Is there any doubt that America’s Constitution is under attack? For decades, the power and intent of the Constitution have been whittled away by liberals and others who do not value the foundation of this country. For that reason, we must send constitutional conservatives to Washington. This is not the time to send people who do not have the experience defending the constitution. It is not the time to send a person who needs to use this as a learning experience for the first couple of years.
Ted Cruz, does not just talk the talk. He has exhibited a willingness to defend the constitution and liberty for all Americans on multiple occasions. He is the freedom fighter we must send to Washington. I’ve listed my reasons below, why my vote will be cast for Ted Cruz.
1. Defended US Sovereignty
Successfully represented Texas before the U.S. Supreme Court in Medellin v. Texas, which upheld U.S. sovereignty and held that the World Court cannot bind the United States justice system and the President cannot order the state courts to obey the World Court.
2. He has defended our second amendment right to bear arms
Ted authored a brief on behalf of 31 states supporting the second amendment right to keep and bear arms. The ban on firearms was struck down in a 5-4 landmark decision before the U.S. Supreme Court?
3. Ted Cruz fought to defend our religious freedom.
Successfully defended the constitutionality of the Texas Ten Commandments monument, winning in a 5-4 landmark decision before the U.S. Supreme Court, setting an important national precedent for the right to display similar monuments.
4. The Tenth Amendment is one of the keys to preserving the balance and vision for our countr
y by the founding fathers. For years, Ted has defended this key amendment.
Tenth Amendment language: The Tenth Amendment states the Constitution’s principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people.
Ted Cruz has consistently championed the 10th amendment, speaking and writing nationally on the virtues of federalism and why excessive regulation and federal government intrusion threaten to destroy America’s free-market economy and the American Dream.
5. Ted opposed the TSA groping at airports
This is an invasion of privacy, that Mr. Cruz’s opponent was afraid to tackle. Cruz said that we should look to Israel and follow their example. “Instead of looking for terrorists, we’re looking for weapons. It’s an ill-advised approach that hurts citizens.”
6. He was unafraid and stood up to protect our efforts for energy independence in America, at a time when the administration was fiercely undermining America’s efforts.
Authored an amicus brief on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and a diverse coalition of 29 Gulf Coast chambers of commerce and industry groups in Hornbeck Offshore Services v. Salazar, in opposition to the Obama Interior Department’s moratorium on offshore exploration in the Gulf of Mexico. One week later, the Fifth Circuit agreed, and ruled against the moratorium.
7. Reinforced the words: “All men are created equal” as written in the Declaration of Independence. There is no place for hate or bigotry in America.
Ted authored a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of 10 states in Rahn v. Robb, urging the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and reverse a decision of the Eight Circuit allowing the Ku Klux Klan to participate in Kansas’s “Adopt-A-Highway” program.
8. Ted Cruz signed the Contract from America.
The Contract from America, clause 4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words–the length of the original Constitution.
9. Mr. Cruz took a definite stand on Border Security.
He has worked on efforts to increase penalties for felons who enter the country illegally. Ted authored a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of 10 states in Lopez v. Gonzales, urging the strictest enforcement of laws punishing those with prior felony convictions who entered the country illegally.
Having met and spoken with Mr. Cruz on multiple occasions, prior to his campaign, I can assure you of one thing. No one is more passionate or driven to defend America’s constitution. There are many more illustrations of his commitment and efforts on behalf of our constitution and liberty. In fact, there were too many for one article.
What can you do to help?
If you are in Texas: I urge each of you to vote. Early voting begins July 23. Election Day is on July 31.
If you are in other states: Fight to take back the Senate. Go to www.tedcruz.org and help to call and get out the vote!Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
The President had his two cabinet secretaries out on the media circuit this weekend, trying to give a positive spin on military action he decided to take in Libya. The result was more than underwhelming. It was a moment of clarity as the two people, Secretary Clinton, and Secretary Gates became a bit rattled under pressure.
What did we learn? The US will not engage unless a lot of other people say we need to do it. Secretary Clinton’s answer says it all. The spin from the President that we cannot stand by while innocent people are killed is a complete farce. In Secretary Clinton’s answer below, she explains how the US “picks” who to save on humanitarian grounds.
On March 1, the Senate passed a resolution on the no-fly zone. In Secretary Clinton’s answer she refuses to state that Speaker Boehner was against it. Odd, that they had over two weeks, and couldn’t get it heard and voted on by the House. It was clear from her answers that she was unable to say Congress supported this effort. Look at the choice of words.
So, the President’s own people have some difficulty explaining what is happening…
Quotes from Face the Nation transcript:
Bill Scheiffer: Madam Secretary, let me start with you. Tens of thousands of people have turned out protesting in Syria, which has been under the iron grip of the– the Assad for so many years now. One of the most repressive regimes in the world, I suppose. And when the demonstrators turned out, the regime opened fire and killed a number of civilians. Can we expect the United States to enter that conflict in the way we have entered the conflict in Libya?
HILLARY CLINTON (Secretary of State): No. Each of these situations is unique, Bob. Certainly, we deplore the violence in Syria. We call, as we have on all of these governments during this period of the Arab awakening, as some have called it, to be responding to their people’s needs, not to engage in violence, permit peaceful protest and begin a process of economic and political reform. The situation in Libya, which engendered so much concern from around the international community had a leader who used military force against the protestors from one end of his country to the other, who publicly said things like, we’ll show no mercy. We’ll go house to house. And the international community moved with great speed in part because there’s a history here. This is someone who has behaved in a way that caused grave concern in the past forty-plus years in the Arab world, the African world, Europe and the United States.
BOB SCHIEFFER: But I mean– how can that be worse than what has happened in Syria over the years, where Bashar Assad’s father killed twenty-five thousand people at– at a lick. I mean, they opened fire with live ammunition on these civilians. Why is that different from Libya? This is a friend of Iran, an enemy of Israel.
HILLARY CLINTON: Well, if there were a coalition of the international community, if there were the passage of a Security Council resolution, if there were a call by the Arab League, if there was a condemnation that was universal but that is not going to happen because I don’t think that it’s yet clear what will occur, what will unfold. There is a different leader in Syria now. Many of the members of Congress of both parties who have gone to Syria in recent months have said they believe he’s a reformer. What’s been happening there the last few weeks is– is deeply concerning. But there’s a difference between calling out aircraft and indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities, then police actions, which frankly have exceeded the use of force that any of us would want to see.
End of the transcript from Face the Nation.
