Wednesday, December 28, 2011

What exactly can Ron Paul do?

Rick Santorum speaking at an Iowa town hall meeting:

“The things that most Iowans like about Ron Paul – his economic ideas – are the things he’s least likely to be able to accomplish,” Mr. Santorum said. “The things that most Iowans are worried about are the very things he will accomplish.”

Paul will be unable to realize his goal of controlling spending and downsizing government in Washington, given the makeup of Congress and the unwillingness of Republicans to go along with his agenda by deeply cutting military programs.

“What evidence has Ron Paul ever shown that he can pass anything?” Mr. Santorum said. “He’s never passed a bill. He’s been in Congress for 20 years and hasn’t passed a bill.”

But Santorum did say that there would be no check-and-balance on Mr. Paul’s role as commander in chief. He urged Republicans to carefully study Mr. Paul’s isolationist foreign policy views.

“One thing he can do as commander in chief is he can pull all our troops home,” Mr. Santorum said. “He can do that on the first day he’s in office. He can shut down our bases in Germany. He can shut down the bases in Japan. He can pull our fleets back. You think the rest of the world is going to say oh, that’s great? We’ll just leave things the way they are?”

He added, “Think about having a guy running for president who is going to be on the left of Barack Obama on national security.” His stance on our southern border security comes to mind...

The rest of the story... Is Ron Paul planning to run as an Independent if he doesn't get the Republican nomination? Is he vindictive enough to split the vote and usher in another 4 years of Obama moving our country toward socialism?
You Ron Paul supporters better think about this...

Monday, November 14, 2011


This is going around on the web... First I've seen of it and although we all had an inkling this is how we operate, seeing it spelled out like this makes it truly UNBELIEVABLE!

How they vote in the United Nations:
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:

Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time.
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time.
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time.
United Arab Emirates votes against the United States 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.

U S Foreign Aid to those that hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2,000,000,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
Jordan votes 71% against the United States and receives $192,814,000 annually.
Pakistan votes 75% against the United States and receives $6,721,000,000 annually.
India votes 81% against the United States and receives $143,699,000 annually.


Perhaps it is time to get out of the UN and give the tax savings back to the American workers who are having to skimp and sacrifice to pay the taxes.

Pass this along to every taxpaying citizen you know, party lines irrelevant!


Tuesday, October 4, 2011

The U.S. Constitution under Attack

Just in the last few weeks more evidence has turned up concerning the disregard for our nation’s Constitution from people either holding high office in our government, former government officials or well-known celebrities. These same people are also the first to hide behind other portions of the Constitution when it suits their purpose. Here are some recent examples:

The President of the United States, Barack Obama
and his Department of Justice under Attorney General Eric Holder have shown blatant disregard concerning our country’s immigration laws. This is being carried out by ignoring the deportation of illegal aliens based upon whether they are criminals or not (!). Obama assures us that his administration is going after the illegal aliens engaged in criminal activity while they continue to advocate the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act. Their means of advocating this act which failed to pass Congress in 2010 is to simply ignore enforcement of our laws when it comes to immigrants illegally in our country who they deem not to be “engaged in criminal activity”. Now I ask you, doesn’t being in our country illegally constitute being “engaged in criminal activity”? In addition, doesn’t this publically declared lack of enforcement amount to a breach of the President’s oath to defend our nation as laid out in the Constitution?

Recently the State of Alabama passed legislation that authorizes police to detain people suspected of being in the country illegally if they cannot produce proper documentation when stopped for any reason. The legislation also requires the state’s schools to determine the legal residency of children attending class. Alabama’s new law was then challenged in U.S. District Court where a Federal Judge (Sharon Lovelace Blackburn) ruled in favor of the state. As a result Obama’s Justice Department filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta which also asked Judge Blackburn to put her ruling on hold pending the appeal. Alabama immediately put the new law into effect and suddenly class size dropped as people illegally in our country kept their children home. As a result, the tax paying citizens of Alabama are seeing their tax dollars used as they were intended. Now the President, in direct opposition to his sworn oath, is trying to supersede the will of the people. The Federal Government’s involvement in our children’s education is just one example of it stepping beyond the rules of our Constitution.

