in the same regard.”

How touching. Where’s the Nobel Peace Prize!

Matthews ignored Dorner’s demand that he and his cronies: “Don’t honor these fallen officers/dirtbags.”

Imagine if Lanza left behind a manifesto demanding the media “not honor those fallen dirt bag children?” Matthews would have flown into a psychiatric rage and shot himself in the leg.

Instead, Matthews considers Dorner a peaceful man with a high IQ because:

[Dorner is] Someone who had great media-savvy, who knew, who had the brains to keep track of Hollywood, to keep up with Charlie Sheen, to establish relationships with people through the media, to, in some strange way, enjoy his situation and at the same time wreak havoc on anyone he came in contact to.

Whenever I seek to be well-informed, I look to the “savvy” rantings of  drug-addicted, alcoholic, wife-beater Charlie Sheen.

Furthermore, Matthews’ so-called passive “brainy” intellect, who couldn’t spell or construct proper sentences, certainly demonstrated a hatred of high powered rifles by morally murdering cops with tinier guns than fellow lunatic Lanza.

Dorner’s violence is acceptable to the media because Dorner was black and bullied as a kid: 

Journalist, I want you to investigate every location I resided in growing up. Find any incidents where I was ever accused of being a bully. You won’t, because it doesn’t exist. It’s not in my DNA. Never was. I was the only black kid in each of my elementary school classes from first grade to seventh grade in junior high and any instances where I was disciplined for fighting was in response to fellow students provoking common childhood schoolyard fights, or calling me a nigger or other derogatory racial names. I grew up in neighborhoods where blacks make up less than 1%.

Poor darling! He was the only black kid in school! Someone called him names! And schoolyard fights? Has any American ever heard of such a thing occurring in school? That has NEVER HAPPENED TO ANY KID IN AMERICA!  

Can anyone imagine the New Black Panther Party referring to whites as “whitey,” “white devils,” or “Cracker, you are about to be ruled by a black man” or “You want freedom, you gonna have to kill some crackers…You gonna have to kill some of they [sic] babies,” and “I hate white people, all of them, every last iota of the cracker, I hate em’!”

Ironically Adam Lanza committed what the Black Panthers yearn for: Lanza massacred white children. Yet Lanza and his guns are vilified by the Left. That’s because murder is justifiable when murder involves killing cops: “Those Caucasian officers who join South Bureau divisions with the sole intent to victimize minorities who are uneducated, and unaware of criminal law, civil law, and civil rights,” further declaring:

[T]his is a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name. The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse. The consent decree should never have been lifted. The only thing that has evolved from the consent decree is those officers involved in the Rampart scandal and Rodney King incidents have since promoted to supervisor, commanders, and command staff, and executive positions.

 

Again: If you shoot children, the world will deem you monstrous and demand gun bans. However, if you shoot cops, you will become a leftist cult hero, not to mention highly regarded Ive League college professor.

On the upside, Dorner, who “wants my brain left to science,” likes Michelle Obama’s hair: “I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama.”

Thank heavens! We can all breathe a sigh of relief! That proves Dorner, whose brain is now useless chard remains, was not a monstrous murderer like Adam Lanza! Dorner was a psychotic murderer with style and taste!

“Architect” Karl Rove is a progressive disaster to the Republican Party: He’s pushing to destroy the Tea Party and American conservatism in order to install his version of politics that mirrors Woodrow Wilson.

There’s not much difference between Wilson and Rove: Wilson wanted control over the Democrat Party and the American people abiding by his will.  Rove is doing the exact same thing: Controlling the GOP vote by putting RINO candidates up against Tea Party candidates in order to destroy conservatives.

Rove  decides GOP primary winners,  not voters.  Rove chose the 2008 and 2012 presidential candidates:  John McCain and Mitt Romney. Both decisions failed and the GOP was defeated like Waterloo on steroids.

Yet, Rove is hell-bent on choosing the 2014 and 2016 GOP candidates and preventing Tea Party candidates from getting on ballots. And the GOP machine does not care: Its goal is power, not constitutionalism.

The result: The GOP is failing because it keeps bringing this power-hungry, overweight knife to the political gun fight.

Despite Rove’s American Crossroads Super PAC proving a dismal failures, the GOP refuses to learn lessons and listen to its conservative base. Instead, the GOP wants Rove to move ahead with his Wilsonian-style plan: Decide the candidates people need as president, Senate and House leaders.

To pull off this anti-Constitution, strong-arming-the-people plan, Rove set up the Conservative Victory Group, another progressive-style Pac to choose candidates, and further to the point, advise candidates on what they can and cannot articulate.