So, we are now acting in concert with many countries because of what we “think” someone may do. After the military efforts began, and the President asked Gadhaffi to go, the Arab League said this is a legitimate government and to not interfere. This was a byline on the BBC one night after the military exercise began by the various countries.
On Meet the Press, more troubling statements were made by both Secretaries, that indicate the US has been heavily involved in conversations with rebels in most of the middle eastern countries.
Quotes from Meet the Press Transcript:
SECRETARY ROBERT GATES: I think that the no-fly zone aspect of the mission has been accomplished. We have not seen any of his planes fly since the mission started. We have suppressed his air defenses. I think we’ve also been successful on the humanitarian side. We have prevented his forces from going to Benghazi , and we have taken out a good bit of his armor. So I think we have, to a very large extent, completed the military mission in terms of getting it set up. Now, the no-fly zone and even the humanitarian side will have to be sustained for some period of time.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s perfectly legitimate for members of Congress and the public to ask questions. The president’s going to address the nation Monday night. A lot of these questions will be answered. But, but I would just make a couple of points. First, on March 1 the United States Senate passed a resolution calling for a no-fly zone. That was a bipartisan resolution. There were a number of people in the House , including leadership in both the Republican and Democratic Parties , who were demanding that action be taken. The international community came together; and, in an unprecedented action, the Arab League called on the Security Council to do exactly what the Security Council ended up doing. Now, the United States and other countries were in a position to be able to act to enforce it. If you look at the coverage on Al Jazeera , if you listen to the statements that are being put out by the opposition in Libya , there is a great deal of appreciation for what we and others have done in order to stop Gadhafi on his mission of merciless oppression. So this was an international effort that the United States was a part of. I certainly believe it was within the president’s constitutional authority to do so. It is going according to the plan that the president laid out. The United States will be transitioning to a NATO command and control .
MR. GREGORY: Did Speaker Boehner raise any objections when he was briefed prior to the mission ?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I know that there was a constant flow of information, both to members and staff. And, of course , the president had a, a conference with some members in person , others, many others, including the speaker on the phone. But we have no objection to anybody asking questions. But I think it’s important to look at the context in which this is occurring. And the fact that we have moved so rapidly to have this kind of international action taken answers in great measure the legitimate concerns of the people of Libya . And now, of course, we’re going to take it day by day . That’s what you do in a situation like this.
End of Quotes from Meet the Press Transcript
America has never witnessed so much unrest in the Middle East. Secretary Clinton and Secretary Gates have acknowledged in many press briefings that our country has been engaged in a lot of conversation with rebels throughout the Middle East. Now we have unrest in almost all of the middle eastern nations as rebels protest against their governments. In the press briefings previously at the White House, it was stated that we are encouraging economic and political reform. Our country is broke. We have people at the highest levels involved in redistribution of wealth on a grand scale. Government processes are ignored on a regular basis. It is time for creative thought as to how to impede the progress of the liberals until 2012. These riots in the Middle East are occuring because the flames of discontent have been fanned by people with agendas.
“Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation” James MadisonRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
The Texas Tea Party Patriots Pac provided an opportunity to hear Mr. John Fund recently. Having read many of Mr. Fund’s opinion pieces in the WSJ (Wall Street Journal), and listened to him on various FOX programs, I was looking forward to a discourse between a patriot group and Mr. Fund. He had been mentored by the late Robert Novak, who was in a class by himself.
His last trip took him to Berlin. To be a candidate overseas, one must be “approved” by the party leaders. In America, it is a more interesting process. The Democrats use a “Blind date” method of selecting the Presidential candidate. Who is popular? Who has the charisma? They look at everyone, find someone interesting, and decide to “try them out”. After they are elected, everyone gets to know who they are and what they stand for as a President. There were a lot of chuckles when this theory was disclosed. Mr. Fund went on to prove his point by a brief review of some candidates in the last century. There did seem to be a preponderance of evidence to prove the point.
What about the Republicans? Who is next in line? There is a definite pattern of behavior from 1948 through 2008. They tend to nominate whoever has been around a while. This was true with the exception of one candidate. The candidate was Ronald Reagan.
The 2012 role is critical to America’s future. It is of paramount importance the two parties have a different process to select the candidates. He encouraged everyone to not make hasty decisions about who to support as a Presidential candidate. The campaign trail wears on people, and in many cases the people change somewhat under the pressure. Politics are too important to be left to the politicians. Most notably in the 2012 race, is that the wide variety of competition will be good for the process.
After his short talk, there were a lot of questions from the audience. The first one had to do with the powers of the Supreme Court. He pointed out the powers of the Supreme Court were largely defined by John Marshall in the 1820’s. Congress has the right to limit the powers of the Supreme Court. At one point in history, Thomas Jefferson abolished many of the judiciary, who he felt were out of control. Is it the most intelligent view, to be governed by 9 people in black robes?
One question that seemed to resonant was “how do we get back to the Constitution, given the overuse of Executive Orders to circumvent the process”? Mr. Fund pointed out we have executive orders left over from the Truman administration! The way we get back to that point, is by continuing to apply pressure to all the elected officials. He found it shocking that the President spent hours convincing the UN to launch the no-fly zone tactic, and then got on a conference call with a few of the Congressional leaders to state the decision he had already made.
One of the poplular questions at every patriot event, was posited near the end of the session. The query was on what his views about compromise between the House and the Senate. He said we need to be realistic. There is no need to compromise on principles, but there may be times when negotiation on points is necessary to arrive at the best solution for America. The people elected to office have the difficult task of translating principle into policy.
When asked why there doesn’t seem to be any passion coming out of the new people in Washington, now that they have been elected…well the answer was very insightful. Mr. Fund said passion is not always what you want from politicians in Washington. These people need to learn how to write legislation, how to take in all the facts, and develop theories, etc. There is a lot to learn when one goes to Congress. They need to buckle down to learn the job, and get the job done. The campaign is over.
He was supportive of the conservatives in Congress. He said people need to realize the 100B cut in spending was promised in September. October 1 begins the new fiscal year. By the time they took office, many months of the budget had already gone by. The 61B was a prorated figure. The majority of the spending is in the entitlement programs. These programs must be reformed for any substantial budget cuts to be accomplished. The conservatives do not control the Senate and will need to negotiate everything to get it passed. That is the reality.
He did say there is some concern about patriots involved in the tea parties, who want to use it for their personal agenda. Many people are maneuvering for their 15 minutes of fame. These people could be somewhat dangerous to the movement. It is important that everyone question issues and people. The goal is to take back the country.
