Tag Archives: UN

Granny Get Your Gun!

When you hear the word treaty you would normally assume that two or more countries in conflict with each other had reached an accord to end the conflict. Take the proposed “small arms treaty” from the U.N. There is no doubt that the rights and freedoms that our forefathers secured for us, scare many of the world “leaders”(for lack of better word).

Most of the “civilized” nations in this world have banned private ownership- or have at least passed stringent laws strongly restricting the private ownership of firearms. Americans have had their rights paid for with over 200 years of freedom loving patriots giving life and limbs for our freedoms and rights. We have fought tooth and nail and paid that same high price to give that same gift to many others around the globe.

“Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty.”-Ronald Reagan

With many of the world’s citizens allowing their politicians to pass laws prohibiting or restricting the private ownership of firearms they have given up their last line of defense against tyranny. The proposed “treaty “, if passed would most likely impose harsh restriction on the buying and selling of firearms and create a national firearm registry. The first steps leading to the confiscation of privately owned guns, leaving the citizen at the mercy of the criminal and the government.

It has been proven time and again that when the citizen is disarmed, the crime rate skyrockets. The criminals already reject following the law, so the government just makes it easier for them. When a politician starts out at the state or local level most all will state that they want to lower the crime rate. This cannot be accomplished by disarming the law abiding citizen, from any government level.

Now is the time to raise our voices and be heard. Let our senators and representatives know that we will not tolerate them signing away our freedoms and rights under the guise of a “treaty”.

_______________________________

For those of you that own firearms, train hard and well and teach those that do not know how. Be good stewards of the right to bear arms, for we are the last line of defense against tyranny.
-Benjamin Wallace


Keep an eye on where this goes through the NRA-ILA.

____________________________

Information Source:

Forbes.com

John Bolton: 2012 Presidential Profile

As I have stated before, I am fairly new to the “political scene”. The fact that I am actually writing about politics and researching political candidates absolutely blows my mind!

I’m one of those that I gripe about now. I had my head in the sand for years. I honestly did not care to know, because my thought process was, “Hey, I can’t change things anyway, what’s the point?” Unfortunately, too many people have had that attitude in the last 4 decades or so, and I firmly believe that is why we are in the position we are in.

What changed things for me was the 2008 election. I was appalled at the comments from women who said they were voting for Obama because he was “cute”. Well, looks are subjective, so I will not even comment on that side of things. However, I knew that this man was not good for our country!

My husband is a Political Science major, so when we married almost 9 years ago I got quite the induction into politics. Let me just say I did not go willingly! Then, as I said, the 2008 election came along. Things really did not change for me until Sarah Palin came on the scene. I was so disgusted with having to once again choose the lesser of two evils. I had even told my husband and my dad that I was not even going to vote. Oh, I’m sure you can imagine the outrage from both of them!

So, with all this being said, I knew John Bolton as a Fox News commentator. My husband has tried to give me a “crash course”, so to speak, to catch me up on “who’s who” in politics, what positions they’ve held through the years, the good that they’ve done, the bad that they’ve done, and all other information in between. My husband is a very “black and white” kind of guy- no grey areas! He’s very objective in his views. It’s quite a unique for me- a woman- who is obviously more “emotional” in my opinions. Hey, it’s just a fact ladies, our emotions play a major role in our decisions.

I’ve always like John Bolton’s commentaries on the various Fox News shows, but I would not have thought of him as “Presidential” material. However, I have determined that what many consider “Presidential material” are found lacking in many areas. So…. maybe it’s time we look outside what we see as normal “Presidential material”. Maybe John Bolton fits that bill!

Let’s explore the facts about Mr. Bolton and then decide!

PERSONAL INFORMATION

John Robert Bolton was born November 20, 1948 in Baltimore, Maryland. He is the son of a fireman, and the family grew up in a working class neighborhood in Maryland.

Family
Mr. Bolton is married to Gretchen, and they have one daughter.  They currently live in Bethesda, Maryland.

Religious Affiliation
Lutheran


Education
1966- Graduated from the McDonogh School in Owings Mills, Maryland
1970- Graduated with a B.A., summa cum laude from Yale University
1974- Graduated with a J.D  degree from Yale University

Early Political Activist
1964- In high school, Mr. Bolton ran the school’s Students for Goldwater campaign
Member of the Yale Political Union

College Classmates and Contemporaries
Clarence Thomas
Bill Clinton- at Yale Law School
Hillary Rodham- at Yale Law School
A “protege” of Conservative North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms

Military Career
Mr. Bolton supported the Vietnam War and enlisted in the Maryland Army National Guard, but avoided serving in Vietnam. He later said that by the time he was graduating it was clear to him that the opponents of the war had made sure we could not prevail.