The Obama Administration’s former “Green Jobs Czar”, Van Jones recently stated in an interview on MSNBC’s program The Last Word With Lawrence O’Donnell, “October is going to be the turning point when it comes to the progressive fight back. We are a part of something called the American Dream Movement. We`re having a huge summit on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday (going on right now). We are going to build a progressive counterbalance to the Tea Party.”
Jones, an avowed Marxist, predicts “an American fall, an American autumn, just like we saw the Arab spring. You can see it right now with these young people on Wall Street. Hold onto your hats. We`re going to have an October offensive to take back the American Dream and to rescue America`s middle class.” After all the Left’s pointed rhetoric concerning Conservatives’ use of words that may depict military action in describing certain things, Mr. Jones’ comments likening an American liberal call to action as an “offensive” similar to the Arab Spring where civil war broke out in several Arab nations has been conveniently neglected by our “mainstream” media. Last weekend, after Mr. Jones’ call to action, 700 protesters were arrested for stopping traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge while several much smaller demonstrations occurred in a few other cities around the country. Will these demonstrators continue their work as October draws on? Will Van Jones call for an “offensive” lead to more civil disobedience or worse?

North Carolina’s Democratic Governor Bev Perdue made headlines last week by stating to a local Rotary Club that Congress should suspend the 2012 elections in order to work on the economy. Considering the current political climate in our country, what kind of person would make such a thoughtless comment? With people like Van Jones seemingly calling for a revolution, this is the last thing our citizens need to hear… Governor Perdue has been publicly back peddling ever since but this is yet another example of the Left’s mindset as they watch their power being diminished.

Finally, none other than comedienne and actress Roseanne Barr (I know we all hang on every word this person utters) stated while on the scene in support of the Wall Street demonstrations last week, “I do say that I am in favor of the return of the guillotine and that is for the worst of the worst of the guilty. I first would allow the guilty bankers to pay, you know, the ability to pay back anything over $100 million [of] personal wealth because I believe in a maximum wage of $100 million. And if they are unable to live on that amount of that amount then they should, you know, go to the re-education camps and if that doesn't help, then being beheaded.” This from the liberal who at one point in her life spent a year in a mental institution…

And so the liberals, with their political agenda to fundamentally change our country, continue with their assault on our laws.

I personally can’t wait until next November…

Friday, September 16, 2011

Charlie Reese Wrote This... How True It Is!


Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-pickingthing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.

The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party.

She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red .

If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ.

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

I'll end this with a Charlie Reese quote from 1993...

"But regardless of whose fault it is, most politicians today are not human beings. You want to pry open their mouths and shout into the darkness, 'Hello! Is there a human being in there?' Buried under all that lust for office, all that fear of offending a contributor? I know there must be."

Sunday, September 4, 2011

The People of the Democratic Party Could Be Better Served…

First, let me say I’m not a Democrat, in fact I’m pretty far to the right in most of my political views although I do have a fairly moderate take concerning certain social issues. That being said I want everyone to understand I’ve been so unhappy with the bungling of the two mainstream political parties in our country that I’ve signed off on both of them and now proudly proclaim to anyone willing to listen that I’m a right leaning Independent.

It certainly has...

So, as a somewhat impartial observer, I have a couple of questions that are just begging to be asked… First, I find it very hard to believe the majority of the people who make up today’s Democratic Party are so far out in left field that they truly support where President Obama and his people seem to be taking our country. Am I misreading this? Are you lifelong Democrats really hoping to see the demise of the Capitalistic system in our country? Are you in favor of a more Socialistic society in which the government either owns or closely oversees the country’s businesses and takes care of not only the few citizens who are unable to care for themselves but also the multitude of citizens who are apparently unwilling to try? Simply put, are you in favor of an ever growing Federal bureaucracy and the demise of rewarding our citizens' self-initiative?  I find that hard to believe and if I’m not wrong then the second question I have comes barreling right up to the forefront… Why in the world would you continue to support Barrack Obama in his bid to be re-elected if you’re not happy with what he’s been trying to accomplish? Conversely, if you actually are in favor of a more socialistic system in our country and hope to see it implemented then I also have to wonder why you would continue to support Barrack Obama as your champion based on his almost total lack of leadership in the face of adversity.

In our country’s history there has only been one sitting President seeking re-election who was defeated before the general election by a challenger from within his own party, so what I’m about to suggest is historically the wrong thing to do, but it appears to me the Democratic Party would be much better served if they nominated another candidate for the 2012 Presidential Election. Beyond Barrack Obama’s apparent need to saddle those of us who pay taxes with an ever increasing tax burden in order to grow Socialism in the United States, this man and his people have grossly mishandled the economic stimulus, the effort to get our military out of Afghanistan and Iraq, illegal immigration, and on and on. Each one of these issues is bad enough, but taken as a whole they add up to nothing short of a resounding defeat of Mr. Obama in the next election and I don’t care if he musters a trillion dollar campaign. The majority of Americans have had enough of this man, his failed policies and lack of leadership. Mark my words, if Barrack Obama carries the Democratic Party’s nomination into the 2012 general election he won’t be the only Democrat going down to defeat.