He did not think the Balanced budget amendment will actually achieve what the people are seeking for fiscal responsibility. His example was an amendment in Colorado. Their law limits government spending and growth to a combination of population plus inflation. A mechanism such as this needs to be in place. Otherwise, the government will simply raise taxes to accommodate their spending habits.
My favorite part of the evening, was his idea about foreign policy. At what point do we change from policemen of the world to night watchmen? In Clinton’s administration, Hillary had become known as the “mad bomber” because she wanted to bomb everything. Well, now she has that power.
On taxes he said there is a very simple solution. When a person is elected to office, they should sign a pledge under oath and penalty of perjury that they will prepare their tax returns with no outside help. The Congress receives $3,000 to get someone to do their taxes. The crowd gasped after this remark. Perhaps then they would realize the complexity of the tax laws.
Driving home, one felt energized there are people out there who do get it. He understood so much of the process, the history, and the nuances. In other words, he had knowledge and common sense. Perhaps we need to list the characteristics we want in a potential candidate for the Presidency.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )
Yesterday, the House of Representatives voted another stop gap bill to fund the government for 3 more weeks. They cut a few more billion of spending, and thought this would pass the Senate as well. This is a time when the government needs several things from Congress. They need to fund the government through September. This situation has occurred because Democrats were unwilling to pass a budget last year when it should have been done.
The second thing the Government wants, is to raise the debt ceiling. A lot of chat shows have focused on liberal angst including that of the President. The President and liberals were speaking about “dire” consequences if the debt ceiling is not raised. EWWW, I am shaking in my boots that the commander in chief is trying to scare us again. Remember how they tried to convince us of the “emergency” on healthcare?? Nothing has happened. The world didn’t come to an end because it is not implemented yet. Neither the President nor Harry Reid are willing to “negotiate” per the Republican leadership. For some reason the refusal by those two parties to negotiate has disturbed the Conservatives.
Do we care? I say we should not care when people who have shown little regard for the Constitution or the people can’t play well with others. We have known from childhood that leopards do not change their spots.
Realizing the Conservatives can’t negotiate with themselves, as that would be foolish….what about a completely different approach? What if we decided the people’s demands in exchange for extending the government funding? Think of 3-4 major spending cuts and attach it to the bill. If they vote against it, the liberals must not really have a fear of the government shutting down. At that point, the Conservatives need to loudly talk about this, everywhere possible. Use a page from the liberal book! I am certain there have been more serious threats to Congress than we have been privy to in the public. However, we must stand strong, if we have any hope of preventing the further takeover by the government.
Now is the time to use what the liberals want, and get some conservative tactics accomplished. Conservatives have leverage now and appear to be unwilling to “tangle” with the President or the Liberals.
What was most amazing today during the vote, is that 54 Conservatives stood strong and voted no to a bill that satisfies the whims of the liberals and doesn’t do much for the people. Please see the list below of conservatives that stood strong and voted against extending government funding for 3 weeks with no real cuts!
Now we have a plan, my fellow patriots. First we need to call our Representatives and Senators in Washington. The people who are unwilling to make the hard choices, have become an achilles heel to the effort. Make it clear, they better band together and use leverage while they have it. ALL non-critical funding must be cut, as the country is broke. As a taxpayer, I am offended we are giving money to a multitude of United Nations efforts when we are unable to care for our own people. I am offended that we continue to give foreign aide by the billions to countries that hate us. No union, or community action group should get any money. I, the taxpayer refuse to give hundreds of thousands to study frogs. They will definitely get the idea.
The second part of the plan involves reaching out to the 54 courageous people who voted no yesterday in the House. We should ask them what we can do to help. Do they have ideas? At a minimum. we need to thank them for standing up for what is right and for the American People. The list of 54 is below.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
President Barack Obama continues to hurt oil and gas industry by eliminating oil & gas incentives and preferences with a fiscal 2012 federal budget request increasing direct taxes on industry by an estimated $3.472 billion next year and $43.612 billion over 10 years. US producers and refineries operating internationally would pay an additional $532 million in fiscal 2012 and $10.758 billion during 2012-21 under modified rules for dual-capacity taxpayers under the foreign tax credit.
There is a wave of instability engulfing the Middle Eastern Countries. America buys much of their oil and gas from these countries. So, let me get this straight…. We have a President crippling the oil and gas production in our country at a time when our other sources may be soon “off-limit”?
There is no other way to interpret the increasing anti-American methods used by this President to dismantle America and “transform” it to a leftist third world country. He and all of his henchmen should be found guilty of treason on many counts. For one thing, each time Congress stops them, they turn to the EPA and the Department of Justice to ignore the Congressional mandates. These two government groups have become the henchmen for this Administration. The second reason they are guilty of treason is that they are picking and choosing which laws to enforce and which laws they declare unconstitutional without any verdict by the courts. The third and most important reason is that the President involves himself on a regular basis in matters that are not the purvue of the President of the United States. We have seen everything from a beer summit which interfered with local authorities, to many secret meetings with union officials.
And lest we forget, for whatever reason, this President has refused to show a birth certificate. In my mind, the most significant part of this action, is that he has defied what has been required for every President – proof of natural citizenshp. Why should he be allowed to defy the Constitutional laws of this country?
If anyone doubts the peril this country is in, please have a look at a few of the headlines in the Wall Street Journal or the Telegraph News Paper in London. There have been hundreds of reports about this President and his administration ignoring the laws of the land and blazing new leftist trails using their own people such as the EPA, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and the Department of Justice. These people have picked up the pace and it is increasingly difficult to keep up with all of the regulations and stripping away of laws that they are doing. There are over 157,000 regulations in this country now. The Departments, like EPA, have been given authority by the President to make regulations that are binding for the public. These are non-elected officials who are making law. Congress makes laws. This is a direct violation of our American system of law.
What to do? It is imperative we place more conservatives in the House, the Senate, and in the White House in 2012. By this, I mean no Marxists, no Socialists, and no experimental third party. The left is moving fast. Conservatives need to unite and stay focused. Watch for divisive efforts by the left. Question everything. America’s future is in our hands.
Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of. Our enemies are numerous and powerful; but we have many friends, determining to be free, and heaven and earth will aid the resolution. On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rest the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves.
The American people were watching every move made by Congress last week. It definitely was a rewarding activity, for once. The Conservatives were prepared and set the tone for what could be expected this year. Most Republicans are aware this may be a short lived career due to hard decisions that must be made over the next two years. This did not deter them from hitting the ground running with the business of the people.
What was the most unusual moment? Having the House members participate in saying the various components of the Constitution was long overdue. For several years, members of Congress have proposed legislation and deals that would have made the founding fathers shudder with remorse.