When I read this fact about Mr. Bolton- that he purposely avoided the war, though he supported it, it made me pause. My dad tried to enlist, but had a couple of health issues going against him. Number one, he was underweight. He drank milkshakes twice a day trying to gain weight to enlist. Now we tease him that he would probably love to go back to those days where he was trying to gain weight!
Also- my father-in-law did go to Vietnam. He had a grenade blow up right next to him and he now has permanent hearing loss in one of his ears from it. Oh, he was lucky, I know! Well, let me rephrase that- luck had absolutely nothing to do with it! I know without a doubt the hand of God Almighty was on his life.
Too many men lost their lives in Vietnam. It is a war that we should have never been in! Or, as the politicians of the day put it, a “police action” we should have never been in! (can you see me rolling my eyes from here?!)
I absolutely agree with Mr. Bolton- it was very clear that the opponents of the war had made sure we could not prevail. However, to purposely avoid going when he supported the effort, war, police action, or whatever else you want to call it- it just makes me a bit uncomfortable. By no means am I saying that his life is not worth something- that he should have gone and gotten killed. All I am saying is that a lot of young men went and did not come back- or for those who did come back their lives were never the same. There’s just something about this that makes me very uncomfortable.

Professional Career
1974 to 1981- Associate at Covington & Burling law firm
1983 to 1985- Returned to his position as Associate at Covington & Burling law firm
1993 to 1999- Partner in the law firm of Lerner, Reed, Bolton & McManus
Former Executive Director of the Committee on Resolutions in the Republican National Committee
Senior Vice President for Public Policy Research at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)
Current Positions:

  • Fox News Channel commentator
  • Counsel to the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, in their Washington D.C. office.
  • Involved with a variety of conservative think tanks and policy institutes, including the following:
    Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA)
    Project for the New American Century (PNAC)
    Institute of East-Wet Dynamics
    National Rifle Association (NRA)
    U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom
    Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf (CPSG)
    Council for National Policy (CNP)

Political/Government Career
1981 to 1982- General Counsel, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
1982 to 1983- Assistant Administrator for Program and Policy Coordination, USAID
1985 to 1989- Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice
1989 to 1993- Assistant Secretary for International Organization Affairs at the Department of State
1999 to 2001- Served on the board of the Committee for International Religious Freedom
2001 to 2005-  Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
2005 to 2006- U.S. Ambassador to the UN
The rumor is Mr. Bolton is considering a run for the office of President in 2012

Public Policy
1997 to 2000- Mr. Bolton worked pro bono as an assistant to James Baker in Baker’s capacity as Kofi Annan’s personal envoy to the Western Sahara.

2003- He was part of the State Department’s delegation to six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear program, but was removed from the delegation after describing Kim Jong-il as a “tyrannical dictator” and adding that life for the North Korean’s under  Kim’s rule, “life is a hellish nightmare.”

Served as Senior Vice President for Public Policy Research at the American Enterprise Institute
Formerly involved with these conservative groups:
Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
Federalist Society
National Policy Forum
National Advisory Board
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research
New Atlantic Initiative
Project on Transitional Democracies

Major Accomplishments
Mr. Bolton led the successful effort to rescind the 1970’s UN resolution that equated Zionism with racism.
Mr. Bolton played a major role in obtaining UN resolutions endorsing the use of force to fight Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
In his position at the Justice department, he was involved in the Iran-Contra affair.
He also helped lead in the judicial nomination process for Antonin Scalia.
Mr. Bolton was a key-figure in derailing a 2001 biological weapons conference in Geneva convened to endorse a UN proposal to enforce the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention.

His Reputation
Mr. Bolton has the reputation of being hawkish on his foreign policy views. He is also described as neo-conservative, but he personally rejects the term, reminding people that he has been a conservative since high school.

He is known to be highly successful in pushing his agenda, but his bluntness has earned him many enemies.
He has been accused of trying to spin intelligence to support his views and political objectives on more than one occasion.
The Economist wrote that Mr. Bolton was “the most controversial Ambassador ever sent by America to the United Nations.”
David Kopel praised Bolton as “Horatio at the Bridge, saving the Second Amendment from a full-scale assault at the United Nations.”

I love the fact that Mr. Bolton is “blunt”. I cannot stand someone who does not “say what they mean and mean what they say”. We’ve got more than enough mealy-mouth politicians in Washington, we most certainly do not need any more!
On several occasions I’ve seen Mr. Bolton’s “bluntness”, and I appreciate that! I would LOVE to have a President that did not mince his words! I have no doubt that Mr. Bolton would have no problem accomplishing that task!
I am also very encouraged by the experience Mr. Bolton brings to the table. This is a definite positive, especially with how vigilant he is with addressing the issues that need to be addressed.

His Happiest Moment
Mr. Bolton has said that his ‘happiest moment at State was personally ‘unsigning’ the Rome Statute,’ which had set up the International Criminal Court.

On The UN
Mr. Bolton has been a strong critic of the United Nations for much of his career. He has said,

“There is no such thing as the United Nations. there is only the international community, which can only be led by the only remaining superpower, which is the United states.”