If the Democratic Party wants to hold onto some semblance of power, it seems to me they will be much better served running a different candidate for President in 2012…

Thursday, August 18, 2011


I received this in an email today and felt it was too important to simply pass it on to the folks on my mailing list.

I've been concerned about this for quite some time and have been told by several individuals not to waste my time on it. The Office of the President of the United States is too strong to allow an honest investigation to take place. Well folks, it looks like it's going to happen and these people bringing the case to the Supreme Court of our land appear to be loaded for bear. This could end up being the biggest scam our country has ever seen and it's not just an affront to the people on the right, it's an affront to every single American citizen...

Here's what I just received:

Hawaii has until August 8, 2011, to produce documents and open the books for a full investigation. This order was delivered on July 5, 2011, under a direct order of the Supreme Court.

In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group "Americans for Freedom of Information" has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College...
Released today, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate.

The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.

This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as President article titled, "Obama Eligibility Questioned", leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey. This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president.

Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending.

This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter...


Subject: RE: Issue of Passport?

While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?

The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?

A : Yes, by his own admission.

Q: What passport did he travel under?

A: There are only three possibilities.

1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?

A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.

Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport. If he were traveling with a British passport, that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport, that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008.

Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you don't care that your President is not a natural born Citizen and in violation of the Constitution, then forget about it and then lower your American Flag to half-staff, because the U.S. Constitution is already on life-support, and won't survive much longer.

If you do care, forward this to as many patriotic Americans as you can, because our country is being looted and ransacked!

Sunday, August 7, 2011

For The Good of Our Country

It’s really difficult for me when I see what is happening in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do you realize our troops have been over there now for 10 years? For those of us old enough to remember the demise of the Soviet Union do you remember what the Soviet leadership was doing just before that momentous event? They were squandering their nation’s people and wealth in a long civil war struggle in Afghanistan. Our leader at that time, President Reagan supported the Afghan rebels with weapons and money. Little did we know at the time these freedom fighters would turn out to ultimately be the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The real problem being that once the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan, our leaders withdrew America’s influence from the region as well. Then came Sadam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and the first gulf war.

Our forces spearheaded the effort against the Iraqis and once again our leaders pulled out of the region without finishing the job. It’s hard to say where we would be today if we had stayed the course over there and helped those people. Maybe we might have never heard of the Taliban or Al Qaeda and there certainly wouldn’t have been a second gulf war. There are so many maybes when you consider it, but those aren’t the cards we’ve been dealt.

Today, with our country’s economy on life-support, we continue to maintain armies of our fine young men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. More recently we’ve supported a multi-nation effort to aid the rebels in Libya’s civil war while we continue to maintain a military presence all over the world at an astronomical cost to our citizens.

So, the question comes to mind: What exactly is our strategy? What would we face down the road if we withdrew from the Iraqi and Afghanistan killing fields? And, conversely, what could happen if we attempt to maintain our presence in those countries? There are two scenarios that recent history points to. If we continue our military presence in the Middle East, there’s the Soviet model of a collapsed economy leading to civil unrest within our country that in turn could change how we govern ourselves. On the other hand there’s the alternative of pulling out our forces, attempting to heal our economic woes at home and risk the rise of an even greater threat possibly led by Iran’s fundamentalist leaders or some other radical Muslim government or sect. Looking at our situation, I’ve got to believe there’s only one course to follow and that’s the military withdrawal from the Middle East. Let’s face it; if our country totally falls apart economically we won’t be in a position to maintain our military presence anywhere, let alone in the Middle East. Withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan at least gives us a fighting chance to get our own house in order. Whether our current President would attempt to get our economy rolling is another question as he seems intent on overseeing the demise of our nation for whatever his reasons may be.

The terrible news of 30 U.S. special force personnel being killed in Afghanistan has brought these questions to the forefront. For the good of our country, take our forces out of the Middle East and pray that a greater threat doesn’t come about. We simply must get our economy on the road to recovery. If we can do that, then we will be better prepared to face what may come next…