What was the best educational moment? Prior to the reading of the Constitution which was instigated by the Conservatives, the liberals wanted to know exactly what would be read on the House Floor. The Conservatives explained that many words of the original Constitution were redacted by the Library of Congress when they were in essence, nullified by various amendments. Most people in the country believe the original Constitution stands as is, and have not factored in the alterations that have occurred via the amendments and precedents set by the Supreme Court. It was an inspiring event to watch, and most Americans were fervently hoping the participants recognized this event was a sacred honor.
Were the Republicans prepared? Yes. On the second day the rules committee hearings began the discussions and testimonies about Obamacare. Majority Leader Cantor immediately proposed rule changes on the floor and shared the schedule with the Minority Leader, Steny Hoyer. The organization and planning was evident.
Did the Liberals make any missteps? Yes. Ms. Louise Slaughter, former chair of the Rules Committee, suffered a great embarrassment in the public hearing. Ms. Slaughter’s new position is senior ranking member of the minority on the Rules Committee. She began by chastising and shouting at the Conservative Committee Chairs that were seated before her. Her exact words were, “ I am astonished that the three of you sit there, and say the Republicans had not input or activity in the Healthcare Bill.” Ms. Slaughter quoted many hours and meetings that went into the Healthcare Bill. Further, she said the Democrat Caucus had logged about twice as many hours in the effort. It appeared Ms. Slaughter was truly upset by the Republicans for having these hearings so soon, much less, at all. The media was crowded into the room, and everyone was riveted to her words. The three men tried to answer her questions and make comments, but Ms. Slaughter continued to badger and speak over the top of everyone’s voices. It was at that moment that something truly remarkable occurred. Mrs. Virginia Foxx asked for the floor. She pointed out the statistics cited by Ms. Slaughter pertained to the bill passed by the house. Ms. Slaughter was misleading people about the facts. One could hear a pin drop in the room. Mrs. Foxx went on to say that the Conservatives were not permitted amendments or discussion on the Senate Bill that was passed, and it was very different from the House Bill. Mrs. Foxx had facts and figures at her fingertips, and quite frankly. Ms. Slaughter was made to look a fool. A round of applause should be given for Mrs. Foxx who can always be counted upon to tell the truth and be prepared.
After all of the proceedings, we also learned the Republicans have a plan to take care of the everpresent Czar problem. They will be putting legislation forward to fix the problem of non-approved people who bypassed the Senate evaluation process. One of the concerns about this administration is the number of Czars, their radical views, their power, and the massive amount of money to pay their salaries. The bill will address the problem.
The Republicans outlined key areas they believe are broken in the Healthcare system. Their committees are already putting together simple documents proposing each solution. The legislation from the Conservatives is likely to be brief as the document to repeal Obamacare was only two pages and very easy to understand. Easy to understand legislation, with no trickery shall be a breath of fresh air.
For the first week, they earned kudos on organization and focus. It was clear from the tone of the speeches and the content, that these people know the economic fate of the land is in their hands. I look forward to the coming weeks of legislation as the 112th The country will be watching as the people’s House is restored to a place of honor and truth. There are no illusions that many of the people in the House have been duplicit and corrupt in past years. However, this is a new beginning and if their activities continue with the high standard of the first week, the American people will be well served.
A government for the people must depend for its success on the intelligence, the morality, the justice, and the interest of the people themselves. Grover ClevelandRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
This is the conclusion of the series on the Tenth Amendment Town Hall, which was held in Plano, Texas. This final segment covers the speeches given by Governor Rick Perry and by Judge Napolitano.
The capacity crowd at the Plano Centre had spent the morning together learning about legal options for the State of Texas and for the country. Now the audience would hear what the Governor thinks about the situation and what steps have been taken by his administration to protect our rights. The Governor took the stage and prepared to share his vision of where we are as a state and what is important for all of us.
Governor Perry began the discussion with what the majority of us have suspected for quite a long time. Washington wants to be all things to all people to get the votes. Why can’t they secure the borders? This is a fundamental need for the citizens of Texas and for the country, yet they show little to no interest in a resolution.
Our founding fathers believed in limited government. Do a few things really well was stated over and over in documents written by the founding fathers. What happens when government goes unchecked? Today the government is continuing to erode our dollars.
It is time to return to our values: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. The unique possibility of an individual to pursue the American Dream without the interference of the Federal Government is what our country is about. It is time for the Federal Government to be more respectful of the people.
The governor had some basic principles of governing which he shared with the audience:
- Don’t spend all the money!
- Have a legal system that doesn’t allow for excessive suing!
- Have a good educational system
- Government should get out of the way, and leave it to the people.
There is a reason to call for a balanced budget for the Congress. Fiscal Responsibility results in a good quality of life for all. Abuse of money and power never ends well for anyone. We have learned what works in Texas. Courageous men and women have done what was right in Texas. Supply side economics works as exhibited by the businesses of Texas. People will be sending a message at the polls – are we going to follow the Washington method of economics, or will we be following the Texas model of economics?
It is imperative that State Rights under the 10th amendment be asserted to preserve the constitution and the vision of our founding fathers for a strong republic. With those closing comments, the Governor introduced the keynote speaker of the event, Judge Napolitano.
The Judge took all of us on a journey through our American History. He helped each of us to understand how we have lost some of our state rights through the years. State rights have veered far away from the original intent as outlined in the constitution.
Can an amendment ever be unconstitutional? When the 17th amendment was added, it took away from state rights. This began the erosion of state rights.
The original constitution demanded no taxation. The Federal government changed the law so they could tax us. It began as a “small” tax and has been increasing exponentially year after year. The more money they get at the Federal level, the more they spend, and the more money they need to cover their wish list.
The Progressives choose power over freedom. During the time of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt this was very clear. The greatest fear of the founding fathers was that the federal government should not have too much power. The aforementioned Presidents did much to instill the importance of power at the Federal Level. They also opened the door to entitlements and dependence.
Since the Civil War, the concept of power dominated over liberty. There was a shift in the priorities of the politicians. Each decade that followed the Civil War illustrated more of a focus on new priorities rather than life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness outlined in the Constitution.
The Feds have learned how to buy away the sovereignty of any state by dangling money with strings in front of any state. Why can the Federal government get away with bribing people, when individual would be locked up for the attempt to bribe people?
If the federal government continues to try to legislate every aspect of your lives, where does it end? None of this is in the constitution.