Rove’s plan was laid out in the New York Times:

The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate. Steven J. Law, a leader of the Conservative Victory Project, say they are taking steps to steer Mr. King away from a Senate run. The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles. It is the most robust attempt yet by Republicans to impose a new sense of discipline on the party, particularly in primary races.

Notice Rove’s goal: “protect Senate incumbents” from Tea Party candidates and “counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates.” In other words, down with Mia Love Tea Partiers shaking things up, no Todd Akin slip-ups allowed on ballots, and defeat upstarts like incumbent Rep. Allen West, whom Rove could not “discipline” and “impose” his GOP power.

Rove’s ideology is similar to British constitutionalism where leaders, not the people,  pick prime ministers and MPs, and decide laws as they go. That was Woodrow Wilson’s ideology. Is it any different than Rove picking candidates? Worse, is that any different than Wilson’s desire to abolish the Separation of Powers?

No, Rove has never called for abolishing Separation of Powers so presidents have parliamentary-style control.  However, if party leaders control votes, prevent people from deciding primary candidates, party leaders control Congressional leader’s votes, and Separation of Powers dissolves, and the House and Senate belong to party leaders, not voters.

To cover his fat rump, Rove made radio talk show rounds, backtracking his bashing the Tea Party.  Big deal! Rove believes he is the architect of politics and he’s attempting to design America’s leadership.

Rove assumes he knows what’s best for the people, as Wilson himself believed. Rove is Woodrow Wilson in every sense of the Progressive Movement: Mold the party, voters, and America’s future to party leadership command, not the Constitution. How is that “consent of the governed?”

There is nothing conservative about Rove’s Conservative Victory Party or Rove.

Wilson said choose elite candidates best suited for making the people’s decisions. Candidates must do the thinking for the people, because citizens are too inept at making individual decisions.

Wilson said: “Governments are what the politicians make them…:”

[T]here should be a science of administration which shall seek to straighten the paths of government, to make its business less unbusinesslike, to strengthen and purify its organization, and to crown its duties with dutifulness.

Rove too wants to “make” the government.

Matt Hoskins, Executive Director of Senate Conservatives Fund said of Rove:

This is a continuation of the establishment’s effort to avoid blame for their horrible performance in the 2012 elections. They [the GOP] blew a ton of races up and down the ticket because they recruited moderate Republicans who didn’t stand for anything. Now they want to use this new PAC to trick donors into giving them more money so they can lose more races.

Hoskins is correct.  Rove helped destroy GOP conservative Florida Rep. Allen West by refusing to help West win reelection and stop the redistricting of West’s seat.

Rove trashed Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin as “thin-skinned,” claiming that if no one speculates “about her, she’d be upset and try and find a way to get us to speculate about her.”

It sounds like chunky skin, who was adamant Palin would run for the 2012 presidency, is not only off beam with erroneous predictions, he’s jealous of popularity that may possibly destroy his power.

Rove demonstrated disloyalty to Rep. Michele Bachmann when Bachmann demanded answers to why Muslim Brotherhood-connected Huma Abedin-Weiner was Hillary Clinton’s top aid with high security clearance in the State Department. GOP leaders Marco Rubio, John McCain, and Speaker John Boehner condemned Bachmann. Rove took the RINO side against Bachmann.

When it comes to breaking Constitution law to grant illegals amnesty, Rove tramples the Constitution for the Hispanic vote. He is empowering Tea Partier-turned-RINO Senator Marco Rubio, whom Rove says has “The framework of the proposed reforms highlights the persuasive powers of Sen. Marco Rubio.”

Notice the phrase “persuasive.”  Rove wants “persuasive” leaders making voter’s decisions. That is what Wilson wanted:

“Wherever regard for public opinion is a first principle of government, practical reform must be slow and all reform must be full of compromises… Whoever would effect a change in a modern constitutional government must first educate his fellow-citizens to want some change. That done, he must persuade them to want the particular change he wants. He must first make public opinion willing to listen and then see to it that it listen to the right things. He must stir it up to search for an opinion, and then manage to put the right opinion in its way.

This is exactly what Rove is doing with conservative voters who must reject what will surely destroy conservatism if “We The People” don’t stand up and fight Karl Rove.

Rove’s Conservative Victory Project is progressivism. His record demonstrates he’s not a Republican, he’s a left-wing progressive in GOP clothing molding the GOP into his image, just as Wilson did with Democrats and America.

When: Monday, February 4 at 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where: Getting Hammered with Steve Hamilton and Stevie J West

Tonight: We’re joined by Todd Kincannon and Michelle Ray to discuss #TGDN