On A Possible Run For President in 2012
In an interview with Politico, he said:

“As I survey the situation, I think the Republican field is wide open. I don’t think the party’s anywhere close to a decision. And stranger things have happened. For example, inexperienced senators from Illinois have gotten presidential nominations.”

And in an interview with National Review he said:

“Individual liberty is the whole purpose of political life, and I thought it was threatened back then”-in 1964 during the Goldwater campaign which he describes as “my formative political experience”-“and I think it’s threatened now…..I write, I give speeches, I appear on television-but the only way in contemporary American circumstances to make those issues as salient as they should be is to run for president.”

One thing is for certain- the Republican field is DEFINITELY wide open! There is one candidate that is actually running right now that I can see myself voting for with confidence. There are a couple of others that intrigue me, but only one stands out as definitely someone I would campaign for. Only time will tell who all the candidates will be, and if Mr. Bolton will be in the line-up.

On The Web
John Bolton on Twitter
John Bolton on Facebook
In His Words- War-Powers Crisis

_________________________

Sources:

Wikipedia

See the profiles of other potential 2012 GOP Candidates

House Reps Block Bill to Recover $179 Million Dollars of your money

      I realize with our yearly trillion dollar deficits today that 179 million is a small figure to the fatcats in DC today, but there is  more than first meets the eye, (or ears) here. This situation should have every hard working, tax paying American citizen demanding answers. Yesterday the house voted on a bill sponsored by Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) that would require the repayment of  money the UN had collected from the U.S and had not proven that it has spent. This tale gets stranger by the minute when we try to understand what is going on here. Something smells, and smells real bad when we take a look at the “excuses” we are being told, as to why our Government isn’t demanding this money be given back to us.

      First of all I find it quite intriguing when the only congressmen talking about this situation so far are all from New York, where the U. N Headquarters just happens to be located. They seem to be on the frontlines of this attempted cover-up.

     Rep Peter King (R-NY) gave us his insight about this situation when  the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee said the issue affected the safety of New Yorkers and the thousands of tourists who visit the landmark building. he then topped off the fear-mongering with: “The fact is this is a disaster waiting to happen,” said King, who broke with his Republican colleagues in opposing the bill. So did another New York Republican, freshman Rep. Michael Grimm. Since we are talking national security here with the new chairman of The Homeland Securtity Committee,  why are we only hearing from New York politicians? Could it be that the State of New York has an interest in sweeping this situation under the rug? Apparently so , as we will see further on in this article. This was the first clue to me that something isn’t right here, and this needs to be looked into bigtime.

    We catch a glimpse of why this bill failed with a vote of  259-169 as it needed a 2/3 majority to pass, in an article from the AP on Yahoo News* here:

” The House on Wednesday rejected a Republican-led effort to force the United Nations to give back $179 million in overpayments, falling short in the face of Obama administration arguments that much of the money already had been designated to boost security around an international headquarters susceptible to terrorist attack.”

    The United Nations has its own security counsel that is paid for out of their general funds, of which the U. S.  is the biggest contributor by far. Where did this extra money go?  We have some people saying this money has already been spent, and the President saying it has been designated to boost security. Maybe someone should ask the folks over at the U. N. to weigh in on this matter, and they did, as further on in the AP* article we have this:

” At the United Nations, spokesman Martin Nesirky declined to comment on the House vote. He noted that the United States was obliged to provide security as host country of U.N. headquarters, but said ultimately it was up to the U.S. to decide how to spend the money in the fund.”

    So here we have the U.N spokesman saying we have the money, and we have a U.S congressman saying we need to take it back from the U.N, and we have a President that says it has already been “designated.”  If this doesn’t show how incompetent our government has become, I don’t know what does here. I do know, that if you follow the money you eventually get at the roots of the corruption/malfeasance/or cause of incompetence in any situation. How did we come to “overpay” the U. N in the first place?  When people give answers and reasons for situations like this that do not make sense, it usually points to a cover-up, designated solely to hide the truth. We as American citizens need to demand the truth today, and it is our duty towards securing our future freedoms.

    Thanks to the tireless work of Ros-Lehtinen, this issue isn’t over by a long shot. This will be voted on again, and much more intense scrutiny will be given, as the people start demanding answers.  To sum this all up in her own words,  “”This is not about security,” said Ros-Lehtinen, who argued that the U.N. and the administration were looking for another excuse to avoid making tough choices.”  The State of New York and N.Y. City in particular seem to have gotten the biggest chunk of this money. They are also high on the States most likely to file bankruptcy list. Coincidence?

   In these times of economic crisis, I agree with defunding the UN entirely. They accomplish very little for the billions they rake in every year, mostly from the U. S. taxpayer. Case in point? Where are the blue helmets of the vaunted UN Peacekeepers in Egypt, Tunisia and across the globe today? Sure are lots of riots, and governments are being toppled today without any discernable U.N. action.  No more U.S. taxpayer dollars should go to the United Nations, period.

* http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110209/ap_on_re_us/us_un_money_congress_2

Recent Entries »