Take Patriot Act passage as an example of the dangers when we ignore the wisdom outlined in our US Constitution. After 9/11, this piece of legislation was deemed necessary to “protect citizens” from terrorism. However, it was really unconstitutional in the assumption of sweeping powers not outlined in the Constitution. Today we have learned an invaluable lesson with misuse of the Constitution. It is extremely unsavory in the hands of the progressives. That is why it is so important that we do not take chances by ignoring the constitution. We cannot predict how unscrupulous people may take advantage of inappropriate laws.
This concluded the remarks of the Governor and Judge Napolitano. What an amazing educational experience! A good idea for Texas and other states is to put similar events on for seniors in the high schools and also college students. Imagine a stadium of students learning invaluable information about our government over a 5 hour period of time. This is how we ensure a strong tomorrow for our country.
For your convenience, listed below are the links for Part I, II, and III of the series of articles.
10th Amendment Rights Townhall (Part 1)
10th Amendment Rights Townhall (Part 2)
10th Amendment Rights Townhall (Part 3)
My hope is the series has given ideas and assistance to citizens of Texas as well as other states that may be looking for answers, as the Federal Government continues to push for more control over the republic.
When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people, there is liberty. – Thomas Jefferson.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Texas Supreme Court Justice Don R. Willett, was given a daunting task at the recent Tenth Amendment Townhall in Plano. He would deliver “The Tenth Amendment: A Brief Legal and Historical Primer”. This overview would serve the audience well as a basis of understanding for presentations to be given for the remainder of the day.
His opening observation was that the Texas Constitution is very large compared to the United States Constitution. The US Constitution is relatively brief and has had few amendments. The Constitution was written with a sparing number of words, which would wield a great deal of power and thought behind each component of the document. These men were creating the foundation for a new nation.
The 10th amendment is short and to the point. Of all the states ratifying amendments, the 10th was the only one proposed by each of the states. Liberty and localism work together. The constitution takes the notion of we the people very seriously and defines it distinctly.
Madison designed the elegant 10th amendment with a very clear, brief definition. It reads as follows: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Justice Willett proceeded to give us examples of how court decisions have not always upheld the state rights identified in the Tenth Amendment. In fact, there have been multiple court decisions through the years which permitted the Federal Government to trump state’s rights. Following are a few of those examples given by Justice Willett.
New York vs US
This Supreme court case set a precedent that the federal government cannot “order States into the service of federal regulatory purpose” via funding. It is a key decision that has been mentioned with regard to Tenth Amendment Rights.
The Brady Act
The Brady Act violated the 10th amendment as it required an action to be done. This act was a Congressional order for the states to take an action because of an order from the Federal Government. The majority of five justices on the US Supreme Court ruled that the interim provisions of the Brady Bill are unconstitutional. In his opinion, Justice Scalia refers to the “dual sovereignty” established by the U.S. Constitution that federalism is built upon. His opinion states that the Framers designed the Constitution to allow Federal regulation of international and interstate matters, not internal matters reserved to the State Legislatures.
Nationalism trumps federalism….
Roe v Wade
In this case, a woman in Texas wanted to have an abortion. Texas had a law that an abortion could only be done in cases where the mother’s life is in jeopardy. The woman sued the Texas State Attorney General, Henry Wade on behalf of herself and all other Texas women who wanted to have abortions in the state of Texas.
Blackmun traced the history of abortion laws back to the Hippocratic Oath and concluded that laws proscribing the ending of a pregnancy in its early stages were enacted relatively recently. He cited the precedent of previous cases upholding the legality of contraceptives and used the right to privacy found in the Due Process Clause of the 14th amendment to strike down both the Texas law and a Georgia law involved in a companion case.
US vs Lopez
This was the first United States Supreme Court case since the Great Depression to set limits upon the power used by Congress under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. Lopez raised serious questions as to how far the Court might be willing to go in implementing judicial safeguards against federal encroachments on state sovereignty
Five days later the court struck it down that the states would have the ability to mandate term limits on the Congress. The court has been supportive of the Tenth Amendment at times and items such as this one arise and they restrict the interpretation of the Tenth Amendment.
Justice Thomas warns the court has come close to turning the 10th amendment on it’s head.
The progressives state the use of the 10th amendment is simply preventing progress. They view people who talk about it the same as if they are “truthers” or “birthers”. The time is now for the states to assert their rights under the Tenth Amendment. This is the way to stop the tsunami of Federal mandates that are headed for the states and it’s citizens.
“But as the plan of the [Constitutional] convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, EXCLUSIVELY delegated to the United States.” Alexander Hamilton
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
We the people have been watching the healthcare debate and all of you over the last several months. To that end, the people want to be certain you are fully aware of our position on the activities in Washington.
We the people are fully aware of the following:
1) Bribes and sweetheart deals have been made to ensure the adequate number of votes are obtained for the healthcare bill. These deals give advantages monetarily to corporations, individuals and states in exchange for support on the healthcare bill. The deals discriminate against the millions of Americans who will pay more taxes and insurance premiums to pay for those promises. For instance, the state of Nebraska is exempt on some costs, and the rest of the country will bear the burden. Senators have been so bold on the Senate floor as to “brag” about the deal they achieved for their state over the other states.
2) This bill is not improving healthcare costs. Healthcare premiums will increase for the Americans who are currently paying for healthcare.
3) The Constitution is being trampled on to satisfy the power grab by the Federal Government. If you listened to the speeches on the floor of the Senate beginning December 21st and 22nd, it was plainly stated the progressives think the rights of the Federal government take precedence over the rights of the people as enumerated in the Constitution.
4) There is sleazy arm twisting going on in the democratic party behind closed doors to ensure the adequate number of votes are obtained for the healthcare bill. Don’t tell us, this is how deals get done in Washington. We don’t care. STOP now.
5) Democrats are more than willing to add further burdens to the people in the form of taxes while we are struggling in this economic climate. People are jobless, losing their homes, and struggling to put food on the table. What did the progressives elect to do, to help us? We know there are 10 new taxes.
6) Small businesses will suffer greatly under the penalties and mandates in this healthcare bill. There are approximately 6,000 businesses in the USA which are selling medical devices. New taxes on medical devices will cause many of them to go out of business, and jobs will be lost. The net result is economically fewer people will be able to afford them, and more people will die as a result. Nearly 1,000 people per day die from cardiac arrest. To save these people, and prevent brain damage, a defibrillator needs to be within 5 minutes proximity of the person. Fewer organizations will be able to purchase these due to the new tax regulations. This is just one example of how the people will suffer more with this legislation in place.
7) This isn’t about healthcare, but about ensuring unlimited powers of the Federal Government over the states and the people. Re: The speech of Max Baucus to the Senate on December 21, 2009. Thank you to Mr. Baucus for making it crystal clear on the intentions of the Progressives.
8) There is a text provision in the Healthcare Bill to prevent future Congresses from repealing this legislation.
9) Both the President and the progressives in Congress have deceived the people.
10) All of you are fully aware the American People do NOT support this legislation based upon the numerous poll numbers reported over the last several weeks.
Consider this your notice that we the people will not tolerate the arrogance exhibited by the progressives in Washington. The Congress works for us, and not the other way around. All of you are strongly encouraged to have a read of the Constitution and the enumerated powers. Please be aware that thugs and bullies in the government are not going to be acceptable to any of us.
This writer is strongly encouraging everyone to make this message viral. The people should send mail to their governors and legislators now to mandate passing of nullification bills. There are precedents that have been made by the Supreme Court on the using of “interstate commerce” as an excuse for passing of unconstitutional legislation. This legislation does not fall into any of the categories outlined by the Supreme Court in their interpretation of the enumerated powers of our constitution. References include: Wicker vs. Philburn, Gonzales vs Reich, USA vs Lopez, and USA vs. Morrison. In these cases the Supreme Court rendered specific decisions on Commerce. According to their guidelines, the Individual Mandate in the Healthcare legislation is not supported by the Constitution. This was brought to light this morning in the Senate by Senator Ensign and Senator Hatch.
It is time we stand up for our liberty, and assert who works for whom, once and for all.
The People who hired youRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )
Senator John McCain was first elected to office in 1986.
He is up for re-election in 2010. Let me preface this finding with an acknowledgement of the conflict many people will find (including myself) surrounding the topic of Senator John McCain. Everyone in America appreciates his service in the military and the price he paid for all of us. This goes without saying. I, like many others fully support and respect the men and women who have courageously served their country. That being said, we should not allow our bias of support for the men and women who have served in the military to interfere with our views on how is he performing in the Senate. These are two entirely separate topics.
Senator McCain is usually one of the first to offer compromise on major bills before the House. It has been difficult for him to “stand his ground” on behalf of the American people and the Constitution. Furthermore his principles/values/beliefs fluctuate on a regular basis as he attempts to “compromise” with his peers in the House. What follows are some examples of poor judgment, and the various impacts to Americans by those decisions.
Voted YES on the Second Economic package – 10/2008 – HR1424
Vote to pass a bill that allows the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase troubled assets from financial institutions, with a total outstanding balance of up to $700 billion, and also provides tax incentives for alternative energies and contains income tax and alternative minimum tax provisions.
Editorial Note: Did we see any charges brought against the institutions that “promoted” the bad mortgages and made billions in profits at the expense of the mortgage holders? Now we want to give the same mismanaged institutions money when they are clearly suffering the consequences of bad business decisions? People and institutions will learn (just as children do) when they suffer consequences for their actions.
Voted YES on the First Economic Package – 02/2008 – HR5140
This bill provides economic stimulus through recovery rebates to individuals, incentives for business investment, and an increase in conforming and FHA loan limits.
Editorial Note: In this bill was the following verbage: “- Increases the limits on the maximum original principal obligation of mortgages for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and for the Federal Housing Administration (Sec. 201, 202)”.
Here is an extract from Senator McCain’s comment on the First Economic Package that they were about to vote upon:
“The bill pending before the Senate–a compromise product between the House and the President–is not perfect. Certainly we can all agree on the important yet limited improvements I mentioned such as ensuring our senior citizens and disabled veterans are not left out of this stimulus package. While perhaps none of us will be fully satisfied with the final measure, we simply cannot afford to include every member’s wish list in this package. I believe the measure we will send to the President is one that almost all of us can and will support”.
Editorial Note: No one in the House or Senate should “compromise” when there are such wide sweeping constitutional implications to the American public. Earlier in his speech Senator McCain said the compromises were necessary to ensure the disabled veterans and seniors were included in the tax relief. So, we pass legislation based on “deals” between the parties.
The two packages listed above helped Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to get deeper in trouble, made temporary tax cuts, put us deeper into debt, and did nothing to curtail the spending in the House.
Here is an excerpt from a speech on the Senate Floor by Senator McCain: “I know these words will fall on deaf ears, but it is certainly not responsible for House to continue to load up appropriations bills–and, yes, authorization bills–with wasteful and unnecessary spending. Americans all over the country are hurting. People are losing jobs, their savings and their homes. Yet we continue the disgraceful earmarking process, elevating parochialism and patronage politics over the true needs and welfare of our men and women in uniform and the taxpayers”.
Editorial note: Although he said the above in a speech on the Senate Floor, he has voted for several bills that included earmarks just to be able to get the main bill through on the vote.
Senator John Sidney McCain, III repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff. What is the political courage test? The Political Courage Test asks candidates which items they will support if elected. It does not ask them to indicate which items they will oppose. Through extensive research of public polling data, it was discovered that voters are more concerned with what candidates would support when elected to office, not what they oppose. If a candidate does not select a response to any part or all of any question, it does not necessarily indicate that the candidate is opposed to that particular item. The majority of the Presidential Candidates, Senatorial, and House candidates have filled out this brief form for the public to review.
Editorial Note: Why would a candidate be against transparency?
The Constitution and the Declaration were very clear on the rights given to the people and the government. There shouldn’t be any “compromise” on the issues at the expense of any of those individual rights. Senator McCain, it is time for you to go.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Representative Mary Whitaker Bono Mack (Rep) represents California.
She has been in office continuously since 1998 and will be up for re-election in 2010.
There are voting instances in Representative Mack’s voting record that are somewhat disturbing. The primary issues we found with her record are specific to a lack of fiscal responsibility, yet speaking out to the public stating the importance of fiscal responsibility in these harsh economic times.
Voted YES on Cap N Trade in June 2009
Congresswoman Mack represents the great state of California that is bankrupt and suffering from high unemployment rates. Bearing this in mind, she voted yes to a bill incurring high costs to the taxpayers when her state and the entire country are operating in the red. This was fiscally irresponsible to vote yes for the Cap N Trade bill that the experts say will add an equivalent 12-15% tax hike on everyone in her district. This is just a small sample of the spending and further expenses to be paid by the taxpayers of this country:
-Appropriates $600 million for fiscal years 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 respectively to establish the Best in Class Appliances Deployment Program for the following reasons (Sec. 214):
-Appropriates $200 million for fiscal year 2009-2010, $250 million for fiscal year 2010-2011, $300 million for fiscal year 2011-2012, $350 million for fiscal year 2012-2013 and $400 for fiscal year 2013-2014 for the Hollings Manufacturing Partnership Program (Sec. 247).
-Appropriates $15 billion for fiscal years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 respectively to establish the Clean Energy Manufacturing Revolving Loan Fund Program for issuing grants to States to issue loans to manufactures for investments in clean energy technology, including, but not limited to, wind turbines, solar energy, fuel cells, biomass equipment, geothermal equipment, advanced biofuels, ocean energy equipment, carbon capture and storage, and advanced batteries, battery systems, or storage devices (Sec. 246).
-Appropriates $2.5 billion to establish the Residential Energy Efficiency Block Grant Program for issuing grants to States, metropolitan cities and urban counties, Indian tribes, and insular areas to carry out energy efficiency improvements in new and existing single-family and multifamily housing (Sec. 296).
-Appropriates $5 billion to the Alternative Energy Sources State Loan Fund established by this Act for the Secretary of Energy to issue loans to states and Indian tribes to provide incentives
Voted YES Housing Bill with Energy Tax Credit Extensions HR 3221
She chose to spend more money yet again.
Increases the national debt limit from $9.82 trillion to $10.62 trillion (Sec. 3083).
-Establishes the Home Ownership Preservation Entity Fund to fund the HOPE (Home Ownership Preservation Entity) for Homeowners Program, which will insure up to $300 billion for 30 year refinanced loans for distressed borrowers between October 1, 2008-September 30, 2011 (Sec. 1402).
Editorial note: Giving loans to unqualified borrowers is what has caused the majority of the housing issue. People should be accountable for their actions, not rewarded for poor judgment. Let them learn the hard lessons so it won’t be repeated . People can live in rental properties until they can afford to do better.
Voted YES for HR1424 – Second Economic Package October 2008
Voted to concur with Senate amendments and pass a bill that allows the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase troubled assets from financial institutions, with a total outstanding balance of up to $700 billion, and also provides tax incentives for alternative energies and contains income tax and alternative minimum tax provisions.
Editorial Note: One would think that this Representative would be especially sensitive to spending as her state is bankrupt (literally).
In her speeches and papers she speaks of fiscal discipline and curtailing spending. Her voting record states otherwise. Please see the speech excerpt below that conflict this action of votes with words:
“Congress must stand for fiscal discipline and reform. I am very concerned about the level of federal spending. One of my top priorities is to reduce unnecessary and wasteful federal spending. It is clear that Congress must work to achieve some balance between the costs that continue to place pressure upon mandatory spending programs and the actual effectiveness of these programs. As we advance in areas like health care, defense, and education, continual changes must be considered that ensure money is spent more efficiently and effectively”.
There are a lot of “nice to have” ideas about the environment, the arts, etc. No one denies this to be true. However, these ideas are not critical at this moment when the country is deeply in debt, unemployment rates are higher than they have been in over 50 years, and people struggle to make house payments. This was irresponsible to vote yes for the Cap N Trade bill that the experts say will add an equivalent 12-15% tax hike on everyone.
This is a matter of priorities and fiscal responsibility. It is time to get back to our country’s foundation as a constitutional republic. Representative Mack, it is time to leave.
Twitter: Texasfor56Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Over the past 4 weeks, I’ve become aware of a phenomenon sweeping the nation. One by one, state by state, there is news of grassroots activists becoming candidates for office. The notion of serving our country was “catching fire”. Announcements have been made for brand new candidates running for City Offices, State offices, and Federal offices.
Recently I attended the local campaign kick-off for a candidate named Mary Huls. Mary is one of the grassroots activists who has decided to be a part of the process for improvement. She will be running for State Representative for Texas. Mary is a constitutional conservative. I came with an open mind, wanting to see for myself – what makes a person step up to such a daunting task? This would be the ultimate test of the grassroots movement.
What I found was a passionate, articulate woman who had a vision of what could be. She spoke to the issues, where she stood, and handled some tough questions. What I appreciated the most is she wasn’t sure on a very few issues, as to how to best affect the change required for improvement. Mary was unashamed to admit she will need to look at all the information before making a recommendation. It was refreshing to witness such a straightforward dialogue without the usual sidestepping of issues we have witnessed the last few decades.
The crowd was intently listening to her every word. You could hear a pin drop in the room it was so quiet. This is the moment many people in the grassroots movements have been waiting for. Much like our founding fathers, people of good moral character and conviction are stepping up to the ultimate challenge. They want to serve the country.
People such as Mary will face ridicule from local politicians and political parties. There are far too many people who automatically vote for incumbents without looking at their records. This is a big part of the problem we have in the government today. Our founding fathers faced a lot of obstruction as well. Can it be that we are experiencing the beginning of a tide to refound our country? The new candidates from grassroot organizations will need to be tough, and face down many negative detractors.
What can we do in the grassroots movement to help these people of courage and honor who are stepping up to the ultimate challenge? They need our support and encouragement as much as possible. This is what America needs – not more of the same, but people who care enough to stand up and be counted for the future of America. I am thankful for Mary Huls and all the people like her, that stand ready to take the country back to an adherence of the framework of our government and our nation.
One man with courage is a majority.
Twitter: Texasfor56Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Senator Olympia Snowe is representing Maine as a Republican. She has been in office each year since 1994. The Senator is up for re-election in 2012.
The country was founded on the basis of less government and unalienable rights of the individual to pursue, life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. This is supported by less government “controls”, where the people succeed and fail primarily by their own ambitions and efforts. Let’s take a look at some of the ways Senator Snowe has translated our country’s foundation into her voting practices.
HR 4104 Senator Snow voted yes; This was passed by the Senate
H Amdt 728: Federal Health Plan Contraceptive Coverage Amendment
H Amdt 723: Increase FEC Funding
Link to Legislation: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:hr4104
In this there was the creation of a National Drug Control Office which took control over drug policies and diminished some of the individual rights of the state to mandate laws and controls that were appropriate for specific state issues. Today, this has grown to a massive organization that is setting drug policies, allocating sizeable grant funds, and making recommendation on both thing domestically and internationally. Yes, we need drug policies, but why do we think it takes a massive “overhead” organization rather than the states to mandate these actions? At most, why couldn’t there be a policy advisor that makes recommendations and observations?
She has consistently voted to support excessive spending (such as the Stimulus bill) and enlarging the government role in people’s lives. If you think this is incorrect, please look at her voting record. In 2008 the National Taxpayers Union gave Senator Snowe a rating of F.
Senator Snowe has grown public policies which encourage irresponsible behavior on the part of people such as those currently on welfare.
Most recently her idea on healthcare to “help the people” is to compromise in a bi-partisan fashion so something is achieved. Why would anyone “compromise” on what is right for the people just to get something done?
September 7, 2009
Senator Snowe was interviewed by CNBC. Please watch this video to get a true picture of her view of reality with our government today.
CNBC: Do you think Barack Obama is a big-government liberal?
“SNOWE: No, it’s interesting, I don’t. In fact, I almost sense the opposite
In closing, I only have one thing to say. Senator Snowe, It’s time to go.
Twitter: Texasfor56Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
What on earth could I possibly have to say about the Speaker of the House of Representatives, meeting privately in Houston to discuss the current Healthcare reform considerations before Congress and the Senate? Quite a lot actually. This was simply another episode in a long line of inappropriate behavior by a person who holds one of the most influential positions in our government.
Why is it necessary for a person of the stature of the Speaker of the House to hold a private meeting to reconcile any “differences” with the CEO of a hospital or any of its’ medical personnel with regard to a Healthcare Reform Bill? Could it be the answer is money? OR is this simply a “quiet” way to ensure the healthcare “industry” will support the bill publicly if their needs are met?
Mmmm, let’s review the facts. Did the Speaker invite any questions from the people who lined the roads into the hospital complex as she whisked in and out of the meeting? Is the reform bill supposedly to “help” the people of the country? Then, why on earth would she not at a minimum make a statement to the many people who waited for hours to see her? Hundreds of people lined the streets going into the hospital. There was zero effort by Mrs. Pelosi to communicate with anyone. Who does she think her employer is?
Perhaps it was money. Let’s explore that angle. If she was raising money for healthcare reform support – the obvious question is why? Does the administration believe that money is needed to gain airwave time for their “cause”? The last time I checked, ABC, CBS, and NBC are ensuring maximum support for the President, his entire administration and their “causes”. A reasonable question might be: Is this the cause of the people, or of the administration? The uninsured are the minority in the country. So, I ask you……is this the will of the people to have a government run healthcare for everyone inclusive of the majority who do not need it? IF this is the will of the majority of the people, why does the administration feel the need to “campaign” about the reform bill? Clearly Mrs. Pelosi is putting the extra hours in, to support what the President and the administration would like to pass into law (regardless of the will of the people).
The following day after the meeting in Houston, Mrs. Pelosi was the guest in a private home in Austin. A lot of people showed up (a lot of lobbyists) to be with her at a $30,000 per plate event. What is she raising private funds for? Shouldn’t there be some form of transparency on the issue of fundraising? They are not running for office this year. If they discussed healthcare reform behind closed doors with a mixed audience comprised of the elite and lobbyists, we the people have a right to know the discussion content. What was the money for?
I recall writing a letter to Mrs. Pelosi a while back. It was not on this topic, but one that was important to me. I asked for her opinion and support on an Eagle Scout who did not receive the traditional flag certificate that also has the word “God” on it. The letter asked for her support to ensure the Eagle Scout got the traditional flag certificate inclusive of the word “God” which has always been on it. Her team sent me a fairly crisp letter stating they would not answer any letters of mine as I was not a “constituent” and to write someone else! She is the speaker of the House!!! Who/what does she represent?
Time and again, Mrs. Pelosi has used power and position to subvert traditions of the country. I submit that as Speaker of the House, she has an obligation to listen to the people in an impartial manner and make decisions accordingly. Most recently she called the people who are at the rallies and protests, un-American! Last time I looked the First amendment was in place that gives people that right. Is she suggesting Americans no longer have the right to assemble or the right to free speech?
In my humble opinion, Mrs. Pelosi is not one of the “56”. What do I mean by that? There were 56 original signers of our country’s Declaration of Independence. These men were also the “voice of reason and vision” as they put together a progressive governmental framework document called the Constitution of the United States. Recently, Glenn Beck put forth the notion of finding 56 honest men and women who want to end the corruption and pandering to special interest groups. This is probably the most progressive approach to the current out of control spending and corruption we are witnessing at the highest levels in the country. It is not a Republican or a Democrat or a move of any other party. It is a bi-partisan move to “clean house”. These 56 men and women of the Congress and the Senate would work together to get America back on track. They would have a sense of honor and duty that was everpresent in our founding father’s thoughts (RE: Federalist Papers). I am proposing the notion that as Americans we should be able to deduce most of these 56 by their performance records, examples of moral character and examples of following the constitution. Do they truly listen to the people? Are they being fiscally responsible? Are they transparent in their dealings? Are they respectful of the constitution? If they haven’t exhibited the above, they need to go!
Let’s start by putting Speaker of the House Pelosi on the list of who must go. She has consistently showed disdain for Americans voicing opinions, the immigration laws, and has been caught lying about key issues such as waterboarding. When caught in mistruths, calling people names or supporting illegal activity, there is usually another diversion, another topic, another speech in which the Speaker of the House diverts attention from her activities. I will refresh your memories by including 3 links to support the arguments. There are hundreds of pieces of footage on the news networks and on the internet if you prefer to find your own substantiation. Who is next on the list of who has to go? You may be surprised. Stay tuned.
Nancy Pelosi Tells Protestors “I’m a fan of Disruptors” , a different story now
Lie exposed: Pelosi’s Power, Oversight and Control of the CIA after being briefed on Waterboarding
Michelle Malkin on Pelosi calling immigration enforcement “Un-AmericanRead Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
This is a blog for the people, by the people, and all people who love the country and the constitution. People who love our way of life. Yes, we have problems like any other society. We can work on those. There is no need to throw away all that is good in this land.
Many years ago, 56 men of strong moral character and conviction, signed a document that began an incredible journey for this nation. They had a vision of a government for the people and by the people. These men had reasoned through the major pitfalls and things to be careful about at the beginning of this monumental undertaking. There were warnings of not allowing government to grow too big as there would be inherent dangers. The liberty of the people could be threatened if government assumed too much control. We are out of control today. The government has grown so massive that very little of the people’s voice can reach them. There is corruption and graft at the highest levels. We the people need to take back our control.
Several weeks ago, Glenn Beck on Fox News suggested we should find 56 honorable men and women in the Senate who want to “refound” the country back to the original premise. These men and women would be willing to stand up and say “Enough of the corruption”!
It is my belief that this may be difficult. However, I agree 100% that we the people need to take action. What can we do? It seems easier at this point to identify who needs to go in the House and the Senate. I am writing these blogs to cast light on who has “lost their way” and needs to go. Beginning with the Speaker of the House and continuing through the rest of them. . . one step at a time.
Time is of the essence. We need to mobilize and identify opposing candidates across the country. America, time to get busy!Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )